Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: bajac on October 08, 2012, 12:21:28 AM

Title: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 08, 2012, 12:21:28 AM
The attached document explains how Mr. Figuera's "infinite energy machine" works.
It is amazing how we keep recycling old concepts over and over again. And then, we even claim that we are the inventors.

Bajac


I NOTICED THAT FIGURE 21 IS IN ERROR. PLEASE, REPLACE PAGE 15 WITH THE ATTACHED ONE!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 30, 2012, 04:14:26 AM
FINAL VERSION!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 02, 2012, 05:07:20 PM
 
[size=0pt]  [/size]
[size=0pt]MR. FIGUERA'S INVENTION MADE OBSOLETE ALL MOTIONLESS ELECTRIC GENERATORS (MEG) BASED ON PEMANENT MAGNETS!
 
 ISN'T IT AMAZING???
 
 PATRICK KELLY PUBLISHED THE PAPER ON MR. FIGUERA. HE DID A NICE JOB ON THE SKETCHES. I REALLY LIKED THE 3D VIEW OF MR. FIGUERA'S DEVICE ON PAGE 19.
 
 STAY TUNED! PATRICK'S WEBSITE CAN BE FOUND HERE:[/size]
[size=0pt] [/size]
[size=0pt]http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf)[/size]
[size=0pt] [/size]
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 04, 2012, 06:21:21 PM
 The commutation using transistors can be done by using a micro-controller such as Arduino. The Arduino controller can be bought from ebay by about 20 dollars.
 
I am attaching the program code that can be used to drive 8 transistors. You can copy and paste it into the Arduino’s application software. The program has been documented to be self explanatory. Each transistor is on for 2ms and 0.5ms before is turned off, the next transistor is turned on to produce a make-before-break transistor switching. Note that 8 transistor will be switched on-off at 2ms time interval for a period of 16ms to generate a frequency of 62.5Hz. The period for 60Hz voltage is 16.67ms.
 
I am also attaching a photo of the setup used to test the software. I tested the functionality of the software with a lower frequency and it seems to be working fine. The frequency can be changed by changing the values of “x” and “y.”
 
Here is the source code:
 
/*
  Written by WONJU-BAJAC
  Source code for Clemente Figuera's Generator
  Generates the driving signals for 8 switching transistors
  where 2 transistors turn on before one turns off
  (Make-Before-Break swtiching.)
 
  This example code is in the public domain.
  As per 2012-11-03 Rev2
 */
 
// Pin 13 has an LED connected on most Arduino boards.
// give it a name:
int led1 = 3;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 3
int led2 = 4;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 4
int led3 = 5;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 5
int led4 = 6;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 6
int led5 = 7;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 7
int led6 = 8;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 8
int led7 = 9;  // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 9
int led8 = 10; // LED 1 is connected to controller's output 10
 
// Variables Declaration:
float x = 0.5; // half millisecond overlapping time
int y = 1;     // 1 + (2 x 0.5) = 2 milliseconds’ time each transistor is on
// defines a time period of 8 x 2 = 16 ms (62.5 Hz)
 
// the setup routine runs once the program starts:
void setup()
{     
  // initialize the I/O pins 3 through 10  as outputs.
  pinMode(led1, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led2, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led3, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led4, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led5, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led6, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led7, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led8, OUTPUT);   
}
 
// the loop routine runs over and over again forever:
void loop() {
 
  // Pre: LED 2 on
  digitalWrite(led1, HIGH);   // turn the LED 1 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds 
 
  // Pre: LEDs 1 & 2 on
  digitalWrite(led2, LOW);    // turn the LED 2 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 1 on
  digitalWrite(led2, HIGH);   // turn the LED 2 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 1 & 2 on
  digitalWrite(led1, LOW);    // turn the LED 1 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 2 on 
  digitalWrite(led3, HIGH);   // turn the LED 3 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 2 & 3 on
  digitalWrite(led2, LOW);    // turn the LED 2 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 3 on
  digitalWrite(led4, HIGH);   // turn the LED 4 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 3 & 4 on
  digitalWrite(led3, LOW);    // turn the LED 3 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 4 on
  digitalWrite(led5, HIGH);   // turn the LED 5 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 4 & 5 on
  digitalWrite(led4, LOW);    // turn the LED 4 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 5 on
  digitalWrite(led6, HIGH);   // turn the LED 6 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 5 & 6 on
  digitalWrite(led5, LOW);    // turn the LED 5 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds             
 
  // Pre: LED 6 on
  digitalWrite(led7, HIGH);   // turn the LED 7 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 6 & 7 on
  digitalWrite(led6, LOW);    // turn the LED 6 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds       
 
  // Pre: LED 7 on   
  digitalWrite(led8, HIGH);   // turn the LED 8 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 7 & 8 on
  digitalWrite(led7, LOW);    // turn the LED 7 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds           
 
  // Pre: LED 8 on
  digitalWrite(led7, HIGH);   // turn the LED 7 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 7 & 8 on   
  digitalWrite(led8, LOW);    // turn the LED 8 off   
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
   // Pre: LED 7 on 
  digitalWrite(led6, HIGH);   // turn the LED 6 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 6 & 7 on
  digitalWrite(led7, LOW);    // turn the LED 7 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds   
 
  // Pre: LED 6 on
  digitalWrite(led5, HIGH);   // turn the LED 5 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 5 & 6 on
  digitalWrite(led6, LOW);    // turn the LED 6 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 5 on
  digitalWrite(led4, HIGH);   // turn the LED 4 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 4 & 5 on
  digitalWrite(led5, LOW);    // turn the LED 5 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 4 on
  digitalWrite(led3, HIGH);   // turn the LED 3 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 3 & 4 on
  digitalWrite(led4, LOW);    // turn the LED 4 off
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
 
  // Pre: LED 3 on
  digitalWrite(led2, HIGH);   // turn the LED 2 on
  delay(x);                   // wait for x seconds
 
  // Pre: LEDs 2 & 3 on
  digitalWrite(led3, LOW);    // turn the LED 3 off 
  delay(y);                   // wait for y seconds
  // Post: LED 2 on
 
}
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 06, 2012, 05:54:03 AM
I did some research on the subject and it looks like the stepper motor drivers are perfect for the application.

I am looking for a dual phase smooth change stepper motor drivers. These drivers can generate two sinusoidal voltages with 90 degrees out of phase. IT IS PERFECT!!!

It would be greatly appreciated if someone can share more information on this subject.

I JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A BIPOLAR (DUAL PHASE) STEPPER DRIVER. IF THIS DRIVER CAN BE FOUND, THE FIGUERA'S GENERATOR CAN BE BUILT WITH THIS DRIVER AND THE ELECTROMAGNETS ONLY. AN AMAZING SIMPLE APPARATUS!

Thanks a lot!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tagor on November 06, 2012, 07:28:46 AM

I am looking for a dual phase smooth change stepper motor drivers. These drivers can generate two sinusoidal voltages with 90 degrees out of phase. IT IS PERFECT!!!

Thanks a lot!

yes i am using afmotor libraries
 
https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit-Motor-Shield-library (https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit-Motor-Shield-library)
 
 
and this
 
http://207.58.139.247/products/81 (http://207.58.139.247/products/81)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wings on November 06, 2012, 09:54:54 AM
like this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cnc-1-7A-12-36VDC-128Micostep-Bipolar-CNC-digital-Wantai-stepper-motor-driver-/170829137223?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27c635c547
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gadgetmall on November 06, 2012, 12:49:46 PM
this one is more to my budget 3 dollars with led indicators for the the 4 outputs and a free stepper ...http://www.ebay.com/itm/DC-5V-Stepper-Step-Motor-ULN2003-Drive-Driver-Test-Module-Board-5-Wire-4-Phase-/170922204635?_trksid=p2047675.m2109&_trkparms=aid%3D555003%26algo%3DPW.CAT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D142%26meid%3D3267539110322744953%26pid%3D100010%26prg%3D1076%26rk%3D2%26sd%3D170829137223%26

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 06, 2012, 09:25:46 PM
I think I found a very good IC for driving two coils with any current trace imaginable: DRV8834 from TI

http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)

One needs a microprocessor with at least two Digital/Analogue converters (Pins) and 6 I/O Pins.

An other drawback is the package (very small, pins close together, a pain to solder by hand)

See page 20 Fig. 12 in the data sheet (High-Resolution Microstepping Using a Microcontroller to Modulate VREF Signals)

The price is very low, less than 5 Euro.

Drive capability: 11.8 Volt, 1.5 Ampere (logic and D/A 3.6 Volt), very good for the TI LaunchPad MSP430

Of course, the program will be a bit evolved (D/A in combination with 6 pins in coordination), nothing for the faint hearted microprocessor programmer.

If some one knows how to solder such a small IC by hand, any suggestions are appreciated.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rensseak on November 07, 2012, 09:20:53 AM
I think I found a very good IC for driving two coils with any current trace imaginable: DRV8834 from TI

http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)

One needs a microprocessor with at least two Digital/Analogue converters (Pins) and 6 I/O Pins.

An other drawback is the package (very small, pins close together, a pain to solder by hand)

See page 20 Fig. 12 in the data sheet (High-Resolution Microstepping Using a Microcontroller to Modulate VREF Signals)

The price is very low, less than 5 Euro.

Drive capability: 11.8 Volt, 1.5 Ampere (logic and D/A 3.6 Volt), very good for the TI LaunchPad MSP430

Of course, the program will be a bit evolved (D/A in combination with 6 pins in coordination), nothing for the faint hearted microprocessor programmer.

If some one knows how to solder such a small IC by hand, any suggestions are appreciated.

Greetings, Conrad

Wie wäre es mit Ultraschalllöten? http://www.sonicsolder.com/ (http://www.sonicsolder.com/)
Wenn Du das mit der Hand löten willst, viel Spaß dabei. Primär gehts wohl darum, dass der Chip nicht durch Hitzeeinwirkung vom Löten beschädigt wird.
Ansonsten würde ich erstmal alle Füßchen von unten mit einer möglichst dünnen Schicht Lötzinn versehen. Anschließend auf die Platine legen ausrichten fixieren und nur noch mal von oben ohne Lötzinn festlöten. Bei allen Lötprozessen für ausreichend Kühlung des Chips sorgen. Hope you are german.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Lakes on November 07, 2012, 10:21:41 AM
SMD Soldering tutorial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 07, 2012, 02:24:48 PM
SMD Soldering tutorial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE)

Thank you Lakes, you made my day, very good tutorial!

I looked a bit deeper into the stepper motor drivers:

In order to drive the two primary coils of the Fiquera Transformer one needs a very flexible stepper motor driver because the phases have to be driven differently to a stepper motor.

See the attached drawing which explains the difference between driving a Fiquera Transformer and a stepper motor.

What it comes down to: one has to be able to drive the two Phases at 180° (stepper motor needs 90°).

So far the only one which seems to be suitable is the DRV8834.

DRV8834PWP - DRIVER, MOTOR, DUAL H BRIDGE, 24HTSSOP
DRV8834PWP - TEXAS INSTRUMENTS - DRIVER, MOTOR, DUAL H BRIDGE, | Farnell United Kingdom (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)

ADAPTOR, SMD, SSOP-24, 0.65MM
RE931-04 - ROTH ELEKTRONIK - ADAPTOR, SMD, SSOP-24, 0.65MM | Farnell United Kingdom (http://uk.farnell.com/roth-elektronik/re931-04/adaptor-smd-ssop-24-0-65mm/dp/1426165?Ntt=1426165)

There might be many more stepper motor drivers which can be used, but look carefully. The two phases have to be driven at 180° for the Fiquera Transformer (and at 90° for a stepper motor). Many stepper motor drivers are fixedly set to a phase difference of 90°.

Driving capability of the DRV 8834: from  +10.8 Volt  to  -10.8 Volt , at 1.5 Ampere. This may be not high enough.

But one could use several pairs of primary coils and for each pair a DRV 8834 (all DRV 8834 ICs driven in parallel with the same pins of the microprocessor).

It may be, that I misunderstand the phase difference (in the two primary coils) necessary for the Fiquera Transformer. Whatever it is, 90° or 180°, one will want to try both (and therefore needs a driver that can do both).

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 07, 2012, 04:52:00 PM
Wie wäre es mit Ultraschalllöten? http://www.sonicsolder.com/ (http://www.sonicsolder.com/)
Wenn Du das mit der Hand löten willst, viel Spaß dabei. Primär gehts wohl darum, dass der Chip nicht durch Hitzeeinwirkung vom Löten beschädigt wird.
Ansonsten würde ich erstmal alle Füßchen von unten mit einer möglichst dünnen Schicht Lötzinn versehen. Anschließend auf die Platine legen ausrichten fixieren und nur noch mal von oben ohne Lötzinn festlöten. Bei allen Lötprozessen für ausreichend Kühlung des Chips sorgen. Hope you are german.

Danke für die Hinweise. Das Wchtigste ist wohl der SMD SSOP24 Adapter.
 http://at.farnell.com/roth-elektronik/re931-04/adapter-smd-ssop-24-0-65mm/dp/1426165

Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 07, 2012, 07:52:50 PM
I have found this dual H-Bridge driver:

L298N (http://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)
- OPERATING SUPPLY VOLTAGE UP TO 46 V
- TOTAL DC CURRENT UP TO 4 A (2A per channel but you can parallel them for higher current output)
- LOWSATURATION VOLTAGE
- OVERTEMPERATURE PROTECTION
- LOGICAL ”0” INPUT VOLTAGE UP TO 1.5 V (HIGHNOISE IMMUNITY)

It will be easy to interface it with Arduino using a protoboard. There are Arduino shields available based in that IC as well, just Google it.

90 degrees phase (or any other angle) can be realized via software, just look for DSS (digital signal synthesis) Arduino code examples.
When I get mine working I will publish the code so stay tuned ;)

BTW. The core I'm using can be found in some PC power supply.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 07, 2012, 09:49:54 PM
I have found this dual H-Bridge driver:

L298N (http://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)

It will be easy to interface it with Arduino using a protoboard. There are Arduino shields available based in that IC as well, just Google it.

90 degrees phase (or any other angle) can be realized via software, just look for DSS (digital signal synthesis) Arduino code examples.
When I get mine working I will publish the code so stay tuned


I hate to play the clever one. But I have to tell you, that the L298N is not useful. You can only supply one voltage to the coils (full step). It may be possible to implement a different phase shift than 90° (but I doubt even that).

The point is, that one can deliver at least 4 (better 8 or 16 or 32) different current strengths (voltage levels) to the two primary coils (that is the reason for the seven resistors when using a commutator). And in addition one wants to be able to vary the phase shift.

It is not so easy to do nicely what the commutator and the resistor bank is doing crudely in the original design. I spent many hours to look for the DRV8834. There are no easy short cuts if one wants to beat "commutator with resistor bank". With the L298N you will do much worse than with the commutator. You can only switch the coil on and of f. But you have to vary the current going through the coil from 0 to maximum current in several steps. I think that 4 current levels are the minimum. I would not do no less than 8 different current levels (to be better off than with the "commutator with resistor bank").

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: I do like your three part transformer. I wonder if one could just take a Ferrite rod (or even a mild steel bolt) and wind the three coils next to each other? One will use low frequency (e.g. 50 Hz to 100 Hz) any way, so no fancy material for the core is needed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 07, 2012, 09:50:17 PM
I'm pretty sure you can do that with an Arduino. The basic Arduino comes with 2 PWM outputs that can be programmed for frequency and duty cycle, IIRC. These are used by robot builders to control servomotors driving wheels, so the robot can turn or accelerate.This means that the frequency and pulse width of each output can be independently controlled, thus giving control of phase in software. I think.

Here a person uses two pots to control the frequency and duty cycle of one of the PWM outputs of an Arduino, I think. Or he might be using both outputs in just the manner you need, one for f and the other for %. The pots don't actually control the motor; the Arduino reads a voltage value from the pots, translates that into a numerical value between 0 and 255, and passes that to the PWM stage digital controller. So the desired numerical values for f and % can be sent by any means or even hard-coded into the program. The second PWM output can be controlled in the same way, and the two can be synched for phase angle in the program. I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hzv6m_8fo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hzv6m_8fo)

Arduinos are easy to program, especially if you know c or c++, and there is a _lot_ of help on the internet for Arduino and Arduino clone users. The "Fry's" electronics store chain even usually stocks an Arduino clone line of products called "Osepp"; I have several of these and they are really powerful, can do just about anything you can think of requiring analog or digital inputs controlling analog or digital outputs.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 07, 2012, 10:04:57 PM
Quote
I hate to play the clever one. But I have to tell you, that the L298N is not useful. You can only supply one voltage to the coils (full step). It may be possible to implement a different phase shift than 90° (but I doubt even that).


You do it by PWM Mr. Clever ONE :)
Read about direct digital synthesis!


Here is an example http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/ (http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: vrand on November 08, 2012, 03:23:27 AM
The attached document explains how Mr. Figuera's "infinite energy machine" works.
It is amazing how we keep recycling old concepts over and over again. And then, we even claim that we are the inventors.

Bajac


I NOTICED THAT FIGURE 21 IS IN ERROR. PLEASE, REPLACE PAGE 15 WITH THE ATTACHED ONE!



Thank you for sharing, keep up the good work!
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 08, 2012, 09:13:54 AM

You do it by PWM Mr. Clever ONE :)
Read about direct digital synthesis!

Here is an example http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/ (http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/)

The DRV8834 (and practically all stepper motor driver ICs) do chopping (at a high frequency) and one can in principle implement a chopper with a microprocessor. But you have to add two full bridges (or at least two half bridges) in an external circuit (and supporting components) in order to get some power (e.g. +-10 Volt and 1.5 Ampere) for driving the Figuera transformer.

My argument is price (less than 5.-- Euro for the DRV8834), the avoidance of a lot of soldering and reliability of operation.

But there are many ways to build a test bed for the Fiquera transformer, I just want to come up with a versatile, cost effective and usable contraption.

I am not a salesman for stepper motor driver ICs, I just happen to know what they can do.

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: Speeding up and slowing down a stepper motor means to vary the time between steps. "Micro stepping" happens in between steps and tries to smoothly push the rotor from one step to the next by varying the current through the coils at step N and through the coils at step N+1 (which happens to be similar to Fiquera's idea). So, Fiquera's idea is similar to what happens between step N and step N+1 in a stepper motor when doing "micro stepping".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 08, 2012, 09:31:11 AM
My argument is price (less than 5.-- Euro for the DRV8834), the avoidance of a lot of soldering and reliability of operation.

It's my argument too, L298N is less than 2 Euro :)
So an Arduino + L298N is very cheap. No problems in soldering, no additional components needed, only freewheeling diodes across the coils and few small caps and inductors for lowpass filtering. (see the example I provided)
By software output signal chopping (PWM) we can control 2 independent full H-bridges inside L298N having TWO sine wave signals (or any other type of signal such as saw-tooth) up to 35 kHz on its outputs.
It means variable current as well...

You can't go cheaper/simpler than that, just wait and see...

Greeting from Poland where the price matters ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gadgetmall on November 08, 2012, 01:22:38 PM
Great Project . Thanks for the Heads up on the driver research. Wish i did not waste 3 bucks but hey i'll experiment with it anyways until a circuit is nailed down for sure .... ..Gone looking for bigger c  and i cores now..

Keep us posted with any progress Please .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 08, 2012, 09:40:58 PM
I couldn't help myself... I will be testing this configuration ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 09, 2012, 02:40:41 AM
 Guys, your set-ups look impressive!
 
 I would like to point out the following;
 the voltage rating of the coils could be more than 20V. Therefore, the voltage rating of the driver should be no less than 30V. With such a low excitation voltage, the primary coils cannot be connected in series.
 
 In addition, I am not sure if the output voltage and current of the stepper motor drives is sinusoidal AC voltage. If the driver voltage is a sinusoidal DC voltage (DC offset), then we have a problem.
 
 Can someone help with this issue?
 
 Thank you,
 Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 09, 2012, 11:49:15 AM
I guess that this fresh video of a SELFRUNNER from mr. clean at energeticforum will be somewhat related to this thread! :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzE-p0GJb_Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzE-p0GJb_Q)


It's based on the BiTT of Thane C. Heins.

Those principles exist in Figuera's generator topology as well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 09, 2012, 06:28:32 PM
Figuera's generator can be considered the first Motionless Electric Generator (MEG).
 
The available information from his patents indicates that the only competition for his generator was the generators based on a rotating shaft. Figuera goes on describing the moving generator as the one that converts mechanical energy into electrical energy, while his apparatus does not utilizes mechanical energy. Figuera also stated that his apparatus is self-excited, that is, a small amount of output energy can be fed back to the N and S coils and the external battery can be disconnected.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 09, 2012, 09:13:17 PM
See the attached schematics for the test system I will build.

For an initial test I will wind all tree coils (primary 0 - secondary - primary 1) on a Ferrite rod next to each other (the secondary will be sandwiched between the two primaries).

Greetings, Conrad

http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2012/07/24/new-product-mcp4725-breakout-board-12-bit-dac-wi2c-interface/
http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/treiber-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234
http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/msp430g2452in20/mcu-16bit-8k-flash-20pdip/dp/1865383
http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/msp-exp430g2/entwicklungskit-msp430-launchpad/dp/1853793
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 09, 2012, 11:45:23 PM
There is a thing called a "motor controller shield" that snaps onto an Arduino, that incorporates 2 L293D quad half-H high current motor drivers onboard, plus breakout connectors. This shield interfaces between the Arduino proper and your motors. It will drive 2 RC servos, or 2 standard stepper motors, or 4 regular DC motors by PWM. You can run the motors off the Arduino power bus or from a separate power supply to the H-bridges. The 293s are in the standard 16-pin DIPs and are in sockets, so you don't have to mess with SMDs and hassle a lot when you blow a driver chip.

I have one that I use with the Osepp arduino clone. It works great for motor control and I suppose you can program any kind of signal to the two L293 drivers you like, maybe.

makeshields.com "full function motor control shield for arduino"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 10, 2012, 10:50:30 AM
There is a thing called a "motor controller shield" that snaps onto an Arduino, that incorporates 2 L293D quad half-H high current motor drivers onboard, plus breakout connectors. This shield interfaces between the Arduino proper and your motors. It will drive 2 RC servos, or 2 standard stepper motors, or 4 regular DC motors by PWM. You can run the motors off the Arduino power bus or from a separate power supply to the H-bridges. The 293s are in the standard 16-pin DIPs and are in sockets, so you don't have to mess with SMDs and hassle a lot when you blow a driver chip.

Unfortunately the L293D is completely useless for micro stepping, it just can switch the transistor bridges on and off (no in between steps, no chopping).

This is what it is all about:

http://www.stepperworld.com/Tutorials/pgMicrostepping.htm

And it is even more complicated in case one wants that the phase difference is not locked at 90°.

Look at the circuit I posted in my last post. This is what one needs. Of course one can do it in many ways, but the circuit shows the principle, it shows the capabilities needed. Whatever circuit one builds or finds, it should match or even outperform the capabilities of my example circuit.

The components in my circuit are all very modern and therefore consume little power by themselves, which is essential for a self runner. There are microprocessors which have on board DA - converters (one needs two), but they need considerable power (in comparison to the MSP430G2xxx series). AD - converters (for sensing applications) have become common in microprocessors, but DA - converters integrated into microprocessors are still rare.

When looking for stepper motor drivers (or boards), look for at least 8 MICRO STEPS. The emphasis is on MICRO (in between steps). For these micro steps one has to vary the CURRENT through the coils along a Sinus wave form with a 90° phase difference. And only a few stepper motor drivers allow to even change the 90° phase difference and to realise any wave form for the CURRENT. Of course, all drives which can vary the current (which can do MICRO steps), do it by chopping.

An alternative way would be to just use two full transistor bridges and to do the chopping and phase control with the micro processor. But to do the chopping in any useful and fairly clean way, a lot of additional circuitry around the full bridges is necessary which I would hate to have to design. This is the reason why I looked to the stepper motor driver ICs, where they have solved all the little problems of "chopping" in the last 10 years.

I continue the (probably unwanted) lecture, just to make everybody understand:

To beat the "Figuera commutator + 7 resistors" one needs a stepper motor driver IC or board which can do at least 8 MICRO steps (driving two coils). For higher voltages and higher currents one can find stepper motor driver ICs, which can do only one coil each, but they start to have limitations (only 4 or 2 MICRO steps).

One can of course design a new "chopper circuit" based on full transistor bridges, but I wish you good luck with that, specially if you want high voltage and high current. Why do you think are the high power stepper motor drivers which can do at least 8 MICRO steps rather expensive and rarely versatile?

I want to test the Figuera idea, but I do not want to go into "chopper circuit design". "Chopper circuit design" has been solved in connection with stepper motor drivers which can do MICRO stepping (8, 16, 32 MICRO steps or even a lot of MICRO steps along an analogue wave form like the DRV8834 can do).

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: I promise to stop my lecturing about stepper motor drivers and chopper circuits.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on November 10, 2012, 12:45:42 PM
Where is the original Figuera work? I can't seem to find that.
Perhaps another group?

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 10, 2012, 03:52:34 PM
Norman,

A sketch of the patent can be found in this Spanish article:
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005

And, this is a poor English translation of that article:
http://orbo.es/?p=26

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 10, 2012, 04:00:12 PM
Conrad,

I do not think the PWM devices work in the manner that you described. The H-Bridge transistors are switching transistors, that is, they turn on and off, only. There is not intermediate steps. The chopping wave that you see is the average value of the PWM pulses. The losses (heat up) would be too large, if the transistors had worked as linear amplifier or with intermediate steps.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 10, 2012, 08:29:41 PM
Conrad,

I do not think the PWM devices work in the manner that you described. The H-Bridge transistors are switching transistors, that is, they turn on and off, only. There is not intermediate steps. The chopping wave that you see is the average value of the PWM pulses. The losses (heat up) would be too large, if the transistors had worked as linear amplifier or with intermediate steps.

Bajac

@Bajac:

I admit doing a bad job explaining multi stepping of a stepper motor and its relationship to the Fiquera transformer.

I also admit that I do not manage to explain why one needs two DACs to drive the DRV8834 in the manner I think it should be driven.

Yes, it looks a bit strange that the two DACs give two voltage wave forms to the DRV8834 which is chopping the two full transistor bridges according to this voltage wave forms (in case you looked at my schematics). But the DRV8834 wants it like this, what can I do. The designers of the DRV8834 thought that a voltage wave form is a very good way of defining a very fine grade current change (and the current change is of course then created by the DRV8834 by chopping). And exactly this gives the very high flexibility of creating any phase shift and any "current change form" one desires.

And I never said that the full bridges in any stepper motor IC are driven in a linear or amplifying manner (all stepper motor ICs which can do MICRO stepping are chopping, switching the bridges on and off very rapidly according to a certain pulse train).

But it does not matter what I say and what I think, please read the data sheets of the stepper motor driver ICs I discussed  (DRV8834 which is very good and LMD18245 which is less suitable) and study the paper about micro stepping I cited ( http://www.stepperworld.com/Tutorials/pgMicrostepping.htm (http://www.stepperworld.com/Tutorials/pgMicrostepping.htm) ), it says it much better than me. You will see by yourself what these ICs do and what follows from that.

If you think that the DRV8834 stepper motor driver IC is not necessary, it is fine with me. I have no stake in Texas Instruments and everybody has a different idea about how to do an experiment. I am also not selling my schematics, it is given for free as an example of a very low cost implementation which according to my unimportant opinion will do a very good job when testing the Fiquera transformer. And the ICs I propose can really be bought, they are commonplace (e.g. from Farnelle and from Arduino sellers, and I am not a salesman of Farnell, I just want to hand out useful information).

From the questions which are asked (again and again) and from the stepper motor ICs and boards cited by other people I believe to see a lack of knowledge in the field of stepper motor drivers. This is the reason why I am a bit sarcastic. One should not ask me, the only way to understanding is studying stepper motor ICs and boards and specially the art of MICRO stepping (which happens from step N to step N+1, so, each hard ware defined step of a stepper motor is subdivided into many MICRO steps mainly to make it run smoother and with less torque variations). And only what is happening in between the natural hardware steps of a stepper motor (the MICRO steps) is somehow related to driving the Fiquera transformer.

So, any stepper motor driver IC or board which can just step a stepper motor is useless, the IC or board must be able to MICRO step (at least 8 MICRO steps in order to beat the "commutator + 7 resistors" of Fiquera). In addition, most stepper motor ICs and boards stick to a 90° phase shift (of the two coil groups in a two pahse stepper motor) when MICRO stepping, which according to my humble opinion is a severe drawback when testing the Fiquera transformer (but it might not bother other experimenters).

Please publish your test circuit, I probably will write my opinion about it in this forum (as I wrote my opinion about the other stepper motor ICs and boards cited by other people).

I know that trying to teach is a bad idea, people do not want to learn, they want to build want they think is best. And many think they can beat well known facts or cut corners when doing electronics.

Finally, I do not claim that I understand the Fiquera transformer and that I can make it work better than anyone else. But I think it is a fun experiment which tickles my brain and makes me do some interesting programming. The schematics I published are also a very good circuit for testing various motor ideas which I carry around in my brain for a long time and never experimented with.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 10, 2012, 11:56:05 PM
Conrad,

Please, do not take my comments personally or in a bad way. It is ok to respectfully disagree and no one should get emotional about it. We all are here to learn from each other.

It is not my intention (and I also think it is not for others in this forum) to discourage you from doing the experiment your way. As a matter of fact I think everyone here will tweak and play around with this device in different ways. THAT IS WHAT MAKES THE FORUM ENJOYABLE!

If you enjoy putting components together, soldering ICs, etc. I am perfectly fine with that. For my part, if I can take a short cut and avoid putting components together, I will. I already purchased the stepper motor driver from eBay. And, do not take me wrong, I can work at that level. I used to build electronics devices as a hobby. I also worked as an electronics technician for about 15 years. I also spent 10 years building control units with PLCs and VFDs, and writing ladder logic programs. However, for this project my main goal is not to put together a stepper motor driver, but to test Figuera's concept.

I hope everything is clear and that we can keep working together as a team.

Regards,
Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 12, 2012, 12:42:05 AM
See attached photo for my construction of the Figuera's generator. The C-electromagnets can be adjusted to change the air gap separation distance. This one shows the driving transistors, but I will replace them as soon as I receive the stepper motor driver.


Thanks.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 12, 2012, 02:04:55 AM
Nice build you got going there, Bajac!

Mine is already working, I'll post a video soon.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 12, 2012, 04:48:40 AM
Once the secondary 'Vsy' voltage is induced, the main limiting factor for the power output should be the size of the secondary wire. That is why I am using a #14AWG wire.

I am forecasting that the model of this transformer differs from the standard ones in that the primary parameters such as resistance and reactance do not affect the output power.

Wonju
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 12, 2012, 07:57:54 PM
OK, so to better understand what we are dealing with here I have drawn a quick graph.

Now which one is the best?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 12, 2012, 10:07:51 PM
KEhYo,

 The original waveform shown in the first graph is about right when you have a pure resistive load. The inductance of the primary coils should distort the shape a bit.
 
I have no comments for the second graph.
 
The third graph is not correct. You are showing two sinusoidal voltages in 90 degrees out of phase. If you applied these two signals to full wave rectifier, then, you get the correct voltage that should be applied to the primary coils. The voltage applied to the primary coils should be half-cycle sine waves. Refer to figure 21 of the document.
 
Wonju.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 12, 2012, 10:26:35 PM
The third graph is not correct. You are showing two sinusoidal voltages in 90 degrees out of phase. If you applied these two signals to full wave rectifier, then, you get the correct voltage that should be applied to the primary coils. The voltage applied to the primary coils should be half-cycle sine waves. Refer to figure 21 of the document.
Wonju.


Maybe the '0' at the beginning of the time line is misleading a bit :) It is 0 A of current flowing through a coil. the trace is a sample from a running cycle when it comes to time line.

Just look at it graphically. It has the same shape as the current traces above, all of them have high and low peaks at the same time! The last one is a current trace as well, not voltage! At the minimum peak a small amount of current still flows through a coil as per schematic!
I am proposing this type of DC-offset sinusoidal wave form as it is my belief that maybe Clemente was trying to do just that!: linear or maybe even sinusoidal current rising/falling through the coils but he only had those simple inductive resistors at hand at the time of building. We do not know the operating frequency and input coil's and resistive element's inductances to predict the waveform on the output. It might have been close to sine wave AC...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 14, 2012, 04:47:16 PM
Basically in this configuration, there are two primaries on the sides and a secondary in the middle. Primaries create magnetic flux unidirectionally and the flux from each side corresponds to the induction of current in the secondary output coil in one direction only. Splitting the cycle in two halves allows the mirror "C" core part to become alternate path for the CEMF flux from the output to take a route through that core (which is not magnetized at the moment of maximum saturation with flux from the other primary). Now, I Get IT! Think about the BiTT - The same principles apply!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: woopy on November 15, 2012, 04:35:46 PM
Hi all

a small video for the interested

This is a test of a simpler version as per the the rotative commutator, with" bizarre" and interesting  results

Hope this helps

good luck at all

Laurent

http://youtu.be/3QguCN8TP7o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 15, 2012, 08:58:25 PM
@Laurent (Woopy):

Your video is very interesting, thank you for showing your tests in such a clear and understandable way.

From the drawing of Fiquera (the one with the many coils) I got the idea, that one should try a very simple design as depicted in the attached drawing. I do not see any indication that one should use a rectangular transformer core and the secondary on a transversal in the middle.

------------------

I had some troubles with the TI LaunchPad and the 20 pin MSP430G2254 microprocessor. The LaunchPad can not program this rather new Microprocessor and an attempt to update the LaunchPad firmware resulted in the destruction of the two LauchPads I had. I need the 20 pin Microprocessor MSP430G2254 (or some other 20 pin Version) in order to have enough I/O lines to control the stepper motor driver IC. And the LaunchPad can not program the 20 pin Microprocessors MSP430G... without a firmware update, which is difficult to do and not really supported by TI. Well my loss was less than 20.-- Euro, but still, very annoying.

I am now fed up with the LaunchPad and switched to the Arduino Due, but it will take some time till I get one, at the moment only a few can be delivered (at least in Austria and Germany). It seemed appropriate to wait for the new Arduino Due since it came out just about now. I would have soon regretted having bought an older Arduino

The Arduino Due has two DACs (digital to analogue converters), which will make it simple to control all aspects of DRV8834 stepper motor driver IC (I got already 4 ICs, so that I can fry a few till I get it right).

So, it will take some time till I can start real tests. But once I am up with my rather ambitious hardware I should be able to try out any conceivable current curve on two coils (with a resolution of up to 256 steps). But only with 10 Volt (-10 V to + 10 Volt = 20 Volt peak to peak) and 1.5 Ampere.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: conradelektro on November 15, 2012, 09:23:25 PM
Again looking at the Fiquera drawing (the one with the many coils) I got the idea that one could use two identical primaries (two primaries connected and wound in the same sense) only if one sends a different current wave form through them. See the attached drawing.

It is not more difficult to create the current wave form for the identical primaries (than for the ones with opposing magnetic poles) with a stepper motor driver IC (but only if the driver IC is flexible enough).

What ever one does, I find it interesting that one can play with the magnetic poles of the primaries in combination with the current wave forms.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 16, 2012, 07:42:38 AM
Alrightythen...

I have found a simple way to do the coil driving with Arduino!

All you need is:
1. ONE 10k/100k Ohm potentiometer. Connect the middle leg to Arduino's "A0" analog input. The other two legs of the pot goes to +5V and GND on Arduino.
2. TWO Logic Level MOSFET transistors to do the switching (Logic level - like in IRL series -  means that a mosfet is in a conduction saturation state at just +5V put to its gate). Connect the Gate of one mosfet to "Pin 3" and the others' gate to "Pin 11". Sources go to the "GND" of the Arduino board.
3. Connect +(positive) from a battery to both "North" & "South" coils and their ends to both drains in the two mosfets and -(negative) to the Arduino's "GND" close to the Source legs of mosfets.
4. Connect fast shottky diodes across each coil to do the freewheeling of current.

Program description:
Arduino is generating a digital signal at 32 kHz frequency using 2 PWM outputs. The value for each "sample" is taken from the sine table. There are 256 values of resolution for the "shape" of the sine wave and 256 values of amplitude. You can change phase shift by changing "offset" variable. Potentiometer allows to set the analog frequency from 0 to 1023 Hz at 1 Hz resolution...


NOW copy the code below to Arduino IDE window and save it to the microconroller and HERE YOU GO! ;)


Quote

/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
 * modification by kEhYo77
 *
 * Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
 * http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
*/


#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM


// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {
  127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
  242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
  221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
  76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
  33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124


};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator


int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase


double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6;      // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;


// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count;              // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator;   // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m;  // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.


void setup()
{
  pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  Setup_timer2();
 
  //Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
  cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0);              //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
  sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2);              //enable Timer2 Interrupt


  dfreq=10.0;                    //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
  tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //calulate DDS new tuning word
 
  // running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
  bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);


}
void loop()
{
        apin0=analogRead(0);             //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
        if(dfreq != apin0){
          tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //Calulate DDS new tuning word
          dfreq=apin0;
        }
}


//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM,  16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
  // Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
  sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);


  // Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0);  // clear Compare Match
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
 
  // Mode 1  / Phase Correct PWM
  sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20); 
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}




//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
  phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
  current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24;     // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information                     
 
  OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
  OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 18, 2012, 10:58:35 PM
Here is a video of my setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 18, 2012, 11:25:12 PM
Wow, thanks for that Arduino program code... I'll be trying it out myself, it might solve some problems I've been having on another project.

Does our BBcode allow "code" tags?

some sample lines
entered here as program code

Hmm... not really, I guess.

I wonder if the Arduino will turn a 2n7000 mosfet on directly. If so they could be drivers for larger, regular IRF series mosfets rather than logic level ones. Or if it would makes sense to use a bipolar transistor as the driver for a regular mosfet.

Arduinos are so cool, and it's great that they are programmed in c.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 18, 2012, 11:31:05 PM
Hi TinselKoala.
The best way is to separate Arduino from possible spikes. For that I would use optical isolation chip, then a regular mosfet driver chip and then any mosfet or igbt you want.
This setup is a quickie ;)


This is a simple schematic for hooking up the coils and a video of my setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 19, 2012, 12:10:40 AM
Yes, I agree about the spikes.

But I'm getting a compile error on the file.... something wrong in my avr setup, apparently, it can't find math.h, and neither can I, so I'm reinstalling avr....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on November 19, 2012, 12:13:50 AM
OK, got the compile error sorted... it was a file permissions issue, scrambled in the upgrade to 11.10. All is well if I run as root, program compiles correctly.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 19, 2012, 10:40:55 AM
OK. I need some help.
I've been thinking that if we could build an unidirectional resonant LC tank on both primaries it would benefit the design.


NOW. The question is:


How to make a switching circuit, that after a one way discharge, when C reverses polarity and a flow of current falls to 0, the circuit would FLIP the capacitor's polarities,
so instead of the current to go backwards it would go the same direction once again.


ANYONE?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 19, 2012, 07:42:56 PM
I think I've got it! :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on November 19, 2012, 10:22:32 PM
@TK
Quote
I wonder if the Arduino will turn a 2n7000 mosfet on directly. If so they could be drivers for larger, regular IRF series mosfets rather than logic level ones. Or if it would makes sense to use a bipolar transistor as the driver for a regular mosfet.

Arduinos are so cool, and it's great that they are programmed in c.
   

I would agree with KEhYo that a good mosfet driver is the way to go otherwise the on/off slope is marginal at best. As well opto-isolation works as long as we understand we pay for it in efficiency and again the on/off transition suffers, so as always it is a bit of a balancing act.
I love Arduino's, remember the shit we had to go through just to make a simple multi-stage sequencer or a non-linear duty cycle, it's no freaking wonder I have lost so much hair in the last 20 years. Last week I through together a temperature compensating well pump control with the Arduino which adjusts the pump on/off time as well as the time between cycles based on OAT so I can use the shallow well's natural ground heat to keep my horses water trough full and from freezing without an expensive resistance heater. So it's 10pm/-10 Deg C, pitch black and there I am in the middle of a pasture staring at the screen of my laptop programming a well pump with two horses looking over my shoulder wondering what the hell is going on, priceless.
I think many people have under-estimated these wonderful little devices because as an engineer this is the equivalent of a swiss army knife, a super cheap super easy solution for automation and control.

Regards
AC


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 20, 2012, 12:13:14 AM
Hi AC.
The optocoupler chips consume little current and shmitt-triggered inputs of mosfet drivers don't change the output on/off transition slope in any way. There is only a delay and maybe a minute difference in pulse width. :)
I think I've got enough transistors (16!) to do the One Way resonant LC switching for both coils. This should be interesting... Some heavy 'U93' ferrites are waiting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 23, 2012, 04:00:47 AM
 Hi guys,
 
I just finished winding the secondary coil, 219 turns of #14 AWG. I wanted to share with you my observations about the calculations for this device.
 
First, because the air gap has a much higher reluctance than any ferromagnetic material, it does not matter what type of iron core you use. A low cost sweet iron core is as good as a Silicone sheet steel core. The situation is analogous of having a series connection of two resistors, 1KΩ and 1MΩ. The current would basically stay the same if a 1K, 2K or 5K resistors are used.
 
Second, when doing the calculations for the primary coil, I found that it is almost impossible to obtain 120Vac with a single core set. My calculations showed that 5.6T approximately was required. I derated the secondary voltage to 20vac and the result was 0.8T approximately. So, Mr. Figuera got it right! To have a system with rated voltage, it may be required to add multiple secondary coils.
 
Please, note that I used 1mm for the calculations. If possible, it is recommended to use even smaller gaps.
 
Thanks,
 Wonju.[/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 25, 2012, 11:45:25 PM
 I have finished building the electromagnets. The iron cores are separated with a paper thin cardboard for a minimum separation distance between the cores. The results are very encouraging. I was able to get induce voltages of 1:1 and 1:2. Of course, if primary cross talking occurs, the gap will have to be larger.
 
Notice that I built the coils with intermediate taps. The data is
 
Primary coils:
Wire gauge: #16 AWG
Taps: 215, 415, and 515 turns
 
Secondary coil:
Wire gauge: #12 AWG
Taps: 115 and 5219 turns
 
Next, I am working on the circuit use to drive the primary coils.


Bajac

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 27, 2012, 01:43:08 AM
 I HAVE MADE A REVISION TO THE DOCUMENT. I REVISED THE PATENT FIGURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMMENTS MADE IN THIS FORUM. I ALSO REVISED SOME OF THE WRITE UP AND FIGURES TO INDICATE THAT THE FLUX AND THE VOLTAGE SHOULD BE 90 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE. THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT EXPLAINED IN THE DOCUMENT IS STILL THE SAME.
 
THANKS!
BAJAC
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 27, 2012, 07:24:19 AM
@Bajac
I think that you are wrong in your assumptions of '90 degree' phase shift between Vps,Ips of North/South primaries! (As stated earlier in my posts).
In your 'revised' document on Fig.21, at the 'M' mark, magnetic fields of both primaries are equal as they should be but their magnitudes at this point should be exactly HALF of their maximum magnitudes but they are not! They are both more like 2/3 of their Bmax!

Respectfully

kEhYo
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on November 28, 2012, 11:42:05 PM

I got the new setup ready for testing...
I've built an Arduino based variable frequency flip-flop pulse driver that can be set manually or automatically (not yet implemented). I can generate pulses of precise length and frequency up to 30kHz.


The base is like Figuera's Generator plus additional magnetic shunt on the secondary (alternative magnetic path for the CEMF flux)...


Testing should start on the weekend, as I am a bit sick now.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on December 09, 2012, 05:10:39 AM
 Because of my workload, I do not have too much time to spend at the forum. I just wanted to give you an update of the experiments I am performing. I will continue running more tests for the following two weeks. I have not yet tested the secondary coil with a load. First, I want to maximize the design of the primary circuit.
Please, refer to the following link for the images: http://imageshack.us/g/1/9909982/ (http://imageshack.us/g/1/9909982/)
IMAGE No. 1:
Shows the setup that I am using: the Arduino controller, the breadboard with the driver, the seven resistors (200 ohms each), and the primary and secondary coils.
IMAGE No. 2:
Shows two 50Ω/50W resistors used as dummy loads to replace the primary coils.
IMAGE No. 3:
Shows the output voltages dropped across the two 50Ω/50W dummy resistors replacing the primary coils. Each scope probe is set at x10. Notice that the small voltage steps are followed by a large jump in voltage. The frequency of the voltages is about 68Hz
IMAGE No. 4:
Shows the setup of IMAGE #3 but with seven 10 ohms resistors instead of the 200Ω. The scope probes are set at x1. Notice that the voltage steps are better defined.
This is an important design criterion to be applied when using the resistors as shown in the patent. The value of the resistors must be optimized for the impedances of the primary coils. If the resistors are too high the voltage steps are small and large at positions 1 and 8 as shown in image 3. On the other hand, if the resistors are too small, the DC component of the primary current would be too high, which increases the primary current considerably.
IMAGE No. 5:
Shows the setup of IMAGE #4 but with the primary coils connected instead of the dummy resistors. No load is connected at the secondary coil. There is no DC voltage component at the coils, as expected. The controller and the driver are working fine because there are no voltage spikes. The transitions of the power transistors are make-before-break. The scope probes are set at x10.
When the loads are pure resistive as in IMAGE #4, the minimum and maximum values of the voltages occur when the transistors at positions 1 and 8 are on. When the primary coils are connected, the minimum voltage value occur at about positions 3 and 5.
IMAGE No. 6:
The top graph corresponds to the voltage drop across a primary coil with no DC component. The scope probe is set at x10. The bottom graph represents the current flowing through the same coil and corresponds to the voltage drop across the 0.25 Ohms resistor used as a shunt resistor. There is a DC component. The first x-axis from the bottom corresponds to zero voltage. The scope probe is set at x1. A design goal should be to minimize the DC component applied to the primary coils. Notice that even though the voltage applied to the coil changes in steps, the changes of the current through the coil is smooth. As expected, the current in an inductor cannot change instantaneously.
I am giving you some test bench information that can be helpful for constructing the model.
Wonju-Bajac
PS: this will be my last reference to the issue of the resistors being used as a current splitter and/or the phase shift of the primaries. I just wanted to provide an analysis of a current splitter using six (6) resistors as shown in image 7. The results of the calculations indicate that the sum of the two currents is not always a constant when using resistor loads. But, with the primary inductor coils, it could be a different story.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on December 16, 2012, 02:46:45 AM
 My experiments are moving slowly because I am building more coil sets of the transformer. I have not tested the circuit for over unity, yet. However, I did short circuit the secondary coil with a screwdriver and sparks were generated melting the wires to the screwdriver. The most interesting thing is that a change in the total primary current was not noticeable.
Refer to the following link for more images:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/9/imageno8setup.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/9/imageno8setup.jpg/)
IMAGE_No.8:
Shows the equipment setup. Heat sinks were added to the IGBTs. I also built a variable DC voltage power supply.
IMAGE_No.9:
Shows the reference x-axes channel 1 (above) and channel 2 (below).
IMAGE_No.10:
Shows the voltage of a primary coil (channel 1) and the total primary current Ipn+Ips (channel 2). NOTICE THAT THE TOTAL PRIMARY DC CURRENT IS NOT CONSTANT!
Channel 1 => 10V/Div
Channel 2 => 4A/Div
The conditions for the testing are:
Power supply Vdc = 25.30V input; Vac = 15.45Vrms; Iac≈1.30A input; primary turns = 100t; secondary turns = 219t.
Resistors:
8Ω/20W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 10Ω/10W, 8Ω/20W,
IMAGE_No.11:
Shows the secondary output voltage
Channel 1 => 20V/Div
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
I will keep you posted.
[/font]
Bajac    [/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: daugustus on March 05, 2013, 09:05:47 PM
Wow, I have read some hundreds of pages of Patrick Kelly´s manual and just now have read about this generator!

Except for silverhealtheu´s proposal, which I´m not sure if has already been replicated successfully, and the Kunel patent. seems this is the simplest high power generator there...

Now, in Patrick´s book I saw the inner parts of the iron frames all rounded, which seems is something not easy to find.

Would this shape be a critical point?

Bajac,

First, congratulations on your work and, second, have you already made measurements on the output?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 16, 2013, 11:52:32 PM
Daugustus,

Thank you for your participation.

I assume that you are referring to the inner corners of the C shape iron cores. The rounding is not an issue. I am using 90 degrees corners.

Thanks again,
Bajac
Title: COMPARING HEINS AND FIGUERA'S TRANSFORMERS
Post by: bajac on April 06, 2013, 08:53:38 PM
 I have compared the designs from Clemente Figuera and Thanes Heins and concluded that the 100 years old concept is more efficient. The following are the bases for the conclusion:
 
Can you see a pattern between the apparatus of Figuera and Heins? Figuera’s design consists in placing a secondary coil between two primary coils. Meanwhile, Heins’ design shows a primary coil between two secondary coils.
 
As I already explained in my paper about the Figuera’s apparatus, the induced secondary magnetic field is pulled away from the inducing primary coil by the other primary coil. That is, there is no magnetic fields interaction between the inducing primary coil and the induced secondary coil. However, this is no true for the Heins’ apparatus.
 
First, the Heins’ apparatus found in this link:
 
http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins# (http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins)
 
indicates that the magnetic fields of the two secondary coils must interact with the primary in order for the apparatus to work. Moreover, in order for the Heins’ apparatus to have an optimum performance, the load on the secondary coils must be matched.
 
If you already read my article, you can see that the magnetic field distribution of the Heins’ design and shown in the above link is not correct. Because the magnetic field does not have a beginning or an end, it is not possible to have them flowing within the iron cores, only. Therefore, the secondary magnetic fields must cross the air gap windows of the Heins’ device to reach and interact with the only primary coil. When the loads connected to the secondary coils are the same, the net influence of the induced fields on the primary coil is zero. The effects of the secondary coils onto the primary are null and it can say that the Lenz’s law effect has been mitigated.
 
Second, if the secondary loads are not properly matched, the resultant of the secondary magnetic fields will react with the primary field in such a way as to oppose the primary magnetic field. As a consequence, the effects of the Lenz’s law are not completely cancelled and the current through the primary coil will increase. And,
 
Third, because of one secondary coil, the Figuera’s transformer should have lower output impedance than the Hein’s transformer. Having two secondary coils increases the magnetic flux losses and the wire resistance.
 
The Heins’ transformer should work better if the two secondary coils are connected in series to add their voltages. In this way you will always guarantee that the secondary magnetic fields are properly matched.
 
Finally, I have finished the construction of the primary and secondary coils. See my progress in the following photos: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/)
 
Bajac   
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 07, 2013, 02:50:51 PM
 Because of the criticality when matching the induced magnetic fields in the Heins transformer, in addition to matching the loads and the two secondary coils, the magnetic circuit must be symmetrical with respect to the center line passing through the primary coil. Any mismatch of these two halves can create serious instability issues. Said that, I expect the Heins transformer to be a little bit tricky to make it work.
 
 Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 10, 2013, 12:58:39 AM
I have simulated in Excel the output signal from the comutator as designed in 1908 (I have posted the Excel file with the simulation)

In the Excel file you can play with different values of the resistors and the inner resistance of each electromagnets, and even, you can play with one or two brushes defined as a second contact certain number of steps ahead of he first one.

Clearly Clemente Figuera was searching to create two DC signals which are unphased by 90º. The signals never reach zero voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 12, 2013, 09:48:19 PM
Hi everyone,
 
I have revised the traslation into english of the 1908 patent and I have included a new scanned drawing that I could get from the Spanish Patent Office Archive. This drawing has better quality than the one included in the previous version. Please note that in the original text there are some words which are underlined.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 14, 2013, 07:00:17 PM

Tomorrow I will show a data which confirms that the Figuera generator was running as said. I have found a newspaper article from 1902 stating the story that happened to keep in silence this device.

Be tuned ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 16, 2013, 12:20:27 AM
In the Spanish National Library it can be found some references to Clemente Figuera in newspapers from those years. This is a report which appeared just few days after filing the 1902 patent. I think this could be the reason for keeping silence from 1902 to 1908 when Mr. Figuera filed his second patent about the generator just some days before his death. Just judge by yourself this information:

24th of September of 1902, “La Region Canaria”, Page 4
 
 The Invention of Mr. Figuera

 
 When rumors about the invention of our dear friend and wise engineer Mr. Clemente Figuera appeared, we were its convinced believers, because knowing Figuera´s character he had not claim for sure an statement of such importance publicly, unless he were mad, until not being fully convinced that he had made a discovery of those which performs a great revolution in the industrial world.
 
 We had faith in him from the very beginning, and this was increasing while the famous engineer was providing us, by means of his notable work, which was published in these columns, the theories of  the invention, keeping, as it is natural, the secret thereof. It is no longer possible for even the most skeptical, doubt the invention of Mr. Figuera, because he has just sold , we assume that for high sum of money, the Spanish patent which were obtained from our government when he arrived at Madrid. The company, which has bought it, will be well ascertained, before handing the stipulated capital between that company and the inventor, that the discovery does not leave any room for the slightest doubt. Here Mr. Figuera´s telegram which has produced so much satisfaction:
 
 Madrid 15-13 h.
 
 “I have just signed sale deed Spanish patent managing world bankers first union formation. Congratulations.” FIGUERA.


Many celebrate that a discovery of this nature have been done in the Canary Islands which should worry to large companies worldwide and even to governments themselves; We are very satisfied with the patriotism of Mr. Figuera for having obtained the patent for his invention in Spain, perhaps sacrificing his interests, because everyone knows how great discoveries are paid in other nations.

 Mr. Figuera receive our warmest congratulations that we extend to the distinguished family of the wise inventor. 
(Note: in other newspaper report is written that the sum of money for the patent was 30 million pesetas (around 230,000 USD as those of year 1902)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 18, 2013, 01:16:22 PM
Seven of this electromagnet sets should work fine!
 
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/)
 
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lightend on April 18, 2013, 06:59:10 PM
the two guys who were building them, whats the results?
Im not convinced so am interested in your observations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 21, 2013, 11:05:35 PM
@Lightend


No testing yet. I just finished putting together the seven sets of coils. See my progress of the INFINITE ENERGY TOWER here:


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/197/figueratower66.JPG/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/197/figueratower66.JPG/)


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 23, 2013, 04:42:15 PM
Hi all,
 
Here I attach a pdf file with Figuera´s patent from 1902 about the electrical generator “Generador Figuera-Blasberg”. This patent was filed by Figuera some days before the telegram where he stated that the patent was sold to a banker union with a sale deed. After filing this patent and signing the patent sale there was a big silence until 1908 when Mr. Figuera filed his final patent with a detailed description of his invention on the 31th of October of 1908. In November of 1908 Clemente Figuera died. I don´t know the cause of the death neither the exact date, just that it occurred in November for some mentions in the newspapers. I think for myself that maybe Figuera was very ill and he decided to file his last patent as a legacy before dying.  Clemente Figuera was born in 1845.
 
As you can see in the patent drawing there is no reference to the reddish ink mentioned in the text. Therefore, in the 1902 patent it was not included the position of the induced coil. This patent was not granted because it seems that, after filing it and after the patent sale deed, no one paid the annuity renewal, which confirms the intention of hiding the patent, as occurred in fact.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on April 23, 2013, 05:18:27 PM
@bajac

Its taking shape now :) Nice setup, I like it.
But what about those thick reinforcing aluminium? bars on the sides of cores?
Eddy currents inside those will be huge!
Unless they are there as phase shifters...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 23, 2013, 06:22:25 PM
Keyho,
 
The permeability of aluminum is about the same as air. Because the aluminum is not in the path of the magnetic field, I see not reason for the magnetic field to leave the main core (high permeability) and travel through the aluminum (very low permeability). It could be very small interaction at the air gaps where fringing effects should occur. But, this is an issue that I will pay attention during experimentation.
 
Hanon,
 
Thank you for the superb work that you have done related to Mr. Figuera. It really gives a historical credibility to his work.
 
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on April 23, 2013, 06:36:39 PM
@bajac
You do not seem to understand how magnetic field operate.
It is about Electric vector A potential, a stress gradient. Aligned atoms inside the core make a strong density potential whereas free air outside is of lower flux density.
anything in the path between those two areas will be influenced by this gradient with the inverse square law when it comes to distance away from the core.
You will heat those bars due to eddy currents, even if you would isolate them from the cores with a dielectric (to exclude heat transfer from the cores). 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 23, 2013, 06:47:33 PM
Kehyo,
 
As I said, I will experiment and test the concept. If heating occur due to Eddy currents in the aluminum bars, then, I will replace them with something non-metallic. Thanks for the advice.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on April 23, 2013, 07:16:51 PM
Can't wait for the test results, your setup looks promising.
You're welcome ;)

Title: Re: COMPARING HEINS AND FIGUERA'S TRANSFORMERS
Post by: Farmhand on April 24, 2013, 01:09:55 AM
I have compared the designs from Clemente Figuera and Thanes Heins and concluded that the 100 years old concept is more efficient. The following are the bases for the conclusion:
 
Can you see a pattern between the apparatus of Figuera and Heins? Figuera’s design consists in placing a secondary coil between two primary coils. Meanwhile, Heins’ design shows a primary coil between two secondary coils.
 
As I already explained in my paper about the Figuera’s apparatus, the induced secondary magnetic field is pulled away from the inducing primary coil by the other primary coil. That is, there is no magnetic fields interaction between the inducing primary coil and the induced secondary coil. However, this is no true for the Heins’ apparatus.
 
First, the Heins’ apparatus found in this link:
 
http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins# (http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins)
 
indicates that the magnetic fields of the two secondary coils must interact with the primary in order for the apparatus to work. Moreover, in order for the Heins’ apparatus to have an optimum performance, the load on the secondary coils must be matched.
 
If you already read my article, you can see that the magnetic field distribution of the Heins’ design and shown in the above link is not correct. Because the magnetic field does not have a beginning or an end, it is not possible to have them flowing within the iron cores, only. Therefore, the secondary magnetic fields must cross the air gap windows of the Heins’ device to reach and interact with the only primary coil. When the loads connected to the secondary coils are the same, the net influence of the induced fields on the primary coil is zero. The effects of the secondary coils onto the primary are null and it can say that the Lenz’s law effect has been mitigated.
 
Second, if the secondary loads are not properly matched, the resultant of the secondary magnetic fields will react with the primary field in such a way as to oppose the primary magnetic field. As a consequence, the effects of the Lenz’s law are not completely cancelled and the current through the primary coil will increase. And,
 
Third, because of one secondary coil, the Figuera’s transformer should have lower output impedance than the Hein’s transformer. Having two secondary coils increases the magnetic flux losses and the wire resistance.
 
The Heins’ transformer should work better if the two secondary coils are connected in series to add their voltages. In this way you will always guarantee that the secondary magnetic fields are properly matched.
 
Finally, I have finished the construction of the primary and secondary coils. See my progress in the following photos: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/)
 
Bajac   

Hi Bajac
I assume you are referring to the BiTT setup of Thanes ?

I've done some reading of the Figuera documents but I don't see where free energy or negating Lenz law is mentioned. And anyway I don't think that two secondaries in Thane's setup
if they are evenly matched would negate Lenz effect in total or there would be no output.  No matter if the secondary does not appear to react on the primary because any output got from the secondaries enters the system by way of the primary.

Do you dispute that any energy utilized from the secondaries enters the system by way of the primary. Have you seen anything measured in the Watts range not mW range that
would indicate more energy out than is input by way of the primary ?

If a primary induces a magnetic polarity in a core and an output is got from a secondary then Lenz Law was in action or the energy transfer was not by induction.

Anyway I'm wondering where Clemente Figuera mentions free energy or the negating of Lenz Law.

Could someone point out where he mentions free energy or the negating of Lenz Law please or whatever it is that "implies" that ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 24, 2013, 01:29:41 AM
I have finished all the mechanical work related to the electromagnets. I mounted the electromagnets on a 2 ft x 4 ft base with extra space available for mounting the driver components. I have posted three photos:


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/805/cimg4013.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/805/cimg4013.jpg/)



What is left is the wiring and the electronic driver for generating the two input voltages.


I am planning on experimenting with two types of drivers, the series resistors as shown in the patent and a stepper motor driver.


We are getting close to the truth!


Bajac







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 24, 2013, 02:38:56 AM
Farmhand,

Yes, I was referring to the BiTT unit.

Figuera does not explain how the extra energy is generated or where it comes from. However, his patent does state that the apparatus is for generating electricity without fuel and it also states that the amount of power is sufficient for industrial applications. In one instance, he stated his desire to power the big steam ships with his generator. Hanon has posted a lot of newspaper citations and articles of the time referring to Figuera. Hanon has done an important work rescuing the historical data and putting the pieces together.

Neither Figuera states that the over unity is due to the manipulation of the Lenz’s law effects. That explanation is given in the paper that I posted in the forum. The answer to some of your questions is found in the published paper. I would encourage you to read it and let me know if you have any comments or concerns.

The effects of the Lenz’s law are always present when inducing currents in coils through magnetic fields! The Lenz’s law effect is the mechanism used in physics to prevent having a device with outputs larger than the inputs. In other words, the Lenz’s effect is what prevents the standards transformers and rotating generators from becoming perpetual machines. What Mr. Figuera and others have proven is that there is a way for mitigating the effect and convert these machines in truly fuel-less generators.

Still, the latter does not answer the question where the energy is coming from or what energy is being transformed. The answer to these questions will also require an overhaul of the existing theory and rewriting existing physics and engineering books.

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 24, 2013, 12:06:46 PM
TEST OF PRACTICAL IMPLEMETATION OF THE PATENT
 
According to the spanish patent Law from the begining of the 20th century it was required a certification declaring the practical implementation of the patent in order to grant the patent.
 
After the death of Mr. Figuera in 1908, his representative Constantino de Buforn (who signed the 1908 patent as his representative, what also suggest me that Clemente Figuera was ill and could not travel to file his patent), Constatino de Buforn filed some patents which are identical to the one from 1908 except for slight modifications  (obviously the patent office in that time was not doing a deep exam for novelty because those patents after 1908 are literal copies of Mr. Figuera´s patent). On one of those patents (filed in 1910 with No. 47706) there is a declaration of the test of practical implementation done in 1913 and certified by a engineer. I could revise those expedients in the patent office. The patent was granted and its annuity renewal was paid for some years.
 
With all these data I wonder: 
 
Why did Buforn file more patents about this same subject?
Why did Buforn asked for a test of practical implementation?
Why did Buforn keep on following with this idea from the filing in 1910 to the final report in 1913?
Why do the report of the test of practical implementation show a positive declaration?
Why did he paid the annuity renewal for some years?
Why did Figuera sell his 1902 patent to a banker union and he kept silence until he filed the 1908 patent some days before his death?
 
I am afraid that the answer is clear: Because the generator worked !!
 
Please find attached a file with the traslation of the implementation report and also the pictures I could take in the Patent Office.
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 24, 2013, 09:12:22 PM
hanon, my friend

You are doing marwellous work ! Thank You from all my heart , and I think Mr Figuera is happy now. Keep going, I have a feeling that things are quite opposite to all we have been told....yes,it seems scary but there is big hope at the end....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 04:33:13 AM
Farmhand,

Yes, I was referring to the BiTT unit.

Figuera does not explain how the extra energy is generated or where it comes from. However, his patent does state that the apparatus is for generating electricity without fuel and it also states that the amount of power is sufficient for industrial applications. In one instance, he stated his desire to power the big steam ships with his generator. Hanon has posted a lot of newspaper citations and articles of the time referring to Figuera. Hanon has done an important work rescuing the historical data and putting the pieces together.

Neither Figuera states that the over unity is due to the manipulation of the Lenz’s law effects. That explanation is given in the paper that I posted in the forum. The answer to some of your questions is found in the published paper. I would encourage you to read it and let me know if you have any comments or concerns.

The effects of the Lenz’s law are always present when inducing currents in coils through magnetic fields! The Lenz’s law effect is the mechanism used in physics to prevent having a device with outputs larger than the inputs. In other words, the Lenz’s effect is what prevents the standards transformers and rotating generators from becoming perpetual machines. What Mr. Figuera and others have proven is that there is a way for mitigating the effect and convert these machines in truly fuel-less generators.

Still, the latter does not answer the question where the energy is coming from or what energy is being transformed. The answer to these questions will also require an overhaul of the existing theory and rewriting existing physics and engineering books.

Thanks,
Bajac

I might be missing something and I will investigate further, but from what I have read Figuera simply designed a way of producing AC sine wave power from a battery without the need for a rotating generator and associated rotating generator Lenz effects. Basically what I read up on was a step excitation method kind of thing for generating sine wave AC, the energy comes from the battery I think. Energy cannot be generated, sine waves can be generated, AC power can be generated, sound waves can be generated
but not energy. Electricity is generated with the input of energy to do it. Energy is utilized by way of the electric power generated by the expenditure of energy on the input end.

Looked like it was all powered by a battery to me.

I'm not trying to put anyone off the experiments, just trying to understand where the implication of extra energy is from.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 05:05:17 AM
From the patent here- http://www.scribd.com/doc/114818563/Clemente-Figuera-Patent-30378-1902-Spanish-and-English-1


Here he explains a conventional rotating generator.

Quote
Since 1833, when Pixii, in France built the first magneto-electric machine, to the present time, all machines magneto and dynamo-electric science inventors has led the industry reposan the foundation in the law of induction says: "all magnet that moves toward or away from a closed circuit produces in him flows induction "In Gramme ring and the current dynamos, current occurs by induction that is exerted on the armature circuit wire, cutting their reels lines force created by the electromagnets exciters, or to move said armature, quickly, within the atmosphere between the magnetic pole faces of the electromagnets exciters and the soft iron core of the armature. To produce this movement, mechanical force need be employed in large quantity, it is necessary to overcome the magnetic attraction between the drivers and the core electrostatic attraction that opposes the motion, so the current dynamos are true machines transforming mechanical work into electricity.


Here he explains the benefit of his device.

Quote
In the arrangement of excitatory and magnets our generator armature circuit has some analogy with the dynamos, but they are completely different from that, not requiring the use of motive power is not processing apparatus.

I think there is a misunderstanding of the text or translation mistake. When he says
Quote
not requiring the use of motive power
it means he does not need to turn a generator shaft,
that does not say the device does not require electro-motive force emf to power the device.


The exciting currents become the output.
 
Quote
A excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating, Actuates all the electromagnets, que are attached or in series, or in xxxxx?, or as required, and in the induced circuit currents Comprising Will Arise, together, the full generator current. That Allows suppressing the mechanical force, since there is nothing Which needs to be moved.

The claim indicates to me he invented a type of inverter.

Quote
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing moves, Which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or Which Creates an alternating current induction in the motionless inducedcircuit, Placed Within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 09:25:32 AM
I watched a couple of Woopy's video's and All I see is a constant current transformer. If you try to draw too much power the voltage will drop and so the power will also drop. Just because the input is not affected by the output means very little.
That can be done in other ways as well. When the output exceeds the input something different will be happening.

If a device uses 10 watts right of the bat as soon as it is fired up, before any output is taken, then 5 watts is drawn with no affect on the input the device is only 50% efficient.
If the device uses 10 watts with no load then 5 watts is drawn and the input drops to 7.5 Watts then that is only 66% efficient.

If a device is using 10 watts then when 10 Watts is drawn if the input drops to zero so that there is 10 watts output with zero input, I'll eat my hat.

Testing with LED's is not much use that's flea power.

Has anyone got an output to exceed the input yet ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 25, 2013, 11:57:44 AM

The claim indicates to me he invented a type of inverter.


Farmhand,
 
If you read the patent from 1908 you will notice that Figuera clearly states that he is claiming  a generator which does not use any fuel once started.
 
“…the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”

“From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 25, 2013, 03:53:47 PM
ha ha ha Farmhand, try to explain last hanon citation  :P
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 25, 2013, 05:29:02 PM
I understand Farmhand,

If you came to me 10 years ago with the same story, I would probably have cursed you. And, I would have done the same thing; “REPEATING WHATEVER IS WRITTEN IN TODAY’S LITERATURES”.

This is what I call “STILL CONNECTED TO THE MATRIX”. We are just brainwashed with tainted information that has lasted too long!

The explanation of where the energy comes from based on today’s accepted science is the only reason why scientists and engineers don’t even try to replicate these devices. It is up to the amateurs and technicians to turn this world around and play the role of NEO.

And, I wanted to add that the patent translation made by Hanon and others is correct. My first language is Spanish and I can assure you that there is nothing hidden in the translation. It is what Mr. Figuera intended to convey.

On the other hand, I think we should get back on track and continue with the practical implementation of the Figuera’s concept. The main purpose of this thread is to replicate the Figuera’s device.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 25, 2013, 08:45:27 PM
 ;D ;D ;D ;D   everything is free energy, that's the whole truth, think about it in mantra
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 25, 2013, 10:28:53 PM
Reference in the New York Herald the 9th of June 1902:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg)

"...the only extraordinary point about it is that has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact"....."the whole apparatus being so simple that a child could work it."

As Groucho Marx said after a similar statement: "Bring me here a child of 6 years!"   ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 26, 2013, 06:33:32 PM
Reference in the New York Herald the 9th of June 1902:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg)

"...the only extraordinary point about it is that has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact"....."the whole apparatus being so simple that a child could work it."

As Groucho Marx said after a similar statement: "Bring me here a child of 6 years!"   ;)

The interesting fact here is how it's described as atmospheric electricity and how Tesla reacted on this article.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 27, 2013, 07:31:13 AM

Farmhand,
 
If you read the patent from 1908 you will notice that Figuera clearly states that he is claiming  a generator which does not use any fuel once started.
 
“…the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”

“From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”

Electricity from a battery is not fuel !

Anyway I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from doing anything, I have my doubt's myself.

Is the patent an actual granted patent ? Or an application ?

I don't recall seeing this text below in the patent I'll have to read it again.

Quote
the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”

From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”

Do you have a link to where the text above is from ?

Not here- http://www.scribd.com/doc/114818563/Clemente-Figuera-Patent-30378-1902-Spanish-and-English-1

I see what looks like a patent "application" to me here http://www.energeticforum.com/214451-post116.html

But like you say the purpose is to replicate and see for yourselves. Which is a good idea.

Now I see where the implication of free energy is from, so I can understand.

Does he give indication where the extra energy is coming from.

By the way I'm not in any Matrix.  ;D


Cheers

P.S. What I don't understand is that if the device was demonstrated and a actual patent granted, then how was it suppressed at the time when the drawings were in good condition and he was alive ?

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 28, 2013, 02:14:27 AM
Farmhand,

From your comments I am afraid that you have not followed the complete story of the Figuera´s gnerator. If you want to expend some time you could read in the forums, because I think you have not read them yet. After that, you could start doing some questions because you simple doubts are out of context at this stage.

By the way, from your ideas I could think that you are a person outside of the free energy researchers but I can see right now that you (or a person with the nickname farmhand) have 3,059 posts into the energeticforum.com  forum and you have posted some months ago in that forum about the Figuera Generator so you definitely are not unaware of this device. Sorry but I can not understand by you are asking such simple questions if you know this generator for months.

It would be wellcome if you join us in trying to replicate it, but first you have to teach yourself by reading the previous posts

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on April 28, 2013, 02:43:15 AM
Farmhand,

From your comments I am afraid that you have not followed the complete story of the Figuera´s gnerator. If you want to expend some time you could read in the forums, because I think you have not read them yet. After that, you could start doing some questions because you simple doubts are out of context at this stage.

By the way, from your ideas I could think that you are a person outside of the free energy researchers but I can see right now that you (or a person with the nickname farmhand) have 3,059 posts into the energeticforum.com  forum and you have posted some months ago in that forum about the Figuera Generator so you definitely are not unaware of this device. Sorry but I can not understand by you are asking such simple questions if you know this generator for months.

It would be wellcome if you join us in trying to replicate it, but first you have to teach yourself by reading the previous posts

Regards

Yes I am farmhand, those are my posts, what does that have to do with anything ?  I don't change my name and I only use one name everywhere, I get suspicious when people try to imply I am doing something wrong because I have a lot of posts, why get personal ? On the flip side a lot of posts shows I don't change names or post under different names, like a lot of people do do. I'm not accusing anyone of anything, or implying wrongdoing. Are you accusing me of wrongdoing ? If I get busy with a project here I might end up with 3000 posts here too so what of it.

I was just trying to understand where the implication of free energy came from. When things don't seem to make sense I question them.

In my last post I stated found where the claims of self running were made, and so now I have no more questions about that. Question answered. Thanks.
I do find it strange that there were no claims of free energy in the first 1902 patent or patent application or whatever it is.
And the patents don't look like actual granted patents to me.

Good luck and best wishes. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 28, 2013, 03:40:11 AM
Hi again,

Actually, the patent from 1908 was granted, if I am not wrong. Anyway the granting is not a measure of the validity of a device, it is a measure of the novelty and the inventive level of the patent.

I hope you could join us in this project. Everyone with experience is welcome. You can go throug the full story following chronologically the forums

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 28, 2013, 08:33:21 PM
Farmhand, you are like a super-fish stating that water cannot exists.... ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 29, 2013, 02:27:13 PM
It looks promissing I dont see what all the argueing is for. Tesla stated he had done something like this as well and blew it off as not new.Good for him. Guess that reveals intent and following tesla.s bread crumbs will require deeper scruteny when cross refferencing concepts. Pat 16709 http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/patents/b--16709.006/index.htm (http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/patents/b--16709.006/index.htm) could be operated backwards with a comutator to chop dc into ac. At least the horse shoe type set up. There are other patents in the list but i dont feel like looking them all up. Someone used partial quotes of the notes section from Clemente's patent excludding enough of it to make it look like something it is not. Reminds me of the way the bible is twisted by those who teach or preach. When you fill a cap to max potential I guess you have to keep filling it like a conductor feeding a motor less it magically empty out as quick as it was charged? I thought electric magnetic feilds store energy and release it back in a back spike. It looks like the back spike is going back into the beginning of the resister in the drawing no? Back spike is higher voltage shorter duration so I believe. The higher voltage back spike would out weigh the voltage of the battery or at least match it preventing the battery from expending more power to feed the feilds. As it maybe arguable that back emf does not exist for some,but for those who it dose exist if it be enough greater then the potential of the battery it could possibly be used to power a motor to operate the comutator. Where does it come from all this power? Is that as important as where is not going once started? I am not certain if a modern resister will work the same way a coil resister will work somehow I dont think so for this application. Which makes me think diodes will not work on this as well except maybe at the output but that would not not have any practical use unless you making Teslas ac to dc converter.
 Good luck and good job so far.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 30, 2013, 12:28:49 AM
Don´t you think that the text "To the origin" ('Al origen') and the sign "-" are redundant in the patent figure?
 
 I am not really sure why Mr. Figuera used the text "To the origin" and, at the same time, he used a sign "-". In the rotary comutator he used a sign "+" to mean the positive side of the generator. Therefore the sign "-" is meaning the return to the battery. Is "the origin" a external connection?.  Is it a grounding point? Is "the origin" refering to another source of energy?. Remember that Figuera stated that his generator was capturing electricity FROM the air. It seems that "the origin" may be the air. ¿?
 
I have a newspaper report ,that I hope to traslate soon, where Figuera told that he was capturing the electricity form the vibrations of the ether.

 For me it is very surprising why Mr. Figuera needed to add this text ("To the origin") if a simple sign "-" was more than enough. Perhaps he was refering to another thing.

Any idea?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 30, 2013, 03:34:45 PM
hanon

I believe this statement explains all : to the origin means special winding of coils as you can partially see on schematic....actually it is Figuera secret imho End of coils set is connected to the origin whatever it means, it is the tip for us that here lies the secret...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on April 30, 2013, 08:12:03 PM
hanon

I believe this statement explains all : to the origin means special winding of coils as you can partially see on schematic....actually it is Figuera secret imho End of coils set is connected to the origin whatever it means, it is the tip for us that here lies the secret...




Yes I agree, 'origen' can also mean 'fuente' which is 'source'... but again not telling us what or where the 'source' is?


edit: If it is electricity from the air... then could it be a connection to an antenna? (or to ground?)


Ron
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on May 06, 2013, 10:27:17 PM
Seven of this electromagnet sets should work fine!
 
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/)
 
Bajac

@bajac
Your setup was pretty much I'm ""ancioso"" to know the tests.
I want to build a setup too but I'll wait your tests with the coil cascaded to decide how to build my system.

anything new?
cheers!!!
Schiko
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 09, 2013, 02:28:04 AM
Schiko,
I have tested the coils with AC voltage only. I made this test to check the inductance of the primary coils. The results of the tests were kind of disappointed. When I applied less than 10volts AC, the primary current was approximately 4A. This is a clear indication that the self induced voltage of the primary coils is too low with 100 turns. The air gap really decreases the flux and the self-inductance of the primary coils. The air gap shall be as small as possible. If you look at the photos you will notice that the air gap of my coils is really small. I would say it is about 0.5 mm. To compensate, I am planning to add about 200 turns to each primary coil.
But, before I add the turns, I want to run the experiment with lower voltage levels. I have finished the construction of an adjustable linear DC power supply. See photos of the unit here:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/imageno14linearpowersup.jpg/
I am also writing an Arduino program to generate PWM pulses to drive an H-bridge. I think this is the most cost-effective solution for this apparatus.
On the other hand, I have been tied up with other personal business that limits the amount of time that I can spend on this project.
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on May 11, 2013, 02:16:40 AM
Hi all,
I've read this whole thread and find it very interesting. I found out about Clemente from a free eBook. I decided to try the digital timing circuit. I went to Radio Shack to see how much it would cost ($205.56). The tech there told me I would be better getting the parts myself, and he gave me the web address of the company he gets his parts from which is mouser.com . I ordered the parts from them at a cost of $48.42. Big savings!!! It only took 5 days to recieve my order.
They do have the Arduino, but I do not know anything about them.
I hope this site can help others.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 11, 2013, 09:48:36 AM
I'm short on money so I bought my Arduino clone for 10$  ::) but once I learned how to make it I prefer to build it myself according to needs (it's just a microprocessor with a voltage stabiliser)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on May 12, 2013, 06:35:27 AM
I'm short on money so I bought my Arduino clone for 10$  ::) but once I learned how to make it I prefer to build it myself according to needs (it's just a microprocessor with a voltage stabiliser)

no amount of money in the world will give you infinite energy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 12, 2013, 10:03:47 PM
what ? I'm just trying to help  :o if you have so little money to spend you can find arduino clone very cheap but I don't advice it in other case...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 15, 2013, 11:48:19 PM
Hi all,
I've read this whole thread and find it very interesting. I found out about Clemente from a free eBook. I decided to try the digital timing circuit.

Hi RMatt,

The circuit described by Patrick Kelly in his ebook is fine to do the work and easy to be built ( http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ )but it has some mistakes in the connections. Please see the scheme I have attached to this post for a correct configuration. I have just built the counters. I am waiting for the darlinton transistors to complete the circuit.

Good luck!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on May 16, 2013, 01:57:52 AM
Thank you for the circuit.
Patrick Kelly has shut down his site http://www.free-energy-info.com but was still allowing people to download ebook.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 02, 2013, 02:26:49 AM
Hi all,

Here I attach an interview to Clemente Figuera with some interesting insights. At the end of this post I have included a pdf file with the original press clipping an its translation into english.

INTERVIEW TO CLEMENTE
FIGUERA 1902 (ENGLISH)
Mr. Clemente Figuera. - The name of the
conscientious and intelligent engineer,
Inspector of mountains in Canary, is now
universally known, thanks to the news
published by the press about the generator
of his invention for producing far-reaching
consequences, because it constitutes a
valuable element in modern mechanics,
solving problems which will influence
powerfully in most industries.
The meritable engineer states in a recently
published work. - "With persistent effort
nature keeps its secrets, but man´s
intelligence, the most precious gift due to
the divine artist, author of all creation,
allows that slowly and at the cost of
thousands studies and works, the human
race realize that God's work is more perfect
and harmonious than it looks at first sight.
There was no need to create a agent for
each kind of phenomenon, nor varying
forces to produce the multiple motions, nor
so many substances as varieties of bodies
are present to our senses; In doing so, it
was proceeding worthy of a least wise and
powerful creator that that, with a single
matter and a single impulse given to an
atom, started in vibration all cosmic matter,
according to a law from which the others
are natural and logical consequences”
And later he adds: "The twentieth century
has given us the mercy of discovering its
program in general lines. It will stop using
the hackneyed system of transformations,
and it will take the agents where the nature
has them stored. To produce heat, light or
electricity, it will rely on the suitable
vibratory motion because nature´s
available storages are renewed constantly
and have no end ever. For the next
generation, the steam engines will be an
antique, and the blackness of coal, will be
replaced by the pulchritude of electricity, in
factories and workshops, in ocean liners, in
railways and in our homes”
So says Mr. Figueras, who is consistent
with his scientific creed, has based his
significant invention on harnessing the
vibrations of the ether, building a device,
that he names as Generator Figueras, with
the power required to run a motor, as well
as powering itself, developing a force of
twenty horse power. Should be noted that
the produced energy can be applied to all
kinds of industries and its cost is zero,
because nothing is spent to obtain it. All
parts have been built separately in various
workshops under the management of the
inventor, who has shown the generator
running in his home in the city of Las
Palmas.
The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus.
With the generator it may be obtained the
voltage and amperage required, as direct
or alternate currents, producing light,
driving force, heat and all the effects of the
electricity. It is said that shortly Mr. Figuera
will depart to Paris, to constitute a union in
charge of the exploitation of his invention.
Due to the gallantry of our good friend, the
distinguished photographer of Las Palmas
Mr. Luis Ojeda, we thank for making public
to our readers a portrait of Mr. Clemente
Figueras, to whom we congratulate on his
invention, making fervent hopes to produce
the expected beneficial results, for the
benefit of mankind, for the sake of science
and honor of our country, proud to count
him among the number of its illustrious
sons.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 02, 2013, 05:59:43 PM
When ever in the past I have asked how an alternator can use potential from a battery to form a field to power the loads and charge the battery which really does seem impossible.I am always told the engine provides motive power to turn the field to induce upon or in the stator the current and voltage to power the loads and charge the battery. Induction on the stator formed by building up and reversing magnetic field direction repeatedly quickly. The speed and strength of the feild regulated to offset each other should one be less then enough to get results. I always wondered why the snake cant eat it's tail other then the pain. I never really went as far as to examine the field strength required to get the effects in a counter form without motive power added to create the strength of field. Or how one would double the field strength in the stator with out needing twice the current which would consume more then the required output to do all that work. So looking for the differences between my imaginationary model and the topic of the thread I see a clever use of colliding two of the same direction poles. Thinking about examples of this effect,collision of two objects.How would that help when the two objects consume (x?) amount of energy to get moving so they can collide.At best resulting in no gain and more likely loss will never be avioded. Well eventually I considered a train motor car pushing two box cars side by side down two tracks side by side.One motor car two box cars. To a portion of tracks that ends in a closed loop. How much energy is there in the collision of two objects that are propelled by a single force and then seperated in direction so they can be smashed agaisnt one another? If the total amount of energy could be taken from the point of impact between the two cars would that equal the amount the of energy used to get the two cars moving? Like wise if two seamingly week electro magnets are put up agaist one another n to n or s to s  is the resulting crash 1+1 or something other then?What trickery can be applied to suck out every stitch of power from the point of impact instead of trying to leach off the effects of the moving cars as they pass by from the sides?Tansformers seem to be working off the sides of the fields only. While this thing is using the sides to set up fields (Motion) on the pole faces and smashing them together and pulling off at the point of impact. Is the strength of the feild magnified in the space between pole faces and what likely winding shape would it take to pick off the effect and transform it to current? The shape of field as it grows and compresses against the same would be usefull to determine the type of winding and if it should encompass the individual n or s feilds or all of them together?Or both? Just wondering.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 02, 2013, 07:41:29 PM
When ever in the past I have asked how an alternator can use potential from a battery to form a field to power the loads and charge the battery which really does seem impossible.I am always told the engine provides motive power to turn the field to induce upon or in the stator the current and voltage to power the loads and charge the battery. Induction on the stator formed by building up and reversing magnetic field direction repeatedly quickly. The speed and strength of the feild regulated to offset each other should one be less then enough to get results. I always wondered why the snake cant eat it's tail other then the pain. I never really went as far as to examine the field strength required to get the effects in a counter form without motive power added to create the strength of field. Or how one would double the field strength in the stator with out needing twice the current which would consume more then the required output to do all that work. So looking for the differences between my imaginationary model and the topic of the thread I see a clever use of colliding two of the same direction poles. Thinking about examples of this effect,collision of two objects.How would that help when the two objects consume (x?) amount of energy to get moving so they can collide.At best resulting in no gain and more likely loss will never be avioded. Well eventually I considered a train motor car pushing two box cars side by side down two tracks side by side.One motor car two box cars. To a portion of tracks that ends in a closed loop. How much energy is there in the collision of two objects that are propelled by a single force and then seperated in direction so they can be smashed agaisnt one another? If the total amount of energy could be taken from the point of impact between the two cars would that equal the amount the of energy used to get the two cars moving? Like wise if two seamingly week electro magnets are put up agaist one another n to n or s to s  is the resulting crash 1+1 or something other then?What trickery can be applied to suck out every stitch of power from the point of impact instead of trying to leach off the effects of the moving cars as they pass by from the sides?Tansformers seem to be working off the sides of the fields only. While this thing is using the sides to set up fields (Motion) on the pole faces and smashing them together and pulling off at the point of impact. Is the strength of the feild magnified in the space between pole faces and what likely winding shape would it take to pick off the effect and transform it to current? The shape of field as it grows and compresses against the same would be usefull to determine the type of winding and if it should encompass the individual n or s feilds or all of them together?Or both? Just wondering.




Woooo ,sorry...I have inability to learn long english sentences....but I will try to help you.....ready ? steady ? GO!
watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swNkzM-GYQ0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swNkzM-GYQ0)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 03, 2013, 05:29:56 PM
Hi all,
 
I have been helping to the person who did the first report about the life and inventions of Clemente Figuera in order to include more documentation into his site as well as translating it into English to make easier its understanding by most readers. We have included new material, some of them not yet released until now. The attached files to the new site are:
-        The pdf files of the 5 Figuera patents 
-        Test of practical implementation of a patent filed in 1910 by Buforn, a financial partner of Figuera, who kept on trying to commercialize his generator after Figuera´s death
-        A press report about Figuera
-        An interview to Figuera
-        Figuera´s telegram about the sale of the 1902 patent to a banker union
-        List of Buforn´s patents after Figuera´s death (you can see that they are mostly a copy of the Figuera design from 1908)
-        Some press clippings about Figuera´s invention
 
Spanish webpage: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005)             (link (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?p=4005))
English webpage:  http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)    (link (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258))
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 07, 2013, 12:18:33 PM
"The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus."

Egg of Columbus:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 07, 2013, 02:12:21 PM
"The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus."

Egg of Columbus:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus)


Yes, the simplicity overlooked by others. The scientific fact nobody care about ! The simple reality we ALL KNOW...Guess what ..???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 08, 2013, 03:46:54 PM
Tesla presented his Egg of Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla%27s_Egg_of_Columbus) the previous decade at the Chicago World's Fair in 1893.  Coincidence?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla%27s_Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla%27s_Egg_of_Columbus)

"Tesla's device used a toroidal iron core stator on which four coils were wound. The device was powered by a two-phase alternating current source (such as a variable speed alternator) to create the rotating magnetic field."

See the drawing into Figuera´s patent 30378:  http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf)

I copy one suggestion which was given to me:  "Therefore, what he does is a "Static Simulation" of the same exact changes the conductor faces, by applying a pulsating or sine wave current to the exciting coils...  ....creating a "Virtual Rotary Pulse"...we could easily apply it here if we independently feed one channel per independent exciter coils"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 09, 2013, 01:30:57 AM
Look what I have found about a replication of this generator :

http://maestroviejo.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/clemente-figuera-aunque-para-recoger-electricidad-no-haga-falta-bobina-tesla/ (http://maestroviejo.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/clemente-figuera-aunque-para-recoger-electricidad-no-haga-falta-bobina-tesla/)

The controller is a VFD (Variable Frequency Drive) from a DC motor  (PWM --> pulsed current)

Please share your thoughts about this info
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 10, 2013, 03:13:13 PM
Hanon
 Where did you get the image on Reply #97 ? Where you were asking about (To the origin). Maybe you could upload a collection of images and state where they each came from. I only speak English so looking at you last entry I was only able to veiw a couple photos. As far as thoughts go ,it apears or looks like the inductor/s are placed between the faces of the electro magnets not wrapped around a core piece of iron.Not like a transformer which shares a core with other secondary windings. I think most people can gather that from the patent discription. If all the lines of force will travel the air gap then another set of dynamic princeables have to be used like fluid dynamics to tweek the gap and its relationship to the inductive winding sitting between it. A iron core peice between the gap is most likely not needed ,the opposite electro magnets core will attract the lines of force through the space and inductor coil. If the inductor coil current ends up in the opposite electromagnets after passing through a load it will either be additive to the attraction of the lines of force.Or it will resist the lines of force by pushing back with the same force depending on how the n/s electromagnets are wound.Viewing the electromagnet charactoristics the B-H curve would benifit most if it were short and fat. To much waste goes into reaching the peaks of permiabillity when all the desired reaction is in the changing lines of force and cutting them with as much conductor as possible. Sory for the long sentences.I write as I would speak.Ive never had to use periods when speaking.Everyone I know complains about my grammer and spelling.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 10, 2013, 04:30:55 PM
Hi Doug,
 
The main site to download all info about Clemente Figuera (his 5 patents and all historical documents) is: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
 
Particularly, the picture you refer with the text "To the origin" is the figure from the 1908 patent. This is the direct link to the pdf file: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf)
 
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on June 10, 2013, 05:04:49 PM
so looking at you last entry I was only able to veiw a couple photos. As far as thoughts go ,it apears or looks like the inductor/s are placed between the faces of the electro magnets not wrapped around a core piece of iron

Hi Doug
in the text behind the photos it says one electromagnet is placed between the 2 collectors. And 4 electromagnets with 8 collectors is all that is needed.

Its an inverse way to the original patent, I think.
cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 15, 2013, 01:50:50 PM
Thanks Alvero and Hanon
 Been a long week.
 Have you considered how fast the little comutator gizmo will have to spin to output AC at 50 to 60 htz? It does all seem to be sort of backwards or inverse.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 17, 2013, 04:24:55 PM
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually meen south and north pole faces. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces.The need for seperate core peices is so the field caused by the pulse "on" travels through the other two coils opposite (y+n)or (s+n)so the direction of induction on the center coil and the off coil are the same. Current is added back in series with the on impulse acting upon the off coil through the power source. So if the on impulse was 12 volts + the feild would project through the two other core peices and coils.The reaction on the center coil would act like half a sign wave be it up or down. The outer coil which is off would induce in reverse direction of it's on state at a lower voltage or amperage but would add to the source voltage in series.A clever way to use as much of the feild as possible drawing in and using the lesser force on the far side of the induced coil used to power the load. Im not sure if enough current could be produced to remove the starting power source or not. The only way that could work is if there is unequal abillity of inducing a magnetic feild in a core piece when comparing voltage to ampere. Meaning if I use 1 volt and 100 amp on a core will it be the same measure of gauss feild as compared to 1 amp and 100 volts using identical cores and windings. So that the load could be used in part as a source once it is started even if that ment it has to be stepped up or down to add to the impulse field the strongest magnetic feild that it can produce without taking away from the productitvity of operating the load.Boy that was a bitch to explain that thought.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 17, 2013, 08:09:44 PM
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually meen south and north pole. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces

Doug, you could be right. I had already noted that in the whole text of the patent there is no reference where it is explicitly stated that "N" means north and "S" south. In fact it is just written: " Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and S. Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small). "

It is also curious the way of naming the induced circuit:  "y"  , and the clarification has always intrigued me:  "y" (small)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 18, 2013, 07:00:54 PM
Doug,
Could you post a simple diagram of what you mean? I have read this twice and I'm still not sure.
Thanks Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 18, 2013, 11:57:20 PM
I have been thinking that a possible configuration for Mr. Figuera 1902 motionless generator http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) is based on exciting the coils with a two-phase AC current in order to create a rotating magnetic field in the generator (as Tesla´s egg of Columbus). In this case the 1902 generator would be also composed by two unphased signals delayed 90º as Mr. Figuera did it in his 1908 generator.

I would like you guys have a look to D'Angelo patent www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf (http://www.overunity.com/www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf). In figure 15 (XV in romans numbers) it is represented a generator very similar to Figuera´s 1902 generator. D'Angelo excited his generator with the unphased signals represented in figures 5b and 5c  (V-b  and V-c in romans)

More info about D'Angelo: http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm)

Please comment your opinion about this patent. Do you see any paralellism between Figuera´s patent and D'Angelo´s patent?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 22, 2013, 01:06:13 PM
I dont know if I will get time to make a drawing or not over the week end. Work consumed all my time over the last week. Now i have a pile of work to look forward to at home.Im exhausted just thinking about it. Had a look at DeAngelo's patent read most of it in the dark at 3:30 am just to be able to read it without interuption. Those compound windings are madning to follow.He must of learned how to make his own contact segments from scratch so he could layer them anyway he wanted. I would like stay away from moving parts and brushes but i do see the simlarity in the theory of operation.Clever use of graduated combinations on the stator poles which could be a useful idea. You were very fortunate to stumble on that patent thank you posting it. Everyone is wakeing up and so my free time is gone like a fart in a typhoon. Being on the computor is a an attractant for the people around you to start asking why the sky is blue and why water is wet or did you see the latest video of another stupid pet and or child.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 22, 2013, 06:50:26 PM
Hi all,
I wanted to share my views for Figuera's 1902 patent. During my commuting time to work, I wrote the following about the 1902 patent. Please, forgive me for the poor quality of the hand drafted sketches but I do not have the time to make it better. All the sketches and figures can be found in the following webpage: [size=78%]http://imageshack.us/v_images.php (http://imageshack.us/v_images.php)[/size]
I uploaded image files because I was not able to upload the PDF version of the document. I had to convert it from PDF to JPEG. The following is the write up of the document:


Lenz’s law is a universal law of nature and there is no escape from it. Because of the standardization in the construction of today’s electric machines, the effect of this law is to transmit any disturbances generated by a connected load back to the source. Lenz’s law is the main justification for stating that electrical machines cannot operate with efficiencies greater than 100%. The standardization in the construction of electric machines (transformers, generators, and motors)  is enforced by organizations such as ANSI/IEEE, NEMA, IEC, etc.
However, it is a fact that electric machines can be built with higher output power than the input. The starting character of the over unity transformers or Motionless Electrical Generators (MEG) is the Spanish engineer Don Clemente Figuera. The work of Mr. Figuera is completely different than the work performed by Nikolas Tesla. Clemente Figuera experimented with coils having low frequencies and low voltages. The low frequency application allowed Mr. Figuera to use iron cores for his devices. On the other hand, Nikolas Tesla experimented with coils having high frequencies and high voltages. Because of the high frequency application, Tesla’s coils used non-magnetic cores.
Figuera and Tesla have two different technologies for the manifestation of over unity. Figuera teaches the techniques for minimizing the effects of the Lenz’s law to a point where passive electric machines become electric generators. Tesla, on the other hand, squeezed energy out of copper wires in such a high quantities that it can be compared to a cold fusion reaction. For example, Tesla estimated the power of his wireless transmitter to be approximately 100,000,000 volts at 1,000 Amps. THAT IS A LOT OF POWER!!!
Turning our attention back to the Figuera’s patents, it can be seen an incremental improvement. For instance, the Spanish patent #30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf) from 1902 discloses a generator with fixed rotor and stator and a moving induced winding moving through the air gaps. Spanish patent #30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) from 1902 discloses a true MEG. Clemente discovered that electrical power can be generated without moving parts and with efficiencies greater than 100%. The 1902 patents were sold to a consortium of banks. And finally, the Spanish patent #44267 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf) from 1908 shows an ingenious method for minimizing the effects of the Lenz’s law.
I disagree with the concept that the 1902 device requires two shifted phases or a rotating magnetic field. The 1902 patents should only require a single phase input AC voltage while the 1908 patent requires two DC voltage pulses shifted 90 electrical degrees.
For a magnetic filed to induce a voltage in a coil, the net magnetic field cutting the turns of the coils shall be nonzero. For example, FIG. 1 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/wdio.jpg/) shows five magnetic force lines pointing in a direction leaving (exiting) the winding. The net magnetic field cutting the winding turn is equal to five magnetic lines of force. Because the net magnetic field cutting the winding is nonzero, there is a nonzero net voltage induced in the winding. Assume that the voltage polarity is positive when the direction of the magnetic field points outward. FIG. 2 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/wdio.jpg/) shows five magnetic force lines pointing in a direction entering the winding. The net magnetic field cutting the winding turn is equal to five magnetic force lines. Because the net magnetic field cutting the winding is nonzero, there is a nonzero net negative voltage induced in the winding. If the numbers of magnetic lines entering and leaving the winding are equal, then the net induced voltage is zero. This condition is shown in FIG. 3 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/wdio.jpg/).
As described in my previous paper where I explained the concept of operation for Figuera’s 1908 patent, the polarity of the induced voltage is such that it will generate a current in which the associated magnetic field will always oppose the magnetic field that induced the voltage in the first place. The latter condition is also known as Lenz’s law.
FIG. 4 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/mgcj.jpg/) is my version of the configurations of the Exterior and Interior windings (a, b) of the 1902 patent. It is important to note that the 1902 patents do not meet today’s patent application requirement for disclosing the idea with enough details as to allow the device replication by a person with skill in the art. The patents of 1902 are not easily replicated because of the absence of important details. Great amount of detective work is required in order to replicate the device. Therefore, the device in FIG. 4 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/mgcj.jpg/) illustrates details of the interconnection of the windings not disclose in the 1902 patents.
The next task is the most important, to determine the layout configuration of the induced winding. The lack of details for the location of the turns of the induced winding is a major flaw in the 1902 patents. Nevertheless, an analysis - similar to the one used for describing the operation of the device shown in the 1908 patent – can be performed to figure out the riddle with relative ease.
Let us try first the induced winding configuration with the coil plane parallel to the plane of the page. FIG. 5 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/507/qmdt.jpg/) shows such a configuration. If we assume the relative polarity of the Exterior and Interior windings (a, b) is as shown in FIG. 5 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/507/qmdt.jpg/), then it represents the condition when the magnetic polarity of the Interior windings (b) are not equal forcing the magnetic field B to enter and exit the Induced winding turns (c) similar to the condition described above for FIG. 3. Because the magnetic field entering the Induced windings (c) also leaves, the net induced voltage is zero. The null voltage condition is true for any polarity combination except when all Interior windings (b) have the same relative magnetic polarity.
FIG. 6 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/fqme.jpg/) illustrates the condition in which the relative magnetic polarity of the Interior (or Exterior) windings is the same.  FIG. 6 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/fqme.jpg/) shows the condition already described above for FIG. 1, and therefore, there should be a net induced voltage in the Induced winding (c). However, because the magnetic lines must be closed paths, the magnetic field escapes in a direction perpendicular to the plane of the page resulting in an increased reluctance due to larger air gaps along the magnetic path formed outside of the device’s dimensions. This can be considered an inefficient magnetic design.
FIG. 7 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/203/9b8f.jpg/) illustrates what can be a possible working configuration of the Induced windings (c) as originally intended by Clemente Figuera. The Exterior and Interior windings (a, b) must be connected to provide a relative magnetic polarity as shown in FIG. 7 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/203/9b8f.jpg/). As you can see form the figure, the Induced winding (c) is cut by a magnetic field only exiting the Induced winding, and as previously explained in FIG. 1, there will be a net voltage induced in the c-winding – Induced winding. If a load is connected to the c-winding, a load current would be established generating an induced magnetic field around the c-winding. BECAUSE THE INTERIOR WINDINGS (b) ARE TOTALLY ENCLOSED BY THE INDUCED WIDING (c) THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD WILL ENTER AND LEAVE THE TURNS OF THE INTERIOR WINDING (b) INDUCING A ZERO NET VOLTAGE, WHICH RESULTS IN A CANCELLATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THE LENZ’S LAW. IN OTHER WORDS, THE LOAD CURRENT FLOWING IN THE c-WINDING IS NOT REFLECTED BACK TO THE b-WINDING. It should also be remembered that the Lenz’s law always occurs, that is, the induced magnetic field has a polarity that opposes the polarity of the inducing magnetic field originating at the Interior winding (b). However, the symmetry of the quadratic configuration of the Interior windings (b) and the Induced winding (c) causes a balancing effect on the induced magnetic field that enters and leaves the turns of the Interior winding (b). The direction of the induced magnetic field generated by the c-winding shown in section I-I (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/203/9b8f.jpg/) is perpendicular to the plane of the page, that is, it flows toward or away from the viewer.
FIG. 8 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/20/oae7.jpg/) shows an additional set of c-windings along the horizontal axis for increased power. Note that the magnetic field lines, shown with green lines, enter in the horizontal c-winding and leave the vertical c-winding.
FIG. 9 (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/tyxl.jpg/) shows another possible embodiment of the 1902 device. If symmetry is maintained, the balance of the magnetic paths should produce the magnetic flow drawn with continuous green lines. On the contrary, if the magnetic paths become unbalanced, the magnetic flow can also branch out as shown in dashed green lines.
Can you see any similarities between Figuera's work and Thanes'? Does Figuera's device make obvious Thanes' device?
Thanks to all!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 22, 2013, 07:07:59 PM
Suggestion : please zip your pdf and upload here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 23, 2013, 02:07:21 AM
Forest,


I already reached the limit of my upload quota.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on June 23, 2013, 04:01:19 AM
Thanks Alvero and Hanon
 Been a long week.
 Have you considered how fast the little comutator gizmo will have to spin to output AC at 50 to 60 htz? It does all seem to be sort of backwards or inverse.

If one revolution of the commutator produces one electrical cycle then 60 revolutions per second will produce 60 Hz and 3600 RPM will produce 60 Hz.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on June 23, 2013, 05:36:27 AM
I'm genuinely interested to see what experiments can reveal about this setup. Even though I'm skeptical I'm also hopeful.

From my researches into two phase/split phase induction motors, ( I have a Split Phase induction motor, which is basically a Two phase motor on a three wire plan that runs from a single phase power). The way it does that is simple, there is a capacitor in series with one of the two windings which shifts the phase in the winding with the capacitor in it's circuit by about 90 degrees. And that produces a rotating magnetic field just like in a three phase induction motor. The capacitor and the second winding can be de-energized after the motor is started and it works like a single phase motor, but it has more power when both windings are used all the time. And the power factor is better.

Like all induction motors, at idle with no shaft output taken the input is still significant, they get closer to 100 % efficient as the load gets nearer to the rated load for the motor.

Most have good full load efficiency but none are over 100%.

Lenz's law in my opinion is directly related and (in proportion) to the energy transferred from the supply to the load/rotor. With some motors they have low idle power and that increases a lot when loaded and other motors can be made to maintain a constant (high) input and an output that won't change the input but is limited to the amount of the input less losses. Some motors are made so that as the speed drops so does the input, so the input drops under load (some pulse motors).

Anyway, I'm all for experimenting and checking things out, and I certainly wouldn't ignore some free energy. If it happens I'll be very interested to find out how so I can try to do it in different ways.

I'm surprised there isn't at least some replications on the you tube.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 23, 2013, 06:04:37 AM
Farmhand,


Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred. The law refers only to the polarity of the coil voltages when induced by magnetic fields.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 23, 2013, 10:22:56 AM
I think (and I tried to told all of you about it) Lenz law is just Newton III law applied to EM fields. Just spot the negative factor -  both have: equal and opposite reaction. Both are the governons which eliminate the immediate explosive accumulation of force, so it's very rare in nature. I have no solid proof about this yet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 23, 2013, 10:24:12 AM
bajac : can you just post the pdf with pictures somewhere to let us download it ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 23, 2013, 05:41:58 PM
Forest,


Can you recommend a way or website?


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 23, 2013, 06:01:47 PM
Bajac,
I spent about 6 weeks full time building and testing both the 1908 and the 1902 stationary generators. We are missing some very important point. In one of the patents Clemente mentions the Rumpkorf coil which is an open path magnetic circuit driven by an interrupter. The large Rumpkorf coils used disk shaped secondaries. Also in the rotating generators there is mention that there is no reaction from moving copper only through a magnetic field without a core. This is of course wrong. Just drop a magnet down a copper pipe. In Mexico right after Clemente died, Benitez files for British patents on similar ideas. I have no doubt that these inventions work, just not as drawn in the patents.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 23, 2013, 11:11:12 PM
Bajac pointed to the one most important aspect : all the interactions has to be assymetrical or lenz free : or in other words-  the currents in induced coils when loaded would not affect inducer coils. This is the essence for all if not every ou devices I saw (patents, not in reality ;-) )
I fully agree with all Bajac statements, however I'm not so good in all theory like Bajac.




@Bajac: maybe www.box.com ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 23, 2013, 11:50:49 PM
Forest, I too believe the theories that Bajac explains, however when I build them with iron and copper they don't work.   :(
Garry


P.S.    I don't think Bajac is having such good luck either. :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2013, 12:58:52 AM

I was very happy with the testing of my first 1908 device. I was able to verify that the effects of the Lenz's law can be mitigated. However, because I only had one set of coils (instead of seven) I did not try for overunity.


I want to say that I still have not tested the tower that I built because my workload has been unbelievable! But, I expect to run a set of tests, soon.
 

I am sorry to hear that some of you had no luck with the construction of the device. This is the place to help each other replicating Mr. Figuera's apparatus.


@iflewmyown: can you publish some pictures of your set up? Make sure the pictures provide good details of the construction. You can use the Micro mode function of the camera for better closeup photos. If we work together, I am sure we will see good results.


Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 24, 2013, 02:10:42 AM

Bajac,  My camera is sorry but here is one photo. I am glad your 1908 setup showed negation of lenz's law. I am not working at this time so I will continue with more tests tomorrow.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2013, 02:05:39 PM
@iflewmyown,
 
After reviewing your setup, I see the following issues with your setup; first, the center iron core should no have voids. It should be a solid uniform piece. Second, you need to make the gaps uniforms. The interior and exterior iron core pieces should be firmly attached. Third, I am not sure about using welding. You may be better off attaching the different parts with screws. Fourth, use rectangular interior iron cores. A round shape makes it more difficult to wind the Induced coil.
You can use laminated sheets to build the iron cores. For example, I have Silicone Steel sheets from an old 45KVA transformer. I can cut enough pieces with scissors to form the exterior and interior cores.
My recommendation to you is to start all over again. I keep saying not to cut corners when replicating the device. If you can afford it, make the drawings with dimensions and bring it to a machine shop for a good finished product.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 24, 2013, 02:23:45 PM
Hi all,
 
As bajac has his upload capacity full I have attached here his document about the interpretation of Figuera´s 1902 patent  (No. 30378 - Generator Figuera-Blasberg )
 
The attached file belongs to bajac. I am just uploading it.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 24, 2013, 02:38:54 PM
@iflewmyown,
 
After reviewing your setup, I see the following issues with your setup; first, the center iron core should no have voids. It should be a solid uniform piece. Second, you need to make the gaps uniforms. The interior and exterior iron core pieces should be firmly attached. Third, I am not sure about using welding. You may be better off attaching the different parts with screws. Fourth, use rectangular interior iron cores. A round shape makes it more difficult to wind the Induced coil.
You can use laminated sheets to build the iron cores. For example, I have Silicone Steel sheets from an old 45KVA transformer. I can cut enough pieces with scissors to form the exterior and interior cores.
My recommendation to you is to start all over again. I keep saying not to cut corners when replicating the device. If you can afford it, make the drawings with dimensions and bring it to a machine shop for a good finished product.
 
Bajac


Bajac, thanks for your comments. The center core has more iron mass than the coil cores and should not be an impediment to the flux.
If you look at the second picture you see that the gaps are adjustable with the spacers behind the exterior magnets so that after any induced winding is placed in the gap the gap may be closed tight.
The octagon has machined ends and was shrink welded and checked for gaps.
Clemente and Robert Adams both found lamination unnecessary.
I was attempting to build a working device with enough output to be undeniable. Many small devices produce so little output that they are impossible to measure with accuracy.
Thanks,
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2013, 04:08:31 PM
iflewmyown,
 
Where is the induced winding? The turns of the induced winding should pass through the air gaps in accordance with the 1902 patent.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 24, 2013, 04:54:23 PM
Bajac, I tried many induced winding patterns months ago, except your fig. 8. The device had been dismantled and stored. I have many devices and limited bench space. When I saw your post I set the unit back up again and ran tests on that configuration. It was stored again by the time you wanted pictures.
I am now building a device with laminations for further testing.
Thanks
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 24, 2013, 07:56:39 PM
A gramme wound seconday two oposing core two primary single ignition coil  potentailly ballanced against the source voltage. Shared cores on a single frame wont make it easier to build. Gramme winds to secure desired voltage/amperage, combined units to secure more amperage.Secondary and primary connected.The question is how and where and is the secondary a floating ground.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on June 26, 2013, 11:40:45 PM
Farmhand,


Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred. The law refers only to the polarity of the coil voltages when induced by magnetic fields.


Bajac

I said " in my opinion" but you state it as fact. I really think you ought to be able to demonstrate an example before stating things as fact.

If Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred, then when people say they have negated Lens Law what exactly does that mean ? And what is the indication that has happened ? Makes me wonder why it's such a problem if it has nothing to do with input compared to output.

Not seeing the input power increase when a load is added is not a negation of Lenz's Law. It's easy to do. I can show several examples and they all show that the output is restricted to less than the input.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 27, 2013, 12:10:20 AM
Hi all,

I don´t know if everyone knows that Tesla himself mentioned the generator of Clemente Figuera in one of his letters.

Tesla sent a letter to his friend Robert Underwood Johnson, editor of Century magazine, after reading a newspaper clip about the discovery of Mr. Figuera in June of 1902. Please see the attached file, written up by Oliver Nichelson, who discovered this letter.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 27, 2013, 12:24:37 AM
There is something strange in this letter whihc I overlooked previously. What is the last statement about ? What is the Pic of Tenerife ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 27, 2013, 12:33:57 AM
I think we need a scan of ORIGINAL Tesla article "The problem of increasing human energy" from 1900 and especially page 200 and further...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 27, 2013, 12:41:21 AM
I said " in my opinion" but you state it as fact. I really think you ought to be able to demonstrate an example before stating things as fact.

If Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred, then when people say they have negated Lens Law what exactly does that mean ? And what is the indication that has happened ? Makes me wonder why it's such a problem if it has nothing to do with input compared to output.

Not seeing the input power increase when a load is added is not a negation of Lenz's Law. It's easy to do. I can show several examples and they all show that the output is restricted to less than the input.

Cheers


Farmhand,


You are comparing oranges with apples. I do not have the time to go over this issue again. But, I would like to say that the polarity of the voltage induced in a coil by a magnetic field is the same either when there is no load (zero current) also know as zero energy transferred, or when the coil is fully loaded (substantial energy being transferred).


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on June 27, 2013, 07:57:49 AM
I think we need a scan of ORIGINAL Tesla article "The problem of increasing human energy" from 1900 and especially page 200 and further...

Probably you don't need the original article. You need this (further explanation of the same author):

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing)

Pic of Teneriffe (Peak of Teneriffe) a peak of a mountain in Teneriffe.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 27, 2013, 11:32:33 AM
Probably you don't need the original article. You need this (further explanation of the same author):

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing)

Pic of Teneriffe (Peak of Teneriffe) a peak of a mountain in Teneriffe.


I'm not sure Qwert  ???  Why would Tesla who was pedantic make such a mistake ? Pic instead of Peak ? Written in capital ? Tenerife with one "f" ?  It's interesting because there is Pic a Tenerife in Canada and it is a mountain which I can assume ( a big assumption) was the place of experiment done by Tesla and his friends described in one article available on net. Ok, maybe it's too far but the mistake was indeed interesting
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 27, 2013, 02:29:18 PM
Tenerife with one "f" ?  It's interesting because there is Pic a Tenerife in Canada and it is a mountain which I can assume ( a big assumption) was the place of experiment done by Tesla and his friends described in one article available on net. Ok, maybe it's too far but the mistake was indeed interesting

Tenerife is the name of one of the Canary Island where Clemente Figuera lived in the time of his first patents in 1902. The peak in Tenerife Island, called Teide Peak, is the tallest mountain in Spain. I think Tesla was thinking that Figuera collected the energy from the medium using high altitutes, which is completely different to the method really used. I know that Tesla always lived in the some of the highest floors in the NY hotels searching for better conditions for some of his experiments during his last years.
 
I don´t know if Tenerife is also the name of another peak in Canada where Tesla did some experiments. Can you provide any link to this info?
 
Regards
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on June 28, 2013, 01:41:13 AM
Probably you are right, Forest: Pic a Tenerife is a mountain in the Newfoundland. But, this is mountain and that is mountain, who cares? Of course it makes significant difference if you gonna visit one of them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2013, 12:25:21 AM
Maybe it is simpler that what we think:

Patent from 1908: "so simple that vigilance can be overlooked"

Herald Tribune (June 1902): [Figuera] declares that the only extraordinary point about it is that is has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact."  .... " the whole apparatus is so simple that a child could work it"

Canarian Newspaper (May 1902): "My invention is based on a simple principle, which is not worth the warm eulogies with which I am honored and distinguished,  I can not understand that anyone did not happen to do what I've been fortunate to achieve"

Interview in a canarian newspaper (June 1902): stating that the secret of his invention resembles the egg of Columbus.

If energy is not created, and it is just moved from one place to another, we may say that a conventional generator is just capturing energy from the surroundings and trasnsforming it into electric energy. Maybe what you need to do is just to imitate a conventional generator, but without moving the stator or rotor and only moving electric charges and magnetic fields, just try rotating the magnetic field, and try electrical load in the tests. Maybe, just with this approach,  it may capture as much electricity as any conventional generator.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 01, 2013, 01:36:18 AM
Figuera mixed notions; it is big difference between transformation and amplification. Transformer does not amplify; amplifier does not transform. And he built a transformer and wanted to amplify. Of course, everything worked perfectly but only in his head, never in reality.

Maybe in combination with another idea there is a chance. Something like this:

http://www.overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg364428/#msg364428

or the same available in PDF: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2011143809.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 01, 2013, 10:42:08 AM
QWERT, why are you doing that ?  :o   Figuera device SURELY worked fine. It is a FACT not our supposition.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 01, 2013, 03:41:10 PM
In an effort to find the device which Tesla claims he already figured that out. The closest one I could find was US433702. Built as a ring two cores over lapped ,one shielded from the other. The other not sheilded on the outside of the shielded one seems to be of some importance as well as the the saturation capabillities being different from one another.Tesla appears to be using a motor where figura used resistance and back to the source. There is a slight statement of a pissy nature that Tesla wants to avoid mutual inductance of the two coils in his device but even when shielded it can if enough magnetic saturation is used in the primary. He also uses a motor with two sets of windings one run by generator the other by the device. He must have been wearing his dancing shoes on that trip to the patent office. There are a few simple facts about electromagnets which cant be argured. More turns of thin wire will produce a stronger magnet without using more current. Thicker wire with fewer turns will produce more induced current but lower voltage for the same strength magnetic feild. A iron core will produce a stronger magnet even more so then more turns of wire will.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2013, 08:12:56 PM
In an effort to find the device which Tesla claims he already figured that out. The closest one I could find was US433702.

Doug,
Certainly it is a curious patent ( "protect in a measure the secondary from the inductive action or effect of the primary by surrounding either the primary or the secondary with a comparatively-thin magnetic shield or screen" http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer) ). What I don´t know if we can say that this patent from 1890 can be related to the essay in the Century Magazine in 1900 "The Problem of Increasing Human Energy"  http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1900-06-00.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1900-06-00.htm) (page 200 as refered by Tesla in his letter is the reference to "novel facts" into the text, search for it ). Such novel facts are described as "that an electric current is generated in a wire extending from the ground to a great height by the axial, and probably also by the translatory, movement of the earth") . For that reason Tesla mentioned that the condition in the Peak of Tenerife were fine for such a method  (Tenerife is the Island where Figuera lived). I am afraid that Tesla were thinking that Figuera captured the atmospheric energy -as reported in the newspapers- by using a kind of antenna to take advantage of the height. In any case, I don´t know if we should look for references to free energy in Tesla´s patents from his first years. Tesla was very smart and if he had discovered in 1890 any small possibility to capture free energy he would  have follow this line of research for sure.

Qwert, Please read into this link all the references to real proofs of the Figuera Generator. http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258) I am sure he got it working. I have a reference where it is said that his house was lit with his generator, and I have heard of some references that Figuera´s plan was to light all the streets in his city (Santa Cruz de Tenerife) with his generator just using the standard wiring but, now,  powered by his generator. I am afraid that he didn´t make many friends in the electrical industry with such statement. He start working on it until he signed the sale of his patents to the banker union in september 1902. Later ...all is silence ... 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2013, 09:01:41 PM
Here it is a link to a Tesla paper where he talks about lag in the magnetic core:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-10.html#post226216 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-10.html#post226216)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 03:18:27 AM
QWERT, why are you doing that ?  :o   Figuera device SURELY worked fine. It is a FACT not our supposition.

According to all available articles, there are only witnesses that Figuera said so; no witness had seen it with his own eyes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on July 02, 2013, 03:58:23 AM
Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 03:53:10 PM
Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.
Garry

Any reference to this info?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 02, 2013, 06:01:08 PM
Quote from: iflewmyown on Today at 03:58:23 AM (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg364514/#msg364514)Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.

Any reference to this info?

This test was carried out in 1913, 5 years after Figuera´s death, because one his partner, Buforn, was kept on trying to commercialize this generator and filed 5 more patents all of them similar to the one from 1908. This test report  is kept in the Patent Office as a proof of practical implementation of the generator, a mandatory step to get the patent granted in those days. This patent was granted. It is a pity that the report of the test doesn´t not include if the machine was self-running apart from producing electricity. What was the reason to follow a dead end after 5 years?  For me it is clear. We have collected many proofs. For anyone who has some doubts:  please read the webpage deeply before going into questions. This test report was already posted in the forum some weeks ago.

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf)

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 07:57:45 PM
This test was carried out in 1913, 5 years after Figuera´s death, because one his partner, Buforn, was kept on trying to commercialize this generator and filed 5 more patents all of them similar to the one from 1908. This test report  is kept in the Patent Office as a proof of practical implementation of the generator, a mandatory step to get the patent granted in those days. This patent was granted. It is a pity that the report of the test doesn´t not include if the machine was self-running apart from producing electricity. What was the reason to follow a dead end after 5 years?  For me it is clear. We have collected many proofs. For anyone who has some doubts:  please read the webpage deeply before going into questions. This test report was already posted in the forum some weeks ago.

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf)

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)



These articles suggest that these patents are complete, while our replicators suggest that these patents must be incomplete. Where is the truth?

Here is an excerpt from the second link's article, the author says:

"I don´t doubt that in the coil induced currents are generated, as he thought, but to pretend that more energy is generated in the coil or set of coils, which is needed to generate the inductive fields, even if they vary over time very rapidly, is an illusion."

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on July 02, 2013, 08:11:23 PM
The patents are complete as possible. I do not believe the operating principle was known to the inventor.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 02, 2013, 10:34:45 PM
The patents are complete as possible. I do not believe the operating principle was known to the inventor.
Garry

Oops! That can be true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 03, 2013, 12:48:54 AM
Qwert, The original article about Figuera appeared in January 2011 issue of a History Magazine (Hisotria de Iberia Vieja), as you should have read. This article was done by a historian who researched the life of Clemente Figuera. I met him and I have helped him to get the rest of the patents from the Patent Office Archive and traslate them and his webpage into english in May 2013. This article appeared in an History monthly magazine and thus why he decided to say that no more energy could be generated than used. He did it at first not to show a overunity device but to show the life of this particular character. The rest of the webpage shows that Clemente Figuera was a respected engineer and he knew perfectly what he had between his hands. He powered his own house (lighting) as well as a 20 HP motor with his generator. He didn´t decided to realese the news about his generator, but it was as consequence of people who saw his house and soon the reporter were interested in his generator. His idea was to keep it secret until filing the patent , but the news was spread 5 months before filing the patents. I know all of this because I have some more newspaper clippings where I can guest that story, mainly they are just historic references to Figuera while the only source of technical info are his patents. There are many proofs, maybe there are much more proofs than in many others OU devices. I am not going to convince you. I have told all this for people who are really interested in Mr. Figuera´s invention. I am moving forward. Bye

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on July 03, 2013, 06:52:33 AM
...There are many proofs, maybe there are much more proofs than in many others OU devices. I am not going to convince you. I have told all this for people who are really interested in Mr. Figuera´s invention. I am moving forward. Bye



I'm also not going to convince anybody; my conclusions are only based on info available on internet. Maybe there are more proofs but for today, there are no more proofs. My quote at one of the previous posts (reply #164) comes from a link you, (hanon) provided. Don't hesitate to provide better source if you have such.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 03, 2013, 04:42:44 PM
hanon


Once again I want to say : THANK YOU for Your GREAT WORK !
And to all who investigated time and resources to re-vive Clemente Figuera history . Looks like there is real hope we recreate all free energy lost devices, because that was my small dream to dig out all info about Figuera life and story and you and author of original Spanish article fullfilled that dream ....It was almost like discovery of ancient pharaon tomb, really so deep in darkness and distance from our today life was forgotten Mr Clemente Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Overschuss on July 03, 2013, 05:15:37 PM
hanon


Once again I want to say : THANK YOU for Your GREAT WORK !
And to all who investigated time and resources to re-vive Clemente Figuera history . [...]


I second that. Thanks a lot, hanon !

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 04, 2013, 12:46:36 AM
Hi all,

Here I have traslated some letters that Clemente Figuera sent in 1902 to the newspapers. You can follow cronologically the sequence of events prior to the filing of the 4 patents in September 1902. Before filing the patents there are some references in the newspaper (in april- may - june 1902) . Later he filed the patents  in the 20th of september 1902, and, four days later he signed the sale of the patents to an international banker union. Later... all is silence ... until the 1908 patent few days before his death.

It is curious to note that Mr. Figuera said many times that the principle os his invention is very simple.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 04, 2013, 01:53:50 PM
Hi,
 
For people who may read spanish texts, you can find many more newspapers clippings about Clemente Figuera. I have just translated some of them, but spanish readers will enjoy for sure reading all those documents. --> search for Newspaper report II at the bottom side of the page.
 
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on July 05, 2013, 02:29:04 AM
Hello Hanon,

I watch this topic since 3 Days and one question might be of interest: What was the technique for building electromagnets at 1900 ? What kind of core-material was used ?
Why do I ask this seemingly trivial questions ? Reason : Remanence.
We have to check all paramters in order to get closer to a solution.

I found this here, it is in german but you can see all details: core is plain iron.. so we will have remance:

http://www.ebay.de/itm/LEHRMITTEL-Spulen-Magnet-ELEKTROMAGNET-Physik-EXPERIMENTE-Unterricht-Schule-/360488430954 (http://www.ebay.de/itm/LEHRMITTEL-Spulen-Magnet-ELEKTROMAGNET-Physik-EXPERIMENTE-Unterricht-Schule-/360488430954)

I do not believe that Figuera was using stacked core-material

Second question to focus on  : did Figuera use U-shaped core-material so he  had both rows of electromagnets influencing each other if current was changed ?
The patent does not give an answer which means more effort to spend on experiments.

Last thought about the magnetic flux-density across the gap where the laod-coils are place within.
My impression is: the overall magnetic tension across the gap is not changing, only the density of the fieldlines exiting the frontside of each S and N- core changes. This would mean that the load-coil in between the two pole-faces would get a massage with changing flux-field-density moving with each step form left to right and back again. So in this way there will be generated a potential-difference between both terminal of the load-coil y with one exeption: if the partial-currents for S and N-coils are equal. If this is the case than this would only make sense with a longer load-coil in order to have this effect. This gives a clue of the probable physical dimension of the set-up.
In other words: a constant change of flux-field-density between right and left pole-face of the load-coil is created while the overall magnetic tension in the gap is constant thus reduced Lenz-action. Because of the slow reacting iron-material there is also a smoothing out sharp voltage-peaks caused by the discrete steps of the commutator-brush

Just some thoughts of mine.

Regards

Kator01

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 05, 2013, 10:35:33 PM
Hi Kator,

The only source of technical info about Figuera´s devices are his 5 patents. There it is clearly stated that the cores were composed of soft iron. I think that the idea was to has a composition which could react quickly to the changes in the magnetization. The aim was to create a changing magnetic field in the electromagnets to try to emulate a normal magnet that is spinning inside a generator (N,S,N,S,N,S,...)

In some newspapers is written that Figuera ask for some material to a german company. I think he was looking for very pure iron. The purer the iron the greater the magnetic permeability , therefore, the stronger the filed created  (check in this link the huge increase in the magnetic permeability:

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeabilidad_magn%C3%A9tica (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeabilidad_magn%C3%A9tica)

The best source of technical details are his patents. You can find them in the webpage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 06, 2013, 02:48:34 AM
I consider the air gaps the most important feature of the Figuera's devices. It is against the common sense used in today's electric machines. For example, the discontinuities of the iron cores represented by the air gaps is to be avoided at all cost in today's standard transformers. Nevertheless, the discontinuity of the air gaps is what makes Figuera's devices work. The air gaps must be minimum, but they must exist. These air gaps create a reluctance circuit that allows the magnetic flux to be manipulated with ease for the purpose of minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law.


The above statement implies that the quality of the iron material is not critical. The reluctance of the small air gaps is thousands of times larger than the reluctance of any low quality iron core. The latter is also the reason why the design criteria of the Figuera's apparatus is based around the air gaps.


No considerable amount of power can be obtained without the air gaps feature. If you don't believe me, ask Thane and the BiTT transformer.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Liberty on July 06, 2013, 05:35:39 AM
I consider the air gaps the most important feature of the Figuera's devices. It is against the common sense used in today's electric machines. For example, the discontinuities of the iron cores represented by the air gaps is to be avoided at all cost in today's standard transformers. Nevertheless, the discontinuity of the air gaps is what makes Figuera's devices work. The air gaps must be minimum, but they must exist. These air gaps create a reluctance circuit that allows the magnetic flux to be manipulated with ease for the purpose of minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law.


The above statement implies that the quality of the iron material is not critical. The reluctance of the small air gaps is thousands of times larger than the reluctance of any low quality iron core. The latter is also the reason why the design criteria of the Figuera's apparatus is based around the air gaps.


No considerable amount of power can be obtained without the air gaps feature. If you don't believe me, ask Thane and the BiTT transformer.


Bajac

Anyone able to make one self run?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 06, 2013, 05:27:02 PM
It's been non stop rain here for days which has put a real damper getting much done.So I spent time pulling apart a 10kw inverter that failed to see why before gutting it for parts. As I was examining the transformers all 16 of them I decided to take one totally apart. They are EDT-39's ,much to my surprise they'er not wound with wire they use copper tape windings.Vastly easier to wind or rewind. The tape fills the bobin width and turns are layered. A funny thing though they are wound a bit like the Figuera's device with two differences. They use a single core made from a split core,two E cores really..The coils are layed on top of each other. As if the first is a primary ,second the induced secondary, then another primary over that.The induced secondary is center tap while the primaries are not, just to be clear. Im pretty sure that is to do with it putting out ac and to increase the self inductance of the coil. The cores are made of very nice material ferrite. It would be very easy to cut the tape in thirds width and add an air gap but there is no complete discription of how the Figuera's device is wound or if he used center tap winding on the induced. Maybe someone can find out when the center tap idea came about in history. Such as who discovered it and when. I know the inverter tech works and allways wondered how those little transformers could handle such large currents now I know. They use copper tape not wire. The insulator is just a slightly wider piece of thin plastic sheet. The tape is not coated nor bonded to the plastic insulator.Copper tape is short only a couple of feet each winding,very easy to work with very fast.I never would have considered tape before this now I may never again use wire the labor difference is too great to overlook. It would very funny if an DC to AC inverter is only a couple of tweeks away from being the finish product. I imagine there will be more pissed off people then can be counted.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 07, 2013, 03:27:19 PM
I decided to take a closer look at how these transformers are connected to the cuircuit board becuase something just didnt look right in the solder on the board.Some of the pin holes apeared to to clean ,virgin. I kept placing one transformer back in it's place and realized two pins were missing ,cipped off.In fact the same two pins on each of the 16 transformers are  nipped off at the ends so it doesnt reach the holes on the board.The outer most winding is only connected to the board from one end of the winding but made to look like it is connected at both. It would be easy to miss unless you noticed the defect is the same on all of them. Thats pretty strange.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on July 08, 2013, 07:06:17 AM
I blieve in the quest of the true hearted explorers, and laugh at the non-believers. this that I do has been done for centuries. the only thing that needs to be overcome is the BIG BANKS, THE Government THAT HAS BEEN BOUGHt<NOW MY COMPUTER WILL NOT WORK RIGHT FOR THE FIRST TIME>
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 15, 2013, 02:14:21 PM
Hi all,

As maybe you know there are two parellels forums about Clemente Figuera, one is this one, and the other is at energeticforum dot com. There is a question in energeticforum about the formulation of the Law of Induction. One formulation states that the magnetic lines  (B field) must cut perpendiculary to the moving wire (at speed "v")  of length "l" to produce induction E = (v x B) · l ·sin(alpha) , while the other formualtion E = - N·A·(dB/dt)  is related to the area A of the coil and no "cutting" of wire is needed to produce induction.

For those interested:  an interesting fact about the Induction Law here I link a file which explains that two different formulations seem to exist for the same phenomenon : one,  the Faraday Unipolar generator: E = (v · B) , other the Maxwell 2nd Law :   rot E = -dB/dt, which are two different formulations for the same law !!! Faraday-or-Maxwell by Meyl (http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Faraday-or-Maxwell.pdf) (read page 5 and next of the file). Meyl proposes a theory to take into account the longitudinal waves which were predicted by Tesla in his wireless power transmission system.

An interesting point which Eric Dollard comments in an old presentation  (Youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH3ETTd6bPI#t=38m58s) ) is that in the secondary of transformers the induced current is produced  in the wiring WITHOUT being cut by the magnetic field. Most of the magnetism is supposed to be enclosed into the iron magnetic circuit and therefore no magnetism should cut the secondary winding, which is external to the iron and only encircles the iron. Can anyone explain it to me???

Please comment if you see any inconsistency or error in my sketch. Maybe we are trying to explain it with the equation E = v·B·l·sin(alpha) ,and we should look for any other equation which fits better this phenomenon.
 
 Another doubt that I have is why this equation does not work by approacing o moving away a single conductor from a magnet, while the common Faraday equation E = N·A·(dB/dt) works perfectly with a coil approaching or moving away from a magnet.  Why the area (A) is included into this equation if the central lines of forces (inside the area) do not "touch" the surrounding conductor?? For me it would make more sense to use the perimeter instead the area, don´t you?.... I think we still have some misteries to solve around Magnetism !!!
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 19, 2013, 08:47:30 PM
I have found this patent US20020125774 which has some features in common with one of Figuera´s patents: Link (http://www.google.com/patents/US20020125774)
 
 In fact they both have different wiring disposition but it can be one other implementation of the motionless generator described into patent No. 30378
 
 Regards
 
 PS. Also a curious video I have seen: TPU Secret - Steven Mark (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8asKJNYJIY)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 20, 2013, 04:51:07 PM

“No single solution will defuse more of the Energy-Climate Era’s problems at once than the invention of a source of single solution on abundant, clean, reliable, and cheap electrons. Give me abundant, clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will give you a world that can continue to grow without triggering unmanageable climate change. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will give you water in the desert from a deep generator-powered well. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will put every petrodictator out of business. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will end deforestation from communities desperate for fuel and I will eliminate any reason to drill in Mother Nature’s environmental cathedrals. Give me abundant clean, reliable, and cheap electrons, and I will enable millions of the earth’s poor to get connected, to refrigerate their medicines, to educate their women, and to light up their nights.”

 Thomas Friedman in “Hot, Flat, and Crowded” 2008
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 31, 2013, 10:49:55 AM
The site rexresearch.com has included a page with many info about Clemente Figuera:
 
http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 09, 2013, 03:11:47 AM
John,
There is a very important aspect to be aware of when designing the 1902’s device. The effective wire length, in which voltage is induced, is equal to the distance of the iron core’s depth. In other words, a turn of wire crosses the air gaps twice in the direction of the depth of the iron core inducing two times the voltage. I noticed that the depth of the iron core shown by iflewmyown looks small. I thought you might want to take the latter into consideration.
Hanon,
Thank you very much for your incredible contribution!!!
 Bajac  [/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 13, 2013, 10:03:45 AM
Hi RMatt,

The circuit described by Patrick Kelly in his ebook is fine to do the work and easy to be built ( http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/) )but it has some mistakes in the connections. Please see the scheme I have attached to this post for a correct configuration. I have just built the counters. I am waiting for the darlinton transistors to complete the circuit.

Good luck!!

Hi all,
This is a post to correct some errors in the circuit that I posted in post #106 in the 15th of May. Please see the attached file with the correct circuit to implement two unphased signals as defined in the 1908 Figuera´s patent.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 13, 2013, 01:48:01 PM
Hanon,
Did you build and test the circuit?
My only concern is about the transition of the switching transistors. If the transition is not of the type make-before-break, then there might be an issue.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 13, 2013, 05:33:57 PM
In Patrick Kelly's ebook it stated :

The capacitor “C” in the above circuit diagram will probably not be needed. The switching needs to maintain a constant current flow through both electromagnets. I would expect the 4017 chip switching to be fast enough to allow this to happen. If that proves not to be the case, then a small capacitor (probably 100nF or less) can delay the switch-off of the transistors just long enough to allow the next transistor in the sequence to be switched on to provide the required ‘Make-Before-Break’ switching.

Maybe this might help?
"C" is connected between the base (input signal) and emitter (ground) of each Darlington Pair (NPN).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 13, 2013, 11:56:23 PM
Hi bajac,

I have not yet tested this circuit but I will do it soon because I start my vacations in few days. By now I have put my effort in replicating the 1902 patent. I have built 6 coils with a core of a low carbon steel (I couldn´t find soft iron!!) with 0.1%C and 300 turns of 1 mm diameter wire. I am in the process of testing with AC and soon I will also try with pulsed current. By now I haven´t found any incredible result, but I have to do more tests before taking some conclusions. After testing with pulsed current I will move to the 2 signals as described in the 1908 patent.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 14, 2013, 02:35:27 AM
Hanon,


The recommendation from RMatt is valid. Once you build your circuit, test the signals using an oscilloscope. If the on-time of the transistors during switching does not overlap, you can add small capacitors to the input of the transistors. You can test with different capacitance values until you get the correct signal.
I also would like to ask you if you can publish some photos of your progress work.


Thank you,
Bajac. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 17, 2013, 05:00:28 PM
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually mean south and north pole faces. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces.The need for seperate core peices is so the field caused by the pulse "on" travels through the other two coils opposite (y+n)or (s+n)so the direction of induction on the center coil and the off coil are the same. Current is added back in series with the on impulse acting upon the off coil through the power source. So if the on impulse was 12 volts + the field would project through the two other core peices and coils.The reaction on the center coil would act like half a sign wave be it up or down. The outer coil which is off would induce in reverse direction of it's on state at a lower voltage or amperage but would add to the source voltage in series.A clever way to use as much of the field as possible drawing in and using the lesser force on the far side of the induced coil used to power the load. Im not sure if enough current could be produced to remove the starting power source or not. The only way that could work is if there is unequal abillity of inducing a magnetic field in a core piece when comparing voltage to ampere. Meaning if I use 1 volt and 100 amp on a core will it be the same measure of gauss field as compared to 1 amp and 100 volts using identical cores and windings. So that the load could be used in part as a source once it is started even if that ment it has to be stepped up or down to add to the impulse field the strongest magnetic field that it can produce without taking away from the productitvity of operating the load.Boy that was a bitch to explain that thought.

Doug,

As I answered you I had already noted that in the whole text of the 1908 patent there is no reference where it is explicitly stated that "N" means north and "S" south. In fact it is just written: " Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and S. Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small). " .

 Even in none of the 5 later patents from Buforn it is clearly stated the orientation of the N and S electromagnets...which is curious because you could think that in the last patents maybe Buforn could have clarified this important point instead of barely mentioning it. Buforn always wrote almost the same as Figuera about the N and S electromagnets.

Studying your proposal more deeply I have also noted that in the patent text is written a sentence which match with your explanation that the current in the "OFF" coil adds to the input current in the "ON" coil. In the patent it is written: "As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken". Buforn also states that: "the current which crosses the magnetic field produced by the electromagnets, current which -after doing its function- returns to the origin where it has been taken". Buforn also states:" .... The electricity moves on the magnetic field and returns from it by the two opposite INLET and OUTLET sides of the resistor." (Buforn patent No. 57955, page 12)

Until now we were thinking that the resistor has only one way (current going into the electromagnets). Maybe we were mistaken and the resistor is a doble way path for the electricity to come into the "ON" coil, and to return after being induced in the "OFF" coil if like poles of the electromagnets are in front of each other ....

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 18, 2013, 11:39:39 PM
Hi all,
 
 About the discussion if like poles are facing each other in the 1908 Figuera patent I have thought in the next scheme. Please share your thoughts about the possibilities of success of this proposal.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 19, 2013, 06:35:49 PM
 Hi all,
After a discussion with one of the forum members, I realized that an explanation is in order. The legacy of Mr. Figuera is that he showed us two methods in his 1902 and 1908 patents for mitigating the effects of the Lenz's law. The 1902 method teaches that the influence of the induced magnetic field can be minimized if the inducing and induced coils are placed symmetrically at an angle of 90 degrees. The requirement for symmetry is important because it is the condition that balances the magnetic fields entering and leaving the inducing coil (interior), and therefore, it helps on cancelling any induced voltage in the inducing coil (interior coil) due to the reaction of the induced coil (exterior coil).
The second method of 1908, on the other hand, consists in pulling the induced magnetic field ("y" electromagnets) away from the inducing electromagnets ("N" and "S" electromagnets) by applying two voltages 90 degrees out of phase. Even though the 1902 method is much simpler to implement, it is my belief that the 1908 method is more efficient. The reason for being more efficient is that the 1908 method does not suffer any decrease in performance as the load increases. However, a performance degradation can be expected of the 1902 method due to some symmetry loss whenever the device is loaded. The interaction of the inducing and induced magnetic fields bends and shifts the resultant magnetic field. The distortion of the resultant magnetic field is considered a common event for all electrical machines. For instance, the DC motors use "compensating coils" for minimizing it. And, maybe the same compensating coil concept can be used with the 1902 method. The latter is also the reason why the efficiency of the 1902 device should be tested by incrementing the load gradually from zero up to 100%.
I was able to verify that the currents flowing in the N and S electromagnets are not affected by the load connected to the "y" electromagnets. For example, a while ago I published the data of one of my experiments in which I had 1.3A DC flowing in the N and S electromagnets. The 1.3A did not change even when the "y' electromagnet was short circuited. The experiment was also validated by Woopy in one of the videos he posted in Youtube.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 19, 2013, 07:00:49 PM
Hi bajac,
Which do you think would work better? Doug1's thoughts about  N, S, and Y, or what is in Patrick Kelly's ebook.
(Clemente's work is in chapter 3)
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: v8karlo on August 19, 2013, 09:11:36 PM
Just my opinion..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2013, 12:12:57 AM
RMatt,


Could you be more specific to what embodiments you are referring to?


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 12:33:56 AM
Wooohoooo I think we have solved it !  I mean : lasts posts explain everything !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 20, 2013, 12:48:39 AM
Hi all,
After a discussion with one of the forum members, I realized that an explanation is in order. The legacy of Mr. Figuera is that he showed us two methods in his 1902 and 1908 patents for mitigating the effects of the Lenz's law. The 1902 method teaches that the influence of the induced magnetic field can be minimized if the inducing and induced coils are placed symmetrically at an angle of 90 degrees. The requirement for symmetry is important because it is condition that balances the magnetic field entering and leaving the inducing coil (interior), and therefore, it helps on cancelling any induced voltage in the inducing coil (interior coil) due to the reaction of the induced coil (exterior coil).
The second method of 1908, on the other hand, consists in pulling the induced magnetic field ("y" electromagnets) away from the inducing electromagnets ("N" and "S" electromagnets) by applying two voltages 90 degrees out of phase. Even though the 1902 method is much simpler to implement, it is my belief that the 1908 method is more efficient. The reason for being more efficient is that the 1908 method does not suffer any decrease in performance as the load increases. However, a performance degradation can be expected of the 1902 method due to some symmetry loss whenever the device is loaded. The interaction of the inducing and induced magnetic fields bends and shifts the resultant magnetic field. It is considered a common event for all electrical machines. For instance, the DC motors use "compensating coils" for minimizing it. And, maybe the same compensating coil concept can be used with the 1902 method. The latter is also the reason why the efficiency of the 1902 device should be tested by incrementing the load gradually from zero up to 100%.
I was able to verify that the currents flowing in the N and S electromagnets are not affected by the load connected to the "y" electromagnets. For example, a while ago I published the data of one of my experiments in which I had 1.3A DC flowing in the N and S electromagnets. The 1.3A did not change even when the "y' electromagnet was short circuited. The experiment was also validated by Woopy in one of the videos he posted in Youtube.
Bajac

Hi,
I guess that maybe Figuera had to redesign his original generator (1902) to skip the censorship after selling his patents to a banker union in 1902. He surely sell the patent and he was under a non-disclosure agreement. That´s why he and his generator disappeared from the public from 1902 to 1908.

Later he noted that the bankers were hiding his discovery and he had to re-design his genrator in order to bring it into the market. I think that he achieved a new design around 1907 or 1908, he maybe tried to delayed his last patent the more he could (note: in the 1908 patent is written that he waited for filing the patent until he got running his generator) . In 1908 he filed his patent and he died few days later. Maybe he was ill so he decided to file the patent before dying as a legacy, as a way to assure some incomes from his discovery and as a way to protect the business he had with Buforn, his associate in those years. I suppose that he was ill because he lived in the same city where it was the patent office and instead of filing the patent by himself and taking it to the office he sent to Constantino de Buforn as his representative. This could be an indication that he was quite ill at that moment, and he couldn´t leave his home to carry the patent to the office. But all of these ideas are just my suppositions.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 01:45:18 AM
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:


"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "


This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2013, 02:41:01 AM
I also thought about the 3-phase line reactors such as this one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/R-HOGENKAMP-3-UI-60-a-3-PHASE-LINE-REACTOR-BV-10833A-/380187334031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5884ee558f (http://www.ebay.com/itm/R-HOGENKAMP-3-UI-60-a-3-PHASE-LINE-REACTOR-BV-10833A-/380187334031?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5884ee558f)


The core of the reactors can be cut to produce the "N", "S", and "y" electromagnets. Then, it would be relatively easy to reproduce the 1908 device.


What do you think?


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: e2matrix on August 20, 2013, 03:31:02 AM
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:


"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "


This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !
forest this may or may not be what you want but you do know about :  translate.google.com  ?  It auto recognizes the language and translates to whatever other language you want.   From google this is their translation:  If within a magnetic field is rotated a closed, placed perpendicular to the lines of force in said circuit born induced currents that will last as long as the duration of the movement, and whose sign depends on the direction in which semueva the armature circuit. "  I believe semueva is se mueva which means 'move'.    Or straight from his patent 'background' :  "if within a spinning magnetic field we rotate a closed circuit placed at right angles to the lines of force a current will be induced for as long as there is movement , and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the induced circuit moves."  says it more clearly. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 10:10:52 AM
what is that ?  "within a spinning magnetic field " ? is that really in patent in original text ?  what means SPINNING ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tagor on August 20, 2013, 01:13:48 PM
what is that ?  "within a spinning magnetic field " ? is that really in patent in original text ?  what means SPINNING ?


<<
Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "
>>

en francais :

si dans un champ magnetique on fait tourner un circuit fermé , ce circuit étant placé perpendiculairement au ligne de force du champ , dans ce meme circuit se créé un courant induit qui durera tant que le mouvement se prolonge et
le signe de ce courant dépend du sens de rotation du dit circuit

google translate

if in a magnetic field is rotated a closed circuit, this circuit being placed perpendicularly to the line of force of the field, in this circuit an induced current is created which will last as long as the movement continues, and
the sign of the current depends on the direction of the system's rotation
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 20, 2013, 01:44:51 PM
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:


"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "


This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !

Man-made translation:

"If, within a magnetic field, a closed circuit, placed perpendicularly to the line of force, is rotated, in this circuit will appear induced currents which will last as long as the movement continues, and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the system is moving"

I think you have taken this sentence from Buforn´s patents ( http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf) ) which are only written in spanish. I have been reading them carefully and ALL of them (5 patents) have almost the same exact text. The more mind-blowing sentences are those that I translated in my previous posts. Buforn try to explain more in depth the relation betwen both rows of electromagnets which are related by induction (which is not written in Figuera patent), and he just finally say simply that to collect the induced current a coil can be placed between the electromagnets. Previously he had defined the electromagnet just calling them N and S without any further explanation about its poles.

If I have time I will try to translate at least the one or two most important pages from one of the Buforn patent´s (sorry for not translating the whole patent but each one has around 20-25 pages, basically explaining many different things as the magnetic field of the Earth, the influence of the Sun over the Earth sending energy which can be capture by the atmosphere (ionosphere) and the rest captured by the ground. He even refers to the Tesla´s experiments of sending energy wireless to long distances (which proves that he was aware in 1914 of the test developed some year before in America by Tesla...). One important thing mentioned by Buforn is that the generator does not suffer from the Lenz Law  (which was never mentioned in 1908 by Figuera). In one of Buforn´s patents he called Lesen , in another one Leuz. I don´t know if it was just a typing error by the person in charge of transcribing the text or that Buforn didn´t know how it was correctly written the name of Lenz.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: PiCéd on August 20, 2013, 01:50:35 PM
The 191st post is interesting, just hope that the current does not return to the primary with several connections of this type. :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 20, 2013, 01:53:29 PM
Hi bajac,
Which do you think would work better? Doug1's thoughts about  N, S, and Y, or what is in Patrick Kelly's ebook.
(Clemente's work is in chapter 3)
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf)

Hi Rmatt,

I can say you that all the info included in Patrick Kelly´s ebook abouth the Figuera interpretation was released by Bajac in one of the first posts of this thread. You can search for the pdf document uploaded by Bajac.  For new users I have searched for the Bajac´s post  (post #55) where the explanation is attached as a pdf file:

http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg346032/#msg346032 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg346032/#msg346032)


Later on, Kelly designed a circuit to acomplish the task to create the two signals in the resistor, and he added it to his ebook.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: PiCéd on August 20, 2013, 02:11:25 PM
(Aïe) I probably forgot that it worked only in resonance frequency. ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 20, 2013, 05:47:38 PM
(I am no expert in electronics, just interested in electronics for about 40 years. I did go to school for computer electronics about 18 years ago, but have forgotten alot since then. Anyway, back to the fun stuff.)
Doug stated:
"Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces."
In the ebook it shows N for North, S for South. They are alligned with N and S facing. It goes on to explain that the current rotates around the coils.
That is what I was refering to earlier.
Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2013, 06:23:50 PM
RMatt,
There is no rotation of the magnetic field or the currents in the 1902 and 1908 Figuera's devices. I do not understand why some people keep referring to a rotating field. The principle of these devices is the same transformer action used in todays transformers. A voltage is induced due to a change in intensity of the magnetic field. It does not have to rotate.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 20, 2013, 07:27:25 PM
Hannon yhank you .I see where you answered my question I must of missed it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 20, 2013, 07:43:29 PM
Spinning a magnet or anything ells is in the background section of the patent not in the discription of operation for the device being patented. It is his way to explain how generators or dynos work and why, to set up in the text of the discription what makes his different.
 In the discription it states:
The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial
induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it
matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of
the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them;
but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained
electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve
the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any
inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine."[/font][/size][/font][/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2013, 09:14:10 PM
I know Doug, but "spinning" took my attention because it resemble the way I look at magnetic field. I don't know why picture in Figuera patent seems to differs from description, however...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 21, 2013, 12:10:13 AM
The way I see it is that Figuera is still referring to the prior arts in the description part of the patent. The prior art being the existing technology of the day, which consisted in generating electricity by using rotating generators. In his patents, Figuera clearly states that his generator does not require moving parts. The small motor shown in the 1908 patent was used to generate the two (90-degree shifted) voltages. It should be noted that the way the these voltages are generated is not part of the inventive concept. It is just an embodiment showing a way for implementing the inventive concept.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 21, 2013, 12:39:35 AM
TRANSLATION OF KEY PARTS OF BUFORN PATENT No. 57955 (1914) (text extracted from pages 12,13 and 14)


By using a magnetic field, consisting of two series of electromagnets N and S, a resistor and a circumference of contacts isolated from each other .....

...

Note that only the contacts located in the Northerm semicircle are in communication with half of the end sides of each resistor, and the contacts in the South semicircunference are not in communication with the resistor, but respectively with the contacts in the semicircle communicated with half of the end sides of each resistor, and inasmuch as the current moves on the the magnetic field and returns from it  by the input and output sides of the resistor, and as this field is composed of two series of electromagnets N and S , therefore, and as result of the operation of the device when the electromagnets N are full of current, the electromagnets S are empty, and as the current flowing through them is reducing or increasing in intensity according it passes by more or less turns of the resistor, and therefore, in continuous variation;  since we have done a continuous and organized variation we have achieved a constant change in the current which crosses the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets N and S and whose current, after completing their task  in the difrerent electromagnets, returns to the source where it was taken.

...

We have already achieved to produce the continuous and organized change of the intensity of the current which crosses the magnetic field.

 ....

The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it, because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we call inducers,  another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire.

....

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be produced , as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all purposes you want.


http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original spanish text:

Valiéndose de un campo magnético, compuesto de dos series de electroimanes N y S, de una resistencia y de una circunferencia de contactos aislados uno de otro .....

...

Hay que tener presente que unicamente están en comunicación las delgas de la semicincunferencia Norte con la mitad de los extremos de las partes de la resistencia y las de la semicircunferencia Sur no se comunican con la resistencia, sino respectivamente con las delgas de la semicircunferencia comunicadas con la mitad de los extremos de las espiras de la resistencia y además como quiera que la corriente pasa al campo magnético y vuelve del mismo por los extremos de entrada y salida de la resistencia y como este campo está constituido por dos series de electroimanes N y S, resulta que en virtud de lo expuesto y del funcionamiento del aparato, cuando los electroimanes N están llenos de corriente , los S, están vacíos y como la corriente que los atraviesa va aminorando o aumentando en intensidad según pase por mas o menos espiras de la resistencia, y por tanto en variación continua y puesto que esa función hemos logrado hacerla continua y ordenada habremos conseguido el cambio constante de la intensidad de la corriente que atraviesa el campo magnético formado por los electroimanes N y S y cuya corriente una vez cumplida su misión en los diferentes electroimanes vuelve al origen de  donde se ha tomado.

...

Hemos conseguido ya producir el cambio continuo y ordenado de la intensidad de la corriente que atraviesa el campo magnético.
 
....

El modo de recoger esta corriente es tan facil que hasta parece excusado explicarlo; pues no tendremos más que intercalar entre cada par de electroimanes N y S, que llamaremos inductores, otro electroimán, que denominaremos inducido, de tal modo debidamente colocado que, o bien los extremos de su núcleo entre en el seno de los correspondientes inductores y en contacto con sus respectivos núcleos o bien aproximados inducido e inductor y en contacto por los polos, pero sin que en ningún caso haya comunicación alguna entre el devanado inducido y el devanado inductor.

....

Además se puede aprovechar tambien el seno  de los núcleos de los electroimanes inducidos en los que se puede colocar otro electroimán inducido de reducidas dimensiones y con igual o mayor longitud que el núcleo del inducido grande. En estos segundos inducidos, se producirá corriente eléctrica e industrial al mismo tiempo que en los primeros; y la corriente así producida podrá ser suficiente para el gasto de excitación continua de la máquina, quedando completamente libre toda la otra corriente producida por los primeros inducidos para dedicarla a toda clase de fines que se desee.

http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/buforn47706.jpg)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on August 21, 2013, 01:26:27 AM
Hello hanon,

I do not know what´s wrong but I do not see any graphics at rexresearch since a few months. This might be some failure at some of the german servers. If I specifically open a graphic or pic ( show graphic ) I get the following URL:

http://rexresearch.com/badbotnopage.htm (http://rexresearch.com/badbotnopage.htm)

I looks like rexresearch regards my visit as beeing a bad robot and blocking it. Viewing the text is not affected.

anybody here who has the same experience ?

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 21, 2013, 03:07:03 AM
Kator01,

You may want to try this page:
http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 22, 2013, 01:13:06 PM
TRANSLATION OF KEY PARTS OF BUFORN PATENT No. 57955 (1914) (text extracted from pages 12,13 and 14)


By using a magnetic field, consisting of two series of electromagnets N and S, a resistor and a circumference of contacts isolated from each other .....
...
Note that only the contacts located in the Northern semicircle are in communication with half of the end sides of each resistor, and the contacts in the Southern semicircunference are not in communication with the resistor...

Why does he call it "Northern semicircle"?  It is curious how Buforn defines that the "Northern semicircle" is in communication with the resistor but not the "southern semicircle", don´t you think so?. Please see the attached picture. It seems that the he places the North in the upper part of the sketch (as usually happens in maps). If so, the electromagnets may be are labelled according to their orientation: N facing North and S facing South ... Just an idea....I really don´t know

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 22, 2013, 05:48:14 PM
well well well I have strong suspicion that we missed the point....





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 22, 2013, 06:15:34 PM
Hanon,
The rotary switch shown by Figuera in the 1908 patent is correct when using only a contact. The patent that Buforn submitted requires two contact in opposite directions (at 180 degrees.) Otherwise, a single contact needs to rotates 180 degrees before making connection with the resistors and it will make it difficult to have a make-before-break configuration. I do not trust Buforn's work!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 22, 2013, 06:20:41 PM
Actually, if you refer to the upper left corner of the sketch you can see that Buforn is repeating the contact sequence required for a single switch similar to the 1908 patent. Then, the "Northern semicircle" refers to the upper part of the rotary switch and not to the polarity of the electromagnets. KEEP FOCUS GUYS!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 22, 2013, 09:22:25 PM
Hanon,
The rotary switch shown by Figuera in the 1908 patent is correct when using only a contact. The patent that Buforn submitted requires two contact in opposite directions (at 180 degrees.) Otherwise, a single contact needs to rotates 180 degrees before making connection with the resistors and it will make it difficult to have a make-before-break configuration. I do not trust Buforn's work!
Bajac
Hi,
Can you elaborate why in Buforn's patents two contacts are required?

From the documents I have collected in 1907, one year before Figuera's death, Buforn and Figuera were already associated. After Figuera's death the 1908 patent was owned by Buforn. Later he filed 5 patents, which are identical between them, and almost a carbon copy of the 1908 patent (as it can be seen comparing their identical figures.., the resistor, the conmutator, the electromagnets names...all the same. Thus is why I think that we can find some missing details into Buforn's patent and their sketches.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2013, 12:38:42 AM
Hanon,


Why do you think that the puzzle has not been solved? This is probably the simplest of all FE devices that I have ever seen. I thought that I had clearly explained the basis of operation for this device. In my opinion the only task left is to build the apparatus.


I have seen persons complaining that the device did not work but when they posted the photos, their setup is not what Figuera taught. They just made short cuts that are not recommended. I keep repeating myself, JUST REPLICATE THE DEVICE AS SHOWN IN THE PATENTS!!! Plain and simple.


Why are we still wasting time with something like looking for the meaning of "N" and "S"? Stop this analysis paralysis until the device has been really replicated.


If the device does not work after its replication, then we can go into the troubleshooting mode. I am kind of disappointed that no one has replicated this simple device (including myself).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on August 23, 2013, 01:42:44 AM
Bajac,  You yourself have in no way replicated the 1908 patent and yet you keep talking. The 1908 patent was for a 20 hp generator and used a mechanical rotating commutator. Your own pictures do not show a rotating commutator or a device anywhere near 20 hp. I await your replication and some test results. The reason people still look for answers is that none of us have solved this puzzle, simple as it may be. 
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2013, 02:25:12 AM
Bajac,  You yourself have in no way replicated the 1908 patent and yet you keep talking. The 1908 patent was for a 20 hp generator and used a mechanical rotating commutator. Your own pictures do not show a rotating commutator or a device anywhere near 20 hp. I await your replication and some test results. The reason people still look for answers is that none of us have solved this puzzle, simple as it may be. 
Garry


Garry,


The important question is: what is the invention? Can you isolate Figuera's inventive concept from the implementation details? For instance, suppose that someone else build the generator using the same configuration of the Figuera's electromagnets as shown in the 1908 patent but instead of using a rotary switch, this person uses a stepper motor driver to generate the two 90 degrees shifted signals. Is this person infringing Figuera's patent if the 1908 claims include the rotary switch? Do you really believe that the rotary switch is part of the inventive concept? I will leave it up to you as a homework but I can give you a hint: refer to the oscilloscope's graphs published by Woopy using a rotary switch and the graphs that I published using an electronic circuit (Arduino controller) to generate the signals.


The above questions are for brainstorming, only. You do not need to reply because I will not waste more time on this issue.


It looks like you did not understand what I was referring to when I said "replicate Figuera's apparatus".


Bajac

PS: I am planning to take a long vacation away from the forum. However, there is more than enough information posted (for you guys) to build this wonderful apparatus.




 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 23, 2013, 04:15:24 AM
Hi all,
We are in this forum to help us each other. Our aim is the same for all of us:to get a working device. Please take it always in mind. The rest is secondary. Do not start having a row for a different point of view.Bajac, we need your unvaluable help and expertise.

As for myself, as you know, I dont have deep knowledge of electricity, but my task here is to spread what it is written in the original spanish patents, to keep this forum alive and to show details to make you think about possibilities. Bajac, I trust your technical report, but I am just discussing some points which are not well defined as the orientation. I am just trying to help, it is good to have different options in case the first attemp fail. I hope to see you around here tomorow. ;), and I agree that we may skip the use of a rotary conmutator.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 23, 2013, 04:46:48 PM

snip

The above questions are for brainstorming, only. You do not need to reply because I will not waste more time on this issue.

It looks like you did not understand what I was referring to when I said "replicate Figuera's apparatus".


Bajac



Hi Bajac,


Now the one problem I have with your suggestion is... what to replicate?


You see I build things from a standard drawing which has a plan view, a front view and a side view. The patent drawings are only schematics and convey no useful information. What did the device look like?
How big is it? what shape are the cores? how many turns of what size wire? Then it is said that the coils are at 90 degrees in the 1902 patent but not in the 1908 patent? Then in the latest patent there is a 'bar; show across the three coils... so much confusion and no answers???


Regards,


Ron


"Schematic": schematic diagram represents the elements of a system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System) using abstract, graphic symbols (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol) rather than realistic pictures. A schematic usually omits all details that are not relevant to the information the schematic is intended to convey,
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 23, 2013, 05:13:15 PM
Greetings everyone,

I have lurked on this forum on and off for a couple of years and this is the project I seriously believe will work and is within my ability to build. My goal is to build a self running 12VDC high amperage generator to feed a high output inverter to 120VAC.

After studying the 1908 patent and sketches and modeling the commutator on a CAD I understand how it works with one contact brush (+ voltage) and the resistor. It is not complicated at all. The picture of the commutator in the Buforn patent in post #216 by hanon is correct. The commutator ring with the 16 contacts is attached to the resistor taps in 8 places on the upper side of the ring. Those 8 upper contact points are jumped to the lower 8 contact points in the lower half of the ring as shown in the upper left corner of the Buforn drawing. The brush must always be in contact with two adjacent commutator contacts at all times as it rotates around the commutator. If you have ever taken apart an old fashioned automobile generator, just picture the commutator with one wide brush riding on it.

My build is going use the commutator and an old fashioned wound resistor. These may have to be fabricated and may take a while.  My thinking is the methods available in 1908 should be used. Presently I think a small DC motor will be used to rotate the brush. The motor and the supply voltage to the inducing coils will be powered by separate windings in the induced coils after starting.

May I ask a favor? Can anyone point me to information about building or winding high amp DC coils? Maybe in the 10 amp range or higher?

Best Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2013, 06:15:09 PM
i_ron,
Your are 100% correct! A patent is just a concept, an abstract!! You can implement it by trial and error or by using some engineering expertise.
I will post (in about two weeks) some sketches and information of what I am doing with the corrections based on my experience with this device. It might help you and others.
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 23, 2013, 10:46:51 PM
Again : is there anything in patent text about box around the connection point from the commutator to power supply , I spotted ?
Maybe there is a better , bigger  picture of the method of connection here ?


Why ? You should easily guess.... ::)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 24, 2013, 12:58:13 AM
i_ron,
Your are 100% correct! A patent is just a concept, an abstract!! You can implement it by trial and error or by using some engineering expertise.
I will post (in about two weeks) some sketches and information of what I am doing with the corrections based on my experience with this device. It might help you and others.
Bajac


That will be great Bajac, I look forward to that.


Thanks, Ron

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 24, 2013, 09:27:55 PM
Again : is there anything in patent text about box around the connection point from the commutator to power supply , I spotted ?
Maybe there is a better , bigger  picture of the method of connection here ?


Why ? You should easily guess.... ::)

The connection box has intiged me since I saw it. I domt know what represents and there is no further explanation in the text. It is only mentioned that the current after doing its task in the electromagnets returns to the origin where it was taken..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 24, 2013, 10:29:45 PM
The connection box has intiged me since I saw it. I domt know what represents and there is no further explanation in the text. It is only mentioned that the current after doing its task in the electromagnets returns to the origin where it was taken..




you see... origin ? not power supply ???  ::)

better give us the complete translation
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 25, 2013, 01:13:42 AM
Hi all,

In Reply #199 it was mentioned about 3 phase line reactors on ebay. I just purchased 10 of the transformers for a total price of $173.23. Expensive, but I hope they will work. I should recieve them by 29 Aug 13.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 25, 2013, 01:40:53 AM
I also bought 10 line reactors of about 3/4HP. I am still waiting for them. Something to keep in mind is that the line reactors are designed for 3% impedance only. Which means that there are not too many turns in the coils. I had recommended about 300 to 400 turns for the N and S coils. The wire gauge of these electromagnets can be AWG#18. The "y" electromagnets shall not be less than 200 turns and no smaller than AWG#14.


You need to be careful when cutting the iron core. The laminated core should be pressed or sandwiched between two pieces of stiff material to avoid damaging the steel sheets.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 25, 2013, 02:13:21 AM
bajac,
The ones I bought were RL-00201 reactors, 600V 2Amp. I thought they might need to be rewired, but did not know wire size and turns. Thank you for the information.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on August 25, 2013, 02:52:40 AM
Hi Ron,

long no see here. How are you ?

Many things are not clear in this patent/concept:

1) are the N-S-cores one U-shaped core or two cores with an airgap at the bottom
2) how long are the output-coils ?  For me this is the most important question because taking into accout the
    shape of the primary voltage  ( see attachment ) at S and N  then my estimation is that at each moment
    during on cycle the overall magnetic flux across the long secondary coil does not change...but the magnetic
    field-density-distribution along secondary-coil is changing at each step. This then means that - if we assume
    a core-material  exists in the secondary coil - that the inductivity at each end of the secondary coil is
    different ( I know it sounds strange ) ... but with one  exeption: if current is equal in both primary coil
   ( midth of the cycle )

So if I visualize the process during on cycle the magnetic field density at at both ends of the secondary might behave like a standing wave ( reflecitve) ...if one side is decreasing the other side is increasing.
In other words we have a local change of magnetic field-desity without an overall change of the inductivity..
a change without Lenz.

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 25, 2013, 05:42:51 PM
Hi Ron,

long no see here. How are you ?

Many things are not clear in this patent/concept:

1) are the N-S-cores one U-shaped core or two cores with an airgap at the bottom
2) how long are the output-coils ?  For me this is the most important question because taking into accout the
    shape of the primary voltage  ( see attachment ) at S and N  then my estimation is that at each moment
    during on cycle the overall magnetic flux across the long secondary coil does not change...but the magnetic
    field-density-distribution along secondary-coil is changing at each step. This then means that - if we assume
    a core-material  exists in the secondary coil - that the inductivity at each end of the secondary coil is
    different ( I know it sounds strange ) ... but with one  exeption: if current is equal in both primary coil
   ( midth of the cycle )

So if I visualize the process during on cycle the magnetic field density at at both ends of the secondary might behave like a standing wave ( reflecitve) ...if one side is decreasing the other side is increasing.
In other words we have a local change of magnetic field-desity without an overall change of the inductivity..
a change without Lenz.

Regards

Kator01


Thanks Kator, I am doing fine, two projects on the go beside this...


But yes, that makes sense, trying to follow this so every bit helps!


What I need is to see (or understand) a working model of the principle...


B R,


Ron
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 26, 2013, 04:58:22 PM
Quote
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus
 

I may have discovered the meaning of this!

Using the rotating commutator and tapped resistor from the 1908 patent, if you graph the voltage change of the N S solenoids as the brush rotates through 360 degrees the voltage waves are flattened at the extreme difference of voltages. The volts remain at the maximum for one set of coils and minimum for the other set of coils for close to 70 degrees of rotation, at 0 degrees and 180 degrees. Then the voltage bias begins to switch to the opposite coils. In other words the magnetic bias moves back and forth like a pendulum, pausing at the end of each stroke before reversing. The exact amount of 'dwell' would depend on commutator design and brush width.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 26, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Where is the return to the origin in the drawing http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/126632/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/126632/)  from page 15? Or the starting power supply conection?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 26, 2013, 05:58:23 PM
Thinking some more, I wonder if magnetic spin is involved.

The molecules of the core(s) become aligned N-S, or S-N when magnetized. Molecules have mass, thus inertia. If the NS inducing coils are oriented with like poles to each other, as the field strength transfers from one set of coils to the other, the molecules in the induced core would flip N for S. then S for N, repeatedly.  Wouldn't they? Having mass and inertia I think they would continue in the same direction of 'spin', thus each molecule would become a tiny spinning magnetic field, spinning faster and faster as the inducing field strengths move back and forth at a greater rate. Bruce_TPU on his TPU thread keeps emphasizing “counter rotating magnetic fields” as a key to power.

Something to think about.

@Doug1
The return to origin and the starting power supply would be the square box (battery / power source) just above the signature.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 27, 2013, 04:16:31 AM
A few questions about coils/electromagnets.

When several coils are connected in series, does the voltage add together?, does the amperage add together?, does it multipy?

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 27, 2013, 09:56:53 PM
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.

"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: i_ron on August 29, 2013, 04:34:21 PM
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.

"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"

Bob


Hi Bob,


Yes that is almost the case, voltage adds and amps stays the same... except it will be less than one coil as the more coils in series the more resistance, so voltage and amps will need to be adjusted accordingly.


Ron
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 29, 2013, 05:14:13 PM
Thank you for the info Ron.

I recieved 4 of the 3 phase line reactors, and should recieve the other 6 today. ( see Reply# 232 and Reply#234 ). I am going to try using just one for now and reverse one outside coil to get a N-S allignment. I am not going to rewire them until after I have tried them to see if they will work. If they work, I am considering placing all 10 sets ( instead of just 7 sets ) to get a greater output. My main problem will be that I do not have an O-scope, so I will have to find someone with one to run test for me. Hopefully I will have some results by next week.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 29, 2013, 11:21:28 PM
Maybe the reason for being a Lenzless generator is simply because both changes in the inducer currents are in opposition. The back emf is a consecuence of the change in the magnetic field, and is calculated by the equation back_emf = -N·S·dB/dt .
 
 Because the current in the N electromagnets is increasing while the current in the S electromagnets is decreasing we can say that their time derivatives are opposite :  dIN/dt = - dIS/dt
 
 As the inducer field is calculated as B = (nu·N·I)/length , therefore deriving:  dB/dt = (nu·N/length) · dI/dt . For this reason , with opposite changes in both inducer currents, the change in both induced magnetic fields are  in opposition: dBN/dt = - dBS/dt
 
 If both values can be added (I am not sure (please comment..)) dBfinal/dt = dBN/dt + dBS/dt = 0  . Thus, althought there is a change in the primary magnetic fields (the cause of the induced current), the resulting induced magnetic field (the consecuence) -moving back to the electromagnets- is almost eliminated.
 
 Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 29, 2013, 11:51:38 PM
Hannon
 You will also have to add to the calculation how much effect  one set of electromagnets helps to collaps the other set or pushes the feild in the other direction as the one set is powering up the other is powering down not just to a state of off but being pushed by the other harder then it would fall by itself. The back emf will be aided by the forward emf of the other.
Title: Two unphased signals
Post by: hanon on August 30, 2013, 06:24:35 PM
Hi all,
 
In the attached Excel file there is a calculation to obtain the two 90º unphased signals required in the 1908 patent. The method is very simple, and is summarized as follows:
 
            1- From a AC signal apply a full wave rectification to convert it into two always positive waves. ( By using a center tapped rectifier you can obtain two series of signals: one coming from the positive half waves of the AC signal, and the other signal from the negative half waves of the initial AC signal ). Also you can create both series using a PWM, taking a derivation of its output to a NOT gate, and then two transistors to create two independient square signals.
 
            2- Apply a RL filter or a RC filter. This filter will smooth and will create a lag in order that both series of signals will be delayed and, thus, superimposing themselves. This way you can obtain the two unphased signals.
 
The RL filtering of RC filtering is defined by the value of L/R or R·C in each case. Choosing a proper value you can get the required result. All the info is included into the Excel file. I have included both possibilities because I don´t know if you can use a RC filter with high amperages, or if the output intensity will rever its direction in an RC circuit. Please comment.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 01, 2013, 02:58:39 PM
 Its obvious no one has figured this out yet or come up suporting evidence in a working operational theory. I think the patent was skillfully executed. 
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on September 02, 2013, 08:28:34 AM
Hi all, Bob here with a thought or 2?
 
IMHO,

In PJ Kelley's newest ebook V24.01 R. Date 14 AUG 13, pg 175, next to the bottom of the page,

"Señor Figueras has constructed a rough apparatus
by which, in spite of it’s small size and it’s defects, he obtains 550 volts, which he utilises in his own house for
lighting purposes and for driving a 20 horse-power motor."

1. 1 HP = 746 wats, 20hp = 14,920W, + lights (lets say 80W), TOTAL=15,000 Watts

2. 15,000 Watts/ 550 Volts = 27.27 AMPS (lot of Amps) Maybe multi stage trans. to get it to useful?

3. 7 sets would be 27.27 Amps each with a Voltage of approx. 78.6 Volts

4. So if there were 27.27 AMPS in each set, and each set had 78.6 Volts, with 7 sets there would be:: 15,004 WATTS.

5. If there were 10 sets, each would have 27.27 AMPS and about 78.6 VOLTS, with 10 sets there would be 21,432 WATTS.

Comments welcome and needed as alsways

Bob

(It's funny what my little brain thinks of when I have a drink or two! LOL)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on September 02, 2013, 08:45:00 AM
Hi all again,

I think I might need another drink or three to get this straight.  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on September 02, 2013, 09:12:50 AM
Hi All,

Bob again,

looking at the only diagrams available, do you think pnp and npn transistors will help? limited v/a?

I think with another drink, that "origin" on the "-" side might mean total ground-put a ground rod in the ground, preferably deep. gather E energy! So?

Any questions I will not be qualified to answer because
I need another drink!!!! yea!

My tempory disability( dog tried to kill me) is slowing me down some!
But I Love this fun!

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 02, 2013, 09:53:12 AM
Hi RMatt,

The quote that you refers about Figuera generator is dated in 1902 ( 20 HP and 550 V), so it was obtained with his 1902 generator (which didn´t ahve 7 stages but a different arrangement. In the 1902 patent is written that he only shows a group of four stages but more stages could be used for increasing the output). All the newspaper references that we have are from 1902, later, after selling the patent there are no more references, and his 1908 was filed just before dying so no more reference in the newspapers.

About the NPN transistors in Kelly´s diagram I think there won´t be any limitation V/A because they are for the inducer current which is supposed to be small.  Instead of using a cascade of the 2N3055 + 2N2222 to create a Darlington you could use a BDX53 which is directly a Darlington (so it is simpler to be welded)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 02, 2013, 04:35:59 PM
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.
  If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 03, 2013, 03:28:37 AM
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.
  If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.
 
I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand  it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out  a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 03, 2013, 11:21:52 AM
I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand  it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out  a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.
Hi a.king21,
Could you explain better how can energy be extracted from an oscillating bloch wall? Is there any link or reference to this subject?

What it is true is that Figuera stated that the distance between the two inducer external coils should be very small. And this statement is related with some kind of effect that he was trying to capture. Is it needed to wind each external coil in clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW) directions?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 03, 2013, 03:15:51 PM
Hi a.king21,
Could you explain better how can energy be extracted from an oscillating bloch wall? Is there any link or reference to this subject?

What it is true is that Figuera stated that the distance between the two inducer external coils should be very small. And this statement is related with some kind of effect that he was trying to capture. Is it needed to wind each external coil in clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW) directions?


http://servv89pn0aj.sn.sourcedns.com/~gbpprorg/mil/mindcontrol/Richard_Clark_Letters_Compilation_Vol1-3.pdf


About half way in the pdf Richard Lefors Clark explains the gating of the Bloch wall.


I would treat N ans S as one continuous coil - so the windings are in the same direction. The Bloch wall arises naturally.
What Figuera appears to have done is to oscillate the Bloch wall with this simple design.
That's why he clearly pictures the y coil as much smaller than the two control coils.
If the y coil is much  bigger than the Bloch wall then Lenz kicks in and ou is gone.
You can get one coil from each dead CFL . The core is however ferite and may need to be changed.
I've had this on my "to do" list for a long time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 09, 2013, 07:46:25 PM

What Figuera appears to have done is to oscillate the Bloch wall with this simple design.
That's why he clearly pictures the y coil as much smaller than the two control coils.


It is true that Figuera stated in his 1902 patent that the separation between the poles of the electromagnets must be very small. In 1908 Figuera wrote: "Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small)" I have always been intriged why he called line "y" and not coil "y".

Anyway, I have been collecting some material about magnetism discoveries by Howard Johnson and, Roy Davis & Rawls. Maybe you are interested in the next video. It is -at least- surprising:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWOKefrcpAg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWOKefrcpAg)

I know that there is more into magnetism that the current concepts accepted by mainstream science.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 09, 2013, 11:52:14 PM
Hi all,

Apart from the 1908 Figuera patent there is another Figuera patent (No. 30378 dated in 1902) about a motionless electrical generator: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) This device is even simpler to replicate. Figuera appeared in the newspapers in 1902 when he was using this generator to produce 20 HP. Therefore we know that he also got high energy gains. Later, Figuera changed his design after selling this patent to a banker union.

 A deep study about this patent was also done by user Bajac. You can find his technical study in the next link, which is really worthwhile to read it:

http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/)

As a conclusion: "BECAUSE THE INTERIOR WINDINGS (b) ARE TOTALLY ENCLOSED BY THE INDUCED WIDING (c) THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD WILL ENTER AND LEAVE THE TURNS OF THE INTERIOR WINDING (b) INDUCING A ZERO NET VOLTAGE, WHICH RESULTS IN A CANCELLATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THE LENZ’S LAW. IN OTHER WORDS, THE LOAD CURRENT FLOWING IN THE c-WINDING IS NOT REFLECTED BACK TO THE b-WINDING."

Note: The induced winding is denoted by (c) while the inducer electromagnets are (a) and (b)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 11, 2013, 01:53:58 AM
Regarding the methods to minimize the effect of Lenz's law, one can see that Figuera used two method: the method of in the 1902 patent and the method in the 1908 patent. If you draw the magnetic flowpath in the 1902 generator, it can be noted that the flow of the induced coil (external) enters and leaves the inducer coil (internal). Because the inducer coil is symmetrically placed at 90 degrees inside the induced, the flow from the induced coil will enter and leave the inducer coil. If the flow enters and leaves the coil no voltage will be induced in it. Notice that it is not enough to placed those coils at 90 degrees but also there must be symmetry. This is because if there is no symmetry the balance of magnetic flux entering is not necessarily equal to the magnetic flux coming out.

The method of 1908 is different. While one coil induces another coil deviates the induced magnetic flux so that this flux does not oppose to the coil which is inducing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 14, 2013, 03:26:59 PM
How deep is the rabbit hole Alice? Oh ,it's about yay deep ends about at the spot where you cant go any farther.lol
  In the interest of statements used one could consider what is the patent for and what is it not for. Things that already are in play are not new. Seperate them out and learn what is not new. To better understand what is.
 close'st comparable. There seems to be many, patent 3913004 "Method and apparatus to increase electral power" Built on a standard generator frame fairly straight forward good nuggets. But is that one BS umm have to check the citations 3078409 "Electrical power converter" GM owned aviation use.2640181 "Dynomo electric machine " signed to Bendix aviation.Who know they had a aviation division ,Ithought they just worked with braking systems.3223916 "Brushless Rotary inverter" signed to TRW inc a big gov contractor with lots of little gubby fingers in lots of pies.Like a daycare center on crack. Now while I like to ponder how all these big wigs never stumbled on the idea to just make thier toys not turn I have to remind myself with whom they like to sleep with.Who stands to lose the most money.Not just the money today but all the money for all time. Figura figured out why have it turn at all.Others figured how to stay in business and still get the benifits of better engineering. You can learn a lot if you keep plugging along.The method is what is important not the exact toys. The same applied to weapon like a gun would yeid a zero recoil gun where all the forces both forard and recoil are directed to forward only motion or force forward.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 17, 2013, 12:25:28 AM
Hi all,
 
 I have done some testing with a similar winding to the one posted for the 1902 patent No. 30378. As you can see I did not get any output result ( 0 volts) . The output I got with irregular (manual) pulses were a measurement error dued to the voltmeter. But with AC (and also tested with intermittent DC current) I did get 0 volts. I first tested with two identical coils and later I tested with different coils (internal coil:150 turns, copper wire of 0.4 mm diameter; external coil: 900 turns, copper wire 0.4 mm diameter)
 
 Video 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPKIfTUhWgo)
 
 Video 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syUWEQQiAkY)
 
 I think that in this case the equation of the  induction over a wire of length "l" has to be applied. Changing the magnetic field over a static wire is the same as having a static B-field and move the wire closer and farer from the electromagnet sequentialy. In this case we can not apply the Faraday Law for the induction over a coil perpendicular to the B-field but the equation of the induction of a moving wire at speed "v":
 
 E = l·B·v·sin (alpha) , being alpha the angle between the B-field and the velocity v
 
 In the  case of patent 30378 (motionless generator)  the wire under a oscilatory B-field can be assimilated to move the wire in parallel to a static B-field so the angle  is sin(alpha) = sin (0º) = 0, and then the induced voltage is null. In case of the patent 30376 (where the winding is wound around a drum which rotates around some electromagnets in the center) the wire is moving at right angle of the B-field, so sin(alpha) = sin(90º) = 1 . Therefore I think that this winding proposal is fine for this patent with the moving coil (patent 30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)), but it won´t work for the motionless generator (patent 30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf)).
 
 In 1902 Figuera patented two different devices but maybe he just built one of them. I don´t know if he built both or he just built one and the other was a theoretical proposal. In the 1902 newspaper clippings is written that the Figuera device "consisted of a generator, a motor and a kind of governor or regulator". This description matches much better with the requirements for the the implementention of patent 30376 where a motor is needed to rotate the moving coil.
 
 One detail about patent 30378: reading the text it seems to indicate that all the electromagnets are conected to the same inducer signal. But reading carefully: " this generator whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that, in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, ..." Why did Figuera  remark that it was arranged in two sets of electromagnets? ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 18, 2013, 09:05:40 PM
I am planning to replicate the Figuera device. As I am not that great on electronics, I am planning to build a mechanical switching device. I have a metal working skills and equipment. One question I have is, how many turns of wire are recommended for each primary and secondary windings? Online there in one builder using 150 turns on the primary's and 300 on the center secondary.
Thanks to all,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 19, 2013, 07:56:15 PM
Shadow
It seems that everyone may have given up on the stationary device. I have planned to make the commentator on my switching device able to either bridge two contacts (spark less) or not. I reasoned that since most all of Tesla's devices use a spark, maybe Clemente was trying to somehow conceal the way the way his machine really worked. Also, one experimenter got a better response when every time he manually touched the wire to complete the circuit. Anyway, I could still use a sparking device in other experiments!

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 19, 2013, 08:19:34 PM
Hi all,

Shadow, wellcome to the forum!! I think Bajac sometime ago posted the proper number of turns for these coils. Search it into Bajac´s posts from some weeks (or months) ago.

Another subject: I posted a winding for the patent 30376, the one with the rotating coil but with static core, I made a mistake in the poles. Now I have calculated fine and with the rotation of the wire the intensity generated in both sides adds up.  (I don´t know how to edit my previous post. If someone knows please tell me how to do it)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 19, 2013, 09:04:22 PM
Hello everybody
I am testing the "concept" of the 1908 patent
As the commutator I am using one from an AC motor 10 poles
attached some pics, may be useful for replicators
Cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 19, 2013, 09:14:50 PM
Alvaro: Nice build, looking forward to test results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 19, 2013, 09:58:50 PM
Hello everybody
I am testing the "concept" of the 1908 patent
As the commutator I am using one from an AC motor 10 poles
attached some pics, may be useful for replicators
Cheers
Alvaro


Good job man.
I'm looking forward for the results. I start to build the electromechanic control system. Probably one more week I will be able to test.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 19, 2013, 10:59:19 PM
a.king21
thank you
I had to stop the tests because of problems with the VRs, may be they went toasted as no way to regulate them.
I made the first attempts with a 12V 200 mA power supply (batteries behave there own way)
With this setup lots of sparks, Volts in the hundreds and much RF emission, I realized that with just one multimeter probe  on a cap at the output it reads crazy voltages.
The output may drive a small dc motor (inductive load) but does goes down with resistive, as a 12V incandescent lamp.
At higher rpm in commutator, better output, and lower amps at input.
Before doing more accurate measurements (systematic) I´ve got to change the resistors an put some for 1W or so.
I don.t like to post results with claims, as for reliable measurements, is essential to use professional equipment AND knowledge which I do not have.

cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 19, 2013, 11:36:06 PM
Hi Alvaro,

Very ingenious device!!!  I would recommend you to use much much lower resistors. If you are feeding 12V with just one resistor ( 100 Kohm as you are using) --> I = V/R =12/100000 = 0.00012 A as maximun ( with 1 resistor). I think you should use resistor lower than 5 ohms (or less) to have greater intensities. I posted an Excel simulation where you can see a good value for your resistors. Buy resistors prepared to evacuate some heat (10 W or more ). Also you may use a more powerful DC source. My DC source is from and old scanner (12 V and 1.2 A)

Good luck!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2013, 03:49:49 AM
Hi all,

I have to say that I am very happy to see the enthusiasm and effort shown by the members of this forum about Figuera's devices. Figuera's technology is free and it is here for the taking.

First of all, I apologize for not being able to provide the detailed description in a single document of the device that I am building. I have been really busy with other affairs that do not allow to spend time on this project. However, all information about Figuera's technology has been disclosed in this thread.

The main components are the iron cores and the windings. For example, the key components of the 1908 device are the electromagnets. Once you build the electromagnets, you only need two 90-degree shifted full wave rectified voltages. It does not matter how these input voltages are generated! If you do not know how to build the electronic circuits, you can use the commutated switch and the power resistors shown in the original patent. For the size of the device shown in this thread, it is recommended that the power resistors have a minimum rating of 50W and a maximum of 10 ohms. THESE RESISTORS GET REALLY HOT! That is why Figuera showed wire wound resistor type. When Figuera ran his tests, I can imaging these resistors getting red hot similar to wired heaters. The use of these resistors is the least efficient option. The resistors dissipate relatively high energy.

A better option for generating the input voltages mentioned above is to use a motor-generator. The generator should be able to provide two sinusoidal voltages shifted 90 degrees. Then, each of these generator AC voltages can be applied two a full-wave rectifier diodes.

If the iron core is big enough to house the coils, you can use about any iron core that you feel comfortable working with. The cross section of the iron core that I used is about 1 inch width and 3/4" depth.

I have also recommended to build the 'N' and 'S' electromagnets with no less than 300 turns with taps, let's say 200T, 300T, and so on. If you can do 400T, it is even better. The minimum gauge size for these primaries coils should be #18 AWG.

I also recommended that the wire of 'y' secondary coils should have a minimum gauge of #14 AWG. Minimum number of turns should be 200T. The use of #14 AWG wire for the secondary will allow for the connections of heavier loads.

The other important design criterion to keep in mind is to minimize the air gaps. If you refer to the photos I posted a while ago, you will notice that the air gaps consist of a paper thin insulator.

The above recommendations are based on my own experience with this device. If you follow them, you will have a device with good power output during testing.

With respect to the 1902 patent, the primary coils should have a lot of turns. For testing purposes, I would use no less than 500 turns of #20 or #22 AWG for each of the primary coils 'a' and 'b'. Because the secondary must travel through the air gaps, the air gaps shown in the 1902 patent are considerably larger than the air gaps of the 1902 patent, and therefore, the magnetic reluctance of the of the iron core is much higher for the 1902 device. The latter implies that to create a considerable magnetic flux in the 1902 device, you will need a very high A-T (Ampere-Turns). And, that is why Mr. Figuera furnished the air gaps of the 1902 device with primary coils ‘a’ and ‘b’ located on both sides of the air gaps.

Thanks again.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 04:31:58 AM
Hi all,

I have to say that I am very happy to see the enthusiasm and effort shown by the members of this forum about Figuera's devices. Figuera's technology is free and it is here for the taking.

First of all, I apologize for not being able to provide the detailed description in a single document of the device that I am building. I have been really busy with other affairs that do not allow to spend time on this project. However, all information about Figuera's technology has been disclosed in this thread.

The main components are the iron cores and the windings. For example, the key components of the 1908 device are the electromagnets. Once you build the electromagnets, you only need two 90-degree shifted full wave rectified voltages. It does not matter how these input voltages are generated! If you do not know how to build the electronic circuits, you can use the commutated switch and the power resistors shown in the original patent. For the size of the device shown in this thread, it is recommended that the power resistors have a minimum rating of 50W and a maximum of 10 ohms. THESE RESISTORS GET REALLY HOT! That is why Figuera showed wire wound resistor type. When Figuera ran his tests, I can imaging these resistors getting red hot similar to wired heaters. The use of these resistors is the least efficient option. The resistors dissipate relatively high energy.

A better option for generating the input voltages mentioned above is to use a motor-generator. The generator should be able to provide two sinusoidal voltages shifted 90 degrees. Then, each of these generator AC voltages can be applied two a full-wave rectifier diodes.

If the iron core is big enough to house the coils, you can use about any iron core that you feel comfortable working with. The cross section of the iron core that I used is about 1 inch width and 3/4" depth.

I have also recommended to build the 'N' and 'S' electromagnets with no less than 300 turns with a taps, let's say 200T, 300T, and so on. If you can do 400T, it is even better. The minimum gauge size for these primaries coils should be #18 AWG.

I also recommended that the wire of 'y' secondary coils should have a minimum gauge of #14 AWG. Minimum number of turns should be 200T. The use of #14 AWG wire for the secondary will allow for the connections of heavier loads.

The other important design criterion to keep in mind is to minimize the air gaps. If you refer to the photos I posted a while ago, you will notice that the air gaps consist of a paper thin insulator.

The above recommendations are based on my own experience with this device. If you follow them, you will have a device with good power output during testing.

With respect to the 1902 patent, the primary coils should have a lot of turns. For testing purposes, I would use no less than 500 turns of #20 or #22 AWG for each of the primary coils 'a' and 'b'. Because the secondary must travel through the air gaps, the air gaps shown in the 1902 patent are considerably larger than the air gaps of the 1902 patent, and therefore, the magnetic reluctance of the of the iron core is much higher for the 1902 device. The latter implies that to create a considerable magnetic flux in the 1902 device, you will need a very high A-T (Ampere-Turns). And, that is why Mr. Figuera furnished the air gaps of the 1902 device with primary coils ‘a’ and ‘b’ located on both sides of the air gaps.

Thanks again.
Bajac
Sorry if I didn't do my homework, but I have some questions: the iron core: is it laminated? When you say " 2 times 90 degrees voltage" what exactly you mean? I' m building one oscilator using the patent principle. This device will generate a complete ac sequence.
Thanks e sorry about the dumb questions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2013, 01:54:55 PM
ariovaldo,
Based on your questions, I have to assumed that you have not read the paper that originated this thread explaining the operations of the 1908 and 1902 devices. For the 1908 device, please, use the latest revision posted on this thread. I highly recommend you to read these papers and whatever was posted in this thread before building your device. There are a lot of usefull information.
My understanding is that oscillators devices are usually used for signal (very low power) applications. The input power for the Figuera's devices is relatively high. For instance, the 1908 device that I built using the power resistors required an input power of about 60 Watts. When I tested it without the resistors, the input power was about 15W. And, I am referring to the device with one set of coils only (not seven as shown in the 1908 patent) for which I posted few photos. Therefore, you need to make sure that whatever oscillator you are using is capable of handling that kind of power.
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 02:17:30 PM
Some pictures from the electromechanic "inverter" that I'm building to test the patent.
The most difficult part will be the transformer.
Later on I will post the schematic and the resistors values that I will use to test this in one 3 phases 25 kVA transformer.
I'm not expecting any "OU". I want to learn and understand the circuit behavior ( I will take some scope shots)


Cheers


Ari



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 02:24:06 PM
ariovaldo,
Based on your questions, I have to assumed that you have not read the paper that originated this thread explaining the operations of the 1908 and 1902 devices. For the 1908 device, please, use the latest revision posted on this thread. I highly recommend you to read these papers and whatever was posted in this thread before building your device. There are a lot of usefull information.
My understanding is that oscillators devices are usually used for signal (very low power) applications. The input power for the Figuera's devices is relatively high. For instance, the 1908 device that I built using the power resistors required an input power of about 60 Watts. When I tested it without the resistors, the input power was about 15W. And, I am referring to the device with one set of coils only (not seven as shown in the 1908 patent) for which I posted few photos. Therefore, you need to make sure that whatever oscillator you are using is capable of handling that kind of power.
Thanks,
Bajac


Thanks.
The oscillator will be able to hand the power. The resistors will have the following values



Ohms     Volts
8       =  1
6.6    =  3.6
3.3    =  7.2
2.2    = 10.8
1.65  =14.4
1.32  = 18
1.1    = 21.6
0       = 24



What do You think?



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2013, 06:27:56 PM
Ariovaldo,
WOW! That is not an oscillator but a heavy duty commutated switch. You got some skills!
I wanted to ask you, how did you get the values shown on the voltage column?
Going back to the iron core application, Mr. Figuera stated in his 1908 patent that it can be of a low quality soft iron type. He also stated that a solid piece (not laminated) of iron can be used. His statement can be justified by the use of air gaps in the device. Because the air gaps have much higher reluctance than any low quality iron core, there is no noticeable difference in performance when using, whether high quality laminated Silicone steel sheets or low cost soft iron bars.
Thanks,
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 20, 2013, 07:09:43 PM
hanon:
thanks, I apologize, my PS is from a wifi modem, rated at 12V-1.2A the figure I posted (200mA) is a measure at the input, loaded.
I also tested with a resistor made with the metallic spiral of a hair dryer, min.3 ohm, and so on.
Bajac is right, is should be the most inefficient atempt as it got very hot, which means loses all over !!
In the other hand, I don´t know how to pulse the inductor not having Mr Lenz at the collapse, as the idea of this patent is based in a variable DC current, not falling anytime to 0 volts.

Anyway the learning process keeps on going !

Ariovaldo if just the commutator is that size, I imagine you want to power your own car factory no ? ;D ;D

regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 07:37:52 PM
Ariovaldo,
WOW! That is not an oscillator but a heavy duty commutated switch. You got some skills!
I wanted to ask you, how did you get the values shown on the voltage column?
Going back to the iron core application, Mr. Figuera stated in his 1908 patent that it can be of a low quality soft iron type. He also stated that a solid piece (not laminated) of iron can be used. His statement can be justified by the use of air gaps in the device. Because the air gaps have much higher reluctance than any low quality iron core, there is no noticeable difference in performance when using, whether high quality laminated Silicone steel sheets or low cost soft iron bars.
Thanks,
Bajac
My first intention with this device is to do a trial using a 3 phase transformer that I have, using Gruamge schematics. Having the transformer in my hands, I simulated the voltage drop using 12 volts battery and nichcrome 16 gauge  wire.
Check out.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 10:58:32 PM
My first intention with this device is to do a trial using a 3 phase transformer that I have, using Gruamge schematics. Having the transformer in my hands, I simulated the voltage drop using 12 volts battery and nichcrome 16 gauge  wire.
Check out.


I just built the resistors. Next week probably I will test with the transformer connected.
This weekend I will finish the dc motor drive.


Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 20, 2013, 11:59:32 PM
hanon:
thanks, I apologize, my PS is from a wifi modem, rated at 12V-1.2A the figure I posted (200mA) is a measure at the input, loaded.
I also tested with a resistor made with the metallic spiral of a hair dryer, min.3 ohm, and so on.
Bajac is right, is should be the most inefficient atempt as it got very hot, which means loses all over !!
In the other hand, I don´t know how to pulse the inductor not having Mr Lenz at the collapse, as the idea of this patent is based in a variable DC current, not falling anytime to 0 volts.

Anyway the learning process keeps on going !

Ariovaldo if just the commutator is that size, I imagine you want to power your own car factory no ? ;D ;D

regards
Alvaro
There you go my friend....
That is because you didn't see my Tesla coil... I was forbidden by the city to test it. I heard people saying: -"I don't know, but my sprinkler system start tor works funny, change the time for itself. ....


Ari
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 21, 2013, 11:06:02 PM
Ariovaldo,

I want to congratulate you for the effort you put on the construction details. You do a professional job!

I would not like you to be disappointed and discouraged from building the device, but it takes a lot of effort to work with such a large core, and then, not getting the results that you might expect.

I want to persuade you to get away from dealing with single large set of coils such as the 25KVA one shown in the photo. The success for building Figuera’s devices does not consist in making a single set of large electromagnets but connecting together multiple smaller sets of coils as shown in the 1908 patent. Even though the 1902 patent shows only a single set of coils, I truly believe that to get an operating voltage such as 120Vac, the secondary coils of several sets of the transformers (as shown in the patent) should be cascaded (or connected in series).

I have stated before that the design criteria for building the Figuera’s devices are different from the ones used for building today’s standard transformers. The most important feature of the Figuera’s 1902 and 1908 devices is the use of the air gaps. The definition of air gap is a discontinuity in the iron core path (note that I am not referring to the gaps of the windows occupied by the wire turns around the core). The air gaps are not allowed in the construction of standard transformers and these gaps change the rule of the game for the Figuera’s devices. The air gaps are the key feature to manipulate the induced magnetic fields (field of the secondary coils) in such a way as to make useless the typical current ratio formula of the standard transformers. Because the current of the secondary coils (load current) is not reflected back to the primary coils, the small power supplied to the primary coils is relatively constant even under large load currents. The implication of the above is that the iron core of a standard 1KVA transformer can generate more than 25KVA of power when used in the Figuera’s apparatus. Once the secondary voltage is established in the Figuera’s devices, the main limiting factor of the output power is the amount of current that the secondary wire can handle. That is the reason why the Figuera’s apparatus is known as his INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE.

The above sounds like a heresy but it is true! Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can generate large quantities of magnetic flux lines, which can force the core to reach magnetic saturation easily. As a matter of fact, the standard transformers are designed to work at the knee of the saturation curve where they are more efficient. That is the reason why an iron core used to build a 1KVA unit cannot be used to construct a 25KVA standard transformer. Because in standard transformers the ampere-turns of the primary coil increases with the power demand of the load, the cross sectional area of the iron core must be increased accordingly for the 25KVA unit. Otherwise, the 1KVA iron core will just saturate beyond the knee of the saturation curve and the increase of the primary ampere-turns will not necessarily translate in an increase of the magnetic flux through said core.

On the contrary, the air gaps present in the Figuera’s devices make them to operate at the very low part of the magnetic saturation curve. It is very unlikely that a 1KVA iron core used in a standard transformer will saturate even under a 25KVA load. Because the load is not reflected back to the primary coils, the ampere-turns of the primary coils do not substantially increase and stay constant.

The following is my recommendation:

Use an iron core with relatively small cross section, say not larger than 2 inch square and with gap windows large enough to accommodate the coils. The material can be laminated Silicone sheets or solid soft iron. You must be careful interconnecting the core sections when using solid soft iron materials. Do not add extraneous material between the sections such as welding. All the air gaps must be kept to a minimum. For the 1908 device, use a paper thin material to join the core sections. For the 1902 device, the dimension of the air gaps should be just big enough to fit the secondary turns. Because the air gaps of the 1902 device are larger than the gaps of the 1908 one, the primary coils of the 1902 device will require more turns.

Because of the air gaps, you will need a much higher ampere-turn for the primary coils just to create a small magnetic field. You can use wire gauges such as #18 or #20 AWG for building the primary coils. Even though I have recommended a minimum of 300 turns, do as many turns as you can for the first set. For example, if you can do 600 turns, incorporate middle taps for 300, 400, and 500 turns. For the secondary use no less than 200 turns of #14 AWG. Recall that you do not want to use a thin wire for the secondary because the power output for this device is limited by the gauge of the secondary coil. For the first set I would recommend to do no less than 350 turns for the secondary with middle taps at 200 and 300 turns. The flexibility of choosing primary and secondary taps when performing the testing will be invaluable.

Build and test one set of coils first! Once you know the coil taps that produces the best performance for the given core, you can proceed for the construction of the remaining sets. For example, if the test of the first set indicates that the best performance corresponds to taps that make the secondary coil generates 20Vac, then; you know that five more sets are needed to make a unit with a rating of 120Vac.
I hope the above description can guide you in the right direction.

Thanks and good luck!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 21, 2013, 11:40:14 PM
Ariovaldo,
I want to congratulate you for the effort you put on the construction details. You do a professional job!
I would not like you to be disappointed and discouraged from building the device, but it takes a lot of effort to work with such a large core, and then, not getting the results that you might expect.
I want to persuade you to get away from dealing with single large set of coils such as the 25KVA one shown in the photo. The success for building Figuera’s devices does not consist in making a single set of large electromagnets but connecting together multiple smaller sets of coils as shown in the 1908 patent. Even though the 1902 patent shows only a single set of coils, I truly believe that to get an operating voltage such as 120Vac, the secondary coils of several sets of the transformers shown in the patent should be cascaded (or connected in series).
I have stated before that the design criteria for building the Figuera’s devices are different from the ones used for building today’s standard transformers. The most important feature of the Figuera’s 1902 and 1908 devices is the use of the air gaps. The definition of air gap is a discontinuity in the iron core path (note that I am not referring to the gaps of the windows occupied by the wire turns around the core). The air gaps are not allowed in the construction of standard transformers and these gaps change the rule of the game for the Figuera’s devices. The air gaps are the key feature to manipulate the induced magnetic fields (field of the secondary coils) in such a way as to make useless the typical current ratio formula of the standard transformers. Because the current of the secondary coils (load current) is not reflected back to the primary coils, the small power supplied to the primary coils is relatively constant even under large load currents. The implication of the above is that the iron core of a standard 1KVA transformer can generate more than 25KVA of power when used in the Figuera’s apparatus. Once the secondary voltage is established in the Figuera’s devices, the main limiting factor of the output power is the amount of current that the secondary wire can handle. That is the reason why the Figuera’s apparatus is known as his INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE.
The above sounds like a heresy but it is true! Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can generate large magnetic flux lines, which can reach magnetic saturation easily. As a matter of fact, the standard transformers are designed to work at the knee of the saturation curve where they are more efficient. That is the reason why an iron core used to build a 1KVA unit cannot be used to construct a 25KVA standard transformer. Because in standard transformers the ampere-turns of the primary coil increases with the power demand of the load, the cross sectional area of the iron core must be increased accordingly for the 25KVA unit. Otherwise, the 1KVA iron core will just saturate beyond the knee of the saturation curve and the increase of the primary ampere-turns will not necessarily translate in an increase of the magnetic flux through said core.
On the contrary, the air gaps present in the Figuera’s devices make them to operate at the very low part of the magnetic saturation curve. It is very unlikely that even a 1KVA iron core used in a standard transformer will saturate even under a 25KVA load. Because the load is not reflected back to the primary coils, the ampere-turns of the primary coils do not substantially increase and stay constant.
The following is my recommendation:
Use an iron core with relatively small cross section, say not larger than 2 inch square and with gap windows large enough to accomodate the coils. The material can be laminated Silicone sheets or solid soft iron. You must be careful interconnecting the core sections when using solid soft iron materials. Do not add extraneous material between the sections such as welding. All the air gaps must be kept to a minimum. For the 1908 device, use a paper thin material to join the core sections. For the 1902 device, the dimension of the air gaps should be just big enough to fit the secondary turns. Because the air gaps of the 1902 device are larger than the gaps of the 1908 one, the primary coils of the 1902 device will require more turns.
Because of the air gaps, you will need a much higher ampere-turn for the primary coils just to create a small magnetic field. You can use wire gages such as #18 or #20 AWG for building the primary coils. Even though I have recommended a minimum of 300 turns, do as many turns as you can for the first set. For example, if you can do 600 turns, incorporate middle taps for 300, 400, and 500 turns. For the secondary use no less than 200 turns of #14 AWG. Recall that you do not want to use a thin wire for the secondary because the power output for this device is limited by the gauge of the secondary coil. For the first set I would recommend to do no less than 350 turns for the secondary with middle taps at 200 and 300 turns. The flexibility of choosing primary and secondary taps when performing the testing will be invaluable.
Build and test one set of coils first! Once you know the coil taps that produces the best performance for the given core, you can proceed for the construction of the remaining sets. For example, if the test of the first set indicates that the best performance corresponds to taps that make the secondary coil generates 20Vac, then; you know that five more sets are needed to make a unit with a rating of 120Vac.
I hope the above description can guide you in the right direction.
Thanks and good luck!
Bajac
Thank you Bajac.
To say the true, I started to build that for funny and now I' m thinking to go ahead and test the coils. I will use a solid steel core, since a laminate isn't so ease to find. There is a option to use old transformers but I will think about.
Yesterday  I watch a movie made by a friend of mine that was in Imperatriz,  Brazil in a fair. He saw the Barbosa device working. He said the device was all the time powering an air conditioner, a 20 hp motor and some lights. He didn't  see any secondary set of wires other than one to feed the system. The amplification factor was more than 10. Also, he said the one of 10 kVA, weigh not more tan 20 pounds. I think he is using a solid state version of Figueras device.
Thank for the tips and I will keeping posting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 23, 2013, 01:59:20 AM
I guess nonsense waste time and resources on rotary switches, best would be to invest in a good power inverter circuit where you could control multiple parameters of the input current of the magnetic assembly ...
I could see that the frequency and symmetry of the wave is very important, so being able to control these parameters is very important!
I still can not say I got over-unity, only managed an excellent system performance around + / - 85%, but I can get over-unity.
The idea is you build the magnet assembly and vary the parameters of the signal up to the point where things happen!
If you have a UPS or two PC sources in scrap, already has 80% of the circuit, get to work ...
In my tests I used (structural iron cores), ferrite (core old flay-back) and laminated iron transformer old ... and all work perfectly, but the working point changes depending on the type of core, adjusting the frequency and other parameters and everything goes back to normal ...
With four magnetic assemblies I got 2 light bulbs 12V 5W consuming 1.2A to the source (each lamp consumes about 0.55 A at 12V) ... no load I hit + / - 70V.

My sincere thanks to Bajac, Hanon and to everyone who made ​​it possible for these ideas!

Note 1: I chose to work with higher frequencies to be cheaper to make the coils and magnetic assemblies, but nothing prevents the circuit operate at low frequencies with higher voltages and currents, all depends on the power stage. If working with loads of 12V,,, use a voltage regulator to protect loads! then do not say you were not warned ...

Note 2: I used 4 schottky diodes full wave rectifier and filter 10.000uF/100V before the load ... and one single regulator 12V 3A!
Caution! not touch the wires after the power stage with the system on, the shock is big ... ;-)

Note 3: I apologize for not dominate the language, I will soon post more information pages with photos, diagrams and tests in my native language Overunity session in Brazil, not to depend more insane translator that ...
*********************************************
Acho besteira desperdiçar tempo e recursos em comutadores rotativos, melhor seria investir num bom circuito inversor de potência onde você poderia controlar vários parametros da corrente de entrada do conjunto magnético...
Eu pude notar que a frequência e a simetria da onda é muito importante, então poder controlar esses parametros é muito importante!
Eu ainda não posso dizer que consegui over-unity, só consegui um excelente rendimento do sistema em torno de +/- 85%, mas acho ser possível conseguir over-unity.
A ideia é você construir o conjunto magnético e variar os parametros do sinal até atingir o ponto onde as coisas acontecem!
Se você tem um no-break ou duas PC fontes na sucata, já tem 80% do circuito, mãos a obra...
Em meus testes usei (núcleos de ferro estrutural),,, ferrite ( núcleos velhos de flay-back) e ferro laminado de transformadores velhos... e todos funcionam perfeitamente, mas o ponto de trabalho muda dependendo do tipo de núcleo, ajuste a frequência e outros parâmetros e tudo volta ao normal...
Com 4 conjuntos magnéticos eu consegui acender 2 lâmpadas de 12V 5W   consumindo 1,2A da fonte ( cada lâmpada consome em torno de 0,55A em 12V)... sem carga eu atingi +/- 70V.

Meus sinceros agradecimentos a Bajac, Hanon e a todos que tornaram possível essas ideias!!!

Nota-1: eu optei por trabalhar com frequências mais altas por ser mais econômico fazer as bobinas e os conjuntos magnéticos, mas nada impede  que o circuito funcione em baixas frequências com tensões e correntes maiores, tudo depende da etapa de potência. Se for trabalhar com cargas de 12V,,, use um regulador de tensão para proteger as cargas! depois não diga que não avisei...

Nota 2: usei 4 diodos schottky retificador de onda completa e filtro de 10.000uF/100V antes da carga... e um regulador simples 12V 3A!
Cuidado! nao toque nos fios depois do estagio de potência com o sistema ligado, o choque é grande... ;-)

Nota 3: peço desculpas por não dominar o idioma, em breve irei postar mais infos com fotos , esquemas e testes em minha linguagem nativa em Overunity sessão Brasil, para não depender mais desse tradutor maluco...


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 23, 2013, 02:34:54 PM
Some more update about the rotary commutator device. I'm not worry if this system will work or not. To me this is more than " free energy". This is a therapy, a hobby.
About the transformer I will use some tips that Bajac gave me, trying different versions, using 6 and 12 set of 3 coils. After the test with the three phase transformer, I will change the resistors for the new set of coils.


Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 23, 2013, 03:11:11 PM
Ariovaldo: I like it!!
Re: Barbosa
I have some questions.
Do you know how long the devices were on?
How much was the load?
Was the device continuously plugged into the mains?


I do not say this lightly: I suspect that Barbosa is an investment fraud because 2 of the other patents are 1 Kapanadze and 2 Bedini's 1984 generator without the 110 degree make-break switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: john-g on September 23, 2013, 03:44:09 PM
Ariovaldo,

I want to congratulate you for the effort...

..... Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can ......

Bajac

It looks as though some excellent progress is being made here. You say that standard transformers do not have air-gaps, however normally they are built up of laminations.  Although these are primarly to stop eddy currents, do not the small gaps between the laninations, caused by the coating of varnish not add in small air-gap?

Kind regards

John

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 23, 2013, 11:51:47 PM

Hi all,
This is a post to correct some errors in the circuit that I posted in post #106 in the 15th of May. Please see the attached file with the correct circuit to implement two unphased signals as defined in the 1908 Figuera´s patent.
 
Regards

Hi all,

I have been testing the circuit disclosed in post #185 and previously in post #106 to create the two unphased signal required in the 1908 patent. I have found a mistake because pin No. 3 in the second CD4017 counter must not be used. Therefore this post correct post No. 185 and 106. I attach this file in pdf format and in jpg format.

Regards and good luck to all replicators!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 24, 2013, 12:09:30 AM
Ariovaldo,


I wanted to ask you about the air gaps. Are you providing air gaps to the iron core of the 25KVA transformer? If you do not provide the air gaps, there will be cross talking between the two primary coils. In other words, the magnetic filed of a primary coil will reach the other primary coil moving through the secondary coil completely, and as a result, there will no be induced voltage in the secondary coil.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 24, 2013, 03:07:06 AM
Ariovaldo,


I wanted to ask you about the air gaps. Are you providing air gaps to the iron core of the 25KVA transformer? If you do not provide the air gaps, there will be cross talking between the two primary coils. In other words, the magnetic filed of a primary coil will reach the other primary coil moving through the secondary coil completely, and as a result, there will no be induced voltage in the secondary coil.


Thanks,
Bajac
The 25 kva transformer is just to play. My intention is to build 6 small transformers with very smal air gap, to avoid the " normal" transformer  function...
I will sketch to show you..
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 24, 2013, 07:20:22 AM
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.

And thanks again for everything!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 24, 2013, 04:11:44 PM
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.

And thanks again for everything!!!


Good!!!! 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 24, 2013, 08:47:21 PM
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.

And thanks again for everything!!!

Hi Schiko,
I have not studied in deep your circuit yet, but the circuit that I posted -which was originally created by Patrick Kelly (in his ebook Chapter 3) and I have just done some small corrections- do the same sequence as the original Figuera rotary commutator with contacts 1,2,3 ....8,9,10 ....15, 16...(as Figuera wheel). Therefore this circuit make the right switching including the steps in the first and last contact  because it makes a pulse in 8 and later in 9 and then in 16 and 1. Maybe your circuit is an improvement but Kelly´s circuit do exactly what it is described in the 1908 commutator. This circuit just follow the contacts in Figuera´s drawing with the cylinder

I will study in deep shortly . It is good to have more variations to test, but I would start with Kelly´s design and later I would test your proposal

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 25, 2013, 05:10:46 AM
@Hanon
No problem my friend...  8)         just for the record, generate sine wave through the steps, much more steps better!  ;)

@ARIOVALDO
?????? Thank's  8)

@Bajac
You've built your H-bridge???  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 25, 2013, 09:17:07 AM
Hi all,
 
I attach here a patent about an overunity transformer filed by Carlos Subieta Garron (US3368141). If you read it you could see that he is looking for the same effect as the 1908 Figuera´s patent. Also I post two videos that you could find useful to understand the patent.
 
 
www.youtube.com/watch?v=orRvh4K8Qvc

www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8asKJNYJIY
 
Please post your comments about this patent
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2013, 06:35:50 PM
 It is just amazing!
 
If you recall, I also published "Reinventing the Wheel Part 2 and Part 3" showing designs with Permanent Magnets. The device shown in figures 4, 5, and 6 of Carlos' patent are almost identical to one of my embodiments that I posted in those documents. In my document I called coil B22 as the secondary and coils B18 to B21 as the control coils. The only difference between Carlos' design and mine is that he uses air gaps. Of course, my device would have not been patentable because they are obvious with respect to the devices shown in Carlos's patent. Again, I did not used air gaps in my design because I thought (as the mainstream science) that air gaps would make my design less efficient. Now that I know the Figuera's devices, I can say that Carlos' apparatus should be more efficient. As Figuera, Carlos found a way for minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law by using air gaps.
 
No wonder why I called my papers "Re-inventing the Wheel". We just keep recycling the old technology because it is not well known.
 
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 25, 2013, 08:28:11 PM
It is just amazing!
 
If you recall, I also published "Reinventing the Wheel Part 2 and Part 3" showing designs with Permanent Magnets. The device shown in figures 4, 5, and 6 of Carlos' patent are almost identical to one of my embodiments that I posted in those documents. In my document I called coil B22 as the secondary and coils B18 to B21 as the control coils. The only difference between Carlos' design and mine is that he uses air gaps. Of course, my device would have not been patentable because they are obvious with respect to the devices shown in Carlos's patent. Again, I did not used air gaps in my design because I thought (as the mainstream science) that air gaps would make my design less efficient. Now that I know the Figuera's devices, I can say that Carlos' apparatus should be more efficient. As Figuera, Carlos found a way for minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law by using air gaps.
 
No wonder why I called my papers "Re-inventing the Wheel". We just keep recycling the old technology because it is not well known.
 
Bajac

Hi bajac,

Time ago I saw another patent of a MEG based on air gaps but I can not find it again. If I get to find it I will post it here also. Carlos Subieta Garron literally writes in his patent US3368141: "The assembly will not work as an annular magnet, there should be a small air gap between the core member and the shoe poles" (please note the attached drawing with the air gap !!). Air gaps are used to "re-route" the magnetic field to avoid opposing the inducer coils, thus minimizing the Lenz effect over those coils.

All this agree with you theory. Also the lay-out is very similar to the one that you propouse for Figuera 1908 generator.  ;) . Some questions: Why do you think that this patent will be more efficient than Figuera generator?. Do you think that it is easier to build than Figuera´s device? (here it is only needed one AC input). Please can you elaborate your ideas a bit deeper?. Thanks for all your help!!

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 25, 2013, 08:31:45 PM
@Hanon
Could you explain why you thought the similarity between two patents?  ???
I have not seen!  :-[

In my mind patent 1908 has three aspects
1 - Reluctance
2 - increased electromagnetic section
3 - symmetry between the tensions of the primary lagged 180 degrees

Simple as a generator!  8)

For me the problem is to find the best ratio between primary and secondary inductance because it directly affects the resonance frequency of the magnetic assembly where the phenomenon occurs.
 
LF, HF will work no matter it all depends on the coils  ;D

There is an advantage of electronic commutator, adjust the frequency to any type of coil.

If you'll work fixed at 60Hz prepare for the difficulties of tuning coils  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 25, 2013, 09:01:36 PM
That makes sense and I do think we have something here. Air gap, very small one. Don't you guys think we can use dc coil instead permanent magnetic?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 25, 2013, 11:33:12 PM
That makes sense and I do think we have something here. Air gap, very small one. Don't you guys think we can use dc coil instead permanent magnetic?

Yes... air gap = reluctance

The machine of Mr. Figuera magneto is not necessary, in my case fumbled more than helped ...
If you observe the threshold of the negative peak of the sine wave never goes to zero volts, coils always a small current, adjust the threshold in your case is more difficult to increase or decrease the value of the resistors.
Find the right point helps the phenomenon I experienced this!  ;)

ps: when you arrive at the point of work, the cores will stay super magnetized!!!

abraço!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2013, 11:46:54 PM
Hanon,


I am sorry for the misunderstanding. I was referring to the performances between the device I disclosed and the device found in Carlos' patent.
I can only speculate that Carlos and I had the same reasoning, BECAUSE THE ENERGY MUST COME FROM A SOMEWHERE, A PERMANENT MAGNET WAS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE ENERGY SOURCE. However, Figuera and Tesla showed us that there are other more powerful energy sources that we just do not know about it. Figuera and Tesla taught us how to extract infinite amount of free energy from wires
Suppression or not, The truth is that these types of energy sources have been hidden from us for too long.


Regards,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 26, 2013, 12:14:29 AM
@bajac

Bajac you did not answer if you have finished your H-bridge???
So I am waiting for your tests.

I do not have large coils to test!

cheers!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 26, 2013, 12:36:35 AM
Schiko,


I have not finished the H bridge or my set up yet. It will take much longer than what I had expected to build my unit. I am hoping that a member from the forum could complete it soon.


I wanted to ask if someone knows of any dynamo or small motor/generator that can output two AC voltages shifted 90 degrees. If we can get such a unit, it would be very easy to do the input driver. We can use a small VFD driver to control the speed of motor driving the dynamo. For the 1908 device, if you want the output to be 60Hz, the input voltages should be 30Hz.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 26, 2013, 09:38:28 PM
I put a video showing the electromechanic oscillator operating. To say the true, I did't like it. The brush is the one that is rotating and doing that, the centrifugal forces is holding the brush without touching the commutator, so wave form is more a square than sine as should be.
Solutions for this system
1) increase the spring size
2) modify the the commutator/brush holder, so the commutator will turn


Others solutions:
1) solid state device ( hanon/Shiko)
2) use pure ac 60 HZ
3) modify a small generator and use as VFD to drive it. ( I do have a VFD and I will check generator)


The most important part is the transformer and I do know that. My intentions is modify the transformer in video, creating a small gap...

The transformer connections are based in the Grumage drawings

Cheers


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 26, 2013, 11:09:04 PM
I put a video showing the electromechanic oscillator operating. To say the true, I did't like it. The brush is the one that is rotating and doing that, the centrifugal forces is holding the brush without touching the commutator, so wave form is more a square than sine as should be.
Solutions for this system
1) increase the spring size
2) modify the the commutator/brush holder, so the commutator will turn


Others solutions:
1) solid state device ( hanon/Shiko)
2) use pure ac 60 HZ
3) modify a small generator and use as VFD to drive it. ( I do have a VFD and I will check generator)


The most important part is the transformer and I do know that. My intentions is modify the transformer in video, creating a small gap...

The transformer connections are based in the Grumage drawings

Cheers


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek)


Something very interesting happened !
As you can see in the movie, the light seems to be half way bright and the voltage that I used was 80 VDC.
As I said, the commutator was not OK, and it wasn't generating sine wave. Was a kind of pulse/square.
After the test, I disconnect the system and I connected 110 AC, at the same point, keeping the the 2 out-side coils in serie as was, and I had nothing in the output. I got some ideas for the next test
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 27, 2013, 12:06:15 AM

Time ago I saw another patent of a MEG based on air gaps but I can not find it again. If I get to find it I will post it here also. Carlos Subieta Garron literally writes in his patent US3368141: "The assembly will not work as an annular magnet, there should be a small air gap between the core member and the shoe poles" (please note the attached drawing with the air gap !!). Air gaps are used to "re-route" the magnetic field to avoid opposing the inducer coils, thus minimizing the Lenz effect over those coils.


I have been looking for that patent that I saw time ago with an air gap to achieve overunity in MEG. I have found some references. It seems that the "air gap" has a clear function to get a minimization of the Lenz Effect over the inducer coils. Just for the record these are the overunity references to air gaps in transformers:

http://www.overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/#.UkSESVN5DC0 (http://www.overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/#.UkSESVN5DC0)

http://www.overunity.com/11256/curious-ou-transformer-schnelzer-turtur-horvath-marinov-any-replications/#.UkSFc1N5DC0 (http://www.overunity.com/11256/curious-ou-transformer-schnelzer-turtur-horvath-marinov-any-replications/#.UkSFc1N5DC0)

http://pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/9600214_Energy_Anomaly_in_Magnetic_Circuits/ (http://pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/9600214_Energy_Anomaly_in_Magnetic_Circuits/)

http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/msg248924/#msg248924 (http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/msg248924/#msg248924)

Flynn patent US6246561: http://www.google.com/patents/US6246561 (http://www.google.com/patents/US6246561) (see figures 1 to 16)

We should give a greater importance to the air gaps as elements to minimize the Lenz Effect by redirecting the induced magnetic flux along others paths different than the inducer coil.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 27, 2013, 07:34:31 AM

Something very interesting happened !
As you can see in the movie, the light seems to be half way bright and the voltage that I used was 80 VDC.
As I said, the commutator was not OK, and it wasn't generating sine wave. Was a kind of pulse/square.
After the test, I disconnect the system and I connected 110 AC, at the same point, keeping the the 2 out-side coils in serie as was, and I had nothing in the output. I got some ideas for the next test

@Ariovaldo

Not wanting to disturb your fun but perhaps it was better to use a set collector / brush motor.
Your commutator seems to create great spark, I think there is too much space between contacts, remember Mr. Figuera said...

"a las delgas incrustadas en un cilindro de materia aislante que no se mueve; pero alrededor de él y siempre en contacto con más de una delga gira una escobilla"

Just above of this text he said...

"Para fijar las ideas es conveniente valerse de la figura adjunta que no es más
que un dibujado para entender el funcionamiento de la máquina que se
construya según el principio antes reseñado"


I understood that meant that drawing is just to understand the principle of the machine not to interpret literally.

Use collector as photo 1.
Use resitores all equal and measure with oscilloscope by using a resistive load at the output of the commutador and you have a waveform with this photo 2, the output of Transforming you will measure a sennoide almost perfect.

I know, I know you're having fun!!!  ;)             (uma imagem vale mais que mil palavras)

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 27, 2013, 06:30:49 PM
Schiko,
Please, refer to the post#58 of this thread. In the post, I posted the graphs of the voltages and currents. The waveform should be more triangular like step triangle. But, it is not the same condition when the load is pure resistive than when is an electromagnet. You will need to do a kind of impedance matching between the seven resistors and the coils to get the maximum AC/DC ratio of the input voltages.
Noticed that the air gaps shown in your pictures are too big.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 27, 2013, 10:21:00 PM
Schiko,
Please, refer to the post#58 of this thread. In the post, I posted the graphs of the voltages and currents. The waveform should be more triangular like step triangle. But, it is not the same condition when the load is pure resistive than when is an electromagnet. You will need to do a kind of impedance matching between the seven resistors and the coils to get the maximum AC/DC ratio of the input voltages.
Noticed that the air gaps shown in your pictures are too big.
Bajac

Hi bajac

I already thanked you hanon and others for everything they taught us, once again thank you!
I subscribe to the forum (reinventing the wheel) from the beginning and learned all that was said, I think, so do not worry about me I've been through that phase.

I have experienced much the device and was developed over time, but remember, I adopted another path that is: "high frequency between 400Hz and 40KHz",  "regenerate 12V", "with much more power on output that in the input" and "self-run working"...

I'm asking you if you've built your H-bridge because I've finished my, but I don't have many resources to mount the magnetic Assembly like yours, that's why I live bothering you with this question, sorry about that, I would very much like to see a set like your working with H-bridge and see if you can COP>1, in my setup I could only get 4 small transformers, worked fine but not exceed of 100% efficiency.  :-[

I get an almost perfect sine wave output for perhaps the difference from my system to its like I said I can control all parameters of the input signal.
And the pictures posted are old when I started working with this system Figuera 's, these photos are just for show "Ariovaldo" there are other more practical ways to build the magnetic Assembly and that work well within the same principle.
You know in the picture with ferrite core, 12V input and output almost 30V if I don't back off my cores 12V lamp would burn, so...

In fact I think that replicate this patent literally or as many have posted here won't be able to COP>1, this is the "my thinking" and I don't own the truth and I'm here to learn.

"I want to see the snake biting its own tail" auto-run is the word the rest doesn't matter!  8)

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 27, 2013, 10:47:13 PM
I don't have the material to replicate the patent as I would like too, but I do 2 set transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I will play with them. I ordered some 14 AWG magnetic wire that will be here next week.


Have a great weekend.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 27, 2013, 11:06:13 PM
I don't have the material to replicate the patent as I would like too, but I do 2 set transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I will play with them. I ordered some 14 AWG magnetic wire that will be here next week.

Nice cores...

Cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 01:10:05 AM
@ Schiko,
I want to congratulate you for your efforts. I think you are in the correct path.
You may ask as many questions as you like. The nice thing about a forum is that you can get different answers and views. That makes it more exciting!!
On the other hand, why do you think the Figuera's device would not work? Did you replicate it? If yes, could you post the device that you did your test?
I cannot say the same. I tested the device and the results were like nothing I had experienced before. I was telling Hanon that the short circuit test soldered the secondary leads together. I had to shutdown the device to cut the leads. I was not able to measure the short circuit current because I did not have an equipment with such a high current range. But amazingly, the primary current did not change, it just measured about 1.3A DC before and after the short circuit condition. During the short circuit condition, the transformer started vibrating and produced a loud Humming sound. I am so disappointed for not following the teachings of that setting. That is why I am rebuilding the tower to match the coil turns of that setting.

@Ariovaldo,
That core looks promising! It has good dimensions for a first trial.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 28, 2013, 03:02:14 AM
@ Schiko,
I want to congratulate you for your efforts. I think you are in the correct path.
You may ask as many questions as you like. The nice thing about a forum is that you can get different answers and views. That makes it more exciting!!
On the other hand, why do you think the Figuera's device would not work? Did you replicate it? If yes, could you post the device that you did your test?
I cannot say the same. I tested the device and the results were like nothing I had experienced before. I was telling Hanon that the short circuit test soldered the secondary leads together. I had to shutdown the device to cut the leads. I was not able to measure the short circuit current because I did not have an equipment with such a high current range. But amazingly, the primary current did not change, it just measured about 1.3A DC before and after the short circuit condition. During the short circuit condition, the transformer started vibrating and produced a loud Humming sound. I am so disappointed for not following the teachings of that setting. That is why I am rebuilding the tower to match the coil turns of that setting.

Hi bajac
Thanks for your words.  8)

See, when I say "doesn't work" I mean "not to produce more output than input" However my current device worked fine but didn't hit more than 100% yield.
Unfortunately I have no photo of the first device that did not work, who wants to show device failed.
You can show some really small device running on autorun, that's all I ask so I can cheer me up.  :'(

Your device that you got high current which commutator you used, mechanical or electronic??
I also can get high currents in mine, just depend on the coils that use, but never greater in power output at the imput.  :(

Excuse the writing ... that translator I get crazy he insists on changing the words I want to write, but I'm learning heheheeh
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 03:58:49 AM
Bajac

It looks as though some excellent progress is being made here. You say that standard transformers do not have air-gaps, however normally they are built up of laminations.  Although these are primarly to stop eddy currents, do not the small gaps between the laninations, caused by the coating of varnish not add in small air-gap?

Kind regards

John


John,


The lamination is done such that a low magnetic path is formed in the direction of the flux lines. There is no insulation added to the connection between two laminated parts forming a closed magnetic path. But, the insulation is added between two parallel laminated parts configured in a closed path. Because the Eddy currents are induced perpendicular to the path of the flux lines, the insulation between parallel lamination is an efficient way for minimizing these parasitic currents.


The standards transformers are designed to have a minimum core reluctance, and therefore, the goal is to maximize the core permeability. The consequence of the latter is that the core will have the maximum number of magnetic flux lines for a given ampere-turn (NI) of the primary coil. And because the cross-section of the core is just large enough to avoid saturation (at knee part of the saturation curve), the maximum cost/benefit is obtained in terms of KVA to pound ratio. In other words, the design criteria of standards transformers is to maximize the power transferred to the load while keeping the size of the transformer to the smaller possible dimensions (volume). Please, note that the configuration of these transformers will always have an efficiency lower than 100% as explained in the document describing Figuera's 1908 apparatus.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 04:30:58 AM
Hi bajac
Thanks for your words.  8)

See, when I say "doesn't work" I mean "not to produce more output than input" However my current device worked fine but didn't hit more than 100% yield.
Unfortunately I have no photo of the first device that did not work, who wants to show device failed.
You can show some really small device running on autorun, that's all I ask so I can cheer me up.  :'(

Your device that you got high current which commutator you used, mechanical or electronic??
I also can get high currents in mine, just depend on the coils that use, but never greater in power output at the imput.  :(

Excuse the writing ... that translator I get crazy he insists on changing the words I want to write, but I'm learning heheheeh


Schiko,


You seem to be a little disappointed with your experiments. The major mistake you made was not to disclose your setup even if it did not work. You are not the only case. I hear people complaining that they had built the Figuera's apparatus and no results were obtained. When I asked to post photos of the setup, the devices did not really follow Figuera's teachings.


I could tell you that the Figuera's devices do not operate at high frequencies.


A big mistake I made was to dismantle the unit that I showed in post #58 before completing all the tests!!!


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 28, 2013, 06:23:42 AM
Hi bajac
Disappointed, a little, but I still have hope!  :)
I don't want to create controversy that's enough the discussions at the beginning of the forum, but from the beginning nobody was able to show a single device running on autorun, it seems odd to me because the patent claims that there will be abundant energy in fact I think there's something else on the device built by Mr. Figuera that is not in the patent that it would be very natural and whatever the secret was with him to the Tomb, I'm not affirming anything but that's what I think.  ???

But I didn't give up, since nobody's going to show me a device as is in the patent running on autorun, keep trying in other ways, not following the patente literally and searching for the secrets...  ::)

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 28, 2013, 08:52:04 AM
Hi


Do you have any link to detailed explanation about laminated core ?  I have to understand how it is build, work and how it is produced (the steps involved).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on September 28, 2013, 04:19:23 PM
Hi


Do you have any link to detailed explanation about laminated core ?  I have to understand how it is build, work and how it is produced (the steps involved).

Maybe in Europe it does not work, but in the US when I have a question, first I try to find an answer on internet, usually on google.This time I've just put the two words "laminated core" in the proper box. I guess, the short and appropriate answer could be this, from "wiki-answers": http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers)

"What is the purpose of laminating an iron core in transformers?

 Answer:

The reason we laminate the iron cores in transformers is because we want to limit what are called eddy currents. Transformers are basically two coils of wire wrapped around a core of iron. They work by induction. Induction occurs when current flows in one conductor (or one set of windings in the transformer) and the magnetic field that forms around that conductor (that set of windings) sweeps the other conductor (the other set of windings) and induces a voltage. In order to increase the effectiveness of the transformer, we need to improve the way the magnetic fields are coupled from one set of windings to the other set. Iron conducts magnetic lines of force well, so we use that to help conduct the magnetic lines of force from coil A to coil B. Problem is, iron is also a conductor, and it's being swept by the magnetic field as well. If we didn't use laminations, the iron core would provide a place for the magnetic lines to produce (induce) current, and that current flowing in the core would heat the core up really fast and waste energy. By laminating the cores, we break up the current paths within that core and limit eddy currents."

Also, good source of knowledge is, as always, on WikiPedia.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 28, 2013, 07:09:33 PM
The internet is a good source for finding information about anything.
Here is a pdf document that has a summarized description:


http://www.navymars.org/national/training/nmo_courses/NMO2/module2/14174_ch5.pdf (http://www.navymars.org/national/training/nmo_courses/NMO2/module2/14174_ch5.pdf)


 [size=78%]http://www.magmet.com/pdf/TransformDesignConsiderat.pdf (http://www.magmet.com/pdf/TransformDesignConsiderat.pdf)[/size]


Wikipedia: [size=78%]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer)[/size]







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 28, 2013, 07:25:29 PM
Thank you guys. First I did a research but that had not removed my doubts. I have dismantled EI core from transformer and I did it many times trying to replicate JackNoSkills setup. What always astonished me were a marks on each E or I parts like they are composed from a tiny iron wires pressed together. I always thought laminated means that core is combined from a many separated shapes like E+I parts, but HOW THAT PARTS are made is what I WANTED TO KNOW. I know they are covered by some very thin lacquer but that's all I know.
Can you find information WHEN laminated cores become popular and cheap ? COULD Figuera used DIFFERENT setup of core ?

:-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on September 28, 2013, 10:33:40 PM
Hej forest,

In USA patents the oldest mention of laminated transformer cores date back to around 1890-91 when 4 patent applications were filed:
US461135,  US528188,  US581873,  US602218  but they were granted later in different years.

This means that Figuera must have been aware of laminated cores from the year of 1891 (US461135) and onwards.

You can see some drawings on different shapes in the above patents. (I did not search non-American patents to check for dates.)

Gyula

PS:  I use http://www.pat2pdf.org/ for retriving US patents in PDF files (when you know patent numbers, that is).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 29, 2013, 01:27:38 PM
Maybe in Europe it does not work, but in the US when I have a question, first I try to find an answer on internet, usually on google.This time I've just put the two words "laminated core" in the proper box. I guess, the short and appropriate answer could be this, from "wiki-answers": http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers)

"What is the purpose of laminating an iron core in transformers?

 Answer:

The reason we laminate the iron cores in transformers is because we want to limit what are called eddy currents. Transformers are basically two coils of wire wrapped around a core of iron. They work by induction. Induction occurs when current flows in one conductor (or one set of windings in the transformer) and the magnetic field that forms around that conductor (that set of windings) sweeps the other conductor (the other set of windings) and induces a voltage. In order to increase the effectiveness of the transformer, we need to improve the way the magnetic fields are coupled from one set of windings to the other set. Iron conducts magnetic lines of force well, so we use that to help conduct the magnetic lines of force from coil A to coil B. Problem is, iron is also a conductor, and it's being swept by the magnetic field as well. If we didn't use laminations, the iron core would provide a place for the magnetic lines to produce (induce) current, and that current flowing in the core would heat the core up really fast and waste energy. By laminating the cores, we break up the current paths within that core and limit eddy currents."

Also, good source of knowledge is, as always, on WikiPedia.


 Then why do they not use the same techniques to form the laminations as they apply to a bucking autotransformer winding to increase or decrease the magnetic feild within the laminations. Simple enough to connect a couple of laminations on the ends. You could go as far as to make the laminations form a multilayer capacitor.
 Maybe the trick is in the number of free and mobile electrons and if there are more of them in a given space would'nt it be easier to interact with them using a magnetic field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 29, 2013, 05:01:06 PM
check this http://www.overunity.com/12465/patent-from-1920-that-looks-like-coler-stromerzeuger/topicseen/#.UkhAT6K8DOT (http://www.overunity.com/12465/patent-from-1920-that-looks-like-coler-stromerzeuger/topicseen/#.UkhAT6K8DOT)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 29, 2013, 07:51:25 PM
Hi guys

I think you guys are looking for water in a desert ...
Magnetítico flow is important, I mean all research is important, but more important is the resonance "this is the key word," If you learn how to take advantage of the extra energy that is generated when any system enters in resonance you rule the world.  8)

Resonance can be your friend if you learn to treat it with care and attention, but can also become angry and destructive if you don't respect it.
Treat it as if it were your wife and she will reward you.  ;D

ps: in technical school always teach us that "resonance" can cause disasters and should be controlled at all costs, maybe it's time to think different!
RESONANCE is where the interesting stuff really happen

cheers!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 29, 2013, 08:56:14 PM
This is supposed to be a Figuera thread. Can we stay on message please.
If you have other stuff to say then by all means start a separate thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 29, 2013, 10:17:35 PM
This is supposed to be a Figuera thread. Can we stay on message please.
If you have other stuff to say then by all means start a separate thread.

Those words were to me???

I think I'm completely within the subject Figuera 's, but if you didn't understand what I said, I can't do anything about it, just ask cordiality of its part, anyway I think didn't offend anyone so far.

Just put a subject for all we think, if someone show a device Figuera's operating in self-running presentation I would be very happy.  ;)

I am struggling with this device since the beginning of the thread so I think I have every right to express myself here, independent of their will or understanding.

but still I hope you understand and think a bit before you write ...

Sorry for anything I have written that did not please you!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 01:04:35 AM
It's not aimed at anyone. Too many threads go off the rails and invite other people to write even more. It would be good to have posts  which either proved or disproved Figuera. I am of the opinion that all science is valuable even if it doesn't work.
I tried moving a variable resistor manually and did not see anything. That is a positive contribution - even if it was a fail.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on September 30, 2013, 06:17:03 AM
Too many threads go off the rails and invite other people to write even more. It would be good to have posts  which either proved or disproved Figuera. I am of the opinion that all science is valuable even if it doesn't work.

I understand what you mean, and I agree!  :-X

Quote
I tried moving a variable resistor manually and did not see anything. That is a positive contribution - even if it was a fail.

I'm sorry that I don't understand, you're saying that tried and failed ... is this???  :-[

Because I tried it and it worked, just didn't come out more power than entered, worked as a good voltage inverter, just this.
that's why I'm here to find out where did I go wrong ... If I did wrong.
But I have faith in the device design maybe with some modification it work indeed.

It seems that this week we will have news here... stay tuned.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 10:16:31 AM
Yes, I meant I did not see overunity. But my experiment was just a casual one to see which way to proceed.
I am wondering about something.
AT this time 1900 to 1920 it was common to use an interrupter with a coil. Many schematics did not even show the interrupter as it was understood to be a part of all coils. Maybe that is what is missing.
AN interrupter is of course a Tesla switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 01:05:19 PM
Yes, I meant I did not see overunity. But my experiment was just a casual one to see which way to proceed.
I am wondering about something.
AT this time 1900 to 1920 it was common to use an interrupter with a coil. Many schematics did not even show the interrupter as it was understood to be a part of all coils. Maybe that is what is missing.
AN interrupter is of course a Tesla switch.
If is that, we are talking about to mix 2 frequencies again..Is that right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2013, 01:23:04 PM
If is that, we are talking about to mix 2 frequencies again..Is that right?


 ::) ::) ::)   ;D ;D ;D ;D  Yes, in special case.  Now I know you are EE, can you answer the simple question ? How we can magnify current but not voltage ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 02:06:34 PM

 ::) ::) ::)   ;D ;D ;D ;D  Yes, in special case.  Now I know you are EE, can you answer the simple question ? How we can magnify current but not voltage ?
Is that a million dollars answer?  Just kidding.  RESONANCE?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 02:15:39 PM
Resonance? It depends on which definition. EE definition you need a capacitor ie tank circuit.
Tesla definition is longitude  wave. ie radiant energy. I don't remember Figuera  mentioning resonance or capacitors.
You amplify current by using step down transformer. Of course you lose voltage so power stays the same minus losses in the circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 02:20:48 PM
As i said in one of my posts, I have 2 sets of transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I had the windings done in the primaries of one set. Is 360 turns of 14 AWG aluminum magnetic wire. My plan this week is to test several configurations. As you can see, the sets are composed of 2 "C" and one "I". In the picture number 15, I put a small insulated plate to make a "gap" between the elements.
Any suggestions for test?


Ari
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 02:34:01 PM
Resonance? It depends on which definition. EE definition you need a capacitor ie tank circuit.
Tesla definition is longitude  wave. ie radiant energy. I don't remember Figuera  mentioning resonance or capacitors.
You amplify current by using step down transformer. Of course you lose voltage so power stays the same minus losses in the circuit.


That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on September 30, 2013, 07:52:11 PM

That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?
Well... you are starting to sound like the Barbosa-Leal patent from Brazil.
http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html)
about 1/3 rd of the way in the document.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2013, 09:04:17 PM

That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?


Good path.
You already know the answer I'm sure ;-) Sometimes the answer is very confusing....  The simplest way to rise amperage without rising voltage is ....by having the second power source adding electrons at the same voltage level......  ::)     


C'mon...you already saw that picture.... that's how noise is generated to hide the truth by mixing real info with garbage....
If you can take second battery and attach in parallel to the power source at the same voltage then you have the simplest way to rise amperage without rising voltage. Now... the "magic" is to find a way how to do this with AC and 2 frequencies .


That is the special case Steven Mark said "another time" and you already saw the picture explaining it.....just find a picture with two signals drawn by red pen....the noise level is astonishing....

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on September 30, 2013, 09:10:59 PM
Well... you are starting to sound like the Barbosa-Leal patent from Brazil.
http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html)
about 1/3 rd of the way in the document.


Yes, I know that. I will run some tests with the transformer and I need to find out a place to put the results. This tests will be a mix of everything that I can think about the transformers, like the myths that the magnetic flux will divert and release the primary (Lenz law) if we add a alternative path in the transformer...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 01, 2013, 12:05:50 AM
This was the first look be at my understanding of the original patent.
with all three coils equal, primary and secondary example 200 turns, magnetic wire 18 ... This was my first test.
No load was all normal, but when the secondary is loaded the voltage drops and the primary amperage increases, so far so good as any transformer, but varying the frequency it happens something strange, secondary voltage increases and the primary amperage decreases as there was no great loss but does not reach 100%, and depending on the adjustment of frequency and other parameters comes very close of 100%...
The test was done with just a small laminated core, will be that  affect much the core size, not amperage e voltage but effect FE?  ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 01, 2013, 12:37:40 AM
Schiko,

Watching the shape of your signals I think that maybe your are using resistors of very high value. For that reason you just get high values in the contacts close to the inducer coils (both sides: contacts 1 and 8 ). If you use smaller resistors you could get an increase more steady in your signal. Which is the value of your resistor?

What frequencies are you using in your tests? Remember that Figuera used a small motor to rotate the brush around the commutator. Therefore I guess that he could be used a maximun of 2900 rpm. I  think that his generator does not rely on high frequencies. Maybe he operated his commutator to get comercial 50 Hz AC current (Europe), but this is just my oppinion.  Also remember that he used soft iron cores: I suppose that soft iron has a maximun proper frequency. Does anyone know which is the maximun frequency to be used with soft iron?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on October 01, 2013, 12:48:35 AM
Re cores:  There's something to add about this.
In a later patent by Bufon, he shows a diagram in which  the cores are less than half way in the primaries.
Also he states  that you can substitute the cores for a coil and this coil will generate voltage which can make the device a self runner.
I tested a solenoid with an ex tv small coil inside instead of the core and it did produce a good current and voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 01, 2013, 02:23:00 AM
Hi Hanon
This photo I took of a post I made here #304  <   Link-1 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/300/#.UkoCeNLIUko) > has nothing to do with the circuit that I used in the first test was only an outline. The trafo is on the same link is the third picture. And the circuit that I used is this link #288 < Link-2 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/285/#.UkoFQ9LIUko") > controlling 9 Mosfet with resitores of 4 ohms. The frequency was around 30 to 300 Hz.   The waveform did not have peaks as big as those of this photo here. Now I use an H-bridge  I will standby the tests of Ariovaldo.  If ok I'll see if I can get a big transformer to replicate and post too here.

Hi a. king21
It's true, I've seen.
I tried that too but gave the same.
The core I used was the same as the link 1.

cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on October 01, 2013, 03:17:20 AM
There is something else to consider. The original patent resembles an old style motor car distributor cap -  except with more contacts. That setup is almost certain to create sparks. Even if the make before break does not create an actual spark the sudden abruptness of the constant switching is bound to create a radiant effect. So we could be looking at a Tesla switch type situation with static mixing on each resistor contact.
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz.  My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the  cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process. It could be that by introducing static into the switching process we could emulate the 2008 device.
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please  understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each switching contact has a MHZ oscillation in it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on October 01, 2013, 03:29:01 AM
There is something else to consider. The original patent resembles an old style motor car distributor cap -  except with more contacts. That setup is almost certain to create sparks. Even if the make before break does not create an actual spark the sudden abruptness of the constant switching is bound to create a radiant effect. So we could be looking at a Tesla switch type situation with static mixing on each resistor contact.
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz.  My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the  cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process. It could be that by introducing static into the switching process we could emulate the 2008 device.
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please  understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each hz has a MHZ oscillation in it.
If you take a look in the youtube video that I posted days ago, using the rotary device in a tranformer, the lights just went on when the rotary device got problem and start to spark...do you think the original patent use HV?
I like this line of thinking..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on October 01, 2013, 04:30:03 AM

Yes Ariovaldo. Great video - actually it's the first time I've seen it.I read up about spark gaps in an old book. If your spark gap  is too small it leads to a dead short. Then the frequency goes down to your switching rate. If your spark is just right your frequency goes into the mhz range.
Voltage: Figuera talks about emulating mains.
So he must be inputting 220 to 240 volts at 50 hz.

Here's some info on spark gaps from an old book on radio telegraph construction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 01, 2013, 07:42:52 AM
a.king21
Quote
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz.  My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the  cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process.

I understand what you mean, but I think today using spark-gap does not make sense to me is spark-gap as a capacitor dielectric stuck and generates many harmonics difficult to control, now if you want a lot of tension just to have enough alternating current and a transformer with secondary large and well done. Look I do not want to finish with the fun of nobody but that's what I think.

a.king21
Quote
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please  understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each hz has a MHZ oscillation in it.

It is true, I agree.
But I really believe in resonance. And some circuits work fine using BEMF damped. This is my way. I see everyone putting diode in parallel with the coil, I think better to use capacitor in parallel with transistor and use part of the wave and reinject in the circuit. As was used in old tv's
Making a mix of coils Figueira, Thane Heins transformer and others may be we can find a way, I don't know ...

After I read it I was curious here ...
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/inductive_conversion.pdf
But that is a topic for another thead.

cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 01, 2013, 09:48:23 AM
Here is strange question if you can help me ?... If there is transformer having one secondary and two separate primaries each one connected to the separate AC power source what parameters should have those currents to combine into 2 times power output on secondary ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on October 01, 2013, 07:44:11 PM
Here is strange question if you can help me ?... If there is transformer having one secondary and two separate primaries each one connected to the separate AC power source what parameters should have those currents to combine into 2 times power output on secondary ?

I suppose the voltage outputs of the two AC sources must be in phase and if the two separate primaries are identical, then the input in-phase voltages would add in the single secondary.  Of course the cross section of the core should be rated for handling the higher output power. 
I also suppose:  you assumed the output voltage amplitudes of the two AC sources are identical too, as are the inner impedances .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 02, 2013, 10:18:41 PM
  The waveform did not have peaks as big as those of this photo here. Now I use an H-bridge

Hi Schiko,

Maybe if you have implemented a H-bridge circuit to genereate both signals you could post the schematic. It will very helpful for other users!

In the first posts in this forum Bajac recommended to use a stepper motor controller with microstepping. If you note in the picture below you could get the unphased signals if you can join A+C outputs and B+D outputs from this controller.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 03, 2013, 02:45:12 AM
Hi Schiko,

Maybe if you have implemented a H-bridge circuit to genereate both signals you could post the schematic. It will very helpful for other users!

HI Hanon
I'll draw the schematic and post here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on October 03, 2013, 06:08:11 AM
Hi all,

I do not know if this will help, I found this while looking for info on H-Bridge, http://www.robotpower.com/downloads/Simple-H-user-manual.pdf . It can be used as single H-Bridge, 2 each half-bridges, or combined 2 half bridges to double Amp's.

When used as H-Bridge or half-bridge, Voltage 6V – 24V (28V absolute max). 25A cont. at 100%, 20A at 70%, 45A 5 second peak

When used combined, 48A cont. at 100%, 38A cont. at 70%, 70A 5 second peak.

I do not know how long this device (Simple-H HV, with fan) will run continusly. I am planning on calling them 3 Oct 13 to get some more info. Will Let you know what they say.

If you look at the manual, What are your thoughts about this?

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 03, 2013, 07:27:01 AM
@RMat

Good ... how much ...
For those who already have arduino would be great!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on October 03, 2013, 02:48:35 PM
The Simple-H (3V-5V inputs) $49.99, the Simple-H HV (4V-28V inputs) $59.99, and the 12V 50mm Fan with mounting kit $7.00.

You can order them from the website at http://www.robotpower.com/catalog/ . They also have different ones available.

Hope this helps.

Bob

P.S. This info was on the site for the Simple-H :
"The Robot Power Simple-H is a low-cost robust H-bridge circuit suitable for use driving DC motors and other DC loads in the ~25A and 6V-28V range. A wide range of command sources from switches to 555 timer circuits to microcontrollers, BasicStamps and Arduinos may be used to control the Simple-H. The classic "green" Simple-H requires 3V-5V logic level signals on its command inputs.

The Simple-H does not have any on-board logic to interpret R/C, serial, analog voltage or other commands. An external signal source is required to translate command inputs into the switching signals needed to drive the Simple-H power chips. This flexibility allows the Simple-H to be driven from a signal source as simple as a pushbutton or as complex as a microcontroller or BasicStamp. Even a desktop or laptop PC can be used through a parallel port or USB port expander."

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on October 03, 2013, 07:16:34 PM
I talked to a man at Robot Power about the Simple-H HV. He stated that if it were run below 20 Amps, it should run continuously without any problems. He also stated that they have some models that will handle up to 80 Amps, but those are more exspensive.

Hope this is helpful.

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 05, 2013, 12:21:35 AM
I know, I know ... thread out  :-X
Nobody has shown so far in Figueira device self running as I do not like spark-gap still trying to adapt the device "Figueira" to something more modern.  ???

Here could be a way...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo   Would anyone agree?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ariovaldo on October 05, 2013, 04:45:52 AM
I know, I know ... thread out  :-X
Nobody has shown so far in Figueira device self running as I do not like spark-gap still trying to adapt the device "Figueira" to something more modern.  ???

Here could be a way...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo)   Would anyone agree?


Interesting. He use 400 watts ballast. Now, how can we use this power? Motors....?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 05, 2013, 05:58:20 AM

Interesting. He use 400 watts ballast. Now, how can we use this power? Motors....?

You watched the 3 videos?
part-2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd_3lCG1oiI
part-3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOEdFI1qXCU

Perhaps the 4th video it add a real load.
The idea interested me, my problem is when I loaded the secondary transformer "out of tune" and the power drops this idea maybe help me.
First I want to see self-running, then I think about power.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 05, 2013, 09:41:37 PM
Thats not gonna work ,it's been tried before.
 To get a self runner you have to get more from someplace enough to cover whats consumed to the load and to cover the losses. What is being manipulated differently that a different reaction would happen? A pound of flux is still a pound of flux. The same flux going round the same way as usual from one pole to another around a closed path.Even with two paths the pound of flux is just allowed to loosely travel the two. It does not increase the number of lines or how they are intercepted. The total is still the same but with maybe a chance for more losses.
Title: Possible Winding for patent No. 30378 (1902)
Post by: hanon on October 06, 2013, 02:34:21 PM
Hi all,

I have been thinking about possible winding schemes for patent 30378 (motionless generator, year 1902). I don´t know if I could be right or not, but I have realized a feature which could minimize the Lenz effect over the inducer coils (I think).

The concept is described in the attached picture below. This winding is based on having 2 induced magnetic fields which flow in opposite directions along each inducer coil. If you see the picture, you can note than in each inducer coil there are two induced magnetic fields (one created by that induced coil and one created by the next induced coil). These two induced magnetic field are in oppositon to each other. Therefore the decrease in induced coil strength as consequence of the first induced field is compensated by the increase in that coil strength done by the second magnetic field. Thus, a minimization of the Lenz effect in each inducer coil could be obtained.

Could these proposal be right? Please comment. (Note: Remember that there was another proposal done by Bajac for this patent winding that you can find here: http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/125092/)  )

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 06, 2013, 05:21:33 PM
Well at least your trying to reduce losses. Thats a good direction. How would you double the flux seen in the induced with out expending more current to do so?Better yet if you could along the way of increasing the flux could cancel the current at maximum operating saturation that would be even better. It would regulate the activivty.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 07, 2013, 04:56:49 PM
Schiko,

I was also thinking about using "tuned" transformers as almost every coil Tesla used was operating on a "harmonic" or resonate frequency. And apparently, Mr. Figeura and Mr. Tesla, if nothing else, knew each other or at least had knowledge of each other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 07, 2013, 11:50:43 PM
Hi all,

About the concept that I referred in my last post to achieve two induced magnetic flows in opposition (which cancel each other) I have found some links where this concept is applied. It is called the "F-machine" or "F-Transformer" and it resembles slightly to the Gramme machine :

http://www.alternativkanalen.com/ph-machine.html (http://www.alternativkanalen.com/ph-machine.html)

As you could note in the next link this device also needs an air gap to avoid the return of the induced field into the primary coil:

http://en.shram.kiev.ua/top/invention/invention2/2.shtml (http://en.shram.kiev.ua/top/invention/invention2/2.shtml)

I have posted these links here in order to discuss if this concept can be applied to Figuera´s  patents. Please post your comments.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 08, 2013, 07:15:50 AM
Hi all

I'm just an old electronics technician. With old ideas. And I don't consider myself very smart to answer a few questions for sure. But I think the image of the post http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg372131/#msg372131 shows what I think about the subject.
Unfortunately I can't express myself very well in English, I'm trying, but I don't know if I'm to get ...

I don't think Mr. Figuera had exotic ideas in mind when he conceived the machine.
If we think simple, perhaps, get good results too.

I'm making new experiences, when possible, I show you here to discuss.
Cheers
pic's by Wikipédia resonance page

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Spring_resonance.gif (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Spring_resonance.gif)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Standing_wave_2.gif (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Standing_wave_2.gif)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 08, 2013, 10:23:31 AM
Schiko


Would you be so nice to  help me and in reality all of us to solve some mystery related to what Figuera knew ? It require simple experiment but with tools I can't afford or borrow  :(  : good digital scope with power integrating/computing a signal generator and a ferrite core transformer custom made probably (ferrite because it has to have stable inductance), luxmeter.
First let me describe context : everybody knows that by placing a bulb in resonant tank circuit (a bulb with stable resistance, preheated for example) will allow to light it to the same light intensity consuming less power from source.


The question is simple : can we do that placing tank circuit on primary of transformer while bulb is connected to secondary ?
YES/NO - has to be experimentally proved !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Qwert on October 08, 2013, 12:58:24 PM

The F-machine resembles >>Thane C. Heins bi-toroid transformer<<, http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0 or just use google for more info.

The other link shows an article of Hartiberlin (Stefan Hartmann), the owner of this forum. It's more than easy to get him for an answer of concerns regarded here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 08, 2013, 07:47:12 PM
The F-machine resembles >>Thane C. Heins bi-toroid transformer<<, http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0 (http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0) or just use google for more info.

The other link shows an article of Hartiberlin (Stefan Hartmann), the owner of this forum. It's more than easy to get him for an answer of concerns regarded here.

Thane Heins transformer is based on a different concept than the F-machine. Thane Heins try to redirect the induced magnetic flow along the path with lower reluctance but he does not use any air gap. On the other hand, the F-machine is based on compensatig both induced field flowing in opposite direction into a closed magnetic circuit (toroid), and it needs and air gap between the inducer coil and the toroid.   My question is:

Could be right to try to compensate opposite induced fields in the 1902 patent?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 08, 2013, 07:50:28 PM
Would you be so nice to  help me and in reality all of us to solve some mystery related to what Figuera knew ? It require simple experiment but with tools I can't afford or borrow  :(  : good digital scope with power integrating/computing a signal generator and a ferrite core transformer custom made probably (ferrite because it has to have stable inductance), luxmeter.
First let me describe context : everybody knows that by placing a bulb in resonant tank circuit (a bulb with stable resistance, preheated for example) will allow to light it to the same light intensity consuming less power from source.
The question is simple : can we do that placing tank circuit on primary of transformer while bulb is connected to secondary ?
YES/NO - has to be experimentally proved !
Firstly, for me, the ultimate test for any device "OU" is: energize the lamp and auto running at the same time.
Sophisticated tests do not interest me, because I do not have such equipment of tests. So...
This is for you to understand my "line of thinking".

As for the third video Transverter, explanation is very convincing in theory I think possible.
But see, this would be an attempt to solve my problem in high frequency setup.
But the control of the switches is very sophisticated for me.
In moment, I decided to go back the origins, after advice from bajac, and see where I failed.
Thinking of Figuera device as a "simple generator" is easy to see the current gain, but the gain in voltage happens in scale, better saying, associating multiple sets of coils to allow the gain in voltage.
For me, it's going to be difficulty build coil tuned in 120 Hz, central frequency of machine for 60 Hz on the way out, I think that's where I failed.
But i keep trying, HF and LF setup, let's see what happens.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 09, 2013, 01:17:23 PM
The 08 pat does not support the idea of flux redirection nor does the design of the device. There would be too much leakage of flux for it to be effective. Sharp turns just don't cut the mustard. If there were any critical effects of sending the flux around the outside frame it would have been round with no edges or corners.A wire core or flat material wrapped in a circle would have been the depiction in that time period.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 09, 2013, 09:45:52 PM
The 08 pat does not support the idea of flux redirection nor does the design of the device. There would be too much leakage of flux for it to be effective. Sharp turns just don't cut the mustard. If there were any critical effects of sending the flux around the outside frame it would have been round with no edges or corners.A wire core or flat material wrapped in a circle would have been the depiction in that time period.

Which patent are you referring as "the 08 patent? The patent from 1908, or the patent No. 30378? In any of both cases the drawing it is just an sketch. Also in both patents is written that the drawing is just to understand the concept but different configurations may be implemented under the same concept.

About patent 30378, the close external magnetic circuit which surround all the electromagnets must have the objetive of keeping the magnetic flux into it as in any other generator. What else if not? .  I won´t take as an important feature the detail that the drawing has sharp edges.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 21, 2013, 01:27:32 AM
Hi all,

Please check some very interesting posts about Figuera´s generator in the forum at EnergeticForum done in these last days

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html)

Please post your comments about the proposal discussed in that forum.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 21, 2013, 01:48:44 PM
Still not done getting all the reference materials together to support my explanation.I think I will stick with this forum though nothing personal. An effective machine will take a lot of material mass to be large enough to use for primary power supply. I already figured out how large a generator in a IC form I would need to replace the grid would have to equal a 59hp gen to safely cover peak usage safely with out over straining. Need to learn an entirely new math as well and replicate some of the old 1800's test equipment. Today I am helping someone replace their plumbing and going over my own heating system.Cold weather is moving in fast.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 05:25:07 AM
Hanon:cheers:  This just for you and everyone. I know you have a hard time deciphering the Clemente Figuera's Egg of Columbus.

I have attached a schematic below, this should be wound on a annular ring/ferrite toroid for better performance.:blowout:

L1,L2,L3,L4 is the starting of the winding of this 4 coils on the toroid,the winding start is CW facing to side of toroid the winding should be going inside to your chest- like the winding is coming from below hole of toroid to exit on top hole of the toroid going inside to your chest.

On the schematic you will see that the 4 wound coils is group in two pairs. L1 and L2- The start of L2=CW is connected to the end winding of L1=CCW.

 You will understand Tesla's way of winding is simple, its only a persons mind that made it difficult to understand Tesla. I already told people here that Tesla intended to leave this patents and illustration for all(average minded) people.

L3 and L4- The start of L3=CW is connected to the end winding of L4=CCW.

Simple as that. All four wound coils should start with CW. About the magnetic field and magnetic flow you only need a compass and voltage supply test experiment.

The Two Primaries function like a flip flop, when the L1 and L2 is ON-Maximum Field on Generator, the L3 and L4 is OFF- Neutral Field on Generator. When L3 and L4 is ON, L1 and L2 is OFF. The secondary are all wound starting CW, its a matter of choice how you connect the Secondary like series or parallel.:thinking:

 This machine is powered with 2 Phase Alternating Current- which is actually a DC Magneto Generator Tesla converted to perform on AC with the used of genius Commutator design. That is the reason people for 135 years dont take interest on such beautiful design, for they dont know what is the lacking key to such beast. The patent:confused:  will be hard to decipher if no one will guide you how to understand such beast machine. I have already given to you the simplest path to such beast machine:eek: . You can build it like a size:D  of your home. LOL:rofl:

Once you understand this Egg of Columbus you will understand all patents of Clemente Figuera in a simplest form, You will also find which is lacking and the real operation and function of such machine. Clemente Figuera drawed the illustration on a different ways for confusion.:v-peace:

Dont forget to take credit for Nikola Tesla:hug: . This winding configuration is the same with the Tesla Bifilar Pancake when you deeply understand this winding configuration.:notworthy:

@Everyone :notworthy:  you can design a simple Flip Flop/4017 + H Bridge just for testing for all to replicate this machine.

The patent below is the same on the schematic . Figure 2 and Figure 3.
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-390,413-electrical-distribution

Meow:rofl:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 07:38:22 AM
The key is already been given to us long time ago. Tesla  called this Rotating Magnetic Induction Machine=Rotating Transformer/Converter=Electro Dynamic Induction Machine.Tesla had use cleverly the Law of Induction Machine on his Motors/Converters/Transformer.
Tesla called this device on a simple term- Egg of Columbus. 

All your confusion will be clear ones you will understand the concept behind this device.I think its time to revive this thread again, I already posted this before but nobody seems to take interest. 

I know exactly the TPU, Barbosa and Leal Device, Tariel Kapanadze Lenzless Converter,Stanley Meyer VIC,Don Smith Toroid Devices,Clemente Figuera, works exactly the same with this principles. 

The Electro Dynamic Induction Machine is wound with 4 coils groups with as 2 sets. Basically we have two Primaries that each primary is wound diametrically opposite with two Coils= 180deg apart on annular ring. 

The power supply could be AC and DC.   

On DC Supply we need a reversing polarity controller on each coil. We will use the 4 Terminal of the two set of coils on DC Supply. We will need a 4 sequence flip flop switching on this to simulate and replicate the action of an Alternating Current.

On AC Supply we need a TWO phase Alternating Current Generator.We will use only 3 Terminal of the two set of coils, they share common Ground on the 3rd Terminal/Post.

Operation. Lets say: COIL A and COIL B. Lets device this on a 4 quarter cycle.

1. 1st quarter cycle. COIL A(the LEFT-[Positive] AND RIGHT-[Negative] wound coil) is now on maximum magnetic strength, energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 Degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 12 O'clock.

2. 2nd quarter cycle. COL B(The TOP-[Positive] and Bottom-[Negative] wound coil) is now powered by the 2nd phase/lines of supply=flip flop. Is now on maximum magnetic strength while the COIL A is minimum magnetic field.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will move to point 3 O'Clock.

3. 3rd quarter cycle. COIL A(LEFT-[Negative] and RIGHT-[Positive] is again maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 6 O'clock. COIL B on this quarter is minimum strength which means OFF.

4. 4th quarter cycle. COIL B(TOP-[Negative] and BOTTOM-[Positive] is again on its maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity. Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90Degress. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 9 O'clock. And lastly repeat the 1st quarter cycle to fully turn or move the magnetic rotation of the Magnetic Compass(Pointer).

I already wanted to reach this to you before. But no one is interested until a man name machinealive had interest on the Rotating Magnetic Field/Rotating Transformer.He is the one you should thank  for he encourage me to post this on this thread. I already give you everything which some has keep as secret. But there is no such thing as new on their invention, the new to this people is using their common sense. There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.

This device when properly understood is somewhat you guys call the LENZLESS Generator. Don't limit yourself with using only 1 coil windings. Imagination is your limit.I think I have now clear all your confusion.

Background of this Concept.

Read all if you wanted to understand it very much.Please focus on Transformer illustration and drawings. Remember it is powered with TWO Phase Alternating Current Generator. The Induction Motor of Nikola Tesla is the same with this Electro Dynamic Induction Machine/Converter. Some times you can see 4 sets of wire powering this Motor or Converter. You can also see 3 wires with common ground of the two phase alternating generator.

Tesla Patent 381,968 - Electro-Magnetic Motor

Tesla Patent 382,280 - Electrical Transmission of Power

Tesla Patent 390,413 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 382,282 - Method of Converting and Distributing Electric Currents

Tesla Patent 381,970 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 390,414 - Dynamo-Electric Machine



Meow ;D ;D ;D :o 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bbem on October 26, 2013, 08:26:58 AM
The key is already been given to us long time ago. Tesla  called this Rotating Magnetic Induction Machine=Rotating Transformer/Converter=Electro Dynamic Induction Machine.Tesla had use cleverly the Law of Induction Machine on his Motors/Converters/Transformer.
Tesla called this device on a simple term- Egg of Columbus. 

All your confusion will be clear ones you will understand the concept behind this device.I think its time to revive this thread again, I already posted this before but nobody seems to take interest. 

I know exactly the TPU, Barbosa and Leal Device, Tariel Kapanadze Lenzless Converter,Stanley Meyer VIC,Don Smith Toroid Devices,Clemente Figuera, works exactly the same with this principles. 

The Electro Dynamic Induction Machine is wound with 4 coils groups with as 2 sets. Basically we have two Primaries that each primary is wound diametrically opposite with two Coils= 180deg apart on annular ring. 

The power supply could be AC and DC.   

On DC Supply we need a reversing polarity controller on each coil. We will use the 4 Terminal of the two set of coils on DC Supply. We will need a 4 sequence flip flop switching on this to simulate and replicate the action of an Alternating Current.

On AC Supply we need a TWO phase Alternating Current Generator.We will use only 3 Terminal of the two set of coils, they share common Ground on the 3rd Terminal/Post.

Operation. Lets say: COIL A and COIL B. Lets device this on a 4 quarter cycle.

1. 1st quarter cycle. COIL A(the LEFT-[Positive] AND RIGHT-[Negative] wound coil) is now on maximum magnetic strength, energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 Degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 12 O'clock.

2. 2nd quarter cycle. COL B(The TOP-[Positive] and Bottom-[Negative] wound coil) is now powered by the 2nd phase/lines of supply=flip flop. Is now on maximum magnetic strength while the COIL A is minimum magnetic field.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will move to point 3 O'Clock.

3. 3rd quarter cycle. COIL A(LEFT-[Negative] and RIGHT-[Positive] is again maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 6 O'clock. COIL B on this quarter is minimum strength which means OFF.

4. 4th quarter cycle. COIL B(TOP-[Negative] and BOTTOM-[Positive] is again on its maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity. Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90Degress. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 9 O'clock. And lastly repeat the 1st quarter cycle to fully turn or move the magnetic rotation of the Magnetic Compass(Pointer).

I already wanted to reach this to you before. But no one is interested until a man name machinealive had interest on the Rotating Magnetic Field/Rotating Transformer.He is the one you should thank  for he encourage me to post this on this thread. I already give you everything which some has keep as secret. But there is no such thing as new on their invention, the new to this people is using their common sense. There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.

This device when properly understood is somewhat you guys call the LENZLESS Generator. Don't limit yourself with using only 1 coil windings. Imagination is your limit.I think I have now clear all your confusion.

Background of this Concept.

Read all if you wanted to understand it very much.Please focus on Transformer illustration and drawings. Remember it is powered with TWO Phase Alternating Current Generator. The Induction Motor of Nikola Tesla is the same with this Electro Dynamic Induction Machine/Converter. Some times you can see 4 sets of wire powering this Motor or Converter. You can also see 3 wires with common ground of the two phase alternating generator.

Tesla Patent 381,968 - Electro-Magnetic Motor

Tesla Patent 382,280 - Electrical Transmission of Power

Tesla Patent 390,413 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 382,282 - Method of Converting and Distributing Electric Currents

Tesla Patent 381,970 - System of Electrical Distribution

Tesla Patent 390,414 - Dynamo-Electric Machine



Meow ;D ;D ;D :o 8)


Hello Stupify12.
I just want to say 'thank you very much' for sharing your knowledge about Tesla's ideas and inventions.
I read all your posts at OU- and EF- fora[size=78%].[/size] :)


BTW
Maybe you know the answer to the question of Bruce_TPU:
"[size=78%]How do dual rotating magnetic fields help us?  WHY is that important?  Stop guessing at it and study physics involving said current/magnetic fields and you will find the answer."[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
Any idea?


Regards, Bert

Ps. I share your view about the importance of the capacitor (bifilar testla coil beeing capacitor and lenz-less).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 10:43:16 AM

Hello Stupify12.
I just want to say 'thank you very much' for sharing your knowledge about Tesla's ideas and inventions.
I read all your posts at OU- and EF- fora[size=78%].[/size] :)


BTW
Maybe you know the answer to the question of Bruce_TPU:
"[size=78%]How do dual rotating magnetic fields help us?  WHY is that important?  Stop guessing at it and study physics involving said current/magnetic fields and you will find the answer."[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
Any idea?


Regards, Bert

Ps. I share your view about the importance of the capacitor (bifilar testla coil beeing capacitor and lenz-less).

 ::)There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.  ::)

I already found the answer to that question. Build this machine and experiment  from what you understand on its magnetic field and flow. Once you have understand and build have this machine. Everything will be easy for the dual rotating magnetic field. You can make magnetic flow the TWO Magnetic
 
It will be easy for you to understand the dual rotating magnetic field=Helix DNA Waveform Generator=Lenzless Generator the most advance cyclotron a physics could think of.

Everything will follow once you fully understand such beast.The Three Primary TPU is a imperfect design they wanted to force to rotate the Magnetic Field,But Tesla did it naturally on his Rotating Magnetic Field Concept.

Meow ;D ;D ;D :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 26, 2013, 03:21:48 PM
Hi all,

Please check some very interesting posts about Figuera´s generator in the forum at EnergeticForum done in these last days

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html)

Please post your comments about the proposal discussed in that forum.

Regards

http://www.popsci.com/science/gallery/2011-09/archive-gallery-first-appearances-notable-scientists?image=8

Toward the end of the interview, we asked Tesla which arena of science most appealed to him. While we expected him to mention radios and airplanes, Tesla answered that rotating magnetic fields were dear to his heart. "A thousand years hence, the telephone and the motion picture camera may be obsolete, but the principle of the rotating magnetic field will remain a vital, living thing for all time to come."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 26, 2013, 04:23:35 PM
The opposite of consumption is conservation. Conservation is not without activity when the act of conservation is self imposed by the activity.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 26, 2013, 07:49:24 PM
hello all
Stupify: I have been working last weeks with this subject, (Figuera), but not about the rotating field.
As I centered in the 1908 patent, in which the mag. fields are alligned, not rotating but rather fluctuacting from one side to the other (flip-floping ??)

IMHO the way to avoiding Lenz in the two series of inductors, is by means of the progressive addition of resistances after the commutator, (make before brake). So the input V never pases below 0 volts and therefore, no BEMF nor polarity reversal.In addittion, the air gap allows the collector to "produce" AC not influencing the inducing coils.
In my experiments, I reduced the number of resistors, and use a 12 pieces commutator, 3 resitors 100 ohms and 3 direct shunts (see schematic A).
Observed the following:
Spikes are produced at the brushes and also red light observable with one leg of neon bulb.
Variable DC Voltage at the collector higher than the input (after rectified & E. cap), but works with inductive loads, and not with resistive loads. (no amperage readdings yet).

I have been readding your posts very attentively, here and in the other forum, as well as the a.king21 ones.

I will give a try to this schematic you posted so will you be kind to help me with it ?

Is the toroid complete, or with 4 air gaps ?
Is it ferromagnetic ?, (I can make one with plastified iron wire,bailing wire)
Are the two primary winded over a secondary? if yes, should be these secondary in series as one coil ?
And lastly, what do think of using a commutator as B in the attached schematic ? I know that the ON will be longer that the OFF, but equal for both primary sets. It is moved by a small printer DC motor, so the rpm will be not so high (frequency)
thanks
cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 27, 2013, 04:51:38 AM
hello all
Stupify: I have been working last weeks with this subject, (Figuera), but not about the rotating field.
As I centered in the 1908 patent, in which the mag. fields are alligned, not rotating but rather fluctuacting from one side to the other (flip-floping ??)

I have been readding your posts very attentively, here and in the other forum, as well as the a.king21 ones.

I will give a try to this schematic you posted so will you be kind to help me with it ?

Is the toroid complete, or with 4 air gaps ?
Is it ferromagnetic ?, (I can make one with plastified iron wire,bailing wire)
Are the two primary winded over a secondary? if yes, should be these secondary in series as one coil ?
And lastly, what do think of using a commutator as B in the attached schematic ? I know that the ON will be longer that the OFF, but equal for both primary sets. It is moved by a small printer DC motor, so the rpm will be not so high (frequency)
thanks
cheers
Alvaro

The toroid is a complete ring no air gaps on this machine, no toroid splits on the annular ring..The magnetic flow on this machine never collide but moves like "catch me if u can"

Ferromagnetic=if you mean powdered iron,Tesla prefer soft iron which so many splits like a laminated. Ferromagnetic Powdered Iron is the best choice for the annular ring.

The primary is wounded first on the ring, The secondary is wound above the primary. Primary is first layer, Secondary is second layer but what ever how you wound the primary and secondary anything will work.. The patent on Tesla Toroid/Transformer shows how to wind the primary and secondary direction. All coils=primary and secondary wound started with CW. 
The secondary can be wired series or parallel it depens upon your choice, for there is also 4 wound coils of secondary on top of the Primary.

Any commutator will work. but you should put in mind the change of polarity on each Primary.

First, Lets say the COIL A is left=positive and right=negative.

 Second:The next On is COIL B, Top=positive and Bottom=negative,
Third : The next ON Coil is COIL A in reverse polarity, Left=negative and Right=Positive.
Fourth: The next ON Coil is COIL B in reverse polarity, Top=negative and Bottom=positive.

Keep in mind that when the commutator is about to change to the next coil, There is a time that the BOTH COIL A and COIL B turns ON before it proceed to Another Quarter. Like the First Quarter and Second Quarter will ON Together before it proceed to Second Quarter.

First Quarter> First Quarter + Second Quarter> Second Quarter> Second Quarter+ Third Quarter> Third  Quarter>Third Quarter + Fouth Quarter> Fourth Quarter> Repeat from the beginning. ;D ;D

I think I have answered your question correctly. Good luck and Take care ::)

Meow ;D ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 27, 2013, 09:47:47 AM
Stupify
thanks for the detailed answer
I´ll have to diggest it slowly, and take my time.
I see that the polarity reversal is not possible with my present comm. setup.
will study how tesla did it. (I´m not skilled in electronics)

I understand the lenzless efect, but still do not catch where comes the excess of energy from a rotating mag field. I have got to see it with a working device, as my imagination has its limits !! :P

Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 27, 2013, 03:13:51 PM
Reversing the fields will never yield a self runner.Too much waste in fighting self induction, reluctance. Hannon you were on the right path in Reply #375.  Every stich of flux has to leave the induced from inducer in cyclic order. One is declining but in order for it to totally be evacuated the opposing has to push the remaining reminance completely back to where it came from. Any number of lines left behind will defeat the action by the same amount acting like a brake. The greatest amount of change in the induced in a stationary device can only be had by filling up with the magnetic flux then removing it completely. The only way to remove it totally is to have the opposite push out the remaining with another of the same which fortunately constitutes a 2nd pulse on the induced. If the window of activity is too small it will be a week effect and generate heat. The space for the induced will have to be adjusted to the effective working area of the inducers the measure of space where the fields can move back and forth based on the strengths of the inducers fields. Since you have decided to build by way of winging it. Your restricted in the physical size of your device because you placed the build of the cores before the desired output. Electromagnets are considerably stronger then perm magnets and the amount of voltage and current placed into an electromagnet may be far less then your imagining it should be.The amount of wire also makes a stronger magnet.
   You can also take into account some well documented facts about transformers. A trafo with no load other then to keep itself magnetized is 5 to 7 percent of the rated load output. For it to just sit there bouncing its field back and forth or round it;s core depending your point of view ,very little power is consumed. Until you place into the same magnetic path another coil that supplies a load with power. The same field is then threading both coils in a complete circle in a transformer ,the translation is one of a direct nature in a transformer.All the power must be supplied directly by the shared flux passing both coils. Avoid sharing and you avoid the drain on resources. Better still have two competing fields and the drain on resources is reduced with a greater output just like in the real world The only effect you need look for is the changing flux that resides in the induced. The ultimate load or work cares little how you changed the flux so long as it is changing. The more it changes the better so make the change a complete one. I believe the removal of the flux will be harder in the circular version.A inductive load may well be required to make it work but the news paper article mentioned he had a number of lights and a 20hp motor running in his home. The motor may have had some positive effect to counter the resistive load of the lights. I do not recall any mention to the motor actually being used to perform any task or work leading me to think it may have been an unloaded motor used to reinforce the timing in the induced circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 28, 2013, 07:12:40 PM
@ Doug1
I agree with you!
Every explanation will end in simple voltage inverter optimized, not autorun device.  :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 28, 2013, 08:33:41 PM
no, but you would not see the difference  :-[
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 28, 2013, 10:01:24 PM
no, but you would not see the difference  :-[
Hi
Well, nowhere in the patent I read something about "more power output than in input" quite the contrary ...
So what do you say? You could see?

Part of Tesla patent 390.413 posted on previous page...

"In these systems, as I have described them, two independent conductors were employed for each of the independent circuits connecting the generator with the devices for converting the transmitted currents into mechanical energy or into electric currents of another character; but I have found that this is not  always necessary, and that the two or more circuits may have a single return path or wire in common, with a loss, if any, which is so extremely slight that it may be disregarded entirely."

Mas se alguém conseguir auto-execução eu pago a cerveja!!!
But if someone can autorun I pay the beer!!!  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 29, 2013, 01:15:40 AM
Hi
Well, nowhere in the patent I read something about "more power output than in input" quite the contrary ...
So what do you say? You could see?

Part of Tesla patent 390.413 posted on previous page...

"In these systems, as I have described them, two independent conductors were employed for each of the independent circuits connecting the generator with the devices for converting the transmitted currents into mechanical energy or into electric currents of another character; but I have found that this is not  always necessary, and that the two or more circuits may have a single return path or wire in common, with a loss, if any, which is so extremely slight that it may be disregarded entirely."

Mas se alguém conseguir auto-execução eu pago a cerveja!!!
But if someone can autorun I pay the beer!!!  ;)

I think your one of the people that really dont understand easily the patent of Nikola Tesla. On that quote he was comparing the old Induction system to the New Nikola Tesla Induction System. Well you need more readings and review look for the Twice the revolution on the Induction System.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 29, 2013, 04:29:33 AM
I think your one of the people that really dont understand easily the patent of Nikola Tesla. On that quote he was comparing the old Induction system to the New Nikola Tesla Induction System. Well you need more readings and review look for the Twice the revolution on the Induction System.

I like to tease the "Forest" he is very critical and sagacious, it causes good discussions.

I deserved this comment, no problems, but honestly what I understood of the patent was following: is a device or more efficient method to coupling a generator or source to a load, just this.
But if you've discovered a way to optimize the device or method, I'm happy for you, and please teach us how to replicate your method or device with details.

Thanks, in advance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 29, 2013, 11:13:15 AM
sorry Schiko, I have give you answer and it is always in experiments. Because I have no way to show you results and prove my point that's all I can say. You would see no difference if you don't follow the experiment which can open your eyes
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 29, 2013, 05:22:31 PM
sorry Schiko, I have give you answer and it is always in experiments. Because I have no way to show you results and prove my point that's all I can say. You would see no difference if you don't follow the experiment which can open your eyes

No problem my friend, I understand your point, but I want to make clear that I have done many experiments. Because of this sometimes I seem skeptic with some subjects, but it is only appearance.
Experiments is that some apparently very promising in theory but in practice fail gloriously.
My point is: apparently no one will take away power useful FE devices without using complicated electronics.
But I'm open eyes.   :o
I keep trying.   8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 29, 2013, 05:53:42 PM
Schiko, my friend


I'm not sure if I understood your comment, but the process of complication of FE devices using electronics is known to me and I can assure you that the more complicated it is the less usable output it can produce.  ;) 
The best inventions was simple, even without using electronics or using old vacuum tubes for example.
Those were the most covered up and lost from public space because if you cannot complicate things up to the certain level you cannot stop ordinary people from "escaping from the system" when they start  building own resources system...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 29, 2013, 07:48:25 PM
 hello all
this discussion is very interesting, and I have got something to say too:
This thread is dedicated to Clemente Figuera patents, replicas and experiments/ and opinions on their principals, which is a very concrete field. I therefore do not understand why Tesla patents have to be extensively discussed everywhere.
I understand that these kind of devices are all related, and also that the Tesla concepts/devices are very captivating, but there are already hundreds of places dedicated to it.
Understand me well please, it is NOT that I am trying to censor anyone in anyway, it is just the tiredness to get Tesla in every soup.
I felt very often this Schiko statement about people that promotes things but doesn’t show any auto-run device which is the goal of many experimenters here, me included.
At least, some of them as Bajac show their attempts and their failures too, which is a constructive way of contribution.
Hope not having offended anyone. :-[
Regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on October 30, 2013, 06:59:42 AM
@forest
My friend, if you permit, I will disagree with you.
Electronics of Power has evolved a lot today.
You've heard about "Cascade Multilevel Inverter"?
Imagine the machine of Mr. Figuera coupled in this technology, we could easily get to Megawatts.
If we can make the machine of Mr. Figuera do work, of course.
Let's be more pro-active if we leave aside the "conspiracy theory".
I agree that some things were purposely suppressed, I'm not EE, but I'm sure that many of these patents do not pass the examination in the departments of standardization.
Some have dangerous radiation, others are unstable and many do not deliver what they promise.
If the ancients were able, we also be able, but we must use techniques and modern knowledge and get the best possible result, not being locked into exotic ideas of the past.
This link is for you to think and modernize their thoughts.  <<Cascade Multilevel Inverter>> (https://www.google.com.br/search?q=Cascade+multilevel+inverter&sa=X&biw=1259&bih=687&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=XBWHUZGaO5Ke8QTS1YG4DQ&ved=0CDIQsAQ#imgdii=_)

Forgiveness, if any phrase be strange, because I do not write well in your language, but I think pass the message.  :-[

@ALVARO_CS
Thanks for your words!
Do you speak Portuguese?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 30, 2013, 10:47:17 AM
 @Doug:
Reread your post, and find very close meanings to my own thoughts.
Quote: “Reversing the fields will never yield a self runner”- is something I have suspected but only may stand it as an intuitive feeling, not rational nor proven fact.
Quote: “Avoid sharing and you avoid the drain on resources. Better still have two competing fields and the drain on resources is reduced with a greater output “ -IMO here is the function for the air gap
In general (talking about the 1908 patent),your description of the mag fields remanence in the inductors, and the way both push one to the other is what I see.
I have posted here several times that the voltage (wave) never falls under 0V, and so never occurs  
a polarity reversal, but there is a kind of ping pong game between the two inductors.(but no one  here has commented in agreement or dissent  :-X )
Do not know why the patent refers  to the inductors as “electromagnets”, and the induced as “induced coils”, could it be that the induced is just an air core coil ? :o :o

 

 
@Schiko:
Very interesting the link about cascade multilevel inverter, I read  some articles from it. Unfortunately I am stuck with this concept of no polarity reversal. ;D
Unfortunately also I do not speak Portuguese, only Spanish, French and English, but I can read  and understand  it if slowly spoken.
Will be glad to have this beer you offered as soon I get my autorun device !!! ;D ;D ;D
muito obrigado pelo convite ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 30, 2013, 12:21:38 PM
Alvaro
 If the induced has need of it's own core it would only be to focus the field into the center of the coil (induced) to avoid distortion effects felt by nearby fields of the other electromagnets. I spent a good bit of the last evening looking references to pole face geometries which might also help to focus the field into a more beam like pattern even millimeters of focus would be helpful to reduce scattering the field as soon as it leaves the end of the magnet. A second problem I come up against frequently is the notion of amp turns/ If more more turns yield more induced magnetisim per current but also increases more resistance due to length of wire. Why not use the desired length of wire/turns cut into the lengths of less resistance making a it multi stranded? Is it really just a question of whats easier to work with? I would hate to think world sucks just because people are lazy.I can live greed more so then lazy.
 I have found a few references to that but it seams to be in early stages of study with generator applications. The focus of interest seams to be over the difficutly of the diminishing strength of a field per unit of distance and how the conductors at the greatest distance have to be adjusted in length accordingly to avoid voltage differences between conductors or strands. Not doing so tends to build up excess heat in the windings and alters the dilectric capacitance leading to shorts between turns at higher frequencies and gets worse with temperature build up. The hotter it gets the lower the frequency need be for break down.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 30, 2013, 01:26:29 PM
 Doug: Thanks so much for such a constructive comment. Clever analysis.

 
I think that the resultant output Figuera wanted was close to an AC current & Voltage, and this is  the induced result of a progressive positive input into the two opposing electromagnets.
At his time AC used in Spain was at 110 volts 50 Hz. (only hot line & neutral, NO ground)
I am also intrigued about this common negative return, “al origen” because in the drawing, it shows a third segment of lead. . . . may be it was connected to ground (earth) ??? will try it.
Remember that Spanish patent offices in 19 century were not controlled by Edison friends, and therefore there was not so strong constrictions to the “perpetuum mobile” concepts.

 
In my line of thinking, in this device there are not colliding magnetic fluxes, but rather a movement similar to the seesaw work done by two lumberjacks pulling alternatively, not pushing.

 
As I am working at a small scale (economic restrictions) and as I do not need AC 50Hz output, I am using a sharp transition between the two alternatively biased electromagnets.(via 100 ohms resistors)
Attached a pic of the commutator set up I´ll use. My main concern is now in the coils & cores geometry.
For now the comm. Is moved by a printer DC motor fed by an adjustable PC PSU (modified) which allows me to vary the frequency in a short range.
The main input is provided by a PS 12V 2A (from wifi modem)
Any suggestions are welcomed.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 02, 2013, 02:42:27 PM
Alvero
  A persons economy has little to do with anything. Resourcing materials starts with understanding what the materials are and looking for where you can get it for free.People throw away stuff all the time.Unless you live in some remote jungle there will be stuff. Its always a good idea to evaluate your local resources both free and for sale. Have you ever read on the original pancake motor? The short version best I can remember. The guy was broke, so had to come up a creative way to obtain his materials to make the stator and rotor cores. He didnt want to take money from his family's food budget so as a result of limited finances they had to shop around for good deals on food.He came across someone selling off old stocks of canned vegetables in number 10 cans at a penny each. He purchased enough cans of food to solve both problems. He used the cans to make the laminates of the cores by hand. I would like to think if he had unlimited funds he would have never bothered or he would have not done such a good job because his mind set would have been so different that he would not have cared so much or had a need to make a better motor that used less power. Lack of funds is never a downside, just a greater opportunity to show case the human spirit.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on November 02, 2013, 06:12:43 PM
 Hello Doug1
I never said or thought (nor complained) that to be broke is a limitation. I just explained why I am working at a small scale, not that I feel it as a downside.
I have indeed developed from long ago a friendship with some vehicle repair shop owners that keep for me all sort of small DC motors and other parts they discard.
The same with all the superintendents of the neighbor buildings, with discarded electrical appliances. (unbelievable the things people throw out)
“the garbage of a man is the treasure of another”  
I learned well to make the most of resources as I lived with  my family for 12 years in a jungle at the Venezuela-Brasil border. (beautiful place called “La gran Sabana”)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kukenan_Tepuy_at_Sunset.jpg (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kukenan_Tepuy_at_Sunset.jpg)
In fact I am a rich man because I have many friends and . . . much time !!  :D :D :D
regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 02, 2013, 07:06:59 PM
That's good to hear all around. particularly that you have access to auto motive parts. A alternator stator would make a very good outer section with some mods to the teeth where the wires lay in. To turn into a quad pole structure with some teeth removed at the desired gaps to wire it up as a quad /4 pole. Then you only have to build the internal section to mirror the stator section. The voltage regulator will come in handy.
  I didn't think you were complaining sorry if I came off that way. I was just thinking of how many times the easiest route leaves a person hanging high and dry with lots of money spent but no results. Plenty of people don't even try because they think you have to spend 50k on equipment. The best proof of all that something works is getting off the grid.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 03, 2013, 01:57:11 PM
Alvero
  Looks like a nice place to live,very peaceful. Im not one for city living but I could be happy on the Savanna with no problem. I hope yours never gets spoiled by tourists. We get a lot of them here and I have to say I don't care for them too much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 03, 2013, 02:16:36 PM
Forgot one thing.The third segment of lead, how ells would it go back to the origin? Make yourself a model of batteries.Small objects all the same so you can visualize the system. writing the values down as you go round the circuit. Paper tends to run out of room too fast. Have you ever come across a book on the net called "Dynamo electric Machinery A Manual for Students of Electrotechnics." It might help to see things from the perspective of what was taught during the proper time period.By Silvanus Phillips Thompson Dated 1888. Google has a downloadable copy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 07, 2013, 12:40:06 AM
 
Quote
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics

Nikola Tesla utilized a "Radial" Wound Coils Geometry...where wires travel from one end to other end of the total Armature Diameter. We utilize "Axial" Wound Coils in most of all our Electrodynamic Machines...where Coils are wound in the Outer Periphery of the Armature Structure.

About Figuera´s patent with a rotary winding (No. 30376):

 I am almost sure that Figuera in his rotary drum patent  (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf) used radial windings. I am afraid that using axial windings will not get the same results: with an axial winding the induced magnetic field will be opposed to the induced field. With a radial winding in Figuera´s machine the induced magnetic field will be at right angle to the inducer field, IMHO.


 According to the winding proposed by Bajac (posted some weeks ago) the Figuera patent 30376 should have a wire between two poles, then it crosses diametraly the drum, passes between the other two poles in the other side and again crosses diametraly the rotating drum. With this winding you get an  induced magnetic field which is at 90º of the inducer magnetic field. Therefore no Lenz Law is reflecting back to the inducer coils. ( I think - if I have interpreted fine that document-)

Here I  post an schematic for implementing the Figuera´s rotating drum winding for patent 30376 that I think that it has some advantages over a standard winding as drawn in simple form in the original patent. It may work with the same magnet polarity all around the external side. It is a winding with an "8" shaped coil in each turn. It creates two induced magnetic fields, B1 and B2,  with opposite directions. As each semi-turn has different induced polarities then those two field maybe can go in a circle around the central hole without affecting the inducer electromagnets.
 
 What do you think?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 09, 2013, 01:31:46 PM
It's an interesting winding concept. Im not sure about how it will react to the otter section of the device. Or if the induced field will not simply attempt to complete the magnetic loop by diving into the left or right part of the cross. If it did ,it would be very uneven in it's field strength.The strongest field or greatest amount of force being in the corners and less at the extremedies giving a voltage difference with in the turns themselves. Then would generate a lot of heat. Then you have to deal with getting all that wire through the central hole for all four posts without damage to the insulation of the wire. That's a pretty tall order. While it may work well for a single drum shape of a rotor I dont think it will be as effective for a compound of four drums connected together as a cross.JMO
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 09, 2013, 05:24:35 PM
Hi all,
 
 About the discoveries done by Clemente Figuera in 1902 the New York Times published the 9th of June of 1902 (link (http://orbo.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Star08jun1903.gif)):
 
 "His inventions comprise a generator a motor and a sort of governor or regulator"
 
 Figuera in 1902 patented two devices:

       -A motionless generator   (patent 30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf))
       -A rotary drum generator  (patent 30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf))

If the description by the NY Times is right then Figuera used a motor. Then it is possible that the device that Figuera showed to the journalist is the one which needed a motor to rotate the drum. If so, we can think about the two devices patented by Figuera in 1902 that the one which was built and operated was his rotary drum generator with 3 parts:

    1- A generator:  the rotary drum and the electromagnets
    2- A motor: a small motor used to rotate the drum
    3- A governor: ??

Maybe the motionless generator (patent 30378) was just a theoretical extrapolation of his working rotary drum generator, which was actually the device that Figuera built.
 
 Regards

PS:  Doug, we have to remember that the winding used by Figuera was the standard square diametrical winding. The "8" shape coil winding is just a proposal. I think that, as a first step, the winding to be replicated is the one used by Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 09, 2013, 11:50:34 PM
Now that I have a copy of the drum patent  :o That type of winding and pole geometry is very much like some home built wind gens. Difference being they spin the magnets on two plates spinning opposite directions on a flat plane with the induced between. Im sure someone must have tried going the other way as well. I think your gonna boil down to a basket weave motor theory used as a gen. Another difference is most examples use perm magnets witch are weeker then electric ones.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 10, 2013, 01:15:07 PM
Now that I have a copy of the drum patent  :o That type of winding and pole geometry is very much like some home built wind gens. Difference being they spin the magnets on two plates spinning opposite directions on a flat plane with the induced between. Im sure someone must have tried going the other way as well. I think your gonna boil down to a basket weave motor theory used as a gen. Another difference is most examples use perm magnets witch are weeker then electric ones.

Doug, Could you provide any link where we can see those home built win generator that you refer? I would like to check the differences and similarities.

 I think the main advantage of the desing by Figuera is that the induced field is at right angle to the inducer field, and therefore there is no interation, so no Lenz effect is reflected back to the inducers electromagnets. I think that in wind generators the induced coil is wound so that the induced field is in the same plane as the inducer field. Figuera wound it so that it is in aperpendicular plane as is drawn in the scheme provided in one of the previous post. Please share your thoughts.

There are good schematics in this link:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11885-my-asymmetric-electrodynamic-machines-194.html#post242983 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11885-my-asymmetric-electrodynamic-machines-194.html#post242983)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 10, 2013, 05:08:52 PM
It's called an "Axial wind turbine" there is a lot of sites which have a lot of info trial and error to get some ideas from. The difference it is not based on a drum but kept flat. Perm magnets used on both sides of the induced coils. They place the magnets on the opposing frames which the wind blades mount to which is constructed to handle the stresses involved.Big bulky machine to keep it from flying apart. The simularity is the magnetic field relationship to the induced coil in a multi coil system on a circular frame. Change the perm magnets to electromagnets,place the same coil arangement around the drum for the induced and give it a turn.
  I dont know if you will see any similarity at all I guess it depends on what you interpret is the key feature difference in figuruas idea. I dont believe he used a completed magnetic path like transformer. Im thinking it is more like crashing two fields together of the same sign and moving the fine line between them back and forth to produce a difference of field in the induced. In a drum form the fine line would be stationary with alternating distances measured from the center axial point.Rotating the induced coils around between the pole faces.Each inducer being a pair of electromagnets would be alternately shifted in strength so one or the other dominates the induced as it revolves around. Turning only the induced coil which has less mass and there by requiring less force to do so makes it some what counter to what the axial turbine does which is to turn the mass holding the magnets and propeller. Not very clever unless you like giant blades whirling around in the middle of the night. The turbine uses permanent magnets facing N to S completing the magnetic path though the induced as with any ordinary system including a transformer. The key difference as he states well ,:it's not like a transformer". A transformer or the like builds a magnetic field with a primary then adds a secondary "drain" to the single magnetic path taking more power to satisfy both from the source. The changing flux in the induced is at the expense of the primary power source at a rate equal to or more then the secondary is taking.The field set up by the primary once started consumes very little only 5 to 7 percent of the full load on the secondary. Can you imagine getting 10.000 watts of work done at the cost of 500 watts. The physics is simple,balance any object of any size or weight on a narrow rectangular block, fix the block to the object.Then walk the object on the block pushing down slightly and turning it half way around then lift and turn it back .It takes very little to move something so big you cant even budge it other wise. If I had two perm magnets each able to lift 1000 lbs and  pushed them together N to N and left a 1 inch gap then move a coil in the gap closer to one magnet then closer to the other changing the field in the coil as it crosses the shearing point of the two fields resulting in a difference equal to 1000 lbs of force each time the coil crosses the line between the two fields. The induced does not care how you made the change just that you changed it. More flux more speed of change gets you more out. The individual fields of the inducers loop back on themselves to make a complete path for each magnetic field in itself.On a planar view one is left handed the other right handed with a concentrated repelling force in the middle expanding outward to a greater distance then the opposite side of the respective magnets which explains his choice of pole face geometries. The extremedies of the cores flair out to lead the flux as it tends to expand anyway by repulsion where they face each other. Producing a larger diameter field to use a larger surface area induced coil without expending more current grabbing a greater amount of flux in the induced.It might even be more evened out to avoid setting up eddy currents between individual turns of the induced.For such a simple drawing it could be very complex in reality. So there is my thought.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 11, 2013, 05:50:18 PM
If we suppose that the device that really worked in 1902 was the one with the rotary drum, maybe Figuera was trying to emulate those rotating dinamic interations in his final 1908 patent where he proposed the use of two unphased signals. Maybe he tried to simulate those rotary interactions into a motionless generator. I think that his idea was to get induction by flux cutting in his 1908 device, as it is common in any movable generator: all the induction is due to the lines which cut the induced wires [ Induction by motion: E = Length · B · v ·sin(alpha)  ] and no induction is derived from flux linking [Faraday Law: E = S · dB/dt ]

As stupify has stated the use of a two phase AC current (what in fact is composed by 2 unphased signals) can emulate a rotating magnetic field

Also I have noted that when two identical inducer signals are used the lines of force are enclosed into the magnetic circuit: maybe you can shift polarity but the lines of force are always inside the core. BUT, I think that if two non-identical signals are used then the lines of force are not always enclosed in the core, because most of the lines just encircle the electromagnets which is at full power in each moment, being only completely enclosed into the core in the instant when both electromagnets induction is the same. Those lines of force swing back and forth between one electromagnets and the other following the time frame when each one is at full power (here I am following a scheme similar to Buforn patents where the 3 coils are in the same axis).The flux lines move IN and OUT from the induced core. THEREFORE: the magnetic lines cut the wires of the induced coil in each swing. And thus, you can get the same effects which exist into a common movable generator but just using a motionless generator!! (in movable generators induction is achieved only by flux line cutting).

The objetive is to get the induced wire cut by the flux lines.

While a electromagnet is increasing in strength the flux lines are encircling it tighly and leaving the contrary electromagnet; and while it is decreasing in strength the flux lines are expanding toward the electromagnet which is getting more powerful in that moment. It is a constant swing of flux lines between both electromagnets. Maybe this action will induce in the proper sense so that the induction into the induced wires will be created in the right direction to power the inducer field instead of make it weaker as usually happen in the Lenz effect. I am refering that the counter induced field act in the reverse way as usually do, and in this case will reinforce the inducer field.

Do you think that this idea may be right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 17, 2013, 03:39:54 PM
Hanon
  Answer "no.
 
 Here is the Tesla version as was pointed out to you by another person in this thread.Pat 382282
 Disect it ,read between the lines. Examine the images closely,follow the paths.Mark out the fields. Look for the obvious nonsensical portions of the image. Take the time to view the second image until you can come back and tell me what part does not make any sense. When you locate the part you will see how to and how to get a over unity device through the pat office. It really makes no difference who invented first.Everything follows secondary to who first discovered the load stone and the voltiac cell.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 17, 2013, 04:08:23 PM
Yes, it's interesting especially because many motor-generator OU devices have been already shown on youtube. And we can do it without moving parts today....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 17, 2013, 05:03:59 PM
Forest has eyes to see with and knows how to use them.

I guess you always found all the easter eggs as a kid. Revealed the deception of the magic tricks at parties. It's a real hoot Tesla got this through the examiners. Just goes to show you no mater how smart you think you are your still just human.

 Wow it wont let me put the image on here. Oh well ,just look close at the second image of the patent. K K ,K' K'  are actually K and K'.  The doubling up of the K's was to confound the examiner.
  lol  Tricky wrabbit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 17, 2013, 06:54:34 PM
Hanon
  Answer "no.
 
 Here is the Tesla version as was pointed out to you by another person in this thread.Pat 382282
 Disect it ,read between the lines. Examine the images closely,follow the paths.Mark out the fields. Look for the obvious nonsensical portions of the image. Take the time to view the second image until you can come back and tell me what part does not make any sense. When you locate the part you will see how to and how to get a over unity device through the pat office. It really makes no difference who invented first.Everything follows secondary to who first discovered the load stone and the voltiac cell.

I don´t know why some people in these forums say to be sure of knowing the key concept for running a OU device. All they say: "I am not going to tell it, just look for it into Tesla´s patents", but none say what to look for exactly nor they explain in it in a clearly way. At least explain your ideas Clearly and with graphichs as has been done by other users

As far as I know Tesla did not try to patent any OU device, he just patented his AC polyphase system. Are you sure that something else is hidden into that exact patent? Are you sure that thse extra info is related to the design done by Figuera?

I am not an expert into electromagnetism. I have mainly learnt all in this last year since I am involved around the Figuera´s generator. I will try to read and understand that patent. I will do my best but I am not sure of grasping those sutile details...which are between the lines as you state... just with my current electromagnetic expertise.

Regards and thanks for sharing
Title: Induction by "flux cutting" or by "flux linking"
Post by: hanon on November 17, 2013, 07:44:35 PM
Richard Feynman (Nobel prize winner) about the electromagnetic induction:

    "So the "flux rule" that the emf in a circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit applies whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the circuit moves (or both) ...

    Yet in our explanation of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases  E = v x B  for "circuit moves" and  E = -S· dB/dt  for "field changes".

    We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena.

...

The "flux rule" does not work in this case [note: for an example explained in the original text]. It must be applied to circuits in which the material of the circuit remains the same. When the material of the circuit is changing, we must return to the basic laws. The correct physics is always given by the two basic laws

F = q · ( E + v · B )
rot E = - dB/dt                              "

            — Richard P. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

--------------------------------------------

For those interested in a interesting fact about the Induction Law here I link a file which explains that two different formulations seem to exist for the same phenomenon : one, the Faraday Unipolar generator: E = (v · B) , other the Maxwell 2nd Law : rot E = -dB/dt, which are two different formulations for the same law !!! Faraday-or-Maxwell by Meyl (http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Faraday-or-Maxwell.pdf) (read page 5 and next)

http://imageshack.us/a/img826/2978/gzuy.jpg (http://imageshack.us/a/img826/2978/gzuy.jpg)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 17, 2013, 09:01:16 PM
I'm guessing here but the transformer case is incorect.  Why ? Because if the resulting is decoupled E and B then it's against my interpretation of electricity. There is no such thing as a wave with only one side.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 18, 2013, 06:41:47 PM
Also there are two different manifestations of Lenz Law:

1- Lenz Law derived from a flux linking two coils
: It will create a opposing magnetic field (Binduced) against the change in the original magnetic field


2- Lenz Law derived from a flux cutting the moving wire
: it will appear a dragging force (F_b) which oppose the movement.

A proof of this dragging force can be seen here in a coil perpendicular to the inducer field: Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHCwgc_xs3s)

Therefore: even in a coil at right angle to the inducer field we will get a dragging effect, although we can skip the opposing magnetic field. But we still have the dragging force against the movement..

Maybe the idea behind Figuera devices was to move the flux lines to cut the wire instead of moving the wire to cut the flux lines. This way you could skip both the opposing magnetic field and the dragging force. I don´t know. I am still learning ...   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 18, 2013, 07:16:27 PM
Two wave producers super imposed offset by 90 degrees or overlapped. Independently reaching saturation to retard current independently sharing a single source but also controlled independently. I tried to copy paste the image from the telsa patent for two reasons. One it shows how he found a way around the patent examiners which is amusing. Second it shows better detail. If i were more sure of your historical exposure I would have just alluded to the theory of a double acting steam piston engine.
 The inducers are pushing the induced by pushing back and forth against each other they only need enough current to maintain their respective feilds.The point between two opposing fields consumes no power but is the same direction of each other (NN) (SS) so direct linking magnetically is impossible between the inducers.Preventing the activity associated with transformers. If you place any two independent magnets north to south they combine into a single magnet.No good .If you do the same with any two electromagnets you get the same. Then the interception with a secondary or induced follows normal transformer rules, at the expense of supply current. Which has no advantage. Im not big on wasting my time with drawing pictures that already exists.If I were paid to do so I would, maybe actually no I would'nt. I gave you a clear image of two magnets facing each other and the field is clearly seen using iron filings. You can see the way each of the field flow with a distinct shear point between them where all the magnetic lines of force are squashed together in a fraction of the space they normally resided in. How many times have people drawn up something which acts like a normal transformer and got zilch for results. Do you really expect those lemons to give up chocolate milk?Really? Want to toss some formulas into the air showing a singular field? Im sure it is quite accurate but no more relative then the lemon is to cocoa bean. Find a formula to show two seperate fields which alternate in strength never using more then either one at full saturation because the current is adjusted from one electromagnet to the other in part and in succession never going to zero power on either.So in theory you only need calculate one electro magnet at full saturation for one. Then find a formula to give the quality of the magnetic field and it's potential reaction on a secondary or induced winding on a second core in close proximity. What could come out of the induced based on the quality of the inducers field is not at the expense of the inducers or the current which produced the field because you did not link the inducer fields to each other to make a complete path between them they are kept independent of each other. Only the space between the two opposing fields with its shear point and line of seperation is moving to and fro. The difference between these two fields which flow opposite directions (that is to say they still flow N-S but when facing each other N-N it will be seen as opposite flows of flux) it is twice as great as a single field changing direction back and forth.  Im sure you know of or have had some one explain or ask the question" If a south bound train traveling 60 miles an hour runs into a train going north bound at 80 miles an hour what is the speed of impact?" It's not 80 nor 60, it's 140. Consider further will a train consume more fuel going 140mph compared to two which are going one at 60 and one at 80? Lots of variables come into play. trains being pretty far from two magnetic fields pushing against each other .The connection is little more then to help you think in terms of opposition not cooperation of fields.
   Now you speak of a single half wave, I have no idea how you got that.Its far from that.Next you will be jumping ahead to two D cores with a single link between them powered by primaries seperately. Thats not the same thing either. You would still be working off transformer rules by permanently linking all the fields. They cant very well push each other around if they are combining into one.Then the only way to push it around is to use a lot power getting it to reverse direction 50 or 60 times a second.
 Another way of looking at it: Take a pipe and place a balloon on each end.Imagine you have placed a portion of air into the pipe enough to make the balloons taught but not expanded. Then imagine you can get a solid piston inside the center of the pipe. If you were some how able to move the piston to one side you would push more air into that side and the balloon would expand while the other emptied. Then push the piston back the other way and other balloon will fill while the opposite empties. You have not changed the volume of air in the set up you just moved it more to one side then the to the other side with the piston. Now what if it was the air that was pushing the piston back and forth by squeezing the balloons one at a time? Still the volume of air remains the same while the piston moves back and forth. Replace the balloons with inducers and replace the piston with the induced. Think of the air as the magnetic field with a point of seperation between the two sides because they are naturally repulsive to each other.
  In the first model the volume of air is static ,it does not change in volume it just gets squeezed back and forth. In the electrical model the electro magnets will not take on much more current then it takes to reach saturation. Once optimal conditions are reached in the quantity and quality of saturation in the cores of the opposed inducers (NN) (SS) they are squeezed more or less to move the field seperation between them so the fields move back and forth between them like the air and piston in the air model. The induced sees a changing magnetic flux but little was required to keep the inducers flux intact after it was made initially because it thinks it is saturated. Between two inducers in total, the amount of maximum flux for one of the inducers is shifted back and forth between the two. These two inducers think they are nearly saturated all the time. Because as the field becomes more in one compared to the other one occupying more flux space then the other even trying to over take some of the core of the other but it cant because two north or two south cant be in the same place at the same time reducing the effective mass of the lesser as seen by its own field. They can be a little closer or further apart depending on strength giving rise to movement between them.
 I know some people think you can only generate current if a magnet passes all the way through a coil so both north and south poles are involved. Seems kind of counter intuitive since they pass one at a time and cause a reverse effect of each other on a conductor which still has nothing to do with anything since the inducers are facing opposing directions only to prevent direct inductive coupling to each other while still getting a change in a specified location of induction between them for the induced. Truthfully I dont think your going to be able to come with a formula that will be complete enough to be of much use in terms of output due to the complexity of the cores and materials coupled with an inverse motion of induction by seperation. Don't look for me to do it any time soon for you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 18, 2013, 09:52:22 PM
How nice of you to offer up a graphic.
(http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/129975/image//)
 On either side of the induced coil place a mirror image of the magnet (N N) Move the coil left and right in the space between the magnetic fields. So the coil is either completely in one of the two fields. Move the coil back and forth. The induced coil sees a field of opposite direction of flow as it passes from one to the other. To maintain the magnetic field requires little expenditure since it is not reversing magnetic direction. The magnetic field needs to change in strength opposite it's counter inducer magnet for stationary model.So as to shift which magnets field is covering up the induced. These models or images and formulas only account for a single magnetic field and sometimes a cooperating set of magnets.Not opposing magnets, so the formula given will not apply. You need to know how much current it takes to maintain the magnetic field of the magnet then split that between two magnets then move potential or current more to one and less to the other and vise versa in succession at the frequency your looking for. If you combine the flux into a single path so they join you will have nothing worth noting.Just another POS transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 19, 2013, 01:24:37 AM
Two wave producers super imposed offset by 90 degrees or overlapped. Independently reaching saturation to retard current independently sharing a single source but also controlled independently. I tried to copy paste the image from the telsa patent for two reasons. One it shows how he found a way around the patent examiners which is amusing. Second it shows better detail. If i were more sure of your historical exposure I would have just alluded to the theory of a double acting steam piston engine.
 The inducers are pushing the induced by pushing back and forth against each other they only need enough current to maintain their respective feilds.The point between two opposing fields consumes no power but is the same direction of each other (NN) (SS) so direct linking magnetically is impossible between the inducers.

Thanks Doug for your long explanation. Your post are very dense and difficult to dissect. It is a pity that you don´t use schematics to make easier the interpretation (you know what it is said that an image is worth more than 1000 words)

Here I just post a sketch that represent your idea. Two like poles facing each other and swinging back and forth along the changes in intensity in the electromagnets

As you can see in this scheme there is induction by:

    1-  Induction by Flux linking along the part of each coil transversed by the flux lines
    2-  Induction by Flux cutting the induced wire

The key that in this scheme is that the flux cutting induction to be greater than the induction the induction by flux linking. (the flux linking induction is under the Lenz Law effect and will produce an opposing induced magnetic field which will reduce the inducers strength)

The good part of this idea is that if the flux cutting induction by an N-N configuration will induce in the sense to reduce the inducers field, then the S-S configuration will do it in the sense to increase it because the flux lines in each case have opposite direction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 19, 2013, 01:19:53 PM
I do believe he's got it. ;D The only way to conserve input is just that. conserve it by not directly coupling the magnetic effects to the output constantly while still getting the change in flux in the induced. Two magnets with an effect on time of 1/4 of the time each= 50 percent used to operate induction at 100 percent the decline is free. I think you'll find reminance can be your friend along with Lenz law if you have enough realistate to keep everyone happy.Now you can think about geometry of pole faces to even out things and the hour glass shape of the core pieces to consintrate force and reduce wire. The electric motor in the home of Mr ya know who,that was not a novelty. It lags and lagging reflective power keeps all the lights from knocking the entire works out of time. The motor is a must have just let it run under no load. Might work better with a weight to function as a fly wheel if too small a motor is used. May even have to start the motor turning by hand if proportions are out of wack.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 21, 2013, 06:45:53 PM
Doug,
 
I have been studying the Tesla patent No. 382282 that you referred previously and I cannot see the similarity with the system with like poles facing each other. Where is the idea in common in both designs?
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2013, 12:18:21 AM
That's ok hanon   
  What do you see out of the ordinary?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 22, 2013, 09:02:12 AM
btw what is "multiple arc" connection ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2013, 01:01:21 PM
Arc was a type o , ac connection.
  examine the generator closer KK K'K' the gen has two field magnets it;s simple ac generator so why the four slip rings and brushes? Trace out the connections to the annular ring.
  What will be the hard part is to get the fields centered so that the exact place where they reside in the induced is evenly positioned amongst all the sets so when current is shifted between the inducers it happens at the same time with the same amount. A method to test the field strength of each inducer while in place needs to be established. Any difference of sets will counter the effect in the other sets.every electromagnet of the inducers has to be exactly the same in strength and volume. If you have more volume of iron core or wire in half it wont react evenly on that part of the cycle.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 22, 2013, 09:37:37 PM
Doug1


So you state there is something interesting with generator , hmm I was surpriced by two brush pairs but text explains that he took two ac waves each from separate coil of generator.There is no K and K` , only K.


What was very strange to me is the connection of load to the shunted coil ! Trace it please, Tesla even state it has more current into load. That is not series or parallel connection I'm aware of.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on November 23, 2013, 05:30:18 AM
Here is a picture saying what I think he did. Everything to the left of the dashed vertical line is what he patented or made claims on. What he left out of the patent as many say "something is always left out" would be everything to the right of the dashed vertical line.



Forest, Multiple arc simply means "In parallel". The coil and leads represent an "arc" and multiplying them is putting them in parallel (Multiple Arc) while series connecting them is putting them in a string.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 23, 2013, 10:07:05 AM
Farmhand,, yes it's parallel but I never thought about it such way. Essentially when we have a load connected to two or more coils then those coils are shunted by each others...interesting....it's just a new look
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on November 23, 2013, 10:39:29 AM
Yeah Forest, exactly.  :) But we still must be careful to connect them together so as to reinforce each other not with opposite polarities while in phase, kinda thing i think. I'm fairly sure you know what I mean and already understood that, but it is good to say so others might pick up on it.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 27, 2013, 10:31:19 AM
Arc was a type o , ac connection.
  examine the generator closer KK K'K' the gen has two field magnets it;s simple ac generator so why the four slip rings and brushes? Trace out the connections to the annular ring.
  What will be the hard part is to get the fields centered so that the exact place where they reside in the induced is evenly positioned amongst all the sets so when current is shifted between the inducers it happens at the same time with the same amount. A method to test the field strength of each inducer while in place needs to be established. Any difference of sets will counter the effect in the other sets.every electromagnet of the inducers has to be exactly the same in strength and volume. If you have more volume of iron core or wire in half it wont react evenly on that part of the cycle.

Hi,
 
Then you mean that the connections in the annular ring will reach to a like poles facing each other situation. Is this what you are trying to say?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 01, 2013, 05:55:37 PM
Yes, read page two very carefully of Teslas patent. The generator has two coils on the armeture and two magnets either elctro or perm magnets. The two coils are connected to four flip rings. Making two connections to each side of the generator windings. He is splitting each into two. Then off to his ring converter where they are 90 degrees out in one respect but not in the other by way of the second set of connections. The line of greatest effect whirled about. He says "a line" not a square not a rectangle not a field not an egg, a line. The line is where two like poles repel each other. The line is very thin but it contains the volume of both sets of field lines in a small space which can not become mutually interactive with each other except to shift the line in one direction or the other by virtue of the strength of the magnets being controlled. The direction of magnetic flow for each inducer field is in opposite direction of the other. As soon as the line is crossed or the line crosses the induced the field is 180 degrees reversed from the perspective of the induced. How much quicker do you think it would be to move a fine line between two n facing poles a quarter of an inch back and forth compared to completely reversing the poles in a magnetic core. Think about the energy it takes to reverse those poles compared to shifting them slightly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 05, 2013, 07:04:14 AM
Y'all might be ALOT smarter than me, I've heard alot of good stuff around here, but as usual, you hear some bullie types, you hear some jokes, and you hear some truth. It works better if there is alot of truth, some jokes and NO bullies. IMHO. WE need to help everyone to help ourselves.
True or not? ;D

PS: Please remember that not all of us have a Doctorits Degree or what ever the GOV says is required to do or understand this stuff, we like to do it for fun and to help others, EXCEPT FOR THE ONES THAT ARE ONLY!!!! AFTER  PROFIT
!!! ANY AND ALL POLICTICALS!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 07, 2013, 01:38:42 PM
You have to go back to the basics often to keep your thoughts aligned with certain basic rules. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html
 The device is magnetic without the use of a driving force such as a engine or other brute force mechanism to turn a stationary magnetic field (rotor) inside of a stator.
 The explanation of what makes a magnet stronger and how does a lever and leverage function to do work should not have to be defined to people who have the capacity to use a computer. 
  On the other hand. maybe what makes a magnet stronger is missleading or not entirely complete as it should be. Number of turns of a coil N seams to be often locked up into some notion that the turns have to be from a single conductor. A long single conductor leads to higher Ir resistance and losses from heating. no where in any definition does it state turns or loops have to come from a single conductor. Resistance is measure of the length of a conductor/s, number of turns is not always dependant on a single length of conductor. The basic purpose of dividing cores into thin plates to reduce eddy currents into smaller discrete portions is a form of leveraging forces. No one ever said you cant apply the same thing to your coils to make a stronger magnet from a lesser power source. Even a POS trafo is a leverage, works exactly the same way even from the point of view of isolation.
 There is a lot of stuff out there easily found but even more easily over looked. Look hard enough you might even figure out your coils need a perticular angle on a core to get the most out of them.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 07, 2013, 06:43:49 PM
You have to go back to the basics often to keep your thoughts aligned with certain basic rules. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html (http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html)
 The device is magnetic without the use of a driving force such as a engine or other brute force mechanism to turn a stationary magnetic field (rotor) inside of a stator.
 The explanation of what makes a magnet stronger and how does a lever and leverage function to do work should not have to be defined to people who have the capacity to use a computer. 
  On the other hand. maybe what makes a magnet stronger is missleading or not entirely complete as it should be. Number of turns of a coil N seams to be often locked up into some notion that the turns have to be from a single conductor. A long single conductor leads to higher Ir resistance and losses from heating. no where in any definition does it state turns or loops have to come from a single conductor. Resistance is measure of the length of a conductor/s, number of turns is not always dependant on a single length of conductor. The basic purpose of dividing cores into thin plates to reduce eddy currents into smaller discrete portions is a form of leveraging forces. No one ever said you cant apply the same thing to your coils to make a stronger magnet from a lesser power source. Even a POS trafo is a leverage, works exactly the same way even from the point of view of isolation.
 There is a lot of stuff out there easily found but even more easily over looked. Look hard enough you might even figure out your coils need a perticular angle on a core to get the most out of them.


Ah Doug1, if I could have Litz wire..... check the same turns coil inductance please somebody can do video ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 07, 2013, 07:59:20 PM
Litz wire is too expensive. Rough off the hip backwards estimate. 10,000 watts 120 volts AC is 84 amps roughly. Half the volts to be dual dc opposing magnets 60 volt dc, even to take that to a set of 5 being 12 volts each magnet they would have to handle continuous with out over heating at the maximum time the maximum load was expected to run. 12 volts 84 amps 60 percent duty cycle per inducer magnet.
  I can bundle my own and use welding cable specs to cross ref. the ampacity rating for the stranded bundle under constant load. There are formulas to figure out the magnet core specs. Im no math wiz but I will suffer through it. Old texts as I remember used to recommend keeping the lines of flux down to 7000 per cm squared. Using two independent magnets opposing each other the induced is going to encounter a potential difference of magnetic change equal to 14000 lines per cm if it were linear from a single magnets field alternating. The number of inducers can be added to or subtracted as needed to stay below the point of generating waste heat. The return to the original, while Mr figurara does not explain how to use batteries and alternating currents in combination to behave as diodes and amplifiers we can always to fall back old Mr faith full for some detailed explanations and drawings on how to. That would be How to get dc currents from ac currents with out rectifiers or commutators or diodes or tubes. If components fit then there you go. Grab your bucket of flowers and storm that machine gun nest.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 08, 2013, 08:12:23 PM
¿Vamos a tener un dispositivo de auto-ejecución hasta navidad???????????
Después de tantas teorías y tantas discusiones sería un gran regalo de Navidad, todos están de acuerdo ...

Estoy preguntando, no afirmando ok.

Feliz Navidad.

Are we going to have a self-run device until Christmas???????????
After so many theories and so many discussions, it would be a great Christmas gift, all agree...

I'm asking, not saying ok.

Merry Christmas.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 09, 2013, 01:08:54 AM
you might even figure out your coils need a particular angle on a core to get the most out of them.

Hi Doug,

I am intriged with this sentence. I could have expected a particular shape to improve the output, but not a particular angle in the coil. Could you define your proposal? I don't get to understand it.

Another question: who is Mr. faith?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 09, 2013, 04:39:31 PM
Tesla is old faithful,there is lot I dont care for about him but he has taken the time and expense to leave behind a great deal of patents to use for educational purposes.
  The angle of wind is just that. The winding as a coil around a core. Sometimes you see coils wound layer after layer with a single conductor back and forth. That method may increase dilectric capacitance inbetween layers but it has to cancel out some of the inductive action. A coil with a slight slant where the winds when considered to be a advancing path around an object partially fall behind on any given portion of the path. At no point would going backwards help to advance anything.Layers of winds should be single layers with terminations at the ends of the start and stop length along the core or bobbin tied together at the ends of each layer. There is nothing  in stone that says each layer has to be of the same wire diameter. Fields weaken as the get further away. Take every advantage. If your winding is around a 1 inch thick trafo "I" section and the coil is 1 inch thick and 1 long the field around the core piece is not going to be rectangular shape that follows the shape of the core. It becomes a shape more like a foot ball.Fewer lines of force or lines that are more spread out in the middle. There will be less induction possible for a given wire size at the places where the lines of force are spread out more. Not that you would intercept it there. If you inclined to try to keep the lines of force more straight and less bowed out in the middle you need to think about why they bowed out in the first place. The windings generating a magnetic field sit over the core. The direction of spin around the windings is in one direction close to the core on the inside of the winding. It's the opposite on the outside of the winding. As the flux created in the core has to complete its path it has to jump over the flux on the outside of the winding which is now going the opposite direction. If the core is hour glass shaped the windings are not only shorter in wire length for the same number of turns the flux is kept in a smaller space and will less effect nearby coils.Less wire ,less core material wasted. Wider pole faces will spread out the number of lines per cm squared and produce less heating on the pole faces if your operating above a excessive level of saturation.In a non moving design, one that does not rotate the rotor piece the heating if it were to happen would be evenly distributed unlike one that does rotate. In a revolving system the heat produced is on the leading or lagging edge of the pole face depending on different factors caused by leading or lagging loads.
  It would be better to just not have a lot of heat develop in the first place but it may not be possible to completely stop that from happening.

  Will ya have a working model before Christmas? I wouldn't bet a plumb nickle on that.Besides time is not important. Rushing causes misstakes that is why I have spent weeks unwinding with greatest care 25lbs of wire from a core I miss calculated. I could go the route of a mini model but i dont trust that everything will work correctly when scaling up. It become far too complicated to think of everything that has to be considered when scaling up. To truly be able to scale down you have to have a way to scale down the size of the magnetic domains in the core material not just use smaller pieces of normal material that reduce the number of domains. Since it will in the end have to be baked to keep the torq on the windings at bay and the volume of materials are not cheap. The time put in if spare time is used which would otherwise be wasted on things that are pointless is instead used to build this.Then time is what is less important. Im in no hurry to see how many mistakes can be made.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 12, 2013, 12:47:49 AM
Hi all,

There is a spanish patent about a overunity generator filed in 1955 by David Hogan and carlos Ludovik Jakovlewich (patent ES225316) which is curiously very very similar to the Figuera patent No. 303376 , the one with the rotary drum coil.  In this patent the coil is stationary and the magnets are mounted over some rotating discs.

I have translated the claims of this patent:


---------------------
CLAIMS SPANISH PATENT ES225316

The authors claim in this patent:

1) New electric generator characterized by the existence of series of discs, variable in number and in dimension, susceptible to host "magnets".

2) New electric generator according to claim 1 characterized in that the series of discs are mounted on a shaft in parallel arrangement ; the shaft rests on its sides over bearings. This arrangement of supporting bearings allow its intermediate extension if required.

3 ) New electric generator according to claims 1 and 2,wherein the " magnets " located in the discs must be placed parallely on the shaft. These discs, spaced, will allow that the poles of the magnets ( magnetos) of each disk are facing " north-south " (opposition of poles).

4) New electric generator according to claims 1 to 3, characterized in that between the discs (series of two) a stationary or fixed screen or sieve (grids) of copper wire or any electroconductive material glazed and covered with insulation is placed.

----------------------------------
In the description it is clearly stated that the authors are describing an overunity generator where a part of the energy produced could be used to power the machine and the rest could be used externally for other uses.

Any comments?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 18, 2013, 11:49:53 PM
Hi all,
 
 This is how I think that this patent may work fine. This is a modification to solve the problem of cancelling the opposite effect in each side of the coil in the original drawing (IMO). The winding could be a type of classical drum winding which crosses the center point diametrically and surround two discs inside (see photo below).

In my oppinion the key is :

      1. A coil perpendicular to the inducer magnetic field. With this configuration the induced magnetic field will not oppose to the inducer field. There won´t be any opposing field against the magnets.
 
      2. Static wires and moving magnets. With this configuration the wires, being static, will not suffer any dragging force. The dragging force just appears in the wires -where the current is flowing. If the wires are the static part then this problem is skipped, IMO. (The dragging force is calculated as the Lorentz force, F=Intensity•Length•B , and this force just appears in systems with electrical charges in movement. If  we place the current into an static part, then -I think- we won´t have this dragging force which usually opposes the movement)

Therefore there won´t be any opposing field neither any dragging force in the wires.
 
 Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 19, 2013, 09:54:13 PM
This geneator if off-topic in this thread. The objetive was to compare it with the Figuera patent No. 30376 with the rotary winding, which share some features with this device

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)


Title: May The Force Be With You. May The Force Assist You
Post by: hanon on December 19, 2013, 10:11:21 PM
For deep study:
 
 I think I have discovered a new configuration which may get OU finally. I want to share with you that in a configuration with like poles facing each other the induced magnetic field will not act against the inducer field (as usual) but it seems to reinforce the inducer field in the electromagnet which is increasing in strenght at that moment. In other words: the induction take place to ASSIST the inducer field, not to reduce it, as usually happens in the Lenz effect.

The important idea is to note that induction can take place as consecuence of two different phenomena:

1- Induction by flux cutting the induced wire: This induction is done by the lines of field cutting the wires. This motional emf usually creates a dragging force which acts against the movement. As this is a motionless device there won´t be any dragging force.

E_cut = B·v·Length·sin(Theta)

2- Induction by flux linking two coils
: This induction is done by the flux linking two coils. This induction does not need to cut the wires (as happens in transformers). It will create a induced magnetic field that will tend to oppose to the change in the inducer field.

E_link = A·dB/dt

In order to emulate a movable generator into a motionless device it is necessary that the magnetic flux lines cut the induced wires. Therefore we should maximize the induction by flux cutting and minimize the induction by flux linking.

 Like poles facing each other: By changing the magnetic strength in both electromagnets (excited with the two opposite signals) the lines of force will repel and will leave the induction iron core. The sequential change in both currents will create a swing of the lines of force back and forth in each cycle, cutting the induced wires which surround the induced core.
 
 The features that will require this configuration are:

 Feature 1. Two north poles facing each other N-N in the electromagnets: With this set-up the magnetic field lines will leave the core inside-out. (Maybe two south poles will also work fine. I have just studied the N-N configuration)
 
 Feature 2. Excite with two opposite signals each electromagnet . It will achieve a  relative movement of the flux lines cutting the wire back and forth along the whole coil length from side (pole) to side (pole) (that we will name as coil thickness). One magnetic field is increasing and other magnetic field is decreasing, therefore no change in magnetic pressure between them will be created during this swinging motion.
 
 Feature 3. A rectangular shape in the electromagnets an in the induced coil in order to maximize the flux cutting induction and minimize the flux linking induction. The ratio of both effects will be increased with high values of the induced core perimeter and low values of coil area. This is a new feature which is fundamental for a optimized induction.
 
 ( E_cut / E_link ) = ( Coil_Perimeter · Coil_thickness) / Coil_Area

 
 Note that the flux linking induction is produced in the part of the coil linked by the inducer flux lines. This induction will produce a counter induced field (as usual). Therefore it is needed to minimize this flux linking effect. We need a ratio E_cut/E_link > 1  because the induction by flux cutting will be the one that won´t produce an opposite Lenz effect because this is a motionless device.
 

 Feature 4. As the flux cutting induction just happens in the zone where the lines are expelled from the core then we need that each turn will be cut during all the time. Therefore, it will be better to wind the induced coil with a tape instead of a wire (the tape must cover the whole coil thickness from side to side). With a tape all the turns will be cut all the time by the flux lines coming out the core. This will not happen with common wires. Tape winding will maximize the flux cutting induction and will minimize the induction by flux linking. I think that tape winding is mandatory for achieving a ratio well over 1.

 Conclusion: With this new features I think that this generator will be able to get a much higher induced current than the current used to excite the device. The Lenz effect in this configuration will reinforce (assist) the inducer field which is increasing at that moment in the corresponding electromagnet. This configuration will get the Lenz effect working to make a stronger field instead of making a weaker field, as normally happens.
 
 Please share your comments and ideas, and tell me if I have made any mistake in this reasoning.
 
 Regards,
 
 Hanon
 
 
 ANNEX  -  Equations
 
 
 E_cut= B·v·Length = B·v·N·Coil_perimeter
 
 v=Space/Time = Coil_Thickness/(1/2·Period)= Coil_Thickness·2·Frequency
 
 B=B1+B2 = constant =Bmax
 
 Frequency =1 / Period
 
 E_cut= Bmax·Coil_Thickness·2·Frequency·N·Coil_perimeter
 --------------
 
 E_link =N·Area·dB/dt
 
 dB/dt =(Bmax - Bmin)/(1/2·Period) = Bmax·2·Frequency
 
 E_link =Bmax·2·Frequency·Area·N
 ---------------
 
 E_total =E_cut - E_link = Bmax·2·Frequency·N·(Coil_Thickness·Coil_Perimeter - Area)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 20, 2013, 09:51:53 AM
Now your getting somewhere Hanon. The tesla version uses ac.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 20, 2013, 09:59:41 AM
Side note,your second page showing the signal of the two inducers, some people will only view it from the output of the induced. IE the signals are in reality above the zero line from the view of current but sinusodal from the aspect of effect on the induced. Good luck trying to keep that straight in any conversation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 20, 2013, 04:46:09 PM
@hanon

Only one question.
What is the phase of the input signals?
If it is 90 degrees in the machine Figuera, does not work. Try to see.
If it is 180 degrees, nothing changes. It is exactly the operation of the machine Figuera.
If 0 degrees, how do you propose will create a standing wave, you will have a gain, while the system is tuned but with a nonlinear load will not work very well.  :(
My question is, how do you go the junction of overlapping fields (> | <) to move from one side to another?
See, my question is for Figuera 1908 machine, and not to other patents. Before that, "Tesla's experts" appear explaining details.  ;D  :-X

Merry Christmas
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 20, 2013, 07:12:32 PM
Hi,

The key is not thinking of phase... nor in creating standing waves... Both signals must operate in counterforce, when one increases the other decreases and the reverse, when the second increases the first decreases in magnetic strength. Make a test, join your palms and put then in front of you, now push more with the right one and less with the left one. The contact point should have moved to one side. Now make the opposite, push more with the left palm and less with the right one.

As you should note you are swinging your palms from one side to the other with very few effort if you do it rhythmically. The device works the same but with magnetic strength in each electromagnets to move the point where the lines of field are expelled from the core.

Both signals must be in opposition, and as remarked by Doug they must be always positive to avoid switching the poles.

Regards and merry Christmas !!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 20, 2013, 09:14:30 PM
Hi,

The key is not thinking of phase... nor in creating standing waves...

If I can't think of "phase", in which I'm going to think?
We're talking about physics and electronics here, no?
The 1908 machine, is an induction machine, right?
She has the behavior of a transformer, right?
She needs the induced field varies in order to work, right?
For the induced field vary he needs the electrical current varies, right?
If the electrical current varies, she creates a wave, right?
This wave at any given instant in time, has a "phase", right? or am I wrong?  :-[

Regards!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 21, 2013, 12:15:57 PM
Some aclarations about the pole orientation and the rectangular shape:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-24.html#post247198 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-24.html#post247198)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 21, 2013, 02:07:36 PM
The internet is not the easiest way to communicate is it.lol
 Here is a drawn trace of all three coils in time. Im not a big fan of scopes hard to use a two dimensional image of three dimensional activity. This sort of what your looking for.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 21, 2013, 03:45:36 PM
The advantage is in the method of using the current to make a strong field and not asking the field to reverse polarity.Only to reduce in strength. There is only one source current which is shared by two inducers. Each inducer is controlled in two ways.The amount of current going to it and the time.

 Tesla's model is doing the same thing with the source being ac.

 What makes a electro magnet stronger? More wire turns,more current,better material. Current costs money for ever.More you use and or the longer you use it the more you pay. More current is not a good way to make a stronger magnet.
  The number of turns of wire results in a longer wire with higher losses. Who told you to use one wire? If they ment to say a longer wire or that length of wire was important part they would have come out and said that plain as day. What it says is more turns "N". More copper cost more money to but only once. When you have a long length of wire and it laps back and forth don't you expect the field around each wire to continue to act as it should? There are a lot of things I don't understand but i dont think going the opposite direction of what I want to go in will get me to a place very soon.
  Take a look at some battery operated lift magnets (http://www.magnetoolinc.com/magnetic-tools/battery-operated-lifting-magnets.php). Up to 11,000 lbs from a 12 volt battery. you have to scroll down the page to find the spec sheet. Now if you had two of these facing each other with a induction coil between them and rotated the current form one to the other and back so one is getting a little voltage say 3 or 4 volts while the other is at 8volt and smoothly reduce the 8 volt one while increasing the the lower one the point between the fields would shift back and forth. The flux of each pushing against the other the entire time. The two separate flux paths being opposing have a total potential difference of a single magnet being on at a full 12v at all times. The induced coil will react as if you were cutting the lines with rotation in a magnetic field that has 11,000 pounds of lift. while less practical and expensive to use two of these this way it's just to give you the image in your head hopefully. Subdividing this into several smaller magnets enables the induced coils to be wired up in series to reach a useful voltage.
 A wave yes, a cyclic wave no. Reversing magnetic domains wastes too much energy. Can you imagine getting your fingers between two of those magnets set up to attract each other? That would be a bad day.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 21, 2013, 05:07:03 PM
Thanks Doug for your comment and sketch. Your analogy with two strong electromagnets is very interesting: how a 12 V battery may lift heavy weights. I still don´t get why you say to use more turns "N"  not in a conventional way. Are you refering to a torus electromagnet? Anyway, maybe it is a just a optimization. By now I would be happy in having a working unit. Optimization will come later.

 I have here another picture for Schiko in order to explain how the two opposite signals are.

Note that it is important to change the field intensity but you don´t need to reverse polarity. Maybe even it is mandatory to avoid reversing polarity, I am not sure. Therefore the opposite signals must be always above zero voltage.

Regards and merry Christmas!!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 22, 2013, 11:36:14 AM
 The number of times the wire turns a turn round a core the greater number of linked flux paths it makes the magnetic field stronger. The length of wire adds resistance with length. The thinner the wire the worse it gets so keeping conductor length short and keeping turns count high can only be done with more conductors. Much more then a few. So that a very small current can make a much stronger magnetic field. Picture it like this, if I can determine the length of conductor based on it's resistance alone for example if 5 ft has nearly no Ir loss but after 5 ft it starts to climb up. Then I would limit the conductor length to 5 ft each. I find I need 3000 turns to reach a maximum flux density in my core at 12 volts. I have to take as many 5 ft lengths of conductor as it takes to make in total 3000 turns. Then I have to decide the best way to wind it or construct the core so I can wind it. There are lots of ways to wind it but what sticks in my head is that little phrase 'those skilled in the art of". Show me a working unit and I will bet that person is the one who is skilled. It's not the inventors problem if you lack the needed skills.
 Slapping on a birds nest of wire on a stick is not a skill except for the sake of argument.
 The amount of preasure between the inducer magnets is not known. Two magnets facing each other with the same sign pole faces will exert repelling force. What if it turns out to require hundreds of pounds of force to be maintained as the two fluxes move back and forth in the space of the induced? or thousands of pounds of force? How will you choose to make your magnet stronger? You can always make it weeker by reducing current if it is too strong nut after you wind it there is only one way left to increase it.More current.
  The drawn wave image I left you was to show all three coils/inducers and induced. The induced is the coil of the three which reaches below zero and into the negative side of the scale.

  Im going to have to send this part before the storm knocks out the power. At least I wont have to start over from scratch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 22, 2013, 05:31:04 PM
Forgot to answer this "    I still don´t get why you say to use more turns "N"  not in a conventional way. Are you refering to a torus electromagnet?"

   Any electro magnet.

Convention is ruled by economics. They have be able to make a lot of something quickly and cheaply in manufacturing. A 100.+ a plate meal does not come in a frozen box from wallwart. It's made to order with quality food. It most likely is not economical to build in a production setting.

  I found there is study of the electromagnetic field and it's effects on living organisms which has been going on for a good 20 yrs. They use field distortion to create large volumes of space that contain a uniform field. Aside from the health interests is the method to make the space large enough to have a meter size uniform flux that small animals or plants can be placed to perform the tests. Worthy of noting that there are some configurations already studied and measured for us to exploit to gain a better understanding of the orientation of the conductor groupings to yield a desired result. The paper I was looking at was more related to the equipment and how to organize a double blind study by using two spaces and a single power supply to operate both units at the same time. One makes a field the other cancels the field . Helmoltz Kirschvink 1992 pdf. (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lepp.cornell.edu%2F~critten%2Fcesrta%2Fecloud%2Fdoc%2FHelmholtz_Kirschvink_1992.pdf&ei=zw-3UpiQLaPuyAHD2oHgAw&usg=AFQjCNExQeOzeKH_Ax2wo7Qq2de0y4u3DQ&bvm=bv.58187178,d.aWc)
  Im contemplating there may be use in finding a way to concentrate the field to avoid leakage and to avoid one inducer completely over taking the opposite one magnetically. In order to prevent the activity of a common transformer where flux traverses the entire set. Once turned on it will be hard to determine if that is happening other then it wont be possible for it to self run. With the number of possible reason for failure it wouldnt hurt to consider some of them may be avoidable while giving some better insight to the type of coil winding required.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 22, 2013, 10:10:47 PM
@ hanon

Yes hanon now you got there !
Remember I built the machine , I know exactly how it works !
Remember also , my objective is to achieve self-running device.  ;D

Essas palavras são para você Hanon! A maquina de 1908 funciona exatamente como eu já coloquei aqui em postagens anteriores, ela funciona como um transformador de PULSOS já que a polaridade dos indutores não é invertida em relação ao induzido e com os pulsos defasados em 180º a transferência de energia é boa o único problema é que para atingir a máxima transferência de energia você tem que manter a frequência dos pulsos sintonizada com a ressonância das bobinas indutoras, se você fizer indutor e induzido na mesma proporção (1:1) o resultado é excelente.
Outra coisa, a maneira que você propõe, os indutores com a mesma face polar (N.N) ou (S.S) também funciona, mas só se você usar pulsos de 0º, ou seja, sinal exatamente igual nos dois indutores o que se torna mais fácil pois você só precisa de um sinal para alimentar os indutores e basta inverter a posição dos indutores em relação ao induzido para que eles fiquem com a mesma face polar apontadas para o mesmo.
Outra coisa importante é que o núcleo tem de ser fechado sobre si mesmo, de outra forma as perdas são muito grandes e a maquina não funciona bem.
O desenho que está na patente, tanto de Sr. Figuera como Buforn é só um esboço e não deve ser seguido ao "pé da letra" é apenas para se compreender os conceitos de funcionamento da maquina.
Espero que esta palavras ajudem na sua incansável busca...

ps:estou construindo um novo protótipo e poderemos discutir tudo que foi dito aqui.
grande abraço! Schiko
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2013, 12:19:23 AM
Hi all,

In order to get this device running we need to use two unphased signals, one in each electromagnet.

I have found a system to generate two 90º unphased signals with a very simple method.

A Thomson Ring (in balance atraction-repsulsion) get in the secondary coil a current 90º unphased respect to  the primary current. Later we can take this signal into a diode bridge to rectify it and feed one electromagnet. We could get a signal identical to the last signals which is drawn in the picture from my previous post

http://sdsu-physics.org/physics180/physics196/Topics/faradaysLaw.html (http://sdsu-physics.org/physics180/physics196/Topics/faradaysLaw.html)

We may get a transformer where the distance between coils could be adjustable in order to regulate the phase shift.

Welding machine: "The intensity control could be done by displacing the coil: It consists on moving away the primary and the secondary"

Link to a paper about the Thomson Ring http://www.journal.lapen.org.mx/march13/3_LAJPE_744_Guido_Pegna_preprint_corr_f.pdf (http://www.journal.lapen.org.mx/march13/3_LAJPE_744_Guido_Pegna_preprint_corr_f.pdf)

Any comments? Please tell me if you think that this method could work properly. Thanks

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 23, 2013, 01:05:54 AM
@hanon
hanon if you insist on phase 90 degrees will not get nowhere.
The transfer of energy is very low when the waves are at 90 degrees.
Again I repeat, we are talking about the 1908 patent.
It's so easy to get two delayed signals for testing ... try!  8)

Regards

ps:you have a scope? if not. I post link program that simulates a scope and signal generator that you can use for your tests.
If you want just talk. is freeware.
and how the machine works at low frequencies will work just fine!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2013, 01:16:28 PM
Hi Schiko,
I am refering to opposite signals.My idea to use a Thomson Ring, 90 phase shift, is related to the last scheme in the previous picture with all kind of signals.

Suppose that you feed the Thomson Ring with AC, you will get a 90° unphased signal. If you later on take both signals into two diodes brigdes you will rectify them into a doble positive wave with a period half of the original period. Both signals will be now 180° unphased (opposite)as the last type of signal drawn in my previous sketch with the signals.

Please tell us the easy way that you use to get the opposite signals. You said time ago you designed a controller to do it. Please share with us. I dont have a signal generator nor an scope nor a pc card. Anyway I am afraid that those outputs are low power outputs. You wont get any resuls in the machine with miliamperes. As I have understood  your device just operate near 100% efficiency. For me this is not a working Figuera unit so you should not say what works and what does not work yet.

I am here just talking as you have said. I am here to discuss and to share. Lately apart from Doug none else is helping actively, what it is really a pity in a device of such a great potential.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2013, 03:20:43 PM
Hi all,

I have collected into a single PDF file my last ideas about an overunity generator as we have been discussing lately.

Regards,
Hanon

Other link to the PDF file:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/ybmdtyn38d3eo5i/PROPOSAL%20FOR%20A%20MOTIONLESS%20OVERUNITY%20GENERATOR.pdf (http://www.mediafire.com/view/ybmdtyn38d3eo5i/PROPOSAL%20FOR%20A%20MOTIONLESS%20OVERUNITY%20GENERATOR.pdf)


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 23, 2013, 03:52:28 PM
Hannon
    Schicko is trying to give you a simple short cut by using a sound editor computer based program to generate the input signals for the electromagnets. By your resistance to the idea I have to guess you have never used such a thing before.
   The wires leading to the speaker can provide a pulsing dc signal that you can adjust on your screen. You could even go as far as to gut a pair of blown out speakers and use the voice coils by removing the magnet and leaving the slug that the coil slides up and down on just glue it to the slug.
   Then you can adjust the dwell and angle of the signals with less effort then it takes to explain. You could go altra lazy and record the signal from a single wire of a ac source as your sound to edit with a sensing coil which works like a clamp on amp meter. Lay in a second track and start adjusting till they overlap just right. Might need a rectifier in there to protect your pc sound card. You get stereo outputs from your computer so two individually controlled line outputs are already there. the head phone port would be the cheapest to connect to.
   Im not sure what the limitations of those programs are so far as frequency they can handle or the maximum output power. Last time I used one I didn't get any work done just spent all day playing making myself sound like Darth Vadar and messing up music recordings.
    90 degrees out of phase is perhaps the wrong way the express it,but it's easier to say that then to say an unknown degree of delay of two identical frequencies clipped off for + v only.

  Personally Im working on the Tesla ring version for a couple reasons. Automotive  alternators I have several which I have broken down completely and would like to find a way the use parts from them. The stators are readily available in quantities. The materials already have defined specs both for the material and performance tolorences for heat ect... A lot of the work has already been done and repeatable builds easier form parts that can be sourced. Tesla's ring version places the induced on the outside of the coils.They are layered up or outward rather then placing them between inducers. The induced windings are not tightly wound but have a uniform spacing of 1 to 5 so far as I can tell form looking at it and several layers of windings for the inducers compared to one layer of the induced with it's spacing of 5 to 1. The option to add more layers by wrapping iron between them has my curiosity. In any case I don't want to end up with something that just powers a couple LED lights. Once i get my power bill down to 100. or less a month I can go solar pretty cheaply.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 23, 2013, 10:04:53 PM
Visual Analyser Project - Scope Freeware
Good up to 10Khz
You do not need to buy the hardware for it to work.
But if you can, will have a useful tool for a good price.

http://www.sillanumsoft.org/download.htm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 24, 2013, 12:50:03 AM
I do not know how to link pictures with a post, so I am just placing the
links below. Link 1 is for a 555 circuit, Link 2 is for house electrical
connection, and Link 3 is for fifty different 555 circuits.

In the picture in Link 1,  the top 555 Sinewave output picture might help.
The output is similar to a sinewave, but it is above 0 volt. If using a 12 volt
suppply, the output would be about 11 volts and up to 200 mA. The output
would need to be raised somehow.

Link 2 shows how U.S. houses are connected to the grid. In the top left side
you will notice that the input to the transformer is split on the secondary,
and the wave forms are "out of phase" by 180 degrees.

If you take the output from the 555 chip, amplify it, use a RC low
pass filter to get a sinewave, then use a transformer that has a split
secondary, would that work?

Link 1:
http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/images/555-Osc-1.gif

Link 2:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html#c1

Link 3:
http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/50%20-%20555%20Circuits.html#B
THE SIMPLEST 555 OSCILLATOR
The simplest 555 oscillator takes output pin 3 to capacitor C1 via resistor R1.
When the circuit is turned on, C1 is uncharged and output pin 3 is HIGH. C1
charges via R1 and when Pin 6 detects 2/3 rail voltage, output pin 3 goes LOW.
R1 now discharges capacitor C1 and when pin 2 detects 1/3 rail voltage, output
pin 3 goes HIGH to repeat the cycle. The amount of time when the output is HIGH
is called the MARK and the time when the output is LOW is called the SPACE.
In the diagram, the mark is the same length as the space and this is called 1:1
or 50%:50%. If a resistor and capacitor (or electrolytic) is placed on the output,
the result is very similar to a sinewave.

IMPROVING THE SINKING OF A 555
The output of a 555 goes low to deliver current to a load connected as shown in the
circuit below. But when the chip is sinking 200mA, pin 3 has about 1.9v on it. This
means the chip does not provide full rail voltage to the load. This can be improved by
connecting pin 7 to pin3. Pin 7 has a transistor that connects it to 0v rail at the same
time when pin 3 is LOW. They can both be connected together to improve sinking
capability. In this case the low will be 800mV for 200mA instead of 1900mV, an
improvement of 1100mV. This will add 1v1 to the load and also make the chip run
cooler.

Hope some of this might help,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 24, 2013, 02:19:56 PM
RMatt
 I am curious, why do you want to use ic's to build a driver oscillator?

 Im not against it entirely because it may become a required component but I dont think the original idea required it to function as it was intended to operate simple resistive and inductive loads according to time period. Inductive loads are indicated in both types which I believe was the timing device in the form of a free wheeling motor placed on the output side. Because in a state of self acting a balance would have to exist between the oscillation of the load/s and the original source of power used to start it in order for it work as a self runner. In operation if the load circuit being the induced had a quantity of  current circling were viewed as one half and the source plus the inducers were viewed as the other half. If the two were equal then adding more into the magnetic field of the inducers would not be needed. A difference in potential would hopefully not exist or be so so small that it would be practically zero. The only part I can see which has a way to be minipulated  is the magnetic filed. One of the ways to make a stronger magnet is to provide more turns of wire without increasing current. A stronger field will provide greater induced current on the output. So a up close Nat's ass view of everything going on in time on the load circuit is next because unless you can find exactly when and where to connect magnetically or electrically a step up function to retard the voltage potential so there is no difference between load and source even at the fraction of a second the current switches from + to - in the cycle.
   Let the arguments begin!
 A snapshot of time. One load, two wires, an alternating current. Are we going to use high and low voltage potentials or pressure and vaccume ,ying and yang ,black and white whats the flavor of the day everyone can agree on to describe the activity?
   Regardless of your designation for it, there has to be a greater and lesser in order for the "it" to flow from one place to another. There has to be an accounting for the distance the volume the resistance to the movement/flow when applicable.
   Another argument I would like introduce is friction. Friction is a form of resistance which restrict the movement or flow of something. What is it that is being consumed when movement or flow is restricted? Is a restriction invincible ?
   In a snap shot voltage is at a higher potential on one wire and lower on the other with a restriction in between. The restriction can be in the form of a poor conductive element or a long section of wire condensed into a small space to accumulate a strong magnetic effect in that small space ie a magnet. Agree or disagree so far?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 27, 2013, 05:52:55 PM
Hi Doug,

Hanon was looking for signals which did not change polarity between +positive and -negative,  and were out of phase. The links I gave above could possibly give him the signals he was looking for.
That is why I listed them, if that is alright with you?

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 27, 2013, 06:41:45 PM
No way Bob, they are in search of something sacred. ;D
Something we mere mortals can not understand.  :-[
Mr. Figuera said (it's so simple that even a child can build).  8)
I say (people with preconceived ideas fail to understand or build).  ::)

It's all a joke on people, do not take it seriously ok, remember that we are all in the same direction, maybe different ways, but the direction is the same.  ;)

Happy new year to all!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 27, 2013, 11:25:39 PM
Thank you Schiko,

We all have to have a little fun every now and then, lol. ;D

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 30, 2013, 03:58:18 PM
The first thing I said I was not entirely against it using a modern sound generator to make the signal.
  Am I looking for something secred ? ,no I wouldnt say that. Im sure some person will be able twist it that way to discredit any functioning method or design. Much like the buzz word "conspiracy" has effected investigative reporting. Anything can be discredited by those practiced in the art of.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on December 30, 2013, 05:53:37 PM
Hi Doug,

I was not trying to "Harsh your mello, dude". I know you are smarter than me. I was trying to
share so information that I thought Hanon, or someone else might find interesting. You made your
comments, then I made a joke. I did not mean to upset anyone, it was just a joke.  :) When I can
afford some test equipment, I will try those very same suggestions just to see if anything good
will happen with them.

Peace man,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 31, 2013, 05:17:48 AM
@Doug1

Relax man ...
As I said before, we're all going in the same direction!
Some with more knowledge, and more technics.
Others with less technics and less knowledge, but all going in the same direction.
The problem is: people trying to help with new theories outside the focus of the thread hinders more than helps because it confuses the objectives and efforts of all who are really trying solve the problems.
This becomes exhausting and discouraging for everyone I think.
I guess Bajac had already told this in previous posts.
Another thing, everyone that have replicate the patent 1908 reached the same results I arrived, just an efficient converter.
But in my tests I noticed strange behaviors under certain circumstances, so keep trying.  8)
And what I have said here so far has been experienced by most people at the beginning of the thread ...
I said the machine " can " work well in " high frequency " and she works best as a transformer to " pulses " as the original machine, and anyone who says otherwise is why did not understand how the machine works.

As for hanon, I just wanted help with a simple solution, if it has a computer was just download the program "oscilloscope" and connect the audio output of your PC in a home audio amplifier.
Make a voltage divider and use the audio input from the PC to test the signals, turning the PC into a simple but functional oscilloscope and signal generator.
The machine is not a motor, does not need excessive electrical power to work if the principle is correct should also work with mW ...
And to test their theories in practice.
I guess the intention was the same as Bob.
It was not to cause "anger" anyone.  :-[
I sometimes exaggerated in kidding, sorry if I offended or hurt someone was not my intention.  :-[

Happy new year to all !!!  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 31, 2013, 05:43:55 AM
Here is a sample of the program running on my PC.

You still get the gift of a frequency counter, and a voltmeter.
Are not precision devices but work very well.
The waveform generator may also generate square and triangular wave.
The voltage divider you calculated according to the sensitivity of the audio input of your PC.
Treating the square wave signal you can control a MOSFET driver directly in a very simple way.
Hands on.
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 31, 2013, 08:56:40 AM
The real deal is to ask the correct questions. Look at the scopeshots and tell me what is going on in circuit in the point on top of green waveform. ::)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on December 31, 2013, 09:16:06 AM
hi all
can anyone confirm soundcard produce signal always above positive ?.

thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on December 31, 2013, 04:00:54 PM
@forest
Now this is a job for hanon!  ::)  ;D


@Marsing
You have to treat the signal, because basically it is a common audio signal.
If you understand a bit of electronics is easy!

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 01, 2014, 04:44:06 PM
 Im not smarter then anyone ells, maybe older.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on January 01, 2014, 05:15:22 PM
Well Doug,

I'm 50, but sometimes it feels like I'm about 90 ;D

Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 01, 2014, 07:15:09 PM
 I wont insist on being called sir although i could lol. Whipper snapper.
 Im in the middle of enjoying an epiphany.  I will probably  forget what is is shortly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on January 01, 2014, 07:54:01 PM
Yes Sir  ;D, same here  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 02, 2014, 02:44:36 AM
Happy new year to all of you! I hope your projects will materialized this year.


I wanted to share with you my progress. As I stated before, I have to rebuild the "Energy Tower" because of the extremely low number of turns of the coils. I did not want to wind the coils manually so I purchased an old coil winding machine. I just finished winding the first section of the device. It was kind of fun using the winder, and in my first trial I was able to make them in just four hours. Here are some pictures of the transformer's section:

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/w5yl.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/w5yl.jpg/)


Primary:
750 Turns #16 AWG - Taps: 200, 400, and 600


Secondary:
300 Turns #12 AWG

Also note that I replaced the metal screws with ones built with Nylon.

I will use #14 AWG for the other secondaries. It is somewhat difficult to use #12 AWG wire for such a small iron core.


I am planning on running some experiments within the following two weeks. I will keep you posted.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Schiko on January 03, 2014, 12:00:23 AM
@bajac

I am anxious to see the device working!  :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 03, 2014, 01:35:20 AM
Bajac: In theory the Figuera device should work. The big question is of course is it ou.
Good luck with your replication. Good science is always worth learning about.
Please post your results.
All the best.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on January 03, 2014, 09:38:44 AM
Hi Bajac
Glad to see youre still on it !
may u show us what kind of commutator are u using ?, I made one with two comms. from two identical car window DC motors, 8 segments,two brushes each.(4 alternating paired segments with 100 ohms resistor)
I´ll try to input a square pulse over 0, Not smooth, but I think of higher freq.
May post a pic. if someone interested.
Thanks for posting.

a.king21
after revising my posts, I think I owe to apologize for an unfortunate comment I did about your comparison of Tesla (rotating field) and its similarity with Figuera´s patents. Sorry for that. I really appreciate all input of yours, as I learn from everyone here.

kind regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 03, 2014, 09:29:46 PM
First, I will use a step drive to generate the two 90 degree phase shifted voltages. I already started writing the code for an Arduino's controller. As a back up, I also have the electronic switching device with the seven resistors as intended in the Figuera's patent.


However, the resistor method is the worse approach for generating the two primary voltages. I am sure that Mr. Figuera use it because he did not have many choices and because of its simplicity. Getting the two phase shifted primary voltages from a small motor-generator configuration had been the only efficient method in 1908.


You should keep in mind the following design criteria when using the voltage division resistor method:


1) Recall that the input voltages have AC and DC components.
2) The resistors value must be chosen to match the impedance of the primary coils to keep the ratio of the AC-to-DC voltage components to a maximum.
3) Practically, how does one know that the resistors' values are just right? The best way is to use an oscilloscope to check the voltage waveform. If the resistor value is too high, the voltage waveform will show small increase and a sudden large peaks. If the resistor value is too low, the minimum voltage value will be high making the AC amplitude (component) small.


It is somewhat difficult to apply mathematics to calculate the value of the resistors because of the large amount of harmonics produced when switching on/off each of the seven resistors.


The Figuera's devices should use step-triangular or half-sine voltage waveform. Square wave should not be applied to this devices. The applied voltage shall increase and decrease gradually. Square and rectangular voltages will just increase and decrease instantaneous.


That is the reason why Figuera went though all the trouble for using the resistors to generate the triangular voltages.


Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 04, 2014, 12:42:12 AM
It's just dawned on me why this device will work ou.
Figuera is mixing DC with AC on the collapse of the magnetic field.
This is a known OU phenomenon and was used by Carlos Benitez in his patents!
So for this device to work you need to have pulsed DC (or even ordinary DC)  mixed with radiant energy generated AC.
Good luck. I am really interested now.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on January 04, 2014, 01:03:46 AM
Bajac: In theory the Figuera device should work. The big question is of course is it ou.
Good luck with your replication. Good science is always worth learning about.
Please post your results.
All the best.

In theory, theory and practice should be the same. In practice.... they are often different.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 04, 2014, 01:48:58 AM
King,


It has nothing to do with radiant energy/electricity. I already explained in the published article how overunity can be achieved by fooling the effects of the Lenz's law. However, the paper does not explain where the extra energy is coming from. But, do I care? Not at this stage.


I highly recommend you to read the article.


Whatever we are doing here has enormous implications. I am pretty sure that the physical model that scientists have put together to explain the laws of nature and the universe is wrong because they do not take into account these overunity phenomena already proved by Mr. Tesla and Mr. Figuera.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 05, 2014, 05:00:06 PM
Bajac
    There is no extra power needed. Power is a measure of a reaction like work done results in what ever was the objective. The extra power is not an extra just a better use of the power you start out with for a period of time in such a way that where the potential is lower after performing some work it is tricked into providing a reaction which is large enough to satisfy the continuation of the work being done through transformations or translation depending on your use of the word. At a high enough level to prevent anymore of the source from entering the system If you assume a 1 to 1 ratio of power used compared to work done or less then you have to assume the system was designed that way for economic reasons. Everything learned for such a system that uses continuous input will not support anything different.
  Have you measured potentials yet in the load circuit? If you plan to use the load as a source after the start up you will have to be very intimate with every inch of the load circuit. Treating it as a group of magnetic events per cycle. In order for the device to have a self acting field strong enough to prevent any incoming source current you'll need two equal magnetic fields where you would normally think there is one. The second one is not supplied with an equal amount of current as the first but still it has be magnetically just as strong as the one tied to the source for it to induce into the inducer enough field strength to translate back to the load. The load becomes the source when the reaction can be magnified into a larger event with no more then is left at the end of the event in terms of current or potential.
 When it is right it will work anywhere anytime on everything. Every living thing that ever was or will ever be is your model.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 09, 2014, 06:17:16 PM
Well I spent all morning getting pictures on line!
I am building the "OLD SCHOOL" version of this device. The pictures show my "resistor." This is an
electric heater that I bought at the biggest store chain in the us. The price was under $20.00. If
needed I can put the core back into its original plastic housing and use the fan to cool the heating element.
I made a drawing of a sign wave superimposed on a graph of squares on my computer. Across the top is
time moving from right to left. Down the left side are ohms from zero downward to around forty-two on the left.
As you can see the values on the paper indicate the actual values I obtained by using my ohm meter.
I am currently, after getting the pictures online, making a new attempt to only have eight spaces for time
across the top. I believe this is what the Mr. Figeura had in mind.

Swamp
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 09, 2014, 06:19:35 PM
Picture 2
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 09, 2014, 06:20:30 PM
Picture 3

Swamp
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 10, 2014, 07:36:49 PM
This is my last try to get pictures.
Sorry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 12, 2014, 04:28:41 PM
View for the top of the two coil "resistor."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 12, 2014, 06:12:59 PM
TEST#1 - Open Circuit Testing voltages and Currents (NO LOAD) - TAP = 600 Turns.


Transformer's data:


Input coils #1 and #3 Taps: 200, 400, 600, and 750 turns of # 16 AWG.


Output coil #2: 300 Turns of #12 AWG.



Picture 'TableSettingTest1' shows the Table configuration for testing my a single section. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/0msrlfj (https://imageshack.com/i/0msrlfj)
You can see the power supply on the right having an adjustable auto transformer, the transformer's coils on the center, and the step drive and arduino controller on the left.


Picture 'StepDrive2M542Tables' shows a closeup view of the step driver. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/nq2sjxj (https://imageshack.com/i/nq2sjxj)


Picture "ArduinoControllerConnection' shows a closeup view of the arduino controller having a shield attached. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/f1k3nsj (https://imageshack.com/i/f1k3nsj)


Picture 'ArduinoCodeTest1' shows the arduino program used to provide the pulses to the step drive. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/mas3npj (https://imageshack.com/i/mas3npj) Notice the frequency is set for 32KHz. The step drive was set for 25,600 micro-stepping generating an output voltage on coil#2 of about 58.8 Hz. Note: the output pin is #13 (not #6 as stated in the notes)


Picture 'CurrentAt120VacTest1' shows the AC current at 120Vac going into the power supply. See this link: [size=78%]https://imageshack.com/i/09bxkdj (https://imageshack.com/i/09bxkdj)[/size]
notice that the current is barely visible in the analog scale.


Picture 'StepDriverVoltageOutput' shows the DC PWM voltage out of one of the step driver outputs. See this link: [size=78%]https://imageshack.com/i/n9cijij (https://imageshack.com/i/n9cijij)[/size]
As expected, notice the square shape of the voltage waveform.


Picture 'StepDriveCurrentOutputTest1' shows the DC current out of one of the step driver outputs. See this link: [size=78%]https://imageshack.com/i/0f9wz2j (https://imageshack.com/i/0f9wz2j)[/size]
Notice the spikes generated. Anyway, the overall shape is pretty good.



Picture 'AcVoltOutputCoil2Test1' shows the AC output voltage from coil #2. See this link: https://imageshack.com/i/0stc73j (https://imageshack.com/i/0stc73j)
The data measured for this voltage are the following: Vrms =16.40 Vac; Vp-p = 40 Vac; Freq = 58.8 Hz. Notice the good quality of the voltage waveform (it looks similar to a modified sine wave provided by inverters). The voltage output looks much better than the one using the seven resistor method.

I also wanted to add that the loses are minimum when using this method to generate the primary voltages. The resistor method generates a lot of heat and losses.

I will run more open voltage test for the other taps to then proceed with the load and short circuit tests.


As I stated before, I am kind of disappointed that none in this forum have gotten good testing results with the resistors. Instead, I see many people confused and moving away in the wrong direction (not the one recommended by Figuera and I). We need to stop the BS theory and move into construction as originally intended in this forum.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 12, 2014, 08:22:32 PM
I truly believe that the talented people on this forum will find out the answers to the Figeura device.
Way back in the forum on post 87 BaJac stated "JUST REPLICATE THE DEVICE AS SHONE IN THE PATENTS!!!"
I agree.
When I read about the device on "Practical Guide to Free Energy Devices" I had a few thoughts about the device.
The first thought was, how can one get a true sign wave without varying the ohms to follow the wave. Oh course,
since then I read this happens when a square wave is run through a coil! Oh well.
 I will start on four sets of transformers as soon as I finish building my coil winding device.
Good luck to all, including me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 12, 2014, 08:33:42 PM

Note that TEST #1 generated an output rms voltage for the secondary of about 16.5 Vac. To get the 120 Vac target, I would need to build 7 more sections if using that particular tap (600 turns.)
[size=78%]
[/size]
I want to say that a secondary coil with 300 turns is still not ideal. For the next section, I am planning to make a secondary coil with 500 turns of #14 AWG.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 12, 2014, 11:36:53 PM
Shadow, when do you estimate your setup will be goo for testing? I love to see how Figuera's original device would have worked?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 13, 2014, 02:02:00 AM
I just finished for the night but I wanted to share some more findings.


As illustrated in the figures that were posted, the PWM function can be used to generate the two primary voltages. However, the problem with the step driver is that it behaves as a current source. In this initial stage, we want to get away from the current source because it can create issues that can complicate our understanding of the Figuera's device. I am working on using the PWM outputs from arduino and connect them to a high power H-Bridge.


In addition, the performance of the device is better for the taps at 600 and 750 turns. The taps for 200 and 400 turns generate wave forms with a lot of harmonics. The 200 turn tap is the worst.


I will keep you posted. Thank you.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 13, 2014, 02:18:14 PM
Probably finish in the next two weeks or so!
Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on January 13, 2014, 04:49:49 PM


Alrightythen...


I have found a simple way to do the coil driving with Arduino!


All you need is:
1. ONE 10k/100k Ohm potentiometer. Connect the middle leg to Arduino's "A0" analog input. The other two legs of the pot goes to +5V and GND on Arduino.
2. TWO Logic Level MOSFET transistors to do the switching (Logic level - like in IRL series -  means that a mosfet is in a conduction saturation state at just +5V put to its gate). Connect the Gate of one mosfet to "Pin 3" and the others' gate to "Pin 11". Sources go to the "GND" of the Arduino board.
3. Connect +(positive) from a battery to both "North" & "South" coils and their ends to both drains in the two mosfets and -(negative) to the Arduino's "GND" close to the Source legs of mosfets.
4. Connect fast shottky diodes across each coil to do the freewheeling of current.


Program description:
Arduino is generating a digital signal at 32 kHz frequency using 2 PWM outputs. The value for each "sample" is taken from the sine table. There are 256 values of resolution for the "shape" of the sine wave and 256 values of amplitude. You can change phase shift by changing "offset" variable. Potentiometer allows to set the analog frequency from 0 to 1023 Hz at 1 Hz resolution...




NOW copy the code below to Arduino IDE window and save it to the microconroller and HERE YOU GO! ;)


Quote
/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
 * modification by kEhYo77
 *
 * Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
 * http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
*/




#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM




// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {
  127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
  242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
  221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
  76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
  33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124




};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator




int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase




double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6;      // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;




// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count;              // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator;   // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m;  // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.




void setup()
{
  pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  Setup_timer2();
 
  //Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
  cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0);              //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
  sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2);              //enable Timer2 Interrupt




  dfreq=10.0;                    //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
  tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //calulate DDS new tuning word
 
  // running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
  bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);




}
void loop()
{
        apin0=analogRead(0);             //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
        if(dfreq != apin0){
          tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //Calulate DDS new tuning word
          dfreq=apin0;
        }
}




//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM,  16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
  // Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
  sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);




  // Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0);  // clear Compare Match
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
 
  // Mode 1  / Phase Correct PWM
  sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20); 
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}








//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
  phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
  current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24;     // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information                     
 
  OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
  OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs&hd=1)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 14, 2014, 01:19:25 AM
Thanks KEhYo for the information. I will use test it and see how it works.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 15, 2014, 12:44:41 AM
Hi all,

I am pretty sure that with a magnetic amplifier (saturable reactor) we can get the two opposite signals needed for the Figuera´s 1908 patent. For example: with a magnetic amplifier an audio amplifier (push-pull) may be implemented.

Idea: use a rectified AC signal as input to a magnetic amplifier in order to regulate the output signal with negative feedback, (negative gain) so that an increase in the input will make a decrease in the output (see attached sketch)

Some important facts about mag amp:

"The magnetic amplifier, like the vacuum tube and the transistor, is an electrical control valve where a smaller current controls another circuit´s larger current"

"With a magnetic amplifier you can control AC load current only. For DC applications it is possible to control an AC current and rectify the output"

"Magnetic amplifer control circuits should accept AC input signals as well as DC input signals. The DC input signal is called "bias". The most effective way to apply bias to a saturable core and also allow AC input signals to control the magnetic amplifier is to use a bias winding"

I attach an schematic to clarify this idea. The schematic is just to show the main idea. It is not a working design because I am not an expert (maybe someone more skillfull into mag amps may design a working device...). The main advantage is that this will be a very easy implementation. Any expert around here?

http://maybaummagnetics.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/68-71-27-2.pdf (http://maybaummagnetics.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/68-71-27-2.pdf)

http://avstop.com/ac/apgeneral/magneticamplifiers.html (http://avstop.com/ac/apgeneral/magneticamplifiers.html)

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/33587/controlling-a-current-with-another-home-made-alternatives-to-the-transistor (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/33587/controlling-a-current-with-another-home-made-alternatives-to-the-transistor)

http://www.tpub.com/neets/book8/32o.htm (http://www.tpub.com/neets/book8/32o.htm)

http://www.rfcafe.com/references/popular-electronics/magnetic-amplifiers-jul-1960-popular-electronics.htm (http://www.rfcafe.com/references/popular-electronics/magnetic-amplifiers-jul-1960-popular-electronics.htm)

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Magnetic_Amplifiers/ (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Magnetic_Amplifiers/)


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 17, 2014, 01:32:37 PM
Ok, Guys,
I was getting something like 16V at the secondary and more power going in than going out. Does that mean that Figuera's device does not work? Not necessarily! I need to increase the secondary power output. How do I do that? One thing is for sure, 300 turns in the secondary is too low. Even though it is not stated in the patent, it is clear to me that this device requires a lot of turns to make it work. A lot of turns in the primary and secondary coils.
I will increase the secondary power by increasing the number of turns to increase the voltage. THIS DEVICES WILL NEVER SATURATE THE IRON CORE BECAUSE OF THE HIGH RELUCTANCE OF THE AIR GAPS! So do not be afraid to add turns to this device.
I am in the process of making a secondary coil with about 1,000 turns. I will let you know the results.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 17, 2014, 01:41:52 PM
The reason why the power output is increased by just adding turns to the secondary is because there is no relation between the input and output currents, that is, there are no effects of the Lenz's law.
In standards transformers, adding turns to the secondary coil would decrease the output current to maintain the I_primary/I_secondary current ratio of these transformers. And, if the secondary current is increased, so will the primary. This is no the case for the Figuera's devices.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 17, 2014, 02:52:38 PM
The reason why the power output is increased by just adding turns to the secondary is because there is no relation between the input and output currents, that is, there is no effects of the Lenz's law.
In standards transformers, adding turns to the secondary coil would decrease the output current to maintain the current ratio of these transformers. And, if the secondary current is increased, so will the primary. This is no the case for the Figuera's devices.
Noted.
 Also at the time the fashion was for high turns secondary. It was an accepted fact because  the interrupter was a common feature of most coils. Sometimes the interrupter is not even mentioned, and I was wondering about Figuera in that light.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 17, 2014, 05:52:51 PM
Noted.
 Also at the time the fashion was for high turns secondary. It was an accepted fact because  the interrupter was a common feature of most coils. Sometimes the interrupter is not even mentioned, and I was wondering about Figuera in that light.
Hi,

Which interrupter? Could you clarify that idea? A picture or link will be nice to see it

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 17, 2014, 06:13:30 PM
Interrupter is a make/break switch (usually electromagnetic) designed for DC transformer
operation. Think how an old electric bell works. So it is effectively a RADIANT ENERGY DEVICE!!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 19, 2014, 09:03:39 PM
Bajac
  In order for the device to be able to function at some point without adding more current from the batteries or source there has to be a method to loop the current from the load back into the inducer coils and in doing so there will be less of it after the load has consumed what it needs. The potential will be lower between the load and the return path compared to the leading direction of current to the load.Potential drops,higher in the beginning lower at the end. Which is hard for anyone to argue regardless of type of current dc or ac.
   The inducers manifest a magnetic field between which the induced will reside.
 The circuit of the induced does not show a wire connection back to the source or to the inducers.Unless I am mistaken.
    So the magnetic field must be conserved once established by movement of the field within the core/s and regenerative even after load consumption.You can refer to magnetic reminence in a self exiting generator where the left over magnetic field is used to increase the rotor field strength on the start up of the gen. The field in rotation is induced into the stator the current from there is used to further power up the rotor enough to hold a stable output.
  The strength of the field produced by the inducers must be greater then the field in the consuming circuit. Adding more turns to a conductor (mag wire) increases resistance with length of wire being longer in order for it to make more turns. Unless,,,,, you use more conductors and combine them only on the ends there by increasing the turns without increasing the resistance. With a little creativity of compounding some of the conductors some of the current used to establish the field by the source may be stored within the core to produce the same effect as a rectifier.Instead of blocking current it would be blocking the propagation of the magnetic field reflected back from the induced circuit and forcing it to re enter the coil/s in the same direction as the source would to complete the loop magnetically.
 As to turns count ,before the holidays I had come up with 2008 T per inducer with 56 strands 200.66 ft of wire for my use.Keeping conductor length at that which has very little resistance per strand. The resistors are supposed to handle the steering of the currents into the inducers with out wasting power. If the path to one of the inducers is an easier path then through the resisters it will follow to the inducer intended.They to will have to be compared to and match the load circuit and resistance of it in terms of reluctance set up in the induced coil to prevent the induced coil from dominating the inducers. For the purpose of testing, lights would work well as resisters with varied sizes and wattage's. The object being no lights should actually light up if the current is going mostly to one of the desired inducers avioding the path of resistance. If a light or number of lights were to become lit it would indicate there is too much reluctance against the inducers and the load is too large for size of the electro magnets making up the inducers.
  No you may not have a picture.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: that-prophet on January 20, 2014, 05:00:05 AM
yes, you loop the cureent
with pulleys of different sizes
you can not only loop it
but you can multiply it
with sinple pulleys

free energy is so simple
that we have overlooked it

Free energy has been discovered = (this is a Gift from God)
http://free-energy.yolasite.com/
I call this free energy machine a GEM = (God s Electricity Multiplier)

This Christian Warrior was shown this Miracle by the God of our Holy Bible
-   from The God of the Bible = (Father +Jesus +Holy Spirit)

When you take a careful look at this technology
-   It seems obvious (the more generators you add, the greater the multiplication factor)
-   -   You put power into a motor with a large pulley
-   -   -   Which you only have to turn the one single turn (very little energy)

Then you take power out of the one to a hundred small pulleys with generators
-   That you attach to the same belt
-   -   Each generator rotates tens to hundreds of times faster
-   -   -   Each rotation gives you electricity (lots of energy)
-   -   -   -   It is truly that simple
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 20, 2014, 11:26:04 PM
lol Im scared of belts and pulleys they have not done well for automotive alternator except to keep the engine business alive.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on January 21, 2014, 05:54:15 AM
Hi,

Which interrupter? Could you clarify that idea? A picture or link will be nice to see it

Regards

hi...    hanon
more about   interrupter    google    "  ruhmkorff coil " . 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 04:55:48 AM
I have performed two changes:
First, I replace the 300T coil with an 800T. And,
Second (the most important) is the replacement of the 0.6 mm air gap spacers with 0.1 mm. The performance improved dramatically. I have the primary and secondary iron cores practically touching each other but there is not electrical continuity (isolated) for very small air gaps.
I am sure that there is a way of adjusting the reluctances of the air gaps. For example, the standard transformers have the ‘E’ and ‘I’ electrically isolated but the reluctance of the magnetic path is made very low by overlapping the ‘E’ and the ’I’. What I want to say is that the reluctance of the air gaps can be adjusted lower by partially overlapping the ‘C’ and the ‘I’ of the Figuera’s devices. The electrical isolation should be maintained to get the required air gap reluctances. By doing the latter, it might be possible to use secondary coils with lower number of turns and high current output. I have this task as an item in my “to do” list.
I am still using the step driver, which is not good because it behaves as a current source instead of a voltage. I am in the process of replacing the driver for a more suitable power supply.
 
Look at the tables of the attached document showing the open and short tests results for the 400T and 600T primary taps.
The output power calculated above is based on a Thevenin circuit. The power output is the power absorbed by the internal resistance. As a conservative value, assume 30% error to account for measurement issues.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 03:11:52 PM
Do not feel disappointed if you do not see huge power gains (KW). This is a device with a technology that we have just started to experiment with. It will take some time to get the feeling for its design and extra its full potential.


According to the news, Mr. Figuera was able to make very powerful MEGs. And, I am confident that we will be able to replicate his apparatus.


Being an engineer and having more than 30 years of experience in the field, this moment is a turning point in my professional life. I would have never expected to see a device that can output more than what is being input. At least, that what is taught at all engineering schools.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 03:36:59 PM
Please, note how the results from tests #11 and #12 do not practically change. This is because of the step driver saturation. When using the 600T and 750T taps, the step driver cannot increase the voltage any further to maintain a current preset (Ipeak). The voltage limit for this step driver is 50 Volts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 22, 2014, 03:51:13 PM
Do not feel disappointed if you do not see huge power gains (KW). This is a device with a technology that we have just started to experiment with. It will take some time to get the feeling for its design and extra its full potential.


According to the news, Mr. Figuera was able to make very powerful MEGs. And, I am confident that we will be able to replicate his apparatus.


Being an engineer and having more than 30 years of experience in the field, this moment is a turning point in my professional life. I would have never expected to see a device that can output more than what is being input. At least, that what is taught at all engineering schools.


Am I reading your results correctly?


Cop between 200 and 300%?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 22, 2014, 04:46:33 PM
Remember that the 300% power is dissipated in the internal resistance of the secondary coil. It does not mean that I am getting 300% power output being fed to a load (utilization). Nevertheless, it is a clear indication that the Figuera's device is a potential overunity apparatus. Performing such a test on standard transformers would have never shown overunity.


The following link shows a picture of the 800 turns secondary coil and the 0.1 mm (paper thin) air gap spacers: https://imageshack.com/i/1qahf0j (https://imageshack.com/i/1qahf0j)


My experience so far indicates that a fundamental criterion for building this device is the reluctance of the air gaps. Minimizing the reluctance of the air gaps (without eliminating it) is the key. That might be the reason why Figuera stated in his patent that the air gaps can be made small. He considered the role of the reluctance of the air gaps important enough as to be mentioned in his patent.

The next important step is to overlap a little bit the primary and secondary iron cores to decrease the reluctance of the air gaps, even more.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on January 22, 2014, 05:02:21 PM
I believe Mr Figuera stated that a small part of the output can be used as input.
That would settle the debate once and for all.
No need for measurements to prove the  point if that can be achieved.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 23, 2014, 12:32:56 AM
Bajac, i was wondering if you could outline how you calculated the output power. The figures show you seem to be multiplying the open circuit voltage with the short circuit current and no mention of phase difference.

The way I figure it and the way I believe it is meant to be done is that if the voltage is zero on short circuit then you simply multiply the current by itself.

So then say we take the first measurement in the list I took from your PDF then we multiply the 0.463 x 0.463 we get a result of . 0.215 Watts dissipated. There is no phase difference to consider as there is no voltage. To get the power of a point in time we need to use both figures from the same point in time, the voltage must be measured at the same time as the current (when loaded).

When a battery is used the voltage of the battery is usually fairly stable. But an output coil can have significant voltage drop, which must be considered.

I would suggest using a 10 or 100 Ohm resistor so that a voltage can be measured along with the current and a phase difference is then able to be measured and the real power dissipated calculated.

AC Source:
W = V x A x PF

Example.

So if we measure say 10 volts across a 100 ohm resistor and the phase difference is 45 degree we calculate the power factor by the multiplying the phase angle by cosine, so if the phase difference is 45 degrees then if you plug into a calculator 45 then hit the cosine button the result is 0.70 which is the power factor.

So in my example above, then we multiply the volts by the amps, the amps is 10 volts divided by 100 Ohms or 0.1 amps, the voltage is 10 volts.

So the power in my example is 10 x 0.1 x 0.7 = 0.7 Watts.

Cheers

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 23, 2014, 12:39:45 AM

Because of the importance of minimizing the reluctance of the air gaps, I have given a lot of thoughts lately. I have said before that a big iron core should not make a big difference because the reluctance of the air gap is thousand of times larger than the reluctance of the iron core. Well, that might not be all true. At that time, I did not think of the reduction of the air gap reluctance due to an increase  of the cross sectional area of the iron core.


To prove the above, I will make the next section having an iron core with bigger cross sectional area.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 23, 2014, 12:45:12 AM
Well done Bajac !!!

This is just the beginning . A COP = 3 is a very promising starting point.

Your expertise and skills make sure that the tests are accurate and the measurements are properly executed.

These results shows the potential of this device!!!

Best regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 23, 2014, 01:03:32 AM
The way I figure it the power in the first line of the list of measurements I posted from the PDF shows a power dissipated of 0.215 Watts with an input of 9.2 Watts which works out to 0.215 W out divided by 9.2 W in = 0.02 C.O.P. or an efficiency of 2%.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 23, 2014, 01:40:45 AM
Farmhand,


Based on the oscilloscope current and voltage waveform, I estimated a phase angle of approximately 40 degrees. That is why I proposed a 30% derating factor to account for errors in the phase angle and instrumentation equipment. You can even use 75% error, and still, it looks promising. The results are not conclusive because there are a lot of tests that need to be performed on real loads. We should not get excited, yet. I estimated the power at short circuit from the Thevenin equivalent circuit. You should be careful when applying the Thevenin circuit to batteries. The problem with batteries is that the Thevenin voltage changes with the charging state. That is, the open circuit voltage of new and used batteries are not the same.


In addition, I was frustrated with the step driver. Please, note that not all the settings of the step driver and the primary taps give an apparent overunity. I expect the testing results to improve when using a voltage power supply. I just ordered seven wired wound rheostats of 25W/20-Ohms each. I will build a resistor box and wired them in series. It will be much easier to adjust the value of the rheostats than replacing and soldering individual power resistors.


I am also searching for a dynamo that can generate two voltages with 90 degrees difference. Does anyone know?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on January 23, 2014, 04:30:41 AM

I am also searching for a dynamo that can generate two voltages with 90 degrees difference. Does anyone know?

( i am not sure)
 stepper motor can  generate  that, with low voltage and high ampere
and need low speed to drive stepper.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 23, 2014, 06:18:13 PM
Marsing,
I am sorry for the confusion. What I wanted to say is that I am looking for a dynamo from which two 90 degree out of phase voltages can be generated. Dynamos normally are single phase. But, if the dynamo has four poles, then its internal connections can be modified to output two quadratic voltages. I referred to four poles because the geometrical and electrical degrees coincide.
Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 24, 2014, 02:56:19 AM
Please, note that the results from the tests are preliminary. I would not take these results too seriously.


I just do not like them because the step driver source is not a reliable power source for this particular application. I wanted to share them for argument sake and keep our discussion. Shortly, I hope to start the tests as intended by Mr. Figuera in his patent. Only then, we can discuss the results with more authority.


I have to say that I have gained a lot of knowledge from this setup. In this learning process, I have made few changes and witness the output current grow from 0.1 Amp to about 1.0 Amp. I am sharing my findings in this thread as a way to help you avoid my mistakes.


I cannot wait to build another one with an iron core having larger cross-sectional area.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 24, 2014, 02:02:40 PM
There seems to be some confusion with the application of the Thevenin circuit. Well, the Thevenin circuit is the same for standard transformers also. The circuit has a voltage source (Thevenin) voltage in series with a resistors (Thevenin resistance). At open circuit, there is no current flowing and the output voltage is equal to the Thevenin voltage. As you load the circuit, the current will increase and the output voltage will decrease as per the voltage division formed by the load and the Thevenin resistance (power source internal resistor).
If you continue changing the load, there will be a point at which the load impedance is equal to the internal resistance of the power source (Thevenin resistance). This point is known as the maximum power transfer condition. If you continue changing the load to a zero impendance, the condition is known as short circuit. At short circuit, the power transferred to the load is zero. But the Thevenin circuit (secondary of the transformer) is heavily load showing the higher current value. The secondary of the transformer is producing power at a rate of Voc x Isc which is dissipated in the internal (Thevenin) resistance as heat. That is why the short circuit test shall be as quick as possible. Otherwise, you endup burning the transformer. For standard transfomers, the short circuit test is performed by reducing the applied voltage in order to limit the power being dissipated.
Notice that the maximum power transfer theorem is not used in power systems because 50% of the power being transferred is consumed by the load and 50% is consumed by the transformer. The maximum power condition is only used for communication and audio systems that deal with relatively low amount of power.
I kind of surprise that this basic concept has caused such a ruckus.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 24, 2014, 07:07:41 PM
But coils on a separate cores is not a normal transformer. When I do the experiment with AC a normal coil on a normal core and place another coil on another identical core so the cores are very close together the supply voltage does not drop nor does the supply power increase (if it does it is not much, I cannot notice it, if anything it seems to reduce), only the induced voltage drops in the separate or induced coil and some current flows. If I use the theorem you used I would get similar results with that as well. I will test this second arrangement. The coils in this experiment will have less than 1 Ohm resistance.

Was the AC voltage RMS for all values in your equations ?

Cheers

I guess my point is that if there is extra energy with an arrangement as described then the same would happen with any such arrangement, the excitement method would make little to no difference. If there is extra energy I'll use it, if not I cannot use it. That is my angle.

Why use a special driver, why not power it with an isolation transformer and a sine wave ?

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on January 25, 2014, 02:39:26 AM
Hi Bajac,

On the Barbosa and Leal thread, SolarLab posted in reply #375, an interesting link to a website about Dr. Harold Aspden. In report #1, Dr. Aspden writes in length about "air gaps". I don't know if this will help or not, just thought it interesting.

Bob

Hi Fellows,

Dr. Harold Aspden's two latest patents [UK Patent # 2,432,463 May 23, 2007 and #2,390,941 January 21, 2004] both relating to "Electrical power generating apparatus."

Here are several related links, not only to the patent information but Aether Electric theory in general.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Harold_Aspden (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Harold_Aspden)
Scroll down to the PATENTS heading.

http://haroldaspden.com/ (http://haroldaspden.com/)
http://haroldaspden.com/reports/index.htm (http://haroldaspden.com/reports/index.htm)     
Aspden's "Reports," especially No. 1 and No. 6; you may find provide a fresh prospective (???).

Regards...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 25, 2014, 05:33:07 AM
Bajac, Can I respectfully ask what the DC resistance of your 800 turn secondary coil is ?

My Tutor indicates that the output impedance is what the Thevenin's Theorem tells us. eg. an open circuit voltage of 50.5 volts and a short circuit current of 0.463 A tell me the output impedance is about 109 Ohms.

Handy online calculator
http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/calc/power-calculator.php

Quote
RESISTANCE, REACTANCE AND IMPEDANCE

Resistance causes the loss of (i.e. dissipates) power,
reactance does not. Pure (ideal) reactance returns all energy that it stores in its field.

http://www.magazines007.com/pdf/Brooks-RCI-2.pdf


And here.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/1.html

Quote
At a frequency of 60 Hz, the 160 millihenrys of inductance gives us 60.319 Ω of inductive reactance. This reactance combines with the 60 Ω of resistance to form a total load impedance of 60 + j60.319 Ω, or 85.078 Ω ∠ 45.152o. If we're not concerned with phase angles (which we're not at this point), we may calculate current in the circuit by taking the polar magnitude of the voltage source (120 volts) and dividing it by the polar magnitude of the impedance (85.078 Ω). With a power supply voltage of 120 volts RMS, our load current is 1.410 amps. This is the figure an RMS ammeter would indicate if connected in series with the resistor and inductor.

We already know that reactive components dissipate zero power, as they equally absorb power from, and return power to, the rest of the circuit. Therefore, any inductive reactance in this load will likewise dissipate zero power. The only thing left to dissipate power here is the resistive portion of the load impedance. If we look at the waveform plot of voltage, current, and total power for this circuit, we see how this combination works in Figure below.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 25, 2014, 04:13:50 PM
RMatt,
Thank you for the information! I have found it very interesting so far. I will keep reading it.


Farmhand,
I prefer to conduct new tests using the 1908 configuration and re-evaluate the results. I just do not see the point for arguing on results from tests that do not really replicate Figuera's settings. Let's just wait a few more weeks when I expect to have completed the driving circuit. Anyway, we have waited for more than 100 years.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 25, 2014, 11:23:50 PM
Then this is for the others who may be interested.

OK then, so lets just suppose the DC resistance of the coil is an arbitrary 5 Ohms and the current is 0.463 Amperes.  Power = Current squared x Resistance or P= (I x I) x R. So assuming that the reactance portion of the impedance does not dissipate power we get the result below.

I = 0.463 Amperes and R = 5 Ohms so 0.463 x 0.463 = 0.214369 x 5 = 1.07 Watts dissipated in the example above.

So now lets say the input for the above example is 9.2 Watts, then if we divide the 1.07 W x 9.2 W = 0.11 % of the input is dissipated in the 5 Ohms DC resistance of the coil.

No point to working out a C.O.P. as there is no output. But if it were expressed as a C.O.P. it would be a C.O.P. = 0.11. I think.

Not knowing any actual resistances I'll leave it at that.

I think it is very important that other people do not get the wrong idea and go shouting C.O.P. 3 which whips up hype.

So the only thing left is for other people to either do the math themselves or get another opinion before they go shouting C.O.P. 3.

I think there is sufficient evidence in the links I provided to suggest the method I employed is correct.

Cheers

P.S. The Thevenin Theorem allow us to ascertain the output impedance and so with that we can calculate the power which would be delivered to a given load.

Maybe someone will confirm or correct my calculation.

..

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on January 26, 2014, 12:37:41 AM
FYI: in practice things are more complicated.


On a regular basis, I have to witness factory tests and I also have to review the test reports for traction power transformers and rectifier equipment. In these reports, you cannot take for granted the DC resistance of the coils. For example, because the DC resistance changes with temperature we have to use formulas to extrapolate between the DC resistance and the actual temperature of the winding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on January 26, 2014, 03:19:51 AM
FYI: in practice things are more complicated.


On a regular basis, I have to witness factory tests and I also have to review the test reports for traction power transformers and rectifier equipment. In these reports, you cannot take for granted the DC resistance of the coils. For example, because the DC resistance changes with temperature we have to use formulas to extrapolate between the DC resistance and the actual temperature of the winding.

I didn't take it for granted I asked you but you didn't say so I used an arbitrary figure as an example. As I stated clearly.

The point is only the DC resistance dissipates power. The AC reactance impedance does not.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 27, 2014, 07:01:42 PM
Are we assuming the device in question was producing ac? After looking over the news paper articles I see no evidence which would indicate the currents are alternating or direct. Motors and lights come in both forms ac and dc.
  Many days of deeper reading have brought me to a place where I have some concerns over the assumptions that this device is producing ac currents.Not to say it could not be used by conversion into ac. Just something to think about.
  As for That-Prophet, not only can one make the loop.It can run with gain. 100 watts can become 10,000 as was proven in WWII on most battle ships.It's called an Amplidyne.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 28, 2014, 01:03:45 AM
Hi Doug,

The newspaper references correspond to the 1902 generator which was witnessed by many people and journalist generating 15 HP .  I can not assure which was the actual current output from that machine because the input was stated to be intermittent. The 1902 patents are very poor in details.

Later on, the design evolved into the final patent/device: the 1908 patent metions that the output from the 1908 generator may pass by a conmutator to convert it into direct current if required. Therefore I suppose that the 1908 device produced AC (or a kind of AC wave)

Regards



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 06, 2014, 08:20:15 PM
Hallo Everyone,
this is my first post in OU so please bear with me!
I was reading and following the evolution of different forums and threads related to “Free energy”, and one of most directly related is this one: Figuera Generator.
I took my time to read an re-read the patents and I read also all available information in English and Spanish languages posted here and there by hanon, bajac and other members.
So I did my home work before trying to register here in OU and give my opinion about the invention of Mr. Figuera.

The most significant patent IMO is that one with a rotary commentator. This one tray to SIMULATE or EMULATE the principal of the Dynamo “faraday induction effect”.
In order to get into the subject of his invention, Mr Figuera, took his time to make an introduction to the classical dynamos/generators:
In order to understand what they are, he started by observing the rotation of the rotor (with the induced coil) between the two OPPOSITE poles of two magnets or electromagnets (very known concept).
Then he made his critics regarding this solution (introduced by Gramme, Werner von Siemens, Paxii and others), and he based his opinion explaining the problem with dragging (Lenz low)and subsequently the more energy needed to rotate the rotor, so making them inefficient (energy transformer device).

His solution was: no more moving “rotor” (that means no more energy needed to break the dragging) but instead he was moving magnetic field making so a solid state power generator (analog to the Columbus Eggs or the rotating magnetic field in the Tesla`s patents). And the power needed to create this moving magnetic field is very small and it could be derived from the output power of the device, therfore his device is a generator (not a transformer!).

He invented actually a kind of Resistor ladder (known today as R-2R ladder or DAC), so he could change the tow excitation currents in a complementary fashion, and then supplying them to the 2 primary coils of a transformer (like modern inverters BUT with a different sequence of excitation)!

The construction of his generator was not different from the known dynamos at that time! U-Shape with tow electromagnet and the collecting coil+armature in between them at the free ends, that is all!
He also stated, a small gape OR no gape at all is needed, because there is no need to move or rotate anything, so simple that it does not need any explanation! (they said)

In reality there is no limitation to any kind of shape, you can take any transformer make tow primaries and one secondary and you get a generator (IMHO you can even take a bar of iron or laminatetd core an do the same thing!). maybe the primaries wound a la Tesla bifilar are a must!

The tricky part is the sequence of the tow excitation currents in complementary fashion.  Just like “Arm wrestling” but in a synchronized way.

The 0 current in the output take place when the two primaries current have the same value, because they are creating a N and S poles with the same magnetic field potential in each side of the secondary core.
So indeed he was producing alternating current due to the alternating magnetic polarity created by the two electromagnet working together and at the same time by increasing one and decreasing the other ! (2 trianular waves taking only positive values at 90 deg phase)
I tried to replicate the same commutating solution with a PCB, but the precision was not good and I forgot the most important fact described in the patent:
There must be at least TWO contacting point every time! That means, “abruptly” excitation or de-excitation ARE NOT ALLOWED. No collapsing magnetic field is allowed.

That was the error I made. Now I am trying to make a better commutator, and i am also trying to make a better electronics in order to replace the rotating commutator.

I will share my design of the PCBs and the arduino code (based on public domain version).

Working together and sharing experiences and opinions in a constructive way is the most important step to find the solution for our common problem (make our self’s free!).
Just for your information, the Spanish government created a new low for this year in order to eliminate any alternative energy for personal use by paying taxes more expensive as the price of the grid!!..and  they call it democracy…my post is a claim of the human right to be free for whatever we want to do with our life if we don’t take others freedom.

I m very proud to be part of this revolution and happy to be with you in this hard way!
Best regards
NMS (NoMoreSlave)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 06, 2014, 08:40:06 PM
Some documents of my work

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 07, 2014, 07:35:42 AM
And the power needed to create this moving magnetic field is very small and it could be derived from the output power of the device, therfore his device is a generator (not a transformer!).
Best regards
NMS (NoMoreSlave)

Care to demonstrate the claim you made that I made bold text ?

Have you actually created a rotating magnetic field device and drawn more energy from it than is input to it ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 07, 2014, 09:03:17 AM
This is related to our "contest" about what Tesla archieved with his magnifying transmitter. Activity - you think it is just a synonym for pulse power and there is no OU related , but I think Tesla got OU everytime and his talks about power magnification by capacitor discharge is about real continous POWER OUTPUT.


Ok, I found another gentle tip that nobody understood Tesla but he was not much eager to correct precisely what he got because it was that missing part not included in patents which gave him  advantage over Marconi and others...


I would not said that here but it's related, very deep related.


Here is that tip:


"The arrangement was simply this.  I  had a  number of studs
with cups which were insulated,  24 if I  recollect rightly.  In
the interior was a  mechanism that lifted the mercury, threw it
into these cups, and from these studs there were thus 24
little streamlets of mercury going out. [*]  In the meantime,
the same motor drove a  system with 25 contact points, so that
for each revolution I  got a  product of 24 times 25 impulses,
and when I  passed these impulses  through a  primary, and excited with it a  secondary,  I  got in the latter complete waves
of that frequency.


Counsel
What frequency,  then,  did you get in your secondary?


Tesla
Oh, I  could get in this,  600 per revolution.


Counsel
You mean 600 trains?

Tesla
No, 600 waves.  Assume then,  600 impulses per revolution
and suppose that I  rotated it 100 times per second [6,000
RPM]; then I  would get 600 times 100, or 60,000 primary impulses  [per secondJ,  and in the secondary a  frequency of
60,000 complete cycles.  The primary impulses were unidirectional.  They came from the direct current source, but in the
secondary they were alternating -- full waves.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 07, 2014, 09:12:15 AM
I don't know how hard is to grasp the simple idea that all this free energy is ...something you use everyday but you must not use it without proper paper to use it  >:( >:( >:(  C'mon you must know what I'm talking about
for example about... http://pesn.com/2011/06/11/9501844_Magnacoaster_Keeps_Coasting_Without_Product_Deliveries/ 
what caused them to delay delivery ? some regulations laws which they were hard to avoid because they use that for amplification....  :P
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 07, 2014, 01:58:37 PM
 You are very welcome! NMS.
The more people we have working on the Figuera's concept, the higher the probability to break the shell. By all means, your opinion counts.
Based on my experience building this device, the tricky part is not the generation of the two excitation voltages but the construction of the electromagnets. That is where the invention lies. Of course, there is the important task of adjusting the correct voltage level to the impedance of the primary coils.
I have been making adjustments and getting different performances from this device. It is a lot of work but also a lot of fun! While waiting for the delivery of some components to build the excitation circuit, I have been reading newspaper articles, patents, and any information available from Figuera's time. Something that called my attention is the following passage from the 1902 Spanish patent #30375:
"As the soft iron core of a dynamo becomes a real magnet from the time when current flow along the wire of the induced circuit, we think that this core must be formed or constituted by a group of real electromagnets, properly built to develop the highest possible attractive force, and without taking into account the conditions to be fitted in the induced circuit, which is completely independent of the core."
I think "properly built" implies that this device has some peculiarities and requires adjustment of critical parameters, i.e., high number of turns, the right dimensions of the air gaps and iron cores, etc., in order "to develop the highest possible attractive force." Does the latter implies high intensity of the magnetic fields?
@Farmhand,
Your comment is out of context. NMS was just reciting whatever is written in the Figuera's patents and/or in the news of the time. Why the SARCASM? Up to my knowledge no one has successfully replicated Figuera's devices. But, we are working on it!
I noticed that most of your comments are not constructive but meant to disappoint and sometimes disrupt the effort for replicating this device. Just because we have failed four, five, or ten times do not imply that Figuera's devices did not work. Based on the historical data and the reputation of the persons involved, I am confident that his devices work. Not only that, prior to knowing Figuera's work, I was working on similar devices based on the same principle. That is why it was so easy for me to figure out his work.
It is ok and productive to argue and challenge the work being done but it is not acceptable to make comments with the intention to show off, make people appears like idiots, or even try to discourage them from continuum their research on these devices.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 07, 2014, 02:06:46 PM
which is completely independent of the core.


 ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 07, 2014, 06:22:04 PM
Forest,
 
I was wondering if "completely independent of the core" means that the induced currents in the secondary coils are completely independent of the iron core size. I have previously stated that once the primary magnetic field is established, the secondary currents will depend on the gauge of the secondary wire and not the primary current. I came to this conclusion because if the interaction of the magnetic fields between the primary and secondary coils is minimum (minimum effect of Lenz's law), then, the output current shall be independent of the primary current. That is, there is no fixed current ratio for this device.

I will try to read the original Spanish patent to make sure there is no translation error.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 07, 2014, 09:18:33 PM
Hallo Bajac, Forest, Farmhand and everybody,

Thank you very much for your warm welcome :)

Forest is right about the independency between the 2 driving primaries and the collecting coil or secondary.
if you read the following statement , just after what you sited before in your post, he explained the same thing:

“El procedimiento queda, pues, reducido a establecer un circuito inducido independiente, dentro de la esfera de acción o atmósfera magnética formada
entre las caras polares, de nombre contrario, de dos electroimanes, o series de electroimanes, accionados por corrientes intermitentes o alternas.”

my translation:
The procedure is thus reduced to establish (put) an independent induced circuit, inside the sphere (field) of action formed (created) between the polar faces, WITH OPPOSITE NAME (N-Pole & S-Pole), of two electromagnets, or an array of them, exited with blinking (blinking = fading in/fading-out) or alternating currents. (See attached picture)

in other hand he also stated the following:
“Las actuales dinamos, proceden de agrupaciones de máquinas de Clarke, y nuestro generador recuerda, en su principio fundamental, al carrete de inducción de Ruhmkorff.”

hanon translation:
“The current dynamos, come from groups of Clarke machines, and our generator recalls, in its fundamental principle, the Ruhmkorff induction coil”

I agree with you Bajac about the principal your shared in you documents, but in my INHO, Figuera was just taking the same known construction concept of the Dynamos and he just keeping them quiet silent and without dragging (solid state), and doing so in Canary Island in 1902/1908 should not be so complicated! 

Just trying to give my point of view Farmhand (BTW I appreciate the work your are doing, the constructive critics must be taken in account )
And I m devoted to go after this Figuera generator, at any cost!

The electromagnet lifts over 100 lbs with a AA battery: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGoOu8cPmeM
Now take the same magnetic flux created by this AA battery and shake it or move it at high rate, then put your output coil inside his “sphere of action” to get the juice.
Like this one : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUJza3l8rmU


Best regards,
NMS

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 08, 2014, 12:22:37 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Daniel_Ruhmkorff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Daniel_Ruhmkorff)
I really have to  come in here, so you don't go astray. 
The Ruhmkorff coil is a coil of high inductance designed to produce currents of high voltage and frequency.
The high frequency is produced by the interrupter  which is  a make-break mechanical device with a similar principle to the
old electric bell.
Each make-break of the interrupter produces oscillations in the mhz range.
The Rumkorff coil comes complete with it's resonant capacitor.
During Figuera's time the interrupter and cap were sometimes omitted from schematics because it's action was well
understood.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 08, 2014, 02:23:59 AM
Some documents of my work

Regards,
NMS

Hi NMS,

Welcome to the forum!! Your enthusiasm is really appreciated for us with months without results.

I share with yuo the idea that Figuera tried to emulate a dynamo. but dynamos are charactherized by the flux lines cutting the wires and maybe that was what Figuera looked for with the unphased primaries. I dont know.

Figuera sold his 1902 patents to a banker union just 4 days after filling them. I have even thought that maybe Figuera knew that the patents were going to be sold, and he wrote them  without being very precise. Or he kept occult any key part.

In your post, that I quoted above, there is no attached file. Maybe you forgot to attached it

Regar
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 02:57:41 AM
Hanon,


I have thought a lot about why Figuera's patents look so incomplete. Were these patents tampered with after filing? Patent #30378 reads "...for this generator whose form and arrangements are shown in the attached drawings, ....and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink..." Was there more than one page of drawings? Where is the thick red line representing the secondary coils?


It is very suspicious!!!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 05:08:10 AM
Hallo a.King21,
Thank you for the input, but if you read carefully the patent 30378 you will find the mention of Ruhmkorff:
“…In the arrangement of the excitatory magnets and the induced, our generator has some analogy with dynamos, but completely differs from them in that, not requiring the use of motive power, is not a transforming apparatus. As much as we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of these coils which differs completely. It has the advantage that…” in the case of Figuera, he was using a commutator instead of one breaker and TWO primaries. BUT how is the current induced in the secondary coil of Ruhmkorff induction coil?

@bajac:
This is my answer to your question about “the properly built core” (after the mention of Ruhmkorff-like construction in the patent 30378 ):
“…It has the advantage that the soft iron core can be constructed with complete indifference of the induced circuit, allowing the core to be a real group of electromagnets, like the exciters, and covered with a proper wire in order that these electromagnets may develop the biggest attractive force possible, without worrying at all about the conditions that the induced wire must have for the voltage and amperage that is desired. In the winding of this induced wire, within the magnetic fields, are followed the requirements and practices known today in the construction of dynamos, and we refrain from going into further detail, believing it unnecessary.

IMO he was talking about the advantages of this kind of construction in comparison with the prior art:
In the other generators(he used word Dynamos), due to the rotating armature, you have to adapt or condition the induced coil to the free space you can get inside that armature or core, because of this limitation you cannot get that much from the winding and you have to decide if you want more current (ampers) or more voltage. BUT with his solution, you break that dependency and now you have a freedom to select the appropriate copper sizes at your convenience in order to get the power you need. About the mention of the properly built of the core, he meant –IMO- a stacked or laminated one, that was the optimization made at that time, today we can use commercially available cores, or maybe without any core, but just Tesla bifilar for electromagnet in sandwich form (in my ToDo list).
In the case of tesla bifilar coil (very low self-inductance) as primaries and secondary:
-   Witch induction formula should we use?
-   Is Lenz law also present?

I will tray all this configurations, but first I need get the correct sequence of excitation, because that part seems to be clearly descried in the patents and discussed.
First step is to reproduce the same commutator, scope the two excitation currents coming out from the resistor ladder, then implementing a modern alternative.
The transformer is just a matter of winding an scoping until catching the effect.
A DoE (Design of Experiment) is a good method for every researcher, experimenter.

@hanon: thank you!

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 08, 2014, 05:18:31 AM

hi all
   
i've been watching this thread to find  result from bajac and friend, i made no replication so i can share nothing, NMS you give fresh air ,but where are your documents ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 05:35:05 AM
hmm ...hanon asked the same thing!
I attached a spring layout file (Figuera-zip) containing some ideas that I am using to make my tests.
I upload it hier again.

Please improve it an share!

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 08, 2014, 07:07:34 AM
NMS.
FYI, you never uploaded file before,    ;D
btw, thank you for your quick response.     :)

edit
whatis lay6 extension,  is there any jpg/png/pdf  file?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 08, 2014, 09:38:34 AM
@Farmhand,
Your comment is out of context. NMS was just reciting whatever is written in the Figuera's patents and/or in the news of the time. Why the SARCASM? Up to my knowledge no one has successfully replicated Figuera's devices. But, we are working on it!
I noticed that most of your comments are not constructive but meant to disappoint and sometimes disrupt the effort for replicating this device. Just because we have failed four, five, or ten times do not imply that Figuera's devices did not work. Based on the historical data and the reputation of the persons involved, I am confident that his devices work. Not only that, prior to knowing Figuera's work, I was working on similar devices based on the same principle. That is why it was so easy for me to figure out his work.
It is ok and productive to argue and challenge the work being done but it is not acceptable to make comments with the intention to show off, make people appears like idiots, or even try to discourage them from continuum their research on these devices.
Bajac

Which comment are you referring to ? As I recall I asked two questions directly related to the statement/claim that NMS made. If NMS has done it and can show it, that would be a big help, but just saying it is less than helpful.

I am not making comments with the intention to show off. I have humility enough to admit when I am wrong. No one is perfect.

I am not making people look like idiots, that would not be possible only we can make ourselves look like idiots, besides I am against personal attacks. I make comments about things or ask questions and people attack me personally and declare what my intentions are when they have no idea of my intentions, as well as make false claims about what I say. Misrepresent what I say and try to put words into my mouth that I did not say. 

I am not trying to discourage people from continuing to research anything.

But I am against inflating figures and hyping people up to encourage people to spend time experimenting with the hope of OU.

If we make a claim we should be able to back it up. Or show evidence to back it up.

Another thing that annoys me is the people making claims on behalf of Tesla, claims that Tesla never made.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 08, 2014, 10:55:30 AM
I want to say , that you who can read Spanish directly are at the best way to crack this out, translation to English is not correct in subtle nuances I think (but I don't know Spanish unfortunately just catch single words with many meanigful translations.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 11:01:07 AM
Hallo Marsing,
there is no pdf inside the file, only PCB traces of my setups.
google sprint-layout!

@Famhand,
I must admit that I was following you and other since a LONGTIME ago! Just observing, reading, understanding what is going on.
I read 100.100k of posts: kappa, SM, tesla this tesla that even in 7 different languages .....so I do really know what happened  around me! and what you are traying to say.

But that did not give you right to pies me off after MY FIRST POST!!!
Because I was just giving my own interpretation of the Figuera patents and devices like others perfectly understood AND also did!!
so please be polite and let’s work together because we are SLAVED!!!

Please look how OTTO is still remembered! Look Stievp and the hardworking, look Ufopolitics and others !...thousands of people, look how the world is waking and standing up!... That is my motivation to come here and share my opinion.
I WIL NEVER GIVE UP with or without your help, but it will be nice to have you know-how in our wagon!…so let’s start again!

Could you please tell me what technical aspect of the claims made by Figuera or my explanation/translation you find not correct?

Best wishes to all and everyone taking his time to tray to be FREE!
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 11:12:32 AM
Hallo forest,
you have the spirit and the vision!!
I speak Spanish fluently as my mother tong (and other 6 languages) so I did give you my own interpretation of what I read in the original patents.
hanon did an excellent ACADEMIC translation. He was very precise. BUT the translation from one language to another ist not an easy task and should not be made -IMO- so perfectly (1:1 word translation), because of the cultural differences between US.

Best regards
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 08, 2014, 11:39:24 AM
Hallo forest,
you have the spirit and the vision!!
I speak Spanish fluently as my mother tong (and other 6 languages) so I did give you my own interpretation of what I read in the original patents.
hanon did an excellent ACADEMIC translation. He was very precise. BUT the translation from one language to another ist not an easy task and should not be made -IMO- so perfectly (1:1 word translation), because of the cultural differences between US.

Best regards
NMS


Thank You ! I know I'm asking a big favour but can you and hanon join to prepare translations with all possible rational interpretations or troublesome sentences ? I'm not sure how to do that but just maybe some tricky words in all possible translations (I mean all having sense there ) in brackets ? It is a big flaw of description of Figuera genrators that we have no 100% sure description of both principle and embodiment details.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 08, 2014, 11:59:07 AM
...
...can you and hanon join to prepare translations with all possible rational interpretations or troublesome sentences ?
...

It needs not only a good command of the language but you have to be 'at home' in the technical background of the topic too.  This is what a translator should combine, or it is fortunate if  both the language and the expertise are present.  Add to this requirement the always problematic  and often special  'patent language' and the fact that the era was more than a 100 years earlier.  This forum enviroment may help to join and add forces.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 12:16:05 PM
NMS,


what is the software application you are using to generate the PCB layouts?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 12:30:18 PM
I agree absolutely  with you Gyula, it’s like cracking or decompiling some hex code written by others  :(

Even for the English people, reading an original English patent isn’t an easy task, because they are written to cause that sensation of ambiguity but at the same time to give the inventor the possibility to protect his work and that is also correct.

As I said the translation done by hanon is excellent, but we should maybe make some “tweaking” to make it readable for us today.
I will try to comment the hanon´s works if he gives me his permission to do so. or we can just comment online what is not understandable.

@bajac,
I use Sprint-layout 6 from abacom:
http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/sprint-layout.html

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 12:46:37 PM
NMS,


Thanks for your response. But, I also wanted to ask you, how easy is this application to use? I tried a similar application before and it was not user's friendly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 08, 2014, 01:07:06 PM
it is the simplest one and very convenient for what we are doing hier!
in youtube you can find some tutorials to speed up the learning curve.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 08, 2014, 07:35:39 PM
Hanon,


I have thought a lot about why Figuera's patents look so incomplete. Were these patents tampered with after filing? Patent #30378 reads "...for this generator whose form and arrangements are shown in the attached drawings, ....and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink..." Was there more than one page of drawings? Where is the thick red line representing the secondary coils?


It is very suspicious!!!

Hi all,

First I really feel very happy after watching the forum response to the new enthusiam injected by NMS. I am really glad for the collaborative side of this forum and I have noted that many people keep on flowing this thread although sometimes may seem to be idle. Many people is folling this thread because we know of the potential of this device. Soon or later we will change the world. I will kile to help more with the test but my equipment and knowledge is very limited.

NMS, You are free and welcome to improve my traslation. For taht reason I kept in the pdf files the original spanish text, in order to avoid loosing those details in possible future translations. If you get a finer translation please send them to me for uploading and updating those in the website www.alpoma.net

About the question from Bajac the 1902 patents:

I went twice to the Archive of the Spanish Patent Office. I could get the patent 30376,30377 and 30378 which were not yet into the public (previously just 30375 and 44267 (the one form year 1908 were public). Those patent were very damaged by humidity (you can see it in the drawings) that the clerks in the archive did not let me to scan it. I could open the documents, read them and make pictures of them. You may order by email a scan of any historical patent  to the Archive and they send it to you by email  but They don´t scan those damaged patents, so I had to go there to look for some pictures by myself. Even in one of them I was advised by the clerk to not to open it. As I was sat in a far corner from the clerk and he was sat oriented to the other side of the room I did not make any case of his statement and I opened it to make the pictures... All for the betterment of this world. I confess that some sheets were really damaged and I broke some edges slightly during my work. But as a counterpart now we have that info to share it and IMPLEMENTED!!

Figuera filed 4 patents in 1902. Four days after filing them we have a telegram published into a newspapers where he stated that he had sold the patent to an international banker union.

In the patent attached files I could find that originally there were no more drawings than those we have. In the patent data base it is written the number of drawing: 1 drawing or 0 drawing, but noone with  2 drawing. Also in this patent database it is written the number of copies provided by the the author during the filing. In all cases Figuera gave 2 copies of each patent.

But in the files there is now just one copy of all of them, except for the patent 30375 that the file contains the two refereed copies. In the case of patent 30378 were the "reddish ink to mark the induced wire" is missing I have always wonder if the second copy would have drawn that line. I don´t know what happen to the second copy.

One month or so after filing the patent it is published in the Patent Office Official Bulletin that Figuera  was requested to correct some formal requirement into the patent text. The patent were noted to have some details missing (as polarities, wire connections or even the scale of the drawing missing). Figuera were advice to correct those formal requirements in certain period of time.

As he did not correct those details the patent were cancelled. The cancellation appeared in another  publication of the bulletin. I didn´t realeased this info until now because this is the proper kind of info that non-believers use to attach. Please note that Figuera did make many public demostrations and he had many witnesses of his generator. He was a high reputed man of his time. Non-believers: the cancellation was just consequence of not correcting the formal details, not because as you will be saying that the patent validity

I thought for myself that as Figuera had sold those patent he had no more intention to keep them in force, so maybe he refused to correct those requirements.

What it is really true is that after selling the patent there were 6 years where there is no mention to Figuera. He stopped appearing in news papers and nobody else keep on talking about his system. I am afraid he was forced to keep silence

He just filed his 1908 patent one or two weeks before his death. I think he wanted to leave his legacy with this patent. If he was about to die maybe he did not take care of the prior non-diclosure agreement that maybe he signed with his good friend the bankers, those who undertook his invention from the world.....Always the same history.... Now In Spain we have a 25% of unemployment due to our crisis (created just by the bankers and the politicians...


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 08, 2014, 08:03:58 PM
Hanon: Many thanks for your brilliant detective work.
I have a couple of questions.
In the UK copies of patents are held in Reference libraries up and down the country.
Is there a chance that there may be better copies in the Spanish reference library system?
In the UK there are also technical journals in the library system.
Is there a chance that there are old Spanish technical journals  dealing with Figuerea's inventions?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 08, 2014, 11:59:22 PM
Hanon,


THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT INFORMATION!!! It is really educational.


I think if you release all information including the bulletins, there will be more people involved trying to solve the Figuera's puzzle.


Even though a patent represents a protection of an intellectual property, it is treated like any other property deeds. Once sold, Figuera no longer had any legal authority to answer to the Patent Office Actions. It is clear that from the beginning the true intention of the Bankers was to just let the invention die.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2014, 12:18:42 AM
Hanon: Many thanks for your brilliant detective work.
I have a couple of questions.
In the UK copies of patents are held in Reference libraries up and down the country.
Is there a chance that there may be better copies in the Spanish reference library system?
In the UK there are also technical journals in the library system.
Is there a chance that there are old Spanish technical journals  dealing with Figuerea's inventions?

Hi,

You have to realize that we are talking about a time in the first years at the begining of the 20th century. As far as I know there are not more copies of this patents apart for the Official Historical Archive in the Patent Office.

In that time the patents were handwritten. For the first time I am publishing here the pictures taken from the patent 30378 (Figuera Generator) (year 1902). You can note the current state of the sheets.

Also I attach here the clipping from the Official Bulletin (Boletin Oficial de Propiedad Industrial, BOPI) with the formal  requirements that were not fulfilled by Figuera. Requirements: the objective of the patent is not clearly described, the scale in the drawing is missing, the ownership conditions and the novelty must be explicitly stated.

I hope you can enjoy this documents, at least at historical notes. I haven´t disclosed it till now because they are not technical documents.

For all the translations of the patents and other historical notes about Figuera please look into this site: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 09, 2014, 05:08:27 PM
Has anyone built this exactly as drawn in the patent/s yet? No deviations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 09, 2014, 05:34:24 PM
Hallo Hanon,
thank you for the your dedication and for the help you are giving to the community.
I am working in the document, tying to make it understandable as much as I can.

BTW, I was expecting some more reaction to the artwork I uploaded, but...In order to give you something to think about it:

Quote
PRINCIPIO DE LA INVENCIÓN
    Puesto que todos sabemos que los efectos que se manifiestan cuando un circuito cerrado se aproxima y se aleja de un centro magnético son los mismos que cuando, estando quieto e inmóvil este circuito, el campo magnético dentro del cual está colocado ganando y perdiendo en intensidad; y puesto que toda variación que por cualquiera causa, se produzca en el flujo que atraviese a un circuito es motivo de producción de corriente eléctrica
inducida, se pensó en la posibilidad de construir una máquina que funcionara,
no según el principio de movimiento, como lo hacen las actuales dinamos, sino según el principio de aumento y disminución, o sea de variación del poder del campo magnético, o de la corriente eléctrica que lo produce..

“…For the first time in the patent, he revealed the option used in his invention:
Creating induced current by changing the flux density using a variable excitation current.  as simple as that!, by doing that, you create or destroy the lines of flux making then to move closer or wider from each other's, this movement cut the coil winding!” => you need the best core materials to get the best electromagnet …lamination with high permeability ...nothing new for us..

Then you have to find the CONVENIENT position for the collecting coil or the induced=> just look at PEAKS in the AC curve ;) do you see how are the 2 B´s??

You will find more in the document, once is over.

Hi Doug1,
That is my intention (IMO, that should be the first step, and then playing with 3 coils). I am working on the commutator right now.

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2014, 08:55:55 PM

Creating induced current by changing the flux density using a variable excitation current.  as simple as that!, by doing that, you create or destroy the lines of flux making then to move closer or wider from each other's, this movement cut the coil winding!

One thought I have been digesting is that the system , as difference with a transformer, has two magnetic fields. When both fields are equal (I1 = I2) both have the same intensity and they create a perfect link between them: all the lines of forces cross from one side to the other along the collecting coil. But when one field increases and the other decreases I think that this link is broken and the lines of force are not crossing the collecting coil anymore but they must go other site and thus they cut the winding. I posted an sketch in page 27 at the bottom. Maybe you want to go there to have a look.

It is just an idea trying to answer the question: Why did Figuera required two electromagnets, one at each side, with different magnetic fields instead of havinghat the same field?

I have found this video. Does someone know what it is explained? It seem a basic Figuera coil configuration
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rIlTB4orFZ4 (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rIlTB4orFZ4)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on February 09, 2014, 11:30:42 PM
Welcome MNS!

 Doug 1,

I am attempting to build the "old school" device with few changes. It is difficult to build a commutator
like a barrel like Mr Figuera, so I built one on a flat plane like the drawing shows. Since I was using
a 1800 RPM motor, I decided to increase the contacts to 32. Sounds simple enough but the amount of
connections and wires are confusing to say the least. I do not recommend this. If I don't get it sorted
out soon, I will build another with 16.
Anyway, I have four sets of transformers. I am having trouble right now getting the wiring for them and
the resistor to do what I wanted them to do. So far no good results. Also, I just found out that the
wiring diagram I had printed from the Internet wasn't correct and had the connections to the
transformers wrong.
I will keep everyone up to date it I have any success.

Thanks,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Artoj on February 10, 2014, 12:35:56 PM
Hi All

I think Figuera made his patent vague enough so you could not copy his work and broad enough to cover a multitude of configurations, this is the writing and drawing of someone keen on both protecting his work and misleading its true configuration. We can all use our expertise, just as 100's of others have done to make different versions, alas I can only add another version myself. We are confronted by the fallacy of words against the engineering reality. I have added a few simple switches that can reconfigure some of the vagueness to concrete possibilities  Regards Arto

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 10, 2014, 06:08:41 PM
Please bear with me on this and read on.  :) I'm posting because I am interested, not to try to dissuade anyone.

Not sure if anyone has noted or mentioned this but Tesla's patent for the Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy - was issued 1901 November 5,
and the patent for Method of Utilizing of Radiant Energy - 1901 November 5.

Now both these patents pre date Figuera's patent, and so it makes sense to me that Figuera may well have used the atmospheric or radiant energy collector to gather the energy to power the device, but could not possibly patent that part because Tesla already did it, it is even possible that Tesla heard of Figuera's plan and intuitively knew what he was doing and so hurriedly filed the patent first even though he likely thought of the principal many years before. Figuera's patent is 1902, very close to the same time and due to Tesla already patenting the general idea of getting energy from the atmosphere, Figuera was left only with the "rotary switched inverter" apparatus to patent which could be used to generate AC electricity from the energy gained from the collector.

It is just one possibility that makes sense as the patent shows a positive and negative input and it describes an exciting current from an external source. Although.

The parts in bold in the paragraph below don't really make sense. Firstly if the current does not return to the generator there is no current loop and so it would not even work without that happening, so the current returning to the generator means little to nothing. Secondly if the feeding current was just removed then the current loop would need to be connected back to itself to maintain a current loop, and as well the 'output power as the result of the initial feeding current' would need to be more power in real Watts than the "input power" related to the feeding current.
One thing is for sure, and that is if a switch was opened to disconnect the feeding current the current loop would be broken and the operation would cease very quickly. This leaves two options the input was shorted to itself or a battery or other source of potential was left connected. No current will flow without a closed loop, unless through displacement current as in a capacitor and that only works with AC. Thirdly if the device did in fact produce more output than input and could work with no input then it would surely continue to increase the system energy until destruction. He seems to be claiming that the returning of the current means it will keep working with no further input. I don't think the entire story is told. If I genuinely thought it could work I would surely try to build one, and if someone does in fact end up looping one I will eat my hat on video and apologize. I think it possible he could start it with a battery then use the collector to continue it's working.

Quote
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted.  From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.
   

Something doesn't add up. But I would say that if the initial power source is removed and the current loop was broken by the feed wires not connected together, there would be no more current and it would definitely cease to work.

He does claim it can be done somehow in this patent http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf 1908 though he is not clear on how to remove the feeding current supply. I read it that he claims it runs itself.

Quote
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns
to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be
a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if
wanted. From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.

 

However in this patent 1902 http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf  he makes no such claim but states this.
Quote
The driving current, or is
an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign
alternately by any known method, or is a part of the total current of the
generator, as it is done today in the current dynamos
.

Anyway good luck, and I hope to taste my hat soon.  :D

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 11, 2014, 03:33:48 AM
Anyone know how old Figuera was when he died ?

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 11, 2014, 03:04:09 PM
Figuera was 68 years-old when he died in november 1908.
 
He was still working as engineer for the Spanish government, but all this research was done in his spare time, not related to his job for the State
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 11, 2014, 09:03:24 PM
Hallo,
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Please make some +&- operation and share your opinion.

Hi Farmhand,
nice to see your post.
IMO, the switch you mentioned  is a commutator (the second one controlled by the motor, witch not appears in the patents, because it was a common method), it has the function of converting the AC to DC.
like the one you find in the DC motors but it is used in reveres mode, the brushes rotate to get DC from the statistic output coil for the self-looping.

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 11, 2014, 09:06:07 PM
credits for the picture goes hier:
http://www.todocoleccion.net/madrid-1867-retrato-clemente-figuera-ustariz-fotografia-alonso-martinez-hermano~x27627520
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 11, 2014, 09:19:18 PM
Hi Arto,
I like your drawings!
but i dont see the looping back.
did you made that commutator/potis?
Thanks!

NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Artoj on February 12, 2014, 12:52:08 AM
Thanks NMS
I find most patent drawings misleading and sometimes incorrect. This is usually done so it is hard to copy, I redraw the patent so it is a step closer to engineering reality, which means I could build it and test the patent holders assertions about validity. I have been able to discover a lot about the nature of the deception or about the underlying designs, any which way is a step closer to knowing how something is supposed to work. I try to make it easier for others to find their answers, regards Arto.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 07:10:55 AM
Hallo,
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Please make some +&- operation and share your opinion.

Hi Farmhand,
nice to see your post.
IMO, the switch you mentioned  is a commutator (the second one controlled by the motor, witch not appears in the patents, because it was a common method), it has the function of converting the AC to DC.
like the one you find in the DC motors but it is used in reveres mode, the brushes rotate to get DC from the statistic output coil for the self-looping.

Regards,
NMS

EDIT: Actually the drawing does show the device is permanently looped, I think, my bad. Except for the one position it is shown in ?

If we turn the commutator one position, then the current loop goes from the commutator to the north coils then from the north coils to the south coils then back to the commutator and through the resistors back to where we started from.

Cheers

P.S What do you mean by the 90 degrees thing ?
Quote
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Do you mean 90 degrees phase difference between voltage and current at the output ?

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 08:00:33 AM
I think it needs to tried exactly how it is drawn ! Even if only with one set of coils, three coils, one north, one south and one induced. A resistor board a commutator and a battery to start it.


Maybe a good idea to use a separate battery just to run the commutator so as to keep it at a constant speed. I don't think there is any need to worry about the power the commutator consumes. I think that can be overlooked for now.
..

If I am the first one to make it work do I get a let off on the hat eating.  ;D

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 08:31:59 AM
To save some time has anyone worked out a resistor scheme for 12 volts input or done a series of drawings of current paths for each commutator position ? Anyone come up with a quick and nasty commutator design ?

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 12, 2014, 09:52:25 AM
OK that's a slightly confusing setup, I was forgetting the resistor array is a constant loop.  :-[

I've got a series of pictures of all commutator positions and with the resistors that are bypassed marked. Now i'll try to work out a resistor scheme for 12 volts.

I have an idea or two for a commutator.

Cheers

OK I've read the patent two or three times and I've got a visual of how it would work with the battery in place, one brush that is in contact with two "contacts" at any time and the positive is connected to the brush which turns around the cylinder. The resistor array acts as a splitter so that the north and south magnets get a varying current ect.

But the thing for me is that the demonstration that was done was related to the other guys patents in 1910 and I would need to believe the output could sustain the resistive losses in the input side, as well as the feeding current and give output also. I just cannot believe the output could be more than the input.

We ought to be able to just feed it out of phase sine waves in this day and age, then use the extra output to power the sine wave generator and do away with the resistor array, brush and commutator setup.. 

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 13, 2014, 09:21:15 AM
Hi all,
 
I have found an interesting patent about the implementation of a dynamo into a motionless device (US5926083) by Asaoka based on changing the flux density of an open magnetic path. It requires an air-gap and a permanent magnet. I don´t know if this patent may have any relation with Figuera´s design but I think it will be worth to attach it  here for someone interested.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Artoj on February 13, 2014, 05:30:21 PM
Hi Farmhand,  now you know why I redrew the patent, you must get past the fact he doesn't explain the engineering details at all, just vague notions. Looks like you understand his basic design, its is all in my picture, no need to strain your head trying to figure out Figuera, I've drawn the figures, LOL :) regards Arto

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 13, 2014, 08:18:08 PM
If we apply alternating current to a permanent magnet, the magnet will lose its magnetism in no time. Of course if you apply milliamps and millivolts it might not happen. These models are good for table top demonstrations. Not for industrial applications.

The US Patent cited is not related to the Figuera concept. The Figuera patent and design are totally different and use electromagnets. I have built a modified version of the Figuera device and it actually produces greater output than the input power. On the problem of self sustaining it I have not achieved yet but it can be done. No law of physics is violated here. The first self sustaining generator was built probably by McFarland and then by Tesla in 1890. It was a DC design and so he kept quiet. Figuera, Hubbard and Hendershot are the others and of which we have information only on Figuera thanks to the efforts of Hanon. The device works. I'm a patent Attorney and I read a lot of patents and when time and money are available I also do some research. I can confirm that we built an exact replica of Figuera and it did not work and then we modified it and the device worked perfectly well in that the output current was far higher than the input. 1540 watts input. 12600 watts output at no load. Interesting thing is output is 630 volts and 20 amps at no load. I will need to take an electrical engineer and custom built a transformer to step down the voltage and then see if it can be tested to see if the amperage wattage shown is real. Until then let me keep quiet.

I'm not an electrical engineer and am really surprised that most of the people have missed the importance of his 1902 patents which he sold for a lot of money at that time..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on February 14, 2014, 03:13:20 PM
To all,
I am giving up on the 32 pin electrical controller and making a 16 pin rotary.
I could not get both the plus and minus magnets to work. I plan to run the
16 pin controller at 1800 rpm to check things out then build a 1 to 2 ratio
pulley to get the 3600 rpm that should give me a 60 Htz sign wave. I will be
on track to build to the original design.

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 09:44:42 AM
To Farmhand and Shadow:

You are off the mark.. What is the purpose of the rotary device..To create an interrupted or alternating current that will change signs when it moves from one point to another point.. When your mains supply is already alternating current the rotary device today is not needed and remove the rotary device and the resistor setup and just feed directly from the mains.. That way you get sign wave and 50 Hz or 60 Hz current automatically. Figuera did not disclose the best method of carrying out the invention and so he disclosed a weakest method of carrying out the invention. His disclosure substantially hides one important point. Both the primary electromagnets must be of equal strength for the device to work best. They should not be of weaker compared to one another. Of course his set up made the two electromagnets alternately stronger and weaker and we did not test that but in our tests we got the best results only when both the primary electromagnets are of equal strength.

Simply this is an amplifying transformer. Two step down transformers  acting as primary electromagnets set up in such a way that the opposite poles of the two are facing each other and in that place you place another secondary of many turns to step up the voltage. Then what you get is both amperage and voltage increase. In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that.

The set up is NS - NS - NS  The bolded outer electromagnets are the step down transformers where the secondary is placed near the core and the primary of many turns and preferably bifilar or trifilar or quadfilar is wound upon it. I used Quadfilar primary. Secondarly is a single wire. In the middle electromagnet you increase the number of turns many times and many layers. In all I used about 1300 meters of 4 sq mm wire out of which about 500 meters were primary and 800 meters were secondary. The electromagnets were built on a plastic tube 4 inches in diameter and 18 inches length. We used soft iron rods to create the electromagnets. 3 such devices were placed in the NS-NS-NS configuration. That is all that is needed to test and verify the results. This device works.

However be careful. When you give 220 volts electricity the electromagnets take about 7 amps but the output is really dangerous 630 volts and 20 amps output..You may get more or less depending on the number of turns and depending on the input voltage.

This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true. If you use the output of the first module to feed the second module and the output of the second module to feed the third module you are going to get increasing voltage and amperage. Any one can test it and see the results themselves. But be extremely careful as the resulting voltages are deadly as the amperage also is very high.

Making the device self sustaining is of no problem really. The output is high voltage and higher amperage. Secondary current will flow in the direction opposing the primary current. When you provide a step down transformer to use the electricity, the output of the step down transformer will flow in a direction oppising the feeding secondary current. So the output of the transformer will be in phase and synchronise with the primary input. Now all you need is a make before break change over switch and change the source of feeding current to the output of the transformer. A part of the transformer output is enough to keep the unit running. Rest of the transformer output is given to load. The original feeding current is removed and the system will continue to work. I have not done this part. But I think given this information any number of posters here can replicate the results.

If you use this in an Electric car, the car can run any amount of distance. Only thing is that we need to convert the AC output to pulsed DC output to run a DC motor or may be use a capacitor to make it a perfect DC current to run it. A Battery, an inverter and this set up and then converting to pulsed DC through a bridge rectifier and then a capacitor to make it perfect DC is all that is needed. May be use a solar panel to keep the battery charged. Since the battery would be used only at the starting time, it will not diminish and in any case the alternator present in the car will keep charging the battery.  This is an extremely simple device really and I do not know how you people who are all experienced electrical engineers have missed the mark.

Let me see comments that will call all this a mirage. But do test it yourself and check the results before calling my results bad..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 15, 2014, 10:41:59 AM


This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true.


I hope the Thuth guides you. I always think in the 3000 million people without access to electricity in our world..

Best wishes
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 10:54:50 AM
Regarding the question as to how the output is higher than the input, the answer is simple. The secondary placed in the middle is not subject to Lenz law. Please see the exception to Lenz law here from wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz's_law#Conservation_of_momentum

When the induced electricity is created due to the interactions between two opposing poles, Lenz law does not apply. In other words the charges are opposite charges and the force is one of magnetic attraction and not magnetic repulsion. The voltage would continue to increase until it reaches the other pole. The amperge will remain the same and then the voltage will continue to increase in the second electromagnet as well. So in the result we get a much higher voltage and higher amperage output due to this set up.

If we are to compare this, if we are cycling uphill a lot of effort is needed to go up but if we are going downhill, no effort is needed except that we need to use brakes to reduce the increasing accleration of the cycle.

Many have also missed the fact that the secondary is placed also inside the primary to increase the amperage. If you do not place the secondary inside the primary as a step down setup you end up wasting that part of the electromagnet. This is present in only one line of the Buforn patent spanish versions. Buforn calls it is needed to get industrial level currents. That is only in one line.

The device uses a low input current and the rotary device which creates sparks. The function of sparks is to increase the frequency of the current and hence increase the voltage of the inducing current. If you want to test this, connect a lamp to your mains through a wire. Make a part of the wire open and use the tester to touch and tap the open wire to create mild sparks. See the voltmeter and the when the sparks come the voltage will shoot up. So the rotary device essentially created mini sparks and increased the voltage of the inducing current really. Again we do not need it today as we get 220 or 230 volt or 115 volt AC supplies today in almost all places.

Again regarding the law of conservation of energy, Buforn asks the interesting question where is the electricity coming from? A permanet magnet does not create any current. But when it is made to rotate and a coil of wire is palced around the rotating magnet, electricity is generated. What is the source of that electricity..Buforn answers that as the magnet interacts with the solar and cosmic radiations which continuously bombard Earth and give the energy to the earth to rotate. The rotating magnet interacts with the magnetic field of earth and acts as a focusing point and generates electricity in the coil. Read that part and that is very interesting. This is exactly in line with what Don Smith has claimed. This is open system that takes electricity from the atmosphere and the total energy of the system remains constant and the law of conservation of energy is not violated. Actually all energy producing systems are open systems but they are built and designed in such a way to work like isolated systems and it is these designs that are responsible for the wrong notions. Without access to atmosphere, no device can produce electricity. If you think about it all generators have access to or open to the atmosphere.

I have tested this by covering a transformer with copper plates on all sides and placed a copper plate beneath it and then covered it with layers of plastic and the transformer refuses to work. I have built devices where even the primary current will not go. Nothing in the secondary if no air is present and the device is covered fully like this..

Possibly I'm not an electrical engineer and have not learnt the electrical engineering subject in the proper way and so I ended up testing and finding these things to be correct. I strongly suggest that you test the NS-NS-NS setup as I have built check the results for yourself and then criticize me..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 11:52:40 AM
Thanks Hanon:

I appreciate your thoughts on the millions of people without access to Electricity.

Only due to lack of knowledge, effort and money  people remain without electricity. Read Teslas patent on generating electricity using radiant energy. I will post some picture or video on generating electricity for free any where in the world in significant amount to light your own home. It is certainly doable. The problem is we can share knowledge. Effort and money has to be there to light the world. That is where big corporations score and they certainly are entitled to get the returns on their investment. All we can do is to share knowledge. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 15, 2014, 12:25:55 PM
NRamaswami

Thank you very much for your contribution.
Your posts make much sense to me (not EE also)
This quadrifilar primary you mentioned is (Tesla) series, or 4 insulated wires winded & connected in parallel ?

regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 01:26:51 PM
Thanks for the good words..I actually did not expect to see good words on my posts..

Quadfilar wire is wound like this..

All wires run in parallel. End of first wire is connected to beginning of second. End of second connected to beginning of third and end of third connected to beginning of fourth wire. Input given to beginning of first wire and taken out at the end of fourth wire. I do not know how it is described in the Electrical engineering terminology..

Quadfiliar is primary.

First wind a single wire as a step down component and upon that wind the quadfilar primary. 

The components are like this NS - NS - NS Opposite poles always face each other in this set up. It can be SN-SN-SN as well.

The output from the first primary electromagnet goes to the input of the third electromagnet the second electromagnet acting only as a step up secondary. All three secondaries are connected in series to increase the voltage and amperage.

Results can be replicated and verified easily by any one..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 01:26:55 PM
Quote
Making the device self sustaining is of no problem really. The output is high voltage and higher amperage. Secondary current will flow in the direction opposing the primary current. When you provide a step down transformer to use the electricity, the output of the step down transformer will flow in a direction oppising the feeding secondary current. So the output of the transformer will be in phase and synchronise with the primary input. Now all you need is a make before break change over switch and change the source of feeding current to the output of the transformer. A part of the transformer output is enough to keep the unit running. Rest of the transformer output is given to load. The original feeding current is removed and the system will continue to work. I have not done this part. But I think given this information any number of posters here can replicate the results.

I think that you, like many others, pretend to teach what you actually do not know.

If it is "no problem really" to make the device self-sustaining, why have you not done this part? I know why... it is because it is more of a problem than you seem to think, and that YOU CANNOT DO IT.

In other words, you are making claims you cannot support with real data, outside checkable references, facts and calculations, demonstrations of your own.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 01:29:00 PM
Quote
Without access to atmosphere, no device can produce electricity. If you think about it all generators have access to or open to the atmosphere.

Now you are just being silly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 01:52:10 PM
Very well. we will try and post the results but I'm short of cash and we will do it. But I certainly cannot claim any credit for it even if we achive it. 

I suggest that you replicate the experiment and see if the results tally.

Regarding the self sustaining claim, check the patents on Amplidyne a device used extensively during world war II in US and British Navy ships.

If you cannot find the patents let me know and let me post them. In these devices the original current was maintained not removed. But for every watt of feedback current, the output increased by 20000 watts as the patents which are granted indicate.

The point to note is if the feedback current voltage is higher than the original input current, the original current would not go and there is no need for it. This is not theory. This is why Figuera has used a low voltage initial source and the feedback was higher voltage. At that point of time the original current is not needed as it would not go in. To do this all we need to do is build multiple modules and then connect the higher feedback to the original point with low voltage input.

If Radio amplification is doable and agreeable, energy amplification is also practical. This has been done in Amplidyne devices. Same principle was used by Figuera.  I'm sure you would agree if the initial current is not removed, the source of that current can be continuously energised by the output current. Is it not a self sustaining machine then?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 01:57:33 PM
Regarding the silly claim part.. I suggest that you take a small transformer. Place copper sheets and plastic sheets beneath it and cover it on sides with copper sheets and then plastic sheets. Insulate it except for the input and output wires.. See if the transformer works and produces current in the secondary.. Why call me silly when you have done the experiment..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:02:47 PM
Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy.

Generators work just fine in total vacuums. Wrapping a transformer completely in copper won't prevent it from working. You've made several statements that are simply total BS. "Self-sustaining" around here means that you can remove _all_ input sources of _energy_ and the device continues to operate. The Amplidyne is not self-sustaining and does not produce more ENERGY output than input. Neither does any device from Figuera. Neither does any device you can demonstrate.

Please stop posting utter fictions and distortions of reality. Please stop pretending to "teach" what you yourself do not know. If you make a claim, like your "generators don't work unless they have access to the atmosphere", that contradicts what we all know, then you really should provide some evidence that supports your claims. But of course you cannot.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:07:31 PM
Regarding the silly claim part.. I suggest that you take a small transformer. Place copper sheets and plastic sheets beneath it and cover it on sides with copper sheets and then plastic sheets. Insulate it except for the input and output wires.. See if the transformer works and produces current in the secondary.. Why call me silly when you have done the experiment..

I have transformers all around me that are completely encased in metal and plastic and they work just fine. Would you like to see photographs of them? This "experiment" is performed millions of times every day, by all the sealed, completely encased transformers in the world.  I challenge YOU to provide proof of this claim. Let's see your "experiment" where you do as you say. There is absolutely no empirical or theoretical support for your claim... so YOU are the one who needs to do the experiment and show your results so that they can be examined to find your ERROR.

Further, let's see you demonstrate your claim about generators and the atmosphere. That should be loads of fun. I'm sure NASA will be distressed to hear that their spacecraft power plants, waaaaay out there in space distant from all atmospheres, cannot generate electricity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:09:46 PM
1. I'm not teaching any thing for I have made it clear that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.

2. What I have posted are results obtained and that can be verified and can be replicated by any one.

3. I do concede that I have not tested the self sustaining part. There is nothing to hide. The output voltage and amperage is very high and cannot be done without help from a trained Electrical Engineer. Safety first for me.

4. Space ships use only solar arrays and Nuclear materials based thermionic batteries. They can easily carry a powerful alternator..Why don't they do it?

Results that I stated are verifiable and replicatable by any one..Do the experiment and then shout me down..if the results are not there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:20:19 PM
You mix things up..

I said Transformers covered with copper sheets all around. Then plastic sheets placed on copper sheets. 

All transformers are made up of magnetising metals. Without iron transformers would not work. When transformers are covered by copper plates in the way I described they do not work. Your statement is transformers covered with metals. All transformers we see are covered with metals to dissipate heat but they are not copper but magnetisable metals.  My statement is non magnetic copper sheet covered by non magnetic non metallic plastic. Please post pictures of transformers fully covered with copper working fine..

In my experiments I have found that if we make the magnet very powerful current simply refuses to go to load. If the magnet is very powerful it simply eats the electricity given to it. I suggest that you wind a quadfilar coil around plastic tube of 4 inch diameter and wrap on that another plastic sheet and iron rods and then continue the winding in this fashion and after about 18 layers complete the quadfilar winding. Try to send the current through the quadfilar winding to a load and see if the load is able to get any power..

Zero.

Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it. I do not know why it happens. This is a result you can replicate easily.

I do not intend to teach any thing to any one. I'm just sharing the results of my experiments. Nothing more. If I have not done any thing, there is truthful admission that I'm yet to do it..I suggest that you replicate the experiments and then tell me please..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:26:10 PM
1. I'm not teaching any thing for I have made it clear that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.
It is perfectly clear that you are not an Electrical Engineer. It is also perfectly clear that you are trying to impart knowledge that you _believe_ you have, to others who you think don't have that knowledge. Please look up the definition of "Teach".
Quote
2. What I have posted are results obtained and that can be verified and can be replicated by any one.

Where is the replication of your claim about wrapping a transformer in copper? Where is the demonstration that a generator will not work in a vacuum? Nowhere.
Quote
3. I do concede that I have not tested the self sustaining part. There is nothing to hide. The output voltage and amperage is very high and cannot be done without help from a trained Electrical Engineer. Safety first for me.
There are plenty of people who can handle high voltage and amperage safely. I am one of them. You cannot provide any proof of any self-sustaining electrical device, and the reason has nothing to do with high voltages or currents.
Quote
4. Space ships use only solar arrays and Nuclear materials based thermionic batteries. They can easily carry a powerful alternator..Why don't they do it?
Because something has to turn the alternator, or provide the force to drive linear alternators. It's simpler and cheaper at present to use solar arrays, but there are Stirling-cycle driven linear alternators operating in space as well. Do a little research!
Quote
Results that I stated are verifiable and replicatable by any one..Do the experiment and then shout me down..if the results are not there.

Show me one single "replication" of your claim that wrapping a transformer in sheets of plastic and copper will make it stop working. Let's see your own demonstration of this. I want to know exactly how to wrap, because I have transformers, copper, and plastic, and I know how to make the necessary measurements. So when I see your demonstration, I'll repeat it and report my findings. Or, if you have some exact specifications as to the transformer, the copper, the plastic, the measurements you made.... please report them here.

You are making claims that are outrageous, and you cannot support them with real data. So far, anyway. What is preventing you from providing references that support your claims? What is preventing you from demonstrating that you might know what you are talking about? I know.... and so do you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:32:18 PM
"Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy."

This is your statement.. Pray tell me then what is Energy?

Amplidyne devices produced more output than input. It is in the patents. Patents that are granted. Devices that are used in US Navy and UK Navy ships during world war II.  They claim that every 1 watt of positive feedback the device produced up to 20000 watts of excess output. This is similar to sound amplification only.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:36:16 PM
You mix things up..

I said Transformers covered with copper sheets all around. Then plastic sheets placed on copper sheets. 

Show me. Make a dimensioned drawing, showing the exact placement of plastic and copper, and give the details of your measurements. Show some outside reference that supports your claim. Tell us why completely metal-sealed transformers still work, but magic copper and plastic makes them not work.
Quote

All transformers are made up of magnetising metals. Without iron transformers would not work.

False. Utterly and easily demonstrably false. There are dozens of people laughing at you right now, because they, like me, all have transformers working that contain no iron, no magnetizing metals at all.

Quote

When transformers are covered by copper plates in the way I described they do not work.

Also false. Demonstrate the validity of this remarkable claim by showing your experimental work.

Quote
Your statement is transformers covered with metals. All transformers we see are covered with metals to dissipate heat but they are not copper but magnetisable metals.  My statement is non magnetic copper sheet covered by non magnetic non metallic plastic. Please post pictures of transformers fully covered with copper working fine..

You are being really really silly. YOU are making the claim that copper and plastic (what kind of plastic? I laugh...) will stop a transformer from working. Many people want to see YOUR demonstration of this. Why do you not show it? I know why: your "experiment" is an error.

Quote

In my experiments I have found that if we make the magnet very powerful current simply refuses to go to load. If the magnet is very powerful it simply eats the electricity given to it.


More utter ignorant BS. Now you have more people than just me, laughing at you.

Quote

I suggest that you wind a quadfilar coil around plastic tube of 4 inch diameter and wrap on that another plastic sheet and iron rods and then continue the winding in this fashion and after about 18 layers complete the quadfilar winding. Try to send the current through the quadfilar winding to a load and see if the load is able to get any power..

Zero.
Come on, demonstrate! It is up to YOU to provide demonstrations of your ridiculous claims.

Quote

Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it. I do not know why it happens. This is a result you can replicate easily.

I do not intend to teach any thing to any one. I'm just sharing the results of my experiments. Nothing more. If I have not done any thing, there is truthful admission that I'm yet to do it..I suggest that you replicate the experiments and then tell me please..

You have shown nothing. You have made several claims that are utter fantasies. When... or rather IF... you  yourself are able to demonstrate the validity of any of your claims, that will be the time for others to try to "replicate" them.

"Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it."

That gets a ROFL, for sure.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:42:49 PM
Many thanks for accepting at least one of my statements that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.

I used a ready made 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer to do the experiment. It did not work when covered in the way I indicated.

The other large 18 layer device produced very strong magnetism but the current would not go to the lamps and power them up.

As I said when I time and money are available I do the experiments out of interest. I have tried to replicate the Alfred Hubbard device without success todate. However I do know one thing. The outer 8 coils are wound in this fashion. the first four coils are wound in clockwise direction and the next four coils are wound in ccw direction and only then in all the 8 coils magnetism is produced. Otherwise magnetism is not produced in the last four coils.

I will check your statement on the alternators working in space. My knowledge is limited and I continuously learn.

There is no intention to teach and only intention to share the results.

I strongly suggest that if you can handle high voltages and high amperages, please replicate the experiment of Figuera as described by me. And see the output voltage and amperage. And please be honest with results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:44:38 PM
"Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy."

This is your statement.. Pray tell me then what is Energy?

Amplidyne devices produced more output than input. It is in the patents. Patents that are granted. Devices that are used in US Navy and UK Navy ships during world war II.  They claim that every 1 watt of positive feedback the device produced up to 20000 watts of excess output. This is similar to sound amplification only.

Energy is the ability to perform work. Energy is conserved. Volts, amps, watts: Not conserved, not energy.
Energy is measured in Joules (in the SI system). Amplidyne devices do not produce more _energy_ output than input. Go ahead, take the Amplidyne patents and make something from them that is self-sustaining, or that produces more energy out than in. You cannot.

The WATT is a measure of POWER not energy. I have a device right here -- a transformer that has no iron or any other magnetizable metal in it -- that produces 30,000 Watts output power from only 75 watts input. Why is it not self-sustaining? I know why.

At this point I doubt that you even understand "sound amplification only", if you don't understand the difference between a Watt and a Joule.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:49:48 PM
No problem. give me two weeks time and I will rebuild the device and show the proof live if you want on the powerful magnet stopping the current to go to load.. This looks certainly ridiculous but I'm not able to understand why it happens and this is why I stated this..

I can also show live the results of the figuera device output. But I will reduce the number of turns to reduce the voltage to less than 500. When the voltage is reduced the amperage would also be reduced. But I guarantee that the output is higher than the input..Figuera did not cheat and there was no need for a professor of his calibre to come out with false statements.

I'm not a regular poster and I have a number of clients to serve and when time permits I will rebuild the device and post videos of on youtube and here. It is not a problem.. However if you are regularly in Electrical Engineering I suggest that you also do the experimentation and see if the results are replicated or not..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:50:18 PM
Many thanks for accepting at least one of my statements that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.

I used a ready made 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer to do the experiment. It did not work when covered in the way I indicated.

The other large 18 layer device produced very strong magnetism but the current would not go to the lamps and power them up.

As I said when I time and money are available I do the experiments out of interest. I have tried to replicate the Alfred Hubbard device without success todate. However I do know one thing. The outer 8 coils are wound in this fashion. the first four coils are wound in clockwise direction and the next four coils are wound in ccw direction and only then in all the 8 coils magnetism is produced. Otherwise magnetism is not produced in the last four coils.

I will check your statement on the alternators working in space. My knowledge is limited and I continuously learn.

There is no intention to teach and only intention to share the results.

I strongly suggest that if you can handle high voltages and high amperages, please replicate the experiment of Figuera as described by me. And see the output voltage and amperage. And please be honest with results.

No, I will NOT do your homework for you! I challenge YOU to demonstrate any thing you have claimed.

Here are some of the claims you've made that I would like you to support with demonstrations or references of your own.

-Transformers will not work without iron or other magnetizable core.
-Generators don't work in vacuum.
-No electrical devices work without access to atmosphere.
-Wrapping a transformer in copper and plastic will stop it from working.
-The Amplidyne is self-sustaining and produces more output than input.
-Magnets eat electrical current.
-No current passes through your "18 layer quadrifilar iron rod" whatever device, even though the wire is continuous and not broken somewhere.

They look rather formidable when all gathered together, don't they. Just pick an easy one and demonstrate the validity of your claim.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 02:55:55 PM
 
Quote
Interesting thing is output is 630 volts and 20 amps at no load. I will need to take an electrical engineer and custom built a transformer to step down the voltage and then see if it can be tested to see if the amperage wattage shown is real. Until then let me keep quiet.

How do you get 20 amps output... if there is no load?

I am afraid you are way over your head here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 02:56:56 PM
This is actually a punch to me really. Earlier in posts Farmhand has claimed that a device cannot produce more output than input. Now you provide the proof that a device can provide more output than input. Why don't you show a video of your 30000 watts output transformer in youtube video for a 75 watts input..for the benefit of poor souls like me. Since it is your claim you can demonstrate it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 03:08:37 PM
Please check my first post. We got 630 volts and 20 amps in the Ammeter at no load. Since this was way too high for us we stopped. We need to build a transformer to step down the voltage to around 200 volts and then give it to the load lamps to check. Secondly I have had
50 Amps Ammeters burning out after showing 50 amps at no load. I would not believe that there was amps at no load if the Ammeters had not burned out..

The 4 sq mm wire is rated only for 24 amps. So we needed to buy a very expensive transformer and provide safety set ups. The Electrician who participated in this experiment passed away due to illness suddenly. So we kind of stopped all these things for a few months now.  We have also put up a small website www.tmptens.com where we are coming up with a different effort.

I can provide full description and show what we did and send you photos and if need be make videos. If you can handle the high voltages and high amperages, you may try to do the experiment. Given that you describe a very expensive transformer, money may not matter you. If you can replicate the experment please do so. I have funds problem and I will need time to redo all this. I have the wires but I have to hire people and redo the wiring manually. All wires are plastic insulated wires.

None of the statements are false. There is no intent to teach but only an intention to share the results. You can check it yourself and then let me know.  You appear to have access to good funds given your description of your transformer. That is in short supply here at the moment.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 03:16:33 PM
This is actually a punch to me really. Earlier in posts Farmhand has claimed that a device cannot produce more output than input. Now you provide the proof that a device can provide more output than input. Why don't you show a video of your 30000 watts output transformer in youtube video for a 75 watts input..for the benefit of poor souls like me. Since it is your claim you can demonstrate it.
There is nothing special about making more Watts at peak output than input, because POWER IS NOT ENERGY. Ask Farmhand, he has devices too that produce more peak power output than they use as input, by far. He knows that these devices are not overunity and cannot "self sustain" or be "self-looped". Naive measurements -- such as are likely to be performed by patent examiners who are not physicists or electrical engineers -- will see the peak power levels and believe that some "energy" amplification is happening, when actually it is nothing of the sort.

You want to see some video demonstrations of power amplification? You, who mention Tesla's name in your posts? Take a look at my YT channel.

But let's start simple, shall we? Here's a transformer working without any metal, iron or otherwise, in the core or anywhere nearby.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6uQUxC7DS8

So that's one of your silly claims put to rest, right there.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 03:18:46 PM
Regarding your challenge, I can easily take the 18 layer quadfilar test and show it. I don't understand why it happens..But the magnet that is made is very powerful.

I will also demonstrate the Figuera device.

I understand that compared to you my knowledge is very little in this field but the results can be replicated easily. I would appreciate if you show the 75 watts input 30000 watts output transformer in a video to all of us. I would be very obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 15, 2014, 03:43:31 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

Please don't enter in the game initiated by Tinsekoala. This user is the first time that participate into this thread...what a coincidence... You are just sharing your empirical results...if someone don't want to understand this it is not our problem. Just ignore those users...As Don Quixote said :"Dogs are barking, therefore we are getting closer"

Keep on testing and doing a good work, and avoid going into these dirty games

Best regards and good luck!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 03:47:35 PM
If you honestly show your 18-layer thing and your measurements, we can figure out why you are getting the results you think you are getting. I assure you... magnets, no matter how strong, do not "eat" electricity. However a large inductor like you are describing can definitely present a high impedance to an AC power supply, which would prevent a series light bulb from lighting perceptibly under some conditions. Did you measure the current through your device with a proper instrument, or are you simply relying on your visual judgement of the brightness of the bulb? I think I already know the answer to that question.

Now... before we go any further, please acknowledge that you are wrong about transformers requiring iron or magnetizable metal in order to operate.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2014, 03:50:44 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

Please don't enter in the game initiated by Tinsekoala. This user is the first time that participate into this thread...what a coincidence... You are just sharing your empirical results...if someone don't want to understand this it is not our problem. Just ignore those users...As Don Quixote said :"Dogs are barking, therefore we are getting closer"

Keep on testing and doing a good work, and avoid going into these dirty games

Best regards and good luck!!
So then, I guess that user "hanon" also believes that transformers need iron cores to work, that they can be prevented from working by wrapping in copper and plastic, that magnets eat electricity, that an Amplidyne is self sustaining....  but instead of providing evidence, he chooses to attack me personally instead !!

What a hoot you people are. This is better than watching daytime television, for sure!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 04:04:36 PM
I went through your video.. It is an air core Tesla coil. Did you convert the voltage increased to usable power? There is no indication that for 75 watts input that it produced 30000 watts output but I agree that if the voltage increases the amperage should also increase.

Please see this http://www.physiotherapyequipment.in/short-wave-diathermy.html

It is a physiotherapy equipment used in India and even a fused out tubelight will be lit brightly if we show it six inches above the condenser pads..The pads radiate out waves in radio frequency and that heats the gases of the tube light and even if it is fused out would glow brightly.

1. Contrary to a Tesla coil, Figuera used iron core and the results are not peak output but sustained output. I say this for we have used the primary, in another experiment, not as electromagnets but to power the lamps. 10x200 watts lamps and the secondary was able to light up to 5x200 watts lamps. This was done for tests and for safety considerations. However the combined output in this case is less than the input.

2. It is only when we make the primary work like electromagnets we get more output than input and I believe that is sustained one. I will do the tests and then I will inform you. If the results are negative also I would inform you.

In the system on the para marked 1,  I think that there is a variable frequency driver controller circuit used in wind turbines and Alternators and if it is used in the system as described the voltage in the primary would not drop and the usable output would be more than the input. But I need to check and test them.

I find that Figuera's statement and Buforn's statement that electricity comes from interactions of atmosphere and earth to be correct on experimental basis. So I believe them. Of course they are more than 100 years old. I believe that the Tesla coil secondary also is earthed at one end and the increased output is due to using high frequency and connecting between the atmosphere and earth. But I have not built or experimented with a tesla coil. So I really cannot comment.

I will take a minimum of two weeks to come back. I'm not loaded with cash and I have to put in my own money to do these tests and report. But I will come back and you can see for yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 04:13:41 PM
I will need to agree with you on Transformers if you consider Tesla coil to be a transformer. By Transformers I meant commonly used transformers and did not consider Tesla coil which outputs high voltage and cannot be used to generate usable power. To my limited knowledge.

We have used an Electrician, voltmeter, ammeter, and a multimeter and no voltage showed up in the primary. The current used was AC as you rightly describe. The iron rods have high impedance again. But the magnetism was enormous but there was no power to the lamps. Not even a single volt..That was the amazing thing..How an electromagnet can block about 2000 watts of power from getting through the wires wound around it is not understandable by me.

The results are perfect. And I do not cheat and I do not have the kind of your knowledge and so I do not intend to teach or pretend to teach.

Your language is very strong and so Hanon feels agitated. I take it in a friendly way and am not disturbed for I only report the factual findings here so others can also benefit. Nothing more. I do not know any one here and I do not know people personally and do not take things personally.

I apologize for any miscommunication and let us carry on. But give me a break for two weeks. And try to replicate the results and check for yourselves.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 15, 2014, 05:04:55 PM
Power is defined as "rate of work done"

Think that you have 100 Joules of stored energy.  You can dissipate it as 10 Joules in 10 seconds (power is 10 Watts), 100 Joules in            1 second (power is 100 Watts), 1000 Joules in 0.1 seconds (power is 1000 Watts), 10,000 Joules in 0.01 seconds (power is 10,000 Watts) and so on ...

In all the above instances if you multiply watts with time,  you will get energy as 100 Joules which is conserved.

A simple example  -  If you connect 3 Watts bulbs 100 nos. in parallel to a battery,  the battery dries out quickly delivering 300 Watts.  But if you connect just one 3 Watts bulb, the battery retains its charge for a very long time delivering just 3 watts.

I think this is just high school physics and no electrical engineering is involved in this.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 06:04:52 PM

...  We got 630 volts and 20 amps in the Ammeter at no load. Since this was way too high for us we stopped. We need to build a transformer to step down the voltage to around 200 volts and then give it to the load lamps to check. Secondly I have had
50 Amps Ammeters burning out after showing 50 amps at no load. I would not believe that there was amps at no load if the Ammeters had not burned out..
...


Hi NRamaswami,

Would like to ask on your 20 Amper output current measurement you performed on the secondary with 'no load'.  I guess that you connected the Ampermeter directly across the secondary coil,  actually measuring the "short circuited output current" of the secondary coil, was this so?  If yes, then you actually had a load: it was the inner resistance (impedance) of your Ampermeter, ok?

But then your earlier measured 630V voltage (which I assume was measured across the open secondary coil) was divided between the secondary coil's inner impedance and the inner resistance (impedance) of the Ampermeter: these two impedances were in series from the 630V induced emf point of view and you can surely understand that due to the voltage divison across the series impedances,  the bigger part of the 630V induced emf remained inside the secondary coil (and got lost as heat as in any generator) and only a smaller part of it remained for the Ampermeter which was willy-nilly the 'load'.  This is because an Ampermeter has a much less inner resistance (impedance) in the 20-50 Amper range than your described secondary coil impedance has.

So what I mean here is that your output power cannot be calculated by multiplying the 630V with the 20A if your ampermeter was indeed used to short circuit the secondary coil. 

Perhaps a possible solution to step down the 630V output voltage is to use 3 identical off-the-shelf 220V step down mains transformers and connect their primary coils in series, and also connect their secondaries either in series or parallel as need arises.

OF course the simplest solution would be to use less number of turns for the Figuera secondary coil so that it can output less than 630V.

ONE more thing I would like to ask: did you monitor the input current when you were measuring the 20 Amper 'no load' current in the secondary coil?  I.e. did you use an Ampermeter also in the primary coil between one of the input mains wire and one of the primary coil input wire? I am curious how the input current changed (if it changed, that is) when nothing was attached to your secondary coil and then you attached the Ampermeter to the secondary?
Putting this otherwise: how the Figuera transformer behaves for a short across its secondary?  (here I assume the Ampermeter shorted the secondary coil)

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 06:33:34 PM
The secondary was not shorted. It was kept open. Not connected to the load. We kept it open to check what is the voltage. We expected high voltage but did not expect the Ammeter to show the Amps and did not expect to see such high voltage. So we immediately switched off.

Both Primary and secondary had voltmeter and Ammeter connected separately to them. This why we are able to say what is the input voltage and amperage and what is the output voltage and amperage. Input voltage is 220 volts and 7 amps. Output is 630 volts and 20 amps. We need to put a step down transformer to see that the output is not peak output as it happens when we switch on or switch off but sustained output.

We have tried to reduce the input voltage and lower the input voltage, lower is the efficiency of the device.  If we reduced the turns of the secondary as you say we could check what is the amperage in the secondary but my feeling is that lower the voltage in the secondary, lower would be the amperage. Doubling the voltage would quadruple the amperage is something that we read about secondary output. So if we reduce the turns to reduce the secondary voltage, we may not increase the amperage in the secondary. The system has to increase both voltage and amperage but then must be stepped down using a powerful step down transformer that can take up to 100 to 200 amps. That would be costly and would need to be custom built. 

My guess is that Figuera drawings are showing 7 different modules the result of first one feeding to the second and the second one feeding to the third and so on.

Probably then the rotary device was intended only for the first module with the rest of the other modules not being shown by him.

I had given 12 volts and 16 amps to the module also and found very little increase in the output. Unless we increase the input voltage, the secondary does not perform.

Power given in Watts matter but of that power Voltage must be at least 20 times higher than the Amperage for the device to show efficiency in the secondary. Since magnetic field strength depends on number of turns multiplied by amperage, there needs to be a reasonable amperage for the device to work. If the 20:1 minimum ratio for the input voltage and amperage is not there, we do not have any results.

If we give high amperage low voltage, magnetism is high but the resulting induced electricity is not high. If we give the same wattage with high voltage and lower amperage combination the resulting secondary performs well. I do not know why again....But this is the result we got..Probably the induced emf is higher when the input voltage is higher. I have read that we can increase the frequency of the current for a low amperage to get a high induced emf  and secondary output and probably the rotary device of Figuera by producing sparks achieved that as well. I do not know. Sparks have high frequency I guess.

The frequency used was the mains frequency of 50 Hz only..We did not give high frequency. Plain simple normal mains AC was directly used to generate the electromagnet.

We will build the device again and add a step down transformer and then would inform you all. But it will take 2 to 3 weeks depending on my workload. Thanks and will post my replies only next week. Until then please bear with me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 06:59:57 PM

....
Both Primary and secondary had voltmeter and Ammeter connected separately to them. This why we are able to say what is the input voltage and amperage and what is the output voltage and amperage. Input voltage is 220 volts and 7 amps. Output is 630 volts and 20 amps. We need to put a step down transformer to see that the output is not peak output as it happens when we switch on or switch off but sustained output.

....


So if I understand you correctly, you used only one voltmeter and one ampermeter all the time, and did not use 2 voltmeters and two Ampermeters simultenously, right?   Two meters (a volt and an Amper) for the primary input and two meters for the secondary, used all four meters at the same time, this was not so?

Thanks for your answer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:04:08 PM
Sorry for any miscommunication on my part..

We had two volt meter and two Ammeters..

One voltmeter and one Ammeter for primary

Another voltmeter and another ammeter for secondary.

Hope this clarifies your doubts..Bye for this week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 07:12:05 PM
Okay, thanks for the answer.

Please check with a digital Ohm meter the inner resistance of your Ampermeter set to the 20-30 Amper measurement range, I think you would measure under or around 1 Ohm values or so, and this value is with which you shorted the secondary when you saw the 20 Amper.  And I believe the 1 Ohm or less resistance is already a very nearly short circuit for a 600V secondary coil.

Thanks, Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:21:25 PM
Hi:

1. That Ammeter is an analog ammeter and we cannot set it to 20 to 30 amps range.

2. That has already burnt out and we will use a different one.

3. We did not short the secondary. It was kept open. Your assumption is wrong here. That is why we say under no load conditions.

4. We will check the ohms of the Ammeter next time. You may well be right but as I said we have to use a step down transformer and see the voltage and amperage output and see the useful output. That part is pending as I have told you from the beginning. That said as the voltage goes up, the useful amps also go up in the secondary. This is a fact we have recorded when we have tested other lower voltage versions.

This is why I say we need a significant primary input voltage and amperage combination. Minimum 20:1 ratio needed for secondary to work reasonably and higher we go better it becomes. However the amperage should also be reasonably well in the 5 to 10 amps range for any voltage for reasonable magnetism to be present to show effect on secondary. Figueras rotary device achieved high frequency it seems in addition to all this.in his modular approach. But I need to test and then only I can report..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:36:23 PM

You are quite correct in stating that resistance of the wire and the ammeter must be measured together to arrive at the amps. Volts= amps x resistance.. But this is AC and would the above equation apply..

We certainly did not measure the results this way. we have had up to 250 volts and had 2 amps useful power as we used to light 200 watts lamps. This is when the primary was not made an electromagnet but was used to power lamps. The incidental emf was what was used in the secondary to get 500 watts of useful power.  Higher the voltage, higher the amperage avaiilable in the secondary.

However when the primary is used as electromagnet, more power output comes as the voltage is higher. So when we had 630 volts we were under the impression that we had 20 amps. You can well be right that we cannot calculate it that way. The only solution is to rebuild the device and test and check the results with a step down transformer that can handle the high amperage current.

We will do it and report this to you all so all can benefit. Thanks for the understanding and support.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 07:36:44 PM
....
3. We did not short the secondary. It was kept open. Your assumption is wrong here. That is why we say under no load conditions.
....


Please understand that the Ampermeter can only measure current when it is inserted into a circuit:  the meter makes a closed circuit in the secondary coil, otherwise there is no any current could flow when the secondary were an open circuit.  This is why I mentioned the inner resistance of an Ampermeter, it is small enough to be nearly equal to a short circuit effect.

Anyway, I am looking forward to your new tests.

Take care,
Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 07:45:19 PM
Hi:

Double the voltage and amperage would be quadrupled is the dictum on secondaries I think.

For 250 volts we had 2 amps of useful power. No doubt on that.

Make the voltage 500 volts and the amps become 16 amps.

Make the voltage 630 volts and the amps become 20.16 amps..So I think we kind of recorded properly. But let me check by testing.

My intention was to tell others what I have done and what we saw and what we can to help the community to move forward in this device. If that is done to a little extent today, my purpose is served. Please note that I spend my own money, I'm not a rich person and I have my troubles and so I may take 2 or 3 weeks to come back to report the results. I cannot keep posting like this. Today I had to post 21 posts here and I cannot do like this.. I'm sorry for not answering any questions until next week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 07:56:28 PM
Hi:

Double the voltage and amperage would be quadrupled is the dictum on secondaries I think.

For 250 volts we had 2 amps of useful power. No doubt on that.

Make the voltage 500 volts and the amps become 16 amps.

Make the voltage 630 volts and the amps become 20.16 amps..So I think we kind of recorded properly. But let me check by testing.
...

I keep my finger crossed that what you say above would be correct for the Figuera transformer.  Because for normal transformers it is not true, unfortunately.

I am trying to help also and weed out misconceptions or bad measurement results.  I hope you will be successful in replication and take your time, no need to sit here and always answer.  Just take it easy.

Greetings,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 08:11:10 PM
Hi Gyula:

Many thanks for the kind words. What I'm not able to understand is the one simple thing all of your highly skilled people have forgotten.

A normal transformer works on the principle of magnetic induction between identical or same charges. Lenz law applies here. This normal transformer changes voltage in to lower or higher voltage. Power being constant the ampere value changes. This is subject to the forces of magnetic repulsion.

In Figuera design you have a difference. The middle section is where the forces of magnetic attraction alone are present. The charge here is the opposite charge. As the electricity of lower voltage and higher amps in the secondary in the primary No 1 reaches one of the poles it moves without resistance and using magnetic attraction to the opposite pole of primary No.2. Here you have both voltage and amperage to build up. This built up amperage voltage is what separates Figuera design from other transformers. There are seven such modules in his design to increase the power. This is because he gave a lower voltage input and it needed to increase to the 550 volts output reported.

At 550 volts Figuera was reported to get about 16000 watts of power. So it was around the 28 amps range. That essentially means that he used the modular approach to keep building the power from one module to the next module.

I'm not able to understand why all of you people ignore the power of magnetic attraction between opposite poles present in this design and in the design of Alfread Hubbard.

Thanks again for your kind words of encouragement. This is not a normal transformer. The amplifying center core is not present in other transformers and the double primaries whose opposite poles face each other is also not present in normal transformers. Let me do the tests and report to you all. Thank you so much for your very kind words..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 08:26:23 PM
...
I'm not able to understand why all of you people ignore the power of magnetic attraction between opposite poles present in this design and in the design of Alfread Hubbard.
...

Dear NRamaswami,

I may cause you disappointment but I myself have not dig deeply into the Hubbard or the Figuera setups because of lack of correct details, and I do not  have much money either to build and test most such setups, sorry.

I 'dared' to share my views on your measurements because it does not depend on whether I have built the Figuera setup or not: this setup (or the Hubbard one) is a black box: it has an input and an output and you have to perform and apply correct measurement methods for both.  I have experience from my earlier job so I 'dare' to comment I see fit.

Regards,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
No disappointments really and I appreciate your kind words very much. I can see that you want the measurement to be perfect and that is perectly desirable and understandable.

Thanks to the efforts of Hanon we have the old spanish patents and I have translated them. Even before that we have ignored whatever is stated in textbooks and went by our experimental results. For example the High voltage is needed to induce a high induced emf is never stated in any book. We needed to test that and understand that. Prior to that we used to give 12 volts and 16 amps current from a step down transformer without any success in generating power in the secondary. It was all a slow learning curve. If we look at the magnetic field stength of a magnet it only talks about ampere turns. Strangely a weak magnet produces better output in secondary and a strong magnet does not do that. We found this minimum 20:1 voltage:amperage combination by experiments.

I apologize for any miscommunication on my part. I thank you very much for your very kind words and cautious approach in using the right technique and measuring instruments for measurements.

Regarding Hubbard, it still remains mysterious to me. He is reported to have used mimimum number of layers which may not be true. But the output is very high amperage and lower voltage when it was given to load and so a higher voltage must be present at no load conditions. But that is still not resolved by me. I can understand the Figuera concept clearly and am reasonably confident that I can come up with working results.

I remain grateful and I remain obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 15, 2014, 09:25:02 PM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/)


Reading all your comments makes me feel like Alice in Wonderland, so extraordinary it is.Imho Figuera invented somethind which perpetuate in history for a long time. Hubbard device should be the same , maybe without iron core powered by Tesla coil ?
I feel that the mystery maybe about the way magnetic induction is used , did you allow magnetic field collapse to zero or maintain it constantly above zero strength when changing ?


Good luck and please keep going !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 10:25:48 PM
Hi Forest..

Thanks for the kind words..

regarding the fact whether the magnetic field was collapsing or not, How do I know? I do not know..All I know is this..

If the magnetic field strength of both the coils is the same we get the best results..If one primary is weaker than the other the results are not useful at all. Both of them must be of equal strength.

I determined the magnetic field strength by the number of turns of the primary and kept both of them constant. Since the input is AC and is coming from the same source, there was no need for the rotary device and since the current moved from NS of P1 to NS of P2 there was no need for any resistor array.. I ignored them all. No capacitors were used either. They were simply a waste of input..Only without capacitors and with just wires we got the best results. No complicated circuit nothing. No electronics.. Simply it s massive number of iron rods running to perhaps about 150 kg and a lot of wires and nothing more than that.  All wires wound in the same direction.. That is all is needed to replicate the experiment. You need a lot of turns and a lot of wire. One thing that might have made all this possible is the quadfilar coil as current circulates four times in the first primary before it goes to the second primary. And the middle secondary is of equal length but has a lot more turns than the primary as it is a single wire and has many layers of wires.

Any one can easily replicate the experiment. And see the results. But be extremely careful the voltage and amperage output is high.

Iron used was soft iron rods. Nothing else..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 10:40:39 PM
By any chance, did you or your mates take any photograps of that setup you had?  OR you still have some 'remains' and could take a photo?

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 10:57:46 PM
Oh Yes.. I have all the wires remaining and can take pictures and post right away.. I have removed the quadfilar wire and wound them in to different things and last week we were trying to understand the Hubbard core.. We have succeeded in creating magnetism in all the 8 coils..Just wait..Just took them as they are in my mini lab room in the office and am posting them for you.

The quadfilar coil has been removed to do other experiments. I bought 8 to 12 coils of 4 sq mm wires and we manually fixed them to become as quadfilar coil to cut costs. The one you see on the Hubbard attempt is the only three core cable we have. We have a total of about 1300 meters of wire but that is needed to make one module of Figuera and we would need another 1300 meters to make the second module.

The problem can be solved easily if I make the second module a step down transformer of sorts and then provide the feedback from the second module secondary to the first module primary. But I need to invest time, money, manpower etc and note that all is my personal time and money.

You now have the photos. We can take videos and show the actual results also but it would require another few man days of work and I need to hire people and pay them all. That is a problem and getting the right people to do the work is also a problem..But I will do it any way..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 11:11:19 PM
Thank you.   And just take your time, do the replication step by step as convenient.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 11:29:31 PM
Hi Gyula:

I hope you are satisfied now that I instantly took the photos of the lab as it exists and posted it for you to recognize that I infact conducted the experiments as claimed. My intention is to put the information in to the public domain so every one can replicate. I have an idea how the self sustaining part of Hubbard worked but in my experiments I have promised on mother Earth that some thing will happen bound to happen and had been disappointed that it did not happen. So I can only do experiments and only after confirmation I can confirm that things happen in the way I have posted. Any one having any doubt that we did or did not do the experiments would now know that we have indeed done the experiments. I'm now aged 51. Let me do my contribution to humanity..That is all I have in my mind..There are to my knowledge at least 4 to 5 different devices that can be used to generate energy as self sustaining energy generators.. I will need to work on others and post them..

I actually got in to this for in India especially in Tamil Nadu where I live due to power shortage lot of families lost employment, lot of businesses closed and I have 1200 clients and am a busy person and even I had to struggle to run the office. I have seven full time employees now and two part time employees and have given appointment to another one. At one point I had 19 employees and those who left me could not get employment for some time. I know the difficulties. I came to Madras the city I live in with just $20 and had struggled in life enormously to reach this level and so when I see people losing employment for lack of power, I understand their problem. It is only then last year i decided to look in to what is power generation and how it can be improved and I have filed a few patent applications as well.

So there is no deception here. Whatever I reported is a fact and if I do not know something I would say so and would be happy to learn and happy to be corrected and guided as well. I remain obliged. I hope you are now satisfied.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 15, 2014, 11:38:03 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

I did not ask for photos because I did not believe you , I simply hoped to understand the modified Figuera setup much better from seeing an actual implementation, than by reading the texts.  You surely know the saying: a photo worths a thousand words. That is all.   

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2014, 11:48:54 PM
The modified implementation of figuera has been taken down by us now. But we can reconstruct it and show the results without any problem.

We removed all that for the Electrician who worked with me on that project passed away three months back. Then others did not want to work on that project. So I asked them to remove them all and kind of cleaned out the room. Then we tried to do Hubbard. Failed in getting magnetism in four of the 8 coils. Now we have succeeded but the second four have lower magnetism than the first four coils. I think I have understood how to fix it but only experiment will tell.

I will rebuild the cores again and show the results. So you can even direct me to take the measurements and check online webcast through skype what we are doing and guide us as well. That is also no problem. We are quite open. And I only report facts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 16, 2014, 12:24:30 AM
Hallo NRamaswami,
It´s very nice from you to post your results and you’re your experiments, Thank you!

As I could read, did you used the same arrangement as I posted some pages before?
2 identical Electromagnets (red & blue) and the third in between as sandwich?

I have the same opinion about giving the thing to the people everywhere in the globe.

Best regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 12:36:31 AM
Ok. Next time I build the device I will make the secondary coils to go to earth as a safty measure. We will measure the voltage and amperage then. Is that ok. Whether you all agree or not this is what I'm going to do as I need to check the voltage and then wind a transformer to reduce the voltage and increase the amperage. That is both safe as well as increase our confidence that higher the voltage, higher would be the amperage. We will then build a customized step down transformer to step down the voltage and then give the output to the load. We can all then see if the output power is higher than the input power or not..We will try to do this within about ten days..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 12:50:54 AM
Hi NMS:

The photo shown by you is different.

Mine was a rocket like set up or pencil like set up..

Three electromagnets all connected in series. Like a Pencil or Rocket..

NS - NS - NS

Bolded NS are Primary 1 and Primary 2. In these things a step down secondary is wound first upon which the quadfilar coil was wound as primary.

The secondary NS is a step up version of a single wire having several layers. I did not count the turns and layers. But we ensures that the P1 and P2 had equal number of primary wires to get the same magnetic field strength. Ene of P1 connected to beginning of P2.

All three secondaries are in series..

There is nothing more to my set up. Simple one but a large one to construct. we believe that about 6 feet of iron rods and a lot of them are needed to get sufficient force and magnetic flux to induce the secondary. There are no moving parts. Large the core, the larger would be the output is true.

Will get back to you later. Bye for now..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 16, 2014, 01:20:07 AM
One problem can be if the voltage and current output are 90 degrees out of phase then you'll get next to no output power as the power factor will be close to zero. but the open circuit voltage and short circuit current might not indicate that, it would help to see voltage and current traces for the output while on load of say 60 Watts compared to say 25 Watts, then we could see what would happen with even more load as a picture of circuit behavior is made.

If the "magic" is happening in the arrangement of the transformer parts then all we need replicate is the actual transformer arrangement and excite it to get the same current/voltage phasing that the resistor array/commutator does. Remember Figuera says that no real diligence is required so there should not need to be any micron tolerances for gaps ect.

Many people in the past have excited transformers or (coils) from both ends with opposite polarities and different phasing. I fail to understand how people can think no one has tried to do just exactly that before.

Figuera died not long after his claims changed from a 1902 regular inverter type arrangement to a 1908 device that is self powering and outputting copious power as well as running itself with no real changes to the device.
This in itself is odd. Is it possible that the sudden onset of an illness could have affected his judgement ? Back in the day he lived little was known of many illnesses which can affect cognitive function. Maybe Bufon was a hypnotist, anything is possible.

The main thing is the device is tested properly and investigated.

Woopy made a video showing a small setup where the output did not affect the input, but that means nothing unless the output is more than the input. What it probably means is the voltage and current output are likely about 90 degrees out of phase.

So we need a north and south inducer coils on cores and an induced coil between, when the north coil is energized as compared to the south coil needs to be graphed. Is it 180 out of phase as in a normal inverter or is it 90 degrees out of phase ?

Bufon's claim that to get industrial scale currents the induced coils need to be wound under the inducer coils on the same core means something. That is if he did make the claim, I don't read Spanish.  :-[

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:32:16 AM
Farmhand:

I also don't read spanish. I typed the patent of Buforn in to google translate and got the translation.

I do not know what is the phase of the secondary with respect to the primary. What I did is simple.

Wound a single wire secondary core on P1. 3 layers If I remember correctly about 85 to 88 turns per layer.
Wound the primary upon the secondary. Quadfilar primary.
Primary is wound for a number of layers and turns. Probably about four or five.
Primary and secondary are wound in same direction. This is P1.

Identical P2 is also wound.

The secondary is the middle coil which is single wired and is made up of many layers and a number of turns.

Connection is like this NSP1- NSs-NSP2

Now I do not know if there is any 90' phase difference or 180' phase difference is there. What is the phase difference between the secondary and primary of a normal transformer must have been there as all the secondaries are connected in series.

Regarding phase difference between the P1 and P2 I do not know. Current circulated four times in P1 before it went to P2 where it circulated four times. So a time varying magnetic field is present in both P1 and P2. This induces the secondary which works.

There is nothing more than this for me to disclose at the moment. Sufficient information is given for any one to replicate the device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:48:43 AM
Farmhand:

Please check Buforn's patent. He demonstrated it before the spanish patent office. The spanish patent examiner agreed that the machine worked as claimed. That translation is provided by Hanon himself I think.

In my experiments what I have understood is this. Electricity and Magnetism can exist together or exist apart. We have had magnetism cancelled in devices we built but we have had eddy currents in the electromagnets. The rods did not magnetize. It depends on the way we wind the wires.

Similarly as I reported earlier if the magnet is very strong it blocks the electricity from moving forward. It is quite possible that iron rods have high impedance so electricity is not going to the load. Alternatively what I believed was that the powerful magnet acts in the reverse way of a rotating permanent or electromagnet that produces electricity and the static powerful electromagnet simply absorbed the electricity and sent it to atmosphere like a blackhole.

So we really do not have full information on this subject. You would no where find the info that high voltage: amperage ratio is a must for secondary to work. But thinking about it, I'm not aware of any transformer in mass use that uses low voltage and high amperage as input and works. My knowledge as I repeatedly acknowledge is limited but even if they do work, their efficiency would be way too low.

Calling Buforn a hyponotist or Figuera might have gone insane at old age are not fair when the Patent office has examined the device and certified that it worked as claimed. Simply because we do not have such devices today does not mean that the technology did not exist. There are several technologies of ancient era that are superior to todays technology but have disappeared. We do not have any information on them. Hanon must be complimented for his hard work to bring this patent and the device to our attention. My only limited part is I modified the device, understood the patent, eliminated the unnecessary parts and made the device a simple one. Because the input is given as AC or can be given as pulsed DC..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 16, 2014, 06:31:17 AM
I didn't call Bufon a hypnotist, I suggested the possibility. And the possibility of people suffering a rapid onset disease that affects cognitive function is real.

Here is all I see about the "demonstration" to the patent examiner. It certainly doesn't seem so simple as him saying that he observed the device "in operation" and producing more output than input energy.

Quote
GERONIMO BOLIBAR
Engineer-Industrial Property Agent
Barcelona
 
Honorable Sir,
In compliance with Article 100 of the Law of Property May 16, 1902 I have the honor to
transmit to you a certificate signed by engineer D. Jose Ma Bolibar y Pinós crediting to
have conducted measures of practical implementation of the patent No. 47706 issued
on June 6, 1910 in favor of Constantine Buforn by an “Electrical Generator "Universal".
God preserve you many years.
Barcelona June 5, 1913. Signed: Gerónimo Bolibar
To: Illustrious Lord Chief Registrar of Industrial Property


....................................................................


D. Jose Ma Bolibar y Pinós, Industrial Engineer, at the request of D. Constantine
Buforn, patentee of invention No. 47706.
 
Certify: That I have examined the material consisting of original memory corresponding
to said background patent, issued on June 6, 1910, for "A GENERATOR OF
ELECTRICITY" UNIVERSAL "which consists essentially of a series of inducer
electromagnets combined with a series of electromagnets or induced coils, a switch
and comprising a brush or rotary switch, which makes contact successively on the
series of fixed contacts and get a continuous variation of the current flowing through
the coils of the inducer electromagnets, developing in this manner a current in induced
coils
.
 
I further certify that provided the necessary reports when they had to come to the
knowledge of the conditions under which it is carried out the exploitation of this patent
,
that D. Constantine Buforn exploitation of this patent in the street Universidad No. 110
ground floor, of this city, having of all the elements necessary for the construction, in
the proportion rational for its use, of electricity generators which are described and
characterized in the memory of that patent
.
 
For all these reasons, I consider the above patent implementation in accordance with
Article 98 provided in the current Industrial Property Law.

And for the record I issue this in the city of Barcelona on June 5, 1913.
Signed: J.M. Bolibar


..............................................................

On June 6, 1913 Mr. G. Bolibar submitted certification dated June 5, 1913 and signed
by Mr. J.M. Bolibar, Industrial Engineer, to justify the implementation of the invention
patent number 47406.
 
NOTE
 
In view of what is stated in the certification referred to in the above extract, presented
for the purposes of Article 100 of the Law, and as the application was filed within the
period set by Article 99 of the Law thereof, the undersigned believes appropriate to
declare as implemented the object of that patent, according to article 34 of the
Regulation.
V.S. resolved
Madrid, July 9, 1913
Signed
 
 
Implemented
Number 47706
July 9, 1913
The note
Signed


Unfortunately I am unable to locate the English translations of the patents number 47406 and Patent number 47706. So if anyone could link those I will read them.

There are several possibilities.

1) The Engineer-Industrial Property Agent status of the examiner may not have qualified him to properly analyze the device.

2) He was paid.

3) The device outputs more power than input but not more energy.

4) The device shows more current output than current input but not more energy.

5) The device actually does output more energy than is input to the device by the operator and we will all soon have free energy for ever.

..

Anyway the proof is in the pudding and old patents will not power household appliances. To do that we need a real device.

Now if we look at the control setup with the commutator and resistor array, and plot a phase diagram we ought to be able to determine what the phase relationship between the south and north magnetization of the inducer coils is, then we ought to be able to emulate that and with the same type of inducer induced coil arrangement we should get the promised result.

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 08:53:59 AM
Hi Farmhand:

Thanks for your detailed analysis.. I agree that people can suddenly lose their cognitive functions but that does not happen until the age 78 or so as I could recall. At age 68 for a working person suddenly losing cognitive functions is very difficult to happen. Neurodegenerative diseases do not show up very late. It is only now these subjects are still being researched. I have written patent applications for vaccines for many such diseases.

The modified figuera  device as described and built by me outputs more voltage and amperage than input amperage and voltage. That is all I have determined.  I would neither claim overunity nor claim it as free energy. And I believe that devices can be made to self sustain themselves. Most hydroelectric turbines use a small input power to generate a large output because the rotor is driven by the water force. This small exciting current can be and is taken from the output to run the turbine.

In a similar way a solar powered agricultural water pump can produce electricity by using micro water turbines which are then driving Low RPM alternators to produce a lot of power. That power can be used to charge batteries and provide lighting if we use a large battery bank to store that energy. If power from the alternator is given to this device the output power is going to be greater than the one originally supplied and more batteries can be charged which can then be inverted to useful power.

If you are talking about free energy, I would understand that nothing is free. If you want to stay healthy do a bit of walking, exercise, eat at proper times proper food and have proper sleep. So even to stay normally healthy we need to follow these practices. By that way these experiments have cost me a lot of money and time and it is certainly not free of investment and effort. The learning curve was not free. So nothing comes free without effort. By that view, the solar cells that produce electricity are not free to buy and install but are only converting energy that was being wasted in to useable power.  So essentially Free energy is energy that was hithertobefore wasted and now converted to useable energy. Regarding overunity, if you look at my posts I'm not really not competent to say any thing on the subject.

All I can share and have done is to share the results of my experiments. My experiments strongly indicate that so far the devices that have been built have not used the forces of magnetic attraction but forces of magnetic repulsion. When both these forces are used together to create useful output power, then what we can get as output voltage and amperage is greater than the input voltage and amperage.

Other assumptions are not scientific statements but mere assumptions on your part.  100 years back corruption was negligible not even heard of in most places of the world. The racial practices of the society were different. If you are from US, until very recently blacks were not even given the right to vote I believe. So do not assume things. People did not take bribes that easily in olden days..Society and its values were different. Figuera had a reputation to protect. Buforn as a Patent Attorney has maintained the patent at his own expense for several years. After that we do not know if he sold it out for a fee.  Unless there is something worthwhile, a Lawyer would not spend his own money.

But the strange thing about the Figuera device is this.. It uses both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion again and again and again in the core to build more output power than the initial input. That modular approach combined with using both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion again and again is what strikes me as highly innovative. And it avoids mechanical force totally.

Just name any other generator that does this today..To my limited knowledge there does not appear to be any such generator that uses both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion. 

I believe for these reasons and for the reasons of my results that there is very significant potential in this concept and device. I just assisted the community with the results of my experiments so people can take it forward and keep it in the public domain.

I would appreciate if rather than theorizing any one would try to replicate the experiments very simple ones at that now that I have shared that I did with you all and verify if what I found was true or false..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 16, 2014, 08:54:48 AM

Simply this is an amplifying transformer. Two step down transformers  acting as primary electromagnets set up in such a way that the opposite poles of the two are facing each other and in that place you place another secondary of many turns to step up the voltage. Then what you get is both amperage and voltage increase. In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that.


  "In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that"

NRamaswami,

I tried to figure things up from your view , from  many of your posts,
but your above statement were amazing/wonderfull/magic/..../.....   etc,   :)
I think, "That is not as simple as that".

can you post a "simple  drawing"?, at least with paint application.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 09:43:54 AM
NRamaswami


Can you look at picture and correct it ? Sorry, I used Paint to do that  :-[ We also need to know is that is one one single core (composed of iron rods) or there are 3 cores inside with gaps (as suggested by original patent) , and again the wire sizes, all information about construction repeated, sorry. It's very hard to guess from the word description.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 16, 2014, 11:36:37 AM

OK,
is this your version of Figuera ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 12:41:06 PM
I think Mr. Ramaswami stated long tubes one after the other, may be like this attached.
he will tell us which one is the closer to his setup.
Regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2014, 12:41:16 PM
I had always wondered why Figuera used two primaries. It is clear that he looked for a balance of forces between both them to get and special effect. If not he just had used one primary.

I have an official document that shows that Figuera kept working in a new design after selling the 1902 patent. Maybe he was upset after seeing that they buried his generator. He derived a new design in his 1908 patent

Buforn paid all his patents until 1914.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:14:44 PM
Hi:

1. Air gaps were present in between the cores.

2. The drawing given by ALVARO_CS is very close to what we did. My eyesight is poor and I'm not able to figure out what is the difference between his two figures. Both of them look the same to me.

3. All other earlier drawings are not correct. ALVARO_CS has understood my description correctly.

The drawin that shows an E core and I core in the middle and another E core in the reverse direction is wrong. This is all one straight tube and I said it is rocket like or pencil like to make things more clear. ALVARO_CS is very correct in his drawings but I do not see what is the difference between his two figures.

4. You can connect two step down transformers in series. Amperage will remain reduced but voltage of the two will be combined as the secondaries are in series. This is common knowledge. When we add a middle section where the forces that operate are not the normal forces of magnetic repulsion but forces of magnetic attraction between opposite poles, voltage and amperage increases further..

The problem is that all of you are educated in theory. I'm not..So not knowing things will not work, I have carried out experiments and when we found that the texts do not describe what happens clearly but the experimental results are contradictory, we went by the experimental results..Nothing more..

By the way, how many of you know how to convert iron to permanent magnet and how many of you have actually converted iron to permanent magnet? Real hands on experience..For many electricians I contacted did not know and have not performed that part and did not even that knowledge..

I have reported my experimental findings.. nothing more..I will do the experiments with a step down transformer and let you all know what is the usable output obtained. That I think should solve the issue..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:24:09 PM
Hi Forest:

All wires are 4 sq mm wires that can carry up to 24 amps.

Both secondary and primary are only 4 sq mm wires.

We bought coils after coils of wires of 4 sq mm only. Then put them all together and wrapped up them to make a quadfilar coil. I do not remember the exact number of layers of primary but it was four layers and both primary sides had the same number of layers and same number of turns. Then the magnetic field strength is approximately equal.

However the resistor effect may be there due to the current circulating four times in the primary P1 first before it went to P2 where it circulated another four times before it returned to mains.

Will it have any effect? I really do not have any theoretical knowledge on this part. Nor do I have equipment to measure these things nor I have knowledge or experience in handling such equipment or even what those equipment are..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 01:24:56 PM
hanon


In my opinion,in
1918 Hubbard took exactly the same and slightly improved version of device, and in 1921 he had already finished 8 -transformer device in loop,  self-running and producing 40kW output. Between 1918 and 1939 you can found surprisingly many free energy inventors taking energy from Earth "atmosphere".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 01:25:05 PM
Sorry for the mistake, I tried to edit my post, to attach a bigger image, but could not erase the small one.
Both are identical
(there is air gap between cores)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:31:23 PM
ALVARO_CS

You have not marked the poles in both the figures..

The poles are like this NS - NS - NS   

The South pole of P1 faces the North pole of secondary and the south pole of secondary faces the North pole of P2.. Secondary is located between the two opposite poles of P1 and P2. Whether they are south or north does not matter as I do not know which one is south and which one is North and in any case in AC current poles reverse 50 times a second. But the poles must be opposite poles to enjoy the forces of magnetic attraction..

There is no magic here. We do not have any device that uses the forces of magnetic attraction. Look at an Induction Generator. It is an induction motor that uses the forces of magnetic repulsion but is boosted to rotate faster than the magnetic field to produce electricity due to mechanical energy imparted to it by mechanical means. Figuera clearly describes that this is not needed if we use the forces of magnetic attraction and since the charges between opposite poles are opposite charges, Lenz law is not applicable here.

If you send a rocket up, it needs a lot of energy to go up against gravity. when the energy is expended it stops and then falls back to earth. Its speed is initially zero and as it falls its speed keeps on increasing due to gravitational pull. Right..A body of fixed mass with increasing velocity would increase the energy of the body..So between opposite poles the increase of voltage and amperage is normal. There is no violation of law of physics as far as I can see it. There is no magic here. It is normal common sense and we find this to be experimentally correct.

Please do replicate the experiments and see for yourselves..I have not hidden any thing..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 16, 2014, 01:36:55 PM

@ALVARO_CS


That figure looks remarkable.  Such an arrangement should cause addition of fluxes from all wires  resulting in tremendous output from middle secondary.  Have you tried it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 01:42:57 PM
Newton II:

Not very tremendous..It increases by 6 times to 8 times. Higher the voltage, higher the amperage.

Hi Forest:

Yes,..You are correct that Hubbard device is similar to Figuera device..I'm working on it and I hope I can replicate it.. Let us wait and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 01:46:12 PM
Hi Forest:

All wires are 4 sq mm wires that can carry up to 24 amps.

Both secondary and primary are only 4 sq mm wires.

We bought coils after coils of wires of 4 sq mm only. Then put them all together and wrapped up them to make a quadfilar coil. I do not remember the exact number of layers of primary but it was four layers and both primary sides had the same number of layers and same number of turns. Then the magnetic field strength is approximately equal.

However the resistor effect may be there due to the current circulating four times in the primary P1 first before it went to P2 where it circulated another four times before it returned to mains.

Will it have any effect? I really do not have any theoretical knowledge on this part. Nor do I have equipment to measure these things nor I have knowledge or experience in handling such equipment or even what those equipment are..


4 mm square ? that's quite thick wire, how big is you transformer then so it only consume 7 amps in primary ? sound like a lot of turns is required for that at 220V. To be completly clear may I ask : did you connected quadfilar once after finishing all layers of primary with 4 wires coming together or did that for each layer separately ? sorry, if it's obvious but I want to see all details.
Maybe would be possible to make small model of device for testing using thinner wires, for example one with 21 insulated strands
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 01:47:06 PM
@ NRamaswami

I drew the cores in red-to-blue color to indicate the two polarity in same element.
As you say, they change depending of time due to AC.
This way of coloring, is a conventional representation that means two polarity.
It is used commonly when representing the two poles of a magnet. Therefore in the setup drawn, opposite poles are facing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 01:52:19 PM
@NewtonII
I tried a similar one WITHOUT the two secondary beneath the primary, and without AC, but pulsed DC via a double commutator.
I`ll keep on going
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:04:49 PM
Hi Forest:

I said it earlier.. We have used 1300 metres of 4 sq mm wire in building the device. Each core 18 inches long. And so we had electromagnets for about 5 feet for the rods were coming out of the tubes on both the sides. So it is about 5 feet long. I think the rods would have weighed about 150 kg of soft iron. You need bulkier iron core to have a lot of turns. Small iron core does not work. Each core when wound with a single wire has 80 to 90 turns..This is because we have used the same wires again and again and cut them and then connected them again using tapes and at these places the wire is thicker and so we do not get the same number of turns.

Larger the diameter and longer the length better is the output.

I do not know the theory and so I can only tell you how much the voltmeter and ammeter showed. I cannot even guarantee that the devices are perfect for the devices are cheap analog devices.

You can also use pulsed DC but the results are better with AC than with pulsed DC.. But for feedback purposes I think pulsed DC would be easier to implement..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:06:26 PM
ALVARO_CS:

thank you for the explanation. I did not know that color scheme.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 02:15:10 PM
Hi Forest:

I am not able to understand the question on Quadfilar primary..

What we did is as follows..

1. Wind single layer secondary on tube 1 acting as P1. Each turn may have about 85 to 90 turns. Wind three layers of wire. Go down first from top to bottom and then come in the same direction from bottom to top and then go down again from top to bottom always winding in the same direction.

2. Now wind the 4 wires which are in parallel to each other as primary again as above but here the quadfilar coil ends at the top and not at the bottom of the tube.

3. When the winding is completed for four layers or six layers of such quadfilar coil, connect the end of the first wire to the beginning of the second wire and end of second wire to the beginning of the third wire and the end of the third wire to the beginning of the fourth wire.

4. Now wind a similar P2.

5. Now wind the secondary single layer of multiple layers.

6. Place all them. Now connect the end of the P1 fourth wire to the beginning of the P2 wire 1.

7. Connect all three secondaries in series and connect them to load.

8. . Input is given to the beginning of P1 first wire and end of P2 fourth wire.

That completes the set up..Variations to increase the rate of change of magnetic flux are possible but I have not tested them yet..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on February 16, 2014, 03:56:06 PM
NRamaswami
First I would like to thank you for posting all this information. I spent six weeks full time last year trying to duplicate Figuera's device and failed and I am very happy to see some positive results. I believe you have given me enough information  to replicate except for one detail. You mention iron rod for cores. In this country there are many products still called iron but they are in fact steel. Many experimenters here use steel welding rod that has been either painted with lacquer or oxidized with rust for electromagnet cores. Did you use something similar or is iron rod much more common in India? I can buy cast iron rod for dollars a pound or pure iron rod but it is dollars per gram. I hope you can help.
Thanks
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 04:56:40 PM
Hi:

Thanks..We used soft iron rods. You go to junk shops and these rods would be available. If you get steel only it is not a problem really. Steel is supposed to retain some magnetism but when we apply AC, you do not need to worry about it really. For AC would demagnetize any magnetism that is present. We did not have any insulation for soft iron rods and did not bother about hystersis loss or eddy current loss. One of my friends criticised me for not covering the rods with insulation but we simply cut costs. We bought from junk shops to cut costs. 

This device is very very simple to make.

Create a powerful high voltage high amperage secondary in module 1.

Then create a step down secondary in module 2. But step it down to some where near or slighltly higher voltage than the input of module 1.

Now you can simply power the source of the power for module 1 from the output of module 2. Since the output is higher in module 2, the remaining output is used for useful work.

If you can handle high voltages and high amperages,  build more modules than that and make the last module a step down one.  Higher the voltage in the device output, higher would be the amperage. This is the difference here.

But be extremely careful..The voltage that comes out is very high and Ammeters do not show any amps when the voltage is up to 250 volts when they are not connected to load. When it went up to 630 volts the Ammeter showed 20 amps at no load and that indicates a very strong current is also present as the voltage increases.

This will require a lot of man hours and winding will have to be done by hand as all wires are thick insulated wires. It takes a lot of time, effort and money. If it is going to be very costly to replicate in US, we can do it in India since we have already done the project here. We will only need to build the second core now, insulate every thing with plastic and paper and then do this experiment. The step down part requires expensive copper cables which are highly insulated with thick plastic or rubber insulation like those used on the batteries of 5 Kw inverters. They should be able to carry 100 amps of current at least. That is where it gets costly here in India. Another cost is man hours. It costs money to get both unskilled labour and skilled people. Skilled people are needed only for oscilloscope and that kind of stuff but I'm not worried about it as we now know the device performs best under the conditions described. We have used pulsed DC also and the device does not perform well in pulsed DC. I do not know why for I expected that the impedance would be lower in pulsed DC and the results should be better in pulsed DC but to the contrary only when we apply AC we get good results in the secondary. Possibly when we provide a feedback current, the lower efficiency of pulsed DC would be compensated I guess. But guesses are just guesses and experimental results are different from our expectations and calculations.

Since many of the people were going wrong here I posted the experimental results.

Do not bother about steel or any thing else. Ac will demagnetize any magnetism present. Even if it is present, do not worry. Just take action and see the results..Do not go for expensive materials and cut costs..This project has eaten a lot of my money..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2014, 05:19:37 PM
Hi,

What about using 3 light bulbs or 3 heaters in series to reach the 630 volts: 220 V + 220 V + 220 V . Maybe you could use some heaters (resistors) to test the output in a simple way.

Good luck with your tests.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 05:36:06 PM
Hanon:

Three lights would not consume 630 volts. Lights would burn out if the voltage exceeds 270 volts. We need to step them down before we can give it to any load. Same is the case with heaters.

I can not take risks. We would not give any voltage higher than 250 volts to any load. I'm not experienced in high voltage experiments and this is both high voltage and high amperage and is very risky.

So we would better take safety measures than take risks..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 05:50:48 PM
I just want to make one acknowledgement for the results of my experiments.

I was mentored and trained by Mr. Patrick J Kelly PJK who has shut down his website. I emailed him on Feb 8, 2013 when I had no knowledge on these subjects and Patrick asked me to try to replicate Hubbard and then guided me. The guidance was not on point and there were many misconceptions. Then Patrick had a health problem and he retired. He has now given his website to another person in Europe.

I have not mentioned Patricks name for without his consent I did not want to disclose his mentorship but only now I have received an email from him complimenting me and approving my desire to acknowledge this support. He is the person who planted the seed for doing all these experiments in me and without his mentorship and guidance we would not have come to where we are today. All credits go to Figuera, Hanon and Patrick..Without Hanon Figuera would have remained in the shelves..

if you look closely at Figuera's designs and patents he advocates using the foces of magnetic attraction rather than the forces of magnetic repulsion. However in the one we are considering he has combined the effect of both the forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion together to get a higher output.

To be honest, we also did not believe the results initially but when the ammeter burnt out we knew that current is there.

If you look closely at Don Smith patent on generating energy from capacitors which are suspended on high voltage and high frequency magnetic rod, Don Smith has omitted the fact that the magnetic rod must be placed between the two opposite poles of two primaries.  Once that is done the rest of the results would fall in place.

So only due to the Guidance of Patrick I was able to initiate and start the experiments. When he left we persisted with our efforts and got the results. He has read the forum posts and is very appreciative of me and I feel really very obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 05:57:49 PM
hi Hanon

I do not know how to measure the amperage of a current in an open loop. (no load)
Only know to put the ammeter in series with one of the two output wires when load is present closing the circuit. Also in series (inserted between one wire) before the device, to see input amperage. (eg. before a motor or a lamp)
IMHO, if the whole circuit is open at the end, (no load) no current is circulating.
The primary is closed: two leads live-return
The secondary is open: two leads no load
If the two secondary leads (in-out) were connected to the ammeter, it was shorted (closing the circuit) as has been stated in a previous post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 06:08:58 PM
Alvaro_CS:

Output wires were not connected to each other. They were connected to the load bulbs but because the voltmeter showed very high voltage, we did not switch on the lamps. It is at that point the ammeter showed 20 amps. Normally the Ammeter does not show any amps when no light is burning or even when two 200 watts lights are burning. Ammeter starts showing amperage only when 3x 200 watts lamps are burning and that is only around 1.5 amps. Although the lights are rated at 200 watts they consume less than 200 watts to light up.

When I said the secondaries were kept open I essentially indicated that the secondaries had no load on them and were open circuit. I apologize for any miscommununication on my part and please understand that neither is English my first language nor is this subject my basic expertise area and I readilly acknowledge that I do not know much..Forgive me for any mistakes in communication. Please..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 06:34:06 PM
@NRamaswami

When there is such a good will as yours, no mistake can make an offense, so. . no apology nor forgiveness needed from both sides.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification

English is neither my mother language

regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 16, 2014, 07:03:39 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

You wrote:

Quote
Output wires were not connected to each other. They were connected to the load bulbs but because the voltmeter showed very high voltage, we did not switch on the lamps. It is at that point the ammeter showed 20 amps.

What you describe above is an impossible situation. If the load lamps were switched off, then there is no way the ammeter showed the 20 Amper current. And if it showed, then you somehow had a closed circuit in the secondary you were not aware of, please try to ponder on this. 
I am not saying you do some miscommunication here but you yourself should realize that it is impossible to have an open circuit at the output and still state the 20A current and state an output power with it.
It is okay if you calculated the current by linear interpolation (by mathematically) as you described it last night deducing the numbers from the input current and voltage hence input power but then it is not a measured power but a calculated one.


You also wrote:

Quote

Normally the Ammeter does not show any amps when no light is burning or even when two 200 watts lights are burning. Ammeter starts showing amperage only when 3x 200 watts lamps are burning and that is only around 1.5 amps. Although the lights are rated at 200 watts they consume less than 200 watts to light up.


I put in bold your first sentence above: the first part of your sentence is correct till the word or but the second part is not! When two 200 watts bulbs were burning the ammeter should have already shown a certain current but not zero! Maybe the ammeter was not connected correctly to measure the output current or it was not a dependable instrument? 
Normaly to get the load current at the output, you connect the ammeter in series with the bulbs or in series with the group of the bulbs and the series combination of the meter and the bulb(s) are connected across the output. Was this done so, can you recall?

Well, earlier you mentioned you had an analog meter and it burnt out. Before it burnt out, it must have been abused already because if it was correctly connected in series with the bulbs,  then it should have measured half an amp, one amp etc, any amps higher than zero, ok?

By the way, English is my second language.  I hope you understand it and then you could try to explain this output "mistery".  No problem that you are not an Electrical Engineer but you surely feel that when the bulbs were unconnected, then the 20A current had no way to flow in the secondary coil.

And I am trying to help with these posts and I hope you understand now how the output power is to be measured in the simplest way when you have an AC voltmeter and an AC ampmeter, hooked up at both the input side and the at the output side.  Ammeters always inserted in series with the input side and/or with the output side, this is the only way to get info on the input current draw and on the load current drawn by the bulbs at the output side.
 IF something is not clear in this respect, please ask, and I can draw a simple sketch to show a measuring setup, basically it would reflect what I wrote so far.

Regards,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 16, 2014, 07:18:47 PM
I see only one danger , (not real one but in interpretation) - if that 20Amps are at low voltage or in other words if output is mixed 630V low amps and some lower voltage 20 amps. Could it be ? Sorry, English is also not my primary language and I'm not electrical guy also...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 07:36:35 PM
Gyula:

You are correct in all your statements. The Analog Ammeter can be relied on only after 1 Amps. It oscillates a bit before it indicating the current when lamps are burning. But I have no way of knowing what amps it is.

I did not calculate the Amps output. The Ammeter jumped up to 20 amps. It does not do that when the voltage is even at 250 and at no load condition in the secondary.

I have no knowledge on calculation methods for this is not my domain. I perfectly understand your posts and am also eager that the correct report should be given. This is why I have given all the information as we have without hesitation. And I have found that many posters were going wrong. As one of the friends put it, he spent six weeks last year without being able to replicate Figuera. We kind of figuered out a way but we are actually afraid to go forward due to the high voltages and amperages that are shown.

About Voltage: Amperage calculations, I find that if we get 240 volts in the secondary at no load, when we light the lamps we can go up to 1.8 Amps and 100 volts. So it is about 180 watts of output usable output power there.

But when we go to 250 volts at no load the usable output increases to 120 volts and 2 amps. For a 10 volt difference at no load condition the usable output increases by 60 watts. So at 630 volts at no load assuming that there is no amps present, the usable load would go up significantly. It is possible there was a short circuit inside the ammeter. But I have no way of knowing or interpreting these things and my knowledge is not to that level.

Regarding why I'm afraid of this voltage, this comes at 50 Hz frequency. Electricity at low frequency is deadly. This is why we have people getting killed under high voltage lines. In Tesla coil electricity is given at very high frequency. Electricity above 20 Khz is supposed not to kill but I do not know.

In a way I'm also irritated that we are not able to go forward and so shared the information freely.

Regarding the query of Forest, Whether it is low voltage or high voltage current of more than 2 amps can kill people. At 20 amps I'm told by an Electrical Engineer that it can even cause human blood to boil..Can I take risks here? With my kind of knowledge? So we have kept quiet and did not take it forward. Physiotherapists give electrical stimulations at milliamps only for this reason.

But it is a very simple device. Competent people can easily replicate my work and then build the second step down transformer.

Problem is that the iron rods carry the same current as eddy current and at the same frequency.  I'm not satisfied with our knowledge or capacity to handle this kind of voltage and amperage combinations and this is why we have not moved forward. But we will try this week or next week and post to all. I will share the results freely. No problem.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 16, 2014, 08:12:09 PM
NRamaswami

The way I see the originality of your setup, is that no one here, as far as I know, has tried with a secondary (induced) under the primary (inductor), but just an induced coil central between the two inductors.
I`ll try this next week but at a lower scale. Much to wind.
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2014, 08:34:18 PM
Actually the original designs are Figuera designs. He clearly describes in one line for using a secondary under the primary to get industrial scale currents. Normally in patent applications the inventors will avoid providing full and particular descriptions and best mode of carrying out the invention and the mode of invention disclosed by Figuera is the weakest one of carrying out his invention. What we did was to understand the purpose of rotary switch and resistor set up and in deleting that and replacing it with Alternating current and making the device an extremely simple one without any electriconics to make it easy to replicate. As I'm a Patent Attorney, I was able to spot this.. Earlier descriptions were completely wrong with same poles facing each other which is totally contrary to the teachings of Figuera..

All electrical turbines today use the force of magnetic repulsion. This results in rotation of the core. Then as the core rotates slowly, to make rotate faster we need mechanical energy which is supplied through mechanical means. This conversion process results in loss. Figuera advocated a different approach altogether to use the combined forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction and use them all and avoid the mechanical means to generate a much larger output than the input.

This is the theory that has been ignored. But it is certainly a valid theory.  Possibly all of you have focused only on the drawings and have not studied the patent description of the original and missed the line. Since the original Figuera device we made did not work, I worked it out and did not want to lose the power that can be taken out of the primary. We have actually wound Coils outside the primary also in some experiments but there was not much of difference. When you have a lot of excess voltage output and amperage waiting to be tapped, why create additional voltage and further complicate the issue was the thought and we avoided it all.

Please take care while doing the experiments as these are very high voltage and high amperage ones. You are not going to see any major excess output until you cross the 450 or 500 volts in the secondary I think but this is a guess.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2014, 10:08:27 PM
Hi all,

Here I attach an interview to Clemente Figuera with some interesting insights. This is direct testimony from Figuera himself. It is a good historical review of his findings. It appeared in a local newspaper in 1902. Enjoy it !!!

INTERVIEW TO CLEMENTE
FIGUERA 1902
Mr. Clemente Figuera. - The name of the
conscientious and intelligent engineer,
Inspector of mountains in Canary, is now
universally known, thanks to the news
published by the press about the generator
of his invention for producing far-reaching
consequences, because it constitutes a
valuable element in modern mechanics,
solving problems which will influence
powerfully in most industries.
The meritable engineer states in a recently
published work. - "With persistent effort
nature keeps its secrets, but man´s
intelligence, the most precious gift due to
the divine artist, author of all creation,
allows that slowly and at the cost of
thousands studies and works, the human
race realize that God's work is more perfect
and harmonious than it looks at first sight.
There was no need to create a agent for
each kind of phenomenon, nor varying
forces to produce the multiple motions, nor
so many substances as varieties of bodies
are present to our senses; In doing so, it
was proceeding worthy of a least wise and
powerful creator that that, with a single
matter and a single impulse given to an
atom, started in vibration all cosmic matter,
according to a law from which the others
are natural and logical consequences”
And later he adds: "The twentieth century
has given us the mercy of discovering its
program in general lines. It will stop using
the hackneyed system of transformations,
and it will take the agents where the nature
has them stored. To produce heat, light or
electricity, it will rely on the suitable
vibratory motion because nature´s
available storages are renewed constantly
and have no end ever. For the next
generation, the steam engines will be an
antique, and the blackness of coal, will be
replaced by the pulchritude of electricity, in
factories and workshops, in ocean liners, in
railways and in our homes”
So says Mr. Figueras, who is consistent
with his scientific creed, has based his
significant invention on harnessing the
vibrations of the ether, building a device,
that he names as Generator Figueras, with
the power required to run a motor, as well
as powering itself, developing a force of
twenty horse power. Should be noted that
the produced energy can be applied to all
kinds of industries and its cost is zero,
because nothing is spent to obtain it. All
parts have been built separately in various
workshops under the management of the
inventor, who has shown the generator
running in his home in the city of Las
Palmas.
The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus.
With the generator it may be obtained the
voltage and amperage required, as direct
or alternate currents, producing light,
driving force, heat and all the effects of the
electricity. It is said that shortly Mr. Figuera
will depart to Paris, to constitute a union in
charge of the exploitation of his invention.
Due to the gallantry of our good friend, the
distinguished photographer of Las Palmas
Mr. Luis Ojeda, we thank for making public
to our readers a portrait of Mr. Clemente
Figueras, to whom we congratulate on his
invention, making fervent hopes to produce
the expected beneficial results, for the
benefit of mankind, for the sake of science
and honor of our country, proud to count
him among the number of its illustrious
sons.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 16, 2014, 11:53:09 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

I would like to show you an ebay link where an analog AC ampermeter is offered, maybe you like it:

http://www.ebay.in/itm/Class-2-5-Accuracy-AC-30A-Analogue-Ampere-Panel-Meter-/251452933597?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_203&hash=item3a8bc345dd   

And I found this transformer manufacturer based in Tamil Nadu, maybe not so far from you, and maybe, just maybe they have a junkyard where burnt out tranformers are stored, probably waiting for recycling or rebuilding, and I thought you would approach them for a favor... 
this is their site: http://www.transformersindia.com/ 

Greetings,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 12:06:14 AM
Gyula:

Thanks for the info.

The days when we needed transformers to be built for us are gone. We now have the knowledge to build transformers of fixed output type ourselves. But we still do not know how to build a variac.

The transformer of the step down type that I would would be very costly to purchase. Rather I would buy insulated copper or aluminium wires that can carry 100 to 150 amps and then wind down as the secondary in the second coil or wind it up as a second module secondary which is of a step down type... But that is not the problem.

Problem is lot of voltage in the first module. Iron rods also carry electricity when magnetised. So we need to make the device one without any holes. and then cover the ends with plastic caps. Then we need to cover the wires again with plastic sheets. It is only then that I can test it again to check whether the system would work without the air gaps. I think it would.

Once that is cleared, then I need to measure the voltage and then decide on the number of turns and hand wide a large wire as the step down thing and check that the output voltage is acceptable and can be given to load. Then we will give it to the load.

I would build one module as step up and another module as step down ones so both of them get the benefit of magnetic attraction and do not work as normal transformers.

A normal transformer if I want to order can be ordered over the phone but we would end up paying a lot of money. This way we know what we have done and what exactly is needed and can unwind or make additional windings..

Thanks for your support and kind thoughts..

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 12:09:58 AM
Hi Gyula:

You see the picture of the Ammeter at the bottom. Up to 5 amps I would not know what is the amperage. I have better ones than this but they are little more costly. I can order what is needed over the phone. I know a lot of people. I'm a Patent  and Trademark Attorney and I have 1200 clients with 26 years of experience. So I can order over phone and it will come to me. Thanks for the support.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 04:35:58 AM

@NRS


When bulbs are switched OFF, ammeter cannot show any reading if it is connected in series with bulbs.

With your description we have to conclude that you have connected the ammeter directly to the output terminals. By doing so you have shorted the output terminals through ammeter.  An ammeter should always be connected in series with load.  When you connect the ammeter to the terminals without load, it becomes parallel to the terminals and output will be shorted through ammeter. 

So, the current 20 Amps which your ammeter is showing is short circuit current which may not be the current produced by your device.  Because when you make a short ciruit,  the entire current flowing in street pole lines ( connection from electricity board) may come to your device depending on the type and configuration of device if you are drawing input power from city power supply.

When I was studying in schools,  I used to conduct such 'short ciruit experiments' unknowingly, drawing huge current from street power supply lines to my house causing blowing of fuse, damaging house wiring, burning of sockets etc.  which is a very dangerous thing to do.  (somewhere you have mentioned that you have blown off one ammeter).

Just a guess.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on February 17, 2014, 04:41:26 AM
Hi Fellows,

Great topic and some extremely interesting discussions and information.

One brief observation/comment: "Also" consider Figuera used a commutator yielding Staircase Step Functions to drive the induction coils. These "STEPS" likely contained very steep rise and fall times especially considering the only capacitance found in his circuits appear to be the inductor coil internal winding capacitance. Note that many OU (COP > 1) applications involve disruptive transitions [spark gaps or other fast dV/dt apparatus]. Therefore this feature might be worth keeping in mind as you pursue the Back EMF mitigation aspects.

Also, there's a very talented and excellent Lecturer named Michel van Biezen (Lectures On Line) who has a Youtube channel that is probably well worth taking the time to review and refresh your Electricity and Magnetism recollection. The following six lectures may be of great interest:

Physics - Electromagnetic Induction: Faraday's Law (4 total)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejRJM-kCyWQ&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejRJM-kCyWQ&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i80TIzF9D88&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i80TIzF9D88&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHzpPyxK6a8&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHzpPyxK6a8&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atbioBvN8hE&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atbioBvN8hE&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)

and; Physics - Electromagnetic Induction: Faraday's Law and Lenz Law (2 total)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-aoGz5X_j0&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-aoGz5X_j0&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUcQqHsQjqg&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUcQqHsQjqg&list=PLX2gX-ftPVXU_CiWsaFpXh9O3k90L7jTv)

Or, subscribe as this fellow is "as good as they get" and his channel is a great engineering/physics/chemistry/etc. reference source.

I can appreciate that some in this blog have a reservation regarding the "formal" sciences but hey, every bit of help is appreciated - we're all in this together!

Have a productive week...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 17, 2014, 07:21:52 AM

hi..  all

NRamaswami stated some where ( i forgot ) that he was helped by some electrical engineer,
so pre-assumed that there was no wrong measurement, maybe only miss communication.
 
however, any sketch/drawing "how to use ampmeter and voltmeter" from gyulasun or others should be good to posted, i agree with what you said gyulasun about measurement. i have ever seen from webpage someone measure amperage by connecting ampmeter to output directly.

i guess, only with sketch/drawing will reduce miss communication, as Alvaro_CS (thanks for drawing) who have posted "drawing" help us to look it as start point. those all will save much time from reading and arguing everything. and also, English is not my daily language, sorry for that.

...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 17, 2014, 08:33:03 AM
just guessing here ...but maybe it would be possible to use electric kettle resistive heating elements ( for example from scrap yard )  in series as a resistive divider to lower voltage to 220V. It doesn't need to work for a long time just enough to connect the bank of incandescent bulbs to have clear evidence of output power. I think a few seconds is enough. What do you think ? Surely caution is required , but all that setup is cheap and can be put in some heat resistance metal box grounded and insulated from outside, and operated from distance by a switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 09:03:13 AM
Hi All:

Ammeters are always connected in series. Patrick J Kelly my mentor has advocated low voltage and low amperage to give to devices and those devices did not work. For they were huge the and input voltage and amperage was less to make any effect at low frequency.

We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. So what Newton tells me makes sense.

Even wikipedia says that Lenz law does not apply to charges that are opposite to each other is not included in the textbooks.

Actually Tinselkoala appears to be a very knowledgeable person with a lot of hands on experience. He initially rejected the idea that the inductor itself would not transmit the electricity to the primary and the current stops dead in the electromagnet without going to the load lamps but then very quickly figured it out why it does that and gave a very cogent  and convincing explanation that the resistance of the iron rods becomes very high and the magnetism would be very high and electricity may not show at all in the lamps..He has also shown the Tesla coil to claim that it has an input of 75 watts and an output of 30000 watts. Whether that 30000 watts is useable energy or not he has not answered. But I believe that it is useable energy. How we can use that.. Let me try to answer that..

What I have seen at 50 Hz ( I repeat the frequency for it is very important and not understood in Electricity) current is, as we give higher voltage the electromagnet performs well to produce output in the secondary. If we give 440 volts and 4 amps in the primary, it would then produce a very significantly higher voltage in the step up transformer set up of Figuera but because the stepped up voltage would also increase the amperage in the device, the output amperage would also be higher..

Now the other friend has just pointed out that the other designs all have a steep spike and then a steep dive things in other devices of this type. This is essentially done to increase the frequency. the rotary device has 16 points for making sparks and sparks turn the frequency in to very high frequency.

I can show two patents on the importance of frequency. A common sense approach.  I can say that if we use a bicycle dynamo if we petal faster the bulb would glow brighter. From practical experience I'm making this statement.

When we petal the cycle faster, the dynamo magnet rotates very fast and it increases the rate of rotation or increases the rate of change of magnetic flux and therefore the induced emf being directly proportional to the rate of change of magnetic flux increases. When the induced emf increases the output increases. Increasing the rate of change of magnetic flux is increasing the frequency. Nothing more. Nothing less. So higher the frequency of the input current, greater would be the output. The Tesla coil that produces 30000 watts output at 75 watts probably uses Radio frequencies. There is no magic to that. 

However iron core would heat up so much at high frquencies and it is not practical to have an iron core based transformers at high frquencies. There is a common notion that iron would not respond to frequencies above 500 cycles or 1000 cycles. But I have taken information from a Prof who teaches Metallurgy that iron would respond at high frequencies to generate magnetism but would heat up enromously.

Now the Tesla coil actually agitates the atmosphere and has an earth connection. We have all seen the 1901 patent of Tesla on Radiant Energy Apparatus. As simple as it sounds, if you give high voltage high frequency current to the plate on the top and then loop the wire down, put the current through a series of capacitors immersed in salt water and then through the other end connect it to the earth again using a lot of coils for the wire. This is nothing but tesla coil in the reverse.

Now the current can be taken both from the capacitors as DC and from the earth connection. The output would be far higher than the input.

Now you check US8004250 Pyramid Electric Generator where a Pyramid configuration declared as an essential ingredient of this set up. There you have a USPTO patent for a device which claims 100 times the output as the input and uses the same principles as above by giving high voltage. It gives a low inital voltage but then steps it up to high voltage using a step up Tesla coil to the capacitor and then gives it to the Tesla antenna plate. It takes the output from near the ground point.

If you look at the patent of Don Smith which was rejected which projected that capacitors in series loaded on a high voltage high frequency rod without the opposing primary, it is also based on the same above principles. That opposite primary is a missing thing in the  patent of Don Smith.

All these things are common. Figuera's original device also has the spark plugs in the form of the rotary device and in the form of the resistor array combination for steep hike and steep dive for frequency increase of the interrupted dc current.

It is very difficult to perform that particular rotary device. It probably required a very custom design and custom built to his specifications but essentially that is the real purpose of the device. That is where many of us have failed. I have also tried to replicate exactly as he did and then failed and then I realized that the device was manufactured in Pre world war I Germany which was known for its precision work and the manufacturer wanted to know why Figuera wanted this device and Figuera would not let them take a look at his set up.. This is there all in the Newspapers. So a very competent manufacturer custom built this rotary device for Figuera to his specifications and this is why the device worked. Pre World War Germany was an industrial power known for its perfection in Engineering to this day..So we have all failed in replicating the rotary device..

Having understood the purpose of the rotary device, I made it a simple Ac mains drive device. As we realized that if we give mains voltage, it takes a lot of amps automatically to drive high output in the set up.

There is a problem here. The Inductor -capacitor theory states that as the Electric field collapses the magnetic field increases and as the magnetic field collapses the electric field increases. In other words you need to have a weak magnet, that is highly vibrating to get high output in secondary and that is achieved at low frequencies by using high voltage. If you use high voltage and high frequencies, the input current would drop for the output amps would increase if you increase the input frequency..But such devices would not produce useable electricity unless the set up of Radiant energy appratus of Tesla is used. The capacitor converts this to DC and this can be charged to battery and then the battery can use an inverter to give out useable electricity. I think Tesla also used high power capacitors immersed in salt water or solvents but that is now considered a lost science. That lost science is a key to mastering energy production.

The key here is that either you must increase the voltage:Amperage ratio at fixed frequency. (That is dangerous at low frequency of the mains. But that low frequency is needed as majority of the machinaries are made up of steel and only then it is useable.) or you must increase the frequency to increase the output. Increasing the frequency is impractical for we have devices made up of iron and other metals which may heat up by using electricity at high frequency.

Now you check the claims of Figuera that where is the electricity coming from? It comes from the interactions of the atmosphere and the magnetic field of the earth..It makes sense. I'm theorizing and certainly I have not carried out these experiments but you can see you tube videos of copper and aluminium plate capacitors which are round shaped and which are separated by a rubber strip and then immersed in salt water generating electricity to run a computer fan.

Tineselkoala has not answered my question whether the energy of his 30000 watts output and 75 watts input  can be used at all and the answer is yes it can be used and it can be done only through the process of electrostatics and not magnetics. The key for that is the Teslas patent on method of using Radiant Energy apparatus.  But he can very well say that I'm saying all this as theory and he is perfectly correct in that for I have not done the experiments but given this information a lot of people can do a lot of things now..Again I guess so..You can very well say these are wild guesses and not experimental observations and you are perfectly correct in that..I have not validated any one of these things..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 17, 2014, 11:12:28 AM
Hi All:

Ammeters are always connected in series. Patrick J Kelly my mentor has advocated low voltage and low amperage to give to devices and those devices did not work. For they were huge the and input voltage and amperage was less to make any effect at low frequency.

We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. So what Newton tells me makes sense.

Even wikipedia says that Lenz law does not apply to charges that are opposite to each other is not included in the textbooks.

...........


hi.. NRamaswami

thanks for sharing here.

last time you said,  you  measured without load,
my question is.
 
- did you connect both terminal of analog ampmeter when you measure the amperage to output?
- did you measure amperage and voltage at once or separately?
 
Please born in mind, everyone only want to know how you make it,
at least me, i can not be patient.    :) 
short answer will be very appreciated.   

About TK, it was a joke, example, you can find  build-up amplifier in electronics store, where output will be labeled 3000 watts , input  only consume 100 - 200 watts.
but, you can see after 3000 watts there is a big letter "PMPO" .
newton II or someone else have  explanation about this. i forget  the reply number.

thanks again.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 01:29:26 PM
Hi:

The input is like this..

Input wire - Ammeter one terminal 1 - Ammeter other terminal - Input wire to load Phase or mains or live wire..

Ammeter one Terminal 1 above - Voltmeter terminal 1 - voltmeter terminal 2 - Neutral wire.

In other words we connected the ammeter in series and voltmeter in parallel. We had a trained electrician Narayanan who passed away due to illness.

You can go here to see how we connect the Ammeter and voltmeter and all your doubts would be over..

http://www.tmptens.com/agricultural-water-turbine/

There are five videos and the meters set up is clear there. It is a water turbine for agricultural pumpsets. The bespectacled man who is lean and who wears a green shirt is Narayanan..He is no more now..



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 02:10:19 PM

 ... we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses.



Those are the clear indications that you are drawing more current from input mains.  With this method you can never say whether your output power is more than input power because megawatts of power will be available in power supply mains.   We cannot rely on measurements due to various reasons.

The best way to verify your device would be :


1) Get one motor- alternator set having standard power output

2) Start the motor by connecting it to lab power supply

3) Take the alternator output and connect it to your figuira device.

4) If figuira device output is 630 Volts,  reduce it to motor voltage using a stepdown transformer.

5) Now connect the output power from your device to motor in synchronisation with existing power supply.

6) Finally disconnet the input from lab power supply.

If output power of your device is more than the input,   the entire setup now should run on its own without taking any power input from any external source.   So, you have a ever running overunity device. (setup)

Wish you best of luck.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 17, 2014, 02:12:51 PM
Hello All

First time posting here...
Will read the previous posts

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 17, 2014, 02:13:20 PM
hi..  all

NRamaswami stated some where ( i forgot ) that he was helped by some electrical engineer,
so pre-assumed that there was no wrong measurement, maybe only miss communication.
 
however, any sketch/drawing "how to use ampmeter and voltmeter" from gyulasun or others should be good to posted, i agree with what you said gyulasun about measurement. i have ever seen from webpage someone measure amperage by connecting ampmeter to output directly.

i guess, only with sketch/drawing will reduce miss communication, as Alvaro_CS (thanks for drawing) who have posted "drawing" help us to look it as start point. those all will save much time from reading and arguing everything. and also, English is not my daily language, sorry for that.

...

Hi Marsing,

I edited Alvaro's schematic and included input and output voltage and current meters. 

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 02:26:45 PM
Forest:

I have already tested the output in a safe way..I have indicated that the output voltage under such conditions is reduced to 240 volts and 250 volts. That is a very inefficient set up but a safe set up. I have already indicated that as the voltage keeps increasing the wattage starts dramatically shooting up beyond 240 volts. that increase would continue at a higher rate at 630 volts.

I cannot take your suggestion to test like that. I can safely say put up about 80 x200 watts lamps in series and lit them all together and see what is the voltage. If one of the fuses out all of them would not work. If we put all of them in parallel we need to device an expensive board.

But that is a risk we can safely take. But rather than all that I would prefer to do a step down transformer and check the output of the step down one in a safe way. Output even in step down method would not diminish in this configuration. Amps would go up and voltage would come down. I will try a self sustaining replication and explain as to how all hav to be wound and then explain how and why it happens. As I understand it which may well be incorrect.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 17, 2014, 02:45:22 PM
Hi Gyula:

You see the picture of the Ammeter at the bottom. Up to 5 amps I would not know what is the amperage. I have better ones than this but they are little more costly. I can order what is needed over the phone.
....

Hi NRamaswami,

Yes, you are correct that up to 5 Ampers the meter (I gave the link to) has no scale to see how many Amps flow below 5A but this is a 30A moving iron type ammeter, this is why it has a small nonlinearity in its scale.  There are such meters with 5A full deflection or 3A full deflection  but I know that we all do not like to use so many meters.  The problem is that moving iron or moving coil  analog meters  usually are not so precise in the first 20-30% of their full scale.     
Perhaps you have a normal digital hand held AC/DC multimeter with true RMS measurement feature for AC, these have a 10 or even 20A current measuring range which can serve nicely below 5A currents once you most likely have a sinusoid 50 HZ AC output. 

When using bulbs for the load, they have a cold resistance which is much much lower value than the hot resistance, this is a reason why the input or the output current is very high at the switch-on moment.   A solution could be to use 5 to 10 bulbs of identical wattage each in series and after the switch-on moments when these bulbs work with say half brightness you could short circuit some of them (with a switch) to increase the load on the output i.e. let 3 or 4 bulbs work from the 600-700V output.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 02:53:29 PM
Newton II:

All that is going to cost a lot of money and I do not have it here now..We have an economic problem and nearly 300 clients are not paying my bills and slowing down payment.. All are honest to the core people and all are having problem..So I can not invest money in this set up.

I will do a simple wires only set up. Give it a one shot current for a second.. Then remove it. If the device continues to produce electricity afteer the source power is removed, then you have a self sustaining generator..That is fairly simple to do than the expensive method you describe. The output would be lower but it would continuously come. As a proof of concept device. If that is fine, then I can do that. What output would come, I do not know now but I'm not really bothered about it either. Any continuous output should satisfy all including me.
Is that ok..give me four or five days..

But please do test at increased voltage to the device. You would know for yourself. However remember the fact. Magnets act as focussing point for getting electricity from the atmosphere. So the larger the magnetic core, whether it remains stagnant or rotating the larger would be the output. I have already explained in my earlier long post what is the role of the frequency and voltage in producing output as I understand it now..Let me build a small device and then let us see.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 17, 2014, 03:29:34 PM
NRamaswami Properly wound coil does not need capacitors.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 03:35:06 PM

I will do a simple wires only set up. Give it a one shot current for a second.. Then remove it. If the device continues to produce electricity afteer the source power is removed, then you have a self sustaining generator..That is fairly simple to do than the expensive method you describe. The output would be lower but it would continuously come. As a proof of concept device. If that is fine, then I can do that. What output would come, I do not know now but I'm not really bothered about it either. Any continuous output should satisfy all including me.
Is that ok..give me four or five days..


That would be fine.  No need for any time limit.  Take your own time and give us the feedback.   But how will you inject 'one shot current for a second'  in a short circuit ? 

To make the device self sustaining, you have to connect output terminals from secondary to the input terminals of primary.   When you inject ' one shot current' ,  this current will pass through both primary and secondary wires but for your device to work,  you have to see that ' one shot current'  passes only through primary wire.   How will you achieve it ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 03:51:21 PM
Bride rectifier at feedback would make the current not to flow back to the feedback unit. It becomes pulsed DC then. Pulsed DC is less efficient then AC but since it is feedback, it is ok. Otherwise we need to use the method of Amplidyne patents where the initial current is fixed and the feedback is given as 1 volt to add as pulsed DC feedback. For each watt of feedback, amplidyne patents claim an increase of 20000 watts of output increase in secondary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 17, 2014, 04:31:41 PM
Pulsed DC is not same as AC.  When you use pulsed DC the idea of transformer itself will be lost. This device with primary and secondary is a transformer and your current has to be AC only. Better consult an electrical engineer for solution.

Good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 04:35:03 PM
Newton II:'

Your question itself is wrong. Primary and secondary currents go in the opposite directions and phases and would not merge. Feedback units is a different thing. Feedback must be in phase with primary input so whether the current goes in both directions intially really irrelevant. It is the lack of information on feedback unit that keeps all this things a mysterious device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 17, 2014, 04:36:53 PM
................
We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. ................

thanks Gyula, i hope that NRamaswami use that setup for his device.

One more question NRamaswami,
can you say the rate of fuses ? ie 5A or 10A

I will wait your result in a week or two.

thanks...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
We have used fuses from 2 amps to 15 amps. Current fuse is 15 amps and it stays intact as the primary current has never been in excess of 10 amps. Secondary no fuse..But I'm not going to post back any replies as it takes a lot of my time. Bye until next week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2014, 06:20:23 PM
I saw one post from Newton II: Transformerw would not work with Pulsed DC. totally wrong.

Transformers work with Pulsed DC. Full sign wave pulsed DC would make transformers work. Some how the efficiency is lower than AC. That is all.

We are testing methods of windings that reduces the impedance loss. Possibly we need to lacquar the iron rods once to reduce heat loss as hysterisis. But that is expensive for me. With ineffficient methods, the device produced at least as accepted here 630 volts. I know that when the secondary produces 250 volts at no load the voltage at load is 120 volts and 2 amps and when the secondary produces 240 volts at no load the useful power is 100 volts and 1.8 amps. As the voltage in the secondary increases, the vibratons of the core increases and this must lead to higher output. But let us test and then see the results.

I will try to create a smaller version of the device by the end of this week.  Thanks to you all and Bye for now.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 18, 2014, 01:22:09 AM

 describes in one line for using a secondary under the primary to get industrial scale currents. ...

...Possibly all of you have focused only on the drawings and have not studied the patent description of the original and missed the line.


Patent No. 30378 (year 1902) literally states:

"The current dynamos, come from groups of Clarke machines, and our generator recalls, in its fundamental principle, the Ruhmkorff induction coil.  ...

...As much as we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of these coils from which differs completely. ...

...the motionless induced circuit placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets."



Figuera mentioned the Ruhmkorff coil twice for some reason...   Maybe now we can guess why he did it.

Thank you NRamaswami for de-encrypting the patent !!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 18, 2014, 03:02:25 AM
The following link shows the setup for the driver I am using in the 1908 device. See this photo for setup #1:
 https://imageshack.com/i/euodzpj (https://imageshack.com/i/euodzpj)
The waveform corresponds to a load of two 50 Ohms/100W resistors instead of the primary coils. I am using seven rheostats each rated 20 Ohms/25W. This is an improvement with respect to fixed power resistors for avoiding re-soldering, every time a different resistor value is needed.
I ran an experiment to observe how critical is the matching of the values of the seven resistors and the reactance of the primary coils. I started with each rheostat having a value of 7 Ohms, which produced an output voltage of about 14 Vac. See this photo for setup #3:
 https://imageshack.com/i/0nt3urj (https://imageshack.com/i/0nt3urj)
 The output increased to about 19Vac when the rheostats were changed to 12 Ohms. See this photo for setup #4:
https://imageshack.com/i/5b39cej
And finally, the output increased to about 25 Vac when the rheostats were changed to 20 Ohms. See this photo for setup #5:
 https://imageshack.com/i/nfa8y0j (https://imageshack.com/i/nfa8y0j)
 Another adjustment that was made based on the interpretation of the patent description about keeping the cores in contact but not in communication. I made the cores touch each other but without having electrical continuity. I used an Ohmmeter and measured open circuit between the three iron cores. That is, I have a minimum air gap of about the thickness of the insulating coating of the silicone steel sheets. I also verified that there was not cross-talking between the two primary coils. See the oscilloscope’s graphs in this photo:
 https://imageshack.com/i/7gr8yrj (https://imageshack.com/i/7gr8yrj)
 I HAVE NOT YET TESTED OVERUNITY! I want to optimize the electrical parameters, first.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 18, 2014, 03:57:05 AM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/):


All you need is to power one 7 watt cfl light bulb in a self sustaining way.
That would galvanize the entire overunity community in a flash.
You don't need to spend lots of money.
Just show us a self runner.
No need for any measurements at all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 18, 2014, 04:16:42 AM
With the winding of the secondary under the primary thing. I think that will increase the coupling of the primary to secondary and the load on the secondary will reflect to the primary just as in any other transformer.

Here is a document just to get folks up to speed on how a transformer works. http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm

If you're not already a  transformer expert and you don't read the document linked above a few times then there is only one person to blame.  Anyone professing to be an expert that says anything that goes against that document, they get no ear from me.

Quote
At no load, an ideal transformer draws virtually no current from the mains, since it is simply a large inductance. The whole principle of operation is based on induced magnetic flux, which not only creates a voltage (and current) in the secondary, but the primary as well!  It is this characteristic that allows any inductor to function as expected, and the voltage generated in the primary is called a 'back EMF' (electromotive force). The magnitude of this voltage is such that it almost equals (and is effectively in the same phase as) the applied EMF.

Good luck.
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 04:42:02 AM
Hi All:

I saw Farmhand's posts about a book..I don't go by books.. I go by my experimental results. I have not seen any book that says you need a particular voltage:amperage ratio for the secondary to start functioning effectively. We found out from experience.  What we share are the experimental results. Not abcd is stated in xyz book..I'm not an Electrical Engineer and I do not understand the page long calculations and so I ignore them all and trust my experimental results and then move on from there to do other experiments.

I agreed with newton II and also informed that we lost nearly 100 fuzes..So you well know that we have done a lot of work.

We will present the experimental results.. If they are not greater output than input also we will put it here..When I have the honesty to say all this what is my problem? I have no problem.. Really not worried if One member will not give me an ear..I am least bothered really if one member will not listen to me.. Experimental results that any one can replicate will be posted..

And I have asked how many of you have converted an iron to a permanent magnet and I have not received an answer. That is kept a secret.

So I do not care about much of other books. I do not care about what abcd theory says or xyz says.. All I care to see is what is the experimental results. Does it makes common sense? Can we go further without taking risks..

I will devise a safe method to test the high voltage output step down by a transformer and then giving it to a load by putting about 100 x 200 watts bulbs in parallel and keeping all of them on. give power to the primary to induce the secondary and then the step down transformer. Let us wait and see what the voltmeter and Ammeter show on the load. We will then know what happens.. What is the output wattage and what is the input wattage.. We will then see.. Do I have any thing to lose if I say look what we have got is less than the input..Nothing..

Do I have any thing to gain by saying look what I have got is more than the input. Again nothing..

I share the results with the community.. Nothing more and Nothing less. Will it change the world. I do not know and I do not think so..For I have got only two people indicating that they would attempt to replicate the experiments. And NewtonII who appears to be very experienced felt that the flux would be additive in the central core which is what should happen as that portion uses the forces of magnetic attraction.

The problem is all of you have studied theories and machines that use only forces of magnetic repulsion.

Figuera advocated a totally more efficient concept of using forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction combined to get a greater outpt than the input. If one module does not produce the results, we need to give the output of first module to the second and so on. All this increases the input voltage:amperage ratio. This is why I clearly mentioned at fixed low frequency of 50 hz, if you want to get better results increased the input voltage:amperage ratio but the amperage should be reasonbly ok, in the 5 to 10 amps range for magnetism to be effective. I have given all information..And I have said that larger the core size, longer the core and longer the number of wires and higher the number of turns all these things work..

Check Magnetic field strength in any book.. It would say Magnetic field strength = Number of Amperes x Number of turns.. Is there any mention of the need for higher voltage there..

Look at the inductor capacitor theory: As the magnetic field collapses, the electric field increases..As the electric field collapses the magnetic field increses..What does that mean.. A low magnetic field that can create high induced emf will result in a high electric field..This is borne out by our experiments. But if you give milliamps and 100,000 volts you would not see any results.. Input amps must be adequate to create a reasonable amount of magnetism, a low level magnetism to produce electric field.

Have you bought and open a bottle dynamo used in bicycles.. See that the magnet that rotates in dynamos is of very low magnetic strength. That is desired to produced current..

Any way I think we can build a self sustaining generator and give it a one shot electric current and make it continuously produce electric current. Then I will provide the full construction methods and why it works and how it works..That is if It works as I anticipate now. Many of my anticipations have been knocked out by experimental results and so I go only by experimental results..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 18, 2014, 08:21:33 AM

NRamaswami
This setup I saw many times and even tried to replicate BUT it was always on one core, that's why I always failed. I believe this is big step forward because of gaps between cores, but how big they are ?
Could someone more well-read confirm my feeling ? It's about EMF (electromagnetic force) created when magnetic field changes. The same is acting in Rhumkorff coil I believe. Now... if two primaries generate EMFs in secondaries and they  match and add ! , while EMFs generated by any change in magnetic field (by load) in secondaries to the primaries will nullify (being equal and opposite) then we have  lenz-free setup. In such setup the max output is dependent probably on factors like magnetizing current flowing in primary and the saturation point of cores. I believe that is purely Hubbard design, he looped it back to itself , has given the initial big current pulse and it worked indefinitely near the point of saturation of cores. That would be very good and limit the maximum output voltage, however itis only a theory...According to newspapers he used also two additional windings, one probably on the center core and one around all others. The one outside (if existed) reminds me Steven Mark control coil which safetly limited the rising of voltage on output and the one in center I have a feeling was somehow related to the method of starting device. maybe all transformers primaries were in series and that one in center was the middle and used to start-up by initial current impulse ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 08:35:21 AM
Hi Forest:

Air gaps were present. How big they are -  I have not measured nor bothered.

and whether they have any effect. - I do not know.

What is Steven Mark control coil  - Can you post information and pictures on that..Would be obliged.

Hubbard design - I'm working on it. When it starts working I will post pictures and how to construct etc..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 18, 2014, 09:52:33 AM
It is correct that when you provide air gap between cores, it causes addition of fluxes produced by all three solenoids. But when you provide air gap between solenoids, the fluxes produced by solenoids will not flow as freely as when without air gap because iron being a very strong magnetic material holds the flux within itslef and will not allow the flux to pass through the air gap and reach the next core.  To compensate for this you have to pass a very strong current through primary producing stronger flux. ( somewhere NRS has mentioned that 'higher the voltage higher will be output'. Higher voltage will cause higher current depending on power availability producing stronger flux).

If you want to make it self-running,  the number of turns in secondary should be corresponding to the current required by primary.  So you have to correctly design the core, number of turns in primary and secondary with suitable air gap.  If not you may have to do several 'trial and errors'  before you end up with something interesting.

Just by meddling with few wires and iron rods you cannot make a working device.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 11:37:54 AM
Hi Newton II:

I think there is a miscommunication here. What do you mean by air gap?

By air cap I meant that there is an air cap between the outer plastic tubes on which we wound wires. Iron rods are continuous. Same rod may go between two different solenoids. There is no air gap between iron rods but between the plastic tubes that are P1,S and P2. We simply dumb the rods and then hammer them to be very tightly fit. There may be air gaps between rods but not exactly at the points you mention..It is not built like that..You see iron rods are cut to 17 inches. Plastic tubes are cut to 18 inches and then we ensure that no air gap between iron rods are present as that creates a lot of noise. If all iron rods are very tightly packed the noise is reduced. In that respect there is no air gap between in the iron core in the junctions of P1,S and P2. Air gap exists between the plastic tubes for they are cut tubes.


And we cannot have two iron rods with opposite poles standing with air gaps. Against common sense. Magnets with opposite poles with be attracted to each other and stick to each other. Whether they are permanent magnets or electromagnets..


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 11:46:41 AM
Hi Newton II:

When you say self running... Do you mean to say that we must provide exact wattage consumed by the primary back to the primary for it to self run or in exact voltage:amperage combination apart from exact wattage.. For example if I provide the feedback from a lower voltage and higher amperage but similar wattage as feedback from thick wires,  would it become higher voltage lower amperage combination automatically due to the fact that the primary has thinner and so higher resistance wires..Can you clarify on this point please.. I'm obliged..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 18, 2014, 12:07:00 PM
You can find some information about Steven Mark TPU here : http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Steve_Marks_Toroid_Generator Nobody knows the details , like for many OU devices, but Steven MArk has given enough information to realize that it is a self-running ,self-feeding device composed of coils alone.The control coils are there to limit the output voltage as in other case it will immediately vaporise due to extensive power runaway. I found in one newspaper about Hubbard description of a wires wound around the device, maybe for the same purpose (to contradict runaway action by magnetic field resistance?) All that is not much important as it is only my intuition...


Can you clarify that you have 3 separate coils each of his own PVC tube ? How they are connected , glued together ? Previosuly I thought that it was all on one single PVC tube with 3 cores inside.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 01:49:33 PM
Hi:

What you call as steven Mark coil is MOLINA-MARTINEZ, Alberto coil.. It is nothing but a Hubbard coil. No patent granted for it  for it is a violation of Law of Conservation of Energy. No Steven Mark coil but it is a MOLINA-MARTINEZ coil..Patent was obviously refused. This is nothing but a three phase Figuera device. In fact the Figuera device itself could be three phase but because I do not understand Electrical Engineering and three phase, I made it a single phase one. The output I recorded is correct from the information on this coil. All videos have disappeared but I located the patents. They are based on the way the Earth works. It is a 24 coil Hubbard coil rather than a 8 outer coil Hubbard coil..Your description of runaway control is wrong but it does it differently.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 18, 2014, 03:08:58 PM

Do you mean to say that we must provide exact wattage consumed by the primary back to the primary for it to self run or in exact voltage:amperage combination apart from exact wattage.. For example if I provide the feedback from a lower voltage and higher amperage but similar wattage as feedback from thick wires,  would it become higher voltage lower amperage combination automatically due to the fact that the primary has thinner and so higher resistance wires..Can you clarify on this point please.. I'm obliged..



1) Think that starting input wattage is 'X' and output wattage is 6X (as you said earlier 6 to 8 times),  send some  1.5X watts back to     
     input primary assuming for losses and balance 4.5X watts you can make use of.

2) Instead of connecting secondary directly to primary, connect it through step down or step up transformer as the case may be to get
    exact voltage required by primary.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 18, 2014, 03:31:36 PM
Hi:

Thanks.. We will try to rebuild it. It may take till Saturday or Next Monday. I will come back after that. We will first check whether the output is exactly 6x times as all are doubting the 20 amps output figure. We will check if the doubts are valid or if we made a real breakthrough. We will simply report the facts. If the voltage is very high we will step it down.. That will take building a custom built transformer to reduce the voltage to 220 volts and then connecting to load to check what is the output. If that output is positively 6 to 8 times higher as I believe it should be, then we will try for the self sustaining part. Others can also come up in the meanwhile with their results. They can validate or negate my results. ok. I think this is fair for now. Let me now focus on my work.. Bye.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 18, 2014, 09:09:40 PM
Hallo People!
A very good job going there :)
my 2 cents
Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 19, 2014, 12:13:46 AM
Hi all,

As refered previously in the forum the patent US119825 by Daniel McFarland Cook also used concentric wound coils.

I have looked for that patent and in the text is referenced a circuit "D" which does not appear in the available figure. Maybe there is a missing figure where this circuit is represented. What do you think?

http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm (http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 19, 2014, 12:32:10 AM
Just thought i would add my 2 cents. have been fallowing Figueras for some time now and i have designed my own timing board that really blows PJK out of the water. what most people don't understand is that the 4017B decade counter has built in overlap capabilities. as one channel is coming down the next is coming up and so timing overlap caps are probably needed but i designed it in the board just in case. most designs on the internet have a blinking secondary output which means that there is no timing overlap what so ever in which figueras specifically said needs to happen(make before you break).  i have 9 channels because i didn't like the awfull stair step people were getting. 1-9 5 being 0 volts. the board is capable of 60 to 500 hz or more with 20 or so milliamp with 7805. it has a centel grounding pin on the IDC connector for people that want to use opto isolators and it has isolation on main power. board was made with DipTrace free and is 4"x 2.3"2 layers. 1 % metal film resisters and poly film caps all ic's cmos. the transistor are MJ11028's ran through a adjustable vitreous wound resistor  from NTE. i will post more as my build continues  and will post video on youtube soon.check out attached pic. may all of you have success
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 12:58:27 AM
Hi:

I'm informed by Hannon that all of you thought that there should be an air gap between the South Pole of P1 and North Pole of secondary. I apologize for the air gap confusion. I fail to understand how two powerful electromagnetic cores with opposite poles can be kept apart. That will require a tremendous effort.

The air gaps I mentioned are the ones between the two plastic tubes. There is a slight air gap between the tubes. It need not be present and the whole thing can be constructed on a 5 foot or 6 foot long single tube. For ease of construction we cut the tubes. Nothing more. The presence or absence of the slight gap between the tubes is irrelevant for the function of the device.

The Figuera device as done by me is an extremely simple device. But the dimensions and the wire sizes must be kept in mind. You cannot build a cat and should not say why it does not weigh or behave like a Tiger. To make some thing to become a Tiger, you must build that like a Tiger.

You can use a 3 inch dia or 4 inch dia or 5 inch dia plastic tube and build the device. I promise you that the results will be there if you try to replicate but the size of the device and the wire gauge used and the length of the wire we used and the number of turns must all be there to see a similar performance. This will require a lot of effort and you will need a lot of labour help. It is not a one man job. But as I said the voltages are very high and the amperages are going to be high and it is deadly and you need to be careful. You must do the replication at your own risk and must take all safety precautions.

I have already filed a provisional patent application for the device disclosed and I will file a complete specification and a PCT application and then would provide step by step construction details and what are the details needed.

Whether it can become a self sustaining device I cannot say now but I can say that the device will output more watts than input watts. That much can be promised.

I again apologize for the air gaps confusion.

Regards,

Ramaswami





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 19, 2014, 02:18:41 AM

 I fail to understand how two powerful electromagnetic cores with opposite poles can be kept apart. That will require a tremendous effort.


Fix the three rods to a single base frame using clamps, bolts and nuts.  Clamps will hold the rods tightly in place. No  'tremendous effort' is required.



You cannot build a cat and should not say why it does not weigh or behave like a Tiger. To make some thing to become a Tiger, you must build that like a Tiger.


I think you are doing the same thing.   Seeing the cat through a magnifying glass and getting illusioned  that it is a Tiger!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 03:06:20 AM
"I think you are doing the same thing.   Seeing the cat through a magnifying glass and getting illusioned  that it is a Tiger!"

Thanks..Regarding the bolded part.. Perform the repeatabillity of the experiment and share your results. What you think is irrelevant if you do not or would not perform experiment and share the results. 

This is not a single rod to be fixed by nuts and bolts. Do you know how many rods are needed to pack a 4 inch dia plastic tube. Try packing it and then you would know the number of iron rods needed and the weight of the soft iron. So you think you would make two massive 4 inch dia soft iron electromagnets of 2 Tesla with opposite poles and they would remain in place with a clamp, nut and bolt.. At least when you think, please properly think..There is a difference between thinkers and performers.

"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword, clearly has never been under any automatic fire- Gen Dougles"

Don't share your thoughts. Please do perform and share the results of your expriments. Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Newton II on February 19, 2014, 03:39:54 AM

This is not a single rod to be fixed by nuts and bolts. Do you know how many rods are needed to pack a 4 inch dia plastic tube. Try packing it and then you would know the number of iron rods needed and the weight of the soft iron. So you think you would make two massive 4 inch dia soft iron electromagnets of 2 Tesla with opposite poles and they would remain in place with a clamp, nut and bolt.. At least when you think, please properly think..There is a difference between thinkers and performers.


What I said is just an example.  If it is not possible to fix the rods using clamps, you have to think of some other methods. You are talking about few rods,  I have fixed pumps and motors weighing 5 to 10 tons to base frames using power bolts and nuts. Nothing is impossible in fabrication.

Your postings clearly show that you neither have book (theoritical) knowledge nor fabrication knowledge.  You are not miscommunicating but just getting confused without knowledge.

Don't think that members of this forum are fools. They are intelligents enough to understand things without performing experiments.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 19, 2014, 04:23:28 AM
Steel rods as a core would not be a good choice I don't think, because the ends of the cores will face each other and any loose rods will try to move when the coils are energized not just together but also they will probably try to repel as well depending of phase differences. And as well as that the rod cores will have a lot of air gaps still present.

A small gap can be maintained between cores by using paper or something in between the cores, but then that would be a paper gap and not an air gap.

Here's a suggestion to use the rods though, take one piece of tube that holds all the rods cut to length for all the cores or as many as can be got from one length of rods (bundle).

Line the inside of the pipe with a coating of oil or something like that to stop the glue sticking to the pipe (former) if you want to remove the rods bundle from the pipe that is if not let it stick.

Ok so you have a bundle of steel rods and a tube as you fill the tube with rods use some glue to glue them all together (and to the tube if desired), leave to dry so that all rods are leveled at the ends. Now you have one big core set solid inside a insulating pipe (former) that you can cut into whatever sized pieces you want without needing to cut a lot of rods. And everything is held solid in one piece. Then to prevent any movement you can use a piece of paper between the cores and use wooden blocks behind the cores to stop any repulsion vibration "movement of any significance".

Best way to cut would be with drop saw or with a "metal 'Steel' cutting disc" on a grinder, which is inherently dangerous, be careful. They make really thin ones now that cut real good but are more fragile. For safety be prepared for the disc to fracture and fly apart sending pieces at high velocity towards your chest and neck/head, if your not ready for that, then you're not ready. Suit up and full face shield.

Otherwise a hacksaw could be used or whatever.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 04:34:39 AM
I'm sorry I never said or indicated any one here is not intelligent. Simply calculate the force needed to keep two 50 kg electromagnets of 2 T with their opposite poles facing each other and without touching them with an air gap between them. And then visualize if my mini lab could have the facility to have such powerful devices. Is it possible or practical..Your motors and pumps are not electromagnets with opposing poles kept not to touch.

You clearly show that you have not used the forces of magnetic attraction as the magnets just instantly move towards each other and attach themselves. To keep two Neodymium magnets that have about 0.6 Tesla strength and which will weigh about 100 gms each not to touch each other when their opposite poles face each other with our bare hands or even to separate them from one another is difficult. It is done but we need to do it carefully as otherwise it will hurt the fingers.  When that is the case two electromagnets weighing 50 kg with their opposite poles not to touch..., what will be the force needed. Cranes will be needed to do that to the electromagnets. See if I would have them in my place..

Please see that I'm saying that is laughed at like Magic etc.. by others.

I must have some guts to report this kind of results. I must have some guts to say some thing that would be contrary to what would be expected. I must have done the experiments and then I'm posting the results here, a place of posters acknowledged with an open mind.  And I must have some guts to show simple, a very simple device that uses both the forces of magnetic attraction and repulsion and combine them which is not done today.

Granted that I have no theoretical background and it is openly acknowledged by me. But Figuera was a Professor of reputaton. What I have done is to de-codify his careful words and modified the whole set up, deliberately made complicated by him to hide the simplicity of the thing and made a simple device that can be replicated easily by any one..None of you have done that decodification..And I have disclosed the simple device. Read his interview posted by Hanon that the whole thing is very simple.

Rather than making assumptions or presumptions, do the simple to replicate experiment. If you do not have the facility or if you do want me to post the videos when it is replicated here, I would post it. When some friend demanded pictures of disassembled set up in took the photos and posted it as it is in a moment.

I look at other members here with respect. No disrepect is never intended or given. But please do not assume things. If you calculate the force needed to keep 2 telsa electromagnets with their opposite poles not to touch each other, you would know what is the force needed to do it given your mechanical background. Just see if I would have it doing things part time with my own money.

I have my reputation also when I post such results. If the results are not there I would not dare to post. See if I have made a dishonest claim. No.. I have open mind to accept that I need to check and since all of the members doubt that the 630 volts and 20 amps result could come, I'm in the process of replicating it. I have also reported that for an increase of just 10 volts at no load from 240 to 250, the output increases by 60 watts at load conditions. Please do replicate the experiment. It is not easy to do and I have given you a lot of information.

Please do replicate the easy to do device, in the given configuration and you can check and verify for yourselves..I'm saying some thing that is not normal. some thing like that is magic..to repeat the words of other friends. Why not replicate and check it yourselves.  I have answered all questions..And when I theorized, I indicated that I'm theorizing and I have not done the theorized experiments.

Figuera and Hubbard both used a similar set up. That set up mimics the Earth. How it rotates. Figueras set up is based on full rotation of Earth. Hubbard set up is based on half rotation of Earth..And pleaes note that I'm a Not at all a rich man..I have my problems. I have my profession and clients and family. When I deciphered some thing that would be of interest and that is contrary to known or expected results, I would normally try to keep quiet. I'm posting the information that can be replicated and verified here. Please do replicate and see for yourselves. If you do not have the means to do so, let me post the videos.

I'm neither confusing nor am I confused. I have the results and you will see the results yourself. The details that I have given are not in any theory books.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 19, 2014, 04:38:57 AM
Hi All:

I saw Farmhand's posts about a book..I don't go by books.. I go by my experimental results. I have not seen any book that says you need a particular voltage:amperage ratio for the secondary to start functioning effectively. We found out from experience.  What we share are the experimental results. Not abcd is stated in xyz book..I'm not an Electrical Engineer and I do not understand the page long calculations and so I ignore them all and trust my experimental results and then move on from there to do other experiments.

I agreed with newton II and also informed that we lost nearly 100 fuzes..So you well know that we have done a lot of work.

We will present the experimental results.. If they are not greater output than input also we will put it here..When I have the honesty to say all this what is my problem? I have no problem.. Really not worried if One member will not give me an ear..I am least bothered really if one member will not listen to me.. Experimental results that any one can replicate will be posted..

And I have asked how many of you have converted an iron to a permanent magnet and I have not received an answer. That is kept a secret.

So I do not care about much of other books. I do not care about what abcd theory says or xyz says.. All I care to see is what is the experimental results. Does it makes common sense? Can we go further without taking risks..

I will devise a safe method to test the high voltage output step down by a transformer and then giving it to a load by putting about 100 x 200 watts bulbs in parallel and keeping all of them on. give power to the primary to induce the secondary and then the step down transformer. Let us wait and see what the voltmeter and Ammeter show on the load. We will then know what happens.. What is the output wattage and what is the input wattage.. We will then see.. Do I have any thing to lose if I say look what we have got is less than the input..Nothing..

Do I have any thing to gain by saying look what I have got is more than the input. Again nothing..

I share the results with the community.. Nothing more and Nothing less. Will it change the world. I do not know and I do not think so..For I have got only two people indicating that they would attempt to replicate the experiments. And NewtonII who appears to be very experienced felt that the flux would be additive in the central core which is what should happen as that portion uses the forces of magnetic attraction.

The problem is all of you have studied theories and machines that use only forces of magnetic repulsion.

Figuera advocated a totally more efficient concept of using forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction combined to get a greater outpt than the input. If one module does not produce the results, we need to give the output of first module to the second and so on. All this increases the input voltage:amperage ratio. This is why I clearly mentioned at fixed low frequency of 50 hz, if you want to get better results increased the input voltage:amperage ratio but the amperage should be reasonbly ok, in the 5 to 10 amps range for magnetism to be effective. I have given all information..And I have said that larger the core size, longer the core and longer the number of wires and higher the number of turns all these things work..

Check Magnetic field strength in any book.. It would say Magnetic field strength = Number of Amperes x Number of turns.. Is there any mention of the need for higher voltage there..

Look at the inductor capacitor theory: As the magnetic field collapses, the electric field increases..As the electric field collapses the magnetic field increses..What does that mean.. A low magnetic field that can create high induced emf will result in a high electric field..This is borne out by our experiments. But if you give milliamps and 100,000 volts you would not see any results.. Input amps must be adequate to create a reasonable amount of magnetism, a low level magnetism to produce electric field.

Have you bought and open a bottle dynamo used in bicycles.. See that the magnet that rotates in dynamos is of very low magnetic strength. That is desired to produced current..

Any way I think we can build a self sustaining generator and give it a one shot electric current and make it continuously produce electric current. Then I will provide the full construction methods and why it works and how it works..That is if It works as I anticipate now. Many of my anticipations have been knocked out by experimental results and so I go only by experimental results..

Well I'm impressed, someone who had an OU device and knew it was OU, but left it to do other stuff, a person who apparently short circuits secondaries with a current meter, and who is against some conventional knowledge so much that a large post is required to explain why.

The part in the quote I made bold reminded me of something I heard said just recently almost exactly the same by another person. And although it is true magnetic field strength is determined by ampere turns, the voltage does not need to be mentioned because we know from Ohms Law "books" that if we want 10 amperes of current in a coil and the coil of wire has 10 ohms resistance then anything less than 100 volts will result in less than 10 amperes of current to begin with, so even though the voltage is not mentioned without the applied voltage there would be no current to cause any magnetism. No voltage no current - no current no magnetism. Very simple concept.

Cheers

EDITED:

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 05:09:09 AM
Farmhand:

At 12 volts, you can have a lot of amperes to flow. That would result in a very powerful magentic field. Extremely powerful magentic field retards the electric field. For efficient electric field to be developed, high voltage:ampere ratio is needed. This is the practical thing we found and we did not see it in any book. We have reported the results.

Whether a devie is OU or not is not my interest. My interest is my profession. When the Electrician who managed the experiments passed away we stopped it for sentimental reasons and I have already informed that I'm posting the information so others can take it forward. If it is laughable, I have no problem.

I have also promised that I will try to replicate the experiments and share the results. If the results are not what we felt they are also we would report them. If the results are lower input higher output also as I strongly expect it to be, we would report them. We would also provide full information on how to replicate. We will see next week.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 19, 2014, 10:17:23 AM
Waiting for detailed step by step tutorial.... I'm lost with details and don't want to cut my iron rods (I've already stripped hundreds of welding rods for that) before being sure if that is necessary.  Talk is cheap but material not, I think all here have others things to do also... Keep going, I pray for you success.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 12:24:40 PM
Hi Forest:

Please hold. Rather than giving step by step instructions, right now,  I will show the proof of the pudding is in the eating by showing the set up live and on video. You can see what is the input voltage and amperage in the primary and what is the output Voltage and amperage going to the step down transformer. Then this issue is solved. 

I hope all will agree that this saves time, effort and money for all. The onus is on me to show the proof. Because replication attempt by all can result in significant costs to each one of you. Why spend it? I can replicate myself and then after you see the proof, you elect to replicate or otherwise at your choice. I think this is fair. Right.

We are now rebuilding the unit.. But give me some time. I can build the step down transformer only after determining the voltage level reached. I need to wind the first unit step by step to reach the 600 to 630 volts level. Last time we just tested a concept and so we did not measure the turns, did not check. This time we will need to test, be precise in measurements and so construction will take a few days.

For those who are interested in doing it on their own any way, the diagram is there and the construction details are in the earlier pages. You do not have perfect number of turns, spaces between turns, whether the air gap is in the core or between the plastic tubes etc. Let us avoid all miscommunication and misunderstanding.

I have claimed that all machines used today are based on the forces of Magnetic repulsion and that there is no machine that currently works  combining the forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction. No one has opposed that statement. So let me build such a device myself and let me show it online as a video.

If the Unit can output more than the input I think there are hundreds of friends here, well trained people here who can make it self sustain itself. All I need to prove is that the output is higher than the input. Let me do it. Until then please wait.   

I promise that there will be full disclosure after I have filed the PCT application.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on February 19, 2014, 01:47:29 PM
at all
language confusion I see.
Same as I posted about the two colors indicating two poles, here comes the air gap issue:

There is also a conventional way in electric-electronic-magnetic issues,
to express the physical separation (gap) between two pieces of metal.
When an "air" gap is mentioned speaking about magnetic or electric relationships between two ferromagnetic cores,
this gap can be not just air, but also any material with no magnetic nor electric properties; eg. paper, cardboard, wood, or even a paint or varnish or epoxy etc.

Therefore, it is assumed, that a separation of two cores by mean of a piece of paper is an "air gap"
Further more, no bolts, clamps or whatever other means are needed to keep the electromagnets in place apart of some
long wooden or plastic exterior structure to hold them aligned and touching at the junction, as the attraction when electrified
will hold them together. (that is, assemble them together before energizing, when no magnetism is present)

Also to your consideration, is the electric insulation (varnish or paint) between rods in a bundle, as used in transformer sheets, to minimize losses-heat due to eddy currents

Remember that the electric-magnetic properties-behaviors of electromagnets, are different if the windings are over:

1- all windings over 1 core (made with a single rod or many).

2- each element winded over its own core, and assembled together in line, the cores touching at their ends metal to metal.

3- each element winded over its own core, and assembled together in line, the cores NOT touching at their ends (air gap or insulated)

4- each element winded over its own core, and assembled together ALONGSIDE (not in a row)

The coil formers (plastic or PVC non-metallic) are not mentioned as not relevant to this post.

In conclusion, as the drawing posted by me, was stated as correct,which clearly shows an "air gap" separation between the 3 different electromagnets (including the cores), and a posterior discussion indicates that all the coils are winded over 1 core, and as I have already experimented with a Figuera setup, and know there is a big difference in behavior in the ensemble depending on the four points above mentioned, my confusion grows instead of reducing.

@Farmhand - please correct me if wrong (your knowledge is highly appreciated)

Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on February 19, 2014, 05:26:24 PM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/)
IN the OU game you can NOT trust ordinary meters.
These meters are designed to be used by conventional mains and DC electricity.


The only way to be sure of your output is to power a device or devices which require many times more energy
than the input.


An example would be
1. 100 watts input; output powers a 2 KW heater to full heat.
or
2. 100 watts input:-  output powers 20 x 100 watt incandescent light bulbs to full light and heat.


Alternatively make a small device that anyone can replicate.
Not all of us have access to the heavy duty wire which you are using.


Anyway good luck sir.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 19, 2014, 06:00:50 PM
 
@ALVARO_CS,  NRamaswamy,
 
Instead of making things complicated why don't you provide air gap in a standard transformer itself?  Please gothrough the attachment and let me have your thoughts.
 
You can make such arrangement in a 6 Volts or 12 volts transformer reducing the cost and also avoiding any sort of risk with high voltages.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 19, 2014, 07:21:34 PM
Hi All,
I think NRamaswami ist not here to share anything!, he told us he want to fill a PTC with Spanish patent from 1916 (the oldest one), and after that he will show us some iron bars with wires!
so tell me NRamaswami, did you came with anything new?
did Bajac, Hannon, Farmhand dont share allot of the technical aspects of Figuera?
Are you the only one who see the changing B to induce current in the secondary??
My friend, if you really want us to give you a technical explanation in order to fill a patent, then I must say, just keep everything for you, but please don’t post more here in order to create a precedent for you patent! because everything posted in public domain is not more patentable, I hope everyone got it.
If you want to be reach, than find another forum, in this one WE the people of the word are trying to free our self’s from such thing.

@Farmhand, Bajac, Forest, Hanon,…..:
could you please make any comment on the theoretical aspect of what I posted I the last picture?
I will very appreciated.
Thanks!

@Hanon:
If anyone should take credits for the discovery of Figuera´s patent and his content, that one must be you!
I will send you my though about the patents, as I promised.

Regards,
NMS


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2014, 08:08:23 PM
@Nomoreslave:

Thanks for the kind words. My provisional patent was filed 8 months back. So when I file PCT I would get that date.

Please do not try to replicate what I have shown in the earlier pages. You can see that It is not a small device and not a small voltage or amperage test device. Others have used small devices.

I do not know how to calculate. However one of my friends who knows theoretical calculations has come up with a xx KW in theory for the device. The wires will not withstand that.

I know if I wind 220 winds of heavy wire and give 630 windings from the secondary, then the secondary would be stepped down to 220 volts. But what will be the amperage? We really did not know. The friend who can calculate has come up with a figure of more than xx kilowatts. He is not able to believe it. This is low frequency, high voltage, high amperage electricity. I cannot play around with it.

I have already told you all the working principle of Figuera devices. They are based on Magnetic attraction and in this case he used both Magnetic attraction and Magnetic repulsion. Output could be very high. Newton II hit it immediately by saying that Magnetic fluxes would be additive and out put would be tremendous. Another friend who appears to have tested self sustaining coils has asked a test question and I have answered him in my posts.

None of you have denied my assertion that there are no devices that are presently used for electrical generation based on the theory of combining forces of magnetic attraction and magnetic repulsion.

But use wires that are very thick and are more than 1500 meters long for this experiment as well. Figurea talks about reels and reels of coils. 
Hubbard used thick cables with Heavy voltage line insulated wires.

You are correct that I can provide full details only after filing the PCT application. Your understanding is highly appreciated. Not all applications are lead to patents. Not all patents issued are commercialized. I'm more worried on the aspects of safety. So please do not replicate and if you do so I'm not responsible. Hanon knows me.

If you do not have high capacity wires for more than 1500 meteres this system is not for you. Do not try to replicate. I will do it and will show it to you after filing the patent and since I would file the PCT patent, it would be published in its entirety. After filing it and after getting the International priority date, I will disclose the complete system.

I can confirm to you that I have tested devices that have 116% output as compared to input as measured by us. It may well be possible to build this device on a small scale. But we have done tests only with large scale in mind. So I do not know how the small scale devices would perform.

Give me a week or two and then I would come back and provide details.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 19, 2014, 10:59:05 PM
Hello NoMoreSlave,

Let Ramaswami finish his tests and show the results. I think he is quite transparent: he has posted all the details required to built his design. I have not seen many users doing the same here. If he is sucessful we will have the right path to follow. He is just saying that he just talk about facts and results that he got with his previous device. He is not hurting anyone. I think he is helping a lot to keep people interested and testing other configurations.

About his patent, I don´t see any problem in filling a patent. Tesla filed hundred of patents !!!!!  If he had not filed those patent then Westinghouse had not invested in his AC system. Now we will just have the limited DC system by Edison. Patents are sometimes a good way to spread a technology.

Also Figuera, my hero, filed some patents. And now we have that knowledge because it was written in some patents.

You can file a patent to get some profit of your work and at the same time that you release open public a full detailed description....as TESLA did.  His patent were some detailed , with no hidden parts, that he give them to the world at the same time that he got some money to keep on researching.

Ramaswami, good luck with your tests, we all hope with great expectation !!!

NoMoreSlave, your sketch is fine . It is the concept used by Figuera :a variable magnetic field . Now we need to know how to implement it !!! This is the key.


Best regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 19, 2014, 11:48:28 PM
...
could you please make any comment on the theoretical aspect of what I posted I the last picture?
I will very appreciated.
Thanks!
...

Hi NoMoreSlave,

The concepts of the conventional and the Figuera generator setups are nicely shown in the drawings you uploaded here:
http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/720/
I agree with the changing cross section area for the conventional generator and the changing magnetic field of the AC electromagnets in the Figuera setup.

I have to notice that in a conventional transformator the coils are also fixed and the magnetic flux density also changes as the input AC current alternates. So I wonder what makes the Figuera setup to produce more input with respect to its input power? Could you expand your understanding on it?

(Mr Ramaswami already mentioned why this setup is Lenz-less but I would like to read your take on this if you do not mind.)

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 20, 2014, 12:33:09 AM
Hi Ramaswami,

Could you please comment to the forum what you mean by stating that current generators just use the forces of magnetic repulsion while Figuera´s generator uses both the forces of magnetic atraction and magnetic repulsion?

Could you elaborate a bit deeper this idea? Maybe with a kind of example, if possible.

Thanks. I really appreciate your good attitude sharing your design. Go ahead!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on February 20, 2014, 06:44:27 AM
NRamaswami, 

i am just afraid that you have confusion about week,month and years,
as you have confusion about amperage,voltage and watts......
btw, hanon have a good question, can you provide the answer for that?

......
thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 20, 2014, 08:32:12 AM

I have to notice that in a conventional transformator the coils are also fixed and the magnetic flux density also changes as the input AC current alternates. So I wonder what makes the Figuera setup to produce more input with respect to its input power? Could you expand your understanding on it?


When core is through (ie.,single) the fluxes produced  by primary and secondary repel each other because both fluxes are produced within 'one system'.   When air gap is introduced between primary and secondary cores, it becomes  'action at a distance'  hence fluxes produced by primary and secondary attract each other.  If you compare between working principle of a transformer and a generator you can easily make out the difference.
 
But I am afraid when you make fluxes additive in a transformer you may not get output from secondary at all.  Because it becomes like a transformer on no-load where fluxes produced by primary is neutralised by fluxes produced by the core hence transformer on no-load doesnot consume any power (other than losses) eventhough it is connected to mains and current will be flowing through it.  To take power out of transformer, the flux produced by primary has to be repelled by the flux produced by secondary which happens only when you apply load on secondary. (without air gap between primary and secondary).
 
This is only my view of the situation.  Others may have different thoughts.
   
Anyway you may come out with something else while conducting experiments.  Wish everyone good luck.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 20, 2014, 08:37:06 AM
hanon


I'm not alone in stating that all transformers action is not what we were taught. Somehow the arrangement is done that way so effect is symmetrical and COP is always below 1. In fact simple 1:1 transforme SHOULD and IS always 200% effective (minus looses) but I cannot prove it with ordianry transformer  >:(  But please think for a moment, if Lenz law is about magnetic fields opposing , then the two magnetic fields are produced, the change of secondary is always reflected to primary and we don't see the additional energy which is lost as heat. Such explanation looks better in case of the most basic law : action vs reaction Newton  law. But in case of ordinary transformer energy is always taken from primary source, except for rare cases when transformer burn  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 20, 2014, 08:40:29 AM

When core is through (ie.,single) the fluxes produced  by primary and secondary repel each other because both fluxes are produced within 'one system'.   When air gap is introduced between primary and secondary cores, it becomes  'action at a distance'  hence fluxes produced by primary and secondary attract each other.  If you compare between working principle of a transformer and a generator you can easily make out the difference.
 
But I am afraid when you make fluxes additive in a transformer you may not get output from secondary at all.  Because it becomes like a transformer on no-load where fluxes produced by primary is neutralised by fluxes produced by the core hence transformer on no-load doesnot consume any power (other than losses) eventhough it is connected to mains and current will be flowing through it.  To take power out of transformer, the flux produced by primary has to be repelled by the flux produced by secondary which happens only when you apply load on secondary. (without air gap between primary and secondary).
 
This is only my view of the situation.  Others may have different thoughts.
   
Anyway you may come out with something else while conducting experiments.  Wish everyone good luck.


I think you should rethink that statement. I already posted the solution and it is not new and it is patented. You all didin't realize that all was patented before , you can only pated exact embodiment, exact device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 20, 2014, 02:30:21 PM
Forest,
 
Could you tell in which post did you commented this?  I don´t know what you are referring exactly with your last post
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 20, 2014, 07:56:48 PM
Dear All:

I believe that I have given significant information here but I'm a Patent Attorney. I have my practice. I have my clients and family. Last few days I had to overwork working day and night and I ended up with swollen legs that would not ener my shoes. I had been to physiotherapists and I had been asked to take cosiderable rest. I have a heart problem and am a chronic diabetic also. I have heavy litigation work to complete and a lot of deadlines to finish.

This forum is so addictive and interesting but forgive for at least two weeks or until I complete the PCT application whichever is later. Then I will come and inform you.

Forest..I have read a transformer book that says that transformers would not work without an iron core. But Transformer equations do not provide for the need for the core. I do not understand equations and so I do not know if this is true. I'm not trained in electrical theory and check if it is so.

You say some how transformers which should be 200% efficient produce less than 100% efficiency. 

Ok. Do this small experiment..

Please take any wire, any size.

Wind the primary on the solenoid of about 2 inch diameter plastic tube and 6 inches length first. Two layers of primary. Then wind on the primary the secondary (multiple layers of secondary) and again wind the Primary on the secondary at the end another two layers. You have two primaries covering secondary. Use any magnetising material for the core. Give AC current for best results.

If you are going to use less amperage and less voltage use many small diameter rods or powder to make the core.

A single large core would need a lot of amps. 

Build the secondary as a step up transformer.

Check the efficiency of such a unit. Note it down..Add more iron outside and check what happens to the efficiency.

Tell the others what is the efficiency..This is also one of the patents of Figuera.

You are all taught hysterisis loss should be avoided. insulated rods should be used. Eddy currents must be avoided. This is all wrong. Was Figuera an idiot to use soft iron rods..

Transformers today have a single primary and a single secondary. This is why they are less than 100% efficient. This is a common sense practical hands on knowledge gained.

I'm really surprised that so many people think that more than 100% efficiency is unachievable. It is such a simple thing..

I read some friend posting action at a distance..What is that? If fire cracker is suddely burst some where close to you unseen by you and unexpected by you, your body gets a shock due to sudden sound.you are rattled...that is action at a distance..

I have given you all more information than needed for you all to easily build a COP>10 device already in my posts.

I request you all not to try to replicate the device I indicated. It appears to be a dangerous one. If in spite of this specific and humble request you attempt to do so, I'm not responsible for it.

I'm not trained and this is all common sense approach and hands on knowledge  of a dummy guy really..My experiments and results were based on common sense approach.

I will come back after completing my tasks and when I'm free. This forum is very addictive indeed.. In the meanwhile have a nice time. Bye for now. See you all later..Thank you all...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 20, 2014, 09:46:52 PM
Hallo Hanon,

Let guess that the patent and the knowhow would put in the public domain, but without more overlooking! 

Quote
I have to notice that in a conventional transformator the coils are also fixed and the magnetic flux density also changes as the input AC current alternates. So I wonder what makes the Figuera setup to produce more input with respect to its input power? Could you expand your understanding on it?

INHO, Figuera told us what make his generator to go overunity or self-sustaining for ever:
As there is no moving rotor, there is no need to put more energy to BREAK the Lenz-law! …Buforn stated that there is no Lenz in the generator.
I don’t agree with that statement:

Any action taken to BREAK the equilibrium , an natural reaction is taken place in order to try to keep that equilibrium state.
every action has a reaction in the opposite direction, that is Lenz and that is Newton, and that is why they put the “-” in the Faraday´s law to become Lenz-faraday´s law.

in his Generator, Figuera DOES NOT TRY TO REACTE AGAINST THE NATURE (against Lenz which is natural). So, there is no need to use extra energy to rotate that coils inside the generator.
In the patent, the small motor is used for following tasks:
-   Convert 2xAC (coming from an extra coils, and only shown in the later Buforn Patents) to 2xDC!! (@90 deg out of the phase)
-   Is also a DAC: it generate the known changing excitation currents (TWO) (but is not alternating!)
-   This Motor/Commutators setup could be used only for starting the device, BUT there is DEFECT in this assumption:
o   In order to make sefl-runig, even if you have more output than the input, you have to BREAK & CONTROL the synchronization before feeding back the current, That is the main task of the small MOTOR+Commutators.
o   A good solution could be found in the Sweet bi-filar/bi-coils configuration (INHO, Sweet is a high optimization of Figuera concept: Two magnet in attraction mode and coils in between, he then modulated the magnetic lines of force with the other perpendicular coils, which are exited from the output coils, extremely intelligent! BUT LENZ WAS THERE, and it doesn’t hurt )


So if you have a electro-magnet which can give you a known magnetic flux B. How many options have you, in order to get the maximum induced emf from that field even if it is a weak one?
Just ONE: shake it faster!, that means, in our case, you don’t need to put more current in the excitation coils BUT, you can reach a high output by making that DC motor rotate faster, which is the same as putting a higher frequency in the aduino or whatever you have used to excite the primaries . you have to get a HIGH RATE OF THE CHANGE of the magnetic field. And THAT small change (making DC Motor running faster) is the only “input cost” but it will give you a very high output (Faradays induction formulas, the faster is the CHANGE, the biger is the juice you get).

That was the optimization made by Figuera. DON’T PLAY AGAINST THE NATURE, let it do what she want to do. We should only use our intellect to use that correctly and quickly.

In the Figuera generator, there should be a hidden secret (as state from many) which is related to the excitation sequence, BUT I m sure we can hunt it , because there are a few unknown variables!

We can use an alternating current to do experiments: use the main 220/110vac + step down transformer (220 AC to 24AC etc..)+ the 3 electromagnets magnets no danger at all. (don’t make a cat to looks like a tiger …EXPERIMENT!)
I personally took stator from an AC motor stator from a used washing machine (come with two electromagnets and put a third coil inside). I have also a set of 3 high voltage transformer from LCD backlight driver (samsung) and  with that I do my experiments….just imagine!

The following picture must help to break down that secret, Please look to the ZERO & PEAK Points of the output.
@0 output, there is NO 0 input, so feedback from the output to the input MUSST be somehow worked!
else if (output = 0){ input = 0; the generator = dead; } //we have to put our effort here.

Best regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 20, 2014, 09:48:45 PM
Please ignore the degrees in the picture! There are 2 cycles
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 21, 2014, 12:40:20 AM
Hi NoMoreSlave,

An sketch (or picture) of your design would be very useful. You are talking about two coils from an AC motor stator and a coil "inside"  (inside the stator? inside the coils? or between them? Please clarify...). Also you talk about step down and high voltage transformer. Where are those high voltage transformer located?

You talk about "break down the secret" and "just imagine" . It is like if you are about to say something but you prefer to tell just some clues . Which are your input and output values?

One question: How do you get the two unphased signals?
 
About the feedback loop and the synchonization: Figuera in his 1908 patent did not loop back the output current directly to power the electromagnets. He tells in his patent that the output is used to power the small motor in the rotary conmutator. So he needed to use the rotary conmutator in normal continuous operation, not just for starting. Also he needed it because he required (in the 1908 patent) to create the two unphased signals using this conmutator and the resistors.

For all: my idea is to replicate the system shown by Ramaswami but in a small scale to avoid any risk. I have a 1" diameter iron rod. I would like to build it with input around 50 VAC and 2A (or 25 VAC and 1A). With these value I could get the voltage:amperage ratio over 20 that he suggests. This seems to be a very simple system. I need to buy some step-down transformers and also to have some free time!!. During working days I have very few free time after finishing my job. Weekends is my only time to do some tests.

Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 21, 2014, 05:37:55 AM

I read some friend posting action at a distance..What is that? If fire cracker is suddely burst some where close to you unseen by you and unexpected by you, your body gets a shock due to sudden sound.you are rattled...that is action at a distance..


Nice entertainment?
 
I weigh 105 Kgs.  Even if you blast a dynamite near me,  my body will not rattle.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance)
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 21, 2014, 07:01:01 PM
Hi Hanon,
You may be thinking that I m hidding something, but I have nothing with me.
I read the patents and I re-read them again and again...so I try to visualise the ideee behind that concept, thats all.

I will give you some links or show you exactly the kind of materials i have:
x10  CCFl Inverter trasformers (1P & 2 Second but used in reverse mode): desoldered fom LCD TV (junk yard) the same as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72kGU6SetpM
I got also some HV inverter (1,2kvAC outout,very small amps):
http://www.pollin.de/shop/dt/OTgwOTc4OTk-/Bauelemente_Bauteile/Aktive_Bauelemente/Displays/CCFL_Inverter_GPBC03.html

toroidal transformer like this one:

the answer to your quetion about the AC Motor stator is: i have like this one:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stator_eines_Universalmotor.JPG

see how AC Motor works (is Tesla rotating magnetic field, which is a general form of Figuera principale)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtJoJBUSe28

Your quation about 2 phased currents: they are obtainble using a capacitor
see this one at 2:54 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8

regards,
NMS


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 22, 2014, 04:31:42 AM
Just out of curiosity and since I have an old, 2phase 3 motors steppermotor control card (smc 800)  here, did anyone in here actually manage to get this thing working?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 22, 2014, 12:11:50 PM

-   Convert 2xAC (coming from an extra coils, and only shown in the later Buforn Patents) to 2xDC!! (@90 deg out of the phase)

.....

about 2 phased currents: they are obtainable using a capacitor
see this one at 2:54 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8)


I was noy able to find any special procedure in the later Buforn patents. In fact I have always thought that they are exact copies of the last Figuera patent from 1908 plus some minor improvements.

I have done a partial translation of some key parts from the last Buforn patent form 1914. The rest of the patent is just simple copy/paste from Figuera 1908. I hope you could make good use of this translation

Your idea of using a capacitor for the two unphased currents is very good. The capacitor should withstand the amperage to the primary

See the partial translation of Buforn patent No. 57955 attached

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 22, 2014, 01:17:29 PM
YEEEES!
also this from 44267:

Quote
....puesto que la que NO VA A EXCITAR unos electroimanes EXCITA a los otros y así sucesivamente;
pudiendo decirse que los electrodos N y S obran simultáneamente y en opuesto sentido pues mientras los primeros van llenándose de corriente se
van vaciando los segundos y repitiéndose este efecto seguida y ordenadamente se mantiene una alteración constante en los campos magnéticos dentro los cuales se halla colocado el circuito inducido, sin más complicaciones que el giro de una escobilla o grupo de escobillas que se mueven circularmente alrededor del cilindro “G” por la acción de un pequeño motor eléctrico.

Quote
Como se ve en el dibujo la corriente una vez ha hecho su oficio en los diferentes electroimanes vuelve al generador de donde se ha tomado;
naturalmente que en cada revolución de la escobilla habrá un cambio de signo en la corriente inducida; pero un conmutador la hará continua si así se desea.
De esta corriente se deriva una pequeña parte y con ella se excita la máquina convirtiéndola en auto excitadora y se acciona el pequeño motor que hace
girar la escobilla y el conmutador; se retira la corriente extraña o de cebo y la máquina continua su misión sin necesidad de que le presten ayuda ninguna
para suministrarla indefinidamente.

now you can see the an alternating excitation current IST NOT the way to go!

The translation you posted is a construction variation, but not an improvement. That construction can give you 2 Phases! x and y
see the polarity in a line: (S  N) y (S N) x (S  N) y (S  N) x (S  N) y (S  N) x
where
(S  N) is an electromagnet unit.
x : series of induced electromagnets to get one phase
y : series of induced electromagnets to get another phase





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 22, 2014, 09:19:15 PM
Why do these images of patent drawings look touched up? If they are, is there any chance to post them without the touch ups?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 23, 2014, 03:19:40 AM
It seems that most of them have been tampered with ...it is either the power elite does not want the average person to have this info or there are many morons trying to be a flippin hero. i am testing  and digesting all info and coming to my own conclusion . what i do know is that with one coming down and one coming up is the same as pulling the north out while pushing the south in getting a push pull effect. this allows the gyroscopic spin directions of both charges to be in a complimentary state (attracting one another) negating the lenz law effect.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 23, 2014, 03:56:42 AM
Why do these images of patent drawings look touched up? If they are, is there any chance to post them without the touch ups?

All Buforn's patents may be downloaded in a pdf file from this link: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf)

As always, all Figuera's patents and documents can be found in: http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on February 23, 2014, 06:50:18 AM
Hi all,

Has anyone else had PROBLEMS trying to download post and pages at this site lately. They must have changed the software or something, because it now takes more than 60 seconds to get comments, post, Login to appear. And instead of going to the top of the current page, it goes directly to the newest post, (this part is good). This seems to me to be slowing down greatly the connection time, and new quest may think that the page is locked up and go else where.
Any thoughts?
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 23, 2014, 11:08:10 AM
RMatt:

This problem is very real and is frutrating.

Marathonman:

Regarding old records, Rather than any one tampering with or other people trying to be Heros, we need to see that these are very old papers that if not properly maintained will wither away. I have my Grand fathers books in 1904 or so and they will fall apart as the due to some paper eating bacterial action on old papers. We in India try to avoid that by using neem leaves being placed in between the papers of many books and then using turmeric powder mixed with water to be pasted on the sides of the books. Both of them have anti microbial properties. If this is not done, the papers would wither away without any one having to do any thing to them. It depends on how the libraries maintain the records. In spite of this we have the problem of maintaing very old records. If this is so in a family archive, just think about how a public archieves would be maintained of very old records and what would be their condition.   What methods they used in spain to maintain the Archaives are not known to me.

What you say is the arrangement of a kind of circular coil or the multiple cores of Figuera or the straight core of Buforn where the secondaries placed between the opposite poles would first face magnetic lines of force to flow from N direction to the S direction and then from the S direction to the N direction. I had tried to do that but I could not achieve that with the rotary device which is specially made to create sparks. I can confirm that sparks when created even with a tester on wire going to the through a coil wound on iron rods,  connected serially to a resistive load, increases the voltage at the load voltmeters. We checked at that time why many old devices used sparks and what sparks do but we did it in a safe way by making minisparks by taping the wires with a tester. Because the sparks increase the frequency, induced emf goes up and so voltage goes up.

But I can also confirm that I had not been able to replicate the feat that you mention as magnetic lines of force alternating in the way described by Figuera. Howver the difference between your description and the description of Figuera as seen in the patent is an orderly circular rotaton through all devices and not a half rotation. But because of the arrangement of the 7 coils, both are the of the same effect.  It applies to common sense that if the forces act like that the gyroscopic motion that you indicate would be the result. However I had not been able to perform that becuase the rotary device built to generate sparks instantly breaks down. My idea is that it is a regular rotation of the magnetic field intensity which rotates between the 7 core coils in a regular way was achieved by Figuera. I have to confess that I have not been able to replicate that feet. But we found that only when the poles are of equal strength and not varying strength we got good performance. Howver I must admit here that the pole strengths are all fixed as we relied on the number of turns to fix the magnetic field strength and not on the variation of electric current flowing through the coils in a routine way. While you indicate a half rotation, Figuera describers a full rotation which constantly fluctuates. As I said the effect is the same in any case.

Hubbard's 8 coil generator also works on the same principle of half circular motion from one side to other first and then half circular motion in the reverse path. I have succeeded in creating magnetism in all 8 coils by still we had not been able to magnetize the inner core. This is what I indicated as half rotation of the earth. Hubbard coil refuses to work if it is not half circular motion. It is similar to your putting a roller and then having a rope around the roller and then pulling the roller from Right hand extending your left hand  outand then pulling the extended left hand towards the shoulder while the right hand goes outwards. This kind of regular arrangement where current fluctuates and the coils are fixed would result in an orderly variation of the magnetic field strength.

While understanding the concept looks easy, performing it is not. This is the problem. Even if some one performs, because it is in public juris now whether they would come forward to disclose is another doubt. Figuera is reported to have achieved about 550 volts and 28 amps and without the sparks in the circular device it could not have been done. His patent also shows that the current goes to the source from where it is taken. It is not clear to me if the voltage is increased and if a bank of batteries are used, the batteries would continuously be recharged automatically. That is not known to me. Without sparks there is no way to increase the voltage.

Figueras patent indicates that he looped another coil of wire on the secondaries and that coil was used to rotate the small motor.

As is shown in the newspaper reports this device that produces sparks was specially made to Figueras configuration. What is that configuration is not known and we have only a sketch of the device and that is where the difficulty comes in. Other than that the patent papers produced by Hanon and the translations appear to be in order.

It is only in view of this difficulty to repeat what Figuera did,  that I used AC current in the three coils. Unfortunately we are not able to produce the same result again as earlier we have used a different type of wire to create a quadfilar wire. It appears that all coils have their own resonant frequencies and their harmonics at which stage or at near that stage, they would withdraw only very small current while the secondary would produce very good results. I simply do not know how to calculate the resonant frequency of a coil or resonant frequecy of primary and secondary combined and what are the harmonics of such resonant frequencies. Normally resonant frequencies are available at high frequencies only but by strange luck we have earlier succeeded in reaching this usiing ordinary coils, and ordinary soft iron and at 50 Hz frequency. We however have disassembled them and we are trying to replicate them. A much smaller coil wound with much lesser number of turns and length of wires virtually consumes nearly 16 amps at input and causes significant losses at secondary output putting up a performance worse than a normal transformer.   

Regarding the resonant frequency action please see this video on youtube..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY

We by some mistake, appear to have done it at 50 Hz current due to coil arrangement. Some how the coils made by us earlier with a lot of turns absorbed very little amperage while now at much lower number of turns the coils simply take too much of amperage. The performance that we witnessed earlier was not present now. What I feel is that what we have done is to reach some how unknown to us, the resonant frequency or its harmonics, in a coil using 50 Hz current due to the strange shape of the coil and the excessive number of turns. Since we were testing a concept if it would work, we did not even not down the number of turns and simply wound a lot of coils. This rather unexpected success was not due to any thing but due to resonant frequency or its harmonics being achieved by the unusal coil shape.

We have used the coils in a different way to produce more than 100% output results and to be precise 116% results which I cannot give due to patent application reasons. After filing the PCT application, I promise to provide that information. We are able to replicate that performance without any difficulty even yesterday but at lesser number of secondary turns it turns out to be only 103% efficient. We simply need to keep on increasing the secondary turns and check other things. 

This performance being not natural, was earlier verified by a Professor who checked the configuration and felt that the measurements will need to be done with very accurate meters before he can accept the results. He felt that however instead of using soft iron rods if we use nanomaterials used for advanced transformers, we can significantly improve the performance. Let me just say that competent people are studying that design.

I will post more information next week.

Regarding the coil that blocks electricity from moving forward, I had been instructed not to disclose any thing and I'm sorry I have to concede defeat to TK..I have further instructions not to disclose coil shapes and wire patterns. I'm sorry I cannot oblige you.

I will not answer any questions. My apologies.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 23, 2014, 03:22:56 PM
As nobody answered my question if there are any working builds, and as I refuse to read 50 pages when the device is said to be "simple", I'll add some thoughts here anyway.


First of all, based on the intial patent description, this looks just like an ordinary ac/ac transformer to me.


It may be special that the pulses of "N" and "S" are overlapping, but that's about it.


Is it a scam? The author doesn't want money. But he sells books, eg. "science heresy". So maybe it's a prank, llike the many utube vids of fake OU? I have to say, if it is a prank, then it is extremly well done!


Third option is: it's real. I don't see any other options.


I also don't see why it can't be put on a single torroid core with 4 coils, why those air gaps? After all, we want to simulate a magnet that comes close, so a max flux should be the goal.


Yeah, well, seems like I'm talking to walls again, however.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 23, 2014, 04:24:35 PM
NRamaswami Most of the problems you/r having can be resolved with methods of construction already known in other patents.I would site Tesla for the most part because all his works are in collections which makes it easier to access.
  How can one use a magnet to block current for example. Well it is firstly stated wrong. How ever to keep it short the answer is you convert all of it to magnetic fields and place the same sign poles against each other so they repel. In turn the current is retarded because it can not advance as a magnetic field against another magnetic field of same sign. Actually it could be reversed or forced to flow backwards if the correct field was stronger at the proper time.
  The induced coils are being hit with south pole magnetic fields.No north pole fields are aimed at any of the induced coils. Like'n it to a super bloch wall. The control is no more then variable resistance in rotation that is fed by a single source of current from a battery or mains. The fine line of the bloch wall is or needs to be centered. If both inducer magnets were turn on at the same time with south facing poles facing the induced coil or space it would be in.The super bloch wall would fall dead center of the space.Each set has to be centered perfectly. Other wise you create what amounts to cavitation between sets and you lose power.  It needs to be built on adjustable rig.
  You could use a simple model for proof of concept. Use two magnets set up the same way. Build a coil with no iron core mounted on a piece of wood and stationary.build a fork of wood and mount a magnet on each tine facing the coil inbetween the two tines.Make sure you have a way to adjust the distance between tines. Move the fork side to side so only one magnet at a time is close to the coil. In turn the bloch wall is traveling across the coil with the magnets opposing each other. Do it fast and there ya go. Add a iron core that is longer then the coil and reduce the movement of the magnets. The bloch wall has to pass the entire coil not the entire core. If you go past the entire core you get stuck.

   The difference is that figuera's version the magnets are on or fully saturated then the resistance control is turned on to bring it into electrical motion pushing the current against the fields which repel ,stopping any new current from entering. The amount of current required and will fit once turned into a field will just bounce back and forth in a sense between inducers. The induced circuit is actually of little concern to the action of the inducers. Provided it is scaled so the load is not greater then the output of the induced coils how ever arranged. A field in motion will remain a field because of the motion.Certainly you cant expect something to remain in motion if it does not exist.

   This device is the simplistic version,it can be improved with out much difficulty in the methods of winding the coils. Its the conceptual understanding that counts because you can apply that to what ever tickles your fancy. Even a shake up flash light can be modified to work off this notion using two magnets.
 Most of you dont want to consider this to be the case. The only drawing in the patents which indicate any reference to the orientation of the inducer magnets is the one with the rotory  resister. Unless the laws of physics are different in your location the inducers have the north poles facing out and the south poles facing into the induced from both sides. The number of lines of force are doubled at the intersection of repulsion by angular opposition. In an attraction configuration the lines of force will decay and build between electro magnets but they will still represent a single magnetic path around the entire collection including the induced.The induced coil will never see the pole end.It will be as if you were pushing a magnet through a coil but not far enough to do anything. The magnet and it's field has to leave,exit, the coil completely to produce any real measure of effect. Then reverse direction and in doing so it will produce even more then it did when a single pole went through the coil. When the other side of the magnet goes through the coil it's lines of force are now angularly reversed a 180 degree difference. When two opposing fields go in and out of a coil they are 360 degrees reversed. Which one do you think is greater?

   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 23, 2014, 09:00:26 PM
watch this video on you tube i think it is relevant to your 180 - 360 degree rotation dilemma. i know it is about a single phase motor but look at the double revolving field theory.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8&list=PLsZ7gsPPXNMO9K32jh2f   i think the same effect is possible with DC as long as the currant is varied from high to low with opposite polarities i.e. Single revolving field  or am i looking at this wrong. by the way both of you are a credit to this forum....thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 23, 2014, 09:48:09 PM

Position A = If you slid the coil between the north and south magnets you would not cut any more or less lines of force. If you strengthened the or weakened the magnets the coil would not cut any more or less lines of force.The lines still thread through the coil just stronger or weaker.Best you could get is a piss poor transformer. The coil when rotated changes the amount of flux it cuts and the number of lines.Till it reaches position C and is now facing the other way and continues to turn and the effect is reversed. A and C are simply a way to get rotation to reach B and D. Get rid of A and C.
  Treat the N and S magnets as the motor. If you face the magnets N,N or S,S you have obviated another rotation.That is the magnets do not have to swap poles N,S/S,N because that takes more work.The point where the two fields meet will have a shear line seperating them like two window fans blowing at each other.The air will circulate around the fan like discrete bubbles circling each fan. The center point of collision of the air has two opposite direction of flow. If your hand is more close to one fan it feels the air flow and direction from that fan and if closer to other it feels the opposite. If the fans are alternately slowed down and sped up the collision/wall will move side to side. There will exist a positive pressure between the two fans all the time.
 N-S< (induced) >S-N. The induced is AC the poles in the induced alternate. The induced is not consuming of the inducers. The only consumption is the initial power used to establish the fields in the inducer magnets. After they start shifting they sustain themselves the same way any ordinary generator does with movement,you do not input current into a generator from a outside source while using a gas engine as a prime mover to generate electric do you? You just pull the cord start the engine and poof out comes the juice. Long as there is rotation or movement it will expand to it's effective limit and pour out the good stuff till you do something stupid or neglectful to stop it.The real question,the right question is how does a generator work in the first place.Because it does in fact get more magnetic field out then it started with even though no one added any current or greater field strength from an outside source. If something is not true today then it was not true yesterday and wont be true tomorrow.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 23, 2014, 10:20:18 PM
Sorry about that image garbage at the top of the post.It's not letting me in to edit it out.
I will keep trying.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on February 23, 2014, 10:38:48 PM
Sorry about that image garbage at the top of the post.It's not letting me in to edit it out.
I will keep trying.

Hi Doug,

You try to click on the Modify icon in the upper right hand side of your above post, right?  If it does not work, click on the Report to moderator or write a personal message to hartiberlin perhaps.

Gyula

EDIT  you have just solved it, ok.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on February 24, 2014, 04:02:02 PM
Possibly useful related background information... since some of you fellows may not be familiar with:

Vladimir Utkin

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/VladimirUtkin2.htm

http://free-energy-info.co.uk/VladimirUtkin.pdf

He does investigate, amongst other things, Back EMF suppression in a resonance coil using a single Primary with two Secondary windings - but NOT two Primaries with a single Secondary. Somewhat enlightening in any case!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 24, 2014, 05:25:31 PM
hi dieter,

Quote
Just out of curiosity and since I have an old, 2phase 3 motors steppermotor control card (smc 800)  here, did anyone in here actually manage to get this thing working?

I did not got to work, I m testing it with a 12 VDC nut it is rectified, and i got a sine wave in the output even if ther is no rotation of the commutator, so i have to buy a bettery to see how the signal looks like with a pure DC input...

Beste regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on February 24, 2014, 05:39:09 PM
hi Doug1,
Quote
Position A = If you slid the coil between the north and south magnets you would not cut any more or less lines of force. If you strengthened the or weakened the magnets the coil would not cut any more or less lines of force.The lines still thread through the coil just stronger or weaker.Best you could get is a piss poor transformer. The coil when rotated changes the amount of flux it cuts and the number of lines.Till it reaches position C and is now facing the other way and continues to turn and the effect is reversed. A and C are simply a way to get rotation to reach B and D. Get rid of A and C.
  Treat the N and S magnets as the motor. If you face the magnets N,N or S,S you have obviated another rotation.That is the magnets do not have to swap poles N,S/S,N because that takes more work.The point where the two fields meet will have a shear line seperating them like two window fans blowing at each other.The air will circulate around the fan like discrete bubbles circling each fan. The center point of collision of the air has two opposite direction of flow. If your hand is more close to one fan it feels the air flow and direction from that fan and if closer to other it feels the opposite. If the fans are alternately slowed down and sped up the collision/wall will move side to side. There will exist a positive pressure between the two fans all the time.
 N-S< (induced) >S-N. The induced is AC the poles in the induced alternate. The induced is not consuming of the inducers. The only consumption is the initial power used to establish the fields in the inducer magnets. After they start shifting they sustain themselves the same way any ordinary generator does with movement,you do not input current into a generator from a outside source while using a gas engine as a prime mover to generate electric do you? You just pull the cord start the engine and poof out comes the juice. Long as there is rotation or movement it will expand to it's effective limit and pour out the good stuff till you do something stupid or neglectful to stop it.The real question,the right question is how does a generator work in the first place.Because it does in fact get more magnetic field out then it started with even though no one added any current or greater field strength from an outside source. If something is not true today then it was not true yesterday and wont be true tomorrow.


That is what I was trying to show here, but it seems that we are here just to copy schematics and not trying to understand the effect.
Figuera started by obvserving the existing generatos, then he made a solid state version, evryone can do the same, JUST by LOOKING TO THE MOVEMENT in a slow motion:
reduce the numbers of the coils just to 3 , because they are the pattern-base for evry rotating generator, or alternator or dynamos....

with 2 primary coils in complimentry exitation mode, the induced current is made by BOTHE magnetic fileds (N & S): I_total = I_n + I_s (abstract formula), see the sign of the current!

I have to leave this forum for now, i must continue with muy experiments (hard to find material in this small town   :'( )

@ ALL : Good luck


Best regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 24, 2014, 10:34:13 PM
some times i have to visualize some things to get it (sorry for Pics). :'( :'( im better with moving parts than abstract. i would like to comment on the SN/ Y \SN in line coils and cores. when SN coil is energized the flux influences Y coil. when Y coil Current begins to flow it reverses to counter balance SN'S magnetic flux influences so they are of same polarity opposing one another but because you have SN in line opposite end it to will oppose Y coil flux as they are same polarity because current has to flow at all times in order not to get BEMF. SN{NS}SN this my friend will end up with you searching for pee-wee herman's Bicycle on a Sunday mourning :o .......UNLESS you bring opposite coil down to almost zero before cut off ?????  ;D  then it is possible to loose the magnetic rotation that was spoken of  earlier. :-*
Food for thought ...might want to use this program Dip Trace free, my boards turned out great.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Voouq_1Waro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 24, 2014, 11:55:30 PM
I think in order to visualize the function of the setup to make a wave drawing we need to imagine the brush rotating around the inside (or outside) of the cylinder and the brush making contact with at least two of the cylinder contacts at any one time. The brush making contact with two cylinder contacts at any one time should minimize sparking. I'm thinging the brush rotates around the inside of the cylinder similar to an old automobile distributer, but the brush is a contact brush, it could go around the outside or inside.

The brush only has one wire attached to it, but the cylinder has many, it is definitely the brush that rotates around the cylinder. So from this knowledge we should be able to ascertain the current through the coils at any given stage of rotation. And from that we can get a wave drawing for each coil and the phase as compared to each other.

..

P.S. Sorry bout the coffee stain, I made two copies and cut the cylinder out of one so I could spin it on the second drawing. The cylinder doesn't spin but it has the same effect if we look at the current through the brush.

..

 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 25, 2014, 04:02:41 AM
Surprising that after 50 pages the device is still interpreted so vaguely.


IMHO the cylinder does rotate, but there is the 2nd half of stator contacts missing on the drawing, and each wire on the cylinder has 2 brushes. So this way it's really simple to create two sinoids, independently. Anyway, we know the goal: to get two sinoids that are overlapping, actually not sinoids but triangle sawtheeths! Tho, the exact shape may not be critical.
You could take mains grid ac (transformed to 24vac for small scale test), "fold up" the negative part of the wave by reversing the poles (after extracting it with 2 diodes), additionally do this a second time, but 90deg out of phase using a cap. This would give you two phases with constant pulses, overlapping by half of their pulsewidth. Actually exactly what is described in the patent, except that they are sinus and not triangle. Why figuera didn't do it that way? Most likely there was no mains grid at that time on canary islands.


From the initial patent we also realize that the main goal is to create an alternating magnetfield in the induced coils core. The idea is, that moving a magnet along a coil requires mechanical work that varies in electrical efficiency, depending on the  distance of the magnet, which chanches repeatedly. By inducing the magnet with stationary coils, this mechanical work is not neccessary.


It should be mentioned that in a good generator the only mechanical work is the lotentz force, the rotor should spin with low resistance when no load is connected.


Anyway, this brings up the question: if there is no motion, is there also no lotentz force to fight?? Now that would be interesting. But then again, why are ordinary transformers not OU, they are doing basicly the same, inducing over a core a secondary coil.


Seems like everybody in here has a diffrent view of the device. Like the image of the window generator somebody posted. I yet have to see a clear diagram of the coils. Seems also, the topic starter has left the building, did he?


The only thing that is really interesting, is the convincing story about figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 25, 2014, 12:55:32 PM
The many views and opinions, how this works were rather confusing. Nevertheless I was thinking about it and it seems to me, in simple terms, it works like this:


Two strong, opposing fields on the same core with eddy suppression, between them a gap. Here's the bloch wall, where the two Ns os Ss' hit and get radially compressed.


In the gap (Probably the 3 coils share a single ferrite core) there's a pancake coil. It is capable of picking up the radially compressed bloch wall field. While the two inductors don't consume energy as long as they have the same strength, no matter how strong they are (turning on not in calculation and assuming no inductive loads) , they are capable of moving the bloch wall a few mm left and right, just by variing their voltage slightly in alternation. As soon as the bloch wall is left to the pancake, the pancake sees himself on the north pole of a strong magnet, when the blochwall then goes a few mm to the right, the pancake is south to the magnet. And here's the point: It's got a full ac cycle at the voltage of the strong opposing magnets that are consuming only the variation of the bloch wall.


Obviously, the bloch wall is not affected by the lorentz force, at least this would explain the source of energy.


So if I get it right, it should be very simple to build a test device.  It may even be interesting to simply play with two neodyms and a pancake coil.


Please note, I used the term "bloch wall", I mean the "wall" between two opposing magnets, like n vs n.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 25, 2014, 03:36:24 PM
I agree. what if Mr Figueras drew his invention for simplicity like most patents do. instead of winding the coils on separate cores for visualization purposes, what if it was wound on one core alternating NS Y SN winding layers.( NS Y SN Y NS Y SN ect.) then tying the out puts together and varying the current to NS SN coil layers. this would cause the required magnetic rotation needed for proper AC output in the Y coil Please watch this Video to visualize what i am talking about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8
please ignore the subject and rotor and pay attention to the rotating magnetic flux fields. this is what is taking place in Figueras invention and i am darn near convinced i am right on this one....please advise ! .........this would cause the magnetic rotation in the wires and the iron core will significantly magnify this event. he then series and or paralleled the outputs to required voltages and Ampers. with the NS Y SN coils being so close in proximity and magnetically coupled together the Lorentz effect would be eliminated as the Lorentz effect is only applicable to same like charges ie..NN or SS...++ or --.   yes it could be possible for the Y coil to be sanwiched in between to pick up bloch wall events. things that make you go Hmmmmmm.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 25, 2014, 05:08:49 PM
Thanks, I double that hmmmm. Ive made a diagram to illlustrate how dramaticly  and effectively field lines can be compressed by the bloch wall. The lorentz force will act on the pancake, so it must me fixed well. Iron core may cause eddy current losses, so I said ferrite. A magnet field monitor foil from wondermagnets.com makes finding the bloch wall easy.

Also, permanent magnets probably may be used to setup the basic bloch wall, and only an additional emagnetfield is applied to do the oscillation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 25, 2014, 07:44:37 PM
Dear All:

I have a doubt. It is a basic and fundamental theoretical doubt. Could any one of the friends here clarify on this point please. I would be very obliged.

Now I have a doubt.

The induced emf in secondary called counter emf or voltage is based on the following factors as I know.

1. Number of turns of the secondary.
2. Rate of change of mangetic flux or frequency
3. Length vs Diameter ratio
4. Core material used as it determines magnetic permeability.

There is another variable present here. Magnetic Field Strength.

Now The magnetic field strength is based on the Number of turns multiplied by the amperage applied. If we increase one or both of them the intensity of the magnetic field or the magnetic field strength would increase.

My doubt is very specific..

What is the effect of the intensity of the magnetic field or what is the effect of increasing the amperage on the solenoid..Would it increase the induced emf or would it reduce the emf.

Please consider that in both the situations the applied current is either AC or pulsed DC. As is known the impedance of the wire carrying current is reduced when the current is pulsed DC.

So how would the intensity of the magnetic field strength would affect the induced emf in both these cases. I checked all material online and am unable to find answers. Could you please answer this please? I would be obliged.

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 25, 2014, 08:10:21 PM
Good Point i'll have to get back to you on that one, but i do know that if the magnetic field is increased ( i.e Currant or Ampur turns) to much it has a decreasing effect in relation to the efield which we don't want to happen. the rest i will get back. i have a drawing that could help....very bad attempt at paint though. Dieter i though the bloch wall is only relevant to North and South poles.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 25, 2014, 10:20:39 PM
Hi Ramaswami,

In a solenoid the magnetic field B  maybe calculated from B = nu·N·I/Length . Therefore the intensity and the turns determine the final magnetic field.

As Faraday Law  the induce emf depends on the rate of change of the magnetic field, dB/dt: it is the sames going form 100 to 80 than going from 30 to 10, because in both case the variation is 20 units.

For flux linking two coils:    Faraday Law:            emf = N·Area·dB/dt   

then emf = N·Area·nu·(I_max - I_min)/Time  , therefore the higher the jump beetween Imax and Imin and the higher the frequency (1/Time) then the emf will be greater

For flux cutting a moving wire at certain speed the formula is the Lorentz Force     emf = B·Length·Speed

I haven´t read the last post I have just arrived home. I will read them after dinner


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2014, 12:33:06 AM
Thank you Hanon for explaining it in a way Dummy like me can understand..

However the answer still does not answer the other important point of the question..

What will happen if the current is pulsed Dc and if the current given is AC. From experience I know that 240 turns are needed to keep the electromagnet stable for AC current and 960 turns are needed to keep the electromagnet stable when pulsed DC is given.  Of course for solenoids.

The answers provided does not say what will happen to induced emf in these two cases. I have exeperimented and found that both pulsed dc and AC have transformer actions or produce an induced emf but under the conditions performed AC was found to be superior in performance than pulsed DC. So we stuck with AC..

However I still find some information that we see in the experiments is not given in the books. The earlier answer indicates that higher the current higher the magnetic field intensity and that will reduce the electric field and that will reduce efficiency. In a way it is correct. In a way it is wrong. Our experiments indicate that up to some point the efficiency increases if we increase the amperage. After that it drops out as the electromagnets start making unacceptable notise indicating core saturation.

Why that happens why the efficiency increase up to certain point and why the why the efficiency decrease? That is not clear to me.

Also I have heard that the wires tend to magnetize and then demagnetize and then magnetize again. This I heard from a very distinguished Professor and I found similar information online.

Now my question is what would happen to induced emf when the current given is pulsed DC and current given is AC..How does it affect the induced emf..I also want others to confirm that what Hanon said is correct.

While I'm a dummy I have made a lot of experiments, found a lot of results that are inconsistent with the theory in books and am puzzled with many results. Earlier some of the posters were pointing out that the best results would come if the magnets were to be placed in NS-NS-SN direction in a straight core. This is against the law of nature. A straight core cannot have this configuration as the magnet must have a south pole and a north pole at the opposite end. If you do it with an electromagnet, you wind the coil in the first primary in clockwise direction and in the second primary in anticlockwise direction. Wind it and see that the electricity is present in the form of eddy currents in the core but the magnetism disappears. Nothing is produced in the central core. Because there is no magnetism. But if you wind for a number of 4 coils or 2 coils and then wind counter clockwise in the second part the magnetism stays but the first part is stronger and the second part even though it has same number of turns is a weaker magnet. when we have separate cores. So if the NS-NS-SN were to work we must have two different primary electromagnets and the primary at the ends facing secondary must be separated by either plastic sheet or copper sheet if all of them to be placed inside a same tube so that the central secondary does not rotate but will remain stable.  I think probably this is what some friends earlier called an air gap..I do not understand. But I can confirm that in a straight core magnetism is destroyed. in the NS-NS-SN configuration if you use the same wire to generate it. Eddy currents of course remain. No output from central core.

I will check these things out from the knowledge given by Hanon but my question still remains unanswered.   What is the effect on induced emf if the current is AC or if the current is pulsed DC? And whether information given by Hanon is correct.

Would be grateful if other friends would clear up. But from experience I can tell you that to a certain extend increasing the amperage results in increased efficiency and then the iron creates so much of sound we do not dare to go further increase the amperage. Amperage increase is controlled by connecting the primary to resistive loads. We can increase or decrease that way. The same effect is present for both single solenoid and a transformer kind of solenoid where we have both primary and secondary..Secondly I'm not able to understand the formula emf = N·Area·nu·(I_max - I_min)/Time  When we give current the amperage is constant. Where is the question of I max and Imin here..For an electromagnet to hold itself stable again I is constant. I in my understanding here is amperage. Where do we get Imax and Imin..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 26, 2014, 02:13:29 AM
When you pulse a coil with dc and do not block the back emf, then it becomes sort of ac, where the negative waveside is spikey. Depending on impedance, the back emf can be very fast, shorter than the dc pulse and in that case, the voltage is higher. The back emf contains the energy that was required to saturate the coil.


Anyhow, it seens to me people didn't notice the meaning of my diagram...


Although I agree, one single core for all 3 coils may be a problem  better "stick to the plan" and use some real gaps. The bloch wall (or what ever it's called when N vs N causes a highly compressed field stenght 2D zone) will be there anyway. You may continue your quest, I for myself have solved the puzzle and explained it sufficently IMHO.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 26, 2014, 09:37:24 AM
 
Hi Ramaswami,
 
The discussion about pole orientation comes from time ago. The problem is that Figuera in 1908 patent did not clearly stated the pole orientation (He did it in the 1902 patent, but not in the 1908 one nor Buforn did it in his latter 5 more patents !!!). I will copy literally what it is written in the 1908 patent (both in the text and in the claims) so that everyone may judge if this a properly way of defining the pole orientation or maybe it is just a patent notation “trick” using the letters “N” and “S”  (Note: in Spanish à North = Norte ,  South  = Sur)
 
In the description:  “Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and S. Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small)”
 
In the claims: “The machine is essentially characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, between whose poles the reels of the induced  are properly placed.”
 
We should test every single possible configuration to avoid missing anything.  It is all about testing also this configuration.
 
About the I_max (maximum current Intensity) and I_min (minimum intensity) you will get it from the variable resistors system: if you have a R value in each coil and you have 7 more resistors of the same value, you will have a value of minimum resistance R and a maximum resistance 8·R during a half rotation of the commutator
 
R_min = R  --->  (Ohm´s Law)   --->  I_max = V / R
R_max =8·R  ---> (Ohm´s Law)   --->  I_min = V / 8·R
 
Also note that smaller values in the resistors will get a higher I_min  so the step from I_max to I_min will be smaller which is not good. I used 4.7 ohm in each resistor (able to dissipate 25 W each) with no success so far. You have more testing capability than me so it would be good to test it in your conditions
 
Dieter, some points in your previous posts are very valuable. We need different opinions to enrich this forum. I found very interesting your idea of having two resistor set to create two independent sinusoidal waves. I think it was also posted by Shadow some time ago.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2014, 01:14:30 PM
Hanon:

I will check..I can provide a maximum of 230 volts and 18 amps as input. Please advise what is the ohms needed for the wire to reach this figure. Note that I have a fluctuating voltage from 200 to 220 to 230 volts but is is normally in the 220 voltage region.

I agree that we can test the NS-NS-SN configuration. But if we do so the following things would need to be done.

1. I need to create two large electromagnet of equal and opposite powers.. ( unless we are using multiple primary coils)

2. Each coil must be connected separately as an electromagnet. Each coil must be able to handle at least 230 volts and 7 amps pulsed DC. Remember Pulsed DC is more powerful as there is very less impedance in the coils and from our experience  we know that 4 times the number of turns and coils are needed to maintain the stable electromagnet. We would need 960 turns to be precise to hold the electromaganet. Please let me know what is the length of the pipe needed to make this number of turns.

See the solenoid magnetic field calculator here http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html#c1

Please note that the Tesla of the magnetic field strength should not exceed more than 1.5 Tesla to be on the safe side. We can go to higher levels but from our experience only when the magnetic field strength is less it produces better amount of electricity. It is a kind of mystery really as more powerful magnet should produce more powerful output but it does not work that way.

3. The secondary would need to be separate from the primaries by a copper sheet. or we need to use a small plastic sheet that will not block the magnetism but will still act as an air gap.

4. Secondary would need to be half the size or less of the primaries.

5. The secondary would need to be surrounded by strong iron poles or be structured in such a way that it cannot move. 

6. Electrical output can be expected in secondary when pulsed DC is used or AC is used.

7. You need to calculate the ohms of the wire, and not more than 1.5 tesla for a  45 cm length and 10 cm dia electromagnet. I get for 45cm electromagnet with 960 turns at 3 amps itself the 1.6 Tesla range.

8. If we are going to wind it on a 1 metre electromagnet, it would become, for 220 volts and 8 amps we would need 27.5 ohms for the magnet to be stable. 

9. 27.5 ohms will require us to buy 2000 metres of 1.5 sq mm wire. I can try with 2.5 inch dia tubes as they would have less electromagnetism.

10. My multimeter shows 0.005 for the 2k setting of the ohms. What is the ohms. This is a 4 sq mm wire with 327 turns. What would be the amperage for 12 volts. My variac can handle up to 2 amps and so I can test that also for up to some thing like 25 volts. Assuming 5 ohms ( AM I right or wrong?) for 12.84 volts of battery it would be only 2 amps and nothing would happen. We need minimum of 7 to 8 Amps for any thing to happen here. Preferably 12 amps.

11. Assuming 230 volts main connection fuze would blow out guaranteed and the electromagnet at the moment would not withstand that.

12. 220volts/7amps =  32 ohms is the ohms needed. We will need about 2000 metres of 1 sq mm wire for that.

13.  We will try to create two large electromagnets with what is available to me at the moment. 4 sq mm wire. I will calculate the ohms.

14. While all of you talk about the patent and whether it is north or south, you have forgotten Figuera talks about taking electricity from an extrernal generator. He is also talking about reels after reels of wire. If we are going to use batteries, You need to get 100 volts means you need to use 8 batteries. I have only 2 batteries for testing purposes.

15. I will organize this with existing material and then use the pulsed DC.. I'm honestly very very doubtful about the results but I want to honor the friends and so we will do it. I will check the number of turns and check the ohms and then come back to you and tell you whether we can handle it at the moment with materials available with me.

16. I'm really very very doubtful but let us see. Both Doug and others insist it should work.

17. Assuming it works at 220 volts and about 8 amps then we have defintely a working one. Howsoever small and howsoever litttle the voltage is. Whether that would produce enough voltage? I am again doutful for the number of turns woudl be much lesser than in the primaries. But we would have made a basis for the device to be tested as advised by all the friends and so we will know.

18. We will test with what we have and so all of you have the benefit of it. Remember we are going to use airgaps. Very thin plastic sheet. The center cannot move around as we will have it secured and then place weights around it to prevent any movement. We will also need to prevent it from vertically jumping up.

19. This is not a Bifilar coil but just a single wire coil. We can test Bifilar, trifilar, quadfilar etc if this producs results. The Pancake drawing shile impressive shows the pancake outside the magnetic field and it would not work. Pancake should be within the magnet and so I'm going to use only a 25 cm tube for the secondary. About 1 meter tubes of wires for the primary. Let us see if it holds. If it does not hold then we will need to buy small wires that can make the electromagnet to hold at 6 to 7 amps. Problem is that if you increase the number of turns or increase the amps in both cases magnetism will increase and we need low magnetism for the electromagnet to generate electricity in the center.

We will test and let you know..If possible today..If  not tomorrow..

If it does not result in any thing as I expect then we will test the NS-NS-NS configutation. I know that this works but we need to use much smaller diameter rods and much smaller diameter wires for the primary I guess Leaving the secondaries to have larger wires. But again it is a guess and who knows what happens..Strangely the patent of Daniel McFarland Cook talks about using small wire for primaries and large wire for secondaries. Let us test and see..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2014, 01:20:54 PM
see I'm not using any resistors or any thing like that..Just plain simple solenoids arranged to see what happens if the N-S-N combination would work. It would result in motor action or motion as in induction motors but whether it would result in generator actions we need to wait and see.

I will check AC, pulsed DC and well DC also. Permanent magnets are DC. When they rotate they produce electricity. When the poles of two permanet magnets are held together separated by a coil what would happen in that coil. The same thing should happen here. In my opinion nothing will happen but again who knows..Let us see the results.

We will actually need a very powerful variac for these experiments with up to 20 ampere rating. Let me check if it can be obtained. it will take about a week or so even if it is ordered by us to come. We can simply modify the voltage and depending on the wire ohms, we can modify the amperage and we can use AC, pulsed DC and plaing DC by using a capacitor. We will wait and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 26, 2014, 01:53:57 PM
Hi Hanon.


When the poles left and right to Y are N and S, then it is indeed just a simple induction transformer. Figuera clearly stated that this is not the case. The imaginary fieldlines of a magnetized coil assemble a torroid, a core may concentrate it in the center. Nonetheless, at the end of the core the field lines exit the core in the center, turn around and go to the other pole on the outside. The magnetical field on the poles is therefor characteristicly strong.  In my Idea, facing the two inducers N to N, the same number of field lines are still present, but they are forced to be compressed on a 2D area. Each line must circle in it's own torroid, no matter how strong the compression is. The result is a high field strenght of ns-sn in a small area.  oscillating this area between the left and right side of Y will reverse the polarity of Y, with only little field strenght variations on the two inducers, but maintain the high, compressed field strenght in Y.


A really nice theory IMHO, but to be fair, it just didn't work. I just made a very small scale test, and I used simple alternating 2 dc pulses. Even tho the coils oscillate as the are supposed to, I get absolutely nothing on the pancake, null, nil, nada, not a Millivolt! Which is really strange.


Anyway I don't give this theory up so quickly, unless somebody's going to explain me where my mistake is.


First I will check the pancake coil, maybe it has a short cirquit. Also my cores may be not usefull, as they are steel spheres right now and the may focusize the fields to some random spots.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2014, 02:07:31 PM
Hi Dieter:

Please check if you made two different primaries or wound the same wire around both the primaries. Then the magnetism itself would be gone in the primaries. Please check if magnetism is present or not. That is an important thing to first check. If magnetism is not present, no magnetic induction would happen. You need to have two different primaries for your concept to work. Each must be a separate solenoid on its own. Not a single wire.

Let me know if you made this mistake. If not then the NS-NS-SN thing does not work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 26, 2014, 02:49:22 PM
NRamaswami you know you can use a computer power supply to get the amperage you need. my power supply will handle up to 50 amps @ 12 volts. buying a 20 a variac will rip the pocket book to shreds.  you can also use a step up transformer to what ever desired test voltage you want or need, besides the fact you could take wall AC mains through bridge rectifier if need be. as for the doubt as the secondaries being less turns, you have to remember that the sum of each coil output is added as per coil count i.e. secondary 60 volts x 20a x 7 coil outputs = 420 volts x 20A  or what ever combo you need just like a series battery in your flash light. in my case i have 8 coil pairs x 60 = 480 volts at 20 to 30 A. my goal is to run 480 to a transformer to supply house with 220/ 110 or there of. i don't have all my core material yet so i am at a standstill. see  in USA all corporate are thugs and when they find out you are building free energy devise they tend to go sour or charge out the ass. i plan on using 4 mil high Z for my 800 hz DC unit and 11 mil high Z for 60 hz AC unit after i get it perfected. the DC unit is AC ran through bridge rectifier for transportation purposes. i have designed and built  timing boards and They work perfect i am also using a 300 watt vitreous wound adjustable resistor NTEWA series for my 7 middle taps 9 all together counting end taps. i am using MJ11032's for my transistors and if i use higher voltages i will use ESM3030DV power module from ST micro. good luck all....happy Figuering ! P.S. i have also designed a 0 draw solar alarm system for shed or stand alone building and a Board for a Tesla Ion Generator but these are another Story or forum.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2014, 03:46:36 PM
Hi Marathonman:

Thanks for the kind words.. I'm really a dummy and so do not understand much of it. The only person who can handle transistors and soldering had got sick from soldering and he is no longer willing to do this. The other person who worked for me and who knows the subject is no more. So I do not have any knowledge of Electronics. I have used 50 volts and 16 amps transformers and they are not effective. I have also used 12 volts and 16 amps transformers and they are not effecctive. Only when we have Voltage greater than amperage combination we see real results. In fact that should not happen and powerful magnets when they are vibrating must produce powerful secondaries.  I have an idea as to how Figuera did this and let me check that..I'm short of cash at the moment and we will perform that and come back to you. In India you get every thing for a price. But my understanding is that in US every thing is hyped up and so costly. With this Internet era, we have communications so advanced, information so wide spread, every client bombs me and I need to keep sending and receiving and performing all at the same time. I think I have figured out this device and let me wait and test and then come back to you all.

We will test the N-S-N or S-N-S test tomorrow but I'm very doubtful it would work. Let us wait and see.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 26, 2014, 07:49:18 PM
@NRamaswami
Yes, I checked their magnetism and also polarity. This is done with a small neodym in my hand, I then clearly feel attraction, repulsion, or the ac vibration. I think my mistake was a completely wrong ratio of dimensions: the effective area of the pancake simply had not enough mass to move a significant charge separation. I'll build it again, with better proportions, closer to the patent drawings.


In the patent there are 2 Y coils. As described in the patent, the primary voltage or pulses alternate in polarity. The 2nd primary coil is 90 degree out of phase, so the flux in both Y never comes to rest. Also, as the polarity in one intuctor alternates with every pulse, this allows the back emf of the coil to add to the next pulse.
So, this "stereo" design may work much better than a straight set of 3 cores/coils.
I have made an interesting observation: I sticked 2 Neodymium magnets together N to N. Then I moved this N-N Area trough a coil. Not only did I reach higher voltages than with the end pole of 2 magnets in nsns constellation, I also had to move the magnet over a shorter distance. The lorentz force although, was stronger, so lenz not violated yet.
I will make tests with the magnet monitoring foil to see how much energy is required to move the compressed N-N Domainbarrier of two permanent magnets a certain distance.
I also wonder when there is a load on the Y coil, how will the primary react, since lorentz force cannot compensate anything in the solid state setup. Maybe the primaries just get hot?






Yeah, Figuera... What a mystery to solve!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2014, 08:22:58 PM
Hi:

The answer is in your post itself. You moved the Permanent magnet around the coil with the same face facing each other. The repulsive forces are there. The charges are identical and they oppose each other.  You prevented the magnet from turning and rotated the magnet or just moved the magnet. Then this acts like an induction generator. No doubt. This motion would be opposed by the currents when the develop in the coil substantially. What will happen to the primary. I do not know. But what I do know is that we need to secure the secondary as well as both the primaries well from turning or from jumping up. Even then I'm not sure if the repulsive forces alone are enough to cause the secondary to respond. I really do not know. I'm also worried about security. Each one of the primary magnets would weigh about 90 kgms to 100 kgms along with wires and the secondary would weigh about 15 kgm with wire. I suggest that I restrict myself to the NS-NS-NS configuration as you did not get any result except when you moved the magnet. Check if the magnet is stationary if you get any result. or Create an Electromagnet and then the Neodymimum magnets would be vibrating and at that time show the same pole faces to the bifilar pan cake coil. If it responds then it may respond to electromagnet.

I'm really worried about the magnet. These are large powerful iron core ones and if they suddenly move it can break our legs. I just suggest that you do this with your small neodymium magnets in the way I described above when they are not moving and pulsatig and let us see if we get any results and then let me set this up here and then we can check.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 26, 2014, 09:27:30 PM
No matter if you use nsns or snns , you need to move the magnet anyway to get a voltage. Figuera just substituted the magnet motion by stationary electromagnets. The field still needs to be moved.


It cannot be simple induction, there must be something special, some unusual constellation.


In a nsnsns setup, there is nothing special, this is the same as a transformer. Also note: we say snns, but in fact they are not turned on together, but alternating, so it is more like ns  sn  ns  sn  .... But since the alternation is overlapping (aka 90 degrees out of phase), there may be a socket magnetisation of alternating snns nssn snns nssn...
I agree with you about savety tho. Although, even in a nsnsns setup,  things can be shot trough the air when parts break.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 27, 2014, 12:14:06 AM
Man my head is about to pop! :o i just read every post on this subject and i think my brain is sizzling. i am looking forward to Bajac return, love the work he has done. need more core material to do my initial test run. boards are great but i might have to rethink my vitreous resistor set up and bring the NS-SN crossover closer to zero volts.....hmmmm not sure. oh here is a DC two channel board design i came up with "DIP TRACE FREE" yahoo!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 27, 2014, 03:29:34 AM
I just made some more small scale tests. One thing is for sure: any air or plastic gaps will dramaticly reduce efficiency of inductive coupling, if inductive coupling is the goal at all.
Since in a transformer primary and secondary coils sit on the same sheetsteel or ferrite core, inductive coupling is high. If in the air a N-N confrontation creates an effective pseudopole (in terms of generator efficiency), then why not in a core?


These gaps just give me way too much loss, so I will try it on a single core without gaps.


BTW. funny thing, I tried all kinds of coils for Y, and one time I added a neodym magnet as the core of Y. Due to some kind of mechanical resonance it went from discrete hum up to a loud rattle and gave me 10 times more voltage than any other setup. So, electromagnets cause a permanent magnet to oscillate inside a secondary coil... and gives best results... weird ... But Amps were still near zero. Considering the setup consumed 20 watts, this is just emberassing. :-[
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 27, 2014, 04:13:24 AM
Because of inductive losses are so high i would suggest that your primary cores are twice as big as your secondary core and of IRON. also you should have more windings on your primary as well as higher voltages. try minimizing your gap to paper thin . do what i did ... i read every post on this subject.all 50 + of them...much better understanding of things. just remember the wright brothers crashed and burned many, many time before those nuts got it right. just remember that the next time you fly..........they didn't give up! and also NO this is not a regular transformer. a regular transformer can not get away from Mr. Lorentz but Mr. Figueras with his split core did and took his wife to....ha ha ha!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 27, 2014, 01:29:56 PM
Thanks. Reading all 50 pages did in fact establish your nickname  :) . Please let me know when I obviously miss something.


One interesting thing, that contradicts the books, is, when I applied a voltage to the pancake coil, then monitored the field, it did not cumulate the strength radially as expected, but gave a stronger field just away from the big cake surface, kind of like a loudspeaker. The thin side at the other hand didn't even draw a line.  Such things teach me not to trust the theories too much.


Thanks for your suggestions. I didn't think of a smaller core for Y.
An other thing I think I have seen is: tbe magnetic fields of a permanent and an electric magnet did not accumulate like 2 permanent magnets, but it seemed they were more like overlayed. Could that really be? Could it be that they are not the same kind? Ok, just a strange observation that I really need to verify.
The ratio of the number of turns will also determine the voltage in the secondary. Additionally I  have made the observation that a rather little number of turns is better for a strong magnetfield that can build and collapse quickly, where for the secondary a higher number of turns will help to achieve a voltage at all, at the cost of lower amperage of course.
The problem with the gaps is: using as little gaps as possible is just the same like using no gaps, but then take a material that suppresses eddy currents (eg. a core made of welding rods, or painted spokes or painted iron wire), or maybe a core that is conducting the magnetism but not any electricity, like ferrite. Too bad I only got two "E" cores made of ferrite, and not one straight one. Will do some more tests later on.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 27, 2014, 05:16:28 PM
We as human  and the science community actually know very little to nothing about this universe we live in. only a few actually know the real workings of it and they are massively censored and controlled. what little information we have are used to attempt in building of free energy devises that that may or may not work as almost all patients are mangled to the point that the information is hard to follow. so that leads us to follow are hearts and mind of reasoning and interpretation  threw the collection of information. in that note i would suggest collecting all information about Figueras and other related devices and through self experiments, i.e. trial and error to "GET THIS DAMN THING RUNNING" with the help of your friends of course.
i would start by trying to follow Figueras to the tee for starters. his set up is like a transformer except he is splitting the primary in two to avoid the nasty Lenz law  that simply related to two like charges. these two primaries have to be bigger than the secondary because of the losses from material i.e. winding , core and gap losses. in this process of primary separation we have two opposite charges that attract one another and the reaction of the air gap mitigate the Lenz actions that allow the secondary to produce uninhibited voltage and currents that steps the voltage down and raises the amperage.  we then series them for the desired voltage like a flash light battery and use it in any form we want...i.e AC/DC one for house the other to power are cars for ever. allowing us to STICK IT TO THE MAN SIDEWAYS ! oppression is real and active and we are the "Gardians of the gate of Humanity" and have to stick together.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 27, 2014, 07:48:18 PM
Hi Marathonman:

What you are saying about patents being deceptively worded is ok. It is correct to a point.

You are confusing between Lenz law and Lorentz Force Law. Please check wikipedia to know the difference.

This is neither a step down transformer nor a step up transformer. When you talk about transformers you talk about stepping up the voltage or stepping down the voltage. This is a Generator that uses transformer emf.

Let me explain.

Induction motors work on the principle of rotating magnetic field. Induction generators work on the principle that if the rotation of the core of the induction motor is increased to an RPM higher than the RPM of the rotating magnetic field, the increased rotation would convert the induction motor to function as an induction geneator. RPM is nothing but frequency.

In a Transformer the rotating magnetic field is the casue for the electricity being produced in the secondary. So theoretically speaking if we manage to increase the frequency of the output in the secondary, then the transformer should be able to function like the generator in the same way the induction motor has been made to become an induction generator.

Is it such an impossible task for more than 125 years to be achieved? I'm not an electrical engineer and all of you know that I'm a dummy in Electrical engineering but all of you also know that I'm a hard working and straight person. Let us see if any one can say this or that circuit can change the frequency of the secondary of the transformer.. Then that transformer will become a generator. Not a transformer that steps up or step down voltage. This is what Figuera did. So this is why it remains a mystery device.

Let me know if the above principle is wrongly stated for I have not studied physics and most of you know that I'm a dummy. So if I make mistakes I have no problem and I will correct myself and learn..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 27, 2014, 09:27:06 PM
Yes i know i was referring to one Law  but spit out another (sorry). no i was talking about the patient office deceptive practices and patient being reworded or pages/info missing. as to the induction motor/ Generator, there has has been accounts in early Germany that some people have rewound a motor to act as a generator at the same time so YES it is possible but i myself haven't the clue how to do it.  i think the word you or should be using is Ignorant not Dummy. the definition of ignorant is "NOT KNOWING" the other...well you just can't fix stupid in which you are NOT. every person will have a different interpretation of the same thing that is why we are here to hear other people's interpretation and together come to a logical conclusion. i had an epiphany earlier and this is what i came up with. this is the wave form of Figueras devise or rather my interpretation of his/my wave form. THIS IS VERY SIGNIFICANT TO FIGUERAS SO PLEASE STUDY and please advise.
Quote from Doug1 ----The point where the two fields meet will have a shear line separating them like two window fans blowing at each other.The air will circulate around the fan like discrete bubbles circling each fan. The center point of collision of the air has two opposite direction of flow. If your hand is more close to one fan it feels the air flow and direction from that fan and if closer to other it feels the opposite. If the fans are alternately slowed down and sped up the collision/wall will move side to side". N/S-S/N exactly what is taking place below in my Paint pic. zero line is moved side to side of normal zero.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 27, 2014, 10:19:48 PM
Remember it was said by witnesses, that it was unbelievable that such a simple system was not invented already earlier.


After some tests with cores, the ferrite core has 1500% effiency compared to a simple iron core. So now I' m doing some coils for it. Running out of wire here  :'( thinking about to sacrify a microwave oven supply... desperately searching for alternatives...


The pulses are indeed important, nice drawing BTW. As I see it, characteristics are as follows: while in Primary A the pulse is crossing the zero volt line, Primary B is already at 50% voltage, this means Y  will never rest but always being pulled in one direction, where the change of direction must be very fast, compated to the entire pulsewidth.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 28, 2014, 01:48:14 AM
Ok, I was reading the patent again and then I realized: the inductors are not eighter SNNS or SNSN, they are both, alternating! There is no other possible interpretation. Carefully watch the following diagram and be aware of the flux always tries to flow in a circle using the easiest path:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 28, 2014, 02:11:25 AM
I'm sorry. I made a mistake.

In an induction generator, if the RPM rotor is increased by supplying mechanical energy to increase the RPM in excess of the frequency of exciting current, then the electricity produced.

So essentially it is only in the primary of the transformer we must increse the frequency to get a higher output. I think the Tesla coil does exactly that but it goes to a very high level of mega hertz level and uses air core, to create sparks as it uses sparks in the input. If the input frequency is increased from 50 Hz to 400 Hz or 30000 Hz  or so we should see a considerable increase in the output of secondary..Instead of typing as primary I typed as secondary. It is only the rotor rpm that is increased to generate electrical output. I think it depends on the core material used to increase the frequency as we desire.

My mistake. My apologies.

I think if we increase the frequency of primary of transformers to higher levels by using materials that can respond to higher frequencies the output should be higher. The output current then will have to be rectified to dc and then again inverted to AC at 50 Hz..I think this is already used in some inverters. Will need to check.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on February 28, 2014, 04:27:36 AM
Ok, I was reading the patent again and then I realized: the inductors are not eighter SNNS or SNSN, they are both, alternating! There is no other possible interpretation. Carefully watch the following diagram and be aware of the flux always tries to flow in a circle using the easiest path:

Dieter your drawing is correct except there is a north and south electromagnet and the zero volt line is at the bottom of the graph and the south magnet wave needs to be inverted

It would seem to me that the north and south electromagnets are 90 degrees out of phase, the waves are sinusoidal but the north wave is above zero and the south wave is below zero. The south magnets can be made south by either connecting the wires opposite to the north magnets or winding the coils the opposite way, I prefer to keep all coils wound the same and connect them opposite.

Figuera says as one current is rising the other is falling so that means the two are 90 degrees out of phase. The rising current in the south magnet makes the wave go down not up, even though the current is rising it is causing a negative magnetic pole at the induced coils meeting edge. So the wave is south going. Both waves are sinusoidal but one is above zero volt line determined by the battery negative and the other is below that same line.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 28, 2014, 05:51:44 AM
Like i stated in my previous post picture that i made with paint says it all, just what Figueras said. i will stick with what i have until my test build is complete and i have run test. :) only need a few more pieces of Iron....Happy Figuering all!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 28, 2014, 10:47:40 AM
The confusion is only due to a simple issue. This was written in spanish language at a different era.  When customs and language requirements were different. This was in addition in legalese of Spanish Patent Law at that time. Now it is translated to English by Hanon.  We are trying to understand it. Each one interprets it differently and each one carries out experiments at a smaller scale to attain the results. Experiments to replicate the patent are not done as exactly stated in the patent. Even if we think we are doing exactly what he did, every one comes with different schmes and different waves at different days and times. This is because our methods of learning are different and our methods of thinking are different. When I studied maths we had to have all tables by heart. Today calculators and computers and spreadsheets are used and none knows or follows or needs the old methods. This patent is based on the old methods and old thinking used 100 years back in Spain. This is what creates the problem.

I'm sure the solution would be found by one or more of the members of the community. It may well be just sitting before our nose. Or we might have forgotten some thing that we ourselves did some months back..And then may remember that again. saving considerable time.

Let us wait and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 28, 2014, 12:40:54 PM
NRamaswamiVery well spoken.There are times when I wish had  command of communication the way you do.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 28, 2014, 03:24:55 PM
Marathonman, I agree with your drawing, as far as I see it says the same as the one from me, no? Anyway, I was wrong with my first drawing (the fancy 3d one on page 51 I think), altough an interesting thought, not really what figuera was describing.


To clearify: in my last drawing the inductors are like:
 N        S
(             )
 S        N


But that's just the wiring, due to the 90deg out of phase of the 2nd inductor, there is like I said alternating snns snsn nssn nsns... In fact I think it doesn't matter how they are wired, it's self synchronizing, as long as the 90 deg. delay is there.


Now, 90 degrees out of phase, actually is the wrong term because we do not only shift the current (ampere) out of phase, but we need to delay both, ampere and voltage, by 25% of the full ac cicle, assuming we have an ac source like 50hz mains grid.
So, as far as I see, as the dummy I am (too!), we cannot simply use a cap as a capacitive blind resistor that will delay the voltage only, but we need to combine it with a coil that does the same with the current, so the result is in phase by its own, just delayed as a whole by 90 degrees. Correct?


An alternative would be the mentioned steppermotor controller or the original commutator. But a coil and a cap would be perfectly simple.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 28, 2014, 03:47:49 PM
Doug:

Thank you so much for your kind words.

I think the commutator and the resistor array may not be needed now. Earlier they used to have DC currrent and amperage was high and voltage was low. Cost of materials was low. communications were very difficult. Today we live in a different world where electricity is supplied at high voltages that were not available at those days. Getting a spark was considered an achievement today if you just tap the tester on a an open wire joint carrying current, minisparks instantly come boosting the input frequency boosting the primary voltage which gets reflected in the secondary.

So I believe that the Figuera device was all about defeating Lenz law effects using a method that is not in our books. But possibly known to them at that time. The patent specifically mentions that it is not subject to Lenz law. So I think that is where the key is.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 28, 2014, 07:47:51 PM
I agree, but Figuera had to take care, not to be considered being the builder of a "perpetuum mobile" because that wouldn't be granted for patent, so the easiest way was to say it does not obstruct Lenz's law.


About the commutator, even if it is archaic, we should think about to use it, just to stay as close to the little information we have as we can. The more modifications we do, the more it becomes unlikely that we ever achieve the same effect as Figuera did.


You named it, sparks. Do we know how they affected the coils? Sparks can cause tremendous back-emf, and they may interfere with the back emf already given by the inductors. These back emfs by the inductors, seen isolated from the source, are rather soft due to the sinus shape pulses, nonetheless they are there and they are added to the following pulses, which is good.


But even so, I still don't see where the extra energy comes from.


BTW. I have made some flux tests with the ferrite core and the amazing thing is, although monolithic, the magnet flux can choose certain paths inside the material, and it always chooses the shortest way! (without any gaps). So, a single magnet at the edge of part 1 of my dual E- shape ferrite core allows to attract part 2. If I add a second magnet, part 2 falls right off, the flux chooses the path to the other magnet, instead of the part 2 ferrite. This way you can guide and channel the flux just like traffic trough the material. This showed me that there may be no need for the gaps. (tho I agree, not too many modifications, it's just, ferrite is so hard to cut...)


I am optimistic that  I can do some pretty conclusive tests this evening.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 28, 2014, 09:47:59 PM
Dieter i don't think they are the same. yours has two positive peaks and two negative peaks from two different coils and i have one coil producing only a positive peak up and down and one coil producing only a negative peak up and down with o voltage line being shifted every 180*.  i have reasons for not disclosing the hole theory until i get some test done with my cores. still waiting on Iron. if i am right i will disclose all in nice report with video for all. i am still leaning towards the 300 watt Vitreous wound adjustable resistor as i can have multiple taps at any position i want to get desired amperage. i originally designed my boards with LED's but i realized that any thing over 14 hz using 4017B's are a waste of time. they are solidly lit so no blinking....looked cool though. 4017B's have built in overlap that's why i am using them and also their is no programming to F with just 555 timing and the fact that i built them and they are just sexy. ha ha ha!
that deal with the Caps are not a good idea as Clemente NEVER stated a word about caps besides the whole idea was to get magnetic swing with a split core (two). if my theory is correct their will be no lenz even produced....my advantage is i am self taught and my mind is not corrupted by present day Academic or Scientific DOGMA that hovers over our Societies keeping us in the dark (dumming down) not allowing the real truth about magnetism and electricity being two sides of the same coin and that it can be pulled from the Environment at your house just like the utility companies do... i am out side the box looking in not the other way around.........i have one board at 500-800 HZ and one at 60 hz i will be testing
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on February 28, 2014, 11:52:04 PM
Dieter i don't think they are the same. yours has two positive peaks and two negative peaks from two different coils and i have one coil producing only a positive peak up and down and one coil producing only a negative peak up and down with o voltage line being shifted every 180*. 
Although I believe I remember it was said (by who?) the polarity of the inductors is alternating, your concept may as well be interesting. If the device is once built, all these modes can be tested with a few editing of drivers and wiring.
Quote
...

that deal with the Caps are not a good idea as Clemente NEVER stated a word about caps besides the whole idea was to get magnetic swing with a split core (two).


The only reason why I would use caps is to go out of phase as described, as substitute for the commutator or driver cirquit. This cap would have to be strictly nonaffective on the coil cirquit.
Nonetheless, I had an other idea, extremly simple: the two halfwaves of an ac supply are rectified so now I got them on two cirquits, alternating (the negative side is just pole-flipped), but they still don't overlap, so I could flatten them a little with two caps. By flatten I mean lower the angle of the pulse and increase duty time, just like a deep pass filter. So then these pulses may overlap nicely. and that all with 4 diodes and 2 capacitors.
Quote
....
if my theory is correct their will be no lenz even produced....my advantage is i am self taught and my mind is not corrupted by present day Academic or Scientific DOGMA that hovers over our Societies keeping us in the dark (dumming down) not allowing the real truth about magnetism and electricity being two sides of the same coin and that it can be pulled from the Environment at your house just like the utility companies do... i am out side the box looking in not the other way around.........i have one board at 500-800 HZ and one at 60 hz i will be testing

I absolutely agree! They closed the books of wisdom and locked them with many seals. . They cannot control the world when there is free energy. Their system would collapse and they would lose everything. From standard oil to the m.i. complex, in the dawn of 20th century it was decided to suppress any independence from oil, coal, uranium. But they can't hide it any longer. It's just a matter of glimpse in time until mankind will proceed, leaving those ticks behind...  :o
Yeah. About 60hz. I agree. Figuera uses an iron core, so it is certainly no high frequency. Also, his commutator might not been faster than like 3600 rpm, which is 60hz.
Got to keep on winding...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 01, 2014, 11:03:30 AM
Ok, dear CSI Figuera people, I think we're getting closer. In fact I've just run my figuera generator the very first time. Please note that I quickly wrapped some real ugly coils, so my efficiency is rather low.


I have it in series with a resistor hooked to a 12V AC Source (230v>12v, 50Hz mains), so it will not heat the supply too much. My primaries have a rather low resistance, the wire is relatively thick (like a secondary of a powersupply, maybe 0.3mm). The secondary Y coil uses about the same wire, but it's bigger, probably not a good idea, anyway. The core is made of two E-Shape Ferrite Cores, basicly it's similar to Figueras cores, but without gaps.
The consumption is 6.84 watt.
When I connected the 12 Vac directly to both primaries, voltage and amperes on the Y coil dropped to zero.
When I connected it only to one, the Y coil gave me 4vac and 70mA. Indeed, a miserable efficiency, when used like this, just like a simple transformer.
So I decided to try a simple 90 degrees phase shift on one of the primaries. I didn't have many caps, tried some, finally it turned out, a 470 uF elko worked best. Now, here's the thing:


If one primary gives me 70 mA and 4 vac, then two primaries should give me maybe 4 volt and 140 mA, or probably 8vac and 140 mA, right? So I was really surprised by the secondary output of 7vac and 250mA! And that aint the end of the story: running one primary consumed 6.84 Watts, no matter if the one with or without phaseshift cap, but running them both (7vac, 250mA) consumed exactly 6.84 Watt too!


Guys we're on the right track I think. Am I really the first one who observed this? Very promising, encouraging stuff here! If I just were not so bad in winding coils. Will post some pics later. That was one good night.




EDIT:  it turned out, the resistor alone burns 6.84 Watt, so maybe my killawatt meter was fooled, although when I measured the generator without resistor, it consumed 22 Watt with both primaries and 16 with only one. Seems like the cap must have a capacitance that depends on the voltage/current. Probably it wasn't phased correctly anymore like that. Eighter way  the 250mA result is impressive.


Also interesting: using only one primary gives a rather loud hum, but when both are running, the hum disappears due to internal harmonies and or flux looping. This is just a great, genious concept.


Please excuse the bad image quality
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 01, 2014, 01:18:10 PM
Hi Dieter,
Thanks for sharing your results. I have checked some electric theory and it seems that a cap unphase 90° the voltage. I think we must try to get the current to be unphased too

If you substract the resistor consumption, which is not really due to the device it self, then which is you balance.

I am lately thinking that Figuera really used coil in a row, not closing the magnetic circle. I arrived to this concluion after studing the last Buforn patent. There he cascades many group of three coils in a row saying that "this way you could use both poles of the electromagnet at the same time". He also placed all them in a row, not closing a torus, which apparently had being a better configuration.

This Buforn patent is opposing to the use of closed magnetic cores but it advocates a kind of linear configuration, longitudinal magnets. For some reason he needed to have open magnetic path at both sides of this row of magnets. Please download the pdf with the Buforn patents and check the last drawing. What is your oppinion?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 01, 2014, 03:57:41 PM
Hannon and all,

After studying the great "The Practical Guide to Free Energy Devices," I built two HHO devices that worked very well.
My next project was Mr. Figeura's device.
The following were my thoughts on the device:

1. I believed Mr. Figeura's goal was to produce 110V 50Hz AC current. Or what ever was
used where he lived.
2. I believed that each group of three transformers would produce 12V of AC current.
3. Wired in series would it would take 12 transformer assemblies to produce 120V.
4. In addition of the multiple transformer assemblies, I thought he might have used
two or more batteries in series to increase output voltage.
4. I believed Mr. Figeura's drawing of the "resistor" was a convenient way to show
the resistor. But instead of the equal spacing of the resistors shown on his drawing,
they would be placed so that they would form a sign wave to create AC voltage.
5. The only problem I had with the information was that he stated he had achieved
550 volts output! The only way I could make sense of the high voltage was that he
was using some combination of batteries in series to run the device along with the
correct amount of transformer assemblies to get near 550V. Four batteries in series
= 48V times 12 transformer assemblies = 576V AC assuming zero losses. One
thing that I thought of was that no matter how many AC volts he produced all he
had to do was use a conventional transformer to bring it down to 110V at considerable amps.

Last September I joined this fantastic group of people that are trying to "crack" the
mystery of Mr. Figeura's device. I am continually amazed at all the work and
thought you guys are doing.
My skills are in metal working = machining and welding, not electronics. I am working
on the original idea of a mechanical "controller" because I can.
I truly believe that if we figure this out that a solid state electronic device or using
AC from the mains or an inverter, is the way to go. Reliability of the device would be
important in a boat, car, or house.

The only bit of data I have to date was that is relevant is while testing my first
controller I measured .5V on output of my four transformer units.
.4V on unit 3
.3V on unit 2
.1V on unit 1
I was disappointed, but at least I think heading in the right direction.


Shadow

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 01, 2014, 04:04:00 PM
Hi Hanon


Right now I think the closed circle is very helpful because it allows the magnetism to flow in circles. The collapsing field of a primary when the voltage is zero does then create a back flux impulse that amplifies the next pulse. As I see it, the circle is perfect, but Figuera stated, that it can be one or more electromagnets.


Right now there are two possibilities: the generator when used with the perfect 90 deg. phase shift cap for the voltage and current given by the supply in series with the 27 ohm resistor:


A: is out of phase in terms of the killawatt meter not being capable of measuring blind current (180 deg out of phase), but the strange thing is, only one primary has a cap so they cannot both be 180 degs out of phase.


B: The generator in this setup does not consume any current :)


As soon as I run it without the resistor, the phase shift of the cap seems to be no more 90 degrees, so it does not work anymore as it should and draws 22 Watts.


I have yet to make some measurements. But basicly, isn't it amazing that adding a second primary more than triples (is that a word?) the output?


And with this 470 uF cap I probably haven't even tuned it to the max. I think properly winded coils would result in even much greater output. It's so cool to see the amps jump right to the top of the scale (from 70 mA to 250mA) only because I connect primary B! The whole thing is so simple. if you wire one primary the wrong way, no problem then the shift will be -90 and not 90, the generator don't care. Just try some big capacitors until you reach a huge boost on the output. Using the wrong caps gave like 1mA or so...


As I wrote earlier, first I thought too we'd need to shift both current and voltage by 90 degrees, but after experiencing these things I do now think a simple current shift by the cap works absolutely.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 01, 2014, 05:45:10 PM
Hi Dieter,
Thanks for sharing your results. I have checked some electric theory and it seems that a cap unphase 90° the voltage. I think we must try to get the current to be unphased too

If you substract the resistor consumption, which is not really due to the device it self, then which is you balance.

I am lately thinking that Figuera really used coil in a row, not closing the magnetic circle. I arrived to this concluion after studing the last Buforn patent. There he cascades many group of three coils in a row saying that "this way you could use both poles of the electromagnet at the same time". He also placed all them in a row, not closing a torus, which apparently had being a better configuration.

This Buforn patent is opposing to the use of closed magnetic cores but it advocates a kind of linear configuration, longitudinal magnets. For some reason he needed to have open magnetic path at both sides of this row of magnets. Please download the pdf with the Buforn patents and check the last drawing. What is your oppinion?

Regards

From Buforn patent No. 57955

"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force.

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the
large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 01, 2014, 06:02:01 PM
Hi Folks,

Regarding the core material for the Figuera coils I found a reference to the use of #7 sized steel shots. These substitute nowadays the age old lead shots (pellets) used for bird hunting etc. See this link for the reference:
http://open-source-energy.org/index.php?topic=1352.0 

In fact, Paul Babcock used such steel shots not only for electromagnets but even for transformer cores too. The good thing is that this material is relatively cheap, and you can easily fill up your individually sized plastic coil bobbins with them, the bad news is that you would have to 'treat' the pellets first by spraying an insulating layer  to prevent electrical conduction between any two adjacent pieces of steel pellets. In the link above the use of simply hair spray or any paint-spray is suggested. This way the eddy current losses are negligible and remanence is also small (hysteresis losses also low).

Price for a 10 lb (4.45 kg) steel shot (type#7: OD=0.1" i.e. 2.5mm) is about 21-23 USD in the USA (above link includes this USA site: http://www.midwayusa.com/product/459705/bpi-steel-shot-7-10-lb-bag?cm_vc=S014  and this video shows how to make an E core with pellets: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U7esOiGBZE

You may find such steel shots in hunters shops or in hardware shops where ammunition for bird (mainly duck) hunting is sold. Look for the smallest sized steel pellet type (OD 2.5mm).

Gyula

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 01, 2014, 06:03:30 PM
Shadow,

Figuera got 550 V with his 1902 generator, the one that he sold to the bankers. You are trying to replicate the patent from 1908. We do not know the exact output for this last generator. I suppsose as you that he built it to get AC to feed the grid .

Your idea about using two independent resistor series to produce two AC signals is very worthy. Although I think that Figuera maybe used not 2 AC pattern as input but maybe two sawteeth shapes.

As you already have the machine and mechanical commutator maybe you could test two likes poles facing each other and tell us.

About the 1902 generator: all the info that we have is from this generator. Figuera just appeared in the newpapers in 1902, not in 1908, when he died few days after filing the 1908 patent.

This is the first time that I release this info: In 1902, as his generator produced 550V and 15 HP, Figuera decided to ligth the lamps which were situated in the streets around his house. Before selling his patent he was planning to light the whole city street lights with some of his generators. But after selling the patent we don´t have more data about this project. Everything stopped. You can guess why...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on March 01, 2014, 06:27:33 PM
From Buforn patent No. 57955

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet."

hola hanon

I´m intrigued by this "around", as he says electromagnet, not coil.
may u post the original text in spanish please ?
(I revised all your posts and could not find the spanish version)
thanks
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 01, 2014, 06:29:51 PM
Hi shadow119g , nice to have you here.


Hanon, I do see the possibilities of multiple modules, but right now I am making great progress with this one, so I will not start at point zero with something else. Tho, using a number of pairs, they still can be connected to one big loop and work the same way as a single pair circle, but propably more care should be taken in the wiring between the inductors.


Ok, it sounds like a cheesy excuse, but my digital amp meter is broken, so I am haalving problems measuring the input and output properly 8) . As you may know (see my video in the thread about arcs, sparks and electron avalanche) I stupidly measured Ac Amps and Ac volts of a stepped up setup that may have had 5000vdc. Since then the meter doesn't work anymore for any AC measurements. So all I got right now is a little analogue meter for vac/vdc up to 500V and DCmA up to 250 mA ( tho I replaced that 250 mA fuse by a thin wire) .


So when I said before there was 250mA at the output, this was measured in DCmA, so it must have been more.


The output gives a nice AC voltage with near zero dc offset. Now I added a full bridge rectifier at the output. When I measure the DCmA now, the needle hits the end of the scala fulminantly! I estimate at least about 500 to 1000mA. Dcv says 5 volts, but since this is still pulsed, Ac recognizes 10 Volts. Let's say 5 vdc at 500 mA, that's 2.5 Watt.
The voltage that is fed into the generator after the resistor is about 2 Volts ac. I could not measure the amps, since the range is limited to 250 DCmA, as I said. So I measured the dc resistance of the generator,that was only 2.4 Ohm. So (2v*2v) / 2.4ohm= 1.67 Watt (I guess I shouldn't do that with ac, but anyhow).


So this is my result:


In: 1.67 watt
out: 2.5 watt, probably more.


See, this entire setup is so simple, you can do this in a day, therefor I please you to build it and test it with your professional measurement devices. I am only a philosopher who's playing with my stone.  When I first run this generator with the right cap, so it worked, I instantly felt that there is something very smart going on, that Figuera indeed was a Genius. The device is selfsynchronizing and selfharmonizing, it neutralizes vibration and by that the output increases.


Please help to verify.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 01, 2014, 07:08:33 PM
Hannon


Thank you for the clarification on the 1902 vs 1908 version!
I only had one resistor just like the drawing shows. Someone else had the two resistor idea.
I am recovering from trashing my 1800 Rpm 120V AC motor I was using to turn my
commutator.
Oh well............things happen.
As soon as I get things going I will let everyone know.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 02, 2014, 12:08:40 AM

From Buforn patent No. 57955

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet."

hola hanon

I´m intrigued by this "around", as he says electromagnet, not coil.
may u post the original text in spanish please ?
(I revised all your posts and could not find the spanish version)
thanks
Alvaro

Hi all,

All the files about Figuera are located in the bottom part of this page:

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

The 5 patents that Buform (Figuera´s partner) files after the death of Figuera are included in a pdf file (there are more thatn 100 pages and I have not translated into english...I don´t have time!. All those patents are copies of Figuera´s 1908 patent plus some minor improvement that he added.)

I want to manifest that the first step to rediscover the character of Clemente Figuera was done by the owner of this website (Thanks Alpoma!!) . He researched in the historical files and rescued Figuera from the darkness. He got a copy of the 1908 patent. Later I got the 1902 patents which were missing by visiting the Patent Office Archive and taking pictures of them. Latter I translated all of them into english. I uploaded all this documents into the Figuera website in order to have everything about him in the same place.

---------

Dieter, I think that you could improve your results if instead of using AC you use rectified AC . Figuera fed his device with a current above zero. He changed the current intensity but he never reversed it (no alternation of poles). Tell us if you have better results!!  Finally, which poles orientation are you using?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 02, 2014, 04:35:57 AM
Hanon:

I am not really able to understand the Buforn drawing.

Current from resistors goes to the inductors on one end and current from the rotary device goes to the inductors at the other end. What does that mean? The secondaries appears to start from the bottom and then go up and then return back to the bottom to make the bottommost the secondary output coil. Now How are the other inductors connected in this straight line series? That is missing in the drawing..There is no connection to the two inductors S and N in the middle. How are they connected here.

In addition to all this confusion, the iron cores show a gap in the inductors. Every inductor has two iron cores and there is a gap between the two cores. The induced is placed on this common core betweenn two inductors. There is no common core for the entire core and the cores appear to be separate.

As seen on the drawing of Burforn, There are 6 inductors with the first and last having a single iron core. The middle inductors have two iron cores each. This iron core between the two inductors passes through an induced electromagnet. Only the first two and last two inductors are wires and the wiring sequence for the middle two inductors is not at all indicated. This is extremely confusing..Can any one explain this.. please..

A more careful look at the inductors appears to show that the inductors have the same poles and the induced are placed in the middle between the North and South poles of a magnet. But each inductor has a gap and each inductor appears to have the same pole on both sides and hence the air gap between the two cores within the inductor. Of course the one of the end inductors would be North and South.

So our discussions that the it is the induced that is placed between two opposite poles of the inductor magnets does not appear to be correct. the inductors in the middle are characterized by having same pole with an air gap between the two identical poles. So each inductor has a winding half of which is CW and half of which is CCW. Air gaps are present between the induced and inductors.

But our discussion has been that the it is induced that is placed between identical poles as in motors. Doug.. Please look in to this and comment please..How will affect the input consumption and output? Please clarify.


I have ordered the commutator for me and it is yet to come and until it comes I have sit quiet.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 02, 2014, 05:02:19 AM
Hi Hanon


I was referring to:
Quote
naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current;


Let me say that I am very thankful for the great work you have done in the recherche of this whole historical Phenomena. I mean, this is so thrilling, somebody could make a hollywood movie about it.  The generator, the banksters, the secrets... I really enjoy becoming part of it.


But concerning my prototype and what I wrote about it, I have to say you all don't really seem to have read it all, did you?


Figuera used a permutator to create AC because the machine needed AC. If he would have had an AC mains grid, he would have done exactly the same as I did. I can only repeat: he clearly explains two sinus or sawtheeth AC waves, whereof one is  shifted by 90deg. or 25% of a full AC cycle.   


The easiest way to get that is to use mains AC and and a cap in series with one of the primaries. The cap must be big, so it will not act as a resistor, but will only shift the phase. This might be in the milliFarad range for higher currents. (note: you can use electrolytic caps in AC when you use two, connected like -++-  or  +- -+, using just a single one may damage it after a while.)


I hope you don't mind but I am a little bit tired of repeating myself, please read my postings. All I say is the efficiency, considering the low quality of the coils is excellent, maybe already now OU. By approximate calculation there is 1.67 Watt input. On the output I have, after rectifing and adding a cap to smoothen the pulses, 15 VDC. When I measure the DCmA, the needles hits the end of the 250mA Scale _intensively_, I would estimate 500 to 1000 mA.


I plugged an inverter to the output, but it required 4 Watts for operation, so it rebooted constantly after 5 seconds.


I don't know exactly, if this is OU, but it is at least definitely  very close to unity.


I made an other version, with diodes, creating two positive waves (when you swap the poles of the negative sinus side, it magically becomes positive, as if there has never been any negative voltage, but only plus and ground...) , described earlier, but the max. output was 4 volts and 70mA.


I carefully read and thought about it, made many tests and I am now convinced that this setup is the real deal. I would really like to see somebody replicating it (I offer my help), or at least carefully read my reports. No offence tho. I am only a bit tired. Monday I'll get some millifarad caps.


My prototype is small as a matchbox, but imagine the size 5x5x5 times bigger would also mean 125 times more current etc.
The number of turns however should be higher, you can't run a 2.4 Ohm load at mains grid...
Ferrite turns out to be the perfect material for the core.
The poles, Hanon, as I said, can be anyhow, it does not matter, Primary 2 will be 90 deg behind or ahead, depending on connecting, both has the same effect.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 02, 2014, 05:41:59 AM
NRamaswami, maybe we should stick to Figueras Patent. Buforn actually didn't manage to make the device popular, why?


Furthermore:  Airgaps may reduce the efficiency, esp when a coil has such a gap in the middle, The coil that is half CW and half CCW will most likely  neutralize any magnetic flux, which is the opposite of what we want, right?


The challenge is, to keep the flux in motion, but nevertheless obtain alternating polarity at the secondary. I suggest you watch my flux alternation diagram one or two pages back.  You have to drop the idea of poles because they change dynamicly.


At least that is my opinion.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 02, 2014, 06:29:52 AM
If we take a coil and vary the DC current though it it will make an all DC wave of one polarity to one end of the inductor and the other polarity to the other end of the inductor. If the current through an inductor is DC and only one way then one end of the inductor will be positive always when energized and the other end will be negative always when energized, the south inductor can simply be fed the other way or turned around to make the south pole face the secondary. No reversal of current through the primaries will result in a DC wave on the coil all above zero or all below zero depending on the one you look at.

A coil given a varying DC current will produce a magnet that has one north end and one south end with no reversals. The patent shows he used the north end of one magnet on one side and the south end of the other magnet on the other side, and the currents were 90 degrees out of phase.

Figuera did have an AC supply, he had motors and generators. But he built this. I think he did it just to remove the need for a rotating generator to get AC electricity. If he found it produced free energy, fair enough. If he actually did then we should be able to do the same.

The effect of the two opposite poles on opposite sides of the secondaries out of phase causes an AC wave in the secondary, I guess.

IF you take an AC source and use a capacitor to split the phase then use diodes to give only positive currents to each of the primaries 90 degrees out of phase so that one primary produces a north pole towards the secondary and the other produces a south pole towards the secondary then the object of the resistor array should be achieved.

But then how to self run ?

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 02, 2014, 08:52:32 AM
According to From Buforn patent No. 57955 pic posted by hanon it clearly shows that the primary cores are larger than the secondaries. this is as i stated in earlier post that the cores are double in size than the secondary or substantially larger now more evident than ever. if the N S Electromagnets are shared with the next group then the flux would have to be large enough for two core outputs plus losses. if you study the patient drawing it looks quite possible that the output cores could be sitting on top of the N S primaries in a T fashion.remember it is suppose to be ridiculously easy. see my drawing and advise. additional winding could be made on primaries or secondaries to make self running as stated by Hanon i think from patients.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 02, 2014, 09:20:29 AM
Or even this set up could be possible for that matter. just remember Electromagnets are far more powerful than magnets by many, many more orders of magnitude .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 02, 2014, 10:44:57 AM
Marathonman:

Your second drawing looks great.. It is a modular design.

I have tested one of the cores like this with one single module in a square pattern . Inputs and outputs are parallel. All follows the NS-NS-NS-NS pattern.

There was no output and magnetism disappeared. I do not know why. If we use it in a straight line we do get magnetism in all 4 electromagnets but when we put all of them in the square pattern magnetism disappeared. I have not checked by reversing the poles as to make like poles are placed parallel to each other. I really do not know why magnetism disappears under the sqaure pattern when it is present in a straight line. Of course I used the inefficient method of a common core in the straight line method before Doug pointed it out and advised that it is inefficient. This is why I draw the attention that in the patents of Buforn or for that matter Figuera the core is only half inserted in to the inductor magnets and not shown to be fully inserted from end to end. This is the question I asked..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 02, 2014, 11:33:41 AM
The way I see the drawing each section goes like the drawing below basically. The north magnet is fed a "lump" of DC and as the current is declining in the north magnet the current is rising in the south magnet, as the current in the south magnet is declining the current in the north magnet is rising to begin the next cycle. We need to remember there is a difference of phase and level in the applied voltage, the current will follow accordingly. That's how I see it, the flux in the induced coil "secondary" is always changing polarity due to the phase difference between the north and south excitation.

More elements could be added in series, but the patent show open ends doesn't it, so maybe it cant be made into a circle or a square.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 02, 2014, 02:09:02 PM
How about a little bit of fried common sense. In reverse it should produce DC from mains ac using only coils and cores. Since the resisters on the control unit produce fluctuating DC the absents of the control unit will yield straight unadulterated DC from the inducers when ac mains is fed into the induced output coil. Then you know you are proportioning your components correctly when you have the dc output you want to work with compared to ac output when you turn it around to work off the batteries to start it. Then you can tackle the method of making it do the impossible.
 Happy hunting.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 02, 2014, 02:39:37 PM
Marathonman


When you pump a  pure dc pulse into a coil, the collapsing field between the pulses will cause a polarity change in the back emf, you will always have to deal with ac. If you block it with a diode, it will get hot and waste energy. Where did you read Figueras had AC Generators?


In your drawng there the coils are facing two diffrent poles, neutralizing eachother. When you vary the voltages, you may rescue some of the energy, but not much.


In a generator there is indeed a similar setup, the inductor coil ends face the inducted coil ends and the inducted ones will move along continously. So sometimes they are facing s to n completely, or n to n, this is the peak in the output. Any constellation in between, like your 50:50 overlapping does reduce the inductive coupling significantly. In your setup, the energy output will be higher if you disconnect every 2nd primary.


Then the cores  don't face eachother, but get close only at the edges, this is not how induction works.


Seriously guys, you seem to love to theorize and completely ignore the fact that there's an existing, working prototype that was presented to you including all data.  You tell me my practical device is wrong and your theory is right. Is that openminded? No it's absurd.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 02, 2014, 02:45:29 PM
This should help in the conceptual sense.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 02, 2014, 03:57:47 PM
Hi Dieter:

Today is Sunday and my boys will come for work only tomorrow. I will check the ladder configuration with the secondary  facing two like poles. as indicated in your experiment. I do not have a ferrite core which is very efficient and used in high frequency experiments but any way I'm going to use the mains AC and so Let me check that. While you have given small currents mine are all mains currents and so we can see what is the power output that comes.

The ladder configuration is the one that I felt could work very well but placed all of them kind of NS-NS-NS-NS in a square to create a single module. Possibly the 90 degree difference does some thing  to cancel out the magnetism. When they rods are all straight up there is magnetism and when the rods are squared and connected at both ends the magnetism disappears. I will check by chaning the winding pattern. Let us see. I can confirm that as voltages go up output goes up dramatically. I will sure test what you have done.

If we are able to make a device that has greater output than input, a part of the output can power the source of the feeding current and that will result in self sustaining operation and so the only question is to make a device with a greater output than the input.  I believe that this device has great potential and let us wait and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 02, 2014, 05:37:20 PM
 While one magnet gets powered up the opposite is powering down.If the magnets face south against south and one field is pushing the other rather then simply combining into a single field of greater or lessor strength the collapsing field wound with a coil must go somewhere.It would be nice if it went into the field winding of the coil being powered up wouldnt it but to do that it would need a force to slap against it  to get to go where I want it to back into the windings with enough potential to over come the potential feeding the upswing of the other inducer coil. Then for each cycle you would use less and less of the source up to it being totally saturated. Then you only need enough difference to wiggle the current instead of the magnetic domains ,which by my estimation domains have much greater mass and would require significant work to move full circle N S N S. But then what happens to a unloaded trafo when it is fully magnetized? Noth'n It uses very little power to maintain the field.What ever amount is needed to produce magnetic movement of the field which is fully saturated in the trafo.Actually I dont believe that is what is really happening in a trafo but for now I will digress. Is the orientation of the poles of any importance to the trafo when it is idle? Noooo  and when a load is permitted it now has a bigger piece of real estate for the current to fill by transformation or translation or both. Current is turned into magnetisim in the trafo and then turned back to current in the opposite side winding so the current can reach the load and be turned back into magnetisism. What if I do not want to use the current from the source, just the motive force to be used in a closed system separate from the source which will be my load without transforming. That's why the three coils are completely separate.  The coils of the same orientation will become one field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 02, 2014, 07:59:29 PM
Doug:

I will check this configuration also on a common core without air gaps. P1 CW winding P2 CCW winding. Secondary CW winding. I will check it on a straight core ( when I think nothing happens) and a square shaped winding with the the secondaries are also CW and CCW and the other two hands being the two Primaries also CW and CCW. Since we send alternating current poles may suitably adjust to produce induction in the most efficent way. If this works, your theory works. Not otherwise. I have gut feeling it may work for all CW or All CCW does not work when the thing is square.

By the way can you calculate and tell me how many turns are needed to hold the electromagnet for 230 volt input. What should be the ohms needed to hold the current and what should be the wire size and core size..I think there is a calculation for this that includes the permeability of the material also and it may be different from material to material but I do not have this information. Please let me know if you know this information..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 02, 2014, 09:30:16 PM
The coils i have shown in my drawings will not cancel each other out because they are not all pulsed at the same time . north is fired then south is fired, please get a grip.  each end will react with the opposite end of the next core . both outputs are separate outputs not interacting with each other. i will try and see if this is possible. it even says in bafon patient that extra electromagnets are possible.....so where do you think he is going to stick them....DUH ! the two pics are the same exact thing Farmhands and mine they will react the same just angled slightly different . on pic #2 is the same thing with added cores that will react the same except output cores are 90* out of phase.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 02, 2014, 10:37:41 PM
Marathonman, of course you can do that and I wish you good luck. It just contradicts what I know about magnetism and induction.


NRamaswami, if you try my setup, try the one with the photo, also with the 2D alternating Flux diagram. Not the green 3D image I posted a while ago! (this was something very diffrent). CW or CCW doesn't matter in this design Core may also be soft steel, but ferrite would be nice.


You best read my postings beginning from :
www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg389978/#msg389978


Up to here, this should give you all neccessary Information.
You will need a lot of turns. Depending on your wanted current, the wire should not be too thin. As a rule of thumb measure the resistance of a Primary, (Volt x volt)/ohm=watt, so a coil of 100 ohm may range around 500 Watts. When you use a capacitor to bring P2 90 degrees out of phase, then it needs a huge capacitance, can't find the formula... A comutator could be used instead, but it's a lot of work and a sparky, scary thing at 220V. To be able to exchange polarity to maintain true AC from the commutator, both wires need parallel commutators, so you can connect eg. 8 of 16 sections reversely. That's then 2 comutator tracks for each primary coil.
The relation of turns between prim. and sec. will define the output voltage. 220 Volts input, secondary half the number of turns should give something near 110 volts. Please note this calculation is for normal transformers, the figuera design may give you more!
The question is then, how many Ampere are there because Volt x Ampere=Watt. So I hope for you, you'll get more than 500 Watt output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 02, 2014, 11:05:17 PM
Hi Dieter:

Thanks.. I need a simple help and guidance.

What is the number of turns for a 4 sq mm wire to be wound on a 4 inch dia iron core. soft iron core with greater induction ability. I'm able to hold the electromagnet study at 240 turns by limiting the supply of current to 5 amps in a 2.5 inch dia core. But with 4 inch core, I'm not able to do it. If we use trifilar coil the 32 amps office tripper trips out. If use bifilar coil it takes 18 amps. If we use a single wire I may be able to maintain the electromagnet stable. 4 sq mm wire has 4.91 ohms per 1000 meteres.

My understanding was that if I use thin wires with high resistance 1 sq mm wire has 18.1 ohm resistance for 1000 meteres. If I use small wires I can keep the electromagnets stable. Or if I use small dia cores the electromagnets may remain stable. I need to get the electromagnets to become stable. Once that is done rest is easy for me.

Unfortunately the electrician who worked with me with scripple on papers and they are lost. I do not know how we managed to get 4 sq mm quadfilar wires to get only 220 volts and 7 amps and hold them study. The loss of trained electrician is put me to great disadvantage.

If you can suggest a small core size, and the wire gauge to be used and the number of turns, I will implement them. I do not have the kind of core you showed me but that is not a problem we can built it using the laminated steel cores used for the transformers and bolt them all up to create the one you created and test it.

All my wires are not magnetic wires but insulated wires. Please advise.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 02, 2014, 11:30:04 PM
Dieter,

Here is a laugh for everyone!

I am working on my commutator and at 3600 RPM my brush holder flew off
and almost hit me on my right ear.
You are correct about building one, I have been working on this one for
almost two weeks/

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 02, 2014, 11:48:56 PM
This is taken from Bufon patient 1914 picture. look closely at the output coil. it has two output coil not one and you can clearly see core on top of North and South Electromagnets.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 03, 2014, 12:31:22 AM
Fine then,if you insist on using a common core you have to perform some tests on it to find out what the lattice structure is. The transition area where the domains flip will have a length spicific to the material for the given length of the core compared to the current and number of windings which creates the field in the core.
  Suspend the core between two coils with cores oriented to attract so the core being tested will have a north end and south end.Use a current equal to the operational current to magnetize the inducers. Find and measure the length of the transition, mark the space on the core being tested.That is the all the space you have to work with for your induced winding. Find the center point of the end areas where you have a length of the core that is north and strong before it begins to flip and do the same for the other side of the core mark them out. That is all the space you have for your inducers. Wire charts will tell you the ratings of the wire and it's capacity, work backwards from what you want as an output that will fit in the space. Take your input source using standard step up or down ratios wind your inducers according to the fact that they each only provide half the output cycle. Assemble the coils on your common core and with a blocking diode on the inducers you should get the DC voltage out or nearly so of the battery voltage you designed it for when you feed an equal to predicted mains power into the output coil there by running it backwards.
 If you have it right and can run it with a dc load for a few hours without it overheating then it will do good enough to move on. Hopefully you will just continue on your own.
  Each core material will have differences in the structure of the lattice, even more so for a stacks of laminates.It is not expected to be made perfectly consistent in mass production. If your placing coils blindly on a core you are relying on luck.
  When you run it forward the inducers which is on has to be strong enough to move the bloch wall past the induced coil so it is completely inside the field of the inducer magnets magnetic field when at full power.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 03, 2014, 12:46:14 AM

...
What is the number of turns for a 4 sq mm wire to be wound on a 4 inch dia iron core. soft iron core with greater induction ability. I'm able to hold the electromagnet study at 240 turns by limiting the supply of current to 5 amps in a 2.5 inch dia core. But with 4 inch core, I'm not able to do it. If we use trifilar coil the 32 amps office tripper trips out. If use bifilar coil it takes 18 amps. If we use a single wire I may be able to maintain the electromagnet stable. 4 sq mm wire has 4.91 ohms per 1000 meteres.

...

Hi NRamaswami,

I know you addressed your post to Dieter but may I chime in too?
Is my posting here on a possible core material an option to you? http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg390270/#msg390270 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg390270/#msg390270)   From your latest post I know  that you have transformer laminations for the core, in this case I ask: you wish to use the I parts from an EI shaped transformer core i.e. you wish to use open and straight cores for the electromagnets in the Figuera setup?

From your given data: 4 sq mm wire,  2.5 inch dia for the core, N=240 turns, I=5Amper from a limiting supply, the AC impedance for your coil could be figured out, so supposing for simplicity a 220V AC input at 5A your input coil must have had about Z=220V/5A = 44 Ohm AC impedance, so this 44 Ohm equals to a Z impedance of sqrt(R2+XL2) where R is the DC resistance of the coil and XL is the inductive reactance of the coil. This shows that the DC resistance from the total 44 Ohm impedance is quasi negligible say it was less than 2 Ohm. (of course it can be calculated or simply measured).

Now assuming a 42 Ohm (or so) inductive reactance for your 240 turn coil it means that its inductance at 50 Hz with its core must have been about L=XL/2Pi*f     i.e.  L=42/6.28*50 = 0.134 Henry.

What I am saying with this kind of 'reverse engineering' your measured data is that it is the AC impedance which would govern the input current for an electromagnet, and you would be able to estimate it in advance by choosing the correct number of turns, the main focus is the number of turns for a given core OD, and to get a stable, sturdy electromagnet the core material is also important: laminated I cores are a good choice.  I do not think that iron rods for the core are a good choice.

I ask what is the size for the I shaped laminations you can have access to? (if it is I shape at all, that is) Starting from the cross section of the I core (I think they are rectangular when bolted together?),  then choosing the length of this I core, an approxamation for the number of turns could be calculated.
I assume you have normal enamelled copper wire with about 2.25 mm outside dia, this gives a 4 sq mm wire cross section.

Gyula

PS I need info how you meant the trifilar (or bifilar) coil? you meant for that case that you used 3 (or 2) wires for the winding and made the coil with them, always guiding the 3 (or 2) wires very close to each other and THEN you connected the 3 (or 2) wires in parallel? i.e. all the start wires into a common point and all the end wires to another common point? 
I assume this because you found the 32 Amper tripper to trip for the trifilar and found 18 Amper input current for a bifilar coil, so if you connected the trifilar or bifilar wires in parallel, then WHY did you do that?
To get higher AC impedance from a trifilar (or bifilar) coil, the windings should be connected in series aiding phase (end of first winding is connected to the start of the second winding, the end of the second winding is connected to the start of the third winding, total coil input will be between the start of the first winding and the end of third winding).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 01:28:20 AM
Hi gyulasun:

Thank you so much.. I must admit that your reverse engineering is extremely accurate. Great work and thank you so much.

I used soft iron rods and not the I rods of the transformer laminated cores for that but still your measurements are extremely accurate.

I'm at a point where I can reach success if I'm able to make the electromagnets remain stable. I have earlier used 4 single core wires and taped them together to make a quadfilar coil.

I also have a three core cable of 4 sq mm wires. This has very thick outer insulation. I have two problems.

1. The cable when used gives very high magnetism. When I place between gaps between adjacent turns when winding from top to bottom and then place the winding from bottom to top in these spaces the magnetim is enhanced enormously. But if I wind the cable for more than two layers I suffer a loss. I'm simply unable to understand why it is happening. The cable is 100 meteres long and therefore has 300 meteres of wires.

2. When I used the quadfilar coil made by duct taping four individual 4 sq mm wires magnetism was not high. Actually this was made by duct taping 8x90 meter wires and so it had a length of 720 meters. My memory is that we made two of four primary and two of the four secondary. However I'm not sure on this point as this experiment was conducted between 22 and 30th July 2013. And then they surrounded the secondary wire a single core one and in the middle also we had a single core one. They were all tightly wound without any gaps. Core Magnetism was low. Core was made up of soft iron rods.

3. My simple question is why did the amps consumption was lower earlier at 220 volts and 7 amps and why do the amps consumption very high when we use a highly insulated cable. When we made the two of the three wires primary the third wire was connected to the secondary wires to increase the secondary turns and then it consumed 18 amps.

4. Is there any difference between giving spaces between adjacent wires ( we find the magnetism enormous when we do it) and not giving any space between the adjacent turns. It sure does but why it behaves like this is not known to me.

5. I have I rods of transformers which can be bolted to form the transformers shown by Dieter. They are laminated iron cores but I do not know if they are ferrite. I do not think so as they are very cheap but ferrite I'm told is very costly.

6. I can confirm to you that this Figuera device is not a normal transformer. The only thing that it obeys is this..If the number of turns are increased for secondary, voltage goes up. But conversely from a transformer amperage goes up as the voltage goes up in the secondary. This is what my friends here refuse to believe.

7. Can you please calculate how many turns would be needed to make a 4 sq mm wire with 4.91 ohms dc resistance to remain stable in a 4 inch dia electromagnet. I do not know how to calculate the impedance and do not have the equipment for that.

The wire specifications are given here http://www.finolex.com/images/UserFiles/File/Housegard_PPLeaflet_June%2012_A.pdf

8. I can make the electromagnet 4 inch dia plastic tube dumped with soft iron rods, They normally come to 5 to 6 feet long but I have material to make it as long as 9 to10 feet long in 4 inch dia tubes.

Your calculation is extremely accurate. Great. Thanks a lot. Please oblige. My feeling is that when we placed the quadfilar coil as two bifilar coil, the secondary bifilar opposed the primary bifilar and the additional secondary wires added to the opposing force and so the primary quadfilar only consumed less amperage.. Is this correct? Kind of Lenz law effect only except that the length and number of turns of secondary are higher than the primary. Can you confirm this common sense hunch..I'm obliged.

My I cores are 6 inches long with a gap at the top and bottom and essentially we can only use 4.5 inches of the I core. I do not have the I cores too much. They are number one expensive and number two very sharp and we have to handle then with a lot of care as otherwise they cut the hands. So we have preferred the soft iron rods which are cheap. If the principle is validated then we can go in for better and more expensive material. But until such time we use just soft iron rods. They are not even insulated rods and eddy currents are there significatly.

Only when eddy currents are heavy magnetism is heavy. When we use laminated cores, the magnetism is very low. Eddy currents are also negligible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 02:07:13 AM
Hi Gyulasun:

I apologize that I have not answered the points below..

PS I need info how you meant the trifilar (or bifilar) coil? you meant for that case that you used 3 (or 2) wires for the winding and made the coil with them, always guiding the 3 (or 2) wires very close to each other and THEN you connected the 3 (or 2) wires in parallel? i.e. all the start wires into a common point and all the end wires to another common point? 
I assume this because you found the 32 Amper tripper to trip for the trifilar and found 18 Amper input current for a bifilar coil, so if you connected the trifilar or bifilar wires in parallel, then WHY did you do that?
To get higher AC impedance from a trifilar (or bifilar) coil, the windings should be connected in series aiding phase (end of first winding is connected to the start of the second winding, the end of the second winding is connected to the start of the third winding, total coil input will be between the start of the first winding and the end of third winding).

I have always connected the trifilar or bifilar as follows. End of 1st goes to beginning of second and end of second goes to beginning of third in trifilar coil. The connection is between the beginning of first and end of third.

In bifilar the connection is between the beginning of first wire and end of second wire.

In quadfilar the connection is between the beginnng of first wire and end of fourth wire.

Impedance calculator is given here http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/imped.html#c4

But I'm not able to make head or tail out of it.

When measuring resistance in the 2k range the multimeter shows 0.007. How many ohms is that? Is it 7 or 2000x.007=14 ( not possible as the resistance value given for the 1000 metres wires itself is only 4.91 ohms by the manufacturer. So I'm really not able to calculate. But if I'm able to calculate the number of turns needed then I can complete the experiment very quickly.

I have wound so many combinations I now know what works and what does not work. But I do not know the theory or why they work or why they do not work. I simply know what works and then builds it from there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 02:09:56 AM
Regarding wires,

All my wires are insulated wires. None of them is magnet wire. The reason is simple. In magnet wire once you wind and add the insulation coating, I'm told that it is not possible to use it again. It is a one time set up. In insulated wires we can wind, rewind and built various types of windings and check again and gain. Of course they are costly but going in for magnet wire will not enable us to do many types of experiments as we wish. We also coil by hand not by machines.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 03, 2014, 02:50:34 AM
Marathonman


When you pump a  pure dc pulse into a coil, the collapsing field between the pulses will cause a polarity change in the back emf, you will always have to deal with ac. If you block it with a diode, it will get hot and waste energy. Where did you read Figueras had AC Generators?


In your drawng there the coils are facing two diffrent poles, neutralizing eachother. When you vary the voltages, you may rescue some of the energy, but not much.


In a generator there is indeed a similar setup, the inductor coil ends face the inducted coil ends and the inducted ones will move along continously. So sometimes they are facing s to n completely, or n to n, this is the peak in the output. Any constellation in between, like your 50:50 overlapping does reduce the inductive coupling significantly. In your setup, the energy output will be higher if you disconnect every 2nd primary.


Then the cores  don't face eachother, but get close only at the edges, this is not how induction works.


Seriously guys, you seem to love to theorize and completely ignore the fact that there's an existing, working prototype that was presented to you including all data.  You tell me my practical device is wrong and your theory is right. Is that openminded? No it's absurd.

Dieter this device should not produce any big coil discharges because the brush is in contact with two wires from the resistor array at any one time, and the DC will be applied and removed slowly, the decline will be orderly.

Besides that the Coil discharge is not back emf it is forward emf, while there is a kind of reversal in the polarity of the coil the output voltage and current is always the same polarity with respect to zero, the voltage reversal happens when the coils discharge causes the the negative end of the coil to increase in voltage to above the supply which is the positive end, although the voltage is still positive with respect to circuit ground just like the supply end of the coil is positive in relation to the circuit ground. Notice in the scope shot there is nothing below the zero volt line on the scope so nothing goes negative with respect to circuit ground. The only voltage polarity reversal is across the coil and only because the discharging coil negative end suddenly has a voltage higher than the supply voltage, the current out of the coil is the same direction of flow as the current into the coil.

See this post here http://www.overunity.com/14343/silly-question-about-voltage-and-current/msg390335/#msg390335

The circuit showing the scope probe placement is in the link below.

I also attached the scope shot here of a DC pulse to a coil and the resulting current when the coil is discharge to a higher voltage battery. And the resulting current when the coil is shunted back to the supply can be seen here. http://www.overunity.com/14343/silly-question-about-voltage-and-current/msg390199/#msg390199

These shots were originally made because I realized I had made a bad observation concerning incorrect scope probe placement and these shots I made to rectify and admit my mistake. Just to explain.

Blue is voltage yellow is current through the coil on coil charge and through the discharge diode on decline. Notice the current rises and declines in an orderly fashion. Even in the snubbed version of the experiment in the second link although in that case the current never stopped there was about 800 ma of circulating current with the switch off.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 02:57:24 AM
Hi:

By the way it is enough if I know how many turns are needed for a 4 sq mm wire to coil around a 4 inch dia tube of any length. I have many tubes of 45 cm to 50 cm length but we can buy 1, 2 or 3 meter ones.

If the number of turns is very heavy for the primary, can we increase impedence by making bifilar, trifilar or quadfilar coils just we did earlier.

Can we reduce the gauge of the wire to increase the DC resistance to about 12.1 for a 1.5 sq mm wire for the primary. In that case how many turns are needed for a single core, bifilar or trifilar wire.

The point is that I want to build a cheap system that I can share with all in full details so that it can be replicated and tested and verified.

For a person not knowing any thing, this recognition is sufficient. Also I intend to build a self sustaining electrical generator which is considered laughably impossible. Not millivolts and milliamps but in many horsepower device like Figuera and Hubbard did and put up videos and explain every bit of it if I succeed..That is a big if I succeed really.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 03, 2014, 03:21:02 AM
I hate to say it but the early 1900's was the era when many people experimented with radioactive substances such as radium and electricity production. eg Stubblefield killed one of his children with contaminated food due to his experiments and poisoned his entire family. Maybe the Figuera device used the same kind of radioactive gain and this also led to his death. There would be no need to disclose that to the patent examiner if the device is demonstrated to work, eg Stubblefield got patents and I don't think he disclosed he was using these extremely hazardous materials. Also some other free energy devices have been shown to or highly suspected of using radioactive materials, this was before they realized how dangerous it was to people, Madam Currie is an example she died from radiation poisoning due to experimenting with radium.

Something to ponder.

This quote below I think came originally from Keely.com, but that link does not work for me, I can't get to the old Keely.com website anymore.

Stubblefield ended up staving to death in a hut by himself after his family abandoned him. I hope he had fun. He killed a child he named after Nikola Tesla. Price of progress ? Price of free energy ?

Quote
IotaYodi:

Im going to add this.
This is an excerpt from an article about Stubblefield written by one of his grandchildren:

 Grandpa was now once again blamed by his wife of 36 years for accidently poisoning three of their nine children through inadvertencies. Neither, at the time of their experimenting with various mixtures of Pitchblende and salt crystals within their 85 farmland soil, knew it was contaminating Teleph-on-delgreen. From 1881 to 1906, the soil-coil RF antenna "hotspots" -- that made it possible for Grandpa Nathan Stubblefield to develop and patent the 1898 induction earth batteries and 1908 Wireless Telephoneâ„¢ -- did contaminate their foodstuffs and water.

 It wasn't until 1906 when their son Tesla died teething on a potato from one of the RF antenna "hotspots," -- that they realized that it could have been the RF antenna "hotspots," mixtures of Pitchblende, salt crystals and other active metals that created the healthy looking but tainted vegetable gardens. The watermelons, tobacco and other vegetation they had commenced growing and selling since their courtship in 1880, when he was 20 and Ada Mae, 16 years of age became an invitation for both invention and the destruction of a family.

 They couldn't shake the sense of dread, so Ada Mae on their 36th anniversary, 1917, left Grandpa Nat stranded. He moved his gear to a one room hut and became a stranger than fiction recluse. On summer nights, he would shock his neighbors by lighting up hill sides from his hut, with his buried RF induction transmitting coils.

One wonders what he did to the ground, the batteries as patented could not do this.

Hans von Lieven
http://keelytech.com/stubblefield.html

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 03, 2014, 03:31:43 AM
NRamaswami,


4mm2 Wire is massive! For effective transforming / induction you need to have great lenght of wire in a very small space, so the magnetism of all turns will cumulate to high density. You choose a thicker wire only when it is getting too hot. Also plastic insulation of wire is too much space between wires. Enameled (laque coated) copperwire would be desirable. Hint: people often trash their microwave ovens, they have 2 big coils inside which would cost like 70 $ to buy and can be reused after some disassembling ( be careful with the hv capacitor in there).
Sometimes the core sheets are welded together on 4 lines, this needs to be filed off.


Anyway, I am not good in calculating coils, but there are many online calculators, just google "coil calculator". Here's one for instance:



 www.66pacific.com/calculators/coil_calc.aspx (http://www.66pacific.com/calculators/coil_calc.aspx)

Some of them may be able to include the core in the calculation.

Core size I think should be in good proportion to coil size, eg. 1 inch core and 2 to 3 inch coil diameter. So the core can be saturated and the coil has the mass to pick up a strong magnet field.

Shadow129g,

good luck with your commutator! I probably will build one too, because it makes it so easy to have a stabile 90 degree phase shift, where with the cap method you have to adjust capacitance as soon as you alter frequency or input current, and finding the right capacitance takes time and money.

The good thing is, the brush will never go from zero volt to full power, but increase/decrease in steps, so sparking should he minimal (the more segments  the smaller steps of change in voltage). A highly heat resistant metal should be used, like the spring and wire in piezo gaslighters. Sparks may be around 2000 degree C. There are several metals that can stand this temperature.

 One needs skills to make a good commutator, but it may be well worth the effort.

Anyway, got to do further optimations here.

I stepped up the output of my prototype to 200 VDC and the curtent still reads more than 250 mA, but I am not sure if I can trust this ampere meter, althouh the current of a AAA Battety was measured relatively correct.

I don't give too much about these numbers, but I definitely know that the prototype has interesting features. The flux is so perfect, that it is completely canceled out when you run it without 90 deg. phase shift of one primary, it works as a transformer when only one primary is active, but it shows a very unusual boost when both primaries are active, one with the phase shift. I wasn't even at exactly 90 degree and already trippled the output, so I really wonder how it's going to perform with precisely 90 degree from a commutator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 03, 2014, 05:00:14 AM
Thank you Dough1 this is exactly what i am working on. if you had seen the pic on my post 783 you would see that this is what is happening. your Bloch not Block wall twist picture shows the twist in the middle. well when the transition from North to South you will see that the Bloch wall is pulled up 45* from regular 0 to the A to B line on your pic then during the South to North Transition the Bloch wall is pulled down 45* from regular 0 to the B to C line on your pic. so this is where i plan on placing my coils in the B section of your Bloch wall twist Picture. i have good eyesight and i can clearly see on Bufone Patient that Haron posted  a common core is there. even my 10 year old Grandson and Daughter realized there was two coils coming off of the output core. i am thinking out side the box and not bringing religious Dogma to this OU table. i am 50 years old not a brat kid that thinks he knows everything and have been told that i come up with some amassing things from time to time .it is stated that this device is not a conventional Science device and that it is so utterly simple that it has been right in front of our noses. so unless you have a working device powering your home as we speak in which i ask you "why haven't you brought it forward" then i would suggest you drop the religious dogma that has corrupted you and go to anger management classes for getting mad at someone that is trying to desperately help this OU forum and myself get off the grid. i enjoy this forum and i welcome advise and suggestions from anyone and would never ever bad mouth anyone for bringing Dogmaless ideas to the table. when we solve this riddle i think there should be a CLEMENTE FIGUERAS day on the calendar .... GOOD LUCK MY FRIENDS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 06:54:37 AM
Hi Dieter:

Thanks so much. I'm not able to understand the calculator and am not able to do this. Gyula has given significant info and I have requested him for help. I'm not able to understand the hints and in India we do not have any one throwing away microwave ovens. We are not at that stage any time now.

Hi Gyula: Pleaes help.

I'm not able to understand the comments of Farmhand that this device used or might have used radioactive materials. I'm a Patent Attorney and I have studied a little bit of science history. Let me now state my views. I'm not competent to write on equations etc.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

Lenz law is a basic principle of Electromagnetism. Lenz law as far as I understand states that the current produced in the induced or secondary circuit tends to oppose the current of the inducing circuit or inductor. Therefore when the magnet rotates the current produced in the coils surrounding the magnet createt an equal and opposite force against the rotation of the magnet. So greater mechanical force needs to be given to the inductor. Similarly in transformers the primary input that creates the rotating magnetic field has to be higher than the output secondary current for the secondary current has to be overcome. In transformers there is no mechanical motion and so transformers are the most efficient electrical devices we have today. Over a period of time, this principle has not been clearly stated in science books. They now teach that it is the mechanical energy applied to generators that is converted to electrical energy and energy can be transformed from one form to another and energy is lost in the transformation process so we cannot get more than 100% efficiency.

Now look carefully..In both these cases the output circuit is stationary. The inductor creates the rotating magnetic field. Now what will happen if we keep the inductor stationary and rotate the induced. Current will still be created in the induced. But the mechacnical force needed to rotate the induced is less, for the induced is only diamagnetic material of copper or Aluminium. The current has nothing to oppose or overcome. have you ever thought about it? Is there any radioactive material..

Lenz has an exception. If the charges are unlike charges and if they flow between opposite poles, the charges that are flowing between opposite poles are opposite charges. Lenz law applies only to like charges or identical charges. So when opposite charges are involved Lenz law has no effect. This is a law of nature. This cannot be patented.

Figuera studied these things. He came with devices that avoid the Lenz law effect. That is it.

He built a device in 1902 NS-NS-NS  The middle bolded NS is simple mere iron rod. There is no wire over it. He put a copper cage on this place. The copper cage had supporting fixesure at the two places made up of copper, copper ball bearings, copper sheet to which copper rods were welded. In each of the copper rods he wound copper wire and welded the copper winding at two sides of the copper cage. He then used a pulley and motor to rotate the coiled copper cage. Here there is a stationary magnet placed in between two opposite poles. A copper cage that is diamagnetic and made up of coils that required very little force to be rotated. output current had nothing to oppose. For here it is not the magnet that rotated but the coils that rotated. This created a device that produced more energy than the energy needed to generate the electromagnets and the energy needed to rotate the copper drum. A 1000 watts input perhaps for both is believed to have generated 20000 watts output. This today can be made by any one for it is out of patent. This is his 1902 patent. He used only cheap soft iron for this device..The output was used to power the motor again continuously. This is the patent he sold for a large fee at that time.

When we build transformers based on the principle of opposite charges or two primaries and one secondary placed in between two opposite poles, trasnformer becomes a generator. Since his 1902 was not used after being purchased, he came up with the motionless transformer generator principle. This is what we are all trying to do.

I have studied these principles and I have built a device that show 103 to 116% efficiency. Note that I simply used the above principles. Note I also do not know much about Electricity and Magnetism. I'm just a Lawyer. 

One professor has studied it and he is not willing to even accept it. But they are doing exactly what I did to measure it with accurate meters. I have simply told them that if we put up more wires on the secondary the efficiency would go up.

There is no radioactive material. This that and other mysteries.  There is nothing but common sense application here. Figuera has built these transformer devices such that the secondaries are connected in series. The drawing is only an indication and is not an exact replica of his device. It indicates the principle. When several such devices are built and secondaries are connected in series the secondary voltage adds up, the amperage increases along with voltage. This is some thing that I have experimentally verified.

In India there are millions of people who have lost employment due to power shortages. I have 1200+ clients. 10 staff. I'm struggling for 350 of my clients are not able to pay. All of them struggling. I find many young college students who come to me and I'm not even charging them a fee when they come up with a good invention and try to connect them with investors. Whether is power from the grid, power from solar or this or that or free energy or whatever, I simply do not care. People need electricity. That is required to get them employment and ensure that many families survive. So here we are all trying to do our best to see what we can do to help in that process.

I'm not able to understand the comments of Farmhand..

I await Gyula's post answering my questions. Thank you all. The 1902 device is out of patent and any one can do it now. Some one demanded that I build some device and demonstrate it. I'm a little short of money due to all clients defaulting due to economic recession, but otherwise I would have organized it and shown it to you all in no time.

I hope now the radioactive materials will disappear..and common sense will prevail.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 03, 2014, 08:03:27 AM

Hi Gyula: Pleaes help.

I'm not able to understand the comments of Farmhand that this device used or might have used radioactive materials. I'm a Patent Attorney and I have studied a little bit of science history. Let me now state my views. I'm not competent to write on equations etc.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

Lenz law is a basic principle of Electromagnetism. Lenz law as far as I understand states that the current produced in the induced or secondary circuit tends to oppose the current of the inducing circuit or inductor. Therefore when the magnet rotates the current produced in the coils surrounding the magnet createt an equal and opposite force against the rotation of the magnet. So greater mechanical force needs to be given to the inductor. Similarly in transformers the primary input that creates the rotating magnetic field has to be higher than the output secondary current for the secondary current has to be overcome. In transformers there is no mechanical motion and so transformers are the most efficient electrical devices we have today. Over a period of time, this principle has not been clearly stated in science books. They now teach that it is the mechanical energy applied to generators that is converted to electrical energy and energy can be transformed from one form to another and energy is lost in the transformation process so we cannot get more than 100% efficiency.

I hope now the radioactive materials will disappear..and common sense will prevail.

I didn't make any radioactive materials appear I merely mentioned the possibility based on the time frame and the practices at the time.

Now you didn't want to read the book where this is explained, but you want Gyula to explain it to you.

http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm

Quote
3.   How a Transformer Works
At no load, an ideal transformer draws virtually no current from the mains, since it is simply a large inductance. The whole principle of operation is based on induced magnetic flux, which not only creates a voltage (and current) in the secondary, but the primary as well!  It is this characteristic that allows any inductor to function as expected, and the voltage generated in the primary is called a 'back EMF' (electromotive force). The magnitude of this voltage is such that it almost equals (and is effectively in the same phase as) the applied EMF.

Although a simple calculation can be made to determine the internally generated voltage, doing so is pointless since it can't be changed. As described in Part 1 of this series, for a sinusoidal waveform, the current through an inductor lags the voltage by 90 degrees. Since the induced current is lagging by 90 degrees, the internally generated voltage is shifted back again by 90° so is in phase with the input voltage. For the sake of simplicity, imagine an inductor or transformer (no load) with an applied voltage of 230V. For the effective back EMF to resist the full applied AC voltage (as it must), the actual magnitude of the induced voltage (back EMF) is just under 230V. The output voltage of a transformer is always in phase with the applied voltage (within a few thousandths of a degree).

For example ... a transformer primary operating at 230V input draws 150mA from the mains at idle and has a DC resistance of 2 ohms. The back EMF must be sufficient to limit the current through the 2 ohm resistance to 150mA, so will be close enough to 229.7V (0.3V at 2 ohms is 150mA). In real transformers there are additional complications (iron loss in particular), but the principle isn't changed much.

If this is all to confusing, don't worry about it. Unless you intend to devote your career to transformer design, the information is actually of little use to you, since you are restrained by the 'real world' characteristics of the components you buy - the internals are of little consequence. Even if you do devote your life to the design of transformers, this info is still merely a curiosity for the most part, since there is little you can do about it.

When you apply a load to the output (secondary) winding, a current is drawn by the load, and this is reflected through the transformer to the primary. As a result, the primary must now draw more current from the mains. Somewhat intriguingly perhaps, the more current that is drawn from the secondary, the original 90 degree phase shift becomes less and less as the transformer approaches full power. The power factor of an unloaded transformer is very low, meaning that although there are volts and amps, there is relatively little power. The power factor improves as loading increases, and at full load will be close to unity (the ideal).

1) Without a annular core there is no rotating magnetic field.
2) The output from the secondary is not the back emf that restricts the primary input, applying a load to the secondary causes the primary back emf to lower and this allows the primary to feed the secondary.

I can quote the words from Tesla that explains that his rotating magnetic field motors and generators acted exactly like a normal motor or generator or transformer when the load is applied to the secondary then the counter emf in the primary is reduced and more input can flow.

It's in this book. https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf

Now things change when we have gapped cores and windings separated and this device is one such case. Still there is absolutly no reason this device should output more energy than is input. Outputting more power than is input is easy, transferring more energy to the load than is input is more difficult or impossible so far for an apparently closed system such as the Figuera device.

VxA = Apparent power, not real power, and power is not energy.

Feel free to show your OU results when you get them.

If Gyula doesn't answer feel free to ask him again.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 09:05:23 AM
Hi Farmhand:

Thanks for the reply. I have made only NS-NS-NS configuration. Primary was connected to first to coil and then to a resistive load of lamps. Secondary was connected to a resistive load.

Primary input 1000 watts
Primary load expended 960 watts
Loss in primary - energy spent in coil - 40 watts
Secondary wattage - 166.5 watts

Total input 1000 watts.
Total output 960+166.5m= 1076.5 watts
Efficiency Input:output 107.65%

This is on load. This is experimentally verified result. I can give you Volts and Amps measured as well and more after patent is filed. 

I believe my experimental results. Because I have done them, measured them and seen them. Dieter got a similar result and so it matches.

Ramaswami is not able to calculate certain things and needs help for this is not his domain. But Figuera was a Professor of eminence. The same Tesla that you quoted has said when the report about Figuera was mentioned that he has already built several such self sustaining machines already.

How come Tesla built such devices if he make a contrary statement as you indicate about the theoretical possibility or theoretical limitation?  Does not match really..Right.

And no banker is going to pay a lot of money for a machine that would not function. Right. Ok Tesla is not God and even if God were to say some thing it must be verifiable by experimental results.

Law of Patents has changed in the last one hundred years. Now you have to fully and particularly describe the invention so that a person in the art can understand and duplicate the results without undue experimentation. Earlier it was not like that but you needed to bring an working model to the office and demonstrate it and the office would verify and certify that the device as claimed in the patent actually worked. Patent specfication requirements were not exacting as now.  It is only after that patent is granted.

Now no patent office asks for working models ( lack of examiners to handle applications and backlog) unless the patent application violates established laws and then must be proved by a working model and explain the concept of the model. 

It is there at that stage many inventors of these devices either declare that they have no such machine or as in the case of Thane Heins abandon their patent application without paying proper fees.  It is strange you see..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wings on March 03, 2014, 09:58:07 AM
I didn't make any radioactive materials appear I merely mentioned the possibility based on the time frame and the practices at the time.

Now you didn't want to read the book where this is explained, but you want Gyula to explain it to you.

http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm)

1) Without a annular core there is no rotating magnetic field.
2) The output from the secondary is not the back emf that restricts the primary input, applying a load to the secondary causes the primary back emf to lower and this allows the primary to feed the secondary.

I can quote the words from Tesla that explains that his rotating magnetic field motors and generators acted exactly like a normal motor or generator or transformer when the load is applied to the secondary then the counter emf in the primary is reduced and more input can flow.

It's in this book. https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf (https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf)

Now things change when we have gapped cores and windings separated and this device is one such case. Still there is absolutly no reason this device should output more energy than is input. Outputting more power than is input is easy, transferring more energy to the load than is input is more difficult or impossible so far for an apparently closed system such as the Figuera device.

VxA = Apparent power, not real power, and power is not energy.

Feel free to show your OU results when you get them.

If Gyula doesn't answer feel free to ask him again.

Cheers


interesting
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 03, 2014, 11:09:51 AM
Hi NRamaswami,

First of all please bare with me, I try to answer in due order as my time permits.

At the moment it is the core you may wish to decide on, what are the mechanical sizes of the straight "I" laminations you have got?  (If they are I shaped, that is, for I assume you wish to use three electromagnets in a straight line, right?)  So you may wish to think about fitting I laminates with rectangular cross section into say a 4 inch dia cylindrical PVC tube, if this is what you are planning.

Regarding your trifilar and bifilar experiments and the different current draws, it is against common findings: it is okay how you connected the trifilar (or bifilar) windings but then the L inductance for such trifilar coil (three windings connected in series as you also described) should increase about 8-9 times with respect to that of a single wire winding having the same # of turns. And this should be a 3-4 times increase in case of a bifilar coil. 

So the AC impedances should also increase in the same amount: from a single wire coil having say Z=40 Ohm, the impedance would be 9 x 40= 360 Ohm for a trifilar coil having the same number of turns than the single wire coil. 
And then the current draw should decrease: from 220V/40 Ohm=5.5A to 220V/360 Ohm=0.61A.  I understand that you found the 32A office tripper tripped for your trifilar coil and your bifilar drew 18A, so there is a puzzle here: perhaps the winding styles for the trifilar (and for the bifilar) coils were very different with respect to the single wire coil, not allowing for an inductance (hence impedance) increase but a decrease!

Regarding your Ohm meter readings: when you directly short the two measuring tips to each other, ideally you should see 0.000 Ohm in any range, including the 2k range. If this is not the case,  then you have to substract the non-zero Ohm part from the measured part: say the display shows 0.01 Ohm when you directly short the measuring pins and then you measure 0.08 Ohm on a coil, the true Ohm value would be 0.08-0.01=0.07 Ohm for that coil. By the way, using the smallest range (which is perhaps 200 Ohm for your meter) would give more precision (resolution) in your low Ohm measurement efforts.

Regarding your post on the magnet wire: it sounds the magnet wire available for you is not insulated but bare, otherwise you would not need to add insulation to cover it, right?  OR if you mean the magnet wire which is available for you is already has the usual enamel coating, then it does not need any further insulating layer and could be re-used several times. Please address this too.

More to come later. No need to hurry.


Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 03, 2014, 11:15:45 AM
More interesting. Quote from end of page 20 to page 21

Quote
In many respects these motors are
similar to the continuous current motors. If load is put on, the
speed, and also the resistance of the motor, is diminished and
more current is made to pass through the energizing coils, thus

POLYPHASE CURRENTS. 21

increasing the effort
. Upon the load being taken off, the
counter-electromotive force increases and less current passes
through the primary or energizing coils
. Without any load the
speed is very nearly equal to that of the shifting poles of the
field magnet.

Cheers

Hi NRamaswami, I find if I make sharp bends in the magnet wire it can injure the insulation and even loosen the insulation from the wire when trying to straighten the tight kinks. Also the wire needs to be protected from sharp edges on the steel cores ( i wrap the core with wax paper"home made" or transformer tape). It is easily damaged by it rubbing on concrete or sharp steel edges. As long as the magnet wire is not kinked or wound into very small coils I find i can unwind it onto another spool and reuse it. Trick is to keep it under control and don;t allow sharp bends or injuries to the insulation that might cause fault later.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 11:50:16 AM
Gyula:

Thank you so much.. There seems to be a diffeence in the way factory made 3 core coils work. They have huge insulation which is over and above the 1100 volt insultation of the single core wires and are rated to be capble of withstanding about 11000 volts I think. It is this insulated wire that took so much of amps.

When we duct taped the wires ourselves this did not happen. At that time the wires quadfilar wires took only 7 amps which is consistent with what you are saying. Does insulation huge insulation and gaps between wires have any thing to do with increased amperage consumption and increased magnetism.

If your statement on quadfilar wire is correct then I should be able to immediately replicate the 630 volts output experiment and check using a step down transformer what is the output. I guarantee that in this device when you keep the poles NS-NS-NS the output from the secondary increases with voltage increase. Not only does voltage increase but amperage also increases wth voltage.

I do not have that many I cores. They are very sharp and cut the hands and are only 6 inches long. We have electromagnets that are usually 5 to 6 feet long when we use the 4 inch tubes and so we use the cheap soft iron rods.

Doug:

We have done a small Square device Like this. CW-CW-CCW-CCW. All of them are placed in a rectangular way. It essentially means that the parallel electromagnets are wound in the opposite direction. and so we have the NS-NS-SN situation here. Not just that it is NS-NS-SN-SN ..

Results for you..

Each electromagnet 2.5 inch diameter. Soft iron core. 8 inches long.

Primary 4 sq mm wire on two oppposite electromagnets. Secondary1.5 sq mm wire on all the four.

Primary turns 35 x 3 layers. Secondary turns 65x 3 layers.

Total number of primary turns 105+105=210

Number of secondary turns 65x3=195 per electromagnet.
For 4 electromagnets Total secondary turns 195x4= 780 turns

Primary 210 turns and secondary 780 turns.

We gave a load of 220 volts and 7 amps and connected the circuit like this.. Mains Phase - Primary input - Primary output - Resistive load of 10x200 watts lamps - Mains Neutral.

Secondary was connected to secondary load.

Primary input 220x7 amps. = 1540 watts.

Secondary output -- only 12 volt lamp is able to burn in a light way.. Nothing more than that. Magnetism is present in all cores but is very weak in two of them and strong in two of them. Though the magnet is small the current given is significant and output is unacceptably low.

Primary and secondary are both only single core wires. I did not put them as routine electromagnets for the wires will not stand a chance to act as electromagnets. We will need a lot of turns of the primary wire being 4 sq mm wire and out experience is that it requires a minimum of 240 turns of wire for the magnet to remain stable.

We will repeat the experiment of Dieter as well and report.

My boys will test it now in NS-NS-NS configuration and I will report the output. I will also provide the primary and secondary turns. We will see the results. We will use the same above method and then find out what is the result in the secondary. I do not know theory and so I really go by the experimental results.

We will accept the experimental results.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 03, 2014, 02:09:12 PM
Marathonman

 "so unless you have a working device powering your home as we speak in which i ask you "why haven't you brought it forward" then i would suggest you drop the religious dogma that has corrupted you and go to anger management classes for getting mad at someone that is trying to desperately help this OU forum and myself get off the grid. i enjoy this forum and i welcome advise and suggestions from anyone and would never ever bad mouth anyone for bringing Dogmaless ideas to the table. when we solve this riddle i think there should be a CLEMENTE FIGUERAS day on the calendar .... GOOD LUCK MY FRIENDS"

 I did not get mad ,I'm still not mad.
  If you get it to work, I hope you have enough sense to check the Laws under which you live before you make a mistake that puts all your efforts into the trash can. Laws regarding commerce. If you had you would be right there with me.
  Anger is something that is earned.Maybe some day you will be angry to and when you think back to this day remember I don't hold any ill feeling towards you even if you may have thought so.
  I still believe in hope.

  So when you and your grand kids noticed the other coil in a coil, did you notice what it is connected to. Maybe it's not so much a coil as a form of shield to extend the block wall effect (bloch e i e i o). American humor regarding Old McDonnald.
 So in effort to help you to reach you objective I will direct you to the patent by tesla only because it is easy to understand. # 512340 The reason for the reference is the coil enables current to pass without opposition. It would not be influenced by the field in the core as it crosses the bloch wall giving you clean separation from the N and S pole ends of you cores. I did mention the patent a long time ago dont blame me if you all ignored it.

 The only way to get off the grid is to learn for yourself so it can never be taken away from you by anyone. I think your doing pretty good.
 Im touched by your concern that I need anger management, I will have to try to watch that show more often. Just kidding ,Im pretty passive most of the time though I agree there is always room for improvement.

 
NRamaswami The core you tested 2.5 x8 one hmm I dont know what to think about your results. Are windings tight? Do you have to thick a former over the core? You could place a shield around the outside of each coil to help lock the flux into your core material but I would check the windings first of the coils and make sure they did a good job on them. Sloppy windings burn off a lot of power.

   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 03:08:14 PM
Doug:

I concede the magnetic flux loss issue is there. I had been told by a client that at 90' magnetic flux loss would be very heavy. Seems to be the case also here.  I will not be able to do much this week due to heavy pending work and will get back to testing later.

Gyula: Your insight is so accurate that I'm really stunned. But I'm still unable to understand why the multicore wires perform well only when they are wound two times and do not perform well when the layers are more than 2.

If my understanding of your writing is correct, greater inductance will increase the magnetism but would also consume more amperage and greater impedance would reduce the amperage consumption but would lead to lesser magnetism in the coil. Am I right? Please reply at your conveience.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 03, 2014, 05:55:14 PM
NRamaswami I do not recall the name of the effect but it has to do with coil geometry and why coils have a rule of thumb for their dimensions. I work more off conceptual aspects and the effects. When a coil makes a magnetic field and the image you get in your head looks like a bubble around the coil it isn't that clean cut. If you made a coil many times longer then it in the diameter the field isnt going to be that nice round bubble.It will stretch out and close in on the coil near the middle portion. You have greater chance to unfortunately cause the self cancellation of the flux on the outer layers when it is elongated depending on the extent and the volume of the flux. Some people have gone to great lengths to design windings that are supposed to prevent that. Gyula might be able to explain it better. I only have short moments between baking formers on my wood stove.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 03, 2014, 06:03:53 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

I think it would be a very good step for you to obtain an L meter and check the inductances of your single wire, bifilar and trifilar coil constructions. I say this because all the coil calculating formulas or online coil calculators are based on normal enamel-insulated copper wires (i.e. 'magnet' wire) and not based on wires covered with thick insulation layers which introduce space or distance (and capacitance) between adjacent wires, either between turns one above the other or between turns next to each other.

I do think that obtaining an L meter is the quickest way to advance your electromagnet constructions because by knowing the actual primary coil inductance in an assembled setup you can calculate the AC input impedance in advance, this makes the input current estimation possible in advance, you could also see the effect of the secondary load on the primary input coils inductance, how the presence of the secondary load would modify the input impedance of the primaries,  this way you also could quickly browse through some electromagnet coils you have left from earlier experiments etc.

When you have a measured primary coil(s) inductance, and you have the DC resistance of the same coil(s) also measured with your Ohm meter, the input Z impedance can be calculated as I showed earlier, I can help you in that.

With the L meter suggestion I do not mean to toss the ball into your field of course but to indicate for you that there is no calculation readily available for arriving at coil inductance (hence impedance) values when using wires with thick insulation, at least I am not aware of such.
Especially with open core coils this becomes more problematic because manufacturers specify permeability data for their soft iron cores when the core has a closed magnetic path (usualy the permeability data is specified for ring cores made from a given soft iron material).
This means for instance that a normal transformer lamination may have say a permeability of 800 in a closed core, no air gap, and using a certain section of this same lamination as an open core its permeability becomes much less and quasi unpredictable. This is where an L meter can help tremendously.

I understand that you do not have many I laminations but if you are going to use iron rods again, then your electromagnets would become 'ill-behaved' again, heat losses and not readily repeatable results would prevail.

So either you obtain more 6 inch long I laminations or you may wish to consider the steel pellet core I referred to already.

A notice to the I laminations: you can place some 6 inch long piece in a single line and then put a second row onto them which would overlap the gaps and so on, of course this would need a sufficient amount of I laminations. Yes they have sharp edges indeed, they need careful handling.

Ferrite cores would function correctly too but they have become a bit expensive during the years. On ebay you can find 8 to 10mm dia ferrite rods with 180 to 200mm length like this offer http://www.ebay.com/itm/16x-Large-Balun-Ferrite-Rods-10x200mm-/201042983709  but you would need more than 16 such rods to fill up the inner volume of a 45-50cm long coil bobbin with 2.5 inch dia and then you would need still twice as many for the other 2 electromagnets.

More on your questions later on.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2014, 11:01:12 PM
Hi Gyula:

Thanks for the great hints. I will find out an L meter in a shop that sells these items. The problem is with these shops there is No Guarantee No warranty No return No refund for China made goods. And most of them are china made only. Another aspect is I simply do not know how to use them really. I will buy them and learn to use it from some body. These are not usually bought items and usually not available and we need to do shop hunting. While we can buy ebooks online, any product import requires an import export code number and a lot of formalities at the customs end.

We do have enamelled magnet wires, the place where the I cores are available also has these enamelled magnet wires.

I have a problem with your explanations so far.

If my understanding of your post is correct, by using small gauge wires with high resistance, high DC ohms, it is easy for us to build quadfilar coils which have very high AC impedance and also inductance. As the number of wires increases like bifilar, trifilar,quadfilar,pentafilar etc and by using wires with high ohms we will get to a point where the input AC becomes very low but the magnetism created is very high.

Does this not go against the Magnetic field strength = Amperes x number of turns formula. Only when amperes go up the magnetic field strength would go up. Here you are reducing the amperes, number of turns remain the same, but the inductance increases for the same core and same material indicating greater magnetization. It certainly happens any way whether the coil consumes less amperage or more amperage but how come for the same coil it happens is a mystery when the amperage consumed is less.

Also please advise  if my understanding above is right or wrong on using small guage wires. It will take some time for me to buy the I cores, arrange them and put duct tapes around them, buy the L meter etc but you are certainly correct that reading at diffrent times gives different results.. May be it is way the gaps inside the material changes. We have iron powder and we can dump them and pack the pipes but the boys are agaist it as it is usually makes them suffer cuts in hands hands however safe we are in handling them.

I will get the L meter and get back to you but I would be very obliged if you indicate whether we should go in for small wires with high DC resistance or large wires with low DC resistance ( which one has the higher AC impedance and hence inductance when coiled as bifilar or trifilar or quadfilar wire). Please let me know.  Without the L meter I cannot make further experiments, I would be very grateful and obliged if you could clear these theoretical doubts. Thank you so much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 04, 2014, 12:42:42 AM
Hi all,

This thread has grown a lot. 20 pages in 15 days!!  I post here a little detail from a Buforn patent to get relaxed among so much technical info:




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 04, 2014, 01:04:31 AM
Hi NRamaswami,


On the choice of LCR meter types,  I would like to mention that the measuring frequency in the L ranges is to be considered: the closer this frequency to the operating frequency of a coil with core, the more accurate the measurement will be. This is important for coils with low frequency cores like normal laminations.  In your case the operating frequency for the coils is the 50Hz of the mains voltage but most LC meters have 100Hz 120Hz or higher built-in test frequencies. Here is a meter which has 80Hz test frequency in the 200mH and 2H ranges and 26Hz for the 20H range, so this is a good trade-off, although I do not know the price: http://www.tradeindia.com/fp23040/LCR-Meter-KM-954MK-II.html (http://www.tradeindia.com/fp23040/LCR-Meter-KM-954MK-II.html) and here is the data sheet: http://www.signalhawk.in/LCR/KM_954MK-II.pdf (http://www.signalhawk.in/LCR/KM_954MK-II.pdf)

There is the LCR-4070 type which has 200Hz test frequency on all the L ranges from 2mH to 20H: http://www.tradeindia.com/fp747683/Digital-LCR-Meter-Model-LCR-4070.html (http://www.tradeindia.com/fp747683/Digital-LCR-Meter-Model-LCR-4070.html) 

Of course there are many other types but perhaps the KM-954 MK-II would serve the purpose


You wrote: 
"I'm still unable to understand why the multicore wires perform well only when they are wound two times and do not perform well when the layers are more than 2." 

I am unsure here, a possible explanation would be that in the first case (when you fill up the gap left between the turns of the 'forward' winding with the turns of the backwards winding if I got you correctly) you eventually have a bifilar coil in series aiding phase connection for the two windings.  While in the second case you do not have gaps between the turns of the first layer winding and you place the second layer onto the top of the first layer and so on. You need to clarify what you mean exactly when you say for the second case: 'they do not perform well'.  What was the number of turns for the two cases, what dia had the bobbins etc


You wrote:

"If my understanding of your writing is correct, greater inductance will increase the magnetism but would also consume more amperage and greater impedance would reduce the amperage consumption but would lead to lesser magnetism in the coil. Am I right?"

No I did not write or mean the second assumption (i.e. consume more current). It is okay that greater inductance (more turns and correct core) would increase magnetism  i.e. insure more flux for an electromagnet but this does not involve consuming more amperage. It is also okay that a greater impedance for a coil (i.e. again more turns and correct core) inherently reduces current input if you stay with the same AC input voltage amplitude (220V in this case) but magnetism would be reduced only in a lesser degree: the explanation comes from the AmperTurns you also mentioned, this means the multiplication of the coil current with the number of coil turns, you increase the number of turns which inreases impedance hence the input current reduces (provided the input voltage stays the same), however their product changes but a little. This is a trade-off game in a sense because inreasing the number of turns inherently increases DC resistance too.

I suggest you to avoid using too thin dia wires which have higher DC resistances versus the thicker dia wires. High DC Ohms increase heat losses and make the coils burn down on the long run.

More on your questions later.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 04, 2014, 02:12:42 AM
Wings,
Very interesting old news snippet. Where did you find that?


I have an intuitive believe that there is indeed a possibility to break the law of energy conservation. Call me mad if you want. Free energy is bad for business and businessmen made the rules. J.P. Morgan, David Rockefeller etc., these guys rule trough control of energy, this is true.


Anyway, thinking about permanent magnet motors, there has always been the lack of being able to turn a magnet off in the right moment. But you know what? You can turn an electromagnet off! You can store its magnetism in an electrical charge and turn it off that way. The electrical charge is then useable by the next electromagnet, with few losses, but you already got the work of the last one, eg. done by attraction. So there is a logical gain.


Going out of phase with one primary could achieve a similar effect. It's all about timing. If this were a motor, let the attractor always be ahead of the rotor. This doesn't require more magnetism than  any sticky point, it's just a timing issue, that can be solved with an inductive delay. And an electromagnet becomes permanent when you short circuit it in magnetized condition. So basicly this is a permanent magnet that can be turned off.


The same applies to solid state generators.


Today I tested my generator with a steppermotor controlcard, "smc800", this is for centronics printerport, so I had to reactivate an old laptop.

Unfortunately my prototype has bad dimensions. Only 2.1 ohm in each primary, so I again had to use resistors to make sure not to draw too much current from the SMC800.

Finally, the voltage on the primary was only -.44 to .44 V, so (0.88*0.88)/2.1= 0.368 Watt consumption on each primary, 0.73w in total. The output was rectified and smoothed by a big cap, the cap went up to 25Vdc, when measuring the amps with the digital meter (the one with defective AC measurement), it read 80 DCmA, so that may be 2 Watt output.

The SMC800 was run with up to 1000hz and NRamaswami was right, higher frequency brings better output (well, not radio frequencies of course).

I am not sure if these measurements are all correct and I have to say, the smc800 is using amplitude synthesis that had a sawtheeth by its own, maybe 10khz, that I can clearly hear when I run it with silly speeds like 0.2 hz , amusingly even these frequencies, that are not my sinus amplitude, generate pretty high currents, although I have no idea if these are out of phase in one primary, obviously they are, because as I know, otherwise the output would be cancelled out completely,

I will try to find a better "driver", a steppermotor control card, powered by a pc supply, plus a laptop, just to generate 2 Watts, that's bulky. I'd rather have some smart transistor pcb that runs from a 9volt dc source. I will however build my next prototype with about 17 ohms in every primary, that's much more practical.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 04, 2014, 03:26:52 AM
Well I've got two almost identical bifilar coils I can use for primaries and another I with 4 windings on it I can use for the secondary, this will allow me to use the primaries two windings in parallel or in series depending on what works better R and L wize and the secondary I can wire up in a few ways for differing resistances and inductances. The cores are insulated steel wires, 10 Gauge.

I can use a dodgy two phase generator to get two phases of DC "lumps" 90 degrees out of phase without diodes I think, if I wire it up correctly, or I can just use diodes.
Of course no matter what the result or how i present it, won't make any difference to anything anyone thinks. So I wonder why I would show anything unless it was OU.
Would there be any point to showing the experiment if looks like it is OU but when measured up correctly it isn't ?

Anyway I'm interested to see what happens so I'm going to do it even though i am in the process of trying to get a result from a magnet switching setup.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wings on March 04, 2014, 05:37:25 AM
Wings,
Very interesting old news snippet. Where did you find that?

Regards

in the book see this Farmhand post:
http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg390602/#msg390602 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg390602/#msg390602)
lot of ideas   ;)
https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf (https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf)[/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 04, 2014, 08:17:41 AM
Hi Gyula:

Many thanks for your insightful reply. Hectic work day and week this week and I will post briefly.

1. The 3 core coil was the insulated 3 core cable. Whichever way we wind ( you suggested two ways) the efficiency drops after one forward and one backward. In fact we find that when more than 3 wires are wound as trifilar or quadfilar, the best efficiency is achieved only in two layer coils. After that impedance goes up so much.

2. Am I right in the understanding that a low gauge wire with high DC Resistance will also have very high AC impedance. In that case a multifilar low gauge wire will not simply allow current to pass through if we have number of layers or would allow very little current to pass through though it will suffer a lot of heat and may even burn out due to heat. Still it will produce magnetism in the core. Am I right in the understanding. But such wires must be avoided to prevent them from burning out. Is this correct..

3. Even with 4 sq mm thick wires we have heat issues. Of course all my wires todate are insulated commercial wires not enamel coated coils.

4. So my understanding from your posts is that the rules or equations of Electromagnetism in books would not apply to the following situations.

a. Where the wires are insulated.

b. Where there is a gap between the wires.

c. Where the two or more core wires come in thick insulated cables (which further incrase their capacitance and hence consume more amperage.. Am I right here in this assumption)..

..I'm learniing a lot here. Thank you so much. I'm very obliged and grateful.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 04, 2014, 10:34:57 AM
Hi Gyula:

By the way I have no bobbins. I use plastic tubes which are 2.5 inch or 4 inch dia and 30 cm to 50 cm in length for winding the wires. Each one of them is packed with softiron rods. 2.5 inch takes about 60 of 6mm dia soft iron rods while 4 inches one take a lot more. Soft iron rods are about 43 cm long. or 30 cm long. All cores are either soft iron or made up of iron powder which is packed in to the tubes with plastic caps on both sides. 99% of the time we do not use iron powder. All winding is by hand so far. No machine winding and no enamelled wire so far.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 04, 2014, 12:35:44 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

You wrote:  "In fact we find that when more than 3 wires are wound as trifilar or quadfilar, the best efficiency is achieved only in two layer coils. After that impedance goes up so much."

As per your description how your setup was connected,  you used a lamp load at the input in series with the primary electromagnet coils and you also had another load across the secondary output.  Is this correct? 
Now, If in this setup the impedance of the primary coil is increased (due to the more windings of the additional layers) then the total input current taken from the same mains decreases of course.  Is this what you mean on: 'efficiency goes down'?

If yes, then I ask: why did you connect a bank of bulbs in series with the output at all?  If the main reason was you wanted to keep the input current within reasonable bounds, then it may show the primary coils had too low impedance and drew too high input current without the bank of lamps. Is this a correct assumption?

It is okay for the primary coils that making more winding layers for them i.e. increasing the number of turns, their AC impedance goes up, this is what reduces input current draw in itself. And if you use a lamp or a bank of lamps in series with such increased impedance primary coil or coils, then you divide the same 220V ac input voltage into two parts, while the input current further decreases because the impedance or resistance of the lamps (which by the way is nonlinear) adds in series to that of the primary coil(s).  This is how I think.

Is it correct to deduce that without the series lamp or bank of lamps at the primary input, the overall efficiency of the same setup is just normal?

You wrote: "2. Am I right in the understanding that a low gauge wire with high DC Resistance will also have very high AC impedance."

I assume again: you mean thin diameter wire on the low gauge wire because otherwise decreasing gauge numbers mean increasing diameter wires, right?
To answer your question, with the use of thin wire which has high DC resistance and you make a coil with that, the AC impedance of such coil increases only by the amount of the increased DC resistance, the formula is Z=sqrt(R2+XL2), and here I assume you use the same number of turns like you had for the thick wire coil to compare and you use the same plastic tube (OD) and core of course. Generally, thin wires are used when you need to produce a relatively high flux density for a job within a certain confined volume or space available and you achieve that by using many turns from the thin wire: more turns fit into or fill up a given volume made with thin wire than with thick wire. (here comes the Amper*Turns excitation question too: you increase the turns you get higher magnetic excitation).

You wrote: "4. So my understanding from your posts is that the rules or equations of Electromagnetism in books would not apply to the following situations."

Sorry but none of your a, b and c  assumptions comes from my posts...

Thick insulating layers for wires, or gaps between the wire turns may modify coil AC properties but basic rules or equations of electromagnetism still apply. It is one thing that very few devoted people took the trouble to actually explore and measure the effects of insulating material on inductance, self capacitance etc of coils but even less people took the trouble of writing software programs on such problems.


Gyula

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 04, 2014, 12:39:12 PM
Hi Gyula:

By the way I have no bobbins. I use plastic tubes which are 2.5 inch or 4 inch dia and 30 cm to 50 cm in length for winding the wires. Each one of them is packed with softiron rods. 2.5 inch takes about 60 of 6mm dia soft iron rods while 4 inches one take a lot more. Soft iron rods are about 43 cm long. or 30 cm long. All cores are either soft iron or made up of iron powder which is packed in to the tubes with plastic caps on both sides. 99% of the time we do not use iron powder. All winding is by hand so far. No machine winding and no enamelled wire so far.

That is okay you have no bobbins but plastic tubes, I used the term bobbin for referring to any coil holder. Regarding the 6mm iron rods, do you happen to have access to about 2mm dia soft iron rods? This would reduce heat losses in them from the eddy currents, especially if you cover them with insulating spray to prevent electrical conduction between two adjacent rods. Welding rods are a choice here too, Bedini suggested a certain type he found good for cores. Or there is the steel pellet #7 size, also covered by spray.

By the way, the repeatability for your setups is also influenced by factors like using identical air gaps between facing electromagnet poles, or like using iron rods cut to identical lengths with that of the plactic tubes holding the coils so that coil ends and rod ends are matched or not, etc. These are details that may affect both the outcome and the repeatability. You may watch for these factors (or you found that such details mean but a little).

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 04, 2014, 02:58:03 PM
Gyula & NRamaswami,

Here is an online coil calculator that allows input of insulation thickness and type, coil pitch etc.

https://www.rac.ca/tca/RF_Coil_Design.html

Be sure to read the whole page before using as there is some handy information, dialectric constant values etc.

I hope it's useful and does not add confusion to your efforts

Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 04, 2014, 03:20:22 PM
Attached is a very nice coil calculator spreadsheet (.xls). I did not write it, it was found online and I don't have the original link anymore.
It is for air-core coils and enameled wire but presents a great deal of coil information including the amount of wire needed, number of turns and layers, coil resistance and gauss strength at 3 different points.

Maybe one of you with good spreadsheet abilities could use the formulae from the online coil calulator and combine it with this spreadsheet and make a spreadsheet that can calculate both types of coils. 8)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 04, 2014, 03:56:43 PM
Hi Gyula:

This is your question:

You wrote:  "In fact we find that when more than 3 wires are wound as trifilar or quadfilar, the best efficiency is achieved only in two layer coils. After that impedance goes up so much."

As per your description how your setup was connected,  you used a lamp load at the input in series with the primary electromagnet coils and you also had another load across the secondary output.  Is this correct? 
Now, If in this setup the impedance of the primary coil is increased (due to the more windings of the additional layers) then the total input current taken from the same mains decreases of course.  Is this what you mean on: 'efficiency goes down'?

If yes, then I ask: why did you connect a bank of bulbs in series with the output at all?  If the main reason was you wanted to keep the input current within reasonable bounds, then it may show the primary coils had too low impedance and drew too high input current without the bank of lamps. Is this a correct assumption?

This is my Answer:

Since we do not know when the electromagnet would hold the circuit was set up like this..

Mains live wire -- Primary coil input -- Primary coil output - resistive load - Mains Neutral

Secondary coil - Load.

Now when we wind the trifilar or quadfilar coils only down and up or forward and backward, the voltage loss in the primary load is negligible.

When we have more than that the voltage loss in the primary goes up dramatically.

Amperage at input and load remains the same. Amperage does not decrease with increasing wires. I suspect this is due to the fact that we are giving same load of 10x200 watts lamps. Possibly due to AC impedance increase and the same load requires the same current or amps, amps do not diminish but amps remain the same but the voltage in the primary load decreases.

However when we increase the layers beyond a certain number the coil loses the ability to transmit current to the load. Probably at this level it is safe for us to make the coil as an electromagnet. Since we do not know how to calculate the whether the coil will hold as an electromagnet or not we did this test. It is a kind of blindmans approach to evaluate whether it is safe to connect the electromagnet to the mains. When we do so after this kind of levels the electromagnet holds. Power draw is low. It is certainly not in the less than 1 amp that you mentioned, possibly it applies to enamal coated windings and not for insulated windings. Insulation probably takes some amperage on its own. I really do not know.

By low guage wires I meant indeed thin wires. In India wires used are 0.75 sq mm, 1 sq mm and 1.5 sq mm, 2.5 sq mm, 4 sq mm, 6 sq mm, 10 sq mm, 15 sq mm, 25 sq mm, etc.  How they are classed in other countries I do not know. I meant thin wires.

Can you explain this forumla please..

Z=sqrt(R2+XL2)

Z I believe is the AC impedance. R is DC Resistance L is inductance What is X? What is sqrt.. Is that square root of R squre plus X multiplied by L square. So Z is directly proportional to inductance and dc resistance. Am I right in this simple understanding of the forumla. If DC resistance increases, AC impedance increases and so is inductance of the coil.  This is what you taught me earlier. Is my simple understanding correct.

Your next question:

If yes, then I ask: why did you connect a bank of bulbs in series with the output at all?  If the main reason was you wanted to keep the input current within reasonable bounds, then it may show the primary coils had too low impedance and drew too high input current without the bank of lamps. Is this a correct assumption?

The bulbs were connected in series only to test when the wire is not able to transmit power to the bulb. At that stage it is safe for us to conclude that the electromagnet will remain stable. Crude method of understanding.

I actually did not know as the number of coils increase like bifilar, trifilar, quadfilar etc AC impedance will increase and so by making more number of coils, we can get the elcctromagnet to remain stable at lower number of turns as the AC impedance would increase manifold for multifilar wire coil than for a single wire and so the multifilar coil would be stable electromagnet.

You see in the absence of technical knowledge, we used a common sense approach to determine at 220 volts when the electromagnet would become stable. When it can be safely connected without the fuse blowing up.

But I need to test whether the Ammeter actually shows so much of less amps as you suggest. We have never ever seen any amp in any electromagnet less than 5 amps.

Possibly your calculations based on enamal wires may not directly apply to insulated wires.

It is the thick very thick insulated cables that show a reverse to this line of thinking. But the insulated 3 core wire was only 300 meteres 100x3 meteres and so the insulation could have taken the amps. This is my assumption.

I will get back to you by weekend after completing tests.  Please advise if my assumptions made hereinabove are correct. I'm obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 04, 2014, 04:16:20 PM
OK I did some tests and it seems to me that the resulting wave from on the secondary is not right when I use two sets of DC lumps (fully rectified AC) 90 degrees out of phase.

Then when I think of the resistor array and then I realize that the resistor array setup would make two DC lumps 180 degree out of phase which makes more sense. I have to say it is confusing to me.

Did the people that made the step drivers use two steps 180 out of phase ? I don't see why I can't just use an inverter circuit. I think the resistor array takes each magnet from minimum to maximum to minimum one after the other. Just like a normal inverter, but with the two primaries on separate cores with gaps. The way it is drawn is quite confusing (at least to me).

To me that means if there is an effect, the effect must be in the gaps or the arrangement.

I'm going to try using a regular inverter circuit and a DC square wave to each coil 180 out of phase just to see what happens. 

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 04, 2014, 04:26:49 PM
Impedance equation:  Calculated from resistance (R) and reactance (XL - XC) )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 04, 2014, 05:39:00 PM
Farmhand, do you have a picture of your coil set? I am not sure if I imagine this right.


Again, I think doing this in plain 0 to +n DC may be a problem. Then again, after all it's the voltage diffrence between low and high, that matters, one would think. As I wrote, I did DC tests, but my alternating p1/p2 pulses did not overlap as in the 90 deg situation. Results were unspectacular in that 2 primaries caused double output as one primary did, and not a lot, compared to using AC from the same 12 v supply (voltage drop due to rectifier given). In the lagged ac setup 2 primaries caused three or more times the output of one primary. As a quick test I would really suggest to simply use the unrectified ac out of a supply, feed it directly into the primaries (suggested 15 to 20 ohms each), with one of them having a big cap in series. It may he a bit tricky to find the right capacitance, it must also work well and quickly, not all caps are perfect.


180° is not really what figuera described, when AC is the input. When it's DC then yes, but you have a congruent Front here, with two same forces, opposing eachother, this doesn't sound too promising, does it? In the AC setup Figueras decription results in a 25% lag that sounds much more like a tail-chasing dog, an afterburner to me. As I  said, I do have the practical evidence, that this 90°  AC setup does not simply add the output of the two primaries together, compared to when they run alone...


BTW.  I have seen on ebay there are some ex-soviet sellers of "ferrite bars" and "ferrite rods", up to 12mm diameter and 200mm lenght, these would assemble a great core and they are cheap. Imagine 3 Rods, eg. 12mm diameter, 100m lenght as the cores (thanks to the round shape the wire will remain reusable), with two bars, like 120x20x4mm as the floor and the roof of the 3 columns, building a double E Core, or a [|] core. This would also allow to test air gaps.


I also saw metglass cores for MEGs (C cores), but I'm not sure if they can handle a T-fluxgate (where the secondary core is sandwiched).
Spontanously I decided to crack and sacrifice my micro wave oven supply, it has a nice secondary with 150 ohms that will give me two or more fantastic primaries, and the sheet core is CI shape if I'm not mistaken, so that could be used too.  This whole magnet wire addiction must look rather strange to "normal" people.  BTW I miss a mad scientist smiley  8)


Regards.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on March 04, 2014, 06:48:28 PM
@Farmhand or Gyula (better both)

I made a commutator using two commutators from a DC motor 8 poles, 2 brushes each (see schematic)
with the idea of feeding the pos impulse at both inductors alternatively. (kind of flip-flop), not a
sweet transition, but neither a sharp one as the brush contact area is thinner that the comm segment.
(note that they are twisted; That is: when A is in direct contact, B is contact through-resistance)
Also note that there is never a 0 voltage situation.

my question is: in theory will the resulting wave in the two primary be 90 or 180 out of phase ? . . .or
will it be any out of phase at all ?

your opinion greatly appreciated
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 04, 2014, 09:01:56 PM
You didn't ask me, but your drawing looks more like a 45 degree shift to me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 04, 2014, 11:29:54 PM

...

Here is an online coil calculator that allows input of insulation thickness and type, coil pitch etc.

https://www.rac.ca/tca/RF_Coil_Design.html (https://www.rac.ca/tca/RF_Coil_Design.html)

...


Hi Cadman,

Thanks for the link and the excel spreadsheet. The online coil calculator is good, the only 'problem' is that it considers single layer coils only.

Unfortunately, I am not good at spreadheets, never had to use it so deeply. Will try to get acquianted with it.

In the meantime I have also found an online calculator which is able to calculate multilayer coils and considers isolation thickness. However, the dielectric constant of the insulating material is not included in it but perhaps this is not a real drawback at 50Hz. Here is the link to it: http://coil32.narod.ru/calc/multi_layer-en.html  from the home site: http://coil32.narod.ru/index-en.html  A good feature is that with selectable plug-in options, it allows to calculate solenoid coil inductance when you insert a ferrite rod into it (hopefully this works for multilayer solenoids too).   I will study it in the next couple of days.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 04, 2014, 11:47:24 PM
Monster Ferrite Rods http://www.stormwise.com/page26.htm
Paper towel  cardboard centers and toilet paper centers covered in resin are good bobbins to.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 05, 2014, 12:38:41 AM
Hi NRamaswami,

I included my answers in bold between your text lines below.


Since we do not know when the electromagnet would hold the circuit was set up like this..

Mains live wire -- Primary coil input -- Primary coil output - resistive load - Mains Neutral

Secondary coil - Load.

Now when we wind the trifilar or quadfilar coils only down and up or forward and backward, the voltage loss in the primary load is negligible.

When we have more than that the voltage loss in the primary goes up dramatically.

Yes, This happens due to dividing the 220V input voltage between the primary coil and the resistive load which is in series with the primary coil. And in case the coils have got only the down and up turns i.e. relatively short overall wire length, the resulting AC impedance is also relatively small, this means that more voltage is divided across the primary resistive load than across the primary coil. And when the coils have more turns (i.e relatively longer wire length) than in the previous case, meaning higher L inductance, then the coil AC impedance gets also higher than in the previous case, hence two things happen: 1) input current draw decreases from the 220V mains,  2) less voltage is divided across the primary resistive load because the previous relatively low impedance of the primary coil has now increased to a higher impedance which does not let as much voltage to the resistive load than previously.

Amperage at input and load remains the same.  Yes, in a series circuit which the primary coil(s) and the primary resistive load represent in your setup, the current is always the same, regardless from its amplitude.
Amperage does not decrease with increasing wires.  I do not get what you mean on 'increasing wires': increase the wire diameter or increase gauge in your sense?    I suspect this is due to the fact that we are giving same load of 10x200 watts lamps. Possibly due to AC impedance increase and the same load requires the same current or amps, amps do not diminish but amps remain the same but the voltage in the primary load decreases.

However when we increase the layers beyond a certain number the coil loses the ability to transmit current to the load. Probably at this level it is safe for us to make the coil as an electromagnet. Since we do not know how to calculate the whether the coil will hold as an electromagnet or not we did this test. It is a kind of blindmans approach to evaluate whether it is safe to connect the electromagnet to the mains. When we do so after this kind of levels the electromagnet holds. Power draw is low. It is certainly not in the less than 1 amp that you mentioned, possibly it applies to enamal coated windings and not for insulated windings.  No,  current does not depend on the insulation type of the wire in this setup, it depends entirely on AC impedance of the given coil.    Insulation probably takes some amperage on its own. I really do not know.  Insulation takes amperage only if it already got burnt and the gutted parts are able to conduct current towards unwanted directions.  Maybe you wish to check the insulation of such wires.

By low guage wires I meant indeed thin wires. In India wires used are 0.75 sq mm, 1 sq mm and 1.5 sq mm, 2.5 sq mm, 4 sq mm, 6 sq mm, 10 sq mm, 15 sq mm, 25 sq mm, etc.  How they are classed in other countries I do not know. I meant thin wires.  Okay, I have already figured it out but I had to ask it and this may help reduce confusion in other members reading here.

Can you explain this formula please..

Z=sqrt(R2+XL2)     more precisely written: Z=sqrt(R2+XL2)

Z I believe is the AC impedance.  Yes,  R is DC Resistance Yes,  L is inductance What is X? There is no L as a multiplier, L is a subscript to X so XL represents the inductive reactance of a coil: XL=2*Pi*f*L   in the latter formula the L is now indeed the inductance of the coil. What is sqrt.. Is that square root of R squre plus X multiplied by L square.  sqrt is the square root of R squared plus XL squared and there is no L multiplier.
So Z is directly proportional to inductance and dc resistance. Am I right in this simple understanding of the forumla. Yes basically this is correct because the inductive reactance, XL, is proportional to the inductance of the coil but this L inductance is not included directly in the formula for Z, now you know.   If DC resistance increases, AC impedance increases and so is inductance of the coil.  This is what you taught me earlier. Is my simple understanding correct.  NO, this latter is NOT correct... It is okay that if DC resistance increases, AC impeadance of a coil also increases BUT the inductance of the coil does NOT increase, I did not teach it to you ever, at least I did not intend or mean that ever.


The bulbs were connected in series only to test when the wire is not able to transmit power to the bulb. At that stage it is safe for us to conclude that the electromagnet will remain stable. Crude method of understanding. Okay.

I actually did not know as the number of coils increase like bifilar, trifilar, quadfilar etc AC impedance will increase and so by making more number of coils, we can get the elcctromagnet to remain stable at lower number of turns as the AC impedance would increase manifold for multifilar wire coil than for a single wire and so the multifilar coil would be stable electromagnet.  Okay.

You see in the absence of technical knowledge, we used a common sense approach to determine at 220 volts when the electromagnet would become stable. When it can be safely connected without the fuse blowing up.  Now I assume you mean here to omit the primary resistive load too?

But I need to test whether the Ammeter actually shows so much of less amps as you suggest. We have never ever seen any amp in any electromagnet less than 5 amps.  I have to notice here that surely you can reach a situation in the setup whereby the primary coil(s) will have a certain AC impedance letting say draw 2A current from the mains but it remains to be seen what power is delivered to the secondary load? [assuming that your 110% or so measured efficiency included the power drawn by the primary resistive load which now will not be present simply because its role was to stabilize the electromagnet(s), right?]

Possibly your calculations based on enamal wires may not directly apply to insulated wires.  If you mean those calculations I showed with the 5A and the 220V about 2 days ago as a kind of 'reverse engineering', then they do apply! This cannot depend so much on the kind of wire insulating material at the 50Hz mains frequency.

It is the thick very thick insulated cables that show a reverse to this line of thinking. But the insulated 3 core wire was only 300 meteres 100x3 meteres and so the insulation could have taken the amps. This is my assumption.  Well, my assumption here is that probably the AC impedance (due to the increased L inductance) of the coil(s) made from the 3 core wire with thick insulation already reached an impedance value which 'blocked' the input mains voltage to reach the primary resistive load as intensely as it let it earlier when the up and down wire length was used.  (if my reasonings applies at all to this situation)

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 05, 2014, 12:45:08 AM
Impedance equation:  Calculated from resistance (R) and reactance (XL - XC) )

Hi Hanon,

Your formulas include a capacitive reactance, XC,   besides the inductive reactance, XL  and I say this to ease the understanding for those learning this. 

Thanks,  Gyula         
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 05, 2014, 12:48:10 AM

...
my question is: in theory will the resulting wave in the two primary be 90 or 180 out of phase ? . . .or
will it be any out of phase at all ?
...


Hi Alvaro,

I think Dieter is correct, it gives a 45° shift,  this may be figured also from dividing a full circle (or turn), 360° by the 8 segments, it gives 45°. 

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 05, 2014, 01:03:53 AM
Monster Ferrite Rods http://www.stormwise.com/page26.htm (http://www.stormwise.com/page26.htm)
Paper towel  cardboard centers and toilet paper centers covered in resin are good bobbins to.

Thanks for this, though they do not do foreign orders... just within USA.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 05, 2014, 03:39:08 AM
OK some more tests with a 180 phased inverter type driver circuit, my coil set is pictured below. Some things to consider are that the excitement of the secondary is by making the core magnetized in a varying way, there is no direct induction to the secondary from the primary as there is in one coil wound on top of another. This tells me that the primary magnetic field strength or density transferred to the secondary's core determines the output of the secondary. So if in my drawing the left primary has a north end facing the secondary then during the left primary current flow the secondary core will become north near the left magnet core end and if the current was kept on it would make the entire core (EDIT: to the right of the neutral zone in the energized coil) north after a short time, like an extension of the primary core. However due to the coil I think this is different. Anyway I see this as kind of like switching a permanent magnet flux through a coils core. The magnetization delay through the core means the flux is going from one end to the other. My coils with full inductance are 60 mH primaries and 220 mH secondary.

I tried one north and one south magnet and also with Two north magnets ( both north ends of the primaries facing the opposite ends of the secondary). With 50% duty to each coil with both primaries north end facing the core I got a sine wave, though not efficient with respect to the secondary output and because I was using square edged pulses I had to collect the coil discharges into another battery, which greatly improved efficiency. My cores are gapped to the thickness of a card or so. Putting a load on the secondary only slightly increased the input but the output was not much through a 266 Ohm resistor 13 or 14 volts.

I think the drawings are not clear enough to get a good picture of how the coils and cores are actually configured. I can think of another way they could be made different to how i did it.

I'll do some more tests with DC and a compass, I was tired towards the end of last night.

It might be a plan for those without a commutator and resistor array to direct the discharge of one primary coil to go through the other primary coil back and forth I have a plan for that arrangement.

So simple a child could put it together, pffft, that means we are all less knowledgable than children, I reject that. I guess if they had all the parts already made and clear instructions on how to arrange it a child could but I fail to see how a child could decipher that patent. That's ridiculous.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 05, 2014, 08:21:52 AM
You could try larger Primaries like this, "Flux concentration"  as Figueras shows larger Primary any ways in Patient ????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 05, 2014, 11:21:20 AM
Marathonman, that's looking good, I wonder how the impact of such a concentration would be.


Farmhand - I was wrong about 180° being no good. I made some further tests and it turned out, 180°, or when AC is used just to exchange the poles on one primary, performs even slightly better than 90°. So I dropped the phaseshifting cap and simply connected one primary in reverse, but both from 12 Vac (actually about 2 Vac, because there is a 27 ohm resistor to limit the max dissipation).


But I got some really exciting news, I may have cracked the secret (I know I said that already twice, but this time it is really something huge). It is very simple, gives 5x more energy, could well be the secret of the Figuera Generator and may have something to do with the Coil set that I have made, because it works only under certain wiring conditions. Using other connections , even although the coils did some transforming, the effect was not seen.


All those who insist on a commutator are on the right track! I found this so exciting that I made a video. It explains it all. Watch this:

 www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s&feature=youtu.be


 Regards




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 05, 2014, 01:46:20 PM
Dear Dieter,

Do you think that instead of 'sparking' the input AC 12V, a bidirectional MOSFET switch driven from a CMOS 555 timer  could substitute your 'hand switching'? Or the 'spark' is an absolutely needed 'ingredience' and no substitute exists for it?

I would like to understand how you arrived at the 5x more energy?

(For me, it is not good to see you short the output capacitor (i.e. the output) with putting the voltage meter into the Amper meter mode with the range switch... Have you considered where the output voltage has gone when your Amper meter showed 'plenty of Amps'?  Please do not be cross with me... I ask this NOT to tease you but to think this over.)

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 05, 2014, 05:55:51 PM
Not sure if it has been mentioned or shown but I think I remember seeing similar already, anyway, Is it possible the cores are Laminates "I" or more like sideways "H" cores, like in the sketch below. from the top they would look like squares, but from the sides they might look like "H" cores on their side.

My next step is to machine the ends of the cores to make them meet squarely and insulate the ends with something much thinner, and then use as little gap between cores as possible.

By the way shunting the coil discharge from one side to the other does work but requires two more diodes and some capacitors, and is less efficient than if I discharge the coils to a second battery, but please note I am using square sided DC pulses, one problem with that is if at 50-50 duty when the first coil is discharging there is current still flowing in it when the current begins to flow in the second coil. The same happens when the coils are discharged to a second battery but it happens quicker.

To get the best result from having both primary north ends facing the center coil in my dodgy setup surprised me, but it gives a nice sine wave of the most amplitude as compared to one north one south. And if I use a capacitor on the output coil to tune it the input drops rather than increase as I would expect and the wave form gets bigger as usual.

Anyway I wish I could try the I cores or sideways "H" cores.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 05, 2014, 08:27:53 PM
Right now I am trying to stop sparking in my commutator!
I do not have the rectifier or the capacitor in my secondaries.
I will give it a try, to see if anything happens.

Shadow.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on March 05, 2014, 08:35:16 PM
The "scratching" produces fast transition times in the primary. The faster the transition from 0 current to full current, the greater the rate of change of the magnetic field produced by the current. The greater the rate of change of the field in the core of the transformer, the greater the "output voltage" that the secondary will produce. This is Faraday's Law, one of the Maxwell Equations. Yes, you can do the same thing with semiconductor switching elements and matching networks. This is the "kick" of SM coils, the fast transitions of the JT, the spikes that make a good Tesla Coil.
 
-E = dB/dt


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 05, 2014, 09:25:55 PM
shadow119g This sparking in the commutator is exactly why i chose solid state  that n less work for same result.  cant you use a cap like on points on a car or magnets to suppress like tesla.  here is 3D view of my board below. the pic i posted on 872 was for Farmhand because that is what he is working on. i myself is / are working on original from patrick C or H like Farmhand posted because i believe Figueras would of made it "Modular" because he was efficient with simplistic design and he said for more voltage just add more cores so i think it is Modular. i am also looking at the T design i used on post 811 or 812 so only time will tell when i get the rest of iron in ARGE !

Will 18 awg be ok for primaries i will be using 100 Volts 1 Amp like has been posted and 10 or maybe 8 for secondaries?????? i am working on 100 volt 1 Amp power supply right now. ;D
 i think im in the 2.08 to 1 ratio from generator  primary to secondary....YES/NO ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 05, 2014, 09:38:20 PM
Gyukasun


I think the sparks are required, contrary to what hanon said.. By moving the brush, you'll get multisparking and each sparks 2 electrodes are in a state of chanching distance to eachother, exactly what is described as a condition to achieve the townsend electron avalanche. I do not only get high voltage, the 100 to 130 Volts are measured at a capacitor! In the capacitor there is the current earlier present than the voltage, so this isn't just spikey voltage with no current, but real energy. Actually the spikes may be much higher ( be save and use a 400 V Cap, this will also help to harvest the spikes), considering the primaries run with 2 Volts and the secondary has about twice as much turns as a primary, it's quite impressive to get 130 vdc AT A CAP.


A commutator is useful for battery operation, but the simplest is a moving brush contact that has only one purpose, to get the sparky transfer. Note this is no sparkgap! Using 12 Volts and then get 1mm sparks that you normally only get with 1000 Volts, makes clear that something is going on, that is unique and probably can't be done with mosfets or transistors. Tho, creating AC from a 9v battery would be a useful task for a transistor cirquit. Personally I hope to be able to run an inverter (12 Vdc to 220vac50hz) , so this would be no further work.


To obtain this effect, the coil must be wired as described. I suspect that the coils form some kind of "back emf trap". Using AC from mains grid, as I did, makes this extremly simple. But I think your core must have the same flux properties, that is 3 possible circulations : right and over middle, left and over middle and skipping the middle, circulating trough left and right. Also, the circle flux allows to selfamplify it by any back emf, as mentioned already.


It's simple, try it.


Shadow119g, a bridge rectifier made of 4 diodes costs only little, a dollar maybe. Fo does the capacitor. You may also us the one from an old power suppy. These days they are closed in a plastic box without screws, but you can crack it with a saw, just be careful and saw onlyhe wall and not what's inside.


I'm off for some more tests.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 05, 2014, 10:37:55 PM
I built  my original commutator so that I could turn the brush long ways
to bridge the contacts or sideways to get sparks. I will be able to do the
same on my new commutator. I just have to finish the new brush holder
hold down strap so it won't fly off the rotating part of the device like it
did a few days ago.
Marathonman:
Thanks for the advice! I am skilled at mechanical things, but not so much
in electronic devices. I stated a short while ago that I believe in the short
future solid state is the way to go as it will be inexpensive and reliable.
It would be cool if you could have at least two devices on any vehicle
(air land or sea)!

Shadow
as a back up.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 05, 2014, 11:46:56 PM
Marathonman, that's looking good, I wonder how the impact of such a concentration would be.


Farmhand - I was wrong about 180° being no good. I made some further tests and it turned out, 180°, or when AC is used just to exchange the poles on one primary, performs even slightly better than 90°. So I dropped the phaseshifting cap and simply connected one primary in reverse, but both from 12 Vac (actually about 2 Vac, because there is a 27 ohm resistor to limit the max dissipation).


But I got some really exciting news, I may have cracked the secret (I know I said that already twice, but this time it is really something huge). It is very simple, gives 5x more energy, could well be the secret of the Figuera Generator and may have something to do with the Coil set that I have made, because it works only under certain wiring conditions. Using other connections , even although the coils did some transforming, the effect was not seen.


All those who insist on a commutator are on the right track! I found this so exciting that I made a video. It explains it all. Watch this:

 www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s&feature=youtu.be)


 Regards

Hi Dieter,

I hope you are right but you would have to test if your measures are accurate in this nonstationary mode. Time ago I did basically the same as you and I got also higher voltages and amperages. I don´t think that my measures were correct because I used a digital multimeter. I don´t know if your multimeter, being analog, may take better reading for those cases. Also you have used a capacitor in the output. What is the advantage of measuring over a capacitor?

Later I tested with an osciloscope from a friend and the voltage were very small which confirmed that my measures were worng. Please see these videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeDipazJxzQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeDipazJxzQ)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE)   (Input: 12 V and 1.2 A  pulsed by a car relay) (when I tested with identical electromagnets the results were null. Then I tested with one 150 turns and one 900 turns and the result were the one in this video)

If you really feel that you results are fine please keep on testing. Just think a way to confirm your results

Please tell me your opinion

Regards 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 06, 2014, 12:02:52 AM
Hello Dieter! I have some questions for you...

How many microfarads (uF) is your capacitor from the video? I see you have one big and one small capacitor in paralell or something - what is that about? (please tell the rating of both capacitors).
What is your load on the output (in paralell with capacitor) - is there a resistor - how many ohms?

THX in advance for the answer!

Dann
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 06, 2014, 12:13:19 AM
Hi all,

I have been re-reading the patent from Daniel McFarland Cook  (patent US119825, from 1871) amd he used concentric wound coils a Ramaswami is doing. Also it is very interesting that McFarland remarked two or three times that the only requirement was that the length of wire were over 500 ft long, even better if it were over 1000 ft long. His coil core length were ranging from 2 to 6 ft. So he built really huge coils ! He lso remarks some times the insulation of the wires. And I still think that something it is missing in that patent because he refers to the "circuit D" and a rheostat which are not in his drawings...

I have also found this article about his story. There is an interview rescued from an old newspaper.  The reported was a witness of his generator in 1886 and he assured that it worked fine. I wonder what happens to his invention from 1871 (year of the patent)  to his death in 1897. Very interesting article and video:

http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html (http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html)


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 06, 2014, 03:06:40 AM
@ Hanon,
Thank you very much for the information you posted about the sequence of patents published by Buforn.
I would like to ask you, when were those patents made available in the internet? About three years ago, I remember searching the internet for any information about Clemente Figuera and I was only able to get one sketch (in bad shape) from one of Figuera’s patent. The sketch is the one I showed in the paper that I posted in this thread.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I STARTED READING BUFORN'S PATENTS (124 PAGES DOCUMENT) AND I WAS REALLY AMAZED TO SEE THE SAME STATEMENTS THAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG. I HAVE READ THE FIRST FIVE PAGES (IN SPANISH) AND THERE WAS A PARAGRAPH THAT CALLED MY ATTENTION VERY DEEPLY. THE PARAGRAPH IS THE SECOND FOUND ON PAGE 6 OF THE PDF (PAGE 5 OF THE DOCUMENT) AND IT READS SOMETHING LIKE:
“IT IS THEREFORE DEMONSTRATED THAT A DYNAMO (ACTION) IS NOT A CONVERSION OF MECHANICAL WORK INTO ELECTRICITY: THEN, WHERE IS THE ELECTRIC CURRENT COMING FROM? THE CURRENT OF THESE GENERATORS MIGHT BE PRODUCED BY AN UNKNOWN PARTICULAR MOVEMENT OF THE MOLECULES WITHIN THE MASS.”

THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS A SCIENTIFIC HERESY THAT I HAVE SUPPORTED FOR SOME TIME. I WILL GIVE YOU THE FOLLOWING TWO CASES TO THINK ABOUT:

1.       AS I STATED IN THE PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS, THE STANDARD TRANSFORMERS MAINTAIN A CONSTANT Φm AT NO LOAD AND AT 100% LOAD DUE TO THE AUTO REGULATION MECHANISM OF THESE CLOSED IRON CORE TRANSFORMERS. THE CONSTANT Φm IS ACKNOWLEDGE BY THE MAINSTREAM ENGINEERING BOOKS AND CAN BE VERIFIED BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE TRANSFORMER’S OUTPUT VOLTAGE REMAINS ABOUT THE SAME DURING THE LOADING PROCESS. THEN, IF THE ENERGY OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD DOES NOT CHANGE NOTABLY AT ZERO AND FULL LOAD, WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE ENERGY IS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED THROUGH THE MAGNETIC FIELD. IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INDUCES A VOLTAGE IN THE SECONDARY COIL BUT NOT THE ENERGY AND/OR POWER BEING DELIVERED TO A LOAD. THE INEFFICIENCY RELATIONSHIP OF THE INPUT/OUTPUT POWER IN STANDARD TRANSFORMERS IS DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF CLOSED CORES, BUT IT IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE. AND,

2.       YET, I HAVE NOT FOUND A MATHEMATICAL MODEL DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ENERGY OF A GIVEN MAGNETIC FIELD AND THE POWER PRODUCED BY A COIL DUE TO A VOLTAGE INDUCED BY SAID FIELD.

SUCH STATEMENT IN THE PATENT IS VERY PROFOUND! AND IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!
 
BAJAC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 06, 2014, 03:58:45 AM
Dear Friends, Bajac, nice to see the topic opener revisiting, unfort. I have some bad news.


Although in plan operation mode without any spark elements, my coil has interesting features like near 100% efficiency (most likely between 90 and 110), I have to inform you about the spark voltage is not what I thought,


I've built a sparky connector, consisting of a small rotating metaldisc with two wires slightly touching it. I used the wire that is inside a piezo lighter, assuming this would be heatresistant. It worked pretty well, I had fluctuating voltage around 100 vdc. I was even able to squeeze 200v out sometimes. Then I notized that the resistor remained cold and amp measurement showed only 6 mA. I realized that these two tiny wire end  electrodes were connected only for microseconds in random intervals and therefor only tiny anounts of current could flow. It may be surprising that there were 6 mA at all.


However, when real brushes are used, there may be much more simultanous connections between individual parts of the brushes and the rotor. The efficiency of such a setup is yet to be tested.


I apologize for my error. I take this seriously and at least I got the integrity to tell you about my errors as well.


Some questions to be answered:
the 2 caps are not connected, they were used in the 90 deg. setup, two electrolyticsls in AC, +--+ connected, each one 470uF. The resistor is a 27 Ohm power resistor, just to make sure total powetr dissipation is not too high for the supply. Instead of this resistor I could as well use 12 additional coils instead.  The cap after the rectifier has 1 uF only.


Ok, back to work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 06, 2014, 06:19:13 AM
@ Hanon,
Thank you very much for the information you posted about the sequence of patents published by Buforn.
I would like to ask you, when were those patents made available in the internet? About three years ago, I remember searching the internet for any information about Clemente Figuera and I was only able to get one sketch (in bad shape) from one of Figuera’s patent. The sketch is the one I showed in the paper that I posted in this thread.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I STARTED READING BUFORN'S PATENTS (124 PAGES DOCUMENT) AND I WAS REALLY AMAZED TO SEE THE SAME STATEMENTS THAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG. I HAVE READ THE FIRST FIVE PAGES (IN SPANISH) AND THERE WAS A PARAGRAPH THAT CALLED MY ATTENTION VERY DEEPLY. THE PARAGRAPH IS THE SECOND FOUND ON PAGE 6 OF THE PDF (PAGE 5 OF THE DOCUMENT) AND IT READS SOMETHING LIKE:
“IT IS THEREFORE DEMONSTRATED THAT A DYNAMO (ACTION) IS NOT A CONVERSION OF MECHANICAL WORK INTO ELECTRICITY: THEN, WHERE IS THE ELECTRIC CURRENT COMING FROM? THE CURRENT OF THESE GENERATORS MIGHT BE PRODUCED BY AN UNKNOWN PARTICULAR MOVEMENT OF THE MOLECULES WITHIN THE MASS.”

THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS A SCIENTIFIC HERESY THAT I HAVE SUPPORTED FOR SOME TIME. I WILL GIVE YOU THE FOLLOWING TWO CONDITIONS TO THINK ABOUT:

1.       AS I STATED IN THE PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS, THE STANDARD TRANSFORMERS MAINTAIN A CONSTANT Φm AT NO LOAD AND AT 100% LOAD DUE TO THE AUTO REGULATION MECHANISM OF THESE CLOSED IRON CORE TRANSFORMERS. THE CONSTANT Φm IS ACKNOWLEDGE BY THE MAINSTREAM ENGINEERING BOOKS AND CAN BE VERIFIED BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE TRANSFORMER’S OUTPUT VOLTAGE REMAINS ABOUT THE SAME DURING THE LOADING PROCESS. THEN, IF THE ENERGY OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD DOES NOT CHANGE NOTABLY AT ZERO AND FULL LOAD, WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE ENERGY IS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED THROUGH THE MAGNETIC FIELD. IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INDUCES A VOLTAGE IN THE SECONDARY COIL BUT NOT THE ENERGY AND/OR POWER BEING DELIVERED TO A LOAD. THE INEFFICIENCY RELATIONSHIP OF THE INPUT/OUTPUT POWER IN STANDARD TRANSFORMERS IS DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF CLOSED CORES, BUT IT IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE. AND,

2.       YET, I HAVE NOT FOUND A MATHEMATICAL MODEL DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ENERGY OF A GIVEN MAGNETIC FIELD AND THE POWER PRODUCED BY A COIL DUE TO A VOLTAGE INDUCED BY SAID FIELD.

SUCH STATEMENT IN THE PATENT IS VERY PROFOUND! AND IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!
 
BAJAC.

Bajac, as explained in this document about Power Transformers and applies to power transformers "mainly" not flybacks and so forth. - http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm
So it doesn't relate much to this kind of setup but it does explain the role of the flux in a regular transformer and shows why the Figuera setup does not work like a transformer as such.

When my "Coil groups" secondary is loaded there is less energy to recover from the magnetic field collapse of the primaries to the second battery than when the secondary is not loaded, this shows me that the primary flux is reduced by the loading of the secondary.

Quote
Preface
One thing that obviously confuses many people is the idea of flux density within the transformer core. While this is covered in more detail in Section 2, it is important that this section's information is remembered at every stage of your reading through this article. For any power transformer, the maximum flux density in the core is obtained when the transformer is idle. I will reiterate this, as it is very important ...

For any power transformer, the maximum flux density is obtained when the transformer is idle.

The idea is counter-intuitive, it even verges on not making sense. Be that as it may, it's a fact, and missing it will ruin your understanding of transformers. At idle, the transformer back-EMF almost exactly cancels out the applied voltage. The small current that flows maintains the flux density at the maximum allowed value, and represents iron loss (see Section 2). As current is drawn from the secondary, the flux falls slightly, and allows more primary current to flow to provide the output current.

It is not important that you understand the reasons for this right from the beginning, but it is important that you remember that for any power transformer, the maximum flux density is obtained when the transformer is idle. Please don't forget this .

   Elsewhere on the Net you will find claims that the maximum power available from a transformer is limited by saturation of the core - this is unmitigated drivel, is completely false and must be ignored or you will never understand transformers properly!

The information provided here is accurate and correct, and anyone who claims different is wrong! That might sound harsh, but it's true nonetheless.

The document says the flux is maximum a idle and only falls slightly when the secondary is loaded, the energy I assume is transferred directly from primary to secondary in a power transformer because it does not come from the flux which remains almost the same.

Quote
When you apply a load to the output (secondary) winding, a current is drawn by the load, and this is reflected through the transformer to the primary. As a result, the primary must now draw more current from the mains. Somewhat intriguingly perhaps, the more current that is drawn from the secondary, the original 90 degree phase shift becomes less and less as the transformer approaches full power. The power factor of an unloaded transformer is very low, meaning that although there are volts and amps, there is relatively little power. The power factor improves as loading increases, and at full load will be close to unity (the ideal).

When the secondary is loaded the counter emf (Back emf) is reduced and this causes more current to flow in the primary to transfer energy through the secondary to the load, just as Tesla describes in the book about his motors. A motor being a generator in reverse in most cases.

I think the transfer of energy through a power transformer is not via the flux but the flux allows the transformer to work as it does, the primary is always working to keep the flux at max and supply the secondary if loaded.

With coils on separate cores there is no real transformer action directly from primary to secondary, in this case the transfer of energy can only be done by variations in the intensity of the magnetic fields or by the magnetic field collapsing through the secondary. This restricts the power to the amount of magnetism the primary induces in the core and then transfers to the secondary.

In a power transformer the output power is not limited by saturation in the same way as other transformer or generator configurations I don't think.

Maybe why the Figuera primary cores are larger to avoid saturation !

None the less if there is an effect then we should be able to see it at lower powers as well with smaller setups.

As I said this reminds me of switching the flux of a permanent magnet through a core by using saturating "control coils" to redirect the flux, just that this setup uses electro-magnets that are switched easily and it varies the flux.

Cheers

P.S. My Tests did show an unexpected result in that when the secondary was tuned by a capacitor the amplitude of the wave form increased but the input reduced, which is different to most other setups I have tested, when the activity in the secondary "tank" created by the capacitor is increased the input usually rises due to increased losses from more current through the resistance of the tank.

Addendum. In the case in my P.S. I think the extra activity in the secondary caused a counter emf in the primaries and reduced the input that way. I'm very busy organizing a trip to Brisbane for a visit with a neurosurgeon, but when I get the chance I will make a video clip to show anything i think of interest which might help.

..

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 06, 2014, 09:16:46 AM
Bajac,
 
The Buforn patents are available by direct email request to the Historical Archive of the Spanish Patent Office previous payment of a fee for each page of the document. Alpoma and me paid around 100 € for the 124 pages. The problem to get the 1902 Figuera were that as those documents were in bad condition, they didn´t want to scan them and send them by email, so I had to go the Office to look for them and take pictures (I had to do it in secret because they told me not to open the damaged booklets with the patent texts (each patent were forming a kind of booklet with all their sheets folded in half). But I open it…and photographed it
 
I did some research to verify if Figuera or Buforn had more patent in some countries as France, Germany, UK but I could not find anything (but I am not completely sure if it is so or that I could not find them: patents from those years are not included in current databases, and you are force to search them into the historical database). Anyway, you could see the filing data of those Spanish patents in the Spanish historical data base: www.oepm.es (http://www.oepm.es/) --> Archivo Historico y Museo (in the bottom right side of the page)  --> Archivo Historico à Patentes (1878-1940) --> Acceder al formulario de busqueda
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 06, 2014, 01:33:09 PM

....

Some questions to be answered:
the 2 caps are not connected, they were used in the 90 deg. setup, two electrolyticsls in AC, +--+ connected, each one 470uF. The resistor is a 27 Ohm power resistor, just to make sure total power dissipation is not too high for the supply. Instead of this resistor I could as well use 12 additional coils instead.  The cap after the rectifier has 1 uF only.

....


Hi Dieter,

Any time you have electrolytic capacitors and you wish to use them in AC circuits, a possible and good solution is the following circuit assembly, though it needs two electrolytic capacitors and two diodes.

 Connect two electrolytic capacitors back to back (it does not matter which polarity will be the common in the middle connection point, just mind for the diodes polarity). The resulting peak  AC voltage rating of the assembly will be defined by the smallest rated individual DC data of the capacitors  (i.e. 63V DC rating gives 63V AC peak rating). To minimize any significant reverse voltage across the capacitors, add a pair of diodes, each one is in reverse parallel with its capacitor, shunting the peak AC voltage for it whenever the AC wave would reverse bias the electrolytic:
           
                    1N4001 to 4007 diodes
               ----|>|------------|<|-----
               |                |                 |
               |   -     +     |     +    -    |
         o--------)|-------------|(-----------o
                 2200 uF      2200 uF
                    63 V            63 V

 This way you can get a non-polar capacitor with 2200 uF value, rated to 63V peak AC.  Up to some hundred Hz the 1N4000 diode series are ok but for higher frequencies than that the fast and ultra fast types are preferred like the UF4000 series or similar.

Using twelve more additional coils in series instead of the 27 Ohm resistor is a good step, and in this case the 8mA 'small' current may go up to a higher value too (using the same 'switching speed' i.e. duty cyle).

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 06, 2014, 01:47:19 PM
Bajac, as explained in this document about Power Transformers and applies to power transformers "mainly" not flybacks and so forth. - http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm)

Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the article do not answer the question for the cases I refer to.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 06, 2014, 02:42:56 PM
Hi Hanon and Bajac:

Please see attached French Patent and an Explanation by Patrick in his book. I got the patent from European Patent Database. The Patent specifically talks about iron core changing from one isotope to another isotope, releasing energy in the proess. My understanding that others tried to replicate it but could not do so as they were not able to give the frequency at 21 MHz used in the patent. The invention is now in public domain and is simple.

Everything in the world is based on Frequency. I think this is a statement of Tesla. While I'm not competent to comment, there are many devices that use frequency to heal problems of human body like pain, spasms etc and these devices work.

I suggest that you read the Secret of Life by Georges Lakhovsky pdf book easily available a Google search to know more about frequeny effects on living organisms and other matter.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 06, 2014, 02:50:53 PM
HANON and ALPOMA we are forever in your debt, words can not describe my gratitude i have for your contribution to the advancement  of the Figueras device. as i can not speak or read Spanish i again am forever in your debt more so.
 all my life i have been on a mission pursuing happiness never really attaining my goal until i found this device. every day i wake up with hope and glee of the thought of some one has come up with an additional clue that will bring me or us closer to solving this buried treasure in the hope that man will be set free from his EVIL Tyrant of a big brother, free from oppression, hatred and mostly GREED.
since i have been on this forum i feel i have inched closer to my goal with the help of you fellow members. i have thoroughly enjoyed the posts and reading from Bajac and the rest of you on this forum no matter how big or small ;D. again thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 06, 2014, 03:22:01 PM
Hi Marathonman:

It is most unlikely that any information about a self sustaining generator will be made available. Even if it is available, it may not be manufactured by any one and sold.

1. Science today teaches us that there can not be a device that has greater output than input. Scientists are very conservative like relgious minded people and would not say or accept any thing that is sacrilageous. If they do accept such new concepts, historically scientists were persecuted and no one would dare say any thing against what would be against the policy of the institution.

2. Businesses will not manufacture such devices even if they have the technology. Reason is common sense. Every business wants to make people buy from them again, again and again. Or set up a unit and keep charging their customers say for example cell phone companies. Electricity generation is similar.

This product is a one time sale and businesses after some time would have to close. Investment made in Electricity generation would suffer. So no bank would finance such industries either.

This is the practical reality.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 06, 2014, 05:15:56 PM
@ Anyone working with the 1908 Buforn patents.

Last summer I built a successful proof of concept of this device. The details were posted to this same topic over at energetic forum, starting around page 16 for those interested. It produced 9.2 vac, 13.0 volt peak, not rectified, with 12vdc input from a 500ma wall transformer. It only had 3 very small coils. The coils were identical, taken from small 12 volt DPDT relays. Input was controlled through an Arduino and transistor circuit, only because I did not have the means to build the commutator / resistor combination shown in the patent.

One of the most important things I learned from this build was the core/coil relation. It is exactly as the Buforn patent drawing shows. One center core, with each end inserted about 45% into each outer coil. There is a small gap between the three coils due to the coil bobbin ends in my build. The inducer coils were N-S N-S and the center coil was S-N.

Another very important point. Plotting the voltage/time curve of the Buforn commutator design shows an increase in brush dwell time every 180 degrees of rotation. This was confirmed in my build as it increased the output by approximately 84% when I added 40ms of dwell at these points. I suspect this allowed the one inducer coil time to build up it's magnetic field as the applied voltage reached it's peak. Also, the brush maintains contact with two tabs of the commutator at all times. Hitting the coils with a square wave gave very poor results, even with the added dwell.

Considering the inducer coils, they are no different than a solenoid coil in construction. The maximum gauss is at the center of those coils. In my opinion that is used to manipulate the flux of the centered core to create the output current, and that is why the center core is partly inside the outer coils. After a lot of study I am 100% certain the Buforn device uses a DC supply that steps the inducer coil current up and down in a percentage of the total current, split between the N-S inducers. This applies an almost constant total gauss to the center coil, unlike ordinary generators where the armature coils move through a magnetic field of less and more gauss.

Other advantages of this setup are:
No mechanical input other than the tiny motor to turn the commutator.
No hysteresis loss, normally caused by the core pole reversals, as there are none.

Keep in mind that the Buforn device is an improved generator / dynamo that is essentially like an old fashioned automobile generator, which has two outer field coils and an armature with many induced coils wound on it. One set of coils in Buforn's device, two inducers with one induced, is not going to develop significant output. That would be like removing all of the armature windings, except one, in the old car generator and expecting it to still work properly.

There is no mystery to the Buforn device and nothing significant is hidden in the patent. That's my opinion, based on my results and study. It is an improved generator, and correctly constructed (coil size / wire gauge, quantity of coils, and connection wiring) it will sustain itself and produce usable power.

All this being said, I hope it does not discourage research into the different devices currently being investigated here.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 06, 2014, 07:32:23 PM
Cadman:  I remember reading your post last summer re your testing of the Figuera/Buforn device.
I wonder, what prevented you from pursuing your research further?
Did you find some obstacle that prevented self running?
Your observations would be very much appreciated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 06, 2014, 07:46:21 PM
@Cadmon:

I will check your suggestion for reversing the middle coil. Earlier Dough indicated that the coil should be NS-SN-NS but I found that it is against nature as a magnet must have a north pole and south pole and it did not work.

Now changing the pole faces in the middle induced circuit is one that I have not thought about. Let me do it tomorrow. However will this not result in the coil getting mageic flux. If you supply DC the primary should keep changing in magnetic field strength to create time varying magnetic field. Without that there is no induction. If you supply DC again you need a bank of 8 batteries to reach 100 volts. Buforn input was 100 volts and 1 amp as Hanon said. If it is DC 100 volts = 1 Amp x 100 ohms. The primary should have had 100 ohms resistance. A 1 sq mm wire has 18.1 ohm DC and that means he used 550 metres of such wires for primary alone.

Again his reported output is 20000 watts. Assuming he used large wires capable of handling 30 Amps it shoudl have required about 650 volts, if it was 40 amps it would have required 500 volts and if it was 50 amps it would have required about 400 volts.

Therefore do you mean to say that the primary was thin wire and the secondary was thick wire. if the secondary was thick wire, then the picture presents a wrong image of the secondary being smaller than the primary. If you have a smaller dia secondary core, at these amps the secondary would sound enormously and the core sizes would have been massive. Primary would have been about 9 inch dia and the secondary 6 inch dia for all these things to work.

the second question that comes to my mind is even if the Primary input is DC, the secondary output is AC..How does that work in combination.

Could you please share your thoughts on this..I'm obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 06, 2014, 08:39:06 PM
Gyulasun,


Thanks for the hint, I knew about the +- -+ caps, but not the diodes. Actually, you can use an electrolytic cap in proper AC, it does damage and selfheal in every AC cycle, but it needs to have a big enough capacitance. But interesting concept with the diodes, I will study this closer.


After my flop with the "gain trough sparks" mistake, I decided to make some serious measurement, as far as my equipment allows. Even if the spark thing finally was not yet the key, there is no reason to be discouraged. Here's my latest data:


The setup (as seen in the video) consists of:
- a Wall supply, labeled 220V 50Hz , 10.5vdc, 2.9W, max, 7.5VA.


-A Resistor 27 ohm, max. 23 Watt.


-The Generator Coil group (2 prim., 1 sec., on same double-E ferrite core)


- a 4 diodes bridge rectifier and a 1uF 400V unipilar capacitor at the output of the secondary coil, aka Y coil.


When in operation, the ac voltage of the whole circuit is 13 V. The Resistor and the generator are connected in series. The resistor alone has 12 Vac at his pins. The Generator alone has 1 Vac.


The Wattmeter says total dissipation is 6.84 Watt. Surprisingly, the Wattmeter says the same when I connect the Resistor only, without the Generator. I thougt maybe the wattmeter cannot see the generator because coils bring the current out of phase. But when I connect the generator only, the Wattmeter reads 27 Watt (which is why I use a Resistor). Clearly, the coils are not made for such high currents. Two calculations can be made: 27 Watt/13, that would mean 2.1 Watt dissipation when run with 1 Vac, Or: 6.84W/ 13= 0.526 Watt.


Since the supply gets hot and is really not made for 29 Watt, I think the first calculation is wrong . Also, the Generator primaries don't have enough turns to handle such "high power", lots of losses everywhere.


So let's say the Generator dissipates a 1/13th of 6.84Watt, 0.526 Watt.


On the output I have rectified DC, smoothed with the 1 uF Cap. The analog Voltmeter says 25vdc, and a current of clearly more than the max DCmA meter range of 250. The digital meter with the defective AC parts, says 21.3 VDC, 65 mA.  Let us assume the worse, that's 21.3* 0.065= 1.3845 Watt.


So that may be:
In: 0.526 Watt
Out: 1.3845 Watt


Efficiency : 263.21%


To be fair, it is hard do exact measurements in the 1 Vac range with this analogue device. But let's say it was not 1 Vac, but 1.5 Vac, then it would be: 0.789 Watt, that's still 175.4%.


Shortening the rectified output resulted in a voltage drop in the primaries of about 0.5 V, where the voltage of the resistor rised the same amount. The total Voltage remained the same, just like the Watts calculated by the wattmeter, regardless of short circuit of the secondary or no load on secondary.


If I'd add 12 more elements instead of the wasteful resistor, on optimistic calculation would be:
in: 6.84 Watt
out: 17.99 Watt.


As I am an amateur, I am not sure if I measure the Amperes right. Of course the voltage drops almost to zero when the Amps are measured, because this will practicly short cirquit them. Am I doing this wrong?


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 06, 2014, 09:49:21 PM

....
 I am not sure if I measure the Amperes right. Of course the voltage drops almost to zero when the Amps are measured, because this will practicly short cirquit them. Am I doing this wrong?
....

Hi Dieter,

Yes I think you are doing the output current measurement wrong. See this link where I show input and output current measurements correctly in the edited Alvaro's schematic http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg388286/#msg388286 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg388286/#msg388286) and this involves using a real load which actually consumes the output current, ok? 
For a real load you may wish to use a 10 or 22 or 47 Ohm etc resistor. If you still have the 1uF capacitor across the DC output, you may wish to increase it to 47uF or 100uF or higher if the setup lets it increase, that is, it would be better to have there a higher value than 1uF. To receive the maximum DC power output (max power match) you may wish to choose a load resistor value which actually reduces the unloaded 25V or whatever DC to about its half value (between 12-13V in the 25V case).

Because you have only the analog multimeter for AC and DC, I suggest using the following measuring procedure:
1) In your switched-on and working setup with a resistor load already chosen for power match and connected, first measure the AC voltage input with your analog AC voltmeter and log it as VAC.
2) Now insert your analog meter set to AC Amp range in series at one of the AC inputs as I drew in the above link and log the AC current as IAC (the same resistor load across the DC output is still connected of course).
3) Now put the analog meter to the DC output, namely in series with the load resistance as I drew in the schematic and measure the DC current the load consumes. (Of course when you remove the meter from the AC input side you reconnect the wires there to have a working setup again). Log the DC current value as IDC.
4) Now remove the meter, reconnect the load to the DC output again and measure the DC voltage across the load with the meter, then log the DC voltage value as VDC.

From your measured data, the approximate input power PAC would be VAC*IAC, this is a very rough method because we do not know any phase shift between the current and voltage but maybe better than nothing but you do not have a scope to watch and consider the phase shift.
The output DC power, PDC would be VDC*IDC, this would be a more dependable value, close to the truth. So the efficiency would be PDC/PAC.

EDIT:   I understand that the series 27 Ohm consumes much more power than your 'transformer' input but in case you wish to deduce its consumption from the total AC power input, you could measure the AC voltage drop, VR across the 27 Ohm with the analog AC voltmeter when you measure the AC voltage input in step 1 above. Then the power loss in the resistor would be PR=(VR*VR)/27 and please substract this PR from the PAC power. Now the efficiency would be PDC/(PAC-PR).  Check the 27 Ohm resistor with your digital Ohm meter too and use that value for the calculation.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 06, 2014, 10:28:46 PM
@ a.king21
You wrote: “I remember reading your post last summer re your testing of the Figuera/Buforn device.
I wonder, what prevented you from pursuing your research further?
Did you find some obstacle that prevented self running?”

– Life interfered. Major medical issues and then winter hit hard and put a complete stop to everything. It had nothing to do with the device itself. Only recently have I started to get going again. Coincidentally, my 16 pole flat face commutator and brushes arrived today. When weather gets warmer I will be back at it and attempting a more serious sized build of this.

@ NRamaswami
If I remember correctly, I did swap the middle coil direction, and I think it did not matter in my build of this, but I may be mistaken. My build is very different than yours. Please do not put too much faith in my coils or change what you are doing based on my build. When I built it I threw it together with what I had on hand in the garage. Actually I was amazed it worked as well as it did.

You wrote: “However will this not result in the coil getting mageic flux. If you supply DC the primary should keep changing in magnetic field strength to create time varying magnetic field. Without that there is no induction.”

– My conclusion (for my build) is that the center coil core nearly always has 100% flux strength. What varies with time is the relative intensity of the north and south poles of the one center core. Each primary coil does keep changing in field strength but as one is reduced the other is increased a like amount.
Faraday's Law: Any change in the magnetic environment of a coil of wire will cause a voltage (emf) to be induced in the coil.

You wrote: “Therefore do you mean to say that the primary was thin wire and the secondary was thick wire.”
– No, my coils were all the same, identical. Again, please do not infer anything from this. It may or may not be relevant.

You wrote: “the second question that comes to my mind is even if the Primary input is DC, the secondary output is AC..How does that work in combination.”
– I am not sure what you are asking here. If you are asking why I have AC output for DC input, I am not sure. In the patents it is said, as I recollect, that for every half revolution there will be a change in sign, which there certainly was, but I can only surmise that it is due to the influence of the predominant primary coil, the one that has the full voltage, and the two primaries are opposite in sign at their end of the center core.

Since you reported such great success using 220 AC I hope you continue to reproduce that particular device. I would hate for my input to derail your efforts.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 06, 2014, 11:51:42 PM
Gyulasun


Thanks very much for your help! Unfort. my analogue meter can measure only DCmA, limited to 250 mA, so I was stuck at point 2.


But it was a good idea to use a resistor as the load. I measured the voltage across the resistor and used the formula (V*V)/R=W. And that was really disappointing. I tried several resistors, 5,10,15,27 and 1800 Ohm, the results were under 100mW, although inconsistent, so this formula doesn't seem to be precise or reliable. Eighter the formula is crap, or my device is. Yeah, the ups and downs in life... actually downs could be used with a dynamo attached  ???


I have to test this under better conditions. But  thanks a lot.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 07, 2014, 12:22:56 AM
Gyulasun


Thanks very much for your help! Unfort. my analogue meter can measure only DCmA, limited to 250 mA, so I was stuck at point 2.


But it was a good idea to use a resistor as the load. I measured the voltage across the resistor and used the formula (V*V)/R=W. And that was really disappointing. I tried several resistors, 5,10,15,27 and 1800 Ohm, the results were under 100mW, although inconsistent, so this formula doesn't seem to be precise or reliable. Eighter the formula is crap, or my device is. Yeah, the ups and downs in life... actually downs could be used with a dynamo attached  ???


I have to test this under better conditions. But  thanks a lot.

Dieter,

It is correct that you get different power outputs for different value resistor loads. You can explain this by considering the inner impedance (resistance) of your setup found across the output,  power output changes as per the load changes, (see the blue curve in the graph in the link below) and maximum power efficiency (red curve) can only be received when your load has the same impedance (resistance) than the output impedance (resistance) of your setup across its output (because it is a generator). But under this matched condition (when RLoad=Rinner) the power efficiency can only be max 50%.  Study this link to understand these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem)  (where Vs and Rs correspond to the DC output voltage and inner resistance of your setup.)  When RLoad=Rs then half of the generated output power is lost in the inner resistance (impedance) and only the other half can go to the load as the output power. 

I hoped that your analog meter can function in AC mode, for you mentioned the digital one which is faulty in AC. Then you may wish to obtain another analog meter.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 07, 2014, 12:52:23 AM
Hi Cadmon:

Thank you so much. very helpful comments. I have actually done a modified or as my friends say a completely different form inspired by the Figuera device. But then the Electrician Narayanan who did the experiments passed away and we kind of shocked out. You can see him the lean bespectacled person with green shirt at www.tmptens.com.

I have learnt a lot in this forum and Gyula was especially very helpful. I'm very greatful. Since I'm not an Electrical Engineer and since I look in to multiple domains, I was able to look at all the things with an open mind. Due to workload I'm not able to do much. I will come back to you all with some results. This time we are not going to simply increase the number of turns of secondary randomly and we are going to slowly increse it to reach about 250 volts with 15x200 watts lamps and then we are going to keep increasing the turns and the load. I'm also planning to use thicker wires this time to increase the amperage per turn and then wind thousands of meters of wire. I may ultimately end up using about 5000 metres of wire I think. If things work correctly as I expect them to be, I may also use a step up transformer to increse the input to 440 volts. Higher the input voltage higher is the efficiency is known to us and the wires that I use handle up to 1100 volts and some wires that I use can handle up to 50000 volts.

I'm very grateful to all especially to Patrick, Hanon and Gyula. and other friends. Thank you so much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 07, 2014, 01:09:47 AM
Regarding Buforn patent figures and Figuera patent diagrams, I think they made a deliberate deception in the drawings. I think it is all NS-NS-NS only as the NS-NS-SN configuration did not work. I need to check if it is NS-SN-NS but all transformers say that the primary and secondary are wound in the same direction. This NS-SN-NS would mean that the secondary wound CCW, if primary is wound CW.

The one thing that comes to my mind is that the gaps shown in Buforns patent may be filled with permanent magnets. When steel is made a magnet it remains a permanent magnet I think. Soft iron loses its magnetism once electricity is removed. I think steel retains the magnetism. However steel becomes a more powerful magnet when it is in contact with electromagnets or placed between the opposite poles of two electromagnets. This creates additional magnetic flux. This principle is used in several recent patents. So it is certainly possible that the gaps are not air gaps but gaps filled with steel permanent magnet materials to increase the magnetic flux. I think even normal transformers show an over unity performance when it is done and Figuera could have easily done it.

Many of the information on Electricity and magnetism are not accurate. They are partly accurate and I believe hide a lot of information. We found a lot of contradictory results. So I would request the friends to consider the possibility that Figuera used permanent magnets and electromagnets alternting them but used the NS-NS-NS configuration to improve efficiency. If you use a very large amount of permanent magnet, let us say 100 kgms, it does not matter if it is not as good as a Neodymium magnet. Size matters in Magnets and this is what I have practically learnt. Please think about it..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 07, 2014, 01:14:21 AM
And by the way, the gaps between primaries and secondaries that Figuera shows are for cooling purposes I think. Electromagnet iron gets very hot. If you use a lot of sott iron rods and steel rods providing such an air gap between primaries and secondary coils enables the iron to be cooled by air. I do not think that there is any thing more to it than that. This is my view any way and as I do not have much information I cannot claim to be sure about it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 07, 2014, 02:06:55 AM
Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the article do not answer the question for the cases I refer to.

What question was that ?

Anyway I disagree with Bufon on the dynamo does not perform a transformation of mechanical work into electricity. Without the mechanical work done on a dynamo there is no electricity. The more electricity that is used the more mechanical work needs to be done. A dynamo cannot operate without mechanical work done on it.

The amount of electricity that a dynamo magnet produces in a conductor as it passes is due to the magnetism induced into the core and/or the varying magnetic field "cutting the conductor" if no core there is still some output. I would be surprised if there is no formula for it. A core can take the magnetism a long way from the exciting magnet "unlike an air core" and it happens at a certain rate not instantly.

Maybe one of these formulae from Tesla does it in reverse (picture below). explanation begins end of page 15 and goes to page 16.
https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf

Basically the magnetization of a core by a coil formula used in reverse should work shouldn't it ?

NRamaswami, A single core makes a difference, if all coils are on the same core then fluxes can cancel each other out better. If that is good or bad depends on what you want I guess.

Cheers



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 07, 2014, 02:56:01 AM
Where is the formula and/or mathematical model telling you that B=XX (Gauss) with an energy density of E=YY (Jules/CM3) can induce a power ZZ (Watts) in a secondary coil having a connected load?
Books teach you only the Faraday's induction law, that is, B=XX (Gauss) induces a voltage V in a secondary coil with N turns. And, the engineering books describe only the power in and power out in a transformer (bypassing any energy/power flow due to the magnetic field.)
I consider this omission to be intentional. If you start digging into this area, you will soon conclude (like me) that the power and/or work between two coils are not the result of the magnetic field energy flowing into the coils. Again, refer to the transformers; the power output can increase order of magnitudes while the magnetic flux/density stays about the same. In other words, the energy density of the magnetic field stays constant and unaffected by whatever is connected to the secondary coils. Of course, there are interactions between these magnetic fields because of the core construction, but still the intensity of the net magnetic field is about constant.
I am not trying to convince anyone and I respect your conviction. However, I disagree with it. On my part, I will not discuss this issue any further.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 07, 2014, 03:24:06 AM
Bajac, what you said can easily be verified: take a little neodym magnet and hold it close to a core, you'll feel the vibration, eg. 50 hz. While holding the magnet, turn on the load, you should feel the diffrence.


You can also hear it, btw. If the diffrence is linear to the increase of load, I don't know.
(EDIT actually, I've noticed they can get more silent with a higher load, maybe that means the b field is there without a load, but gets "absorbed" and turned into output current before it can manifest magnetism  when the output can flow ?)

NRamaswami, like you I don't know what Airgaps in Cores are for, but they are  very common, although only in the inner core and engineers use precise calculations to get the right gap size.


Unlike your explanation of air cooling, I have an other theory: they may act as the magnetic equivalent of a sparkgap. They stop small flux density, but let pass strong pulses and therefor cause  more immediate chanches in polarity and or flux density, resulting in higher power output. But it's just an idea.


EDIT2, everything about air gaps:
www.encyclopedia-magnetica.com/wiki/Air_gap



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2014, 04:15:12 AM
Hi Marathonman:

It is most unlikely that any information about a self sustaining generator will be made available. Even if it is available, it may not be manufactured by any one and sold.

1. Science today teaches us that there can not be a device that has greater output than input. Scientists are very conservative like relgious minded people and would not say or accept any thing that is sacrilageous. If they do accept such new concepts, historically scientists were persecuted and no one would dare say any thing against what would be against the policy of the institution.

2. Businesses will not manufacture such devices even if they have the technology. Reason is common sense. Every business wants to make people buy from them again, again and again. Or set up a unit and keep charging their customers say for example cell phone companies. Electricity generation is similar.

This product is a one time sale and businesses after some time would have to close. Investment made in Electricity generation would suffer. So no bank would finance such industries either.

This is the practical reality.
what the heck was this all about other than you running the mouth about God knows what i dont know. it sure wasn't about any thing i was talking about. i don't want to sound mean but r u on crack or what. skip the speeches next time please. i was born 50 years ago not yesterday, thank you
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2014, 04:58:50 AM
@ Anyone working with the 1908 Buforn patents.

Last summer I built a successful proof of concept of this device. The details were posted to this same topic over at energetic forum, starting around page 16 for those interested. It produced 9.2 vac, 13.0 volt peak, not rectified, with 12vdc input from a 500ma wall transformer. It only had 3 very small coils. The coils were identical, taken from small 12 volt DPDT relays. Input was controlled through an Arduino and transistor circuit, only because I did not have the means to build the commutator / resistor combination shown in the patent.

One of the most important things I learned from this build was the core/coil relation. It is exactly as the Buforn patent drawing shows. One center core, with each end inserted about 45% into each outer coil. There is a small gap between the three coils due to the coil bobbin ends in my build. The inducer coils were N-S N-S and the center coil was S-N.

Another very important point. Plotting the voltage/time curve of the Buforn commutator design shows an increase in brush dwell time every 180 degrees of rotation. This was confirmed in my build as it increased the output by approximately 84% when I added 40ms of dwell at these points. I suspect this allowed the one inducer coil time to build up it's magnetic field as the applied voltage reached it's peak. Also, the brush maintains contact with two tabs of the commutator at all times. Hitting the coils with a square wave gave very poor results, even with the added dwell.

Considering the inducer coils, they are no different than a solenoid coil in construction. The maximum gauss is at the center of those coils. In my opinion that is used to manipulate the flux of the centered core to create the output current, and that is why the center core is partly inside the outer coils. After a lot of study I am 100% certain the Buforn device uses a DC supply that steps the inducer coil current up and down in a percentage of the total current, split between the N-S inducers. This applies an almost constant total gauss to the center coil, unlike ordinary generators where the armature coils move through a magnetic field of less and more gauss.

Other advantages of this setup are:
No mechanical input other than the tiny motor to turn the commutator.
No hysteresis loss, normally caused by the core pole reversals, as there are none.

Keep in mind that the Buforn device is an improved generator / dynamo that is essentially like an old fashioned automobile generator, which has two outer field coils and an armature with many induced coils wound on it. One set of coils in Buforn's device, two inducers with one induced, is not going to develop significant output. That would be like removing all of the armature windings, except one, in the old car generator and expecting it to still work properly.

There is no mystery to the Buforn device and nothing significant is hidden in the patent. That's my opinion, based on my results and study. It is an improved generator, and correctly constructed (coil size / wire gauge, quantity of coils, and connection wiring) it will sustain itself and produce usable power.

All this being said, I hope it does not discourage research into the different devices currently being investigated here.

Regards
Cadman i just spent all day on the energetic forum reading most of the post and watching Eric Dollard Videos......good god that man is smart!.  i was very intrigued with your design and the striking resemblance to Figueras design but mostly at your results from a very unoptimized set up. the Dwell is very interesting in your observations and they are sound. i have two set ups i am working on and i think i will be incorporation your style in one of them.. i will be following your progress and will advise on output. is this the set up you are talking about as i cant see the post pics as i am not a member of energetic.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 07, 2014, 12:24:14 PM
Bajac, Farmhand:

I saw the interesting discussion.. I have one doubt. Please note that I'm not a trained person and do not know theory.

1. When a permanent magnet is stagnent it has no current.

2. When a permanent magnet rotats let me state my understanding as per books. Let Farmhand say if I'm right or wrong.

current theory as I understand it..Let Farmhand say if I my understanding of the theory is a mistake..

Dynamos or Alternators or Large turbines in Nuclear, Thermal or Hydro-electric plants, wind turbines all work on the same principle. The principle is simple. When a magnet surrounded by coils is rotated it creates a rotating magnetic field. The coils cut the rotating magnetic field and current is induced in the coils. The current produced in the coils due to this Electromagnetic Induction opposes the rotation of the magnet. Therefore to continue to rotate the magnet, mechanical energy needs to be applied. The applied mechanical energy must not only be used to rotate the magnet but also overcome the opposing force of the induced current. For this reason, the input of the generators in the form of mechanical energy is always higher than the output of the generator or dynamos or alternators.  More energy is spent in the transformation of mechanical energy in to electrical energy and this energy loss is the cause of the poIr crisis all over the world. These principles of Electromagnetic Induction Ire invented by Micheal Faraday and they remain valid to this date.
This principle is used in induction motors by using the repulsive forces of the similar poles of magnets by supplying current to coils to the stator of an induction motor. HoIver the rotor of an induction motor rotates at a speed lesser than the rotating magnetic field created by the coils. Therefore current needs to be continuously supplied to rotate the rotor.
Similarly to generator electricity large turbines first provide current to an induction motor and then apply mechanical force to the rotor which then starts rotating faster than the rotating magnetic field of the stator current. When the revolutions per minute of the rotor due to applied mechanical energy exceeds the rotating speed of the rotating magnetic field, the induction motor starts working as a generator.  Again mechanical energy is needed to be supplied to the generator to a level which can overcome the opposing current now induced.
The opposing current is produced due to a Lenz law. These laws are regularly measured and are considered a part of the natural laws now.  There is no machine that has overcome the forces of the lenz law which are in commercial use today.
Transformers also suffer from lenz law. The current supplied to the primary of the transformer is opposed by the current induced in the secondary of the transformer. Therefore though there is no mechanical motion, the input current to primary is always higher than the output current produced in the secondary.
In both transformers and Dynamo Electric machines the greater the poIr of the magnet, or the greater the magnetic field strength, greater would be the poIr produced. Therefore large cores of magnets are needed to produce currents. This is the reason for building dams, Nuclear plants, steam turbines etc.

Is my above understanding is right or wrong as per theory taught in books. Please answer this Farmhand.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 07, 2014, 12:56:05 PM
To put it more specifically my doubt is this..

If you make a coil of wire is made to jump, it does nothing.

If you make a permanent magnet move up and down it does nothing,

If you rotate the magnet in empty space do we see any rotating magnteic field. No so the magnetic rays are invisible.

Now when these invisible rays cut the coils made up of conducting materials current is produced in the conducting materials. The argument is that mechanical energy is converted to electrical energy. if that be so if we just make the coil jump and down in the absence of a magnetic field or rotating or time varying magnetic field, current is not produced. We need the combination of rotating permanent magnet and the coil of conducter to generate electricity.

Since in the absence of magnet the mechanical energy is not converted to electrical energy, there ought to be some thing that is present int the magnetic field.. That some thing is certainly not mechanical energy. So a rotating magnet or rotating magnetic field does some thing else to generate current in the coils of wire.

I agree that the current generated in the coils tends to repel the movement of the rotating magnetic field. I also agree that therefore we normally need to give more energy to the rotating of magnet to continue or mainfest the rotating magnetic field. So excess energy is needed to rotate the magnetic field ( not to produce current but to sustain the rotating magnetic field overcoming the force of opposition from the induced current)/

The question is where is this induced current coming from? It certainly is not from the rotating magnetic field as the rotating magnet does not create electricity unless the conductor is placed near it and coiled. Then what happens to the conductor and why the conductor creates electricity.. This is a fundamental doubt..That is not answered in boooks.

I request Farmhand to answer this queston to enable this dummy to understand the situation.. Pleae do not quote from a book but please do give an insightful answer like Gyula gives. I remain very grateful and obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 07, 2014, 03:19:25 PM
Marathonman,

Yes that is the coil and core layout, right from the Buforn patents. The actual gap between my coils is about .050”, due to the ends of the coil spools. I notice your drawing does not have the core inserted into primaries at 45% depth, and this is one of the variables I want to experiment with. That 45% was just a guess for a first try.

My build was an effort to verify the patent, as-is. Even though I am convinced the Buforn patent is straight-forward, there are a variety of physical construction details to work out.

You know, having read through this topic at both forums, I don't recall anyone actually building a device that conforms 100% to the Buforn patent. Not even myself as I did not have the commutator setup. It has been discussed every which way from Sunday, but no faithful replication. :)

Please correct me if I am mistaken.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 07, 2014, 04:11:52 PM
Would someone be kind enough to check these figures for coil amperage draw please?

When wiring multiple coils in parallel, the total resistance is calculated the same as for any resistor wired in parallel, correct? Rtotal = 1/((1/R1)+(1/R2)+(1/R3))

So if one coil is 0.9 ohms, the max current draw from a 12v DC supply would be I=V/R = 12 / 0.9 = 13.33 amps.

Three identical 0.9 ohm coils wired together in parallel would be
1 / ((1/.9)+(1/.9)+(1/.9)) = 1 / (1.111)*3) = 1 / 3.333 = 0.3 ohms
12 / 0.3 = 40 amps

Now if I have 3 sets of 3 parallel wired coils, 9 coils total, these three sets wired together in series, would then be 0.3 * 3 = 0.9 ohms. So then we are back to the same amp draw as one coil, 12 / 0.9 = 13.333 amps?

Three 0.9 ohm coils wired in series would be 0.9 * 3 = 2.7 ohms. 12 / 2.7 = 4.44amps

So we could have either 1 coil or 9 coils wired as above and the amp draw from source would be limited to 13.3 amps, or 3 individual 0.9 ohm coils wired in series at 4.44 amps max?

Is this correct?

Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 07, 2014, 05:01:52 PM
Hi Cadman.

Yes, I think your calculations and deductions are correct. 

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2014, 05:20:32 PM
Hi Cadman.
 I have revised the above drawing for you and this is what i came up with. Figueras showed that the primaries are larger then the secondaries so in order to comply with this i came up with this. is  this what you are trying to say.  hope you like it!
ps. i think you might want to use 100 volt @ 1 amp..... just a thought.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 07, 2014, 06:04:19 PM
Gyula, thank you! Much appreciated. And thank you for all the other help you have provided to everyone.

Marathonman, yes, that is the coil layout, including the bloch wall note, although I disagree with the varying core diameter. I believe it should be uniformly cylindrical as smaller coil does not necessarily mean smaller core diameter. But who am I to say, eh? :) By the way, where does Buforn say the induced coil is smaller? I would think the coil specs would be determined by the desired input and output.

100 volt @ 1 amp input, eh? I will keep that in mind.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2014, 06:25:59 PM
I personally think the patients from Buforn 1908 are as follows. the patient never says there is a core in the primaries just the secondaries so that leads me to believe in my pic i made as per Cadman. this is a sound observation as no BEMF can ever be transfered to the primaries as they have no core to effect yet the flux from the primaries will be transfered to the secondaries as Iron will attract the flux. the pic of Buforn patient pic shows the cores on top as it is impossible to stick two cores from two different directions in one core end. this will also make it Moduler in design and easy to add more more cores for more power as per Patient drawing.
 "please observe and advise"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 07, 2014, 08:49:37 PM
Marathonman, why do the primary cores not pass the Bloch wall in your 2nd last diagram?


And for all those who need some good basic info on what is really important in the construction of transformers, I would reccommend this article:


http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm


As for the figuera investigation, this becomes more of a crime story with every day. I noticed, Figuera must have hidden some essential information in the patent, something must be carefully disguised. Otherwise he wouldn't been able to sell himself to the bankers because everybody could have built it. So the key may not be in the patent per se, but it may help to understand parts of the setup, just like when you turn a text upside down and suddently see a hidden message, or that picture that shows Freud, and when you turn it 180 deg. it shows a young woman, if you know that one.


As for NRamaswamis speech about the economy not wanting free energy, I have to say he was absolutely right, tho probably addressed to the wrong person and yes, usually the tech. aspects of the subject are of interest and not so much the politics, although, when you search for free energy then you may think or talk about politics occassionally. We may not be able to sell it, but we can live in a underground facility virtually forever, while the shell dwellers extinct due to lack of oil and uranium.  8) I mean there must be something good about free energy.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2014, 09:51:56 PM
Dieter,
 Marathonman, why do the primary cores not pass the Bloch wall in your 2nd last diagram?

Because you dont want Both north and south flux on output core.... it will cancell each other out ....right!

And for all those who need some good basic info on what is really important in the construction of transformers.

This is not your regular transformer and therefore it will not act the same as one....whole diff ball game.  so why does everyone treat it as such. this has a whole different set of rules people. read the Patient again...... besides that drawing was for him because that is what Cadman is working on .

and for that last part ... i have been around the world and the USA and i DON"T need to be Lectured .END OF STORY !

I will be using two types of Moduler set up ...one with cores and one without and i will post results. oh i spell his name wrong its Buforn....SORRY
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 07, 2014, 11:59:00 PM
I noticed, Figuera must have hidden some essential information in the patent, something must be carefully disguised. Otherwise he wouldn't been able to sell himself to the bankers because everybody could have built it. So the key may not be in the patent per se, but it may help to understand parts of the setup

I agree with you Dieter. Figuera in 1902 filed  four patents on the 20th of September 1902. The telegram where Figuera states the sale of the patents to the bankers union is dated on the 24th of September. Only four days between filing and selling the patents. I think (but it is just my opinion) that Figuera knew that he was going to sell the patents, therefore maybe he just filed them to have a formal document to be sold. I think that he hid some key parts because he knew that the patents were already to be sold to the bankers and avoid that anyone could replicate the generator in an easy way.

The inventors of the 1902 patents were Clemente Figuera and Pedro Blasberg, a young electrician who helped Figuera in the developent of his invention. Just as a curiosity: Blasberg achieved the position of general manager of the Gas Factory located in the Canary Islands many years after 1902. Blasberg had a incredible professional career respect to a common electrician, don´t you think so?...

 I don´t know what happened to the money that Figuera received for the sale of the patents (around 230,000$ in 1902 paid in Spanish currency) because I have read a document where Figuera was looking for funding to commercialize his new generator in 1907. Then it is when Buforn became his business partner.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 08, 2014, 01:26:36 AM
And soon after he died... strange. Why isn't a Buforn Generator at every corner today? How and when died Buforn? It could be that Figuera decided to break his Bankster deal, or maybe it was time limited. Maybe Figuera thought the world should have access to the generator.


I have some new clues but after my 3 "I solved it!... not."'s I'd rather try it first.


Marathonman, actually only the question about the core was directed to you. But even if the Figuera and Buforn patents are not transformers in a conventional sense, I'd reccommend that article nevertheless strongly as it contains real essential information eg. about core saturation and much more, that is useful in any setup with coils.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 08, 2014, 02:33:37 AM
Bajac, Farmhand:

I saw the interesting discussion.. I have one doubt. Please note that I'm not a trained person and do not know theory.

1. When a permanent magnet is stagnent it has no current.

2. When a permanent magnet rotats let me state my understanding as per books. Let Farmhand say if I'm right or wrong.

current theory as I understand it..Let Farmhand say if I my understanding of the theory is a mistake..

Dynamos or Alternators or Large turbines in Nuclear, Thermal or Hydro-electric plants, wind turbines all work on the same principle. The principle is simple. When a magnet surrounded by coils is rotated it creates a rotating magnetic field. The coils cut the rotating magnetic field and current is induced in the coils. The current produced in the coils due to this Electromagnetic Induction opposes the rotation of the magnet. Therefore to continue to rotate the magnet, mechanical energy needs to be applied. The applied mechanical energy must not only be used to rotate the magnet but also overcome the opposing force of the induced current. For this reason, the input of the generators in the form of mechanical energy is always higher than the output of the generator or dynamos or alternators.  More energy is spent in the transformation of mechanical energy in to electrical energy and this energy loss is the cause of the poIr crisis all over the world. These principles of Electromagnetic Induction Ire invented by Micheal Faraday and they remain valid to this date.
This principle is used in induction motors by using the repulsive forces of the similar poles of magnets by supplying current to coils to the stator of an induction motor. HoIver the rotor of an induction motor rotates at a speed lesser than the rotating magnetic field created by the coils. Therefore current needs to be continuously supplied to rotate the rotor.
Similarly to generator electricity large turbines first provide current to an induction motor and then apply mechanical force to the rotor which then starts rotating faster than the rotating magnetic field of the stator current. When the revolutions per minute of the rotor due to applied mechanical energy exceeds the rotating speed of the rotating magnetic field, the induction motor starts working as a generator.  Again mechanical energy is needed to be supplied to the generator to a level which can overcome the opposing current now induced.
The opposing current is produced due to a Lenz law. These laws are regularly measured and are considered a part of the natural laws now.  There is no machine that has overcome the forces of the lenz law which are in commercial use today.
Transformers also suffer from lenz law. The current supplied to the primary of the transformer is opposed by the current induced in the secondary of the transformer. Therefore though there is no mechanical motion, the input current to primary is always higher than the output current produced in the secondary.
In both transformers and Dynamo Electric machines the greater the poIr of the magnet, or the greater the magnetic field strength, greater would be the poIr produced. Therefore large cores of magnets are needed to produce currents. This is the reason for building dams, Nuclear plants, steam turbines etc.

Is my above understanding is right or wrong as per theory taught in books. Please answer this Farmhand.

Tesla's rotating magnetic field motors and generators all worked as he described which is a similar way to how a regular motor or generator works. If you look back I showed a quote from Tesla about that and a link to the book it came from. A rotating magnetic "field" as in motor "field" or generator field may be more efficient than actually rotating a rotor, but the motor or generator is still subject to Lens Law as Tesla clearly states.

Cheers   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 08, 2014, 02:38:52 AM
Where is the formula and/or mathematical model telling you that B=XX (Gauss) with an energy density of E=YY (Jules/CM3) can induce a power ZZ (Watts) in a secondary coil having a connected load?
Books teach you only the Faraday's induction law, that is, B=XX (Gauss) induces a voltage V in a secondary coil with N turns. And, the engineering books describe only the power in and power out in a transformer (bypassing any energy/power flow due to the magnetic field.)
I consider this omission to be intentional. If you start digging into this area, you will soon conclude (like me) that the power and/or work between two coils are not the result of the magnetic field energy flowing into the coils. Again, refer to the transformers; the power output can increase order of magnitudes while the magnetic flux/density stays about the same. In other words, the energy density of the magnetic field stays constant and unaffected by whatever is connected to the secondary coils. Of course, there are interactions between these magnetic fields because of the core construction, but still the intensity of the net magnetic field is about constant.
I am not trying to convince anyone and I respect your conviction. However, I disagree with it. On my part, I will not discuss this issue any further.

I never said it would tell anything. I suggested it might. I'm not an engineer so I'm not particularly concerned with complex calculations.

Bajac is so quick to want to disagree with me that he doesn't realize I agree with him about the transformer flux remaining about the same and the transfer of energy in a normal transformer being through means other than "through" the flux. This is obvious, but just as obvious is that a transformer where the primary and secondary are on a different part of the core (like a flyback) that the transfer can only be through the magnetic field  because the coils are not close enough for direct transformer action.

My contention is that there should be a formula for determining the magnetic field produced in a coils core when energized by electricity. And that if that formula was reversed we should get the possible amount of electricity from a given applied magnetic field to a coils core. Simple, logical ?. I never said there was one.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 08, 2014, 02:55:36 AM
To put it more specifically my doubt is this..

If you make a coil of wire is made to jump, it does nothing.

If you make a permanent magnet move up and down it does nothing,

If you rotate the magnet in empty space do we see any rotating magnteic field. No so the magnetic rays are invisible.

Now when these invisible rays cut the coils made up of conducting materials current is produced in the conducting materials. The argument is that mechanical energy is converted to electrical energy. if that be so if we just make the coil jump and down in the absence of a magnetic field or rotating or time varying magnetic field, current is not produced. We need the combination of rotating permanent magnet and the coil of conducter to generate electricity.

Since in the absence of magnet the mechanical energy is not converted to electrical energy, there ought to be some thing that is present int the magnetic field.. That some thing is certainly not mechanical energy. So a rotating magnet or rotating magnetic field does some thing else to generate current in the coils of wire.

I agree that the current generated in the coils tends to repel the movement of the rotating magnetic field. I also agree that therefore we normally need to give more energy to the rotating of magnet to continue or mainfest the rotating magnetic field. So excess energy is needed to rotate the magnetic field ( not to produce current but to sustain the rotating magnetic field overcoming the force of opposition from the induced current)/

The question is where is this induced current coming from? It certainly is not from the rotating magnetic field as the rotating magnet does not create electricity unless the conductor is placed near it and coiled. Then what happens to the conductor and why the conductor creates electricity.. This is a fundamental doubt..That is not answered in boooks.

I request Farmhand to answer this queston to enable this dummy to understand the situation.. Pleae do not quote from a book but please do give an insightful answer like Gyula gives. I remain very grateful and obliged.

The thing is that a conventional dynamo situation was said not to convert mechanical energy to electrical energy, now in a motionless dynamo the magnetic field and the coils are already there the thing missing is movement, which requires mechanical input to make the magnets pass the coils/cores so that they can do their work by varying the magnetic field in the coils cores, without the mechanical input energy the dynamo does nothing much at all, and when loaded the mechanical input increases. This cannot be disputed as it is obvious to all who look.

In a transformer things are different and different transformers work in differing ways to some degree. This is all I said.

Cheers

P.S. If we reverse the situation can we say that the electrical input to a motor does not convert electrical energy to mechanical energy ? I say it does.

..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 08, 2014, 03:26:39 AM
And soon after he died... strange. Why isn't a Buforn Generator at every corner today? How and when died Buforn? It could be that Figuera decided to break his Bankster deal, or maybe it was time limited. Maybe Figuera thought the world should have access to the generator.


I have some new clues but after my 3 "I solved it!... not."'s I'd rather try it first.


Marathonman, actually only the question about the core was directed to you. But even if the Figuera and Buforn patents are not transformers in a conventional sense, I'd reccommend that article nevertheless strongly as it contains real essential information eg. about core saturation and much more, that is useful in any setup with coils.


Regards

Another possibility is that the payment from the bankers was not completed, yet another is that the device did not do what Figuera said it would do so the Bankers took back their money and the resulting stress eventually killed Figuera. Stress can kill you just as dead as a bullet it just takes longer.

Another possibility is that he had debts and spent the money on debt, then the device didn't work as he told the bankers it would so he tried again but the bankers put a hit on him rather than lose face.

I was curious about how Figuera died and when, I guess this also goes for Bufon, the other guy might have opted out and stayed out of it when Figuera dropped.

Some guy was Figuera, patents a free energy machine then sells it to bankers 4 days later, then set about patenting a competing device ? Do I understand that part correctly ? Sounds dangerous.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 08, 2014, 05:11:44 AM
@Farmhand
I apologize if I misunderstood your statement. I do not have the time to read all posts, and the few ones that I read, I just glance at them. I have to say that I do not agree with most of the comments posted, but I respect their opinions because it could also happen that I might be the wrong one.


@Cadman
If you read some of my posts, you will find that I had advised more than once that there is nothing hidden in Figuera's patents. We should not be discouraged by not having immediate results with whatever we believe is a replication of Figuera's device. We need to be persistent, examine the results of the tests and make the necessary changes to fine tune the device to the correct parameters.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 08, 2014, 09:43:59 AM
@Farmhand
I apologize if I misunderstood your statement. I do not have the time to read all posts, and the few ones that I read, I just glance at them. I have to say that I do not agree with most of the comments posted, but I respect their opinions because it could also happen that I might be the wrong one.

No probs Bajac, I am also guilty of post scanning quite a bit.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 08, 2014, 09:52:11 AM
I have read all of your post Bajac and i have only one Question. does the Primaries have cores or not ?
i can't really tell from Patients.

Dieter.....I have read entire web site you suggested multiple times .thank you though
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 08, 2014, 12:12:28 PM
Never mind i found what i needed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 08, 2014, 01:46:37 PM
Never mind i found what i needed.


Are you referring to iron cores?
Just in case, did you find out that the Figuera's devices have iron cores? It is explicitly stated in the patents.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 08, 2014, 01:51:53 PM
Marathonman:

I apologize if I miscommunicated. I only intended to say how businesses operate. Technology is different business and politics are different. I was only pointing out that info on this type of devices are not available only due to the reasons. I do not lecture and I apologize if I miscommunicated.

Farmhand.. You are not answering the basic question. Electricity is energy and energy can be converted from one form to another form and we know all this but why is the rotating field and conducting material combination needed to generate electricity. What does the conductor do? Why a non conducting material would not produce electricity.. This is a fundamental question and if the books do not answer that, it is a different issue. What we have is an observation that when conductors are placed in a rotating magnetic field or time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor..Voltage of the electricity so produced is based on the number of times the conductor is looped as a coil. But why conducting material alone does this and why a non conducting material would not do the same thing..

So this is the fundamental question I want an answer..If books do not answer let us then understand that we have not studied it..I have so many material scientists and I think it has been studied well and this is why we have different types of cores and different types of rare earth magnets. But definitely some thing happens inside the atomic structure of the conductors and that contributes to the electricity generation. The key to devices that generate more energy than input mechanical force may be present there..Perhaps one of the keys..May be we have several solutions and since we have a large industrial base which is based only on one solution either we have not gone and thought about it or implemented it.. solutions appear to be present but we have no information. Daniel McFarland cook patent, Figuera, Hubbard, Hendershot, Moray  you name it and we do not have any clear information. Moray's device is particularly demonstrated so many times and then destroyed and we have no information on it. These people might have asked the basic fundamental question I'm asking and might have found the answer and then build the devices..But still we are not able to answer the fundamental question..This is what I wanted to suggest. My boys are on leave this week end and so I could not do any experiment. I'm sorry.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 08, 2014, 06:11:51 PM

I was referring to Figuera's 1908 and later patents.


I agree that the 1902 patent is incomplete. It does not show the configuration of the induced coils which makes it suspicious. Incomplete patent applications are not accepted by any office. A required condition is that the concept shall be provided with sufficient details to allow its implementation by a person with skill in the art. I believe the original 1902 patent application was complete and that it was tampered with by the bankers who purchased it.


I have also read more pages from the Buforn patents and I have the idea that Figuera made a mistake by trusting this guy. I picture Buforn's profile as a greedy business man who did not have Figuera's intellect. I have to thank him though for adding information that I think that I think was originated from Figuera, such as the statement that the dynamos do not convert mechanical work into electrical power.


Then, Buforn made a terrible job by writing extensively about the Sun, atmospheric influence in electric phenomena, etc., to validate the operation of the Figuera's device. It seems to me that Buforn was trying to say that if Tesla's ideas of radiant electricity is true, then it also is the Figuera's generator, which he was trying to rename it as "BUFORN'S ELECTRIC SYSTEM PRODUCTION." That is, Buforn tried to steal Figuera's work.


Buforn's later patents included information that I am sure Mr. Figuera would had never approved. I strongly believe that the last patent (application #57955) showing the Figuera's generator sharing the primaries electromagnets was not his idea. First of all, that device is nothing new because it uses the same Figuera's concept, and second, it should have lower performance and more critical adjustment of the parameter making it less stable because of a higher probability of cross talking between the primary electromagnets.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 08, 2014, 09:46:38 PM
But in 1902, they had to present a working device to get the patent granted. They also had to deliver complete plans, but the patent was given before anyone could try to reproduce it, I assume. Figuera patented it, this gave him the evidence about that it really worked, then he offered it to the bankers, or maybe they had their spies in the patent office and contacted him?


It could also be that Figuera had bought the guys from the patent office so they would confess the device was working. I don't say I don't believe in the possibility of a working device, just listing the options. In fact, I am pretty sure it was working.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 08, 2014, 10:39:01 PM
Because the invention was sold in less than a week after the patent was awarded, there is no doubt in my mind that the business transaction was taken place much earlier.
Like today, the bankers of the time had heavy investments in the oil markets and were important members of the oil cartel. They have always had control and/or great influence in the government, military, and of course the patent office. Today, the USPTO has a special unit to detect and prevent any "special" application related to free energy from reaching the public. Therefore, it should be not a surprise that the patent 1902 is incomplete.
If you have any idea how banks make their businesses, you should have not doubt that the 1902 device worked. Could you think that the bankers would have paid so much money (at the time) for a device that did not work?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 08, 2014, 11:03:43 PM
If he fooled them, he wouldn't have had such a carrieer. They would have found out in 1903, maybe 1904.


Ok, I have a technical issue:  Imagine a horeshoe magnet (U shape) that has a steelbar attached to its end, so it builds a closed magnetic loop. Imagine around the steel bar there's a coil. Now when I connect the coils ends, aka short-circuit it, it will create an inductive load. Assuming this is a permanent horseshoe magnet, does adding the load reduce the permeability of the steel bar?


Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 09, 2014, 12:12:39 AM
A patent can be filed without any detailed description and diagram and it is filed only to get a priority date. That does not require full disclosure. This is called provisional patent application.

Figuera filed four provisional patent applications. If it is not followed by a complete specification within 12 to15 months, the patent would be deemed abandoned. The banks after purchasing the patent, did not file any thing. They simply abandoned all of them. At that time the requirement was not to give full and particular description so that another person skilled in the art is enabled to replicate the patent without undue experimentation.  The requirement was a reasonable description and then a working prototype which is similar to the description.

The last of the Buforn patent contains a lot of information that in general view can be considered nonsense. It may well be the most important patent.

All of Figueras patents patent and devices are based on one single principle...Not theory..Understanding is different implementation is different..

The principle as I understand is this..

An induction motor works because the RPM of rotor is less the RPM of Rotating magnetic field created by the current supplied to it. It then has Torque. If the rotor were to be rotated faster than the RPM of the rotating magnetic field of current supplied, induction motor becomes induction generator. This requires application of additional mechanical energy not only to rotate the rotor but also to overcome the opposing forces due to Lenz Law..

Similarly if the secondary of a transformer is made to have a higher speed for the rotating magnetic field that of the primary inductor rotating magnetic field, the transformer would become a generator. It is an extremeply simple  principle ... This is what he has done in this device..That is the problem to be solved here..So he kept it as secret by wording things without disclosing how the devices are arranged and what is the pole orientation. Even more Amazingly the drawings show that the only 50% of the primary had the iron core and secondary which had iron core all over it had a gap between the primary and secondary where the iron core was exposed to air..What is the arrangment of Poles. It is certainly North - x secondary- South of the core or South -x secondary-North of the core..Just see the drawing. Is it possible to make the secondary to be wound ccw while the primary is CW.. Then why half of primary is empty.. why so much core was exposed to air..That is what we are all not able to agree and understand.

Amazingly Bankers control every thing.. In India it is usury if one individual were to give a loan to another person at any thing above 18%. But this is not applicable to banks. Banks charge on the credit cards 47% per year..and they try to keep the person indebted all the time..A banker would not pay a single penny, paisa to another person unless they get value for their money. It is in their blood. I think I have a fair idea now..

Gyula I need your help..What is magnetic flux cancellation.. I'm not able to understand it.. Please clarifiy..And what is addition of magnetic fluxes and how do these both are done and please give  me examples.

I'm still reading a book by Howard Johnson who created the permanent magnet motor and Howard Johnson says that the Magnetic flux created by like poles facing each other is three times greater than the opposite poles facing each other..This is what Doug has also said and I tried it without any success. But Johnson is also saying what Dough has said and gives experimental data to support it..I'm completely foxed. There is some mistake here.. Possibly the pole configuration is NS-SN-NS  There is no difference to what Doug said but the arrangment is reversal of secondary..I will check it and report. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 09, 2014, 05:51:12 AM
The banks after purchasing the patent, did not file any thing. They simply abandoned all of them.
[/font]
If this is the case, then, a published patent application that is abandoned becomes part of the public domain and can not be enforced, which makes it free for the taken. It does not sound right. Why would the Banks paid so much money for a patent that they would not have been able to control or legally prevent someone from using it or selling it? I think it is more likely that the bankers tampered with the patent from inside the office before it was published.



Quote
At that time the requirement was not to give full and particular description so that another person skilled in the art is enabled to replicate the patent without undue experimentation.  The requirement was a reasonable description and then a working prototype which is similar to the description.


From the beginning, the main goal of the patent system has been to promote innovation and stimulate the economy by benefiting inventors and the public. It benefits the inventors by giving them a 20 years monopoly to make money out of the inventions. And, it also benefits the public after the expiration of the 20 years by allowing competition which brings prices down. It also does not sound right if the patent system allows and awards patents to applications that none one can replicate and the owners can maintain a monopoly indefinitely.


Quote
The last of the Buforn patent contains a lot of information that in general view can be considered nonsense. It may well be the most important patent.
I disagree with that but I know this patent will make a lot of people happy who believe that the 1908 patent is incomplete and requires capacitors, grounded electrodes, oscillation systems, etc.

Quote
All of Figueras patents patent and devices are based on one single principle...Not theory..Understanding is different implementation is different..
I totally disagree with this statement. The 1902 and 1908 patents work on different methods (that you call principles). I already described these two methods in a previous post.

Quote
An induction motor works because the RPM of rotor is less the RPM of Rotating magnetic field created by the current supplied to it. It then has Torque. If the rotor were to be rotated faster than the RPM of the rotating magnetic field of current supplied, induction motor becomes induction generator. This requires application of additional mechanical energy not only to rotate the rotor but also to overcome the opposing forces due to Lenz Law..
I agree with this statement, which is just the classical explanation. But, recall that these motors and generators are built according to specific and approved standards. For example, in United States these machines are specified and built using IEEE and NEMA standards. The benefits of using the standards is that their simplified mathematical models can be used to design and built these electrical machines. If you deviate from these standards you will need to use an analytic process based on electromagnetic waves and electric power theories. However, using these standards is what makes these machines (transformers, motors, generators) inefficient by forcing the output power to be lower than the input power. And then, because the engineering books are written around these standards, they make you believe that the overunity phenomena is an impossible event. This is the reason why these standards do not apply to machines such as Figuera's.

Quote
Similarly if the secondary of a transformer is made to have a higher speed for the rotating magnetic field that of the primary inductor rotating magnetic field, the transformer would become a generator. It is an extremeply simple  principle ... This is what he has done in this device..That is the problem to be solved here..So he kept it as secret by wording things without disclosing how the devices are arranged and what is the pole orientation. Even more Amazingly the drawings show that the only 50% of the primary had the iron core and secondary which had iron core all over it had a gap between the primary and secondary where the iron core was exposed to air..What is the arrangment of Poles. It is certainly North - x secondary- South of the core or South -x secondary-North of the core..Just see the drawing. Is it possible to make the secondary to be wound ccw while the primary is CW.. Then why half of primary is empty.. why so much core was exposed to air..That is what we are all not able to agree and understand.
This is a very confusing paragraph. There are not rotating magnetic fields in transformers. You do get a rotating magnetic field in the 3-phase stators of motors and generators due to a specific configuration of the stator winding. In transformers, the transformation is due to a changing or alternating magnetic field. To my knowledge alternating and rotating magnetic fields are not the same.
We need to be very careful when we say "an extremely simple principle." Simplicity can become complicated based on the level of details used as a reference.
I do not understand the rest of the paragraph. Specifically, what Figuera's device are you referring to? I strongly recommend to show sketches of the configuration you are referring to. Include as much details as you can such as magnetic field, etc. A picture is worth 1000 words.

Quote
Amazingly Bankers control every thing.. In India it is usury if one individual were to give a loan to another person at any thing above 18%. But this is not applicable to banks. Banks charge on the credit cards 47% per year..and they try to keep the person indebted all the time..A banker would not pay a single penny, paisa to another person unless they get value for their money. It is in their blood. I think I have a fair idea now..
I am really surprised. I do not understand how India can afford any economic growth with such a high interest rate. I am sorry to hear it because I have a lot of friends from India.

Quote
... and Howard Johnson says that the Magnetic flux created by like poles facing each other is three times greater than the opposite poles facing each other...
This phenomena is usually explained graphically in the books. For example, look at the figures for like and unlike poles in this webpage: http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html (http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html) 
and pages 4 and 5 of this PDF http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/cymbalyuk/lecture21.pdf (http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/cymbalyuk/lecture21.pdf)


The magnetic field of unlike poles fuse together as a magnetic line from the north pole will connect (become) one with a magnetic line of the south pole. That is , there is a continuation of the magnetic line from one pole to the other. On the other hand, the magnetic field of like poles will repel  and compress each other one next to the other. The more you force the two like poles together the more magnetic line are compressed in a smaller space resulting in a higher magnetic density.


Whenever I need to learn about something new, I usually buy the books with a lot of sketches and figures. I really hate the books that only have text and equations. They are not good for learning as opposed to the books with sufficient visual aid. These books are more expensive because it takes more time and resources to make them. For example, see this PDF document: http://www.physics.ucf.edu/~roldan/classes/Chap27_PHY2049.pdf (http://www.physics.ucf.edu/~roldan/classes/Chap27_PHY2049.pdf) ( Notice the difference?)


Lastly, I normally do not have (and do not spend) so much time writing a post. However, I see that you have a good attitude and high motivation for learning. It is admirable.


Bajac




[size=78%]
[/size]

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 09, 2014, 06:55:16 AM
 l googled without success, so I repeat my question: does an inductive load alter the permeability of the core material?


I am not talking about heat that may be caused by induction and then has an impact on the permeability. I also don't mean the influence of voltage drop by a load. What I mean is, is there something like a reverse lorentz force that is a counterforce against the elementary magnet particles as the cost of induction.


I tried to test it with a magnet loop that had a core with a coil as the botton side, hanging in the air. The core was attracted only slightly, as little as possible. Short circuit of the coil did not make it fall off, a little pulse from a 1.5V battery did (only in one polarity of the battery). But I'm not sure if that means much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 09, 2014, 11:16:46 AM
You don't need books to find that like poles push harder then opposite poles attract. You need just two magnets with a hole in center and a piece of wood rod.  ;D  If you stick rod to the wall and glue one magnet to the wall then you can measure whatever you like.Simple like that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 09, 2014, 11:46:03 AM
BajaC:

I thank you very much for your kind word and I'm obliged.

We are now living in an information age. Situation in 1902 and 1910 is total lack of information. Information is very hard to come by.

In 199/97, Indian Patent Office Branch at Chennai had only one Computer. We cannot get any information as Patent Journals had only titles, names of inventors and in rare cases abstracts of patents filed. And it would take months to get a complete specification of a patent already published. Now it is not so. At that time 93% of patents filed in India are from overseas clients only.

Secondly you are thinking that if a patent is filed and then not followed up it comes in to the public juris automatically. It does not. A provisional patent application is never published. It remains secret and will be abandoned and will not be publised if a complete specification is not filed within 12 months. So the best choice for the bank that bought the Figuera patent was to abandon the application..The only person with knowledge of that invention Figuera has been paid off and cannot disclose and cannot compete. So it is as good as highly classified secret. Except for your efforts and for the efforts of Hanon no body would have heard about Figuera. So we do not get to know any thing about any other invention.  It is probably a mistake of the Spanish patent office to have allowed Hanon to view the archives or probably there is a law as to when the provisional applications that are not followed up can be deemed to come in to public domain in Spain. Ok. This is why we have no information about others. Thanks to Buforn we have information about the 1908 patent becuase he obtained the patent, demonstrated it and maintained it. In my view, Buforns statements are accurate. I beg to disagree with you on this point.

You can easily see this. Earth is a highly charged massive body that keeps rotating. A body that rotates must come to a stop unless energy is continuously supplied to it like an electric motor receivng electricity. A rotating charged body sends electricity either from the circumference to the center or from the center to the circumference. Now we do not feel this current. We are acclimatized to it. But from where does the Earth gets its energy to continuously rotate? Solar radition and cosmic radiation. The atmosphere is full of electricity. It is seen from lightenings. So Buforn is stating his views. Simply because it does not fit in to the academic texts it does not mean he is wrong. Polar light discharges in polar regions are believed to have millions of amperes and voltage. They have to spread out in the atmosphere. Never mind we cannot perceive it. We do not see air also. But we keep breathing air..Atmosphere is full of electricity is a fact. If we make a device that can interact or act as a medium between Earth and atmosphere it can produce a lot of energy. Tesla coils are one such examples.   

Regarding the transformers, I apologize for the miscommunication but the core concept is simple.

If the secondary of the transformer is made to function at a higher frequency than the primary, the secondary would produce more power..It will then become a kind of an induction generator. It is a question of increasing the frequency of the secondary..Is it doable..I do not know..But if it can be done, then we have a device that can produce more output than input.

While the magnetic flux is higher when like poles face each other, they apparantly tend to cancel each other out. But let me test one more possible configuration and then confirm to you.

Thanks for the links and I will study them.. I'm very obliged. In India we do have a big problem which is not being acknowledged nor being reported. Banks have stopped given  personal loans and every small business is hit. I have clients all over India and from 23 other countries and most Indian businesses small and medium ones are now having big difficulty. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 09, 2014, 11:59:57 AM
NRamaswami

I completely agree with you on that topic. Someone need a fresh look of what is happening to realize that rotation of Earth cannot be a passive action due to some starting point in very ancient times. Energy must be supplied continously to rotate such a mass and there is a big chance it is not gravity source. Interactions between planets should very fast stop or disturb that constant rotation if it is passive. Somebody should compute the total energy required for Earth to rotate as today, but that require detailed knowledge of internal structure of Earrth. Very rough computation shows incredible billions of joules per single man on Earth. Drop it to like 1MW per man and I think we could be in safe margin. Except who need 1MW ?  :o
To summarise : constant rotation prove active character of force, small disturbances may indicate reaction to other planets disturbances; also if somebody could find an space object (planet, start etc) which do not rotate and yet has strong gravitation that would be another proof.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 09, 2014, 12:23:23 PM
Hi Dieter,

You wrote: 

Quote
  Imagine a horeshoe magnet (U shape) that has a steelbar attached to its end, so it builds a closed magnetic loop. Imagine around the steel bar there's a coil. Now when I connect the coils ends, aka short-circuit it, it will create an inductive load. Assuming this is a permanent horseshoe magnet, does adding the load reduce the permeability of the steel bar?   

You also wrote:

Quote
  does an inductive load alter the permeability of the core material? 


Sorry but I do not fully understand the setup in which you ask on any change of the core permeability... 

It is okay that you close the magnetic path between the poles of a horse magnet with a steel bar which has a coil around it. No moving and no any input current to the coil from you, you mean this, right?  If yes, then nothing is happening to the permeability of the steel bar when you short the coil ends directly,  the permanent magnet has a static field almost fully concentrated and guided in the steel bar. This field coming from the magnet does not change from the moment on you have attached the steel bar: before you attach,  the bar has (say) a permeability of 800 and after closing the magnetic path it may have a permeability of (say) 500 or whatever less than the original 800, okay?  The decrease comes about just due to some saturation what the permanent magnet initiates, depending on its strength and depending on the magnetic properties of the steel core.

IF you monitor the output voltage of the coil on the steel bar with a scope or an AC volt or current meter, you would see a pulse appearing at the coil output in the moment you attach the bar to the magnet (i.e. you close the magnetic path). This is a SINGLE event, nothing is induced after that if you do not make any change.  And the moment you remove the bar from horse shoe magnet, you would again see a single pulse from the coil, again this is a SINGLE pulse.

So in this setup as I understood your description, the coil on the steel bar does not alter the permeability of the bar, just because there is nothing happening induction-wise.

If this answers your question, that is fine. If not, sorry and please clarify your question.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 09, 2014, 01:47:26 PM
Hi Forest:

Thanks for the post agreeing with me. If you need further proof ask the Indian and Chinese PLA who see eye ball to eye ball in Sikkim. One Retired Indian Army officer has written a book where he says that come afternoon what both armies do is to go and sit in their bunkers for it is routine for the place on a daily basis to get hit with thunder and lightening bolts that rattles the whole area. So the eye ball to eye ball soldiers promptly go to their bunkers during those times..Similarly we can use a thermoeletric effect togenerate any amount of electricity by putting thermoeletric materials 2000 to 3000 meteres to sea. Water in sea at that depth is very cold and water at the surface is warm. The thermoelectricity devices would produce electricity automatically. This is a free energy device. Only problem is maintaing the metals and avoiding corrossion due to sea water which can corrode any thing..We have not even touched the tip of the ice berg in energy production.


BajaC:

I went through the links http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html and the http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/cymbalyuk/lecture21.pdf

I now realize why contrary to expectations the electricity produced when like poles are made to face other is zero. As Dieter said, the electricity produced is nil, nada, zilch and not even a milivolt. I did better by geting a 12 volt lamp to light up but I gave 1540 watts of input to get that 12 volts and milliamps output in secondary.

A simple look at the links you have provided indicates the answer.

The iron should bent at 90' angle to the like poles and should go in four directions. Then the magnetic flux would be captured in the four poles which are perpendicular to the primary magnets. At that time we possibly will have a higher output due to increased magnetic flux. I can test a two softiron cores at 90' to the primary. As magnetic flux goes through the easiest path, then I think it should work. If we show a common secondary it would not work for like poles whereas it would work properly for unlike poles. It is so elementary.

let me do the tests and confirm it to you tomorrow. We have a winner here for if the magnetic flux is three times and the output is three times we can immediately increase the output of the secondary by 3 times from what it is now..So let me check. The configuration of Figuera however indicates that it is only unlike poles and not like poles. and the core in the secondary and the primary is a continuous one in all the 1908 and subsequent patents.

Let me test it tomorrow and confirm it to you all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on March 09, 2014, 02:42:38 PM
l googled without success, so I repeat my question: does an inductive load alter the permeability of the core material?


I am not talking about heat that may be caused by induction and then has an impact on the permeability. I also don't mean the influence of voltage drop by a load. What I mean is, is there something like a reverse lorentz force that is a counterforce against the elementary magnet particles as the cost of induction.


I tried to test it with a magnet loop that had a core with a coil as the botton side, hanging in the air. The core was attracted only slightly, as little as possible. Short circuit of the coil did not make it fall off, a little pulse from a 1.5V battery did (only in one polarity of the battery). But I'm not sure if that means much.


Dieter,


I do not quite understand what you are referring to. That is why I keep saying to use sketches and diagrams as a way to provide details. Because we are not good writers, it is very difficult to construct an accurate scenario of our cases.


I would like to say something about permeability and magnetic fields. Magnetic circuits are very difficult to analyze because they are not linear. It requires trial-and-error and graphical solutions to approximate the answers. For example, the permeability of the iron/steel cores depends on the magnitude of the magnetic field flowing inside. That is, the permeability of an iron core, i.e., having a magnetic flux of 3 Gauss is different than when 6 Gauss are flowing. This makes the analysis of magnetic circuits very complicated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 09, 2014, 03:48:07 PM
Gyulasun, Bajac, thank you for your answer. You are right, only changes in the magnetic field will induce a voltage in a coil. We can assume that the electron charge distribution is static like the magnetic field. So my example probably has not been very good.


Let me put it this way: During the change of the magnetic field in the core, (regardless of heat effects) will there be  a diffrence in the permeability of the core , depending on whether the coil has no load or full load (like a short circuit) ?




NRamaswami, actually this is a misunderstanding. Like poles can induce a current, even better than opposite poles. The reason why is, they are two poles that can be compressed in space. If you watch two cylinder magnets attached to eachother naturally (nsns) then the inner poles vanish and become mostly the new bloch wall, the outer poles get a bit stronger. On the other hand, if you tape two cylinder magnets together like snns, the field between them becomes 200% in intensity. This inner field may not be bigger than the two outer fields of the nsns magnets added together, but in a practical use it allows to gain higher field density in a certain area. Although, some magnets cannot handle like poles very well and their magnetisation will be destroyed,because their remenance is low.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 09, 2014, 04:26:01 PM
In meantime ... look here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQkYAh8Qgb4
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 09, 2014, 05:57:39 PM
Very interesting reading. could be of great importance to this project plus good reading.

Core Coil and capacitance are critical variables in the OU transform. In order to obtain an EMA class C
amplifier, the magnetic component must correct the PF of the inductive and capacitive ones, at a given CORE
impedance where the ENERGY transform occurs. In AC is FULL resonance, in DC is half resonance states
where pulse becomes a logarithmic voltage gain from a discharging coil & or core into a capacitor where it
becomes a POWER vector (potential) extracted from the 0 point of resonant opposed curvature.
If voltage is maximal current is 0; if voltage is 0 current is maximal. These states create SPACE vacuum and
space tensor where energy compresses and relaxes. In theory 2 off phase identical LCs in common grounded
circuit must create potential differential relative to their space-vacuum states, being those captured such devices
extract energy from thermal and electron spin ones (transformation with possibility of self sustaining and
extraction of energy).
Of 9 types of electricity humanity knows only 2 and has only learned to use one in its more primitive forms.
here is the PDF "Radiant Energy and Over-Unity" Dan Combine.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 09, 2014, 07:33:41 PM
I might have come up with a solution to everyone's delemma.  attached is my idea of the figueras core set up and the PDF where i got the idea. it fits with Figueras design parameters and is Lenz less.  i have a hard time writing what i'm thinking, this is why i have to visualize.  dissect and inform please.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 09, 2014, 11:59:44 PM
Marathonman, I was reading this patent, 27D. I am not sure if I understand this "Lenz-less" thing right. The counterforce to induction is the Lorentz force, is this what the patent is about? If so, why is there no Lorentz force?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 10, 2014, 01:19:28 AM
Hi NRamaswami,

You wrote:

Quote
   

What is magnetic flux cancellation.. I'm not able to understand it.. Please clarifiy..And what is addition of magnetic fluxes and how do these both are done and please give  me examples.


On flux cancellation: I do not think flux simply disappears (or whatever similar word is used) when the term flux cancellation is used by many people, rather I believe the resulting strength and the effect of two (or more) fluxes reduces to a minimum. It is important to notice that no matter what,  the flux from a given current in a given coil is always created and of course you can create a 'counter' flux which either substracts or adds to the effect what the first flux would manifest alone and this interaction can take place very close to the first coil windings if you create the 'counter' flux very close to the first coil.
For example there is the bifilar winding style for 'inductionless' wire resistors to minimize the self inductance of wirewound resistors. You first fold a given wire length into half and start winding a coil with the dual wire close to each other, see illustration attached. The ends of both wires will be the coil connections, and you could measure a very little inductance (say under a microHenry with precise windings) between such coil connections with an L meter, considering the total wire length used.
A compass or a Gauss meter would show a much much less flux intensity at the ends or at the sides of such coils, versus the case when you would use only the one half winding of such coil by making the connections to it between the folded back start and any one other end, using the half wire length only. (OF course you have to use insulated wires so that the adjacent turns should not have electrical contact with each other, and also half input voltage when you test the flux created by the half wire length versus the input voltage used for the full wire to insure comparable situations.)

I also uploaded a measurement on the poles of two magnets when they are 1) separated, 2) attracted to each other and 3) positioned close to each other in repel mode. A Gauss meter was used and you can see from the Gauss numbers what member Bajac nicely described to you. The Gauss measurements in the drawing I uploaded was not done by me.

On flux addition: if you can direct flux coming from two (or more) independent sources into a common permeable, low reluctance material, then you can add (or even substract) those flux sources, a Gauss meter would show the increase or decrease with respect to the original strengths. See for instance the parallel path technology, read Josh's research paper with the measurements: http://www.flynnresearch.net/young%20scientist/Josh%20Jones/josh.htm (http://www.flynnresearch.net/young%20scientist/Josh%20Jones/josh.htm) 

Years ago I tested a small electromagnet and increased its strength by attaching a permanent magnet to the core, see this link how it was done in an old patent: http://www.overunity.com/1621/magnet-motor-idea-need-feedback/msg16347/#msg16347 (http://www.overunity.com/1621/magnet-motor-idea-need-feedback/msg16347/#msg16347)  and here my additional notices: http://www.overunity.com/1621/magnet-motor-idea-need-feedback/msg16889/#msg16889 (http://www.overunity.com/1621/magnet-motor-idea-need-feedback/msg16889/#msg16889)

 Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on March 10, 2014, 01:53:54 AM
NRamaswami

I completely agree with you on that topic. Someone need a fresh look of what is happening to realize that rotation of Earth cannot be a passive action due to some starting point in very ancient times. Energy must be supplied continously to rotate such a mass and there is a big chance it is not gravity source. Interactions between planets should very fast stop or disturb that constant rotation if it is passive. Somebody should compute the total energy required for Earth to rotate as today, but that require detailed knowledge of internal structure of Earrth. Very rough computation shows incredible billions of joules per single man on Earth. Drop it to like 1MW per man and I think we could be in safe margin. Except who need 1MW ?  :o
To summarise : constant rotation prove active character of force, small disturbances may indicate reaction to other planets disturbances; also if somebody could find an space object (planet, start etc) which do not rotate and yet has strong gravitation that would be another proof.

But everything in the Universe is in motion, nothing is motionless in the Universe, the sun moves the planets move everything moves nothing stays in one place, even if we put a coffee mug on the table it is travelling at tremendous speed right along side us. In the entire Universe there are no losses, everything is contained in the Universe of all that is.

All energy in the Universe is being transformed and transferred/transmitted constantly.

Can anyone name one thing or body or mass that is completely motionless ? Everything moves continuously. The brain of a human trying to understand the vastness of the cosmos and its entire working mechanisms over eternity is a futile effort.

Yes electrons orbit in atoms seemingly forever so do planets and galaxies also move seemingly forever, but our concept of passing events is minute compared to the eternity of the universe.

The energy dissipated by the Earths rotation may well simply be transferred to another space body and the energy some other space body dissipates is probably transferred to Earth, these interactions would be so complex and dynamic that they defy study.

How do we study a constantly changing scenario.

Is the Earth and other planets in our solar system slowing in axial rotation but the entire solar system increasing in speed through the galaxy ?

Who knows.

Bottom line is nothing in the Universe is standing still in space.

If we could theoretically create a Universe in a box (a closed system) theoretically no energy could escape or enter the box but the box is already teeming with moving bodies in an orderly fashion how would movement ever stop, no heat can escape no energy of any kind can escape, how could the energy of the interior of the box decrease or increase ?
It might turn chaotic then return to some different type of order, but everything is still in the box and nothing is added energy included.

..

Humankind will be extinct for billions of years and everything in the universe will still be moving around as it pleases.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 10, 2014, 02:21:29 AM
Marathonman, I was reading this patent, 27D. I am not sure if I understand this "Lenz-less" thing right. The counterforce to induction is the Lorentz force, is this what the patent is about? If so, why is there no Lorentz force?
Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux or to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.
 If you look at the picture the three magnetic lines of force cancell each other out and will not act in a negative way and these forces will not effect the primary due to gap between primary core and secondary core.  if i am not mistaken one can wire secondary so that induction is cancelled or very much minimized. Bifiler if i am not mistaken.

the Lorentz force is the combination of electric and magnetic force on a point charge due to electromagnetic fields. If a particle of charge q moves with velocity v in the presence of an electric field E and a magnetic field B, then it will experience a force. 
we are not to concern our selves with this law is far as i am aware.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 10, 2014, 02:34:59 AM
Gyula:

Thank you so much for your very detailed post. I'm grateful and obliged. Should have taken a lot of time for you to compose the answer that is very informative and very accurate. I do not have a guass meter but in my experiments I find that the strength of the electromagnet keeps increasing.

I'm not able to understand what is  "common permeable, low reluctance material"

I can understand common as common core. Permeable is magnetisable material. What is low reluctance material. Can you please give me an example. Is soft iron a low reluctance material? Is steel a low reluctance material? Is zinc coated iron a low reluctance material. Will Zinc coated iron reduce magnetism and inductance because it reduces eddy currents.

I have studied Charles Flynns patent last year and that Tom Bearden's MEG would infringe this patent and this is why Tom Bearden is not coming up with MEG is some thing that I thought.

Am I right in this statement theoretically..Is the frequency of the secondary of a transformer is increased than the primary, the transformer should then act as a generator? Please advise. Let us ignore whether it is possible or otherwise.   

Freehand:

You simply answered a most controversial question without realizing it.

Nothing in the earth is an isolated system. You need to consider the entire universe to take it as an isolated system. Therefore applying law of conservation of energy which is a theory formulated when the present levels of scientific knowledge were not there and refusing patents on that basis is not correct.

The systems that require higher input than output are based on their particular design. It is therefore entirely possible to design a system that avoids this problem. Since every man made object is subject to wear and tear such a system will not be a perpetual motion machine but can be more than 100% efficient. The systems that we currently use are less than 100% efficient because of their design characterestics.

Also the Van Allen Radiation belts, outer and inner belts act to reduce the cosmic radition that comes to the earth and then it is further filtered away by nature through the atmosphere. I have read Don Smiths statements that by tapping the energy of these belts an inexhustible supply can be made. I do not think it is necessary. If we just make a secondary of a transformer to have a higher frequency than the primary, then all the transformers in the world would become generators on their own and would become super efficient. I think it is doable easily..This is just my opinion and I may or may not be correct given my lack of knowledge in this domain.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 10, 2014, 03:14:11 AM
NRamaswami
"Also the Van Allen Radiation belts, outer and inner belts act to reduce the cosmic radiation that comes to the earth and then it is further filtered away by nature through the atmosphere" 
 I mean no Disrespect but this is a false statement as the radiation you are referring to is at a certain frequency. when it collides with Van Allen Radiation belts it is reduced and particles and such in our atmosphere lower the frequency even further and by the time it hits our planet it has been lowered to the point that it is not harmful. this is what react in our earth core to keep it hot and what is fueling our sun....not nuclear fusion.
the earth is continually rotating because a rotating object will continue to rotate unless some external forces act upon it to oppose it.plus it might be possible that the Lorentz force is at play causing the rotation.

Gravity has been proven to be a push not a pull. when you are in space, gravity  "from radiation" acts upon you from all angles that is why you are stationary. when you get close to a large body ie...." Earth" the radiation is slowed down slightly "lower frequency" from our atmosphere and the Earth itself so that the force applied upon you is less then coming from the outer space side so you are PUSHED into the earth giving the appearance of Earth having Gravity. this has been proven many many times.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 10, 2014, 03:42:31 AM
Hi Marathonman:

Let us accept it. I'm a Lawyer and am not an Engineer nor a scientist. But after reading your statement and my statement I'm not able to understand what is the difference. Your statement indicates that these belts absord high frequency material, convert them to low frequency and their frequency is continuously brought down so that when the reach the earth they are harmless. My statement was that they protect the earth ( from a layman's point of view). But it appears that our knowledge on all these subjects is very low and we have a lot to learn. Regarding what fuels the Sun I have no knowledge on this and really cannot comment. Whether the earth pulls or space pushes us towards the earth the effect is one and the same. A rotating body will continue to rotate unless it has some force acting upon it to block it is against what I can understand. Just as you say the Earth is continuously bombarded by particles from space all the time. Then they must cause friction and some must support and some must oppose. So it is not as if there is no force is needed to keep the Earth rotating. It rotates not only around itself but also rotates around the Sun promptly every year.. There are other planets that do the same so there are bound to be forces acting supporting or against such rotation.

Let me know your insight that a secondary of a transformer having a higher frequency than primary is bound to act like a generator..You have not commented on it..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 10, 2014, 04:01:16 AM
...
to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.

...




I thought this descibes exactly the lorentz force.


But I want to present to all of you an alternative explanation of the Figuera Generator. What  if... Y was not a secondary, but a PM? And what if the pretended primaries are switching primaries/secondaries? Confused? Watch this:  (Assuming ideal permeabillity and induction conditions)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 10, 2014, 04:25:12 AM
Hi Dieter:

Secondary electromagnets are having coils and it is in the description. It is certainly possible that permanent magnets were placed in the spaces between the cores shown which is readily discernible in Buforn last image but not in figueras image. The gaps are probably permanent magnets in which case the primary is half permanent magnet and half electromagnet. Please see the Figuera diagram that shows that the secondary has a full core described as soft iron rods. Primary half is empty. It is quite possible that the P1 and P2 had their own permanent magnets there rather than the single magnet you are showing. Please see the drawing of Figuera. In order to cool the soft iron core there is space also between the primary and secondary. It could be for another reason as one of our friends indicated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 10, 2014, 07:04:42 AM
 "It could be for another reason as one of our friends indicated." Yes !  and or it could also be used for Regauging the cores. this is used to return the cores to the original state faster and or adding to original flux.

"NRamaswami"  Let me know your insight that a secondary of a transformer having a higher frequency than primary is bound to act like a generator..You have not commented on it..
 i am not inclined enough in the art of transformer theory to engage in this subject but if i was to take a stab at it think i might place a third coil pulsed at a higher frequency to raise the frequency of secondary....The Michel Meyer and Yves Mace Isotopic Generator  otherwise  i am most ignorant in this case.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 10, 2014, 07:39:42 AM
NRamaswami, I know Figueras Drawing. But it seems to me you didn't understand my drawing. Maybe you didn't watch it really? Using Magnets as the cores of the "primaries" makes no sense IMHO.


As we agreed, Figuera must have disguised something. What if the coil on Y is fake? However, my drawing shows an efficiency of 400% and is easy to understand. I posted it in the hope somebody would study it and tell me where my mistake lies. It is also the reason why I asked about permeability and load earlier.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 10, 2014, 10:20:45 AM
Hi Dieter:

I have watched your drawing. The idea of using a permanent magnet  between the primary and secondary of a transformer to increase magnetic flux is in several patents. Old and new. This is not possible to be implemented unless you use steel as permanent magnet. Otherwise all permanent magnets which are subjected to high voltage AC get demagnetised. I do not wish to comment on assumptions as the office inspection report clearly shows that the patent description of Figuera is correct to a substantial degree. So we cannot assume that he faked the Y coils.  Clearly that would have been a gross misrepresentation and the office examination report would have disallowed the patent. So I'm sorry I'm not inclined to accept the idea of the Y coils being fake. some minor thing might be hidden but the patent must be as described and substantially as set forth was the standard used in those days.  So while some thing could be hidden the entire patent could not be a fake. Remember we got to know about this one through the efforts of BajaC and Hanon but for whom Figuera would not have been present in history at all. I'm sorry I'm not able to accept your theory of fake secondary coils. Permanent magnets in the spaces indicated possible. Drawing deceptive possible. But the secondary itself is fake. Not possible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 10, 2014, 01:16:34 PM
?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 10, 2014, 02:02:21 PM
If they cores are pictured as being up and down the dotted line on the bottom used to indicate the units are stacked one on top of the other core to core then guess what the pole orientations are?Ever wonder why they are not on any core ends? I suspect the dotted line was an after thought insisted on by the examiner with the intent to avoid confusion. Ahh the road to hell is paved with good intentions. AKA free entertainment.
  Logic behind the observation. Shorter core= lower reluctance. Poor wiring diagram but one none the less. Explains the dotted lines on the bottom of the drawing and the placement of the designations N, S, A.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 10, 2014, 04:47:43 PM
Doug it could quite possibly be another coil winding as was said per Patient description. adding another additional electromagnet could also just mean another coil of wire on same core. also if another core was present would there be enough flux transmitted to the third core. ?????
So what are your thoughts on my post 947 Diagram and attached pdf ?????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 10, 2014, 05:57:21 PM
I think the first coil on the core is a split coil center tap making up the two opposing primaries and the outer one is the pick up or induced coil. Which would need a thicker wire to handle voltage and current.Not sure if all that activity could work well on a single core.The source would have to be kept very low. One could hope that what applies to dc resistance heating compared to ac would also apply in a core. Then having the fields push back and forth against each other would sort of be like a rotating or alternating field even though the electromagnets are facing same poles to each other. Power is transferred as a alternating event with very short distances of movement in ac ,the potential becomes a rigid connection between the source of movement and the end use in a mains line.Maybe the same thought can work with magnetic fields. I haven't read the pdf yet. I have some time now that the electric company drove a bush hog all over the exposed water line I was back filling.
 Gonna be one of those days.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 10, 2014, 07:17:35 PM
Read it.
  You asked if the flux would be able to reach the third coil. The first coil is or the split coil if it is a split coil is longer and squat compared to the third centered over the split of the first coil. The field will expand out further then normal for the same reason a joule thief can store so much field in such a small core. Magnetic fields are pretty elastic compared to the core.It will squish out at the collision point as well as expand out in all the other directions. If it takes up a volume of space in form of a circle and you push one area flat on the circle it will have a greater pressure applied to the flat spot and expand the lower pressure surface area even further to compensate for the distortion.
  Two balloons will do if you need to see it. Or you can just use you head to picture it. Push a balloon from both sides ,where does the volume of air go? Now think back to the stack and picture it. Lots of compressed double bubbles each set being moved by its own portion of the controlled source in unison to act like a bigger version of a ac power line if you can imagine the bubbles being like mobile electrons in a single file line. Once the fields are established it may turn out you only need to make one of the  electromagnet sets alternate and the rest will have to follow with out consuming any of the source current.
  Have to go, here comes the wonder crew to fix the water line.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 10, 2014, 10:06:32 PM
NRamaswami, the patent was abandoned anyway, so your point is not valid.


There is no "AC" flowing trough the permanent magnet, as you said.  Didn't you say you are not an engineer, but a dummy? So why you dare to tear down a concept you obviously even don't understand? Out of a mood?
I do this stuff not to show you guys how "smart" I am, but to be able to generate electricity independently. And I would be glad if I'd get some specific help. Pls no general nay saying. We got MileHigh and Co. for that.
I'd really like to hear some comments by a competent person about my diagram on page 64. There is a simple and logical thesis of  400% efficiency, please tell me what's  wrong with it, if you can.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 10, 2014, 10:38:36 PM
Hi,

Regarding to Doug´s post #960 at the top part of this page (please see the attached picture by Doug) I want to remark that in all Figuera and Buforn´s patents the inlet of the induced coil and the outlet of the induced coil are ALWAYS taken from the same piece of coil.

If you use a nomal winding you will expect that the inlet will be in one side of the coil (let´s say in the left)  and the outlet at the contrary side of the coil (let´s say the right) . In all Figuera and Buforn´s patents is drawn as in the skecth posted by Doug.

For me this an indication that the winding could be a kind of complex winding pattern, maybe bifilar (or multifilar). If not, what is the sense of drawing always the induced in a such a way?.

What do you think?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 10, 2014, 11:49:07 PM
Hi Dieter:

I agree with your point that I'm not competent to comment on your proposition. I regret if I upset you.

Some observations.

1. It looks to be theoretical model. Please check if it works practically. If it does not work, no problem modifiy it but please do not post it in any forum until such time you have first filed a patent application, at least a provisional patent application to get patent pending status.

2. Patents that show the use of permanent magnets placed to increase the magnetic flux and increase output if I remember it correctly are in force. Please check if you would be violating them. My understanding of Tom Bearden not being able to come up with his MEG device is that if it comes out, it will infringe a patent that is likely to be in force till 2017 or so. There are loopholes there and I do not know why they have not used those loopholes if they indeed want to go commercial. Most of these devices work at low voltages and not commercial size plants. Here factories usually sent 1500 amps and 440 volts power for 1 second to demagnetize a permanent magnet. So if higher voltages are applied a permanent magnet may only start behaving like an electromagnet.

3. I'm not a nay sayer and I wish you all the Best of Luck and success if you try to venture commercially.


Hi Hanon:

The seconaries are series connected to increase voltages. The only thing that can happen is that the secondary No. 1 where it start is having an open wire and is then connected to s2 which is connected to s3, which is connected to s4, which is connected to s5 and then the wires come in return until s1 to increase the voltage. Alternatively it could means that the secondary is bifilar or multifilar. However I think at that time Tesla's patent was in force and the use of bifilar or multifilar coils would have infringed Tesla's patents and he would have immediately sued Figuera or Buforn. the fact that we have had nothing of that sort indicates to me that the wires is wound from s1 to s5 and then back from s5 to s1.. But who knows...we even disagree whther the device is one built like a stright line or one staked up another or one which is air core and iron core and why the iron cores of primary and secondary show gaps.. etc etc..

As Dieter pointed out that I'm not a competent person in this field.  I have no formal training apart from some hands on experience  ( let us say very little) and some observations. I will post again here in this place when I acquire some competence and if the forum remains active.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 11, 2014, 12:38:02 AM
Hi Dieter,

Your design may be genuine but I agree that the use of PM is not refered into Figuera´s patent. Maybe he avoid mentioning any key detail but the basic design is described into the patents. He called 'the induced circuit "y" ' Anyway I am very glad watching that you posted good results independently if it is Figuera or not. Currently I hardly have time for my normal life so I am not testing anything. I am sure that someone may test your proposal.

All,

Googling about McFarland Cook and bifilar coils I found this reference in the book "Saving Planet Earth" by Ken Andersen. The author suggests that McFarland Cook used bifilar coils and he also suggests that the wire insulation could be an important factor. McFarland mentioned 2 or 3 times the type of insulation in his patent...I do not know why he was so interested in mentioning the insulation of the wires so many times.

Figuera also in his patent no. 30378 (1902) referred to the wire: "covered with a proper wire in order that these electromagnets may develop the biggest attractive force possible"

Also, about insulation note that in Figuera´s patent no. 30378 the drawing shows the turns of wire and the insulation seems to be very thick. Figuera highlighted this feature by doing a kind of cut along the diameter of the core. Please check this drawing for reference.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 11, 2014, 12:43:42 AM
Also, about insulation note that in Figuera´s patent no. 30378 the drawing shows the turns of wire and the insulation seems to be very thick
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 11, 2014, 03:10:21 AM
Hi Dieter:

Please check this patent in google.com/patents

Patent US 6,246,561 12th June 2001 Inventor: Charles J. Flynn

This one probably covers every thing you indicated. Not discouraging you. It will remain in force till 2021. Majority of the devices that use permanent magnets including the EMG of Tom Bearden would infringe this patent if they are introduced. Please read this carefully.

I'm not discouraging you but you need to be careful. With that good intention I'm just posting this info.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 11, 2014, 12:20:57 PM
Hi,

Regarding to Doug´s post #960 at the top part of this page (please see the attached picture by Doug) I want to remark that in all Figuera and Buforn´s patents the inlet of the induced coil and the outlet of the induced coil are ALWAYS taken from the same piece of coil.

If you use a nomal winding you will expect that the inlet will be in one side of the coil (let´s say in the left)  and the outlet at the contrary side of the coil (let´s say the right) . In all Figuera and Buforn´s patents is drawn as in the skecth posted by Doug.

For me this an indication that the winding could be a kind of complex winding pattern, maybe bifilar (or multifilar). If not, what is the sense of drawing always the induced in a such a way?.

What do you think?

Regards

        Before going to the bench with it I would suggest looking at the earth model and a few others so you can keep in mind one magnetic field if too strong can completely incapsulate another one. I dont think it would be productive. It is also why I try mention early on that the electro magnets could not possibly be completely turned off. If the field gets looked inside another one it will stall, if the field gets reversed it will stall and both cases it will be very hard to restart. Balance the two and the amount of fluctuation required will be less then the output required operate the load.

   Yes I try to use the way he wired the early ones to figure out the rest of them which are not drawn as well. The concept is what counts and the more methods which can support it the more likely it is valid.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 11, 2014, 01:59:48 PM
I agree whole heartedly  on all counts Doug. Bifiler is the way to go on the secondaries, (maybe) see below.....it may not be necessary. plus one can have additional coils on secondary for self running as is stated in Patent.
The reason i brought up John Reardon's Alternating Current Generator Patent, the concept is one and the same as Figueras. this is why i posted it on post #947 except one is rotating and one is stationary,  both have three magnetic flux fields, one in primary and two in the secondary cancelling each other out nullifying the Lenz Law completely so above may not be necessary. this kind of information is being conveniently overlooked every one is so caught up in trying to prove themselves that they are blinded to other patents that are built on the same concept. this patent i found out has a gap of .0001 between cores so i think this is also applicable to Figueras .  i found this out on page 1549 of PJK Book PDF version 25.3.
even Bajac himself realized the gap needs to be smaller and the Primary core need to be larger. this is his own words from his post so i tend to lean towards someone that has his qualifications.

the bickering needs to stop and also the posted information that means absolutely nothing to the advancement of this thread. all the distraction and disinformation are wearing everyone out.

FIGUERAS FOREVER !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on March 11, 2014, 08:03:06 PM
Hi dieter,
your design is a veriation/optimisation of the MEG. I dont see any problem with that, the primaries are configured in a flip-flop fashion, they are magnetic path switch and at the same time are collectors (one at time). ther is a patent which describe a generator using a  "Magnetic H-bridge" configuration, he claims also a OU, because he needs only small current to switch 4 small coil to cut th emagnetic path as in H-Bridge circuit, and he uses also a permanent magnet as the source of the flux.

but in the figuera/Buforns patents, ther is no mention of a permanent magnet as also said by hanon, so the switching ist made a bit diferent.

good job any way :)

Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 11, 2014, 08:32:45 PM
Have been studying Figueras 1914 patent and John Reardon's 2005 patent all day, trying to come up with multiple ideas and scenarios but i keep coming back to the same conclusion.
Figueras had a few reasons i can think of why he split up the primaries and varied the currant. #1 to negate the Lenz Law effect.  #2 lowering the Amperage draw and #3 no need for rotation.
#1 by splitting up the primaries and using electromagnets this allowed additional flux paths to come into play causing the cancellation of Lenz effect.
#2 by splitting the primaries up and keeping their poles the same (no reversal) less Amperage is used in the operation of the system. ie.. push a car on a flat surface from the back. when is starts rolling run up front and push the other way. a whole lot of energy is spent to reverse the direction of the car. the same holds true for electricity.
#3 by varying the current trough the primaries  at 90* out of phase the same effect is accomplished as bringing a magnet in front of the core then taking it away.
i have some drawings of the primaries and the possible designs of the secondaries. dissect and discuss
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 11, 2014, 09:43:13 PM
Marathonman

  Take the second image and draw the magnetic path over the image that will take place.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 11, 2014, 10:30:39 PM
NRamaswami,


please excuse when I sounded upset. You are right, permanent magnets are never mentioned in the patent. As for patents that may already exist, I do not care since I don't plan to build commercial quantities (or would not be allowed for obvious reasons). I see this more as a subcultural opportunity. And a patent alows to reconstruct the device for purposes of study.
And as a matter of free energy, to be honest, I think patents that forbid to use magnets as a source of energy (which is considered impossible by the establishment) in 2014, are simply not acceptable for me and for mankind.


I am no engineer eighter, and I declared myself as a dummy too, so I hope I didn't insult you by that. If we were engineers, we probably would never try these things.


NomoreSlave,


thanks for your conformation. Well spotted, it's about flux path switching. When two loops are offered to the magnet, it may take only llittle energy to "suggest a decision" to the magnet. Good coupling of coils and cores is neccessary, as wel as high permeability for the [] core, and the magnet should be of the right strength, not neccessarily the stronger the better. As for the core, I'm trying to obtain some metglass ATM.


BTW. I'd also suggest Sweets VTA, Vacum triode amplifer, the name was given by bearden, tho there's no vacum and no triode in it, but it uses Permanent magnets. Very diffrent from mine, but interesting. Reports of successful reconstruction do exist.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 11, 2014, 10:47:12 PM
Marathonman

  Take the second image and draw the magnetic path over the image that will take place.
I already did on post #947 as per John Reardon  patent 6,946,767
If i am wrong tell me,  as this is what i get from the Patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 11, 2014, 11:17:27 PM
Hi Dieter:

No need to seek excuses or apologies. My problem is that I have to get a lot of things done and this forum is addictive. If you go through history of Magnetics, Maxwell and Faraday both postulated and believed that invisible particles move from one pole to other pole. These particles have kinetic energy. So they called it Magnetic Kinetic Energy. Then the equations were altered for simplication purposes. Then the theories were altered. Since I do not have a background in any one of these things I ended up asking various configuration of windings and ended up testing using high voltage up to 220 volts and 32 amps of power as input to huge coils and large size cores. Failed many times succeeded many times and I believe I understand the principles involved now. But not yet sure..This is my status.

After filing several patents for me I will provide the patent content here..No problem..Then you would all know what I have done from 22nd July to 30 July 2013 and then what are insights gained subsequently. But I have a hectic work schedule and am not able to contribute here. I'm sorry. It is not due to lack of interest but lack of time..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 11, 2014, 11:30:31 PM
We can make an electromagnet stronger by doing these things:
wrapping the coil around an iron core  adding more turns to the coil > Reduces current by resistance due to length
increasing the current flowing through the coil. > Requires thicker wire and results in fewer turns and succesive layers decline in the additional strength to the field with distance from the core.

 What is not said is what you need. Everything that is said is true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 11, 2014, 11:53:13 PM
There is nothing to stop the flux path from following all the way around if it alternates it will still go all the around and fluctuate back and forth. There is nothing to stop it from doing so.The air gap doesn't stop it. It just blow out really wide and becomes weak in the air gap. Like a bar magnet ,the flux runs from one end the other but widens out and becomes weakest in the middle where the flux is furthest from either pole. If it runs round in a complete path it works same as a transformer with one of it's ends cut off.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 12, 2014, 12:48:55 AM
so what are you trying to say.????? i am very confused....... that the magnetic flux will jump 4 or 5 inches and mess everything up or what.  have you seen bajac's system it goes all the way around with cores and he got good results.
more tidbits..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 12, 2014, 04:34:39 AM
We can make an electromagnet stronger by doing these things:
wrapping the coil around an iron core  adding more turns to the coil > Reduces current by resistance due to length
increasing the current flowing through the coil. > Requires thicker wire and results in fewer turns and succesive layers decline in the additional strength to the field with distance from the core.

 What is not said is what you need. Everything that is said is true.
I'm not disputing what was said but Sorry i'm not good at cat n mouse games.  can you at least cough up a hair ball for me ( ie.. a clue)
i plan on using 18 awg on my primary laminated cores with 100 volts or so @ 1 amp power supply i built and 8 awg on my secondaries. i plan on using a adjustable vitreous wound resistor with multiple taps,  timed with a board i designed having nine channels/Transistors for #1 and #2 board has two channels that i built. i am not an Electrical Buff or an Engineer so "YES I COULD USE SOME HELP". ive been busting my balls on ideas for this post with no avail .tired of being shot down from people that has no working model...plus darn Iron laminates still not here.
I brought up John Reardon because I think it is relevant to this project as they are so similar and both achieved OU.
i have read and re read every thing i can get my hands on pertaining to this post.....what next
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on March 12, 2014, 07:19:57 PM
Hi Fellows,

This only takes a few minutes and you may find it instructional.

Go to this web page, start the application and perform the following.

http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/faradays-law

- select "Run Now!" [should open a new browser tab];

Try this: (use the pernament magnet to simulate electromagnet)
     {select: 1 Coil; Show field lines; Flip magnet to "N" faces left - consider this our Reference Point}
     {Note: if the Java Script stops responding - just reload the page}

   - move the magnet to a point where the magnet face touches the second Left most coil winding;
      (the vertical legs of the "N" are obstructed by the second right and final right coil windings)
   - use "Flip magnet" a few times and observe the meter (just to get feel for the orientation);
   - set to the Reference Point (N pole inside the coil);
   - move the magnet Right (about 1 coil winding distance) and observe the meter movement (should peg "-" negative)
      {amplitude depends on how rapid [dV/dt} the magnet was moved};
   - continue to move the magnet to the Left in 1 coil winding increments (simulating commutator steps), observe meter;
   - when the magnet is over the voltage meter "Flip magnet" This we will call the Terminal Point;
   - now step the magnet Left towards the coil in 1 coil winding increments (observe the meter);
   - when the magent reaches the Reference Point - "Flip magnet";
   - repeat this motion while flipping the magnet at the Reference and Terminal Points.

Interesting, at worst!    I may have screwed up in my sequencing but you'll get the idea.

Other demo's that may be useful:

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/index.html

 - review the "interactive java tutorials for:
    - magnetic field lines
    - Faraday's 2nd Experiment {note that E = -(DF/Dt)
    - Lenz's Law [this is a very good one]
    - Attraction and Repulsion By Magnetic Poles

Actually most of the interactive java applets are instructive (some are in development and don't work well yet).

Solarlab

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 13, 2014, 03:50:29 AM
There is nothing to stop the flux path from following all the way around if it alternates it will still go all the around and fluctuate back and forth. There is nothing to stop it from doing so.The air gap doesn't stop it. It just blow out really wide and becomes weak in the air gap. Like a bar magnet ,the flux runs from one end the other but widens out and becomes weakest in the middle where the flux is furthest from either pole. If it runs round in a complete path it works same as a transformer with one of it's ends cut off.


Why would you want the flux NOT  go trough it? Isn't that the whole point? But there's an other thing: i assume the left and right primaries are pulsed in alternating amplitude? That would mean that each back emf, caused by the end of a pulse, would fight against the pulse in the other primary, reducing the efficiency. If you turn one primary upside down, this would do the opposite, the back emf of one coil becomes the afterburner of the other coil, increasing voltage but leave amperage stabile. Reducing the duty time of the pulse, as well as a brutal square wave shape (although contradicting the sinusoid round shape by Figueras commutator) may increase efficiency even further.


To utilize the back emf is not normal for a transformer.
Actually it's more of a back emp than emf, electromotive pulse that is caused by B Field collapse . Actually, it delivers pretty much all the required energy to establish the B Field of the next pulse in the other primary, therefor these coils practically can switch polarity with almost zero input power. Just don't hold the field, that ain't neccessary since only the chanches will induce current in the secondary anyway... so the key may be: switch polarity without any pauses, as fast as the core allows. Iron I guess <1 khz, but think ferrite, or on ebay they got metglas cores for 50 bucks...


I refer to my ferrite core experiment, where I was getting 25 Volt from 1 volt input, tho the ratio of turns was 2 to 1, not 25 to 1. Airgaps are seen in many similar designs, see the great pdf "chapter3"(on page 1 of the "i tried to replicate smith device" in solid state devices). Getting 25V was an anomaly, regardless of efficiency, and the art of reaching high efficiency in any coil-core-coil transfer is truely a science by it's own, not simple at all. For instance, a core must be about 95% Saturated to be effective. 101% and nothing goes, or 45%, poor efficiency. So the dimensions are important. Size, turns, voltage, it all plays together.


NRamadwami, wish you all the best in your daily duties.


Solarlab, thanks for the links!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 13, 2014, 04:16:23 AM
Marathonman
  Stronger magnet
  More current
  More turns of wire
  Nobody,no book ever said it has to be one continuous wire.
  More turns,more current. Resistance is controlled not by the coil so wire
  resistance is as close to zero as you can get it.
 
 
 
 
 
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 13, 2014, 08:58:50 AM
To those who said I should post results of my permanent magnet version, Alternating Flux Amplifier AFA, here's some information.


I do now definitely know that PMs are a real option.
I made a simple setup: a steel core 5mm, length about 15cm. In the center there's a coil with a fine wire and many turns, probably thousands. It has a high impendance, but picks up small inductive fields pretty well. It's winded on a plastic tube that fits nicely on the 5mm core.


On both sides of this coil I got two low impendance coils. They are smaller, less turns, thicker wire, maybe 0.3mm.
They don't fit very well as their core diameter should be about 10mm, so they are loose. They are connected in parallel, with the halfrectified pulse of a 50 hz 12vac supply source, so these pulses are the positive part of the sinuswave only, with 50% idle time between pulses. The output of the middle coil is rectified by 4 diodes.
Note: my voltmeter may show silly values, but this is about the diffrence between a setup with and without magnets.


Voltage was measured without a load:
With two Neodymium Magnets attached to the ends of the core: 225 vdc


Without the Neodyms: 140 vdc


With the Neos with wrong polarity attached: less than 140, maybe 90 vdc


The Amps were measured in parallel with a 1.8 kOhm Resistor load, the voltage dropped almost to zero, but this is only about the diffrence between magnets and no magnets:


With Neos: 260 DCmA
Without: 200DCmA


Then I used little steel rods instead of the Neos, to see if it was only a higher inductance that caused the gain, but nope, voltage and ampere were lower than without anything attached.


This test has clearly shown: attaching 2 Magnets to the ends of a dc pulsed core increased voltage and ampere, if attached with the correct polarity. Using the wrong polarity, even only on one of them, but especially on both, decreased the output substancially, by more than half.


Also interesting: a test with a resistor between supply and setup , so the whole thing would not run with the full power of the 7.5 VA supply, reversed the result, adding the neodyms reduced the efficiency in general. This means, the gain by PMs requires a certain core saturation in relation to the PM strenght and core size.


Conclusion: Permanent Magnets can truely generate electric current! OU seems to be only a matter of proper implementation of the inductive coupling.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2014, 01:14:06 PM
Doug1-  What is not said is what you need. Everything that is said is true.

Oh crap!  i understood the post wrong and i was responding to you with ?  whaaaaat ! now i get it but i already knew that.
so bifiler is the way to go with low resistance. why could i not use larger primary cores with short stubby secondaries seams end results would be good.?????. Larger primary cores are the way to go according to Wanju. ?   if i use larger primaries i can use less current "RIGHT"! it should not matter if the Flux was created with 1 amp or 5 amps as long as the proper amount of flux is created.  i am just trying to get all the facts before i start swinging if you know what i mean ie... in the same ball park.
i have a small back yard that has my 18 foot boat in it so i have to turn bedroom into work shop, Duh!. building work benches this week end "Who ho!" Yes i am single i can do this ha ha ha!
What is your opinion on using the 4017B Decade counter for the timing like Patrick did????  it does have built in overlap capabilities as one channel is coming down one is coming up.

thanks for all the help EVERYONE !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2014, 02:16:40 PM
here is a little humor i thought would liven up your day.

THE MATRIX RELOADED.....  (FIGUERAS STYLE)

I know, i know, i have to much time on my hands. i just couldn't resist, he, he, he !


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 13, 2014, 03:24:11 PM
Marathonman;;

My apologies to tell you this first..Have you ever placed NS-NS-NS-NS at 90 degrees.. I have done it and the magnetism will be cancelled. secondary will not work..If you are using 90 degrees you have to use NS-SN-NS-SN style polarity..

Check it to see if I'm right or wrong..Hands on experience here and no theoretical knowledge.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2014, 05:19:04 PM
GOOD GOD dude it was meant as a JOKE... "HELLO" !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2014, 05:58:51 PM
I think the first coil on the core is a split coil center tap making up the two opposing primaries and the outer one is the pick up or induced coil. Which would need a thicker wire to handle voltage and current.Not sure if all that activity could work well on a single core.The source would have to be kept very low. One could hope that what applies to dc resistance heating compared to ac would also apply in a core. Then having the fields push back and forth against each other would sort of be like a rotating or alternating field even though the electromagnets are facing same poles to each other. Power is transferred as a alternating event with very short distances of movement in ac ,the potential becomes a rigid connection between the source of movement and the end use in a mains line.Maybe the same thought can work with magnetic fields. I haven't read the pdf yet. I have some time now that the electric company drove a bush hog all over the exposed water line I was back filling.
 Gonna be one of those days.
Doug;
is this what you were talking about here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2014, 10:25:18 PM
Hi Fellows,

This only takes a few minutes and you may find it instructional.

Go to this web page, start the application and perform the following.

http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/faradays-law

- select "Run Now!" [should open a new browser tab];

Try this: (use the pernament magnet to simulate electromagnet)
     {select: 1 Coil; Show field lines; Flip magnet to "N" faces left - consider this our Reference Point}
     {Note: if the Java Script stops responding - just reload the page}

   - move the magnet to a point where the magnet face touches the second Left most coil winding;
      (the vertical legs of the "N" are obstructed by the second right and final right coil windings)
   - use "Flip magnet" a few times and observe the meter (just to get feel for the orientation);
   - set to the Reference Point (N pole inside the coil);
   - move the magnet Right (about 1 coil winding distance) and observe the meter movement (should peg "-" negative)
      {amplitude depends on how rapid [dV/dt} the magnet was moved};
   - continue to move the magnet to the Left in 1 coil winding increments (simulating commutator steps), observe meter;
   - when the magnet is over the voltage meter "Flip magnet" This we will call the Terminal Point;
   - now step the magnet Left towards the coil in 1 coil winding increments (observe the meter);
   - when the magent reaches the Reference Point - "Flip magnet";
   - repeat this motion while flipping the magnet at the Reference and Terminal Points.

Interesting, at worst!    I may have screwed up in my sequencing but you'll get the idea.

Other demo's that may be useful:

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/index.html

 - review the "interactive java tutorials for:
    - magnetic field lines
    - Faraday's 2nd Experiment {note that E = -(DF/Dt)
    - Lenz's Law [this is a very good one]
    - Attraction and Repulsion By Magnetic Poles

Actually most of the interactive java applets are instructive (some are in development and don't work well yet).

Solarlab
Oh man i can't thank you enough.  playing with that magnet allowed me to visualize what was going on in Figueras core. i took the magnet and put the Bloch wall in the middle of the core then hit the flip button reversing the polarity and the whole page lit up from the light bulb, pegging the meter to the max..... well actually slamming it from peak to peak every time,  so this is what the core is suppose to do.
so i then went back to the paint program and put what i think is happening in the core of Figueras. no wonder every one thought i was wacked in the head.......SORRY EVERY ONE!
This is why he used the split core.... to lower the amperage draw on the primaries as they do not have to reverse polarity only the secondary.  man o man this Figueras sure was an very impressive person.   
can someone please tell me if this is right, is this what is happening.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 13, 2014, 10:25:56 PM
Hi,

About the picture in the post #991 by Marathonman with the 2 induced coils I think it is wrong. Buforn just stated that a second induced coil can be installed in the same core in order to generate the electricity required to excite the device. The other induced coil coulb be then used entirely for any other electrical output

I just quote from the patent 57955 by Buforn:

"Another advantage is that inside the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater length than the
large induced core. In these second group of induced coils an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced coils, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want."


Please keep as close as possible to the patent description!!. The missing piece should be anything not described, but the described things should be taken as the patent says.

My only doubt is why did he state that "the small induced coil must have a length equal or greater than the large induced core"  ??  Any ideas ??

It seems an unnecessary explanation. I do not know why he explicity wrote that sentence...

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 14, 2014, 11:45:06 AM
Marathon
 Split primary the core could go either way depending on the amount of field to be stored in the gap between the windings.
  Im partial to 1 mm wire on the primaries. The number of conductors making up the primaries compared to the turns ratio of the bundles and the total number of the turns counting each wire turn. For argument sake lets say im going to want to push or be able to push 3000 watts on the primary coils in dc to start them. By looking at a wire chart for welding cable the type made of lots of small diameter wire 3/00 will handle 300 amps dc easily. Taking the same number of conductors with magnet wire you get a bundle. Hard to work with so make the group of smaller bundles. Windiing is tricky and slow. Keep the length of wire short because the reisistance is controlled by the controller not the length of the wires. Even if you never crank the magnets up to full power with the starting source you have to be able to handle the intended loads plus start up surges for motor type loads.
   You have to determine your own requirements of output to figure out how many units to build and how big you need each set to be even if your making a useless table top toy. 44kw takes a few sets and a lot of spare time to put together.
  Kw converts to hp devided by frequency converted to ft lbs. Ft lbs to magnet lift foot pounds. The size you can work with and still be happy and sane can be added together to reach the final numbers. Cost is another problem. Its not much different from building a standard generator from scratch. I doubt very many people will want to do all this work. Except for a few who just like to tinker.
  Did I hear someone mention a decade box, do I know you from someplace? I would rather have a million turns of fine wire then a few of thicker for primaries. I can arrange the fine wire with more options in the sense of what makes a stronger magnet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2014, 01:00:27 PM
Thank you Doug for your insites, very much appreciated but my question is still unanswered.  i need to know if the post above is the way Figueras device is operating before i proceed any farther. is the magnetic polls squeezed causing it to pouch out enveloping the secondary coil simulating magnetic rotation. YES/NO???????

I mentioned a decade counter like the one Patrick made but mine is 9 channels. what is your take on using the decade counter?????/
i am using it for its inherent channel overlap capabilities making it a prime candidate for Figueras device.
 here is a pic of my boards, the 9 channel is at 60 hz and the 2 channel is at 800 hz. the two channel one will be ran through a Bridge Diode for DC operation and will employ 4 mil laminate Iron as to handle the higher frequency and the 9 channel will use 11 to 12 mill laminate core, both boards are very low power at 5 volts milliamper range.
Board design was made with DipTrace free up to 300 pins two layer (64 Bit...the only way to fly)  in which i HIGHLY recommend. the view of the boards you see is the 3D feature the program has built in.  the price for a few boards are not that bad but if you were to order a lot of boards i then suggest Futurlec as they are way cheaper plus their parts prices cant be beat by ANYONE.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 14, 2014, 03:15:14 PM
Marathonman:

What are these electronic boards.. What are they going to do..Do we really need all this...Can you explain to me please....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2014, 04:23:18 PM
Not intending to be mean but the post was not intended for you but if you have to know they are TIMING BOARDS FOR FIGUERAS DEVICE . read previous post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 14, 2014, 05:37:36 PM
A bit of scientific new info to help you guys.  We have discovered that a gap in the core DOUBLES the frequency. Also, varying  a gap in the core is a NEW way to tune a device. So we have added to Tesla's ways of tuning. Grumage has some scope shots on the Akula0083 thread. However this has only been tested on ferrite cores.
We also know that the gap produces electrostatic pulses. If that is the case here then we are looking at frequency mixing which was patented by Carlos Benitez a hundred years ago.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 14, 2014, 05:39:15 PM
You can think of the gap in the core as two plates of a capacitor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 14, 2014, 08:13:08 PM
Marathonman

Thank you Doug for your insites, very much appreciated but my question is still unanswered.  i need to know if the post above is the way Figueras device is operating before i proceed any farther. is the magnetic polls squeezed causing it to pouch out enveloping the secondary coil simulating magnetic rotation. YES/NO?(http://www.overunity.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif)(http://www.overunity.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif)

 Yes,two reasons. It's actually not a rotating field in the induced it's just reversing direction 50 times a second as the push alternates. It also will add to the force of the collapsing field in the magnet being powered down so the induction going on as back emf in it can go back around on the wire and suppress the incoming current from the source if it is slightly higher in voltage which back emf spikes usually are.Most of what goes in one way is returned hard and fast as a spike but it will have to pass though the controller so it can be used. With enough fine tuning to stretch the spike out over a longer period of time it should be obvious what to do with that.
  I dont know what to tell you about the output of your controller.I like the one in the patent with the resister elements cause you can watch it and put insane currents through it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2014, 09:56:20 PM
THANK YOU ! ;D ;D ;D
Yes i know i am limited on Amperage with solid state but the MJ11032 hits 50a or the ESM3030DV hits 100a both will take a good punch but i am trying for the lowest power possible. bifiler can be beneficial ...only time will tell.
Again, thanks a million.

a.king21; thanks for the info....might come in handy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 15, 2014, 05:51:02 PM
Here is some FANTASTIC reading from Nikola Tesla. could help with Figueras device.
Nikola Tesla’s most suppressed work was his theory of gravity.  also explaining workings of Electricity. here is the link.copy n paste.

http://aetherforce.com/teslas-dynamic-theory-of-gravity/

In 1929, Tesla ridiculed Heinrich Hertz’s 1887-89 experiments purportedly proving the Maxwellian “structureless” ether filling all space, “of inconceivable tenuity yet solid and possessed of rigidity incomparably greater than the hardest steel”. Tesla’s arguments were to the contrary, saying he had always believed in a “gaseous” ether in which he had observed waves more akin to sound waves. He recounted how he had developed a “new form of vacuum tube” in 1896 (which I call the “Tesla bulb”), “…capable of being charged to any desired potential, and operated it with effective pressures of about 4,000,000 volts.” He described how purplish coronal discharges about the bulb when in use, verified the existence of “particles smaller than air”, and a gas so light that an earth-sized volume would weigh only 1/20 pound. He further said sound waves moved at the velocity of light through this medium.
it looks like Tesla beat Thomas Henry Moray to the punch, both amazing people .

Tesla also talked about Rarefaction and compression (expansion-compression) just what Don Smith was trying to convey.

Also some very interesting info. please watch the compression -expansion wave.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rarefaction

Enjoy ...i sure did.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 16, 2014, 12:54:40 AM
Thanks, just saved, will enjoy it later.


BTW. i "revisited" Figueras design and I think I finally understood it. The keely drawings are partially wrong.


The point is, both primaries never ever alter their polarity,  they are practicly free running, only their amplitude varies (but should never be zero!). By doing that, they have no back emp to deal with. Nonetheless the polarity of Y is alternating.


The back electromotive force of Y on the other hand is not forced to go back to the originating primary, but two paths are offered to it, so it may choose the easier one, thus making the originating inductor (the hard path) "lenz-less". I've seen similar patents and it was said that the COP can be very high, like 1400%.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 16, 2014, 06:11:36 AM
Thanks, just saved, will enjoy it later.


BTW. i "revisited" Figueras design and I think I finally understood it. The keely drawings are partially wrong.


The point is, both primaries never ever alter their polarity,  they are practicly free running, only their amplitude varies (but should never be zero!). By doing that, they have no back emp to deal with. Nonetheless the polarity of Y is alternating.


The back electromotive force of Y on the other hand is not forced to go back to the originating primary, but two paths are offered to it, so it may choose the easier one, thus making the originating inductor (the hard path) "lenz-less". I've seen similar patents and it was said that the COP can be very high, like 1400%.

Exactly, also by the primaries not switching polarities no pole reversal ( Hysteresis i think) struggle is taking place requiring "LESS AMP DRAW"

electricity is lazy always wanting to return to equilibrium (Compression and Rarefaction) as soon as possible so the less reluctant path is always taken.

plus i wander if the secondaries can be bifiler wound????? i will soon find out wire is on its way 10lbs of luscious 18 awg goodness....WHO-HOO!

it's to bad square magnet wire is so expensive.  one would have to buy whole real at almost 2 thousand bucks, i know i checked Essex wire. but man what a electro- magnet you could get.

ps. i think you will like the Tesla link. i think he was touched by God him self. Figueras was just really, really smart. ha ha ha!      GOOD LUCK ALL!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 16, 2014, 07:07:08 AM
HANON;

"Another advantage is that inside the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater length than the
large induced core. In these second group of induced coils an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced coils, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want."

Could it quite possible that this is what he is talking about. (In these second group of induced coils)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 16, 2014, 08:44:27 PM
Marathonman

  I cant get the E core to model up at all to work with the idea of having the same inducer fields pushing the induced to behave like a rotating magnetic field. The collapse time on the inducer fields would have to go completely off and allow the field to dissipate to zero.That would not work with the idea of having the the magnet going up in field strength pushing the collapse magnet back emf around to add to the one increasing. It also doesn't even allow for the notion of keeping the cores partially on to maintain a pressure between the fields even after correcting the pole orientations of the inducers. If you get an LED to run of it you should consider yourself doing well. The flux will want to travel around the outside of the core if you orient it nsnsns and totally avoid the center leg of the core and if put it in nnnsss there wont be any difference in flux in the middle as each side turns off or on. If it was a square then maybe if it is not too leaky. Use bobbins just in case it turns out Im right. So your dont  risking wasting your wire.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 16, 2014, 09:38:45 PM
I dont like the picture thing but I guess ya gotta do what ya gotta do.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 16, 2014, 09:40:26 PM
I dont like green eggs and ham either.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 16, 2014, 09:42:53 PM
Hay figured out how to do more then one pic
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 17, 2014, 03:15:17 AM
Marathonman

  I cant get the E core to model up at all to work with the idea of having the same inducer fields pushing the induced to behave like a rotating magnetic field. The collapse time on the inducer fields would have to go completely off and allow the field to dissipate to zero.That would not work with the idea of having the the magnet going up in field strength pushing the collapse magnet back emf around to add to the one increasing. It also doesn't even allow for the notion of keeping the cores partially on to maintain a pressure between the fields even after correcting the pole orientations of the inducers. If you get an LED to run of it you should consider yourself doing well. The flux will want to travel around the outside of the core if you orient it nsnsns and totally avoid the center leg of the core and if put it in nnnsss there wont be any difference in flux in the middle as each side turns off or on. If it was a square then maybe if it is not too leaky. Use bobbins just in case it turns out Im right. So your dont  risking wasting your wire.

Doug;
 putting your cores in these orientations will get you absolutely no where. ( NN/NS/SS or NS/NS/NS)
it will have to be NS/y/SN the whole idea is to reverse the secondary core only. keeping the primary orientation the same uses less power also. in your set up this will not take place. i think the whole idea is that the reversing poles meet in the secondary core  though you are right the flux will not rotate buy they don't have to just reverse.
This is what is happening in the secondary core each 90* out of phase high primary. N/S N being left c core and S/N S being right c core.

when the cores are hit with current (90 * out of phase) this causes the ZPE to separate and the poles collide in the Secondary Core and expand outward engulfing the secondaries. (Expansion and Contraction)
Tesla did the same thing above in your post but with a Toroid .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on March 17, 2014, 10:38:22 PM
Hallo,
PLEASE give your opinion about the attached file.
Best Regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on March 17, 2014, 11:29:44 PM
Bajac Version = John Ecklin's SAG 6(with correction!) = Don Smith rotary generator
Please Please experiment with Bajac CIC version, use a simple inverter circuit to excite the primaries (with center tape).

to read more about John Ecklin's SAG 6 and the correction:
http://montalk.net/science/72/john-ecklins-sag-6


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 18, 2014, 03:10:26 AM
NoMoreSlave


I've been reading the pdf. Having problems to understand the symbols, lack of description.


Thought the UDT transformer of paul raymond  jensen pretty interesting since it sounds as if the guy really did it.
Surprisingly youtube has nothing about it, was it never duplicated?


However, like a red thread there is something going trough alll of these "lenz less" transformers, be it the bitorroid, this one, figueras ... and that's the redirection of the back mmf (magnetomotive force,  floyd sweet terminology) that normally draws energy by the primary when a load is connected to the secondary. Whether or not the figuera design has 2 primaries and one secondary (compared to two secondaries and one primsry in thane heines bi-torroid, jensens UDT etc.), may be insignificant, since I explained earlier how figueras design does the same, redirecting the back mmf away from the originating primary (actually to the other primary that features reverse polarity, thus being a very easy path for the back mmf). Anyway, if the setup is built, we can try both. Tho, due to logic, with 1 primary you need only one pulse, contrary to the flipflop pulse of the classic figuera design.


Remember my test, where I was getting 25 Volts on the Y coil with only about 1.5 v on the primaries, withe a turns ratio that should have given 3 Volts and not 25. Even tho the overall efficiency was not OU, it was by far the best efficiency I was getting in any transformer I ever built and the analogue amp meter used to hit the upper end of the meter range with brute force... When I connected a 12 to 230 vac inverter to the output, it really started up, but then kept on rebooting, nonetheless impressive for such a tiny source of probably 2.5 watt dissipation.


I probably wil do some more tests with it, since all my other test cores have much weaker efficiency. Recently I even discovered how to increase the output of this double E ferrite core with some permanent magnets attached. Additionally, with some simple rewiring I can also test the jensen UDT with it (with the addition of a "feedback coil" winding ontop of the Y coil :  www.hyiq.org/Research/Details?Name=A%20Free-Energy%20Device  )


So, to all of  us, let's not give up so quickly. Edison tried a Thousand materials until he had a working lightbulb (when Tesla already had neon lights, but anyway  8) )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 18, 2014, 05:05:31 AM
Here's some more thoughts about the figuera design. I am refering to the classic double C design: (|).


The airgaps, demystified! Imagine a pulse on a primary 1. With no airgaps it may just go trough primary 2, bypassing the Y core, at least partiallly. But with gaps... the pulse would have to go over two gaps to do that, but only over 1 gap to go trough the Y coil!


Then, when current is drawn by a load at the Y coil, as we know the flowing current in Y self-induces the back mmf. Up to this point we did not use any energy from the source. But as the back mmf would normally flow back to the primary, it would force the primary to start dissipating real energy. But in the figuera design, the back mmf will face two airgaps and see the reluctance of the C cores behind them. One will be opposing, the other one, due to figueras commutator, near zero and most likely in the same polarity as the back mmf, just like a friendly invitation.
So theoreticly there would be zero  energy consumption. As if a transformer were running without a load.


Great care must be taken in the construction of the air gaps, 0.01mm more or less is like a double size core. Adjustable gaps may be useful, with brass screws. They need to be small , eg. 0.1mm and exactly the same.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 18, 2014, 03:21:21 PM
Here's some more thoughts about the figuera design. I am refering to the classic double C design: (|).


The airgaps, demystified! Imagine a pulse on a primary 1. With no airgaps it may just go trough primary 2, bypassing the Y core, at least partiallly. But with gaps... the pulse would have to go over two gaps to do that, but only over 1 gap to go trough the Y coil!


Then, when current is drawn by a load at the Y coil, as we know the flowing current in Y self-induces the back mmf. Up to this point we did not use any energy from the source. But as the back mmf would normally flow back to the primary, it would force the primary to start dissipating real energy. But in the figuera design, the back mmf will face two airgaps and see the reluctance of the C cores behind them. One will be opposing, the other one, due to figueras commutator, near zero and most likely in the same polarity as the back mmf, just like a friendly invitation.
So theoreticly there would be zero  energy consumption. As if a transformer were running without a load.


Great care must be taken in the construction of the air gaps, 0.01mm more or less is like a double size core. Adjustable gaps may be useful, with brass screws. They need to be small , eg. 0.1mm and exactly the same.

Dieter :

 I think you are spot on with your observations that the air gap plays a vital role in this Transformer set up. Bajac has also stated this observation but has added that the gap be as little as possible... like .001 in which means machining it smooth and that the primaries are larger. (this i already knew)  this will allow for the (III) set up that Figueras/Bafon stated in his 1908/1914 Patent allowing cores to be added very easily for more power.
one thing i would like to point out is everyone thinks that the flux in the coil travels in one direction only from north to south (THIS IS FALSE)
the flux or ZPE when hit with current in a coil is forced apart each traveling in opposite directions.  Nicola Tesla, Don Smith and many others have proven this many, many times and is being conveniently ignored time and time again. north is not stationary, this is not how nature operates. power is only obtained through Rarefication and contraction ie.... expansion and contraction of doublets (pairs).

so on that note i give you this to ponder on. HAPPY FIGUERING

Sorry 1908/1914 Patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 18, 2014, 04:04:28 PM
I partially disagree with the current has to be flowing in two directions. As i see it, this is what we want to prevent, fwd mmf and back mmf in the same core. But I may have misunderstood you, because from one point of view there are in fact two directions, that's the circulation of the field lines, in the heart of the core one way, and near the surface of the core in the other way, just like in the donut illustrations. When a core is oversaturated, the 2 tend to collide, resulting in heat. At least from my intuitive point of view that's what happens.


However, we don't want 4 directions, like when the back mmf has to share the core with the fwd mmf, as normal transformers work.


We don't have to care about the fact that we DO have these 4 in the Y core, because we only have to make sure the back mmf will not flow back to the originating primary. So, if the Y core gets a lil hot, we take it as a free extra goodie.


Too bad my ferrite cores ain't got the right gaps. (E type, so I could have 3 gaps, one in the middle of each coil, but that ain't gonna work!). Seems like I got to make a new core, softsteel preferred.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 18, 2014, 04:57:10 PM
Dieter:

 Please look at my drawing i got off of internet. look closely at the direction of Flux lines. these are not influenced buy nothing...ie true flux lines travel from north to bloch wall then to south or visa versa.????? you get my meaning.

http://haroldaspden.com/reports/01.htm read the part on (Ferromagnetism) and (Air Gap Reaction Effects) it will blow your mind, just what we are talking about .

Consider a simple small-width gap in an elongated section of a ferromagnetic core. The gap adds an enormous capacity for storing inductance energy using a winding on that core and yet the inductance is decreased, not increased. The ferromagnet sets a limit on flux density but the gap allows the core to accept a much greater magnetizing current at that limit of flux density. The LI2/2 energy is related to a flux density proportional to LI and so energy capacity increases linearly with current I, whereas, if L decreases, the energy can increase for the same LI value.

The energy stored in that gap is represented by a very powerful reacting current flow in the aether in the gap. This current is powered by the aether energy sea. It is a kind of diamagnetic thermodynamic reaction state polarised by the presence of the primary magnetization of the main iron core. This is not a flux leakage phenomenon but one by which the composite magnetic flux, that from the main core and the circulating flux induced locally around the aether current reaction, is effective in appearing as a diversionary agency. The main core flux is partially diverted so as to jump through air external to the main core path whilst the remainder crosses directly between the pole faces.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on March 18, 2014, 05:47:40 PM
Hi dieter,
just coming back from work :(

Thank you for your explanation, I omitted any comment in the PDF in order to generate a discussion. and as usually you got it.
there is a gay in Utube (link in the pdf) who made an inverter with parts from old stuffs (he was trying to tell us that its possible to light some bulbs out from 12v laptop battery).
he said the box was working 5 hours at 100% (he looped the system back to charge the battery)...

I think we are in the good track: There are two kind of generators/inverters: HF & LF => I am woking on the LF with a big transformer.
As I see it marathonman is trying to follow the other theory about magnetism (Walter Russell, Steve Davis&Howard Johnson...)
Well it’s an interesting theory and experiment, but how can we engineering it? I don’t know how (I read all that stuff! But..)
If there is any chance to get some more explanations, than it will be possible to make some tests/experiment.

But if we are speaking about Figuera generator, than he clearly stated that the construction and position of the electromagnet are just as its already known in the art. (Faradays law)

The gap is all I can recommend right know.
In my pdf I started by looking at the generator (like Figuera did), then I split the circular shape to make it linear.
After that I took the basic unitary pattern form the stator and from the rotor(face to face) then I double it in order to make a close magnetic path. That’s it.
I ended by getting this picture(similar to bajac, but giving you the way I got it)

i will appretiate your feedback about the2 fields inducing Emf in the coil (am i right with 2xi?).
Thanks & Regards,
NMS


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on March 18, 2014, 06:10:19 PM
Hi marathonman.
I m reding the report, will see...
Thanks!
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 18, 2014, 07:13:17 PM
MY Apologies to every one i posted the wrong pic on Post 1010 Flux is wrong way.

This is correct pic.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 18, 2014, 08:56:09 PM
Hi Gyula please see my post and please advise if you can help. You are more than welcome to give me your insight which is always helpful..

So theoreticly there would be zero  energy consumption. As if a transformer were running without a load.

Dieter..

Please see.."The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit, also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly placed." - Figuera Patent description

Actually the Figuera device consumes less energy due to coil size, shape and wire selected. If you use reels and reels of windings as Figuera directs..As we use more and more coils and build more and more electromagnets the primary has such high impedance or resistance that the input comes down. Inductance goes up and so magnetism increases... I have brought down inputs to very little wattage..The magnetism keeps incresaing all the time due to the increase in the number of turns. and increased inductance..The lowest wattage I have achieved is 200 watts but I can bring it down to 1 to 2 watts probably and get increased magnetism still. Very little current flows to the output of the primary..That I have achieved already.. That is not the issue. This is like achieving resonant frequency in the coil and this is not tough at all..But this requires as Figuera says reels and reels of wires..Not a few turns of coils..Probably about 2500 to 3000 metres of wire if suitable type which is properly placed.

The only thing that is needed is to fluctate the current strength in the primary magnets to have fluctuating or time varying magnetic field intensity that alternates between strength and weakness between opposing primaries..Then the secondary placed in between the primaries would come to life and work and produce output..Because the magnetic fields in the opposing primaries would keep collapisng and increasing alternately the electric field in the secondary would always be feeded. 

Your view on gaps is ok but if we have powerful magnetic fields we can have even up to 1 cm of gap for the magnetic intensity does not diminsh up to 1 cm distance I believe in the case of strong magnets. Whther they are like poles or unlike poles..So if we build strong magnets up to 1 cm distance is ok but lower gap is useful in increasing the output as it will increase the frequency..

I think the Figuera drawing has been tampered with..What is your opinion on that..See the Figuera patent..

"The different pieces of the resistance will connect, as seen in the drawing, with the commutator bars embedded in a cylinder of insulating material that does not move; but around it, and always in contact with more than one contact, rotates a brush “O”, which carries the foreign current, revolves. One of the ends of the resistance is connected with electromagnets N, and the other with electromagnets S, half of the terminals of the resistance pieces go to the half of the commutator bars of the cylinder and the other half of these commutator bars are directly connected to the firsts."

The drawing does not show any connection to the other half of the commutator points..Please let me know your insight..



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 18, 2014, 09:52:54 PM
Two points to make;

#1 The Figueras Transformer operates with 'Over-Unity' performance, clearly showing that the (mystery energy source ATHER) is contributing to the air gap energy (capacitive stored energy) and much of that energy is then used to provide extra output power in the Secondary by being prevented from reentry to the Ferromagnetism of the Primary electromagnets .

#2 By splitting the Primary in two thus is provided a secondary path for the Reluctance to travel there for reducing resistance to change in secondary core to a minimum allowing secondary core to output the transfered energy from primary electromagnet and capacitive air gap unabated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 18, 2014, 10:01:52 PM
Nramaswami,

The Buforn patent drawings show the two halfs of the commutator bars jumpered as follows, clockwise

1 – 8
2 – 7
3 – 6
4 – 5
9 – 16
10 – 15
11 – 14
12 – 13

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 18, 2014, 10:15:12 PM
Cadman: Thanks..

Agreed.  Please refer to page No. 123 top left to see that what you are saying is correct..

But at the bottom the connections go out to only 1 to 8. The commutator bar is always connected to two adjacent bars. Are I assume that the connections are from 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 for all the connections to be useful..If we think that the connections are from 1 to 8 and when the commutator bar goes to the other half there is no connection.No current flows through resistors at that time.That is the confusion I have.. Please let me know your insight..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 18, 2014, 10:18:23 PM
Hi Cadman:

And what is your interpretation of this sentence in the patent..

"the other half of these commutator bars are directly connected to the firsts."

What is the meaning of firsts here.. I'm not able to figure out. Please help..Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 18, 2014, 10:29:03 PM
Hi Cadman:

And what is your interpretation of this sentence in the patent..

"the other half of these commutator bars are directly connected to the firsts."

What is the meaning of firsts here.. I'm not able to figure out. Please help..Thanks.


Commutator was suspicious for me from the starting point and I still can't figure out how connections are made. Here is hidden the principle of operation of device, with clear picture it would be obvious ... The same way was altered Daniel McFarland patent. I smell some real conspiracy secret society working all the time. Illuminati ?  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 18, 2014, 10:45:53 PM
Interesting text (Harold Aspden), thanks for the link. A bit heavy to read when you don't speak english very well. As he mentiones the adams motor, this was my first FE project, maybe 15 years ago. Amazing how I used to put that thing together back then.  remember, strong neodymium magnets didn't work, I had to use ferrite or alnico, with a better evenly area coverage (which sort of contradicts the generic  theory about a field getting weaker 4 times when the distance is doubled). The motor run the whole night from one aaa accu cell. But not yet in OU, nonetheless good for a first setup. Ahh, those were the times  :) .
Goto go back to the hardware...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 18, 2014, 10:47:50 PM
ok.. So this is a confusing area still..I'm not alone.. Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 18, 2014, 11:41:52 PM
forest - speaking of conspiracies, let us not get too much into the "business end of things". Let us just say that if OU exists , then there have to be enemies against it, well funded  ones. Even Townsend, who was an accepted capacity in his time, usually had some black suit spooks in his lab, for purposes of "security", which can be seen on original film about his work. (the guy who tested "electron avalanche" phenomena).


NRamaswami,
The best interpretation of the resistor grid I have seen is in chapter3.pdf, for the link   see page 1 of "i tested a don smith device" thread. It's the most logical and easy to build variation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 19, 2014, 12:49:53 AM
Hi,

Each day I see more differences from the text of the patents and the ideas which are surrounding this forum. It is a pity not to try first the original design instead of thinking of conspiracies and hidden keys.

About the translation of the commutator I think it is fine. I can dissect it to see it more clear as this:


"half of the terminals of the resistor pieces go to the half of the commutator bars of the cylinder and the other half of these commutator bars are directly connected to the first half of the commutator bars"
 
As you can see from the drawing the other half of the terminal of the resistor pieces are not joined to anything. Those terminal are the ones that are located in the upper part of the resistor box.

How many users around here have tested with the original commutator and the 2 original signals? I think you should start for testing the original design, but this is just my humble oppinion.

NoMoreSlave,  I have read your pdf about the inverter. It is really interesting. The links are very interesting. Do you speak spanish? One link is a video in spanish...so I thoulght that maybe so. The UDT that you referred it is really interesting...

Your final design is very similar to the one from Bajac.

I am sorry for telling this but Figuera did not mention any air gap in his 1908 patent text. Maybe it is time to reconduct this forum. Please read the patent and quote here at least one sentence where Figuera said anything about air gaps...

I think that air gap design is genuine. It may work but comparing to the patent text I have to say that there is no mention to any air gap. It could work. It is a very clever design but we have to put into doubt anything that is not included in the original text

This is the only sentence where Figuera describe the coil disposition:

"As neither of the circuits rotate, there is no need to make them round, nor leave any space between one and the other"
I suppose that someone will feel upset for this statement. Please in case that someone want to argue with this, please just quote one simple sentence where Figuera told something about air gaps. Maybe Figuera used air gaps, maybe not, maybe he did it but he avoided to tell it

My intention is just to help to discover the Truth. The air gaps may work but they are not referred in the 1908 patent. Also the last Buforn patent suggest that the electromagnets shapes are longitudinal. In this case this Buforn design has any sense.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 19, 2014, 05:35:38 AM
Hi Hanon:

.see in this forum many people speaking many languages write in English and that makes things looks imperfect. The patent certainly does not refer to any air gaps. I have used a common plastic tube with common iron core and we get the same results that we would get when using three plastic tubes split in to three...magnetic flux cancellation is some thing that I hear frequently here if the cores are used in NS-NS-NS combination..I'm sorry only when we use it that way we get results. Howard Johnson's secret book of Magnets claims that when you use NS-NS-SN the magnetic flux is increased three times. We do not get any volt when we do it.. If we use the NS-SN-NS combination results of output are less than NS-NS-NS combination..There is no magnetic flux cancellation...Air gaps are not mentioned in the patent but as you say it can be used effectively as we have found out..

So as I understand it now the drawing shows at the top left all 16 points connected.. But only one resistor array is shown for the N and S multiple opposite Magnets and another parallel resistor array that is indicated in the top left is not shown for simplicity reasons.. Am I right. If the drawing as used in the top left of Buforn patents were to be used there need to be two resistor arrays and the result would be a commutator bar which will touch four points two in one side and two in the opposite 180' side to run without making sparks for long life but one which will make the primaries oscillate in strength constantly..

Alternatively there is only one single resistor array but the those on the left hand side must be connected to the top of the resistor array points which are not connected now to achieve the same result with a single resistor array..

If the commutator bar were to touch only two adjacent points when the bar comes to half side power will not go to N or S magnets..If the commutator bar were to touch four points two on one side and two on other side the continuous fluctation would be ensured..

This is what the patent says as the principle which is not in question..

Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance, through which circulates a operating current, which is taken from one power source and passed through one or more electromagnets, thus magnetising one or more electromagnets. When the current is higher, the magnetisation of the electromagnets is increased, and when it is lower, the magnetisation is decreased. Thus, varying the intensity of the current, varies the magnetic field which crosses through the induction circuit.

As is seen from real life experience of using large number of coils the first coil where the current enters is the most powerful one and the subsequent coils have literally no electric field due to resistance of coils..but all have magnetic field which becomes constant at low current input which results in the secondary getting zero current at lower inputs.

Only when the current is sent to enter the N and S magnets alternately or fluctuate in strength due to various resistances encountered , the electric field will be created in the N and S magnets alternately..Only when the electric field increases and decreses the magnetic field will increase or decrease..It is only then magnetic flux operates and the secondary comes to life..Am I right in this understanding?

This then was what was done by Figuera to get a large magnetic field at low input by using a lot of coils of wire spread on a number of electromagnets..But he then altereted the point of entry of current at various N and Electromagnets so that magnetic field strength is constantly changed..Electric field strength is contantly changed..Mangetic flux is contantly made to flow from N to S and then from S to N at various points..

When we use a large input current and less number of turns the problem of lack of electric field does not appear but that requires a lot of input current but by using a lot of reels of wire the input current cannot be higher than 100 to 200 watts and can be easily brought down to even 24 to 36 watts.. But the point is the where current enters determines which electromagnet will get the maximum electric field and one of N magnets and one of S magnets at the opposite end probably continue to get charged up fully but the current flows through the others also based on resistance..

Principle is easy to understand..Bringing down current input is also easy if we use large coils of wire..But this part is the toughest one. probably we will do this as well...I have not yet received the commutator and let me use both the Chapter3.pdf electronic version and the commutator versions and see which one is easier..It has taken so much of time for me to learn as to how we can bring down the input current but increase the magnetization at the same time..Let me now try my hand at fluctating the N and S magnets.. Then the secondary would come to life..

I agree that airgaps are not mentioned in the patent but they do work..If we create a powerful magnetic field 1 cm distance is adequate..Only when we have few coils and low input combination the distance of the air gaps matter..I hope others will agree..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 19, 2014, 08:31:05 AM
Hi,
Why do you say that electrical field is different in the first, second, 3rd...electromagnet. The patent says that each row is connected in series, so, the current along all of them is the same, and thus the electrical field should be the same in all of them. Am I missing anything?

If you want to flutuate alternatively each row maybe you could try to excite the N series with half wave rectified AC signal and the S series with the other half rectified wave. This is not Figuera but it is a test that will take 5 minutes and just a few diodes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 19, 2014, 09:16:35 AM
Hi Hanon:

When current enters NP1 it has go through a number of coils and then it goes through NP2, NP3,NP4,NP5,NP6 Np7 and then it moves to SP7 to 1 in that order..You are not taking in to account the massive resistance or ac impendance of the coils..That is what reduces the electrical component in the first place..I'm using only two large primary cores and when we connect the 200 volts input becomes just 200 watts now. If I connect multiple electromagnets as done by Figuera very little wattage would be spent on the input..I'm looking at other ways to increase the electric field using the coil shapes itself without increasing the input.. Let me see...if it works out..We will try tomorrow afternoon or evening..That may possibly eliminate the commutator as and resistance as well...

Pulsed DC is very powerful...four times more powerful than AC.. The AC impedance of the pulsed DC is four times lesser than that of AC. That essentially means that pulsed DC would need four times more coils to get the same low input wattage or alternately if the same coils are used would consume at the input four times more electrical input..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 19, 2014, 12:17:00 PM
Pulsed DC is very powerful...four times more powerful than AC.. The AC impedance of the pulsed DC is four times lesser than that of AC. That essentially means that pulsed DC would need four times more coils to get the same low input wattage or alternately if the same coils are used would consume at the input four times more electrical input..

 The resistive controller takes care of that. If you use wire length to control the input then you lose the peak electromagnetic effects which only last for the time length of the peak output from induced when it is at it's peak. Which is very short. The time it will take for a high resistance winding of length to charge up the magnetic field will take to long.
  If your working with 50 to 60 cycles per sec in the output then it will be 100 to 120 peaks + and -within a sec for maybe a seventh or a tenth of each cycle. There is not even enough time for the domains to relax completely so it has to be under pressure, none of the inducer magnets going into a non magnetic state or a reverse state.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 19, 2014, 01:19:40 PM
Correct me if i am wrong but according to my calculations at 18 awg wire in which i am using for my Primaries, it is 6.385 ohms per 1000 ft of wire which is a lot of wire. even at that absurd length 7 Primaries is only 44.695 ohms and at 100 volts 100 ohms i will get 1 amp so i will have to adjust the ohmage accordingly. this doesn't seem to difficult to me or am i missing something. all i have to do is adjust the ohmage to achieve my desired amperage through 9 resistor taps down to .1 amps on the low side, 1 amp for high side. hummmm! does't seem to difficult to me.

Doug;
 "none of the inducer magnets going into a non magnetic state or a reverse state"

The whole idea of Figueras splitting up the primaries are to not have to be in a zero magnetic or reverse state. it takes a whole lot more power to reverse the domains of the iron core. by reversing the poles of the electromagnets one N/S and one S/N he didn't have to worry about Hysteresis in the Primaries at all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 19, 2014, 02:16:11 PM
Marathonman:

1000 feet is not a lot of wire.. I'm already using 5000 feet of wire.. Yes.. You are right the impedance of the coil is the key.

Doug:

See the current flows from NP1->NP2--->NP7 ---SP7-->SP6-- ---SP1

There are 14 primaries.. It is not necessary for the primaries to lose magnetism..Who knows what is 1/50th of a second..The idea is that the opposite side magnets must become stronger and weaker. If NP is stronger SP is weaker and When SP becomes stronger NP becomes weaker..This creates a state where the magnetic flux is forced to flow in to the secondary.

I have already reached the 200 watts level. Magnetism is increased and remains constant..It needs to oscillate.. That is what the commutator and resistor circuit does..So at very low power input, we have high magnetic flux in the system which makes the secondary get high power output..

I have experienced this when I used high power 200 volts and 7 amps and just two primaries..There are certain things that I'm not disclosing fully here yet but when we have a high electric field and magnetic field combination the secondary is able to produce an excellent output. Figuera has done the same thing at low power input..For a low power input can be easily supplied from the output..Of course secondary will oppose the primary and so we can put a variac to be powered by the secondary output and then use that to provide a fixed input to the system..It becomes part of the output..

Unfortunately I ended up having too much of volts.. And we hit it when we did not have any turns calculations. And we are doing all these things again..

Now for a teaser let me know what will be the output in the transformer below.

Teaser:

I wind 100 turns of insulated wire on a iron pipe within which I put a lot of iron rods. This is the secondary.

Outside of the insulated wire I put another lot of iron rods and then wind the primary insulated wire for 100 turns..

Both the primary and secondary are same guage insulated wires.

The primary input is 220 volts and 7 amps What will be the output of the secondary?

This is a practical hands on experience, first hand experience knowledge and let me see if you can calculate and tell me the answer. I'm sure most will fail this test..Any one can take this test..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 19, 2014, 03:23:22 PM
Nramaswami,

The Buforn patent shows the commutator jumpers at the upper left corner of the drawing, as you noted. Just overlay that commutator drawing onto the one with the resistor wire connections and you will see that when jumpered as indicated, and the resistor wires are connected where indicated, that as the brush traverses the commutator there will always be an electrical connection from the brush to a resistor wire. The brush specified (always in contact with two commutator bars) will contact at least two resistor wires at all times, except when the brush is over bars 4 – 5, and 12 – 13. At those points only one resistor wire will be connected. These are the two points of increased 'dwell' I wrote about earlier. For clarity I refer to commutator bar #1 as the bar at the one o'clock position, which is connected to the fifth resistor wire from the left.

@All,
I keep telling everyone that there is nothing hidden in the Buforn patent but it seems few are listening. The only mystery to solve is the correct combination of core size, coil construction, number of coil sets, excitation current, and frequency (commutator rotation speed).

We may discover some unique properties of this generator after it is built. But first it has to be built according to the patent.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 19, 2014, 05:18:01 PM
This is what I am building
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 19, 2014, 05:33:24 PM
I plan on going with everything in the patent but i can't swallow the inefficient commutator.  i think he used it because solid state wasn't present and since there is no spark involved i see no reason to use it. i can do the same with solid state and with way less power than the motor takes to rotate the commutator plus no parts to wear out  and easier to implement.

 the picture of Figueras device clearly shows that the Primaries are larger than the Secondaries in which i am making my Primary core 4 times the square of the Secondaries so the only concern i have with that is to not saturate the secondaries as this will mangle the output. i will be doing test in the next week to see just how much flux the primaries will put out and then calculate the ball park figure as to the saturation level of the Secondaries and adjust accordingly. this is one thing i haven't heard any one talk about.

ps. i just redesigned my timing board to accommodate switching transistors MJH11022 TO-247 package. ran through a vitreous wound resistor network ie... 9 resistor taps

HAPPY FIGUERING
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 19, 2014, 05:52:02 PM
Marathonman,

Personally I hope to confirm the validity of the original patent design, on a small scale. I think it's great that there are so many different builds going on. Something for everyone.

Anxiously awaiting everyone's results :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 19, 2014, 07:18:57 PM
Marathonman,

Personally I hope to confirm the validity of the original patent design, on a small scale. I think it's great that there are so many different builds going on. Something for everyone.

Anxiously awaiting everyone's results :)

You sure got that right. i feel like a kid in a candy store with this project. i can't even remember the last time i was so excited to build a project.


GOOD LUCK ALL

 and stick it to the man !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 19, 2014, 07:36:18 PM
Quote
the only concern i have with that is to not saturate the secondaries as this will mangle the output. i will be doing test in the next week to see just how much flux the primaries will put out and then calculate the ball park figure as to the saturation level of the Secondaries and adjust accordingly. this is one thing i haven't heard any one talk about.

This jogged my memory. While experimenting with the Arduino setup last summer, capturing the field collapse of the primaries, I inadvertently left the DC power disconnected from the board so it was only running on the output from the controller (2.5 vdc). After leaving the rig running for a while the volts from the field collapse suddenly increased from a few volts to over 20 volts rectified DC and remained there.
This makes me wonder, if we saturate the induced core and then lower the excitation current to a fraction of the starting current, and then oscillate it to keep the core fluctuating right at or just below the core's magnetic saturation point, would we get good output from the induced coils vs the input current?

Hmmm.. reminds me of something Tesla once said, about keeping the tension right at the breaking point..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 19, 2014, 08:27:34 PM
This jogged my memory. While experimenting with the Arduino setup last summer, capturing the field collapse of the primaries, I inadvertently left the DC power disconnected from the board so it was only running on the output from the controller (2.5 vdc). After leaving the rig running for a while the volts from the field collapse suddenly increased from a few volts to over 20 volts rectified DC and remained there.
This makes me wonder, if we saturate the induced core and then lower the excitation current to a fraction of the starting current, and then oscillate it to keep the core fluctuating right at or just below the core's magnetic saturation point, would we get good output from the induced coils vs the input current?

Hmmm.. reminds me of something Tesla once said, about keeping the tension right at the breaking point..

This seems to be a unexpected behaviour.... and all that kind of things is what we are looking for. Common science do not explain these devices.
 
Could you explain more clear how the system was set up and the values of the current?
 
Cadman, I am with you. The most important step now it to replicate the patent as it is written. Later it will be time for modifications.
 
Regards 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 19, 2014, 10:15:55 PM
Cadman

I believe that you have built a reasonable working model of the Figeura Device. I think
your electronic commutator is the way to go. So my next step will be to build your
electronic "commutator."
I have been working for a long time on the mechanical commutators and they are hard
to get right. I said a while back that I believe that solid state device is far superior
than an "old school" mechanical one. The only other way to build a mechanical
commutator would be to have a moving brush inside of a barrel of contacts. This
would be very difficult to build, but may be the answer to the mechanical commutator.
The following are some pictures of my commutators and transformers I have made.
Picture 1 is the 32 pin commutator with 1800 RPM motor = 60 hz
Picture 2 is the commutator and brush holder broken down
Picture 3 is the commutator showing the 12Volt DC + connection brush to rotating brush.
Picture 4 is the 16 pin commutator with the 3600 RPM (Old grinder I built)
Picture 5 is the transformer layout
The 32 pin commutator worked much better than the 16 pin because of excess sparking
at the higher speed.
All were a challenge to build as even the slower motor that I trashed by accident sparked
at one point on the circle of electric contacts.

Good luck to all,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 19, 2014, 10:18:26 PM
Try number two:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 20, 2014, 02:20:58 AM
Shadow119g;

wow! excellent build quality.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 20, 2014, 03:56:30 AM
Hanon,

The system setup was very simple and not worth study except for the curious bemf increase. I never did get around to measuring the current, just voltage. I found the old post about it http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-18.html#post240778 and the circuit is attached below. Just take out the battery symbol and you have it.
Actually I don't think it is relevant to the Buforn patent, other than the possible core saturation aspect of it. He certainly didn't use transistors and diodes back then. Maybe those using a solid state driver could make use of it though.

shadow119g, it's kind of funny. You going to the solid state driver from the mechanical commutator, and me doing the opposite. Best of luck to you. Your commutators are quite large compared to mine, so maybe that will make a difference. This is the one I am using http://store.eurtonelectric.com/12bar98brushdiametertangcommutatord-600-3.aspx

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 20, 2014, 04:03:27 AM
Hi All:

You can use the tool here to calculate what is the tesla that you are going to get.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html

Permeability varies from material to material and this uses soft iron permeability as standard I think.

You can easily understand the core saturation point for the iron will start roaring and not humming at that point. It will get hot and you should try to remain within the 2 to 3 Tesla figures. A sudden increase begins at 3.5 Tesla ranges. And if you go to 4 tesla ranges a chain reaction might ensure that can make even the iron melt as per books.

In my personal experience, if we have reasonable level of magnetism Neither far high nor far low, output is reasonably good. Excessive core saturation while increasing the output makes the iron rods very hot and it makes a lot of sound. I typically avoid that point.

Using the tool above you can see you can vary the length of the electromagnet, number of turns per unit lenth and the amperes to arrive at the Tesla figures. However this is not an accurate one for it does not provide for the Diameter of the solenoid. If the diameter of the solenoid changes then the size of the iron inside changes and that has a major impact on saturation points and this is not included in this calculator. So we can take it as a calculation tool but it is not an exact tool. It gives us a rought idea and whether we have reached core saturation or not can be recognized by the sound of the iron. I do not have gauss meters but the just the sound is enough to tell us whether we are going to a higher level.

Very high magnetic field strength must be avoided and it is better to put more iron core at a lower tesla level as the iron will not get hot and the effect will be the same and safety is assured.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 20, 2014, 04:15:08 AM
Indeed, a lot of creativity is going on there, good work.


Here's a simple and quick method: open a power supply, eg. 230>12V, add a  cable from 12v ac, so now the device has 12 v dc and ac output. Take 4 diodes, connect 2 to each ac pin, one to the ring side(cathode, +), the other reverse. Now connect two cable pairs to the other ends of the diodes, each pair gets a plus and a minus side of a diode, but from diffrent ac pins. This way you get two dc pulses, on separate cables, alternating, like:


A_A_A_A_...
_A_A_A_A...


Now you can add a resistor to the dc supply output and mix it to the pulses, if you want the current not to be off between pulses.  Tho, such a DC offset may not be required.


BTW. I apologize for creating the impression that airgaps are in the patent. On some webpages the patent drawings were mixed with drawings from an unknown person (patrick kelly?), so I though they were part of the patent.


As I already mentioned, redirection of back mmf seems to be the point. We do not want a simple transformer.

It is interesting how little people understand about induction, even electrical engineers. One thing we have to make sure is that  we're talking about the same thing  with the terms "back emf" and "back mmf". Somebody said they are the same. I disagree.

Back electromotive force is the term used for the pulse of current and voltage that flows in reverse polarity when the power to a coil is interrupted, aka the collapsing B (or magnetical) field. Basicly this happens in AC in each cycle and usually a transformer tries to resonate in that this back emf is added to the next halfwave, that then has the same polarity like the back emf .
In a low impedance inductor coil the current of the back emf is usually low and the voltage high.  Let us for now ignore the back emf here.

Then there is the back magnetomotive force. it has nothing to do with field collapse, but with self induction. The controversal issue of induction itself makes it confusing: a current will only be induced in the 2ndary when the B field is in change. Nevertheless, as soon as there IS a current in the 2ndary, this coil will immediately become an electromagnet, aka an inductor, to itself. Unfortunately the generated magnetism (the back mmf!) opposes that of the primary. No problem yet, since we can draw current from the secondary, but what happens now, is: as long as there is no load on the  secondary, the transformer does not consume watts, it is running 90 deg. out of phase automaticly, therefor no consumption. But when a load is added to the secondary, the back mmf by returning back to the primary, will force it into phase. The more current you draw, the more it runs in phase and the more energy is consumed by the primary.

So, if we prevent the back mmf from returning to the primary, it will continue to run 90 deg out of phase, but allow to draw from the output nonetheless.

The sooner or later we'll FIGUERA it out...

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 20, 2014, 12:11:29 PM
Hi Dieter:

This is what happens in the primary.. The primary electromagnet for the two inductors P1 and P2 consumes the same 200 watts or 640 to 680 watts irrespective of whether the secondary is connected to load or not..That is what the P1-S-P2 coil connected in the NS-NS-NS polarity does..

Similarly secondary output has a fixed wattage.

If you increase the number of lamps voltage goes down and amperage goes up but wattage remains the same..primary is not affected by whether we connect secondary to load or otherwise..I have already reached that stage..

I'm going to do exactly what you indicated as A_A_A_ which Hanon asked me already to do yesterday..That will make the primaries send an enormous amount of magnetic flux and oscillation of electrical field to the secondary and I would expect the secondary to work very well. Let me tell you tomorrow..This would avoid the commutator and the resistor set up.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 20, 2014, 02:34:03 PM
NRamaswami, if your device consumes 200w without a load then there must be something wrong. If the resistance of the Ps is too low, the current will be practicly short cirquited and the magnetism is only a small sideeffect. The real resitance  is complicated to calculate, but the dc resistance may act as a rule of thumb. eg. 100 ohm at 230v, that would be 230 x 230 / 100= 529 watt.
Theoreticly, with two primaries, it could happen that one sees the b field of the other one as a back mmf, causing a load by counterfighting 2 primaries. that of course should not happen! Remember, the b field has to build each cycle, it follows the voltage delayed, and that delay depends on frequency and impedance. And also the back Emf has these characteristics. Counter fighting primaries have to be prevented under all circumstances. The path from one primary to the other should not be easier than trough the secondary. Which is where we want the current to be induced.


I am making a new Test, with two E cores and a piece of iron sheet as a spacer between the middle leg, and paper between the outer ones. This way the path from the POLES of the Ps will have an easier loop trough the middle leg, but whatever tries to loop trough a primaries core will find an air gap there... to be confirmed...


Regards






Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 20, 2014, 03:14:30 PM
Marathonman: Thank you. I believe your electronic commutator will work.

Cadman: Thank you, I am ordering a commutator, brush holder and brush today.
 I think I remember seeing them before but I was caught up in my own device. I am
sure this commutator will work as it should.

I still believe in electronic devices, as they have no moving parts, relatively inexpensive,
and I believe, more reliable. I envision having two electronic devices and maybe even
two sets of transformers for reliability on any vehicle or maybe even home. Just as piston
powered aircraft  have two magnetos for each engine. Prior to every flight, the aircraft
checklist, has the pilot check the mags my selecting both then left, the both, then right,
then back to both prior to takeoff.
Thank you again,

Shadow

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 20, 2014, 05:02:34 PM
Shadow, you're welcome.

I believe in electronic devices too, but building a driver for something like this generator is out of my league.

My thinking is, since I will not be using radio frequencies, simple mechanical devices have some excellent advantages to offer. Simplicity and durability for instance. I will be using a lead acid battery source at 12 volts and higher along with various coil sizes and combinations while testing. Since that will result in wildly varying amperage demands from one setup to another, a simple heavy duty commutator and a coil of inexpensive nichrome resistor wire will make it very easy to change the driver circuit resistances to suit the situation, without worrying about blowing up sensitive electronic components. The resistor wire can handle accidental short circuits and dissipate 100s of watts no problem, if need be.

Besides, it will be much easier to design the electronics once the requirements are firmly established.
Either that or one of the other builds will be wildly successful and it will be a moot point.

:)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 20, 2014, 06:47:21 PM
I agree. Even though I am good with machining, welding and other skills
It would be foolish for me to try and build the commutator made by
Eurton Electric. I don't think I could buy the copper for what the
commutator cost. I am back on track now, thanks again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 20, 2014, 07:46:07 PM
Thank you very much :D
I have some very good board designs availible if you you guys need them. i am using DIPTRACE free to 300 pins. i am using 64 bit right now but the 32 bit can be downloaded also. if i post my board output file someone can use diptrace to open it just point it to the file. i'm sure you've seen the boards they are sooooo sexy. ha ha ha !. the file can be output in Gerber and NC Drill to have made. the sequence is 123456789987654321 and has central grounding pin for all transistors. the timing can be set from 50 Hz to 800 Hz with a change in cap from 100 nf to 10 nf then adjust trim resistors. the Transistor Traces are rated for just over two amps 50 mil.
NTE makes a adjustable Vitreous wound resistor that's 225 and 300 watts. that's a lot of amperage guys at 12 or 24 volts. but i will be using it at 100 volts at 1.3 amps with 1500 turns = 2 to 3 Teslas @ 1.5 to 2"x 8" core 5" coil. 3/4 " secondary.

One thing though i have a question about timing: i found a different set up for 555 , it is the pic on top.  which one is better or is it just personal preferance ????both are Astable.

I was wondering if one could wire a transformer to have 9 taps would that work for this with no resistors????? just curious.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 20, 2014, 08:02:39 PM
Hi Dieter:

Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately I'm not able to clarify the theoretical points stated by you. All I can say is this. When the coil is used only on the Figuera device of two primaries and one secondary in the middle with a common core, it behaves like this with low wattage. When it used a transformer using only one single primary where the secondary is wound under the primary, the same coil consumes with an iron core in the center 220 volts and 6 amps and with an air core 220 volts and 18 amps. So Figueras design is an optimized design. Incidentally with the secondary surrounded by center the output of transformer is 85% efficiency only which is understandble considering the core loss due to soft iron which is not even insulated and is fully of eddy currents. If we use laminated steel cores to make the central core or the more expensive ferrite core, the losses will be much more lesser and efficiency will improve.

Another point to note is that I'm connecting the primaries in series and not in parallel. So I can only say what happens in experimental results. I cannot theorize that some thing is wrong or right. I accept the experimental results. I cannot say if some thing is wrong or right. I just accept them and proceed from them. I'm sorry I'm unable to theoretically explain what is happening as I do not have specific knowledge in this field.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 20, 2014, 08:56:43 PM
NRamaswami,


In series? You mean the 7 elements, but I hope not Primary A and B in series?


First of all, reduce the current in the primaries so they won't get hot without a load. Then you have to watch the paths carefully. The primaries cause magnetism, ok. But where does it flow to? A magnetical north pole tries to close the loop to his own south pole, or to an other south pole. If that is not possible, it will try to spread the magnetical strenght in the iron core as much as possible in all directions. These two states are fundamentally diffrent from one another. When a loop was closed, a path is created, absorbing virtually any magnetism. In this state the core will be nonmagnetic to external iron pieces. A loop path was found and therefor the behaviour is non-pathseeking.


On the other hand, when no path was found, the core will continue attracting external iron.  It will appear "magnetical" in every corner of the core. It is actively pathseeking. Magnetism will "leak" at all sides.


With this knowkedge you can test your setup and see if a primary is able to close the magnetical loop. You feed DC to it, unpulsed and you should get no attraction when you try to stick a nail to the core. Any core assembly connection should be as lossless as possible. Leakage can be detected and fixed, eg. by precisely even steel contact surfaces.


Airgaps (between coils) must be small enough to maintain the loop, but they are an unavoidable source for leakage. But this is not always bad, when a gap is inside (or under) a coil then the leak becomes a field distributor.


So what I am trying to say is, try to find out what paths your coils are using and consider the back mmf to be present on paths (not neccessarily the same) as well, but slightly delayed, possibly interacting with the next upcoming fwd halfwave.


I can only repeat, the goal is to prevent the magnet field that is created by the induced current in the secondary (our Output!) from flowing back to the originating primary. It may flow to the other primary, which is low at that moment, so the loss does not become significant...


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 20, 2014, 10:43:33 PM
Here it is a simple dircuit to create the pattern told by Dieter before:

A_A_A_A_A_A_A_A_A
_A_A_A_A_A_A_A_A_

It is a small modification to a common diode bridge in order to operate with two series of coils in parallel

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 20, 2014, 10:52:01 PM
Hi all,

In this link:

http://maestroviejo.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/espero-que-con-esto-no-tengan-disculpa-para-dejar-de-pagar-la-electricidad-gracias-a-clemente-figuera/#comment-42069 (http://maestroviejo.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/espero-que-con-esto-no-tengan-disculpa-para-dejar-de-pagar-la-electricidad-gracias-a-clemente-figuera/#comment-42069)

A guy reports successful replica of Figuera device. He states:

   ( Translation)
   
    Some basic knowledge of electricity is required.
    1º How to make a inductor electromagnet, taking into account the number of turns to avoid that the iron reach the saturation,  in order to be efficient
    2º The turns in the collecting coils, for the voltage needed
    3º A variable frequency drive VFD (or similar) to induce the electromagnets
    4º A diode to keep the electromagnets a 10% charged as minimun, without a return path
    5º Basic means of electric safety

Look at the pictures in the top side of this page. He grounds the induced coil with a cap in between the coil and the ground.

Maybe the key is to mantain a 10% minimun current all the time. some sketches are very weird because he mixes AC with DC current from a small battery. I think he did not disclose the real schematics but just the idea...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on March 20, 2014, 11:04:51 PM
Marathonman,

On Dec. 24, 2013, I posted in Reply #454, a link to a 555 circuit that produces a wave similar to a sinewave. In one circuit, the wave form is above 0v (ground), the other circuits wave form goes positive to negative. It may or may not be of interest to you.

http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/images/555-Osc-1.gif

Best of luck to all,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 21, 2014, 03:33:29 AM
Marathonman,

On Dec. 24, 2013, I posted in Reply #454, a link to a 555 circuit that produces a wave similar to a sinewave. In one circuit, the wave form is above 0v (ground), the other circuits wave form goes positive to negative. It may or may not be of interest to you.

http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/images/555-Osc-1.gif

Best of luck to all,
Bob
Bob,
I have studied these type of circuits and have certain ideas in back of mind that i might implement with smaller cores i have acquired . i am thankful for your attention to detail and appriciate  you bringing it to my attention. at this moment though my full attention is on the task at hand. i have spent considerable funds on the proper cores and timing device as i deem appropriately fit for Figueras device at assumed correct proportions thus producing evidence of my assumptions and labor shortly.
HAPPY FIGUERING !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 21, 2014, 06:04:11 AM
Hanon,


actually I was referring to the following:
(you may try to exchange the contacts of Primary 2, in the pic it's  N y N). Needless to say, a circuit that allows to alter the frequency makes more sense.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 21, 2014, 06:55:57 AM
Hi Dieter:

I'm using both P1 and P2 in series only and not in parallel. I will change to parallel and check their performance.

I agree with you that the electromagnet should feel like no magnet to be the most efficient. However soft iron being strongly magnetic will show magnetism, strong magnetism at that and so leakage is bound to be there when we use soft iron. A core material that will cause low magnetism that is sufficient to make the induced emf which causes either no or low core loss might be ideal solution. We will try to use the laminated transformer cores in the primary and soft iron in the secondary or soft iron in the primary and laminated cores in the secondary. Let me see which one works.

Hanon: If we make one primary larger and one primary smaller then both of them should have current at the same time as the time difference between the two waves is just 10 milliseconds in AC circuits. This is my gut feeling only and remains to be checked.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 21, 2014, 09:39:58 AM
Hi all,
 
Here I attach a circuit with AC rectified current + DC base current to avoid reaching zero current.
 
If anyone knows any other circuit to accomplish this objective please share it in the forum. 
 
In case you use a VFD (Variable Frequency Drive) to get pulsed DC you may provide a minimum current during all the time installing a resistor in parallel to the VFD . This way you could feed a small current even during the off-pulses.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 21, 2014, 04:55:12 PM
Cadman:

Are you planning on using one or two brushes on your mechanical commutator?

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 21, 2014, 06:56:19 PM
Hanon and everyone;

You got me thinking about what you said of the post of the guy that keeps 10% of voltage in Secondary core. it dawned on me that something similar was happening in the figueras core i am working on. if you remember back when i posted a wave form graph of what i thought was happening . i then studied it for quite some time and it dawned on me that even though the core is being switched from NS to SN the Secondary core never sees Zero flux. it is changed from NS to SN when it is half way to zero. this tells me that at position 5 the core is full of flux from both cores and it is them being switched from NS to SN. yes/no
i have included the graph again below. please look at the moved zero volt line. the core is full of flux but at even amounts so no voltage or current produced but that doesn't mean the core is not full of flux just no definitive poles.    IS THIS POSSIBLE or am i just dead wrong.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 21, 2014, 08:22:02 PM
Shadow,

I'm using only one brush.

Marathonman,

This applies to the setup I am building, with one center core. The way I see it there is almost always the same amount of flux in the induced core, call it 100%. At any point in time that 100% is provided by the 2 inducer coils. One may be supplying 60% and the other 40%, or 50-50, or 20-80 etc. and the core poles do not ever reverse. The quantity of flux is constant, the balance of flux between north and south poles is what changes. Of course I could be mistaken.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 21, 2014, 08:42:37 PM
Cadman


You're right about the primaries. But the induced willl have an alternating polarity. That requires one Primary north up, the other one south up. Otherwise there wouldn't be much going on in the secondary.


Hanon,


Good work with the diagram, you may want to combine it with the halfwave separator.


BTW., funny thought: how about to add a smoothed negative voltage to the rectified pulse or halfwave, eg. add -12 Volts to a +10V pulse, that should invert the waveform and give some "stingy" pulses that blend smoothly to the dc offset (here -2 volts). The result is negative, but you just have to swap the wires... Untested thought tho.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 21, 2014, 08:54:03 PM
Dieter,

Well, I disagree, at least until proven otherwise. The reason being that the n poles and s poles of the inducers are always north and south, so how could the corresponding ends of the induced core have a different magnetic polarity? Serious question. The fields of the inducer coils do not collapse, they are reduced in steps.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 21, 2014, 10:22:24 PM
hello;
 I'm sorry to bug everyone but i need help.
my other post i posted again the wrong calculations based on 12 volt not 100. Sorry so stupid of me. well i want to know if a 1.5 inch iron core with a radius of 1.25 and 1 inch coil at a depth of 1/2 inch @ 18 awg wire will put out that much Tesla's. according to the program i used it says i need only 300 turns to achieve almost 3 Tesla's. are these calculations correct. PLEASE HELP!

here is shortcut to program and below is screen shot of calculations 
 http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/electromagnetism/solenoid

oh man radius is wrong i'm sorry i will repost
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 21, 2014, 10:29:53 PM
SORRY FOR REPOST PIC WAS WRONG. PLEASE FORGIVE.
is this correct Please help!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 21, 2014, 10:51:24 PM
Hello guys!

The other day I was searching the internet for an offset ac power supply for this project and I came up with this simple circuit (see picture below). I think this are exactly the waveforms  that are needed for the electromagnets, so I hope it helps anyone at this project.

If AC source (transformer) is 24v and battery is also 24v, then the resistors must be around 40W (you could also use adequate lightbulbs instead of resistors) and the output on the coils will be around 25W, but you can also go with the small power version and use 12V AC and 12V battery. In this case the resistors should be around 7W.

Just calculate the coil according to Ohms law and resistance per meter for your wire and you should be fine.

Well this circuit is nothing about efficiency, but it simply should do the trick.

Dann

http://s26.postimg.org/psz4fs1mh/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera.jpg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 21, 2014, 11:05:32 PM
Marathonman:

The calculation is correct. You are talking about a 1 inch long but 1.5 inch dia electromagnet core with 300 turns per inch.  That turns out to be 11811 turns per meter. You would find the magnet tryiing to jump. The other problem is that the magnet would be wound like a pancake. The wire will try to take more amps and the magnet would be very unstable.  I do not cross more than 1800 turns per meter as a thumb rule. If the magnetic field is very strong you are not going to get any output in secondary. If you send 2 amps current the iron will melt at these ranges. So be careful. (Core saturation starts at 20 turns per inch). You are dealing with Electricity that can kill and harm and so avoid taking risks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 21, 2014, 11:29:49 PM
Cadman,
.I already explained that, so here in short:
P1 is always north, P 2 always south, but they alternate in intensity. If P 1 is most intensive, it will almost exclusively flow trough Y, making Y south (talking about upside). Then, P 1 reaches minumum and P 2 is at maximum, P 2 will almost exclusively flow trough Y, tho, now in the reverse direction.


The collapsing field in Y will add to the next halfwave of the AC output.


The back mmf on the other hand will choose the path of least resistance, that is the currently non-intense side that has the same polarity like the back magnetomotive force. This is why we should get OU, shipping around Lenz law.


If both Ps are north, then there will always be the same polarity and even amplitude in Y. The back EMF will reduce the efficiency and the back MMF will do so even more. I would be surprised if there are 20 Millivolts in the output. I could be wrong tho. However,  just swap the wires to compare.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 22, 2014, 12:02:23 AM
Hi all,

Another method to have a AC signal without reaching zero current anytime  (see attached picture).

Marathonman, I do not understand your explanation about the wave and the 5th contact in the conmutator . Why do the zero level change in the upside and downside of the signal? Why does the flux never reach zero from NS to SN? Could you explain it in a different way?

Madddann, Welcome !!  Thanks for your great contribution. I will study in deepth. It seems to be a simple circuit. It will be great if it works !! Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 22, 2014, 12:32:58 AM
the changed zero level is where both Electromagnets are even, after that one continues to lower and one continues to raise.
the real zero line in the middle is where normal zero would be if electromagnet was to fall completely but it is not, the secondary is switching polarity at 50 % NS to SN.

NRamaswami:

18 awg wire is .0403 inch / 1 inch = 24.8 turns per inch  so what am i suppose to avoid that at 20 turn per inch limit. EXPLAIN!


 dieter;
You get a gold star on your forehead and 15 minutes extra recess. very good explain!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 22, 2014, 05:23:21 AM
Marathonman:

You probably are using enamal coated magnet wire. Not plastic insulated wire. If you wind for 1 inch with 1.5 inch dia, you are talking about 12 layers of turns. Not sure how the magnet would function but test it. But if you are going to 2 amps in that small piece things could be messy. That is all I know. If the iron shouts rather than an humming sound note that it is a warning.  Go ahead and do the experiment and just advise what happens..I have not done these things. My magnets are 4 inch dia and as a thumb rule I have always used a minimum of 1.5:1 LD ratio and maximum of 4:1 LD ratio but well I could be wrong..Just advise the experimental results please. If I were to follow you, I would need to reduce it to 2.5 inches length for 4 inch dia magnets. The intensity in your case is much more higher than what I have done. 11000 turns per meter is an enormous number of wire density in so far as turn ratios are concerned. try with low voltages and then go higher and take care. That is all I would say. All the best.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 22, 2014, 01:31:36 PM
NRamaswami;

 Yes sir you are correct i am using mag wire. i plan on going to max amps of 1 even though traces are rated for 2.1a i will not go no higher than 1 as per your and others 2 to 3 Teslas recommendations so i think i will be ok  plus my past experiences i know core will scream but thanks for the re info just the same. core is 1 1/2 inch but coil is 1"long x .75" thick  at 18 awg diameter @ 307 turns. the MJH11022 T0 247's have a max dissipate of 150 watts 1.5a @100v  so i'll stay at 1 amp. i took myself through transformer school the last couple of days so i follow you well and can understand where you are coming from. plus i took many transformers apart and studied the construction, thickness and coil parameters this is why came to my present design specification for Figueras Transformer.  figueras calls for 100 v @ 1a so this is what i am using.
Of course i will advise this is why i am here.

I HOPE YOU FIGUERA IT OUT. ha ha ha

just a little hummer below.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 22, 2014, 08:15:35 PM
Marathonman:

Thanks for the kind words. I'm obliged. I do not understand much about transistors and electronics and in a way I'm unable to like them for the last time I tried to make circuits, I had lead smoke got in to my nose and it was a big trouble for me for almost two months. It is not for me. I understood the coil size but all said and done a small coil is a small coil whatever be the turn density. If you are making two 1 inch primaries, then you need to have a secondary that is also less than 1 inch long. I do not know how you are going to do and what is the output you are going to get but I wish you all success. I believe that I have understood this device very well now and I will get a commutator, that can withstand stress and it will take another week or ten days for it to be customized and given to me. Then let me try my hands..

By the way can any body suggest a low magnetic, low core loss, low thermal conducting material for me to try to check how the system would work when we use low core loss material and low magnetic materials. I would be obliged for any suggestions. Thanks to all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 22, 2014, 08:35:31 PM
Hello All:

Can some one explain to me how to calculate and find out the capacitance of a coil..How do we know what much of current can be retained in a capacitor or coil..Is there any formula for it? Please oblige.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 23, 2014, 12:14:43 AM
Ok, everybody,

I want you to try, just for a moment, to think out of the box. I know you are openminded, otherwise you would not believe in Free Energy.

So what I got is success, but I had to stretch the term "Figuera" pretty much. Nonetheless, save the image and revisit it later, just don't ignore it please, cause from my POV this is the real deal and it means something to me that I present this here and not on youtube.

As so often in Life, I discovered a feature by accident. And this feature is yet to be exploited,  as right now certain ratios are coincedental. Ok, in simple terms...

I connected the middle coil to the 2 halfwave pulses, virtually reunited them to AC. So this was now the primary. Then I connected a rectifier, a LED and the voltmeter to the right coil.

I measured 2.18 vdc at 8.3 mA, the LED was dimmly lit.

Then out of boredom I short circuited the left coil, and beng! 2.67 vdc at 49.3 mA !!!

The Led was blindingly bright and the device became more silent.

Now, by mistake the left and right coil are not identical, the right one has more turns and 7.4 Ohm, compared to 6.4 Ohm that the left one has. So I made a test, swapped them : left out and right short circuited. Interesting result, efficiency dropped to
2.36vdc at 39mA. So the efficiency is higher when the shortened has fewer turns than the output coil (which is yet to be exploited in further optimizing).

Anyway, long story short: I did this measurement with greatest care and honesty and I measured all with the same meter, which appeared to work properly:

In: 0.021 Watt
Out: 0.131 Watt
Efficiency: 614%

I calculated roughly, a device of the size 1.5*1.5*0.9 meter would produce  3500 Watt, at 500 Watt Input. However, I run the test with a very small current, although the ferrite core seems to be saturated quickly in this mode.

Ok, here's the pic:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 23, 2014, 01:25:15 AM
Ok, everybody,

I want you to try, just for a moment, to think out of the box. I know you are openminded, otherwise you would not believe in Free Energy.

So what I got is success, but I had to stretch the term "Figuera" pretty much. Nonetheless, save the image and revisit it later, just don't ignore it please, cause from my POV this is the real deal and it means something to me that I present this here and not on youtube.

As so often in Life, I discovered a feature by accident. And this feature is yet to be exploited,  as right now certain ratios are coincedental. Ok, in simple terms...

I connected the middle coil to the 2 halfwave pulses, virtually reunited them to AC. So this was now the primary. Then I connected a rectifier, a LED and the voltmeter to the right coil.

I measured 2.18 vdc at 8.3 mA, the LED was dimmly lit.

Then out of boredom I short circuited the left coil, and beng! 2.67 vdc at 49.3 mA !!!

The Led was blindingly bright and the device became more silent.

Now, by mistake the left and right coil are not identical, the right one has more turns and 7.4 Ohm, compared to 6.4 Ohm that the left one has. So I made a test, swapped them : left out and right short circuited. Interesting result, efficiency dropped to
2.36vdc at 39mA. So the efficiency is higher when the shortened has fewer turns than the output coil (which is yet to be exploited in further optimizing).

Anyway, long story short: I did this measurement with greatest care and honesty and I measured all with the same meter, which appeared to work properly:

In: 0.021 Watt
Out: 0.131 Watt
Efficiency: 614%

I calculated roughly, a device of the size 1.5*1.5*0.9 meter would produce  3500 Watt, at 500 Watt Input. However, I run the test with a very small current, although the ferrite core seems to be saturated quickly in this mode.

Ok, here's the pic:


Dieter, I really need a circuit diagram to properly understand what you mean.
Is there any chance you can make  a circuit diagram please?
Great work by the way.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 23, 2014, 03:12:35 AM
It is incredibly simple, but here you go. The resistance in AC is complex, so the primary does not simply run on 0.75v at 200 mA, but in fact on 0.188 v at 114 mA.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 23, 2014, 04:21:52 AM
dieter:  thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 23, 2014, 05:53:59 AM
Great Work Dieter. The simpler it is Better it is. I have only plastic tubes and soft iron rods and lot of coils and I will check if what you have done here could be replicated on a larger size. The cores though will be straight NS-NS-NS only. Let me check and tell you if it works. But since we things a lot bigger, it will take some time for us to do.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 23, 2014, 09:50:02 AM
It is incredibly simple, but here you go. The resistance in AC is complex, so the primary does not simply run on 0.75v at 200 mA, but in fact on 0.188 v at 114 mA.
Can you draw, there you put voltmeter and ampermeter in input coil?


Good work, keep going...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: energia9 on March 23, 2014, 10:51:18 AM
It is incredibly simple, but here you go. The resistance in AC is complex, so the primary does not simply run on 0.75v at 200 mA, but in fact on 0.188 v at 114 mA.
dont forget, ac is not dc, so calculation differs too,  this is not overunity .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 23, 2014, 12:09:06 PM
dont forget, ac is not dc, so calculation differs too,  this is not overunity .
If he meashure in AC mode with multimeter, then measurements can be correct.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 23, 2014, 12:19:12 PM
Dieter,
Great results!!! I suppose that if you are also applying Jensen UDT then you should have used an air gap in one side of the central leg to increase its reluctance. Have you done so?

You device recalls me to the Thane Heins transformer.

Keep on the good work.

The F-machine is similar to the Jensen UDT:
http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/ph-machine.htm (http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/ph-machine.htm)
http://en.shram.kiev.ua/top/invention/invention2/2.shtml (http://en.shram.kiev.ua/top/invention/invention2/2.shtml)
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Issue5.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Issue5.pdf)        See Page 6

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 23, 2014, 02:12:36 PM
 NRamaswami;

when i stated my cores were 1 1/2 inch i was referring to core thickness not length. i miss posted earlier as my Primary cores being 8" but their not their 5" long x 1 1/2 " thick x 1 1/2" wide and Secondaries are 3/4"x 1 1/2"x 5" this makes my Primary cores Twice as big as Secondaries.  with my cores being 1 1/2" wide  this leaves me a window of two inches to play with in Primary coil length. i'm starting at 1 inch but can expand to 2" if i want or need to.
oh i almost forgot my cores are I cores so they can be stacked together like Lego building blocks.(III) easy to add extra power if needed. end core will be C cores but inner cores are all I cores for easy expansion. Remember it's so easy a kid can build it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 23, 2014, 02:40:38 PM
No, no airgaps.  IN was measured like this : AC was separated to 2 dc halfwaves, measured as dc, then reunited to AC, but this can be skipped and AC can be used right away. The 54 ohm resistor is there to limit the supply. There isn't much energy after that 54 Ohm resistor, even when stepped up normaly barely enough to light the LED at all.
The LED is a 5in1 3V 100mA LED (EDIT: can't be, more like 50 mA , 150 mW max).


It was also very interesting to get 49 mA with the shortened, after getting only 8mA with it unloaded/open.


I still try to understand it and yes, it may be a bi-torroid mechanism, reluctance imbalance due to impedance imbalance maybe. A shortend coil may perform recursively in terms of selfinductance...


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 23, 2014, 03:31:08 PM
Dieter, can you modify your circuit like the enclosed diagram
 and measure the battery voltage over a period of 1 hour?
It will tell us all we need to know I suspect.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 23, 2014, 04:49:20 PM
I don't have a lead battery and the output voltage of this setup is not good to charge a car battery. I seem to observe better efficiency after a 54 ohm resistor than after only 27 ohm (79mA, yet got to do the math precisely), so the saruration may be reached quickly in such a small scale setup.


I'd be glad if some of you try it, since my meters are simple.


I will however try to run it at higher voltages to get about 15 Volts output and then add my inverter. Something like in series with some lightbulbs attached to mains.


BTW. you can use your figuera coils, just connect them "reversely". That's what I did. No gaps tho.


As I said, i did the measurement with greatest care, within my possibilities, which are limited and that's where you come in. I have to say, from all the setups with various cores and coils that I have made recently, some of them with great effort, this is clearly the most efficient.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: verpies on March 23, 2014, 05:31:50 PM
I connected the middle coil to the 2 halfwave pulses, virtually reunited them to AC. So this was now the primary. Then I connected a rectifier, a LED and the voltmeter to the right coil.
That means that the input waveform was PDC, not pure DC.

Then out of boredom I short circuited the left coil, and bang! 2.67VDC at 49.3mA !!!
...
Out: 0.131 Watt
Your output power calculation is wrong because for a PDC waveform, the calculation 2.67V * 49.3mA = 0.131W is invalid.
That calculation is valid only for pure DC.
It is invalid for PDC and AC.

Also, it is not surprising that shorting the left winding increases the flux variations in the right winding, because magnetic flux is expelled from under any shorted windings and since half of the flux cannot go through the left leg of the core anymore, then it must go through the right leg of the core....inducting more dΦ/dt there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 23, 2014, 05:51:56 PM
Very interesting reading at      http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2011-02-14g

i especially found this very interesting.

The Magnetic Field
A Charged Particle moving in space or in a medium creates a Magnetic Field. If we wanted to make the charged particle move faster, we need to find a way to reduce its Magnetic Field. The Magnetic Field acts as a Break in some situations. Thus, we commonly see heating of Coils in Transformers, Generators and so on, that's proportional to the power output drawn.

Take two separate sources of Magnetic Fields, opposing, North to North squeezed together, if one was to apply the superposition rules, this would mean that it cancels the Magnetic Field. This is not entirely true unless the source of each Magnetic Field occupies the same physical space at the same time and with the same magnitude. In saying this, the Magnetic Field is greatly reduced the tighter the Magnetic Fields are squeezed together. I have done a very simple experiment that can easily show this is true.

E.G:

Use a CRT TV screen, turn on the TV and set the screen to blue or some solid colour, tape one Magnet on the screen, in the middle, with one pole facing out of the screen. Now push another Magnet into the Magnet on the screen with the Magnetic Fields opposing, North to North, or South to South, watch the field decrease in size on the screen. This experiment is very easy and provable every day of the week.

So with: "geometrically opposing fields" we can see why this is important. It is a way to reduce Lenz's Law, It creates a self feed back mechanism in the power coils that have an EMF generated in them, and reduced Lenz's Law means that the output can go above unity. The very requirement here is that Charges must be flowing for this process to occur.

i have also been studying the wave form from madddann on post 1072 so as i see it this is what the Secondary coil wave form output will look like below.
output coil never sees zero it is keep at no less than 50 %...... interesting to say the least.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 23, 2014, 06:20:08 PM
You just said it, half of the flux... so why the 8 vs 49 mA discrepancy with 20% voltage gain? Like 1+1=7? O-k...


Speaking of pulses, input and output have the same pulses, so the relation persists. And: the multimeter has an internal capacitor, otherwise the values would jump around.


At this point I leave it up to you to check it out, I will not go trough a trial of theoretical naysaying defense. Take it or leave it, AS IS. 


I'd rarther talk about the mechanisms, bejond institutional dogmata. 


Eg. the recursion of excessive selfinduction, is it reversing polarity with every iteration? If so, does it "eat up" the back magnetomotive force?


Is the bmmf of the output coil choosing the path trough the shortened, rather than trough the primary? The primary will be in opposing polarity to that bmmf, But what is the shortened doing? Shouldn't it have a bmmf like the output? Or does the mentioned recursion compensate it, making it the easier path?


And how does the back emf affect the whole thing? These are my thougts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 23, 2014, 06:54:11 PM
Madddann,

The sketch that you provided in post 1072 achieve a 180º unphase between the two signals.

Here we need a system which will provide 90º unphased signals, as the attached imagen shows:

EDIT: As your schematic shows always a positive signal maybe it is possible to be valid. While one intensity is increasing the other intensity is decreasing.OK.  90º unphase was defined for a rectified AC which is not the case for this circuit. I will think it again.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 23, 2014, 07:16:51 PM
I stand corrected HANON but the outcome is still the same. the Secondary core is switching  polarity at intensities at 50 % level from N/S to S/N. it does not ever see zero. this will act as a battery as described by Figueras to be paralleled or series to attain desired current and voltage. Yes/no
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: John.K1 on March 23, 2014, 08:25:09 PM
Guys,

I know it was here on the server already before but I would like to bring it to your attention again. Two documents which are more then close to this topic.  ;)

In the VladimirUtkins document pay the attention to shorted loops and in the lenzless pdf you gen get some more idea of the modification of your device. ;) 

Cheers


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 23, 2014, 09:56:19 PM
Hello Hanon!

Well I think you remember Woopy's replication, here he showed the signals from the comutator:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-2.html#post213544

I think the two signals are the same as the output from my circuit (except the ripples) so we should be good, what do you think?

Dann

Madddann,

The sketch that you provided in post 1072 achieve a 180º unphase between the two signals.

Here we need a system which will provide 90º unphased signals, as the attached imagen shows:

EDIT: As your schematic shows always a positive signal maybe it is possible to be valid. While one intensity is increasing the other intensity is decreasing.OK.  90º unphase was defined for a rectified AC which is not the case for this circuit. I will think it again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 23, 2014, 10:56:49 PM
Hi Maddann,

I have re-think it and your proposal is perfect. It is what Figuera said: "while one current is increasing the other is decreasing". I have just one doubt: Can we mix an AC source with a DC source in the same circuit?

Also there is a page where a 3-phase AC current is transformed into a 2-phase AC current with 90º unphase using a "Scott Connection". I do not know what is that, but I put here the link in order that anyone may use it:

http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html (http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html)

Latter the 2-phase AC current may be rectified to get the required final signals.

I hope it helps

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: verpies on March 23, 2014, 11:43:17 PM
You just said it, half of the flux... so why the 8 vs 49 mA discrepancy with 20% voltage gain? Like 1+1=7? O-k...
Because magnetic flux is not electric current.  The relationship between them is square.
You are assuming a linear relationship between flux variations and current and then you are disproving that assumption (in English that debating technique even has a name: a "Straw Man").

Speaking of pulses, input and output have the same pulses, so the relation persists. And: the multimeter has an internal capacitor, otherwise the values would jump around.
At this point I leave it up to you to check it out, I will not go trough a trial of theoretical naysaying defense. Take it or leave it, AS IS. 
I am not going to leave you misleading other people, that average Volts * average Amps = average Watts, for non-DC waveforms.
Apparently you are very ignorant of power measuring principles.
If you want to play hard ball with me, you need to understand first, that I am not defending myself as you had implied above - I am attacking your power measuring ignorance.

Your claim that input and output are pulsed only proves that you don't have pure DC waveforms there.  It does not mean, that you cannot multiply average Volts by average Amps displayed by your averaging multimeter (with an averaging capacitor inside) to obtain average Watts.
The same voltage waveforms at the input and the output do not change anything.

For non-DC input waveforms you must multiply instantaneous voltage by instantaneous current and average these products to obtain average input power.  You can do the same for output power or you can use a shortcut and connect a sole non-inductive incandescent light bulb to the output and measure its brightness with a PV cell in a dark box (Grumage deftly calls it a "Wattbox").

There are other shortcuts you can use if your waveforms are periodic and of simple shapes, but not without knowing the phase relationship between the input voltage and input current waveforms (as well as the phase shift between the output voltage and output current waveforms).

I'd rather talk about the mechanisms, beyond institutional dogmata. 
Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
Electric power measurement principles are as I described them not because of some authority, but they are that way because it is mathematically and experimentally demonstrateable that:
AVERAGE(V) * AVERAGE(I) <> AVERAGE(V*I)
Do you want me to show proof of the above inequality to you?

As far as mechanisms, I already wrote that a shorted winding excludes magnetic flux variations inside that winding. 
Magnetically this is almost the same as breaking off that leg of the core which has the shorted winding over it... and throwing it in the trash.
The lower the resistance of the shorted winding the more complete the flux variation exclusion.

In fact any resistive load placed across any secondary winding will cause partial expulsion of magnetic flux variations from under that winding.  If the flux cannot find an easy path (low reluctance) to close the flux loop then it will close through air.
This is illustrated by the diagram below.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 23, 2014, 11:43:53 PM
NRamaswami;

when i stated my cores were 1 1/2 inch i was referring to core thickness not length. i miss posted earlier as my Primary cores being 8" but their not their 5" long x 1 1/2 " thick x 1 1/2" wide and Secondaries are 3/4"x 1 1/2"x 5" this makes my Primary cores Twice as big as Secondaries.  with my cores being 1 1/2" wide  this leaves me a window of two inches to play with in Primary coil length. i'm starting at 1 inch but can expand to 2" if i want or need to.
oh i almost forgot my cores are I cores so they can be stacked together like Lego building blocks.(III) easy to add extra power if needed. end core will be C cores but inner cores are all I cores for easy expansion. Remember it's so easy a kid can build it.

Marathonman:

Then your Tesla calculations are also wrong. They would come only about .6 Tesla for a 307 turns and 12.5 cm I core  No core saturation and you may get good results. All the best.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Jimboot on March 24, 2014, 12:16:26 AM

Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

I was brought up to believe every sunday we drank the blood of Jesus and ate his flesh. That's also dogma. Science is often proven wrong. I think that was the point Dieter was making. Dogma = closed mind.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 24, 2014, 12:20:42 AM
Dieter,

I am with you. You are reporting a COP above 6 (supposing that your meters are right)

Maybe you have to multiply your calculation by sqrt(2)/2 = 0.707 to convert maximun voltage and current to rms values , but anyway you have a COP around 4 or 5, clearly above COP 1.

Keep the good work. I think that your system is not pure Figuera´s. But we just need an overunity device to change this world for the better. Go ahead. It will be good if you could test it in the range of volt and amps instead of mV and mA.

Regads
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: verpies on March 24, 2014, 12:26:43 AM
I was brought up to believe every sunday we drank the blood of Jesus and ate his flesh. That's also dogma. Science is often proven wrong. I think that was the point Dieter was making. Dogma = closed mind.
"Closed mind" is a different concept, albeit related.
If that is what he meant than he should choose his words more carefully. 

If your interpretation is correct than it becomes apparent that he did not read any of my more unconventional posts, yet is quick to judge me as "close minded" just because I quoted some well known power measuring principles.
Just because there is a lot of authoritarian dogma taught in physics departments does not mean that all of it is wrong.  Electric engineering, power measuring principles, Ohm's law, etc.. are on of the areas where the mainstream has it correct ...and it can be verified experimentally any time.

Science is often proven wrong
Then let him prove my science wrong with the scientific method - not with name calling.
Dieter better focus on criticizing my ideas and logic, rather than my state of mind.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: John.K1 on March 24, 2014, 12:32:42 AM
Dieter,
Have u COP over 2?  Make it self runner and prove u are right :)

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: verpies on March 24, 2014, 12:32:51 AM
Maybe you have to multiply your calculation by sqrt(2)/2 = 0.707 to convert maximun voltage and current to rms values ,
That would work for full sinewaves only...and average power could be calculated out of these two RMS values only if the phase relationship was known between the sine voltage and the sine current.  This is one of the shortcuts that I had mentioned previously.
For calculating the power of arbitrary waveforms, only multiplication of instantaneous voltage and current works reliably - not average voltage, nor average current multiplication.

P.S.
The RMS calculation is a form of a geometric average.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: verpies on March 24, 2014, 12:38:44 AM
Dieter,
Have u COP over 2?  Make it self runner and prove u are right :)
Exactly. 
O/I Power measurements become superfluous if long self-running condition is achieved, without external energy delivery.  Nature is the ultimate verifier of O/I>1 claims.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2014, 01:01:10 AM
Marathonman:

Then your Tesla calculations are also wrong. They would come only about .6 Tesla for a 307 turns and 12.5 cm I core  No core saturation and you may get good results. All the best.
So basically your telling me the program i am using is wrong and the results i posted on post #1071 is wrong. well you better email the guy that coded the program and tell him he is wrong to while your at it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Jimboot on March 24, 2014, 01:05:10 AM
"Closed mind" is a different concept, albeit related.
If that is what he meant than he should choose his words more carefully. 

If your interpretation is correct than it becomes apparent that he did not read any of my more unconventional posts, yet is quick to judge me as "close minded" just because I quoted some well known power measuring principles.
Just because there is a lot of authoritarian dogma taught in physics departments does not mean that all of it is wrong.  Electric engineering, power measuring principles, Ohm's law, etc.. are on of the areas where the mainstream has it correct ...and it can be verified experimentally any time.
Then let him prove my science wrong with the scientific method - not with name calling.
Dieter better focus on criticizing my ideas and logic, rather than my state of mind.
Didn't realise he called you names.
I tend gloss over most of the measurement discussions on this forum and skip straight to the looping attempts. It would take me less time on the workbench than to understand half of what is been said with regards to measurement.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 24, 2014, 01:59:36 AM
Hello Hanon!

Well I'm sure we can mix the AC and DC, it just should be done right.
Please use my previous schematic just for simulation, because in real life conditions I think there would be unwanted currents (as high as 3,2A) runing through the batteries and the transformer...not so good...

So now I made a better schematic with 2 separate transformers. This should be good for testing. The 2 transformers can be also replaced by one transformer with separate double outputs (two separate windings - not connected to one another)
There will still be unwanted currents runing through the batteries and the transformer, but not higher than 1,6A peak. I think this is the best I can do for it to be as simple as possible, otherwise to obtain that waveforms you would need a special 2 phase generator, or even special equipment and that means lots of $.

Hope this helps!
Schematic:
http://s26.postimg.org/u8deqo5kp/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg

Dann

Hi Maddann,

I have re-think it and your proposal is perfect. It is what Figuera said: "while one current is increasing the other is decreasing". I have just one doubt: Can we mix an AC source with a DC source in the same circuit?

Also there is a page where a 3-phase AC current is transformed into a 2-phase AC current with 90º unphase using a "Scott Connection". I do not know what is that, but I put here the link in order that anyone may use it:

http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html (http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html)

Latter the 2-phase AC current may be rectified to get the required final signals.

I hope it helps

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 24, 2014, 02:41:22 AM
Exactly. 
O/I Power measurements become superfluous if long self-running condition is achieved, without external energy delivery.  Nature is the ultimate verifier of O/I>1 claims.


The circuit I posted is a self runner circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 24, 2014, 05:05:40 AM
So basically your telling me the program i am using is wrong and the results i posted on post #1071 is wrong. well you better email the guy that coded the program and tell him he is wrong to while your at it.

The program is not wrong. Your input was wrong. You have earlier said the lenght of the coil is 1 inch and then you corrected it. I entered the corrected figure for the 5 inch length and 307 turns and you get the results. Please go through the program and what it asks you to insert and insert the .125 meters or 12.5 cm for the 5 inch coil and you get the result.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 24, 2014, 09:31:10 AM
Hello Hanon!

Well I'm sure we can mix the AC and DC, it just should be done right.
Please use my previous schematic just for simulation, because in real life conditions I think there would be unwanted currents (as high as 3,2A) runing through the batteries and the transformer...not so good...

So now I made a better schematic with 2 separate transformers.
......
Schematic:
http://s26.postimg.org/u8deqo5kp/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg (http://s26.postimg.org/u8deqo5kp/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg)

Dann

Hi Dann,

Thank you very much !!
 
I see that you have simulation skills. I would like you to try to simulate your previous circuit but instead of using 2 DC sources maybe you can sustitute them by 2 diode briges and 2 capacitor (using a kind of scheme similar to the one included in  post  #1064) in order to convert AC current into the DC (where required). This way we could skip mixing AC and DC sources and we will just need AC. Also we will save the 2 transformers. Do you think it is possible?

It will be nice to have all your circuit based just on one standard AC source. I think there will be more wires and diodes but the final result will be easier to implement. Don´t you think so?

Thanks in advance!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: verpies on March 24, 2014, 12:21:49 PM
The circuit I posted is a self runner circuit.
Does it function longer than 1200h at 10W load for each 1kg of the battery?
...or more than 12h for 1kW load... ?

The Li-Air battery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium%E2%80%93air_battery) has a theoretical energy density limit of 12kWh/kg, so any device containing batteries is conventional below this limit.

How long does your device function with a 1F capacitor in place of the electrochemical battery?
Title: Info from a guy who built a successful Figuera generator
Post by: hanon on March 24, 2014, 12:52:15 PM
Hi all,

I am sharing some info that was not released previously. If you have followed the forum from the beginning a spanish guy posted in some websites that he had replicated the generator successfully. I could get his email address and I contacted him by email and he wrote me many times. Unfortunately he did not disclose the exact system but he preferred to write about concepts and analogies. I did what he suggested but I could not have success. Now I am releasing in the attached pdf all the info that that guy sent me (I promised him not to reveal his email). Suddently he stopped sending more emails, so I think he thought that there were enough info in those emails. He said that he used as input 12 volts and 3 Amps and he got as output around 3500 W. I think that he did not test all that he described, I suppose that he jsut had a simple coil system, so please, take that info with much care and disect from it just the important ideas.

I post here all this info. Maybe someone could get any idea about this prototype. I couldn´t because the info is very contradictory. You can use Google Translator to get the text into english.

I hope it will help. I uploaded it in an external link because it is 5.5 MB

Regards

Link to view the pdf file:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/5yxy8e2lm5icgt7/Notas_usuario_replica_Generador_Clemente_Figuera.pdf (http://www.mediafire.com/view/5yxy8e2lm5icgt7/Notas_usuario_replica_Generador_Clemente_Figuera.pdf)

Link to download the pdf file directly:
http://download1639.mediafire.com/yhqfh9qauqng/5yxy8e2lm5icgt7/Notas+usuario+replica+Generador+Clemente+Figuera.pdf (http://download1639.mediafire.com/yhqfh9qauqng/5yxy8e2lm5icgt7/Notas+usuario+replica+Generador+Clemente+Figuera.pdf)

Good Luck. I really hope someone could do it soon !!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2014, 01:09:49 PM
The program is not wrong. Your input was wrong. You have earlier said the lenght of the coil is 1 inch and then you corrected it. I entered the corrected figure for the 5 inch length and 307 turns and you get the results. Please go through the program and what it asks you to insert and insert the .125 meters or 12.5 cm for the 5 inch coil and you get the result.
Dude its like talking to the wall with you. the F-in core is 5 inches the F-in coil is 1 inch are you blind or what. NEVER MIND i would rather speak to my 10 year old Grandson at least he understands me.
Thanks anyways.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 24, 2014, 01:12:58 PM
Does it function longer than 1200h at 10W load for each 1kg of the battery?
...or more than 12h for 1kW load... ?

The Li-Air battery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium%E2%80%93air_battery) has a theoretical energy density limit of 12kWh/kg, so any device containing batteries is conventional below this limit.

How long does your device function with a 1F capacitor in place of the electrochemical battery?
Dieter made a claim of cop 6.
So I posted a circuit that would prove it. I have not built the circuit.
Obviously my next step would have been to ask him to replace the battery with a capacitor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: oscar on March 24, 2014, 02:26:48 PM
Hello dieter,

I hope you will be able to confirm the overunity effect of your setup.
I think you were lucky to use such low power levels, because this was helping to not saturate the core you are using.

So when you build this setup bigger, in order to obtain an output-voltage that can recharge a lead acid battery, you should probably take care that you again work below saturation of the core. Using a big (heavy) core may help (but I am not an expert).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 24, 2014, 04:00:52 PM
You can imagine if it is working correctly that you could operate it like a auto motive gen/alternator. You should be able to get it started from a battery and once it is running you should be able to remove the positive battery connection and have it continue to run. Anything short of that is an indication that something is flawed. Any failure has value in what you can learn from it that may be of use later in another part or another type of build all together. I dont see any value in making arguments personal.
 Best of luck to you all.

 Q<A out 1.1
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 24, 2014, 04:26:06 PM
Just came across my old ledskinnin pmh made from an electric brake.I set it into a locked state with a holding force of 39lbs 10 oz and it's still holding firm against the same amount since 2007.woohoo.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 24, 2014, 06:26:37 PM
Hi Dieter:

1. Please do not worry about negative comments. Take them in your stride.

2. Remove the resistor and try to check the same system with a variac if you have one. See if you can give 200 volts and 1 or 2 amps to the device. You will need to use different types of coils I guess.

3. Take the criticism constructively. In AC when voltage is at its peak, Amperage is at is lowest. When Amperage is at its peak, voltage is at its lowest. So the average of the two has to be taken and it is very difficult. Pulsed DC has the same problem.

4. I do not know how to make these measurements but I do know that these problems are present in AC measurements. Last week for an input of 220 volts and 15 amps I hit an output of 300 volts and 10 Amps. I had a load of 14 x200 watts lamps glowing very bright. But unless the amperage at the output also goes beyond the 15 amps input, we cannot be sure of COP>1 performance. This output of 300 volts and 10 amps came out of using only one of the three modules of the Figuera device.

5. My experiments have been reviewed and personally checked by a professor who declined to accept the results. He however agrees that there is some thing here and is trying to replicate the results. Then they will measure. 

6. There is some thing strange in the Figuera device design. When the same coil is used as is used in Figuera device, the coil consumes only 680 watts. When you test it on individual components the same coil notwithstanding the high AC impedance shows high consumption of electricity. This is actually very confusing to me. Secondary output in Figuera design is not affected but primary input dramatically goes down. There must be some reason for this in magnetics.

Do not worry about criticism and laughters. Those who ridicule you have not taken the efforts to test. On the other hand you also made the mistake of coming to the forum with millivolts and milliamps results. Such results are unreliable. Take the cirticism construtively and prove them all wrong by winding large coils and giving the high voltage and amperage combinations. By increasing the frequency in Pulsed DC, you can get low amperage input. But that does not remove the need for high voltage input. Alternatively you can use high voltage and amperage input and ignore the frequency part or to be sure you may try to increase all three. However to my limited knowledge when the frequency goes up, input amperage must be reduced. Output amperage will not be affected. I have not tested it yet but this is the theory I guess.

Winners don't Quit. Quitters don't win. And people who laugh at honest experimenters do so, for it is easy to laugh than to do serious experiments and come to the forum and share them honestly..

Who knows Dummy Ramaswami may come back some day one day with a self sustaining generator and knock out all and run it live on skype..Then all the laughing will stop..Do not worry and continue with your efforts.

However hereafter never ever come to the forum with values in milliamps and millivolts. They are neither accurate nor reliable. This is the lesson you need to learn. Naysayers can also teach us good lessons as to what are the things to be avoided. So take it all in a constructive spirit. Best of Luck in your efforts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 24, 2014, 08:33:24 PM
Thanks for all your motivation. I keep on testing. This feature, where the output increases when the shortened is smaller than the output coil needs to be investigated.
A thin 0.5mm solenoid of 1.05 dc-Ohm didn't perform that well, probably just too small. I will do a binary search for the best ratio, the next is about half of the output coil. Which could make sense.


(I have to say, by accident I had an airgap, maybe already in the 1.05 Ohm test, so I will repeat that.)


The coils were not built for being exchanged repeatedly, so I got some physical Problems here, may have to rewind them with a better bobbin thingie that fits perfectly and is stabile.


I will keep on measuring, trying to verify things as good as it gets, I do that anyway.


A closed loop, a selfrunner is my goal, of course. But the inverter alone dissipates 4 Watts, so probably I need a bigger setup to overcome this "socket loss".


A good core is very important. A EE or EI or III should work, preferably ferrite or metglass, I guess iron is ok at low freqencies, but the surface contacts must be perfectly even, so there is full contact, no airgaps.


It would be great if some of you duplicate the setup, as it is really simple.


As for verpies, I skip those postings, but I thought he's a living proof of free energy... we could plug in a cable and draw unlimited amounts of negative energy from him, and that is something. Always look on the bright side of life.


Regards


PS what I didn't mention yet: when I use both secondaries as output then the total output is lower than with one of them shortened instead. Which seems to be another clue for some weird things going on there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 24, 2014, 09:50:11 PM
 I do not know how to make these measurements but I do know that these problems are present in AC measurements. Last week for an input of 220 volts and 15 amps I hit an output of 300 volts and 10 Amps. I had a load of 14 x200 watts lamps glowing very bright. But unless the amperage at the output also goes beyond the 15 amps input, we cannot be sure of COP>1 performance. This output of 300 volts and 10 amps came out of using only one of the three modules of the Figuera device.

 Check your watts, most likely a RMS average wont allow for coming closer or further from coil resonance. There is only 300watt difference in watts,you might want to record log your inputs you might find a variance due to a sagging line voltage from your utility lines or over compensation at certain times when they expect a greater demand during the work day to prevent brown outs.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 24, 2014, 11:16:54 PM
Hello Hanon!

I fiddled with the simulation software, until it refused to work (lol) and this is the only thing i could came up with. In other configurations with one or two transformers, something would always short out, so this is the best I could do.

The transformer outputs are all 24V, but also 12V could be used for a low power version. You can use one transformer with 3 separate outputs or one with two outputs (for the AC part) and another with one (for the DC part). For the consumption of the transformers and the loads see second picture below. The power rating of the resistors R1 and R4 has to be at least 25Weach, as for R2 and R5 has to be at least 40W each. You can also use adequate lightbulbs instead of resistors.

Total consumption: around 150W, total usable output: around 24W

Make sure the coils for the two electromagnets are 6 ohms each (for the 24V version) and it should work fine.

http://s26.postimg.org/edyigsgu1/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_3_tr.jpg

http://s26.postimg.org/mjzg4ts1l/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_3_tr.jpg


Dann


Hi Dann,

Thank you very much !!
 
I see that you have simulation skills. I would like you to try to simulate your previous circuit but instead of using 2 DC sources maybe you can sustitute them by 2 diode briges and 2 capacitor (using a kind of scheme similar to the one included in  post  #1064) in order to convert AC current into the DC (where required). This way we could skip mixing AC and DC sources and we will just need AC. Also we will save the 2 transformers. Do you think it is possible?

It will be nice to have all your circuit based just on one standard AC source. I think there will be more wires and diodes but the final result will be easier to implement. Don´t you think so?

Thanks in advance!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 24, 2014, 11:54:03 PM
Dieter,

Keep on with your good work. It would be nice that when you finish your research you would do a pdf file with your all your findings. All this info divided  in many post into a chaotic forum is difficult to asimilate by us. I think you are dicovering one of those thing that are not explained by current EM theory. A final paper will be good for sharing your findings with other people outside this forum. Go ahead!!

Dann,
Thank you very much from the deep of my heart. You have got what we have been looking for since many months: a very simple and reliable circuit. Thank you!!!  If you make any further improvement in the circuit do not forget to post it. I am sure that it will be used by many people.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 25, 2014, 01:27:55 AM
Doug:

Thanks for the advice. I do not have watt meters and we will need to buy them.

You are particularly accurate in your descrption. We have voltage fluctuations here and depending on input voltage the output voltage and amperage also changes. If the input voltage is higher the output is also at the higher end. Output decreases when the input voltage decreases. Both input and output use the same analog Ammeters but I would agree that the anlog meters show different readings when they are swapped. So I would concede a measurement error. My request is what are the precise equipment that should be used to measure the output and do I need to maintain the same resisitive load to calculate. That is not known to me. I would be greatful and obliged if you can guide how to measure and maintain the log for AC currents.

Thanks in advance..

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 25, 2014, 03:31:10 AM
OK guys, one last circuit.

I looked back on this thread and I saw an interesting idea in post #1075 by Hanon. My concern with that idea was that the AC transformer would heat up because of the DC pumped through it, but I did a simulation and everything seems to be OK - at least in the simulation.

So this is what I came up with (see first picture below), two transformers, one bridge and a rheostat - very simple.
The first transformer for the AC side has an output of 2 X 12V (or 24V center tapped) and consumes about 10W. The second transformer for the DC side has an output of 24V and consumes around 45W. The load (lightbulbs) consumes around 18W on each output and the rheostat (47 ohm at 20%) is for adjusting offset and consumes around 17W. You can se the consumptions on the second picture below.

The resistances of the coils (for the electromagnets) has to be 36 ohm each if attached to the outputs of this circuit.

OK Hanon and guys, I think this is what you've been looking for, enjoy it!

http://s26.postimg.org/6a9a1xhdl/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg

http://s26.postimg.org/71207pjqx/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg


Dann
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 25, 2014, 08:38:34 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8VvFeu2lQ
Here also one output coil shorted. (it Ф transformer) Efficienty of it about 190 precents, but or there some errors or not wery simple it make, because I not get that results like this gay in this video (but I not 100 precents exatly make like he, I use different cores, other wire and so on).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 25, 2014, 11:46:44 AM
"My request is what are the precise equipment that should be used to measure the output and do I need to maintain the same resisitive load to calculate. That is not known to me. I would be greatful and obliged if you can guide how to measure and maintain the log for AC currents."

 Yes use the same load to test but without the right equipment I dont know how to rig up a substitute to measure the watts accurately. I dont even know what your service is from the grid, single or three phase.I guess your on 220 or 230vac from what you have said so far. There can be too many variables to just guess at the condition of distribution system or how your shop is wired or how the rest of the consumers on your line have split their loads. A system out of balance will have a lot of problems during peak demand periods.Maybe you should try to test at a time of the day when fewer people are drawing more form the system. Still not sure what your output goal is. I stated mine a long time ago in horse power and kw so I would know how much material would be required or at least have something to work off of or toward.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 25, 2014, 03:17:37 PM
Only 21 days until the 100th anniversary of the Buforn patent 57955

14 de Abril de 1914
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Shokac on March 25, 2014, 08:36:08 PM
I do not know whether this is so far been reported, but this device works!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39hVwNIRbNU
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 25, 2014, 10:34:46 PM
MenofFather,


first of all, say Guy, not gay.  Having all those Anodes and Cathodes is already enough.  ;D


So did you build a device, do you have details, pictures?


One thing I noticed yesterday, when the core contact (example given: between E and I) is not perfect then the efficiency sinks rapidly. So therefor I do now use a vise ("schraubzwinge"), with two wooden spacers to prevent altering the core flux.


Update of my tests: 3.6 Ohm shortened (as mentioned) didn't perform well eighter, 20 mA with open and 40 mA with closed "lenz compensator" coil (love that name), so here it really is half the flux. Tested the initial duo again, now 53 mA.


What makes it so difficult to measure AC in is, in a Transformer the amps and volts are out of phase 90° as long as there is no load, and therefor the power factor is zero. You may have amps and volts and yet the consumption may be zero.  And the whole goal here is to draw from the output without to change that zero power factor. Normally in a transformer, the 90° phase shift will decrease, the more you draw. At full load the amp wave and volt wave are matching, phase shift is 0°, power factor is 1, consumption is really equal v*a (*0.707, cause it's AC).


An oscilliscope would be helpful. Isn't there any dead simple 99% software oscilloscope one could build with a couple of resistors?


Hanon, yes, I' ll put all results in one thread and or pdf the sooner or later. With respect to Clemente Figuera I will now back off a little bit in this thread.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 25, 2014, 11:45:02 PM
Hello Shokac!

Can you make a new thread for this one? The idea looks preety simple, you would just need machinning and mechanical skills to replicate it. I'm sure some of the guys would like to at least discuss it. By the way, do you understand the language? I do a bit - already figured out all needed for replication.

Thanks for this one!

Dann


I do not know whether this is so far been reported, but this device works!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39hVwNIRbNU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39hVwNIRbNU)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 26, 2014, 12:50:19 AM
Hi Dann,

Please tell me what you think about post #246 (in page 17) complemented with the circuit  included in post #1058 (page 71). It is about filtering two half AC waves whether with a RC filter or with a RL filter (better). Please see the Excel file attached to see the calculations. In case of the RC filter  the value of R·C = 0.0072 Ohm·Farad , and in case of the RL filter the value of L/R = 0.0072 H/Ohm.

Do you think that it may work fine? Could you make a quick simulation of this circuit?

Thanks!!

Dieter,
One user in post #453 (page 31) recommended a kind of oscilloscope that can be manage through the PC sound card. I have not used but maybe you could give it a try. Copy of that post:

    Visual Analyser Project - Scope Freeware
    Good up to 10Khz
    You do not need to buy the hardware for it to work.
    But if you can, will have a useful tool for a good price.

http://www.sillanumsoft.org/download.htm (http://www.sillanumsoft.org/download.htm)


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 26, 2014, 03:53:27 AM
you should really watch this guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJsVSMQqCOM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 26, 2014, 05:22:09 AM
Hanon, thanks. I'm afraid all soundcard baded solutions cannot display phase shift / volt and amps separated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 26, 2014, 01:36:57 PM
MenofFather,


So did you build a device, do you have details, pictures?

I build about many of this versions, about 3-4 on 50 herc and and about 4 on 15 volts and hight frenquency. On 50 herc all have without load big curent consumptiot, but tthis guy have small curent consumption. I now build something like Hane transformer, because thay wery similar.
My latest divice primary coil have about 820 turns and secondarys coils have about 45-55 turns. But need more turns on primary, to get less energy consumption on without load.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 26, 2014, 01:39:58 PM
Here my latest this tipe divice. Other I disasamble.
Here topic about his transformer, in that place is details about his transformer and my transformer videos. [size=78%]http://realstrannik.ru/forum/19-svobodnaya-energiya/134493-tigra-xitryj-transformator.html (http://realstrannik.ru/forum/19-svobodnaya-energiya/134493-tigra-xitryj-transformator.html)[/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 26, 2014, 10:19:46 PM
Correct me if i am wrong, but the picture shows the Secondary core twice as big as the Primary. won't this Dilute the flux coming from the Primary to the Secondary by 1/2 intensity. will it not spread out in the larger core and have a negative impact on output.
things that make you go Hmmmm ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 27, 2014, 05:26:33 AM
I think the turns ratio mainly defines the voltage ratio, but rhe very diffrent right and left coil seems pretty unlike anything between Thane Heins and Clemente Figuera. But that doesn't neccessarily  mean there's a problem. Heins even stated somewhere the 2 secondaries should be slightly diffrent.


MenofFather, make sure the core parts (double ferrite E ??) are pressed together strongly! Nice pictures tho.


And it should be said: In a 3 coil setup things are not so simple like in a standard 2 coil transformer. In a Figuera Mode you have to achieve a redirection of the back mmf to the inactive side, but before it is inactive it may  perform a field collapse that has the same polarity as the other (active) primary, which is not helpful, so the waveform may be rather crucial, in order to decrease softly. In theory one could use a diode to prevent the collapsing field to manifest at all, but Figuera didn't have diodes.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 27, 2014, 11:39:36 AM
Correct me if i am wrong, but the picture shows the Secondary core twice as big as the Primary. won't this Dilute the flux coming from the Primary to the Secondary by 1/2 intensity. will it not spread out in the larger core and have a negative impact on output.
things that make you go Hmmmm ?
Yes, secondaries I make bigger, somthing like in Hein transformer. To magnetic flux go from primary to secondaries, but not go from secendaries to primary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 27, 2014, 06:00:28 PM
I think the turns ratio mainly defines the voltage ratio, but rhe very diffrent right and left coil seems pretty unlike anything between Thane Heins and Clemente Figuera. But that doesn't neccessarily  mean there's a problem. Heins even stated somewhere the 2 secondaries should be slightly diffrent.


MenofFather, make sure the core parts (double ferrite E ??) are pressed together strongly! Nice pictures tho.


And it should be said: In a 3 coil setup things are not so simple like in a standard 2 coil transformer. In a Figuera Mode you have to achieve a redirection of the back mmf to the inactive side, but before it is inactive it may  perform a field collapse that has the same polarity as the other (active) primary, which is not helpful, so the waveform may be rather crucial, in order to decrease softly. In theory one could use a diode to prevent the collapsing field to manifest at all, but Figuera didn't have diodes.


Regards

Dieter;
Note that the primary that causes the initial flux is taken down slowly while the opposite polarity core takes over at 50 % so this may or may not be the situation you are describing.  by taking the NS coil down slowly and the SN coil taking over at 50% it seems that the BMMf will not form or if it does it should be miniscule amounts  and then redirected to the opposite polarity core in attraction mode.

then again the E fields are combined to Double intensity for SN coil as per Hyiq.org.
The resulting motional E-field is again vertical to both and inwardly directed."geometrically opposing fields."
Thus, the resultant field intensity is double the intensity attributable to either one of the set of coil conductors taken singularly.

Its just a thought but they could be combining and that is where the extra boost is coming from making Figueras OU.
and its possible that the Lenz's Field short Circuits on its self with the use of a small gap (but very small gap). even though the cores are right together is doesn't mean the gap is not important.
More interesting info.
The Magnetic Field
A Charged Particle moving in space or in a medium creates a Magnetic Field. If we wanted to make the charged particle move faster, we need to find a way to reduce its Magnetic Field. The Magnetic Field acts as a Break in some situations. Thus, we commonly see heating of Coils in Transformers, Generators and so on, that's proportional to the power output drawn.

Take two separate sources of Magnetic Fields, opposing, North to North squeezed together, if one was to apply the superposition rules, this would mean that it cancels the Magnetic Field. This is not entirely true unless the source of each Magnetic Field occupies the same physical space at the same time and with the same magnitude. In saying this, the Magnetic Field is greatly reduced the tighter the Magnetic Fields are squeezed together. this allows the charge particle to move at an excellerated rate.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 27, 2014, 06:05:12 PM
Yes, secondaries I make bigger, somthing like in Hein transformer. To magnetic flux go from primary to secondaries, but not go from secendaries to primary.

I was refering to the Primaries bigger and the Secondaries smaller, opposite of what you have now.??????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 27, 2014, 06:23:48 PM
Actually, I did use diodes when I used the two separated halfwaves, but it didn't seem to neutralize the back mmf/emf ...


So I got a question: When a B field collapses, it induces a current of reverse polarity. but if this current can't flow (due to diodes), will the B field persist?


Isn't there a contradiction, whether the collapsing B field induces the back EMF, or the Back EMF causes a Back MMF that looks like a "collapsing field"?


Basicly, is there a diffrence in the effect of the collapsing B field depending on whether a current may flow in the coil or not?


Regards


PS. marathonman, good point about the 50% takeover...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 27, 2014, 10:06:23 PM
Welcome MenofFather

Shadow update

I think my transformers are working properly but at a low voltage.
I also think it is because of the commutators I built. I am getting
about the same results from both the 32 and 16 contact versions.
I really don't know why the voltage is low.
The only encouraging thing is that for each transformer group of
three, the voltage increases as I measure voltage from the first
group through the fourth group.
The following is the voltages for each group of three transformers:

Group 1 = .4 analog meter .2 digital meter
Group 2 = .95                   .6
Group 3 = 1.55                1.1
Group 4 = 1.95                1.6
I have changed the air gap from about .035 to .008 and .002
the last I had to leave the clear office type tape in the gap.
The readings did not change between the .008 and .002
I am using a lawn mower 12 volt lead acid battery sometimes
with a trickle charger.
I machined the mild or hot rolled steel to within a .001 tolerance.
the three pieces of steel are through bolted at the top.
The primary legs are two times the length of the bar the coil
mounts on.

Any ideas why my voltage is so low?
Oh, I have a little over 100 turns of #18 = 1.023mm wire
the same length and turns on all coils.

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 28, 2014, 12:19:27 AM
Shadow119g,


This sounds great. The wire seems a little thick and the n-of turns a little low. With a 1 mm wire I would expect a coil at least 1" x  4", also as a rule of thumb the dc resistance should not be too low, eg.  (12v x 12v)/ 14 ohm = 10 watts dissipation, which is a lot for a 12 v battery. Of course, just reactive, but nonetheless.


The contact of the commutators, is it sparky? That may give you lots of voltage peaks, but not a very long real contact time, resulting in less total current, which may lead to extensive dropping of voltage in the primary.
Maybe try to use a high voltage low capacitance cap accross the commutator outputs to catch and integrate the spark voltage peaks. Note, due to the nature of sparks, they may reach a thousand volt or so, so if your rectifier diodes (and you probably should rectify these peaks, since they contain back emf sparks) are fried, use 5 diodes in series as one HV diode substitute.
The voltage ratio seems to tend to the extreme in figuera designs. I had a turn ratio p vs s of about 1 to 2, input voltage dropped to 2.5 v (iirc), but output was 25 v (after rectifier with cap),


Would be nice to see some pics. Keep up the good work!


PS. maybe this contradicts what others said, but I tend to use rather less turns on the primary and more turns on the secondary. This causes more current flow in the primary, stronger magnetism and finally better coupling. Just make sure tbe primary won't get hot when unloaded. The higher number of turns of the secondary keeps the voltage high, but should not be  too high, otherwise there is no more current in the output.


Where in 2 coil transformers the voltage ratio is the same as the turns ratio, in the Figuera setup the ratio seems to be exponentional.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 28, 2014, 04:26:26 AM
Actually, I did use diodes when I used the two separated halfwaves, but it didn't seem to neutralize the back mmf/emf ...


So I got a question: When a B field collapses, it induces a current of reverse polarity. but if this current can't flow (due to diodes), will the B field persist?


Isn't there a contradiction, whether the collapsing B field induces the back EMF, or the Back EMF causes a Back MMF that looks like a "collapsing field"?


Basicly, is there a diffrence in the effect of the collapsing B field depending on whether a current may flow in the coil or not?


Regards


PS. marathonman, good point about the 50% takeover...

Dieter;
what we possibly have is two opposing  magnetic fields from two different cores that could quite possibly be canceling each other out even though one is causing the other. once current flows in secondary core lentz law will take place but that seems more likely on the same core not separate cores. if the magnetic fields are equal in strength it seems they will cancel each other out leaving only the electric fields to combine for the next pole peak.....ie SN or NS 50 % opposite swing??????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 28, 2014, 04:36:33 AM
Marathonman:

This is in response to your last reply to Dieter.

What you are saying is contradictory to the Figuera patent which clearly specifies that current should go up and come down regularly for the system to work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 28, 2014, 04:43:18 AM
Shadow119g,


This sounds great. The wire seems a little thick and the n-of turns a little low. With a 1 mm wire I would expect a coil at least 1" x  4", also as a rule of thumb the dc resistance should not be too low, eg.  (12v x 12v)/ 14 ohm = 10 watts dissipation, which is a lot for a 12 v battery. Of course, just reactive, but nonetheless.


The contact of the commutators, is it sparky? That may give you lots of voltage peaks, but not a very long real contact time, resulting in less total current, which may lead to extensive dropping of voltage in the primary.
Maybe try to use a high voltage low capacitance cap accross the commutator outputs to catch and integrate the spark voltage peaks. Note, due to the nature of sparks, they may reach a thousand volt or so, so if your rectifier diodes (and you probably should rectify these peaks, since they contain back emf sparks) are fried, use 5 diodes in series as one HV diode substitute.
The voltage ratio seems to tend to the extreme in figuera designs. I had a turn ratio p vs s of about 1 to 2, input voltage dropped to 2.5 v (iirc), but output was 25 v (after rectifier with cap),


Would be nice to see some pics. Keep up the good work!


PS. maybe this contradicts what others said, but I tend to use rather less turns on the primary and more turns on the secondary. This causes more current flow in the primary, stronger magnetism and finally better coupling. Just make sure tbe primary won't get hot when unloaded. The higher number of turns of the secondary keeps the voltage high, but should not be  too high, otherwise there is no more current in the output.


Where in 2 coil transformers the voltage ratio is the same as the turns ratio, in the Figuera setup the ratio seems to be exponentional.

Shadow; im not trying to be picky but figueras used 100 volt @ 1 amp not 12 volt.   it does not make a difference if the flux was from 5 amps or one amp as long as it is substantial enough to maintain current in Secondary core but taking in concideration as not to saturate the Secondary core to the point of frequency degradation. figueras was not getting a crap load of current and voltage out of one coil pair but what he was doing was maintaining slighly more  voltage and current with each tri core pair. then series and paralleling them for desired voltage and current. no where in the patent does it say that each core produced a crap load of power....it was all combined ;D

HANON posted this below. i thank him for translation.


Shadow this is for you......http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/electromagnetism/solenoid

and i don't get that sparky stuff with my solid state timing board.....(thanks to Patrick for the design idea)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 28, 2014, 05:02:57 AM
Marathonman:

This is in response to your last reply to Dieter.

What you are saying is contradictory to the Figuera patent which clearly specifies that current should go up and come down regularly for the system to work.

NO i am not contradicting Figueras and i am quite informed that the current has to rise and lower to mimic the rise and fall of AC sine wave. and that it can't happen with DC is useless in the production of MMF unless one makes the current rise and fall at AC cycles.

what it doesn't say is Figueras using a shit load of current like you are using. ( it states 100 volts at 1 Amp). this is what he used and this is what i am using. peak at 1 amp and fall to .1 amp end of story.

PS. try reading the post instead of scimming  you might be better off.... just a thought!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on March 28, 2014, 08:49:37 AM
Welcome MenofFather

Shadow update

I think my transformers are working properly but at a low voltage.
I also think it is because of the commutators I built. I am getting
about the same results from both the 32 and 16 contact versions.
I really don't know why the voltage is low.
The only encouraging thing is that for each transformer group of
three, the voltage increases as I measure voltage from the first
group through the fourth group.
The following is the voltages for each group of three transformers:

Group 1 = .4 analog meter .2 digital meter
Group 2 = .95                   .6
Group 3 = 1.55                1.1
Group 4 = 1.95                1.6
I have changed the air gap from about .035 to .008 and .002
the last I had to leave the clear office type tape in the gap.
The readings did not change between the .008 and .002
I am using a lawn mower 12 volt lead acid battery sometimes
with a trickle charger.
I machined the mild or hot rolled steel to within a .001 tolerance.
the three pieces of steel are through bolted at the top.
The primary legs are two times the length of the bar the coil
mounts on.

Any ideas why my voltage is so low?
Oh, I have a little over 100 turns of #18 = 1.023mm wire
the same length and turns on all coils.

Shadow
I not wery good understand. But maybe need add more turns on secondary or put in highter voltage to primary?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 28, 2014, 01:01:59 PM
 MenofFather;

Use the link above to get the proper number of windings and with more voltage you should see better results. just remember that the length is the length of your coil not the core length.
GOOD LUCK and HAPPY FIGUERING!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 28, 2014, 01:32:07 PM
Shadow
  Because you neglected to figure out how it was to become self sustaining. Other wise it would have built up to a level that was sufficient for use.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 28, 2014, 02:18:25 PM
Opps! I pushed the wrong button!

Thanks to all for your help.

Here is some more information about my device.
My resistor is made from the heating coil from a small electric space heater
costing less than $20.00.

The total resistance is 42 ohms.
I tapped the "resistor"so that the voltages at each tap would follow a sign
wave curve. I printed a sign wave and assigned ohms along the curved sign
wave. I assumed that would help create a sign wave better than having all
resistors with the the same value. I actually picked up a little AC voltage by
doing this.
I have found out that this heater core only gets slightly warm when in use.
At this point I could safely soft solder the leads to the wires leading to my
commutator. I wonder if I have enough total resistance to work?

Good news, I just got my new factory made commutator, brush holder
and brushes in the mail.

Maybe this will help!

Shadow

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 28, 2014, 02:51:34 PM
Shadow,

Earlier I stated my belief that hysteresis was not a factor in the Buforn design. Now I think otherwise. The reason is because although the core does not change polarity, the shifting of the current level between the primaries will cause a shift of the bloch wall in the core. As it moves toward one side the atoms that were one sign must realign to become the opposite sign when the bloch wall has moved past them. So using a solid mild steel core will likely result in poorer performance than a soft iron core.

Something to consider.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 28, 2014, 03:06:12 PM
Cadman:

I agree, and thank you again for the source of the commutator.
I hope you can give me a source for soft iron. The only thing I
found on line cost over $250.00 for a length of real iron from
England.
My cores are not retaining any magnetism after use. I
know because I have had them apart more than a few times.
When I run 12V DC through one side it makes a strong magnet.
However, when I run 12 V DC through my commutator the
negativity isn't even close the strength of straight DC. I am
letting everyone know my problems so that we may find out
what not to do.

I still believe we will solve the problems we are having.

Thanks,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 28, 2014, 04:29:51 PM
Hi:

Look for soft iron from India..Only Rs. 65 per kg or soft iron rods last time I bought them. Should be about $1 to $1.2 per kg here for 1 kg of soft iron. I'm told that soft iron is not available in Advanced countries..Amazing..Here we have lot and lot soft iron..Look at India and buy from India..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 28, 2014, 06:06:21 PM
Shadow,

I ran into the same thing. Ridiculous $$$. If all else fails I am going to cast my own out of soft steel shot and epoxy.

Nramaswami,

Can you post a link to a reliable Indian soft iron source please?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 28, 2014, 07:12:37 PM
Hi:

There are too many to name..Try this link..http://justdial.com/Chennai/Iron-Scrap-Merchants/ct-20229

Also search through Indiamart

However you need to remember many things..

a. Iron is heavy metal and would weight heavilly. If you order 1 kg of iron there may not be any difference really. If you order 100 kg of iron by airparcel it may come late but may not cost much I guess. But not sure.
b. shipping by air would cost you $$$$ based on weight. Shipping by ship would take a lot of time and they would only accept if you order a container of iron.
c. Air parcel would be fine. Possibly the least expensive.
d. You need to find out if the merchant can export iron. They will need multiple licenses for that. Most are scarp dealers here and are local merchants.
e. This is a bulk material. purchasing in minimal quantities is not going to work.
f. In England I'm told that this if fancy material used for ornamental gates and so is expensive.

I actually find it ridiculous to believe all these things.

Don't you have any iron ore near by. Go there and get some thing from the ore company or just pick up the iron dust there using permanent magnets and you get iron dust which is best. Iron dust should be present all over the place and use a magnet and pick it up..You have made a lot of $$$ worth of scrap iron that way.

My experience so far has been two fold. The best results are obtained when you have reasonably high power input or reasonably high voltage:amperage ratios. But strange thing that only when the magnetic field is less electric field produced is high. I do not know why as usual. But it is the fact observed by me.

I'm even open to do the experiments here as described by any one of you to cut costs and report results to person making the payment provided you meet the costs and do not ask me to ship the materials back to you. I will do the later, if so required at your cost. You will need to define the experiments and we will do it and report to you. No scientific inputs from me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 28, 2014, 08:27:11 PM
Cadman,

I am still looking for US sources for grey iron. The epoxy and #7 shot sounds good.
 
Ramaswami,

Thanks for the info on buying from India
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 28, 2014, 08:54:00 PM
The steel shot idea is from Paul Babcock. IIRC he coats the shot with polyurethane before casting and he describes the process in this interview. Magnetic Energy Secrets   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXMWvloZBgQ

Well worth watching if you haven't seen it.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 28, 2014, 08:58:43 PM
Shadow;
try these you might get lucky with soft iron bailing wire.

http://www.anxinwiremesh.com/products/soft_black_iron_wire.html

http://www.accentwire.com/bailing-wire/black-annealed/

http://www.wire-fenceing.com/wire-mesh/products/soft_black_iron_wire.html

http://www.galwire.com/galvanizedmetalwire/blackironwire.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 28, 2014, 09:54:47 PM
Shadow,

Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?

If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system  (I_north + I_south = constant)

Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way  to make easier its understanding"

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 28, 2014, 10:59:34 PM
This may be a silly question, but what's the diffrence between soft steel and soft iron? I have  a vague idea that you refer to carbonized iron, but in terms of remanence I guess that is only a problem of hardened steel, no? I would also guess a tiny socket remanence won't kill the effect, since the EMF will be much stronger than that.


From what I've seen with "iron" screw rods, zinc coated (most likely impure iron), there is a Remanence that can even hold an attached 1mm nail, but the field is altered with no problems.


One thing you may have to worry about much more is basic Reluctance / permeability. All smart flux path ideas won't work when the field strenght is near zero even before it reaches the secondary.


If I was you, I'd surf to ebay and order some Metglass with that insane permeability, virtually allowing you to build fancy cores trough the livingroom of your neighbour and back, and not lose any significant field strenght on the way, not even at high frequencies. Check the various subtypes, I guess on metglass.com. These are 21st century hightech materials. Seen for 45$.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: adriangray on March 29, 2014, 12:25:47 AM
this is a similar circuit you might want to watch, possibly where one idea might be a trigger to another on same lines.  >  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD_Bwwvlc3I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD_Bwwvlc3I)  <
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 29, 2014, 01:00:45 PM
Dieter;

you answered the question your self, yes Iron has very low carbon content and steel has a high carbon content.

Here is a very valuable tool for EVERY one on this web site its called Electronic Assistant i have used it many times it does everything (well almost)

Get it here   http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/


SOLID STATE TIMING BOARDS

PS. I just sent off to have my Timing board Professionally made for figueras device but i will have Three extra boards available if  any one wants them,had to buy a 4 pack bundle. they are 8 volt (5v to chips) 9 channel boards like Patricks design but very optimized in a 5.95 x 4 package.
the pic below is what you will get (without Parts board only).



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 29, 2014, 01:44:19 PM
That board is looking great, but I guess you'll have to add cooling ribs.


About the steel issue, so carbon is a problem ? What exactly is it?


Wouldn't it be sufficent to use a low remanence material for the Y core only? And to prevent Hysteresis, does it make a difftence wheter steel or iron is used?? I'd rather try laminates, or ferrite, or sendust or otherwise iron sawdust casting.


But I repeat, even a core made of iron wire has a poor permeability, making any efforts very fruitless, where a ferrite core of good proportions, or even metglass or permalloy makes things way easier. A good core permeability is as important as a good enameled wire.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 29, 2014, 09:04:21 PM
Thanks again Dieter, Marathonman, Hanon and certainly Cadman!


Doug1,

Thank you for the encouragement! Even though I neglected to
figure out how to my device self sustaining, I have the solution.
I have done the math and decided that "all" I have to do to make
my device a 120 volt AC self-runner" is to add "only" 71 more
three transformer units. This may take me a little time. I took
about two months to build a transformer winding machine
and finish the four transformer units. Since I now have the
winding machine, please wait awhile before you give me any
moor encouragement.

Shadow
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 29, 2014, 09:26:23 PM
Shadow,

Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?

If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system  (I_north + I_south = constant)

Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way  to make easier its understanding"

Regards

Hanon:

First of all thank you for all the work you have done. We certainly would not be where we are without your translations and research.
I only have one resistor as there is a connection between the two circular heater coils. The total ohms of the two connected coils is 42. If I disconnected the two coils they would each be about 21 ohms. 

I don't know how much total resistance is needed for the device to work properly. But I used both coils to provide the 42 ohms.

Maybe your idea of using two resistors, providing two waves is the way to
success?

If anyone is interested in more information on the little heater or "resistor," let me know.

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 30, 2014, 05:08:11 AM
Dieter;

"Wouldn't it be sufficent to use a low remanence material for the Y core only? And to prevent Hysteresis, does it make a difftence wheter steel or iron is used?? I'd rather try laminates, or ferrite, or sendust or otherwise iron sawdust casting".

Yes you are correct on your assumption as the y core is the only core switching polarity and should be of good quality iron.the best material i have found for this is 4 Mill High Z GOES from www.ArnoldRolledProducts.com.  the primaries do not change polarity and it doesn't matter if there is a residual magnetism left in core.  using the later in your sentence would allow you to use rather high frequencies.  this is why i built my timing boards the way i did to experiment with higher frequencies up to 1.5 to 2 MHZ.... All low power CMOS IC's ......so basically i can go from 50HZ to 2MHZ with a cap change and two resistor adjustments (that's it). not a bad board if i say so myself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 30, 2014, 05:21:57 AM
Shadow


Shure I am interested. 21 Ohm sounds just right. For the resistors, I've seen an idea that goes like: several resistors in series, each side of the series is connected to one primary coil. The commutator brush delivers the current to a certain tap of the series, so depending on the position of the brush, the left side gets more current and the right one lesser, or vice versa. This needs to be in 2 half circles of resistors, whereof one is the flipped version of the other.


Also make shure the number of turns in the secondary is high enough so you get a higher voltage. Did you already test the current?


I want to show you all two Images, one is my Figuera/Heins/Jensen test setup, the other one a Heins bitorroid, that I made quickly. It is a good example for how bad materials lead to extremly bad performence. With this BTT, that was run in series with a 150 Watt lamp at the 230V 50 hz Grid, the output was unbelievable 0 volt, 0 ampere  ;D .


Bad core and bad wire. One thing you don't have to try.
(Actually I tried it to see if it's possible to use everydays materials... it does absolutely NOT.)


Where the other device with the ferrite core and sec. wire from a MOT performs fine.




EDIT : Marathonman, 50 Hz to 2 MHz sounds great! Plenty room for sweet spots in there. Speaking of cores, I must insist:
www.ebay.com/itm/6-x4-CORE-Metglass-nanocrystalline-tape-for-MEG-generator-power-transformers-/321362215573?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ad2ae4295 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/6-x4-CORE-Metglass-nanocrystalline-tape-for-MEG-generator-power-transformers-/321362215573?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ad2ae4295)



Tho I must say I've seen cheaper ones. At ebay, sometimes you have to dig for a while until the better offers pop up.


see also
www.gaotune.com/c-core2.htm
a chinese manufactor, may send samples for free!
And some cheaper offers:
www.ebay.com/itm/C-Core-Output-Transformer-Materials-Hitachi-C-Core-Amorphous-Metglas-MC-Stepup-/331110263471?_trksid=p2054897.l5658





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 30, 2014, 05:44:09 AM
Marathonman,


see my EDIT note in my prev. posting.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 30, 2014, 03:28:45 PM
Dieter thanks;

i was drooling over these cores. the first and second links are great but the third is way to small. i bookmarked the links and i thank you very much. yes you are right the first link was expensive and i will wait for better deal and bookmarked his store but then again you get what you paid for. Awesome Cores thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 30, 2014, 04:33:07 PM
Dieter, Cadman and Hanon:

The bottom web site on ebay appears to be the best bet until next winter!

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Pelonis-Fan-Forced-Heater-with-Thermostat/21804031 This is where I bought mine, unfortunately they are out of stock and I paid almost double the price.

This sounds about right on ebay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pelonis-Heater-Fan-Forced-white-HF0020T-Thermostat-safety-auto-shutoff-/111312785410

Sometime around last September after my first message on "re-inventing the wheel," I started looking items to build the device. I bought the heater thinking
that is would have a resistance heating element in it. I got lucky and it did.
The first picture shows the front housing and brand name of the heater.
The second picture shows the data plate.
Hanon: The third picture shows where I cut the metal strip that joins the two coils.
I know this sounds a little strange, but I cut this strip the day before you
suggested using the two coils separately for two wave forms. I cut it in an
attempt to increase the ohms of the total coil by adding resistor.
Cadman: Fourth picture: This is an aluminum plate I made to mount my new commutator. I haven't drilled the holes for mounting it to the rest of the device yet. If you would like one, I made two, I could mail you one. It uses two set screws to hold the commutator.

Shadow



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on March 30, 2014, 07:08:14 PM
Another possible advantage to using a heater is that you could put the
heater back together running the commutator wires out of a hole in
the plastic case then using the fan to cool the resistor while in use. I
have found that my resistive coil does not get hot so I  haven't done
this yet. Of course, that could have something to do with my low
output on my device. I hope building the new commutator will solve
some of my problems.

Shadow

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 31, 2014, 12:51:07 AM
Hi all,

I have been thinking about the possibility that Figuera´s 1908 patent have electromagnets placed with like poles facing each other.

All electric generators are based on the principle that magentic lines must cut the wires of the induced circuit.

When the electromagnets are placed with like poles facing each other, electric induction is achieved while the magnetic lines, during their swinging back and forth derived from the 2 opposite electric signals, cut the wires of the induced.

I have attached two different sketchs with possible configurations for this implementation. One is a simple configuration, while the second sketch has a closed magnetic circuit to keep the induced field inside.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 31, 2014, 01:37:08 AM
Hanon


I tried both, but like poles gave pretty much no output, because the polarity of the induced never chanches, and the total amplitude varies not much. You can test this easily by swapping the contacts.


I know of 3 ways to achieve induction, by moving the magnet, by rotating the magnet (including polarity flip, maybe the most effective) or by fluxpath-linking/unlinking. Field lines must cut the wire as you said, but there also needs to be maximum change in time.


Your second drawing confuses me. Why would the fwd mmf jump from the outer core to the inner one? BTW., looks like a reverse BTT. If the induced were wrapped around both cores.


Nice drawing tho.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 31, 2014, 01:53:29 AM
Hi,

The magnetic flux looks for the easiest way to return to the magnet, therefore when it finds an opposite flux must come out from the external core toward the internal one. The idea of the internal core is to enclose the back emf inside it without returning to the electromagnets. The wire must be placed between both sides in order to be cut by the "moving" magnetic lines.

Dieter, from your past posts I don´t think that you have tested these exact schemes. In these configurations what is looked for is to get the wires cut by the magnetic lines (flux cutting the wires). These sketches are not based on changing the magnetic flux which crosses a coil (flux linking).

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 31, 2014, 05:58:14 AM
Hanon,
It could be that I didn't understand your scetch fully. I'll study it some more.


Several Tests of my 3-Coil Transformer

The test setup consists a wall transformer with AC output, the coils, a rectifier with a LED at the output.
There is also a halfwave separator consisting of 4 diodes, only to test a certain Figuera mode, other than that not in use Voltage was tested in parallel to the LED, Amps in series with it. Watts are calculated not really correctly, this is more about the diffrences between various coil configurations. Efficiency is calculated in the assumption that the power factor is 1.0, but most likely it is less, so the efficieny is higher. Read under "Input" more about this measurement problem.

Jensen Setup (1 primary, 2 secondaries)
full AC wave to primary. secondaries in series:

2.73 VDC,  73.4 mA,  200.3 mW
Efficiency: 62.2%

Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
a halfwave to each primary, flipflop (note: voltage drop due to halfwave separator at input...):

1.75 VDC,  4 mA,  7 mW
Efficiency: 2.1%


Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
full AC wave to left P, right P short circuited:

2.06 VDC, 51.9 mA,  106.9 mW
Efficiency: 33.1%


Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
full AC wave to both P, parallel (non-canceling):

2.7 VDC,  64 mA,  172.8 mW
Efficiency: 53.6%

Figuera Setup (2 primaries, 1 secondary)
full AC wave to both P, serial (non-canceling):

2.72 VDC, 77.5 mA,  210.8 mW
Efficiency: 65.4%




Input:

Note: unfortunately I cannot test the Power factor / Phase Shift of the transformer, but it is unlikely that the power factor is 1.0. It may be somewhere between 0 and 1. Furthermore, the power factor may differ in each setup.

When I Use the same Fullbridge rectifier and LED directly at the same power supply (which is then a purely resistive load with a power factor of 1.0) then the dissipation is:

2.98 VDC,  108 mA,  322 mW

So 322 mW would be 100% Efficiency, assuming the power factor is 1.0. If e.g. the power factor in the last test (210.8 mW) would be 0.5 then the efficiency would be 113.8%. But who knows, the power factor could be anything, even 0.1 . (At least based on Theories like Heins' BTT).

It may be silly to post these results at all without information about the power factor / phase shift, but it might be of interest how the various modes perform in comparation. It also shows that my older measurements of a COP 6 may be questionable, nonetheless these were the values when I measured the Input

I've been watching the rectified waveform with Visual Analyzer (no current probe so far, just voltage) and it looks almost the same, regardless of if I have 2 Ps in series and one Secondary (Figuera) or one Primary and two Secondaries in Series (Jensen, Heins) Nonetheless there is a slight smearing of the entire sinus wave, as if it became broader with a bigger duty time.

That's it  for now, got to make me an oscilloscope :/

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 31, 2014, 03:27:16 PM
Hi Dieter:

Thanks for posting the detailed information on tests.

In the Jensen type central primary surrounded by two secondaries how were the secondaries wound? Was one secondary cw and another CCW or both of them of the same winding type. How was the primary placed? Was the primary placed vertically or it is placed horizontally to face the secondaries? was there a common iron core for magnetic flux to travel? Would be obliged for answers to these doubts. Only thing that I do not understand is that the coil itself would consume some current by its very nature. When you give millivolts and milliamps how can that be efficient. Certain minimum volts and amps must be given.

Thanks again for the very detailed information.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 31, 2014, 05:00:36 PM
NRamaswami,


thanks for your attention. You may not underestimate the power of eg. 0.3 Watt, if I don't fix the two E core parts well, I get very strong vibration. Most important is good coupling. See my previously posted picture of the 3 coils (where copper wire can be seen). It is a small setup and therefor little chanches have great effects, much like micro mechanics, where one has to work with care and sensitive fingertips.


I prefere these small scale tests and I think ferrite has a more linear permeability, allowing me to get results way under saturation. If things once are working, I can scale up. Watching the price of enameled copper wire, I save a lot of $ this way.


In my humble opinion it is irrelevant whether you use cw or ccw, just use the right connection. If eg. in the sec. series the connection is wrong, output is zero due to cancelling. if both are cw, then connect them ns ns.


This whole cw vs ccw business is rather mambo jambo and don smith is wrong about the electron spin affecting efficience and such. Usually I make all cw and connect them accordingly.


Good is: I just had the idea to use my soundcard oscilloscope like this: left channel the signal after the transformer, right channell the signal as it is before the transformer. This may show me the phase shift ...  :o


Maybe...


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 31, 2014, 06:23:37 PM
Shadow,

Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?

If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system  (I_north + I_south = constant)

Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way  to make easier its understanding"

Regards

Hi,

This is what I meant: Using two parallel resistors in a simetrical way will get two complete simetrical waves.

With just one resistor the shape of one wave is conditioned to the remaining resistance in the resistor and, therefore, both waves won´t be never simetrical.

I think that maybe Figuera used two resistors for achieving a constant overall current all the time. Maybe for that reason he wrote in the patent that the resistor system was sketched is a simple way just to make easier its understanding.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on March 31, 2014, 06:48:24 PM
Hanon,


I've been revisiting your like pole drawing and I begin to understand. It could work in a way similar to the BTT. But I think the outer core must be thinner than the inner core. And the  outer core must be saturated, otherwise the like pole paths may "parallelize" within the outer core and .ignore the inner core. (a rather controversal issue, if such parallelization does exist at all, that I tried to address in the AFA thread)


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on April 01, 2014, 02:08:45 PM
Hanon:

I will try the duel resistor as soon as I finish my new commutator.

Thanks,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: From other Planet on April 01, 2014, 02:33:24 PM
@marathonman: You got my emails?
sorry for offtopic
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 01, 2014, 08:28:46 PM
Just a little update. As I said, I will use the soundcard oscilloscope and try to compare input and output on the left and right channel... only problem: the stupid laptop has only a Mono mic in...  >:( .. So I'm kind of stuck here, but there's one interesting observation I made
When I attached a diode to the input source on one pin, expecting to get something halfrectified, then I was getting the following strange output.


It may indicate a 70 to 90° phase shift, your comments are welcome. Connecting a load however did not alter the "shift", but only the voltage or dB, so the wave decreased in height. The whole probe setup was confusing, as the computer seemed to add some volts to the output when connected... Anyway, here's the scope pic, mono. Whatever is negative there doesn't come from the supply, and for a back emf it looks rather unfamilar to me...



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 01, 2014, 10:29:41 PM
ANOTHER METHOD TO ALTER THE MAGNETIC FIELD OF AN ELECTROMAGNET

As far as we have been discussing we have tried to change the magnetism of the electromagnets by changing the current which circulates along each one. As we know, this system requires a variable resistance, I = V/R . This system is very inefficient because of the heat dissipation in the resistors.

We could also get a variable magnetic field if we change the number of effective turns (N) in the electromagnet.

B = nu·N·I / Length

Suppose that we build a electromagnet with 700 turns with 6 intermediate taps at 600, 500, 400, 300, 200 and 100 turns . If we feed sequentialy to each tap we will get a variable magnetic field in the electromagnet.

This could be got with a proper circuit (as a CD4017 + 555) and some transistors.

I have wonder many times why Figuera used 7 groups of electromagnets and, also,  7 intermediate resistors. Maybe he just drew in that way to clarify the concept but he built it in a different way to skip the heat dissipation... I don´t know

Regards

PS: Also I attach another sketch with the electromagnets with like poles facing each other. The swinging back and forth of the two magnetic field will produce a movement of the magnetic lines. When they collide, they are expelled from the core and in this movement the magnetic lines will cut the induced wire. Suppose a pancake coil or many parallel wires in between the two core sides.

In all dynamos and generators induction is done because the induced wire is cut by the magnetic lines. Just some food for  thought...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 02, 2014, 12:04:34 AM
Hanon;

"Suppose that we build a electromagnet with 700 turns with 6 intermediate taps at 600, 500, 400, 300, 200 and 100 turns . If we feed sequentialy to each tap we will get a variable magnetic field in the electromagnet".

Very good Idea and Very easily to implement. i think i will wire a set of coils to test this as this would save me $ 75.00 in Vitreous resistors.
i would have to have 9 taps as my AC board has 9 Transistors or two taps for DC version.

THANKS !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 02, 2014, 01:11:43 AM
I agree with the resistors basicly being wasteful. The generator needs to overcome this loss, so it should output at least 200% of what the resistor grid delivered.


Using taps in the primaries seems to complicate things substancially, since the impedance of them is the "resistance to alternating current" that is highly dependant on frequency, meaning yor Ps will get diffrent supply, depending on the Hertz rate they're driven.


As the existing Resistor/Commutator devices are some great work, I would suggest to run them with minimal Voltage, eg. 0 to 1.5 V, and then simply use a stereo amplifier. There are some amplifiers that are very economical in power dissipation. Probably you should take care of the phase shift that the amplifer should not do. It may be most simple to use a car amplifer when you use a car battery already. They must be obtainable second hand or so for a few bucks.


An other amplifer would be this:

 sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm


 
Title: Magnetic Amplifier to generate the two unphased signals
Post by: hanon on April 02, 2014, 09:26:15 AM

An other amplifer would be this:

http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm (http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm)
 
Dieter,
 
Very good idea the use of a magnetic amplifier to generate the two 90º unphased signals. Please check post #492 with some insights about this subject:
 
http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg383123/#msg383123 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg383123/#msg383123)
 
In your link I have found a second webpage with a practical implementation of a audio amplifier from a magnetic amplifier with two toroids, a 35 KHz AC source, and a few diodes. Very simple !!. I think that the two unphased signals can be generated from such a system:
 
          1- Using a small rectified AC signal as control current to the amplifier. This signal will act as the common DC input to the amplifier: to regulate the HF AC current. This signal will be the first signal from the two signals required.
 
          2- The HF AC source will be modulated by the amplifier to get the second signal. While signal one increases, signal two decreases, and latter the reverse…  This HF AC modulated in the amplifier can be sent to diode bridge to have an always positive waves with the reverse shape to the input AC rectified used as input.  Please check post #492 (see link above) to visualize this idea. I attach here the design of the audio amplifier used in this webpage. I am pretty sure that this system with a AC rectified input as control signal will do the job to get the two signals !!
 
http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-audio-amp/mag-audio-amp.htm (http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-audio-amp/mag-audio-amp.htm)
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBX1-POuJMw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBX1-POuJMw)
 
Any comments or ideas? It seems very simple to build.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 02, 2014, 12:23:50 PM
Hannon
  you will still need resisters to provide a small forward voltage to the inducer coils/magnets to prevent the field from the one which is "on" from totally backfeeding the one which is off.Once one magnets field swallows up the other two and all three coils become oriented the same, the time involved to switch back all three and the amount of current will be excessive as well. The collapsing magnetic field will have a high spike short duration that can be tamed if it passes through a resistance back to the common connection between the two inducers suppressing the consumption of the source.Glad to see your starting to think in terms of what makes a magnet stronger.
 I only used one meter lengths of conductors in bundles to keep wire resitance down to as low as possible. Using empty 22 caliber shells for terminal ends makes it a nice easy wind and connect up.Solder on one side ,wind then trim and place the other one on.Many thousands of turns able to handle lots of amps but only fed a few to establish a strong field to work with on the start up. The problem with using wire length to control consumption of current is you have greatly limited the amount of magnet you can create when you can no longer take advantage of higher currents. The only part that should get warm is the cores not the resisters.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 02, 2014, 03:54:12 PM
Hi Doug:

I have to admit that I have not used a resistor in between the coils in my tests while using low voltage and high amperage currents. If it works it is fine as it can cut down on the amount of wire and can reduce the cost significantly.

What is the kind of resistance that you would advise to be used for a 12 volts and 16 amps current source. It is a pretty decent 192 watts and the amperage is also significant.

Assume we have two inductors and one induced.

Should we use the resistors between the transformer output wires and the inductors if the inductors are in parallel.

Should we use the 3 resistors if the inductors are in series. one from transformer to primary 1 beginning, one between primary 1 end to primary 2 beginneing and one between primary 2 end to transformer.

Now what is the kind of resistance that you would advise to be used in these places for the current source of 16 amps and 12 volts. Please advise and let me test. I will post results after testing.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MenofFather on April 03, 2014, 08:02:52 AM
If is transformer  with two secondaries like in picture, then one secondary then conected, then input power is small almost same, because magnetic flux go toother pach, but then we short other secondary, then bulb light in full brightness and input current go up.
Now if we put instead primary permanent magnet and on one secondary put load and magnetic flux go to pach there no load,then small, wery small power consuming motor rotates and shorts other secondary, then magnetic flux go from magnet to pach were not shorted secondary, with load, and using small energy possible change magnetic flax, there it go. Like VTA, using small power controling we big power, were it go. :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 03, 2014, 11:33:11 AM
 I was sure it can't work with resistors. Could it be so simple : resistors on commutator picture are representing coils of device. On one side for example all coils are in series , all powered then on the other only one is powered , connection changed fluently. I wonder how would that change the magnetic field....
For me construction of commutator indicate such possibility : on one side all coils are connected in series, that's why one side commutator connections are all tighed together, on other side coils are connected in sequence to alos become all in series finally and then commutator switch direction.
I can't draw it but I have feeling this is close to the solution. Sure, opposite poles are working as hanon described, in original Figuera patent it would be very simply flat large electromagnets on both side of flat pancake coils.
I may be wrong about connection of coils , maybe they are in parallel but the whole idea presents for me a real deal ! It must work and it is simple.


btw there are 3 ways to keep Columbus egg in vertical position, one of them is destructive and doesn't count here, the second one is rotation , also not related so the final one is what Figuera used




For me case is (almost) closed. The only problem is to figure out commutator connection or replacement.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 03, 2014, 11:36:04 AM
btw the reason for make before break is to avoid large flyback spike taking out energy and destroying device, because current flow all around and returning back, today we can do it also with make &break or Tesla way going to HV, but dangers are still here.
Enough from me...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 03, 2014, 10:21:02 PM
Hannon
  you will still need resisters to provide a small forward voltage to the inducer coils/magnets to prevent the field from the one which is "on" from totally backfeeding
"backfeeding"? Pls explain.
Quote
the one which is off.Once one magnets field swallows up the other two and all three coils become oriented the same,
I have to throw in my veto here. This happens only when they are arranged with like poles. So with like poles you have to provide energy to prim 2 only to force prim 1 not to go trough prim 2, but trough sec only. Wasteful IMHO. Additionally, with like poles, how is the polarity supposed to chanche in the sec? Which is required for at least some efficiency.


With unlike poles on the other hand, the collapsing field of sec 2 will result in a like-pole back-emf indused pulse, that forces prim 1 trough the sec. By practical tests it turned out to be most effective. I have also made tests with like poles and a pancake in between, it was very dissapointing, no voltage or any microamps. Blogged somewhere near page ~ 53 i think.
Quote
the time involved to switch back all three and the amount of current will be excessive as well. The collapsing magnetic field will have a high spike short duration ...
As far as my observation goes, a sine signal causes a soft back emf, less spikey, more like a mirror image.


Menofather,


interesting drawing, I will think about it.


NRamaswami,


please see my comment to Doug. Resistors (no coil or cap based resistors, but simple heat dissipation resistors) should be prevented wherever high power flows, they are the opposite of OU, just waste of energy. They may be useful in signal processing. Or as lightbulbs...


If you really want to drive your prims with DC pulses, you can think about the use of diodes to prevent the back EMF to have an unwanted effect. But normally, the back EMF is in resonance and polarity with the next fwd wave and therefor adds to it.


Maybe the secret of Figuera's design is, that the back MMF (not to be confused with the collapsing field pulse) has an easier path trough to prim that is currently occupied by a back EMF pulse only than trough its source which is the active prim .


Forest


You didn't explain the third way to make columbus'egg stand... So??


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 03, 2014, 11:10:49 PM
Two more things that I wanted to say.


First of all, several times I said (V*V)/ohms=watt. I had this from a socalled ohms law wheel, a circle with several formulas, such as w/a=v, v*a=w, etc. etc. I though this is all true since I had it from an engineering page.


Now it turns out to be crap. Why? I have a 25Watt, 230Vac lightbulb and it has about 200 Ohms dc resistance. So, (230v*230v)/200ohm= 264 watts...


So I apologize for posting nonsense, I did what many people do, I just repeated the things that some "obviously skilled" engineer said and most likely he also just repeated it. Lesson learned: question everything, verify everything personally.


The other thing is, what this whole Back EMF and Back MMF business all about? Isn't this the same?


No!


When you put DC current trough a coil, it creates a magnetical field. This magnetical field will induce a current into the secondary coil that's on the same core. It's inducing only when the field chanches, which means in AC always. Now, as soon as it has induced a current in the sec and we allow this current to flow, by means of logic this will cause a magnetical field in the core that opposes the one coming from the primary. This is the Back MMF or Back magnetomotive force, which is present at any time the current flows trough the sec. This bmmf is causing the prim to get "in phase" and start dissipating energy at all. We have to deal with it, probably like Thane Heins did.


The Back EMF on the other hand,  a term often used for the pulse caused by a collapsing field is the reverse polarity pulse in the electrical circuit of the coil that appears when the DC supply of a coil is turned off. Of cource, it also causes a magnetical field or pulse. It is the stored energy of the coil, just like the stored energy in a cap. Unlike the bmmf, the bemf does not appear when the voltage rises in the ac wave. the bmmf appears whenever there is a change in the sec current flow, the bemf is more of a rubberband that snaps back when released.


So I hope I made clear and proofed that bemf and bmmf are not the same. And that we have to deal with both of them.


Regards



BTW. for all those who are still having problems to understand why 2 coils bring a current 90° out of phase:
The inducer causes the magnetical field immediately, but the induced will only be induced when there is a change in the magnetical field. In a AC sine wave, there is most magnetical change when the inducer passes the zero volt line, and least change when it reaches the top voltage (both, positive and negative). This is why the induced will be in a 90° degree (or 25%) delay to the primary. I know this is basic stuff, but often not understood, esp. the part about the inducer acting immediately, but only the induced being delayed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 04, 2014, 01:28:03 AM
I have also made tests with like poles and a pancake in between, it was very dissapointing, no voltage or any microamps.

Dieter, note that when testing like poles facing each other you have to provide two unphased signals to the electromagnets (for creating the swing back and forth of the collision plane between both fields) and you have to provide room for the movement of the magnetic lines in order to cut the induced wires. A pancake coil between two close electromagnets will not let the wire be cut by the movement of the magnetic lines.

Please read this file:
http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/131133/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/131133/)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 04, 2014, 04:43:49 AM
Hanon,


In my test the pancake was very small in terms of total copper mass, maybe that's why I had failed. You have to try it. Build it !!  You may be able to make tape coils with rolls of aluminum foil, and plastic foil interleaved. Tho not shure how Alu performs in induction.


Go for it!


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 04, 2014, 07:25:40 AM
dieter




It's simple....
About Columbus egg : he did that by hit egg on tabletop damaging the tip.Another way is by fast rotating it. However the most natural way is to hold egg using two fingers and I think Figuera could thought about two equal and opposite forces : one on top and one on bottom...
Now you tell me if there is any other way to keep egg standing ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 04, 2014, 02:37:39 PM
Hi Forest,
 
I have to tell you that in Spanish the expression “egg of Columbus” is frequently used when something is very simple but it is difficult to guess at first. I think Figuera used this expression in this sense, not to communicate any idea about the configuration of the device. But who knows…
 
In your post from yesterday you commented that all coils must be in series  and the commutator will power sequentially each one. Could you draw an sketch to show this configuration? I cannot guess how 14 coils are in series and then how the Figuera´s commutator is connected to those 14 coils. Depending on these connections the magnetic field will be different. Please an sketch will be very valuable. Thanks
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 04, 2014, 04:28:17 PM
hanon


I wish I could but commutator is black magic for me. My brain is working first on impressions and not matter how silly it looks it never failed. Flat pancake output coils in parallel makes required amplification factor by rising output current. To do that as you described exact and opposite poles are needed and output coils placed in the middle (exactly!) . Then imagine how commutator connects/disconnects coils on one side to lower field strength while the other side is stable connection (that solve strange commutator one side only while second is simple pass). Changing need to be discovered yet , maybe it is such : one coil then 2 coils then 3 coils and so on up to the final amount to make field strength then same (but opposite) as on other side , then flip sides.


The best would be to check having 4 coils only : 2+2 and trying to see how field can be moved
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 06, 2014, 10:59:48 AM
Hanon;

very interesting concept and worth pursuing but copper foil is expensive and is not coated. one would have to coat manually and that would take some time unless someone knows where to get pre coated foil.???????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 06, 2014, 02:34:28 PM
Marathonman

 MWS Wire Industries
 31200 Cedar Valley Drive
 Westlake Village Cal.
 818 991 8553
 Catalog= TechBook 082011 Pdf.
 If you can find the catalog online there is information in there you didn't even know you wanted to know. They make stuff you haven't even dreamed of yet. I will try to upload the catalog as an attachment but I dont have very good luck with it. If it is there good if not it didn't work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 06, 2014, 08:28:03 PM
Thought I let you know, I modified my core to act like a BiTT. It definitly had a huge impact. eg. without it, I was able to get 200 mW from two secondaries in series, now this gives nothing at all anymore. I was however able to squeeze out a new record of 245 mW, compared to a max potential dissipation of 308 mW, but there are clues that the power factor was way under 1. When I attached the device directly to the supply, regardless of the tiny impedance of the primaries (dc resiststance about 14 ohm together), the supply remained cool and the wattmeter showed zero watts. Without the cap however, the dissipation went up to 7 watts. Without the core mod it usually  used to dissipate up to 20 Watts, way too much for the supply, so in that case it was getting very hot quickly.


This BiTT thing really seems to work. The temperature of a supply is a good indicator (when there is no oscilloscope) for effective dissipation, when the inductive load has only a few dc ohms...


Looks a bit taped and glued together, actually it is, but anywho...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 06, 2014, 10:53:53 PM
Marathonman

 MWS Wire Industries
 31200 Cedar Valley Drive
 Westlake Village Cal.
 818 991 8553
 Catalog= TechBook 082011 Pdf.
 If you can find the catalog online there is information in there you didn't even know you wanted to know. They make stuff you haven't even dreamed of yet. I will try to upload the catalog as an attachment but I dont have very good luck with it. If it is there good if not it didn't work.

Doug;

 I have a MWS catalog already in my possession but i didn't know whether the copper foil roll was coated or not. MWS is very expensive also and they don't sell partial rolls. i priced 18 awg wire at almost two thousand Dollars. OUCH !

Here is copper roll but i don't think it is coated so i will have to coat it myself.  http://basiccopper.com/10-mil-010-inch-.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 07, 2014, 12:11:38 AM
Dieter,
 
Thanks for sharing your results!! I don´t know if a capacitor unphases the intensity by 90º or it just unphases the voltaje. I am not sure of the answer. We are still far from the original design of Mr. Figuera.
 
About the document with the tape coil and like poles facing each other, after publishing that paper I realized that the induced field in fact oppose to the inducer field. I did a mistake and I applied the Fleming left hand rule (used for motors) and latter I learnt that I should had used Fleming right hand rule, which is the correct rule to be aplied for generators. So the induced filed actually is the contrary to the one I stated, and finally it really oppose to the inducer field.

If you think about the Buforn´s patent with all the electromangnets in a row, putting the group of 3 coils in series and one after the other, he said that with this configuration you could use the two poles of each electromagnet. This mean that with the basic group of 3 coils (electromagnet + induced + electromagnet) one pole of each electromagnet is not used. Thus, the configuration should have a pole in each electromagnet spoiled, and then, the only configuration which matches this situation is with the 3 cores forming a line. I don´t know but for any reason Buforn did not close the coil arrangement forming a perfect toroid. For any reason he kept it open in it sides. Tesla also used transformers with open magnetic paths (louse coupling). Maybe an open magnetic circuit is the way to tap energy from the surroundings. I don´t know. Just thinking loudly.
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 07, 2014, 05:28:46 AM
Robert Adams used a type of opened end magnetic path and got massive efficiency in the 800% range so there has to be something to it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 07, 2014, 10:24:15 PM
Marathonman,


You mean Adams from NZ who made the Adams motor that later became the Bedini SSG? Have you got any links?


Hanon,


You are right, neighter BiTT cores nor caps are part of the Figuera Patent. But it may be interesting to see further things you can do with the tri-coil device. And if there's free energy, we will take it anyway I guess.


Now, the simplicity of the following is surprising, considering the impact it may have, while it seems to be unused:


The cap brings the voltage in a -90° phase to the current, right? We know an inductor causes the magnetic field immediately. It is the induced, that brings the current in -90°, right? (or we could say the voltage in +90°.)
So what is probably happening here, is: The inducer works 90° out of phase all the time, so it dissipates only reactive energy, the induced does however work normally, except in this BiTT it will not return the Back MMF to Sender, but deflect it to the additional core parts, so the primaries are not affected.


Fact is, it worked only within about 50 to 150 uF. But we should also mention, that it doesn't mean much when such a wall wattmeter reads zero Watt. Although, with the wrong capacity it read 7 watt, so...


Regards
 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 08, 2014, 01:52:17 AM
Sorry I didn't see the question before.

Hi Doug:

I have to admit that I have not used a resistor in between the coils in my tests while using low voltage and high amperage currents. If it works it is fine as it can cut down on the amount of wire and can reduce the cost significantly.

What is the kind of resistance that you would advise to be used for a 12 volts and 16 amps current source. It is a pretty decent 192 watts and the amperage is also significant.

12 watts or 12v one amp.
 


Assume we have two inductors and one induced.

Should we use the resistors between the transformer output wires and the inductors if the inductors are in parallel.

Should we use the 3 resistors if the inductors are in series. one from transformer to primary 1 beginning, one between primary 1 end to primary 2 beginneing and one between primary 2 end to transformer.

Now what is the kind of resistance that you would advise to be used in these places for the current source of 16 amps and 12 volts. Please advise and let me test. I will post results after testing.

Like the picture,I added the switch according to the text.
"Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance,through which circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign origin into one or more electromagnets, magnetize one or more electromagnets and while the current is >higher or lower<(not on or off) the magnetization of the electromagnets is decreasing or increasing and varying (not off), >therefore the intensity of the magnetic field is the flow which crosses the induced circuit<.
 As seen in the patent drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken;(no it doesn't really show that) naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current(? does that imply the induced circuit is returned to the same connections of the source) but a switch will do it continuous if wanted( what switch? A switch instead of the resister aray? Or it is switched from the original source to a self acting mode). From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch( and? not or?); the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.

First. Give completely for free, electrical currents continuous or alternate of any voltage and applicable to:

 Take some consideration that in Tesla's patent Method of obtaining direct currents from alternating currents #413,353. A stationary magnetic field can be used to block half the wave form of an alternating current to produce dc current. The inducers if provided with low current continuously and alternately given impulses of higher current still maintains the requirement of acting like a diode while shifting the field strength between the inducers. So long as the magnetic poles do not reverse. The only way to keep all this activity is to keep the inducers fields apart. NN or SS with induced in between.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 09, 2014, 05:21:41 AM
Hi Doug:

Thank you very much..It does appear that adding a resistor to the primary would decrease substantially the input amperage and V=IR(and power factor in AC). When power factor remains the same adding a resistor to the primary should bring down the amperage in the primary. Yes it must certainly reduce the length of the coil used and result in considerable savings on wire and we can use less wire of greater size. Probably this is why the resistor circuit was used by Figuera to send the current to the primary electromagnets. Let me check that and confirm to you. I will need to check if the output amperage and voltage remains the same after the input amperage is brought down. Again Thank you very much for the enlightening guidance. I'm obliged.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 09, 2014, 11:49:42 AM
There was a time in early history when people made their own resisters actually not that far back. Made from common and handy junk they had laying around, graphite makes a nice resister if you can get it. I like pencil refills. If it goes poof so what cut another one a little longer or use a small diameter wire it also acts as a fuse and can be used to build a carbon light in a pinch. I doubt they had radio shack or nicrome wire in the late 1800's.If they did it wasnt easy to get. You could build a very nice rotating resister distributor that is adjustable in the resistance at each segment with it;s own sliding contact so the contacts can be moved up and down the resister material.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 09, 2014, 04:49:27 PM
Doug:

I'm sorry. When we have high resistance the amperage drops at the input but the secondary also simply refuses to work. It appears that a certain amount of amperage is needed to create mild magnetism and only then the system would work. I will continue to investigate.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 10, 2014, 12:17:42 PM
NRamaswami Are you saying the 12 watts is not enough to establish a static non moving field in the primary magnets? How did you check it? How did you wind your primaries? Tight clean winds or lose.If you are checking the secondary to confirm the fields of the primaries at rest that will only work when the resister controller is operating to provide the mechanism to drive the changing field that can be induced into the secondary.  Same as any other generator,the initial rotor field is independent of the motion. In a stationary system you have to overlap them.
 Im not sure how to communicate it at 430 am and only one cup of coffee getting ready for work.I will think about it and how to avoid having to draw another image.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 10, 2014, 08:23:26 PM
NRamaswami,


and everybody else. I would really encourage you to use inductive resistors instead. I would have said capacitive resistors, but when you connect a full cap with an empty cap, then you end up with both only 25% full, 50%  of the energy is lost, which led me to a feelig that caps are lossy.
But the inductive resistor may be diffrent.  A coil needs some time to build up the magnetic field and when in series with a load, during that time only a reduced amount of current flows. But it must be the inductive resistance of the coil, not the copper resistance. Using a number of diffrent coils as resistors may be an option, but you cannot use them in series like normal resistors, but you need for every level of the commurator a separately connected coil (every level, not every contact plate), because the coil must be "empty" when connected by the commutator.


After the commutator has passed by, the b-field in this resistor coil will collapse and a back emf will flow back to your battery, reducing dissipation and most likely desulfurate a lead acid battery.


This way no energy is lost in heat disipation, like with normal resistors! Think about it!


And, the max level of current that your commutator can deliver, may be a direct connection to the source, with no resistor at all, so you'll reach max amperage, yet got the sawthooth wave you want. You may however require to use a parallel cap after these coil resistors nonetheless, to smooth their output, because they deliver in increasing intensity, each one  a mini sawthooth.


Thinking about that, you may consider to completely skip the commutator and just use some sort of oscillator, although we have to ask ourselfs again, is the commutator required due to the sparks?


Now we are entering a controversal territory, which is the question if eg. the Bedini SSG does show OU only because the peak back emf's are reconditioning the batteties by desulfuration, or if there is truely a OU effect.


The Bedini SSG that charges lead acid batteries could be based on the same princples like the Figuera Generator.


"The established Theory" says it is no OU, but just battery reconditioning, yet there are believable wittnesses who are reporting success in that they have run a Bedini motor almost eternally, only by swapping run battery and charging battery from time to time. I mean, how much extra energy can be stored in that surfurisation anyway?


Whatever happened there in 1902, it seems everybody was convinced, Figuera, the Bankers, the Patent office. The "Bedini effect" could have achieved this, no matter what it exactly is.


Nonetheless, in addition to the battery effects,  the tri coil setup with the right gaps could also act in a Back MMF deflecting way, allowing the transformer to dissipate reactive energy only.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 11, 2014, 10:38:19 AM
Hi Dieter:

Thank you very much for your very kind words of encouragement. I will check and report back. Give me some time to report back as this is the Summer Vacation time in India.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 14, 2014, 05:30:34 PM

A great video about Electromagnetic Induction in case of two like poles facing each other:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=176 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=176)

I recommend to watch it entirely, from t = 0 sec.  Supppose that Figuera instead of moving the coil just moved the magnetic fields...

Also an interesting document (Electromagnetic Induction by George I. Cohn, 1949). As stated before in this thread there are two types of induction:

        - Motional Induction       
             E = B·v Length
        - Transformer Induction              E = - S · dB/dt 

http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/George%20I.%20Cohn%20-%20Electromagnetic%20Induction.pdf (http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/George%20I.%20Cohn%20-%20Electromagnetic%20Induction.pdf)


Richard Feynman (Nobel prize winner) about the electromagnetic induction:

    "So the "flux rule" that the emf in a circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit applies whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the circuit moves (or both) ...

    Yet in our explanation of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases  E = v x B  for "circuit moves" and  E = -S· dB/dt  for "field changes".

    We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena.

...

The "flux rule" does not work in this case [note: for an example explained in the original text]. It must be applied to circuits in which the material of the circuit remains the same. When the material of the circuit is changing, we must return to the basic laws. The correct physics is always given by the two basic laws

F = q · ( E + v · B )
rot E = - dB/dt                              "

            — Richard P. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

--------------------------------------------

For those interested in a interesting fact about the Induction Law here I link a file which explains that two different formulations seem to exist for the same phenomenon : one, the Faraday Unipolar generator: E = (v · B) , other the Maxwell 2nd Law : rot E = -dB/dt, which are two different formulations for the same law !!! "Faraday or Maxwell" by Meyl (read page 5 and next) http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Faraday-or-Maxwell.pdf (http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Faraday-or-Maxwell.pdf)

The question here is:

Did Figuera used the Transformer Induction Law or did he emulate the Motional Induction Law in a motionless device?


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 14, 2014, 07:01:32 PM
Thank you Hanon for this info it is greatly appreciated. you are a big asset to this community.  i have been busy ordering parts and supplies and will begin testing shortly. Boards will be here Tuesday evening so i will begin assembly on timing circuits. got a really good deal at Bay Area Circuits on a student board price of 30 Bucks each!
happy Figuering
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 14, 2014, 09:12:53 PM
Question is : did Figuera changed point of view completely or just improved device with rotating coils to become motionless without changing underlying principle ? For me the second is true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 15, 2014, 04:11:27 AM
I also believe the second is true. he emulated the Motional Induction Law in a motionless device
what is the deal with the adds???? are the owner of this web site getting that greedy ...good god i have an ex wife i'll introduce you to.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 15, 2014, 12:27:27 PM
Some very enlightening videos:

Lenz´s Law: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x46bAPO24I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x46bAPO24I)   Why is there induction and no lenz effect in the last case?


Lorentz´s Force: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kckxzBUxTHg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kckxzBUxTHg)   ... Some food for thought ...

How to optimize induction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU)

After watching this last video I wonder if Figuera maybe placed the induced coil in between two groups of electromagnets oriented themselved in opposite way. Maybe this way each electromagnets induce just half wires of the coil, and both effects will add each other. Induction taking place as consecuence of flux cutting the wires of the coil (motional induction due to moving fields). 

Note that there are two opposite inducer fields, and just one induced field: therefore one inducer field should be free from them the Lenz effect. Am I right?

Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on April 15, 2014, 08:31:18 PM
Hi,

This is what I meant: Using two parallel resistors in a simetrical way will get two complete simetrical waves.

With just one resistor the shape of one wave is conditioned to the remaining resistance in the resistor and, therefore, both waves won´t be never simetrical.

I think that maybe Figuera used two resistors for achieving a constant overall current all the time. Maybe for that reason he wrote in the patent that the resistor system was sketched is a simple way just to make easier its understanding.

Regards

Hanon:

I tried the two separate resistors you thought of with the following very encouraging results.

I know my secondary voltages are extremely low, but the improvement of using two resistors wired with eight even ohm pickups resulted in quite an improvement of performance. I believe my problem is mainly using mild steel instead of iron.
Time will tell!

Voltage across the secondary with one resistor = 1.6VAC.
Voltage across the secondary with two separate resistors = 2.4 VAC

My single resistor had a total of 42 ohms.
When I separated the two coils of resistance I found out that the last (PICTURE2) coil had a lot more resistance than the first coil. So I measured the same resistance numbers from the first coil and placed the pickups on the second coil to match the first. The company "Radio Shack" is getting rich from my purchases of jumper wires! I used about 2.7 ohms per pickup for a total of about 17 ohms per coil.

Also, when I tried the single resistor wired with eight even ohm pickups I believe the secondary voltage was only 1.4VAC.
I got 1.6VAC on the secondary when I wired the resistor with eight pickups following ohms taken off a drawing of a pure sign wave.

Percentage wise this is a large improvement.

Good luck to all,

Shadow

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 16, 2014, 02:51:02 AM
Shadow,


looking good!


Hanon,


That first link about Lenz really made me thinking.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 16, 2014, 11:36:02 AM
Hanon

with the diagram posted their is no way to swap poles with the Figueras style of circuit. the pole will have to switch polarities to work but i could be looking at it wrong.  it seems viable though. it will be just like the magnet in the middle of the coil and hitting the reverse pole button that made the whole page light up according to my understanding. as long as their is a potential difference between the output coil windings it should work and YES ! Hyniq is a great asset to the free energy movement. i have gained a new understanding of the ZPE because of him, sparky, Tesla and a few other Great people.

shadow you have my attention but when you start using 100 v @1 a then you have my full attention. looking good and keep up the great work!
Been fighting a abscessed tooth had to take a two week break but its on like donkey kong now !

I just got my timing boards and MJH11020 transistors in last night. i had a two channel and nine channel board made. below are the scanned pics of the SEXY beasts before assembly. WHOO WHO!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 16, 2014, 03:15:12 PM
Hanon

with the diagram posted their is no way to swap poles with the Figueras style of circuit.


Hi Marathonman,

Which diagram are you refering to?


For all:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x46bAPO24I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x46bAPO24I)

This setup is identical to Figuera 1908 patent. I think it would be great if everyone may replicate this system with permanent magnets to simulate one field increasing and one field decreasing.

Note that there is no Lenz effect in the last case shown, BUT there is induction !!!

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 16, 2014, 11:05:32 PM
Marathonman,


wow, now you made me jalous.  gotta hide my cardboard cirquit with hardwired pen schematic on it...  ???


Hanon,


the question is: is the amount of induction equal to the test with NN polarity? In an other vid of the same channel it is demonstrated: no. 2 Magnets in Attraction, their poles will be stronger, but the point of connection or iron core between them will become weaker. Moving the coil between the end poles of this SN FE SN bar without to ever cross a pole with a bloch wall will most likely induce only few current.


But this is just a thought and the phenomen should be investigated by replication.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 17, 2014, 02:50:06 AM
Hanon, i am referring to Coil between two groups of electromagnets_1.PNG  the poles will have to change to get any current ie... flux cutting one way then the other or are the two pairs the same pole ????

Dieter, thank you for your compliment. these are my first circuit board design and i am a little proud of them. i must of stared at them for hours.(thank you Patrick)
oh and i have one extra of each board available if any one wants them. one 9 channel and one 2 channel
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 20, 2014, 06:33:18 PM
TO ALL,
 I am wondering if any one else has ordered from FUTURLEC Electronics and have had trouble receiving order. it's been well over a week and nothing, no reply no shipping, no nothing. have almost 40 $ in parts and haven't a clue what is going on. emails has gone unanswered and i would like to know if any one else has had a problem with them. of course my money has been deducted from my card. also i would like to know if anyone has a contact number for complaint. DO NOT BUY FROM THESE SCAMMERS.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on April 20, 2014, 06:58:27 PM
TO ALL,
 I am wondering if any one else has ordered from FUTURLEC Electronics and have had trouble receiving order. it's been well over a week and nothing, no reply no shipping, no nothing. have almost 40 $ in parts and haven't a clue what is going on. emails has gone unanswered and i would like to know if any one else has had a problem with them. of course my money has been deducted from my card. also i would like to know if anyone has a contact number for complaint. DO NOT BUY FROM THESE SCAMMERS.


They are notoriously slow shipping to the USA. They appear to be an Australian operation that has a drop-shipping arrangement with Chinese suppliers. Some people like them for the low prices and are willing to wait.... up to a month for USA delivery, apparently!

"Instructables" likes them. Some other operations don't. You get what you pay for, I suppose.


http://www.instructables.com/id/Top-DIY-Electronics-Stores-Suppliers/step2/Futurlec-futurleccom/
http://domainsafrica.blogspot.com/2012/07/scam-futurlec-electronic-components-and.html
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6326

I've used "UTSource" for really hard-to-find semiconductor items and have been pleased with their service, two-three weeks delivery, 4 dollar shipping charge. I also like a fellow DBA "thaishine" who ships for free, from Colorado USA, four days or so to my mailbox and with low prices too. He has an EBay store but the prices are slightly lower on his own website.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 20, 2014, 10:01:15 PM
Hi all,

This is a very interesting patent, US4687947

http://www.google.com/patents/US4687947 (http://www.google.com/patents/US4687947)

It has some similarities to the 1902 Figuera generator patent
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 21, 2014, 12:52:54 AM
Hanon,


while I wil read the patent in your prev. link, could you please explain a little bit what's going on here:


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE

Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 21, 2014, 04:50:03 AM
TinselKoala:

Thank you very much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 21, 2014, 09:33:10 AM
Hanon,


while I wil read the patent in your prev. link, could you please explain a little bit what's going on here:


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE)

Regards

I did that test trying to emulate a possilbe winding in the 1902 patent: a wire crossing between the two electromagnets. I feed 12 VDC and 1.2 A max. and I used a car relay to pulse the current. As output I could measure up to 60-70 VDC and up to 5-6 ADC  with a diode bridge in the output. I don´t rely on those numbers because I could not light even a very  small bulb. I think that that my multimeter was showing wrong values as consequences of the pulsing pattern. Not much to take into consideration.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 21, 2014, 01:55:28 PM
Hanon,

 I'm curious as to why you didn't use a cap after the bridge? and have you tried the quad electromagnet set up in your earlier post? and if you did what were your readings?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 21, 2014, 06:10:29 PM
Hanon,

 I'm curious as to why you didn't use a cap after the bridge? and have you tried the quad electromagnet set up in your earlier post? and if you did what were your readings?

Hi Marathonman,
I have not tested yet the crossed coils scheme. I just proposed it after watching a YouTube video from hyiq.org channel with two moving magnets inducing at the same time over a coil to optimize induction.

I have conclude that this configuration will only work in a motionless device if we are able to emulate "Induction by Motion" (flux lines cutting the wires) in our system . It will not work with induction by flux crossing the coil. IMHO the only way to emulate "induction by motion" in this system is with like poles facing each other and then swinging the fields as Figuera explained.

I will try to post a video about it  along this week.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 21, 2014, 07:32:50 PM
Does it not emulare flux by motion from raising and lowering the current mimicking a magnet movement to and fro ????? or am i looking at it wrong.
as i read it again does the north poles swing back and forth because they are opposite of one another varying in their intensities causing the side to side motion??????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 22, 2014, 12:34:50 AM
Hanon,


ok, I see. The readings were pretty impressive tho. Reminded me of the output of a "reed stepup" circuit.


Marathonman,


when a magnet passes by a coil, pole to pole, it will induce positive current as long as you get closer, and negative when you move it away (or vice versa, depending on the magnet pole you use) , so this rise and fall may only mimick the motion if one prim. coil is positive and the other one negative, in other words, a setup with unlike poles.


But, whether like or unlike poles must be used, the good thing about it is, you only have to swap two wires to test both.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 22, 2014, 04:20:21 AM
I understand all that, this i know (thank you by the way)  but i am still a little confused after all the post as the correct Figueras operation.
with the negative flux (north) running to the (south) positive the poles will clash in the middle especially at position #5 so this leads me to believe that what Hanon is saying is true that the like poles are moving side to side with varying intensities.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 22, 2014, 03:36:04 PM
Interesting paper Cohen wrote,I like it.
In his words dont confuse flux cutting with flux linking but account for both if need be.
Since both exist in the design at hand your maths just turned into a 6 advil computation. Maybe 8.
  Marvin Cobbs device has some pretty interesting tid bits too. Namely how to eliminate the use of resistance windings without eliminating the resistance. Not to be confused with the resistance controller.
 Mariswammi or what ever his name is didnt understand what I was saying in response to his question about the resister voltage/amperage. The 12 v 1amp is continuous while the greater amperage from the controller is fluctuated between coils independent of the 12v 1 amp. The established flux at a lower power level through the resister prevents all the coils from becoming one big single magnet from flux linking them all together when they are placed N()N. If everything becomes flux linked together in the same direction it is no more then a typical transformer.
 I will have to refer to the old and remind you of the the two Trains. Each traveling at 50 mph on the same track toward each other. The damage is not equal to 50 mph it's equal to 100 mph. The flux cutting is not equal to the current going into each magnet its double provided you can keep them from becoming both in the same direction. The total amount of flux is never "on" in both at the same time but the force between them is always constant in pressure and opposite frame at the same time . For the price of one fully saturated magnet you can have two or at least the effect of two on the space between them.Long as you can keep them separate you only need enough flux to equal one fully on in total which gets shifted back and forth between 2 in time.So sometimes there will be little in one and lots in the other but if you maintain a little in each separate from the controller it will be easier to figure out how much you need and adjust it accordingly to maintain the separation under the load conditions your looking to get out. Cutting generates while linking transforms.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 22, 2014, 06:19:57 PM
Strangely i under stood that. after 1 year of pounding my head with a electronic, electric, magnetic hammer i think my 50 year old brain is waking up.
Thank you Doug, Hanon, Dieter, Wonju, Woopy, (TESLA)(HYIQ)(ASPDEN)(SWEET) and all others (to many to list) that have contributed to this post directly or indirectly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 22, 2014, 07:03:21 PM
Marathonman,


I think the whole thing depends a lot on the waveform used in the primaries. IF  you let the current decrease to zero between pulses, then that coils' field will collapse, causing a back EMF of high voltage that will ADD to the active pulse. you will get a stereo flyback, one side delayed by a halfwave, mixed to mono, sotosay. The output may be pretty efficient.


Now, when you don't let the current decrease to zero during pulses, then this is an entirely diffrent situation. The active primary will have the choise of flowing trough the secondary, which is not very attractive since there may be a load that acts as a reduction of permeability, or it may flow trough the other secondary, that flows in the same direction, acting as a negative resistance in terms of magnetical resistance. So it will take this way, skipping the secondary, but inducing a current to the power supply in the (almost) passive primary, which is not what we want.


So, little diffrences, like whether there is a socket flow in the passive primary or not, can make a huge diffrence.


One thing to try is however, to use diodes between supply and primaries, so the back EMF is really forced to flow trough the secondary.


I apologize for chanching my mind so often about how this is supposed to work, but obviously it isn't as simple as I thought it is, couple of weeks ago.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 23, 2014, 01:38:29 AM
Hi Dieter,

Could you provide any sketch to complement your explanation? You are talking about two different secundaries.

A question for everyone:

1- If you get an induced current by flux linking two coils then it will appear the Lenz effect to oppose the primary field.

2- If you get an induced current by flux cutting the wires ,by motion, it will appear the Lorentz force to oppose the movement.

What do you think that happens when you get induction by flux cutting the wires into a motionless device? Will the Lorentz force appear into a motionless device ? If there is no movement then I think that there won´t be chance to suffer any force which blocks the movement of the fields (1908 device)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 23, 2014, 12:32:54 PM
Hannon
 Motion is relative to the frame of reference of the observer.Or in this case to the frame of reference of the coil it acts upon. The movement of the magnetic field as seen by the coil isnt dependent on moving the magnet if you have command over the magnetic field when created with or by current you just have to provide reversal of motion from the point of view of the coil it is effecting. The motion will turn up as transformation or induction depending on if it is viewed by the coil as linking or cutting. The point of view that counts is the middle coils point of view.
 Your going to want that back emf to go into the other coil but not with out control over the time it takes to do so.
 Try a table top experiment with one coil and two magnets and a analog meter that will show you that it acts just like pushing a single magnet all the way through the coil so both N and S poles swing the meter pos and neg. only your using two N or two S poles with a gap between them. <=>  Edison made a generator simular to it a long time ago but he used horse shoe magnets and moved the coil in between the poles driven by a prime mover to make the frame of coils move in relation to the horse shoe magnets.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on April 23, 2014, 03:13:58 PM
Hanon,


sorry, I meant "or it may flow trough the other PRIMARY"  ::) ...


I have to confess, I know the official definition of the Lorentz force, but I tend to think it is basicly just a Back magnetomotive force like the Lenz effect, but it appears to be unrelated to the pole axis because it increases linear to the inductive coupling, which depends on axis alignement. I probably should consult a book or two  8) .


Whether like or opposite poles should be used, a socket flow or not, and what frequency, if a test device is once built, this can all be tested in every possible conFigu(E)ra-tion. I have made some tests, as blogged earlier, but my meters are really limited and/or unreliable, and my core also has no gaps as seen in the patent. So I'm looking forward to see some test data by you guys.


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on April 27, 2014, 10:02:08 PM
It's been a while since I've been here but I have not been idle.

To recap, the Figuera and Buforn patents are the same thing. The patent drawings are intentionally misleading, in particular, the hinted at coil construction and the missing magnetic circuit. The working principle is the variation of the excitation current in the field coils or the inducing coils as they are called in the patent, in a dynamo. That is all it is, period, the end.

In other words, if you want to be successful then stop building transformers and build a dynamo instead.

The actual DC generator or dynamo is constructed according to the known design principles of the time, those in use around 1900. That means it has an outer steel looped frame with the field coils attached to the inside of it in pairs of north and south, with a minimum of two coils. The induced or armature coils are inside of the frame and the magnetic flux from the field coils passes directly through the induced wires.

The armature coils are not round, they have two straight sides with one side adjacent to a positive field coil pole shoe and the other side adjacent to a negative pole shoe.

The magnetic circuit must direct the flux in a loop from a N coil pole shoe through the induced wire of the armature, through the armature, out through the opposite induced wire of the same coil loop, through a S coil pole shoe and back through the outer frame to the first N coil. The flux path must be of sufficient cross section at all points of the circuit to carry the number of flux lines used.

A dynamo design is based on the number of lines of magnetic flux cut by the armature coils per second as it rotates. The number of flux lines is determined by the area of the field coil pole shoe and the strength of the field coil magnetic properties; type of iron and ampere turns and current. Since ours will not rotate you must calculate based on the flux lines intersecting the copper wire diameter and the number and length of induced wires that will fit adjacent to the pole shoe.

If you want to succeed you must build a dynamo of sufficient size to produce more than enough voltage and current to run the little commutator motor, or your solid state circuit. The current from the dynamo will provide the current for the field coils, just as it does in the old designs. You will need a temporary separate power source sufficient to provide the full startup volts and current needed by your particular dynamo, whatever that may be.

One more tip. By varying the field excitation current according to the patent, you will need to use a commutator and wire sized for additional current since the variation will produce an average current. In other words if your field coils require 2 amps then size the commutator, brush, and wire for 4 amps. The same goes for a solid state circuit.

Here is my parting gift to you. A book written by W. Benison Hird, B.A., M.I.E.E. who was a lecturer on dynamo design at the Glasgow and West of Scotland Technical College. Published in 1908. It contains everything you need to know. Want a dynamo that produces a continuous 500 volt, 200 amp DC, and only requires 19.8 amps of excitation current? It's in there.
Elementary Dynamo Design https://archive.org/details/elementarydynamo00hirdrich

Best Regards to all
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on April 28, 2014, 03:41:15 AM
Thank you. I am looking forward to studying the document.
My commutator still sparks a little. Still working on it.
Thank you again,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 28, 2014, 02:51:23 PM
It's been a while since I've been here but I have not been idle.

To recap, the Figuera and Buforn patents are the same thing. The patent drawings are intentionally misleading, in particular, the hinted at coil construction and the missing magnetic circuit. The working principle is the variation of the excitation current in the field coils or the inducing coils as they are called in the patent, in a dynamo. That is all it is, period, the end.

In other words, if you want to be successful then stop building transformers and build a dynamo instead.

The actual DC generator or dynamo is constructed according to the known design principles of the time, those in use around 1900. That means it has an outer steel looped frame with the field coils attached to the inside of it in pairs of north and south, with a minimum of two coils. The induced or armature coils are inside of the frame and the magnetic flux from the field coils passes directly through the induced wires.

The armature coils are not round, they have two straight sides with one side adjacent to a positive field coil pole shoe and the other side adjacent to a negative pole shoe.

The magnetic circuit must direct the flux in a loop from a N coil pole shoe through the induced wire of the armature, through the armature, out through the opposite induced wire of the same coil loop, through a S coil pole shoe and back through the outer frame to the first N coil. The flux path must be of sufficient cross section at all points of the circuit to carry the number of flux lines used.

A dynamo design is based on the number of lines of magnetic flux cut by the armature coils per second as it rotates. The number of flux lines is determined by the area of the field coil pole shoe and the strength of the field coil magnetic properties; type of iron and ampere turns and current. Since ours will not rotate you must calculate based on the flux lines intersecting the copper wire diameter and the number and length of induced wires that will fit adjacent to the pole shoe.

If you want to succeed you must build a dynamo of sufficient size to produce more than enough voltage and current to run the little commutator motor, or your solid state circuit. The current from the dynamo will provide the current for the field coils, just as it does in the old designs. You will need a temporary separate power source sufficient to provide the full startup volts and current needed by your particular dynamo, whatever that may be.

One more tip. By varying the field excitation current according to the patent, you will need to use a commutator and wire sized for additional current since the variation will produce an average current. In other words if your field coils require 2 amps then size the commutator, brush, and wire for 4 amps. The same goes for a solid state circuit.

Here is my parting gift to you. A book written by W. Benison Hird, B.A., M.I.E.E. who was a lecturer on dynamo design at the Glasgow and West of Scotland Technical College. Published in 1908. It contains everything you need to know. Want a dynamo that produces a continuous 500 volt, 200 amp DC, and only requires 19.8 amps of excitation current? It's in there.
Elementary Dynamo Design https://archive.org/details/elementarydynamo00hirdrich (https://archive.org/details/elementarydynamo00hirdrich)

Best Regards to all

Hi Cadman,

Thanks for your kind help. I have a couple of questions:

1- How can we get the wires cut by the magnetic flux? Dynamos are based on that principle but for that the wire must be moved laterally to the magnetic lines. We need to emulate some kind of relative movement to induce the wires!!

2- What the difference between building a transformer and a dynamo? I understand that in transformers the magnetic flux do not hit the wires, just pass across the coil (flux linking). In dynamos the flux must cut the wires (flux cutting), this take us to the first question again: how can we get the flux cutting laterally the wires?

Thanks for your kind help. Your post is exciting with so many tips. Any good result from your device?  I am happy with your help. This night I will study in deep your tips, now I am short of time.

Regards

PS. Which pages on the book you recommend us to read?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tturner on April 28, 2014, 03:49:33 PM
hey guys newbie here looking for some advice. im wanting to build a fe devise to power an electric bike or car. this means needs to be portable a small enough. any suggestions would be awesome.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 28, 2014, 09:53:24 PM
Exactly, what is the difference hanon ? I think it's easy to find. Just answer the most simple question : what is the basic difference between transformer and dynamo principle ? The answer is always in question. We saw it in equations...
I think most of us here know that part of answer now. I will not  tell what I mean because I learned that the only comprehention is when two people found own interpretations and then agree, every explanation lead to confusion, but here we have something very simple...



The only trouble is how Figuera was able to do so .... incredible indeed...because it looks like impossible task...



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on April 29, 2014, 01:50:23 AM
Hi Cadman,
since my first post, i was waiting for such observation! you got ist my friend:)

Hola Hanon,
si hablo espaniol: https://archive.org/stream/dynamoitstheory02wallgoog#page/n154/mode/2up

THE SECRET IS THE TORIDAL ROTOR AS SEEN IN THE FIRST DYNAMOS MACHINES (remember the introductions in the patents, the first spot or the starting point of Figuera`s investigations).
as we dont want to rotate anything, there is no need to make it round, only if you want to re-use some existing stuffs...


Enjoy, comment & share!
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on April 29, 2014, 02:24:04 AM
Oh yes!,
we have to adapt this code to do the multi-Phase sine wave (6 Phases needed to get 3 Phase figueras generator, 2 phases are also wellcome).
each 2 Phases must be set at 90º of Phases, in order to work together, so we get ONE Phase. then the next 2 phases schould also be set at 90º and theire output should be set at 120º from the first output phase, and the same with the other 2 phases (5&6).

In the modern Pure sine waves inverters, we have:
1: 12/24VDC to 300VDC booster (we need this to start the system)
2: H-Bridge feeded with the 300VDC (ore less) & gated by SPWM (in PIC uC we can use CCP  Modules)
3: LC Thank to smouth the 220VAC output
4: make transformer as in the drawings (wind extra coil for the looping: 100V & 1 A or 2A no more)

I may be wrong, but  we are to learn from each other...at least that s what i think....

Code it & share it with the world! dont be selfish! this planet need our urgent help...
Chemtrails are not a solution, killing peoples ist not the soluction, making money with others blood ist not a solution!!!...wake up humman race!!!!

NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on April 29, 2014, 03:25:09 AM

..lets be hummans :http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WY5PcZCsCP0/Ulh4YDbf1iI/AAAAAAAAAyk/5OQ2_3qLdTc/s400/Child+of+my+heart.jpg
thats all for now...
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on April 29, 2014, 05:14:17 AM
Hi Hanon,

The cutting of flux lines is just a convenient way to describe a concept of magnetic field strength. Faraday's law states that any change in the magnetic field passing through a wire will induce an emf. It makes no difference if the change is from movement of the wire through the field or the change is a variation of the field strength. The convention used is, the number of lines of force passing through a unit area indicates the strength of the magnetic field at that point. In a dynamo, as the field strength increases from additional current passing through the field coil, the number of magnetic lines per unit area increases. This has the same effect as a movement of the armature wire by rotation. This is your emulation of relative movement.

Study the first 87 pages of the book as this starts with the basics used in the book and takes you through the design process. It is particularly helpful because the process starts with a set of specifications the finished dynamo must meet and designs a dynamo to meet those specifications.

This is a concept drawing I am using to layout my generator armature coils and other things. It's a work in progress. As noted elsewhere neither the armature nor the field yoke need to be round, but I am adhering to the radial layout of the coils. After studying the book you will see the advantages of the dynamo over a transformer for generating current and you should also see the advantages of the Figuera design for performance vs a common dynamo.

@NoMoreSlave,
Nice work, I wish you success.

Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 29, 2014, 05:51:25 PM
Hi Fellows.

Your Figuera project is quite interesting and I find your development, for the most part, to be of great value.
Some have spent considerable work and intellect - thank you!

Two areas I have not seen addressed to date in any great detail, but may be of value, involve the work of Dr. Andrey MELNICHENKO. These being "gaps" between ferromagnetic cores and "resonance" in electric circuits. {Further "gap" work => Dr. Harold Aspden.}
 
In particular; the use of a "gap" separating a primary and one, or a number of, secondary ferromagnetic cores to achieve a performance index of 120-150%, or more, on ferrites and alloys. This technique is evident in the work of others but the concept, explanations and experiments of Melnichenko (Melnichenco), IMHO are presented well and easily understood. Unfortunately there is not a lot of information available anymore regarding his theories, methods and techniques.

The Figuera patents, at first glance, appear to be somewhat the same as the "end-to-end" "stacking of cores with coils" referred to by Melnichenko. Both gentlemen also allude to adding additional "stacks" in an effort to provide more output. Also in common is that the output loads do not have any substantial affect on the input - no apparent Lens Law or other effects are present. It's not a transformer action per se, but more related to a relatively unknown "magnetic coupling" mechanism.

Much of the early "gap" work seems to have stemmed from studies by Tesla and others around the same period as Fuguera, at the beginning of the last century.

In general, Fuguera's approach seems to offer other interesting attributes; for example, excitation signals (the commutator) can provide very fast rise and fall times [near spark gap in nature] while still remaining "above the ground potential." Very rapid magnetic field expansion [dv/dt] is found in many OU devices. His commutator provides a stable but adjustable "controller mechanism" or, using today's state-of-the-art, all precision mechanics can be eliminated. Modular "stacked cores" might easily provide various outputs, as required. His system might also be made small, noiseless and quite reliable.

Over the last months it appears similar methods and techniques are rapidly converging with a heightened realization and optimism. Anyway, more food-for-thought.

@all - Great work and have a productive week...

Some links and related information:

http://ferromagnetic-energy.ru/

http://ferromagnetic-energy.ru/core_of_the_physical_effect/

Brief Explanation Notes:
   Magnetisable wind => magnetic fields,
   triblet => (ferromagnetic) core,
   aerial (dielectric) distance => gap with or without dielectric spacer,
   wind => copper or other wire windings.

http://ferromagnetic-energy.ru/core_of_the_physical_effect/ex_1/

Perform the experiment(s); it is quite enlightening at worst!
[See the bottom of page - Experiment; Equipment...; Sequence; download video (video not available?)]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djy5J0kiL58
 
This is the only video clip I could find still in the public domain. It is in Russian but contains English subtitles (a bit hard to read but worth the effort).

The following "cut-and-paste" is included to provide somewhat of a backdrop:

====================
"Here is translation of some of Melnichenco work.. ;)

Out respect for copyrights, I have attached it its entirely..


The following article was printed in the Indian newspaper The Hindu, Science & Technology Supplement, November 20, 1997. It appears to be a translation of a Russian article written by Konstantin Smirnov, RIA Novosti.

Electric resonance for power generation
When Dr. Andrei Melnichenco, a physicist specialising in electrodynamics in the city of Chekhov near Moscow, called our editorial office and described his invention, I did not believe him. But my mistrust did not perplex the inventor, and he offered to demonstrate his device.

The device consists of several batteries and a small converter to change direct current into alternating current (220V, 50Hz) using electric motor.

The power of this motor is far greater than that of the power source. When a small plate with several assemblies is added to the chain of components and switched on, the motor begins to pick up speed in such a way that it would be possible to set an abrasive circle on it and sharpen a knife.

In another experiment, a fan serves as the final component of the device. At first, its blades are slowly rotating but, after a special unit is connected in sequence with it, the fan immediately gains speed and makes a good 'breeze'. All this looked strange, primarily from the standpoint of the law of conservation of energy.

Seeing my perplexity, Melnichenko explained that the process taking place in his device are simple enough, and are based on the phenomenon of electric resonance.

Despite the fact that this phenomenon has been known for more than a century, it is only rarely used in radio engineering and communications electronics where amplification of a signal by many times is needed.

Resonance is not used much in electrical engineering and power generation. By the end of the last century, the great scientist Nicola Tesla used to say that without resonance, electrical engineering was just a waste of energy.

No one attached any importance to this pronouncement at that time. Many of Tesla's works and experiments, for instance the transmission of electricity by one unearthed wire, have only recently been explained.

The scientist staged these experiments a century ago, but it has only been in our days that S. V. Avramenko has managed to reproduce them. This also holds true for the transmission of electric power by means of electromagnetic waves and resonance transformers.

"My first experiments with high-frequency resonance transformers produced results which, to say the least do not always accord with the law of the conservation of energy, but there is a simple mathematical and physical explanation of this", Melnichenko says.

"I have designed several special devices and electric motors which contain many of these ideas and which may help them achieve full resonance in a chain when it consumes energy only in the form of the thermal losses in the winding of the motor and wires of the circuits while the motor rotates without any consumption of energy whatsoever.

"This was shown during the demonstration", the inventor goes on to say. "The power, supplied to the motors, was less than was necessary for their normal operation! I have called the new physical effect transgeneration of electric power. Electric resonance is the principle underlying the operation of the device".

This effect can be very widely used. For instance, electric resonance motors may be employed in electric cars. In this case the storage batteries' mass is minimal.

The capacity, developed by an electric motor, exceeds the supplied electric power by many times, which may be used for devising absolutely autonomous propulsion power units - a kind of superpower plant under the hood.

The battery-driven vehicles, equipped with such power plants, would not need frequent recharging because, just as is the case of an ordinary engine, it would only need storage batteries for an electric start.

All the results have been confirmed by hundreds of experiments with resonances in electric motors (both ordinary and special).

In special motors, it is possible to achieve the quality of resonance in excess of 10 units. The technology of their manufacture is extremely simple while the investments are minimal. The results are superb!

Electromechanics is only the first step. The next are statical devices, which are resonance-based electric power generators.

For instance, a device, supplied at the input with power equal to that of three 'Energizer' batteries can make a 100-watt incandescent lamp burn at the exit.

The frequency is about 1 MHz. Such a device has a rather simple circuit, and is based on resonance. Using it, it is possible to by far increase the power factor of energy networks, and to drastically cut the input (reactive) resistance of ordinary transformers and electric motors.

But creation of fundamentally new, environmentally clean electric power generators is the most important application of electric resonance.

A resonance-based energy transformer will become the main element of such devices. The employment of conductors with very low active resistance - cryoelectrics - for their windings will make it possible to increase power by hundreds and thousands of times, in proportion to resonance qualities of the device.

The Russian Academy of Sciences, in its review says that the principle underlying the operation of the devices does not rouse doubts in theory and in practice, and that the work of the resonance-based electric systems is not in conflict with the laws of electrophysics.

Konstantin Smirnov
RIA Novosti From: Elling Olsen
To: Jerry Decker
Subject: Electric resonance for power generation
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 10:59:49 +0100

Hi,

The attached article was printed in the Indian newspaper The Hindu, Science & Technology Supplement, November 20, 1997. It appears to be a translation of a Russian article written by Konstantin Smirnov, RIA Novosti.

I typed it using WordPad in Windows 95, so you should easily be able to read it and change the file format to whatever you need. Of course I hope the document will be to find on KeelyNet for everyone to read and I will feel good for having contributed ;-) Keep up the good work.

Elling Olsen, eol@norman.no "
====================

Sorry for the long post - I hope your still awake!  :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on April 29, 2014, 09:30:24 PM
Thanks Cadman,
Wish you also success with your researches.
Your approach is based on today construction of generator. This optimization was done in the past due to complexity of engineering the Gramme Ring for massive production (done by hand).
But his approach still more efficient in terms of the power output….lot of criticism and also positive opinion about the ring.

INMHO, Figuera´s approach  is a mix solution  from a transformer (primary part with AC current/changing current) and a dynamo ring as the secondary part of that transformer but without rotation.


back to the difference between a transformer and dynamo machine. INMHO, both are the same thing but with different construction principals, therefore a different defects and behaviors:
1-   Transformer and dynamos have both primary and secondary parts
2-   Trafos work with changing current in the primary parts in order to get something in the secondary part
3-   In a trafo both parts are steady, no moving parts (no need for that, the changing current do that job for us) but at some cost (looses, interaction between prim. & sec.).
4-   In the dynamos: we use DC current in the primaries (no changing current), therefore we MUST emulate the change “EFFECT” of faradays law in the secondary part (rotating it).
5-   The most effective construction of the transformer is by using 2 different coils (do not put opposite currents in the same coil,  a la UFO-Tech)
6-   The most effective dynamo construction in the secondary part, is the Gramme machine:
7-   The defects of the transformers are very well known and understood.
8-   The defects of Gramme machine are: winding the toroid (today isn’t anymore a problem, we don’t  want it to rotate), the precision of the winding in order to avoid contacts between wire and stator (the gape for rotation is needed for others benefits as SolarLab pointed, this fact is now become reality, see how much patent using this)
9-   Advantages of Ring construction based on Pacinotti (1860):

Very nice job done by Alessandro de Robeis:
http://www.percorsielettrici.it/modelli-3d
http://www.percorsielettrici.it/macchine-elettriche/generatori

and worked out by Gramme (1871) (wiki):
http://www.percorsielettrici.it/macchine-elettriche/generatori/32-gramme/25-macchina-dinamo-elettrica-di-gramme


“The Gramme machine used a ring armature, with a series of armature coils, wound around a revolving ring of soft iron. The coils are connected in series, and the junction between each pair is connected to a commutator on which two brushes run. Permanent magnets magnetize the soft iron ring, producing a magnetic field which rotates around through the coils in order as the armature turns. This induces a voltage in two of the coils on opposite sides of the armature, which is picked off by the brushes.
Earlier electromagnetic machines passed a magnet near the poles of one or two electromagnets, creating brief spikes or pulses of DC resulting in a transient output of low average power, rather than a constant output of high average power.
With enough coils, the resulting voltage waveform is practically constant, thus producing a near direct current supply. This type of machine needs only electromagnets producing the magnetic field to become a modern generator.”

“…While the hollow ring could now be replaced with a solid cylindrical core or drum, the ring still proves to be a more efficient design, because in a solid core the field lines concentrate in a thin surface region and minimally penetrate the center. For a very large power-generation armature several feet in diameter, using a hollow ring armature requires far less metal and is lighter than a solid core drum armature. The hollow center of the ring also provides a path for ventilation and cooling in high power applications.
In small armatures a solid drum is often used simply for ease of construction, since the core can be easily formed from a stack of stamped metal disks keyed to lock into a slot


Figuera mentioned Paxii, clark, Pacinotti.. why?

Hi Solarlab,
The theory of Dr. Andrey MELNICHENKO is confirming in some ways what we are after.
Thank you for the link to the website.

NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on April 30, 2014, 06:04:20 AM
Hello Hanon,  8)

 Great progress with researching with the Figuera's device.

1. The simple Induction we knows  still works fine in cutting the copper wires with the magnetic flux we could create on the Inducing Electromagnet.
I already told you before that the concept which Figuera have found are explained really well on the Tesla Patent which Tesla call the Electro Dynamic Induction Machine= Tesla Toroid Transformer.
The real working device which Figuera really had is the Toroidal shape Transformer.

Yes. Tesla showed it really simple how to Virtually rotate the Magnetic Field on a Toroid on his patent.
My first understanding of the Tesla Toroid that it is being powered with a 180deg phase/out of phase, But I was wrong about the 180deg. The 2 phase Generator Tesla used to excite the 4 wound Primary coils of the Tesla Toroid is actually like this, 1st phase starts at 0deg; the 2nd phase starts at 90deg.

2. We are talking here a Rotating Magnetic Field so the Tesla Toroid is actually a Dynamo/Generator with no moving parts only rotating the Magnetic Field around the Toroid.
About how did Tesla do it to laterally cut the copper wire with the flux= We all know that the Core materials are soft Iron which is  a good Magnetic Flux Shaper . If you could see on the simple experiment done by Faraday , the coreless solenoid copper wire and moving the permanent magnet inside the copper wire- that experiment is actually what Tesla did moving the magnets in a Continuous loop in toroid. The dont worry about the Magnetic Field if you are using a Core Material here.

3. Why it needs 2 Phase Alternating Current? The purpose of the 2 Phase is create a waveform with 90degs phase shift. I think most people really knows the fact that the Phase Shift Waveform of the Secondary is 90deg. Tesla showed many ways that output waveform of his Induced Secondary Coils is 90deg.

What will happen if the reflective/opposing magnetic field of the Induced Secondary Coils are always meet with the next Phase?

The TPU works on this Rotating Magnetic Field concept.The Tesla Wireless Transmission still works with this concept. The Tesla Generator also works with this concept, almost all of Tesla's  Magnetism device was to achieved the 90deg.

If Tesla dont used the Toroidal shape Transformer, He will used TWO Separate Cored Transformer still to achieved the 90deg, The Magnetic Shielding which also Tesla introduced was for this purpose to achieve the 90degs Phase Shift.


Just some useful opinion. ;D ;D ;D

Meow   8)


Thanks for your kind help. I have a couple of questions:

1- How can we get the wires cut by the magnetic flux? Dynamos are based on that principle but for that the wire must be moved laterally to the magnetic lines. We need to emulate some kind of relative movement to induce the wires!!

2- What the difference between building a transformer and a dynamo? I understand that in transformers the magnetic flux do not hit the wires, just pass across the coil (flux linking). In dynamos the flux must cut the wires (flux cutting), this take us to the first question again: how can we get the flux cutting laterally the wires?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 01, 2014, 12:57:45 AM
Hi all,

I have found a couple of patents where it is described how to achieve two 90º unphased signals:

http://www.google.com/patents/US4156222 (http://www.google.com/patents/US4156222) (Transformer with divided primary) (see parapraph where Fig. 6 is described and next ones)

https://www.google.com/patents/US546756 (https://www.google.com/patents/US546756) (Production of displaced phases and rotary fields)

I hope someone may find them useful

Regards


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 02, 2014, 07:11:56 PM
Hallo,

Please read this patent (if you can) or look to the drawings, its easy to understand.
The inventor claimes OVERUNITY & SELF-RUNNING Generator in a Static or solide state form.
Just a Toiroid inside a Stepper Motor! ...very easy to test :)

Enjoy
NMS

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 02, 2014, 07:38:33 PM
Sine+Cosine=Rotation
is what Figuera was doing?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 03, 2014, 10:54:02 PM
If someone want to give it a try, let me know.
I will appreciate your comments!
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2014, 03:25:14 PM
Hello everyone,

 I get the whole idea of Tesla devise but what i don't get is why did Figueras use the Toroid. i have been studying the pics and i don't see the magnetic flux encircling the toroid just the Bemf taking alternate route aka.... the non powered half.
i have altered the toroid as to my understanding and is pictured below. can someone please show me a pic of the purpose of the toroid as i don't see the flux encircling the toroid only the powered halves ??????

Ps. NMS nice board. what is the purpose of the caps....are they for 90% phase shift or for over lap.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 04, 2014, 08:13:11 PM
Hello everyone,

 I get the whole idea of Tesla devise but what i don't get is why did Figueras use the Toroid. i have been studying the pics and i don't see the magnetic flux encircling the toroid just the Bemf taking alternate route aka.... the non powered half.
i have altered the toroid as to my understanding and is pictured below. can someone please show me a pic of the purpose of the toroid as i don't see the flux encircling the toroid only the powered halves ??????

Ps. NMS nice board. what is the purpose of the caps....are they for 90% phase shift or for over lap.

Hallo marathonman,
INMO, the Figuera hexagonal shape is not like Tesla patent.
In your proposal, there is no interaction between the 2 inputs (sine & cosine waves, like used by Tesla)

to answer your question about the caps in the board, there are also indicated in that Spanish patent. The inventor says, the caps collects the excess energy at moment of switch off of the transistor.
INMO, those caps are the KEY to the self-Running, look how they are connected.
attached is translation to English (Bing version!)

PS: could you please resize the piscture. its too big :(

To All,
I was expecting some more comments after posting all that documents. I was hoping to generate some kind of technical comments.
If you thing that are just a BS, please let me know your arguments.

To Stefan,
Warum kann man nicht ein Post editieren um ein Fehler zu korrigieren?
Gruss
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2014, 08:31:57 PM
I'm so sorry for the unbelievably large pic i don't know how that happened.but i can't fix it once it is posted...em i think. i edited it in paint and some how it got ballooned and i didn't realize until after i posted. man i think the legally blind can see that...ha ha ha!

thank you for the info!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2014, 09:46:33 PM
CADMAN,

 Is this what you were talking about???? it would seem to me that their would be plenty of flux cutting in this diagram. this is worth investigating in my book and after my initial Figueras test. thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 05, 2014, 12:32:34 AM
Sine+Cosine=Rotation
is what Figuera was doing?

Hi NMS,

This a concept which need a deep research. It is really interesting. It would be nice if everyone may post his comments about this idea. Your previous sketch is great to visualize your idea.

About the spanish patent No. 395792 that you have posted I have a question: once that the field is enclosed into the toroid it wil take both directions (left and right) and the resulting induction will be null. Am I right? Is there any mean to force the field to go just in one direction?. Maybe inserting a permanent magnet into one part of the toroid ring to avoid spinning in one direction.

NMS, I am also into this project for the same reason that the one you linked in your post about the "Child of my heart". Those children need some solution to have water, food and a chance to have a normal life. With energy all these will be possible (drinking water, electricity, transportation...).
 
Marathonman, the good thing about using a toroid is that the toroid embrace the opposite induced magnetic field into it, this field does not escape from the toroid and then it will never get back to the inducers coil reducing their strenght, so the inducers coil will not suffer from the Lenz effect.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 05, 2014, 01:11:59 AM
Thank you Hanon this is what i wanted to hear that the toroid is a less reluctant path.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 05, 2014, 01:16:36 AM
CADMAN,

 Is this what you were talking about???? it would seem to me that their would be plenty of flux cutting in this diagram. this is worth investigating in my book and after my initial Figueras test. thanks
Yes, very close.

I hope you all won't mind a few more details...

Keep in mind that each coil has two sides, no more, and that one side of the coil is under a N pole coil and the other is under the next S pole coil. Then the next coil starts under that S pole coil and winds to the next N pole coil. Keep going around until the armature is wound. According to the book the individual coils are then connected in series so that there are two circuits of coils (wave winding) each circuit developing half the output amperage. Needless to say, every coil should be identical to every other coil with the same size, number of turns and the same resistance. Wind each one on a form before installing onto the armature. See the book for better details.

The figuera/Buforn current modulation alternately increases the two N poles then the two S poles. All four flux circuits are in play at all times. When the N poles are increased the flux passes into the armature and divides to the two S pole coils, so the S pole coils at that time receive half their flux from each N pole coil. This situation occurs again when the S pole coils are increased and the N poles receive half their flux from each S pole coil. This is why the cross section between the poles of the yoke and between adjacent poles of the armature is half that of one pole itself.

In your picture there should be a center hole in the armature also and it looks as if you have cut down the armature too deeply between the poles. Keep the flux path short to avoid excess reluctance and try to keep the steel cross section as uniform as practical in the flux paths. Number of flux lines per unit area, remember that. If the area decreases or increases too much the flux will be affected. Also, shoot for a minimal clearance between the armature and the pole shoes.

It is best to use a high permeability steel with a known value for both the armature and the field yoke. Regular DC generators can get away with a yoke material that has less permeability because the flux from the pole coils is constant and hysteresis is not a major concern there. That is not the case with the Figuera setup because the flux in the yoke is in an almost constant state of change just as the armature is.

Be careful with the steel. It would be best to use a quality grade with a known permeability value that allows the flux to move equally well in any direction, non grain oriented. If you guess at your steel's permeability then your calculations will be based on that guess. Most electrical steels are grain oriented, passing flux easily in the direction of the grain, but very poorly in other directions. Almost all transformers use grain oriented electrical steel. If you use transformer laminations or other grain oriented electrical steel then bend the lengths across the grain into a U shape and stack them on top of each other to get the needed cross section. Four stacks of U shapes for the four pole yoke and four smaller stacks for the armature in a four pole generator.

If we study the book, do the calculations correctly, choose the materials carefully, and pay attention to detail we can build a working Figuera generator. If the design and build is done correctly the only way it will not work is if the Faraday law of induction is wrong. Really, how could this not work?

@NMS and others with different ideas.
I wish you all success. BTW in case you are interested, the toroid armature is mentioned in the book and the reason given for not using it was economics of materials and difficulty of manufacture compared to the drum armature.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 05, 2014, 03:36:19 AM
Hallo Hanon,
I got your message, and I´ll give a feedback :)
I hope that this new illustration make it clear.
there is only two coils switched on at time(every fet switch 2 coils simultaneously, because they are connected in series).
coil 1 is connected to coil6, coil 2 connected to coil7....you end up with coil6 connected to coil1 (different winding set! because each electromagnet has 2 windings)
The transistors are switches sequentially (that is the role of 4017 IC) and the frequency (speed of rotation) is set by the 555 IC.

Thanks Cadman for your help!

Regards,
NMS

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 10, 2014, 01:43:56 AM
Everyone,

Please comment this great idea from NoMoreSlave: 

- Two 90º unphased signals are as a Sine wave and a Cosine wave.   Sine (alfa + 90º) = Cosine (alfa)

- If you place both electromagnets at right angle (perpendiculary) then the vector sum of both magnetic field vectors is a ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD !!!

Please see this gif animation:
http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif (http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif)

NoMoreSlave, Please comment this idea a bit deeper. I think this idea has a lot of merit. People will be grateful for a further explanation of your idea in order to grasp it fine.

Sine+Cosine=Rotation
is what Figuera was doing?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on May 10, 2014, 02:47:30 AM
There you have it man. I congratulate you. That is I was always talking to you ever since I posted on any thread you make. Rotating Magnetic Field with out reflecting the Load to the Primary Inducing Field.

The B-Field should rotate CLOCKWISE. That is all..

There is no problem  on what NMS posted- after I have read the pdf, yes that device will work greatly on solid state switching. This works the same with the very concept of the Tesla Toroid but in another form.

The Tesla Toroid is composed of 4 wound coils, wound diametrically opposite  by 2 sets. Like this. Top + Bottom,,, Right + Left .
Each Coils has Two Magnetic Pole, so Example of the Top has North and South together with the Bottom Coil has its own North and South.

The resulting Magnetic Pole of the 2 Set Top + Bottom Coil = should be like this NORTH +NORTH and SOUTH + SOUTH on the ring perpendicular from the Two Inducing Primary Coils . I think you know how to wound this coils that it will project those magnetic poles on Two Opposing North and South . The resulting Magnetic Pole of the 2 wound coils (Top + Bottom) is a Magnetic Amplified of the Two Norths and Two South.

It is already been proven from those Bedini Motor builders that the Two The Same magnetic pole(North + North) opposing each other will Amplify the effects of the Magnetic Field.

The same goes for the Right + Left Coils.

Meow   ;D

Everyone,

Please comment this great idea from NoMoreSlave: 

- Two 90º unphased signals are as a Sine wave and a Cosine wave.   Sine (alfa + 90º) = Cosine (alfa)

- If you place both electromagnets at right angle (perpendiculary) then the vector sum of both magnetic field vectors is a ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD !!!

Please see this gif animation:
http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif (http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif)

NoMoreSlave, Please comment this idea a bit deeper. I think this idea has a lot of merit. People will be grateful for a further explanation of your idea in order to grasp it fine.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 10, 2014, 10:31:05 AM
I think Figuera found a way to decouple field from magnet .The solution ultimately must be the static magnetic flux moving in space. Rotating field is good imho , but it must be not changing in time and strength (not transformer principle but generator principle)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 11, 2014, 04:30:53 PM
Hi all,

 Found something interesting on internet but man is it to expensive ......SWQO-02 DSP Quadrature Oscillator around 600 bucks. can anyone come up with anything cheaper.
NMS, thanks for the gif it really helped me in my understanding and as i see it it can be done with AC or DC 90 degrees out of phase.

Cadman, the reason i modified the pic is i don't plan on rotating it so no hole. and thanks for the info about non grain oriented iron/steel makes a lot of  sense.

i finished my two channel board construction and am waiting on heat sinks for AC nine channel board.
 (off subject)
 i finished construction of my no amp draw Alarm System for stand alone buildings (Works Great). draws no power until it is tripped and i have it hooked up to a Sim900 GSM auto dialer to notify(Text Message) if building is broke into......shark tank here i come....Whoo who!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 11, 2014, 10:13:34 PM
Hallo Evryone,
I must thank everyone for keeping this thread alive, for your comments and for your technical help.

I think the pictureabout the rotating magnetic field is now very clear (Tesla, Handershot, Figuera, …. even QEG!).
Now is just a matter of engineering the THING with today´s tools.

The picture of the commutator is for delper (hope this help to understand what I mean).
The other one is about a sine & cosine wave generator with only two Op-amp (for experimenting).

Hi marathonman,
is your system also open source?
Thank you for your support and contribution.

Best wishes,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 12, 2014, 04:54:25 AM
NMS, no thank you ! your contribution has been unreal, if you are referring to my Alarm System the answer is hell no ( i will make millions) if it is for figueras then yes i have an extra board i will sell you for cost of the board. i hide nothing like the USA sorry ass Government that is as crooked as a kids teeth on flouride. the sorry ass Alien that  produced us forgot a fatal flaw ....... human are inherently greedy......i am not,  i will give god my tooth brush if he can prove he is god and you my friend are in luck because unlike the Queen, Bush Clinton, Obama and all the other scum, i live by my word as the human race should do.
Navy Seals all the way!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 12, 2014, 04:02:38 PM
Hi marathonman,
The question was about your approach for the Figuera´s driving board.
Wish you a lot of success with your projects.
Best regards,
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 12, 2014, 10:01:56 PM
NMS,

 I'm not sure what you mean???  um do you mean my lay out..... it is like Patrick's design ie. 1 through 9 then 9 through 1 continuous using DC.
i had to use three 4017's because of the 0 chip MF defect and output 10 used for timing purpose, i have a two channel one also.
i will be pursuing duel AC 90 degree phase also.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoMoreSlave on May 12, 2014, 10:17:13 PM
Hi marathonman,
I was curious about the schematics, but you made clear now. thanks!
NMS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 14, 2014, 07:06:40 PM
I'm making an attempt to replicate the Figuera device exactly as shown in the patent. We have succeeded in building the rotary device but the sparks still come and so we need to rebuild the rotary device to ensure that the brush will touch the three adjoining plates always. It must always keep touch two adjoining plates and when it does it there is a spark when the brush for a moment touches only one of the contact points. So we will rebuild it. This will be an exact replication of the Figuera patent. The drawing appears to hide significant information as well as the description at the end about how the machine is continuously run. I'm not yet clear on these points. We have put a step down gear to reduce the speed of rotation to test what happens. 50 % of the time the brush touches two points and 50% of the time the brush touches single point only. Had we not used the step down gear box it would not have been visible to us. Therefore if the spark is to be avoided we need it to touch three contact points at 50% of the time and 2 contact points at 50% of the time. Then the rotary device will work perfectly without sparks is what we believe but we can say that only after the testing is over.

This will be an exact replica of the 1908 patent. After a lot of tests we believe we can replicate it.

Please see photos of the rotary device and the video of the rotary device with the step down gear. Once the sparks are removed completely by makeing the copper contact points larger or by reducing the size of the card board to make the brush touch three contact points 50% of the time and two contact points the remaining 50% of the time, we can move on to test the rotation at high RPM rates. If there is no spark, no heat and the brush will have a long life.

I will update you all as we progress.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 14, 2014, 07:26:56 PM
After going through the patent many times and doing a lot of tests I have also understood one thing.

Current goes from Low to High in one of the primaries. In this case Voltage goes from High to Low.

Current goes from High to Low in the corresponding opposite primary. Here Voltage goes from Low to High.

When current is lower, voltage is higher and when current is higher voltage is lower.

This is due to the simple fact that the resistance array is there controlling the flow of Electricity. As resistance to a particular amperage is high, voltage goes up and amperage goes down. opposite is the situation available in the opposite primary.

Now regarding the central coil and the primary coils whether it should be NS-NS-NS or NS-SN-NS or NS-NS-SN or SN-SN-NS or variations I think both of them would work for the structure of the secondary is different for NS-SN-SN type of identical poles opposing each other. I think I should be able to make both of them work but which one would produce the best results I have to test and say.

In my honest opinion the current supplied from the external generator can be AC or DC or Pulsed DC. The arrangement is such that there is always a fluctuating magnetic field between the two primaries. An inductor subjected to a time varying or fluctating magnetic field will produce induced emf is the rule and so it can work even with DC. Again I have to test this concept and post the results.

How did Figuera make the device a self sustaining generator? This question is not clearly answered in the patent and the description avoids it. So it is some thing we need to find out. We are yet to understand that part although I think the buforn patent says that some other wire is wound over the secondary to power the primary input continuously. while theoretically it looks correct I'm not sure why we cannot put a transformer on the secondary and take the output from that transformer secondary and give a feedback to the primary.  This is possible where the input is AC or pulsed DC but not if it is DC. So this confusion still remains.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 14, 2014, 07:31:52 PM
Now all the friends here have discussed various things but none has explained what is the Al Origin shown in the Figuera patent. What is the meaning of Al origin in spanish. Can any one clarify on this point please.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on May 14, 2014, 09:21:06 PM

 NRamaswami

I built a 32 contact commutator that ran at 1800rpm.
I only had one place where it was sparking. I believe it
is better to operate at a slower rpm to reduce sparking.
However I only had the brush contacting two contacts
at a time. I thought of that, but never tried it.

Good luck,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 14, 2014, 09:33:51 PM
Shadow:

Thank you so much. If you had the brush contacting two points most of the time, then it is 50% or more 3 points and where it was sparking it was touching only one contact point at that point. Better engineering skills. However when you rotate it at 1800 RPM it is difficult for you to catch what is happening. If you find the place at which is sparking and then run the commutator slowly you would find that at that place there is only one contact. I had to spend time to figure it out even after running it deliberately slowly to fix the problems. We will have this sorted out in two days I'm sure now and once there is no spark we can rotate it at any RPM. It is not a commutator that we bought but we hand built this rotary device as you can see. If there is no spark, then probably there is no back emf as Patrick has taught me but I need to test it and verify it. Even now the when the current given is AC to power the + and - points and the rorary disc is made to rotate through a DC motor we have no loss of input and load voltage. But remained at 200 volts. That was very surprising to me. Let me test the entire replication and then post the videos here and let me share what knowledge I gained here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 14, 2014, 11:39:22 PM
AL ORIGEN  = TO THE SOURCE
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 15, 2014, 03:43:06 AM
Thanks Hanon:

It would then mean that the two points are both connected to battery minus (if the input is DC or minus point of source if any other type of current like AC or pulsed DC. AC is ruled out then as current changes direction 50 times a second in AC and so the input is either Pulsed DC or DC) and one of the wires coming from source minus is connected to an earth point before it goes to the electromagnets that it will power. I will have it replicated exactly as shown in the patent and see what results are obtained. I will be doing this around May 20th or 21st only and then I will post the videos and pictures. Since the device will be an exact replication effort, we will know if the effort succeeds or fails. It has taken a lot of efforts for me to understand what is the problem with the rotary device and how to avoid sparks and we needed to handbuilt it and see that it must always touch two points. Only when we design it to touch three points it will always touch two points all the time. I'm only now confident that the rotary device can be built cheaply and easily and can remain very sturdy also so that it will last for a very long time. If there is no spark, no heat. Then the device will last a very long time. We may then need only one of the half of the rotating arm to have the brushes.

If we use pulsed DC using a bridge rectifier from the mains AC then it becomes automaticaly an interrupted DC current. For the direction of AC changes 50 times a second and for these 50 times a second we are not going have any electricity flowing from the source. But were bridge rectifiers available in 1908?. I doubt it very much.

Regarding the input current the patent says that is either an interrupted current or Alternating current. But the whole thing appears to show only a DC current source or a battery or series of batteries connected to provide a particular voltage and amperage for the input to the primary. Let me check it again. So significant work appears to remain here even after this type of focused effort.

I will check both the idetical poles facing each other and the opposite poles facing other. We will try to see how this can be worked around.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 16, 2014, 01:09:17 PM
The first rectifying device without commutation was patented in 1889.Which used a perminent magnet or a battery or a special group of motor sets on a single shaft I mentioned that a long time ago. No way to tell how many people were using it or came to the same conclusion before someone bothered to patent it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 16, 2014, 02:14:22 PM
I'm not able to avoid sparks even when the brush touches 2 contact points always. The only thing that I'm able to achieve is that the sparking is very minute now. It is not clear to me how when one charged rotating arm touches another charged static component a spark can be avoided. It may be considered as a rotating spark gap. I will need further experimentation on this before I can close it. Will update you all if there is any progress.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 19, 2014, 03:57:29 AM
18 May 13 / 21:32:05
Hello All
A few months back ( before the Xmas Holidays ) I built the Figuera's circuit that was on Patrick's website...I got the 555 to fire 16 LEDs then switched down to 4 diodes and power transistor and got the circuit to fire into a radio shack transformer ( I switched the transformer connections ) instead of using the transformer as a step down I reversed the connections and used it as a step up transformer... I was powering the 555 with a Best9 volt battery and got 1 Volt AC from the transformer... I was satisfied with the circuit and was going to finish up a previous planned house project before coming back to the circuit...upon completion of the house project I noticed an update on the Patrick website stating...                                                                                                                                                                                                "It is essential to construct each of the cores of the electromagnets from iron and only iron. While a laminated core does minimise eddy currents, in this application, a laminated core has a major negative magnetic effect (something which is not generally known)."

Could someone elaborate on this...
All the Best
RandyFL
                                                                                                                                                                                             
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on May 19, 2014, 04:57:25 AM
Hello to all, please look at these pics, and let me know whats wrong before I put 4ea. 9volt batts . Hope it works.
AVENGERS :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2014, 02:06:42 PM
18 May 13 / 21:32:05
Hello All
A few months back ( before the Xmas Holidays ) I built the Figuera's circuit that was on Patrick's website...I got the 555 to fire 16 LEDs then switched down to 4 diodes and power transistor and got the circuit to fire into a radio shack transformer ( I switched the transformer connections ) instead of using the transformer as a step down I reversed the connections and used it as a step up transformer... I was powering the 555 with a Best9 volt battery and got 1 Volt AC from the transformer... I was satisfied with the circuit and was going to finish up a previous planned house project before coming back to the circuit...upon completion of the house project I noticed an update on the Patrick website stating...                                                                                                                                                                                                "It is essential to construct each of the cores of the electromagnets from iron and only iron. While a laminated core does minimise eddy currents, in this application, a laminated core has a major negative magnetic effect (something which is not generally known)."

Could someone elaborate on this...
All the Best
RandyFL
                                                                                                                                                                                           

Randy;

 This could have a lot of merit as the late Robert Adams (Genius) came to the same conclusion that solid iron cores were the best way to go so if any one has information pertaining to this subject PLEASE disclose. solid Pure iron does have very little hysteresis/Remanence and this is what is used in huge electromagnet for picking up scrap iron/steel.
 we are ALL tired of our sick disgusting Local, federal government and corporations dictating influencing our very way of life otherwise we would not be here.
 be free, act free and disclose.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 19, 2014, 09:33:26 PM
Hi Marathonman:

In India soft iron is cheaper than laminated iron core. Soft iron is more magnetic than laminated iron. I do not know why. Similarly as you go to higher voltages the efficiency of power produced in secondary increases. Soft iron appears to have lower eddy current losses at high voltages but I have no means of measuring eddy current losses. I'm actually not prepared to go beyond 350 volts in secondary but it appears we need to go above 500 volts to get reasonable outputs. I do not have skilled hands and the budget and the space to do these experiments now. I have gone up to 300 volts and obtained 91% efficiency on loads on an input of 220 volts and 15 amps and an output of 300 volts and 10 amps and lighted 14x200 watts lamps very bright. But it was not a Figuera design but rather my own tests of my own design but the material used for the core was soft iron rods which are tightly packed but had air gaps in between them and so must be considered very inefficient. But if you ask me why this happens etc, I have no way of answering such questions and I do not have the knowledge. I'm not sure if the centre core posted in the picture above your post would work. I have not tested it in the way it is shown but it is possible the secondary may not work at all.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tturner on May 19, 2014, 10:19:47 PM
any ou replication from this device yet? this devise intreged me for a while now just dont have much time to work on it
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2014, 10:34:27 PM
I think Pure Iron means better transfer of Flux ie ..better or easier transfer of MMF between Atoms,  that and solid cores means More Atoms in alignment  to transfer more MMF at one given time than of laminated GOES. i am using almost pure Iron electrodes that are thick and have had great initial test but need to finish building my cores, can't wait to merry it up to my timing Boards. i have finished my two channel board and am in process of finishing the nine channel board. will show pics soon along with progress. God this new job is killing me but i will be taking over the whole Industrial painting Department then i will have more time on weekend to finish my Figueras device.
Be Free, Act Free !  (You gatta love Figueras)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2014, 12:36:38 AM
19 May 14 / 18:31:00
Hello All
I'm not a Lover of government ( Local or national ) but I am admirer of pure free enterprise ( not cronyism )...
I am glad I had the house project before finishing the circuit or I would have regular laminates from a transformer company.
Any ideas of a transformer company that would custom make these soft iron transformer cores.... ( I just want to get the project over - so I can experiment and move onto other Projects :-)

Best of Luck
RandyFL
PS I will share costs if you are interested...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on May 20, 2014, 02:43:25 AM
 :) I put the five 9vlt batts together and measured the volts, came to 37vlts, hooked it up, and got nothing, none on the secondary in the center and none on the inputs from either side of the resistors. The batt reading was 7vlts then I turned the variable resister the other way and the batt voltage comes up to 16vlts. I remove the contacts at the batts and measure 37volts.
Did something wrong somewhere. But before I epoxied all three electromagnets together they were or are strong electromagnets separate. I have to keep tinkering. I tried to stay as close to Figueras drawing and the anonymous contributor on PJK ebook as possible. I did handle the components without an anti static hook up. Any comments, thoughts, suggestions are always appreciated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 20, 2014, 06:03:15 AM
Avengers:

Just do a simple thing. Either mark all three cores CW or CCW and you will have the secondary working.

If you have a CW primary and CCW primary, the secondary in between should be a square. Either the square must be made up of CW-CCW-CW-CCW or CCW-CCW-CW-CW for the secondary to work. In that case the square must be an electromagnet and the the central core must go straight between the two primaries. I do not have skills in painting or drawing  but just imagine a pole of iron into which you insert the square. Then the secondary will work. The pole of iron should be insulated iron core.

Greater the number of secondaries, higher is the voltage.

Higher the voltage, higher is the amperage. We have repeated this so many times I can confidently tell you that higher the voltage higher is the amperage in this multiple primaries arrangment.

When the voltage exceeds 500 volts you start getting more output than input.

The input should have a reasonable voltage and amperage. I tested it with 220 volts and from 7 amp onwards to the input we start getting reasonable output in the secondaries and higher than the input wattage when the output voltage exceeds 500 volts. The iron appears to have no sound at all at higher voltages.

Again the magnetism at higher voltages appear to be lower than at lower voltage and higher amperages. Possibly there is a voltage:Amperage ratio that needs to be exceeded for this to be accomplished but I'm not competent to say any thing on this point. Just an experimental observation that this happens.

Why and how we get higher output higher voltages? I do not know.

Why you do not get more output at lesser voltages, again I do not know.

Voltages mentioned above are on loads. Not unloaded voltages.

You do not need any circuits. Just connect to the mains and you get these results.

Upto this point the above can be easily verified. How did Figuera make the device a self sustaining device. That is not clear yet to me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2014, 06:52:22 AM
20 May 14 /  24:38:01
NRamaswami :
Are the cores that you designed in the same configuration as the Fiquera? same number? And did you use the semiconductors ( that Patrick contributed ) or a machine Like the original design ( like Woopy used ) to get your results. If you have posted these before...sorry for the redundancy.
Lastly...let me see if I understand this. You're stating when you reach a certain voltage and amperage then the over unity starts...

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2014, 07:21:27 AM
20 May 14 / 01:16:01

Hello All:
From Wiki...

Magnetic core
A magnetic core is a piece of magnetic material with a high permeability used to confine and guide magnetic fields in electrical, electromechanical and magnetic devices such as electromagnets, transformers, electric motors, generators, inductors, magnetic recording heads, and magnetic assemblies. It is made of ferromagnetic metal such as iron, or ferrimagnetic compounds such as ferrites. The high permeability, relative to the surrounding air, causes the magnetic field lines to be concentrated in the core material. The magnetic field is often created by a coil of wire around the core that carries a current. The presence of the core can increase the magnetic field of a coil by a factor of several thousand over what it would be without the core.

further down it states...
Soft iron
"Soft" (annealed) iron is used in magnetic assemblies, electromagnets and in some electric motors; and it can create a concentrated field that is as much as 50,000 times more intense than an air core.[2]

Iron is desirable to make magnetic cores, as it can withstand high levels of magnetic field without saturating (up to 2.16 teslas at ambient temperature.[3])

It is also used because, unlike "hard" iron, it does not remain magnetised when the field is removed, which is often important in applications where the magnetic field is required to be repeatedly switched.

Unfortunately, due to the electrical conductivity of the metal, at AC frequencies a bulk block or rod of soft iron can often suffer from large eddy currents circulating within it that waste energy and cause undesirable heating of the iron.

All the Best
RandyFL





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 20, 2014, 08:19:42 AM
RandyFL:

I used soft iron rods. We need about 60 rods to pack a 2.5 inch plastic tube. air can go through the rods from one end to the other end. so heating may be reduced by convecton. I do not know. Rods do not get overheated when we employ high voltage and much lower amperage in the region of 7 to 10 amps. However if the voltage is less and amperage is more rods do get heated. An open core draws so  much of current that circuit breaker at office rated at 32 amps will cut. At high voltage, the vibration is metal seems to be so fast that it dissipates heat very quickly. But the sound at high voltage is different from sound at low voltage. If the saturation levels are reached Iron will scream but at high voltages iron  does not scream.

I have simply used it the way shown in the Buforn patent last patent as all NS-NS-NS-NS-NS..I have already posted this. At that time I could not get NS-SN-NS to work or NS-NS-SN to work. I found that if we use a square electromagnet to surroundthe iron rod that goes between the two primaries with identcal poles then the secondary would work. But the square must be wound as two CW and two CCW coils serially connected. So in essence you have a small y coil between N and S core as shown in the Figurea drawings. No circuits. Just simple plain connection to the mains.

But the small size of the Y coil does not mean that the wire length or turns is lesser than the two primaries. In fact if you have N-Y-S-Y-N you will have three primary coils and 8 secondary coils although the secondary coils will be far closer to the two primaries and will suffer the maximum magnetic flux. Howard Johnson says that the magnetic flux between identical poles is 3 times higher than the opposite poles. Doug1 has been trying to kick this in to my brain without success for a long time. But the problem is that we need the square electromagnet to surround the secondary core to get the secondary current in that set up. For the opposite pole a staight line works. smaller the y magnet in the NS-NS-NS higher is the magnetic flux encountered and voltage obtained. Same as in the identical pole. But Figuera appears to have used opposite poles only for he says that the set up is free from Lenz law. I have obtained the results only in the opposite pole configurations but I think we can obtain better results in identical pole configurations also but I have not tested. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2014, 08:48:42 AM
20 May 14 / 02:32:00
NRamaswami:
Why build the replica of the Figuera when the circuit that Patrick designed works...of course you have to modify the circuit to run exactly as Patrick designed it ( or at least I had to )...
Patrick stated to me that I only needed bar steel ( or whatever its called ) like Woopy used to get it to work... but I couldn't get any electricity from it.... so I went to radio shack and bought a eight dollar ( US ) transformer and reversed it ( step up ) and got 1 volt AC from a 9 volt battery...
Granted...that soft iron is better than steel laminations....but at this stage I just want get to the end product ( asap ).

Namaste
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 20, 2014, 10:38:47 AM
RandyFL:

I'm not doing any thing right now. Nor interested now. I do not know what others did. Patricks circuit is designed for low voltages and will burn out at high voltages. I have tried at lower voltages and higher amperages and as things did not work moved from lower to higher voltage and got the results I could report.

In fact I imagine that the Al origin reported by Figuera to be earth connections. The secondary in my opinion would also be connected to two earth connections. so we would have Four earth connections and four capacitors just before the earth connections. Kind of 1,2,3 and 4..The Points 1 and 4 would have the maximum differences in voltages. So when you excite the Earth with potential differences through a capacitor like that you can take free electrons from Earth due to potential difference between the earth points is my assumption. But I have not tested it. Nor do I intend to test it for the Voltages are very high and I do not know what would be the resulting currents. But it is a fact that when the secondary Voltage goes up, the secondary amperage goes up even without the earth connections. The old devices are actually far more simpler to replicate than lot of electronics which reduces our ability to increase the voltage and frequency as we wish. You can simply use wires without any electronics to increase voltages and it will work. A run capacitor will work at designated voltages. The wire can withstand the amperage for which it is designed. A spark plug can create the high frequency needed without expensive signal generators. These are devices that were made when electronics that we know of did not exist and so we should be able to do these things easily and cheaply.

As to your question as to why I did what I did, that is what I could understand. I could not understand Electronics at all. So I simply coiled the wires and tested. Not any more testing as it has taken too much of my time..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 20, 2014, 02:14:49 PM
Avengers:

Just a thought.. In your three core transformer remove the central core and put there an iron core alone without the coils. Now surround this iron core with the square electromagnet. The secondary would work. Or you need to make all three cores either CW or CCW. Then also secondary will work.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2014, 02:15:18 PM
20 May 14 / 07:45:02

Avengers:
How did you test the 555 and the 4017s?

NRamaswami:
Part of Patrick's design isn't intended for high voltages... The other parts are. As I understand the premise for Patrick's design is for the user to achieve freedom from the electrical company not supply the country for electricity... for example my main electrical need is AC, stove and clothes dryer. One single circuit could achieve 120 or 240 volt in the 40 or 20 amp range all achievable with Patrick's design...
Furthermore...even if the Patrick design doesn't achieve over unity we have the solar panel and wind generator to utilize it...

Its up to US to achieve our financial freedom not Governments or other countries...
All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 21, 2014, 01:21:34 AM
Hi all,

I have a doubt. In this patent referenced by NoMoreSlave ( http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400934/#msg400934 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400934/#msg400934) ) induction is produced by emulating a rotary magnetic field into a central induced coil. This emulation is based on switch ON/OFF a sequence of inducing coils.

I think that this is not the same than having a real rotating magnetic field induced revolving around the central induced coil. With a real rotating magnetic field (as the one created by NoMoreSlave´s idea of placing the coils at right angles with a Sine + Cosine wave) the field really rotate and the field cut the wires perpendiculary creating a real induction  -->  E = B·v·Length· sin(alfa)   ; alfa = 90º , angle between B and v ; sin(alfa) = 1 (Induction by Flux Cutting the wires, as done in current generators)

In the case of switching ON/OFF the inducing coils the field "seems" to rotate macroscopically but, in fact, each magnetic field is created and collapsed and the magnetic field lines cross through the wires but these lines do not cut the wires perpendiculary, therefore, I think that maybe the induction will be null because in this case: the angle alfa = 0º, and therefore sin(alfa) = 0 --> E = 0.

I really think that the idea of placing the coils at right angles with a Sine and a Cosine waves (as proposed by NoMoreSlave in post #1261 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400937/#msg400937)) to create a rotating magnetic field could probably be what Figuera used in his patents.

What is your opinion? Please comment
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 21, 2014, 01:38:53 AM
Randy;
You test your outputs with a LED after the resistor to the Transistor. all my boards are 5 volt so i was good to go as i designed them to be low power.
Keep testing at that level as Figueras used 100 volts @ 1 amp. i used MJH11020's for my project but the MJH11022's can handle more voltage.
the cheapest place i found them are at http://www.futureelectronics.com/en/technologies/semiconductors/discretes/transistors/darlington/Pages/5513205-MJH11022G.aspx?IM=or you can use MJ11028 through 33 at http://futurlec.com/TransPowerMJE.shtml.
and if you really want to get froggy try ESM3030DV for the Biggest bang for your buck 400 volts @ 100 amp's of pure balls to the wall.
Be free, Act free and FIGUERAS your ass off.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 21, 2014, 02:20:02 AM
20 May 14 / 20:15:02

Thanks MarathonMan:
I was asking Avengers how He was testing his...
I too used low voltages until everything worked on a breadboard...

But my question to you is what did you use as transformer(s)?

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 21, 2014, 03:08:32 AM
20 May 14 / 20:55:01
MarathonMan:
After dinner I looked at the specs of the ESM3030DV... WOW! That's plenty enough juice to power things up a bit. :-) That's more power than anybody would need for their own use... Businesses could use em in sets or more...

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 21, 2014, 04:53:25 AM
Hanon:

First I must apologize to you and Nomoreslave. Without the postings from you both, I would not have tested the square electromagnet. I actually wanted to test it like a toroid but because of you, I tested it as a square. Whether a toroid will work or not I have not tested. So the credit for the square magnet must go to you and Nomoreslave.

Regarding what kind of magnet was y magnet used by Figuera, the patent provides the instruction that the device is free from Lenz law. Lenz law is not applicable to magnetic field flowing between opposite poles. However there is no need to ignore the square magnet or toroid type of magnet with a central iron core going between the two identical pole primaries if the primary wires were connected to the Earth. In that case alone, we can provide 100 volts and 1 amps as input to get the 20000 watts output reported by Buforn. 100 volts and 1 amp input can generate about 400 to 500 volts and low amperages typically in the secondary. 100 volts and 15 amps input may provide 600 volts and 20 amps output possibly in the secondaries without the Earth connection.

As you are aware my coils are large coils to replicate the Figuera device and they run to 6 feet to 7.5 feet length when built and tested. I believe that this kind of size matters although I need to concede that I'm not a competent person and the designs I made are very inefficient and can be made more efficient by technically competent persons.

In my assumption, if the earth is used as the source for free electrons, then the device could have used identical poles and square type of secondary magnets with very large primary cores that completely surround the Y square magnet with the iron rods facing each other. the large thick coil shown to protrude through the secondary and to cover the part of the two primaries would then have been used to prevent the electromagnets from moving away and to secure the identical poles to remain in position. So given the kind of Iron core indicated in the drawing and the fact that I assume that the Earth is the Al origin, Figurea could have used the identical poles and square magnets for the Y magnet.

In one earlier posting Marathonman showed that the primaries have iron rods that completely encircle the secondary with the magnetic fields flowing in between. That is how I had tested in July 2013. The coiling arrangements were of course different.

I will test the earth connections some time when I can and then would provide the details. This invention is not patentable today. No point would be served by applying for patents. There are several patents that are granted for perpetual motion devices like equipment which had one or two conditions added to avoid that problem and many patents had been granted like that earlier. So rather than filing a patent application, I intend to simply provide the information here. Those who want to test and replicate and see let them verify it. It is so simple.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on May 21, 2014, 07:48:30 AM
Thank You for all your input, greatly appreciated. The only test equipment I have are these little cheap multi meters, not sure how to test a component like 555's or the other ic's . I did put the 12 vlt cordless drill batt. back on the individual electromagnets and found out the center core doesn't work, but the outer two are still working, I believe I burned the center primery when I experimented with magnetizing all three coils using the center coil to keep all three together long enough to let the resin set. I wound up using a bar clamp and glued them with resin and not retesting the center coil and remembering I couldn't touch it cause it was that hot. Back to the hacksaw and make another center core.
AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 21, 2014, 08:58:47 AM
21 May 14 / 02:50:02

Avengers......

AVENGERS!

Read the two posts above from MarathonMan and Me.......

Test your 555 and then your 4017s ..........First..........
use your cheap multimeter ( 3 volts has to be coming out of the 555 or use a resistor and a LED )
if nothing is coming out of the 555 or 4017s.....then nothing is going to come out of the transformers......

All the Best
RandyFL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 23, 2014, 01:13:40 AM
Hi all,

Do you think that Figuera tried to achieve a rotating magnetic field as NoMoreSlave proposed by placing the electromagnets at right angles (perpendicularly) and excited by a Sine and a Cosine Waves (90º unphased as Figuera explained) ?  (Sine + Cosine = Rotation , see NoMoreSlave´s post #1261 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400937/#msg400937))

Please comment.

See these gif animations (I do not know why these gif files are static when pasted into this forum):

http://www2.seminolestate.edu/lvosbury/images/SinCosAnim4.gif (http://www2.seminolestate.edu/lvosbury/images/SinCosAnim4.gif)

http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~ttyrrell/152_spring_14/SineCosine_animated.gif (http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~ttyrrell/152_spring_14/SineCosine_animated.gif)

http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif (http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 23, 2014, 03:02:36 AM
22 May 14 / 20:39:01
Hanon:
I think whatever Figuera was trying to succeed in He did. As I understand it He was a Professor in the Canary Islands. People like Nikola Tesla, Clemente Figuera and even Patrick Kelly gave/give 100 percent of their time to the betterment of humanity... Whilest people like JP Morgan, Rockefeller and George Soros took/take from the poor for the betterment of themselves...

All the Best
RandyFL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on May 23, 2014, 04:37:41 AM
Hanon, The rotating magnetic field which Tesla showed us is rotating inside and circling around the toroid core. 

Tesla
Quote
Usually I operated quarter phase; that is, I generated
currents of 90° displacement

Tesla
Quote
I employed currents of different phase. I had in my laboratory ,permanently, a  two-phase dynamo(Generator) and could get  phases  between; that is, from two phases , 90deg  apart

The correct rotating magnetic field is the XXZ gif you have shown, 4 wound coils, divided into two primary for the 2 phase.

Hi all,

Do you think that Figuera tried to achieve a rotating magnetic field as NoMoreSlave proposed by placing the electromagnets at right angles (perpendicularly) and excited by a Sine and a Cosine Waves (90º unphased as Figuera explained) ?  (Sine + Cosine = Rotation , see NoMoreSlave´s post #1261 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400937/#msg400937))

Please comment.

See these gif animations (I do not know why these gif files are static when pasted into this forum):

http://www2.seminolestate.edu/lvosbury/images/SinCosAnim4.gif (http://www2.seminolestate.edu/lvosbury/images/SinCosAnim4.gif)

http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~ttyrrell/152_spring_14/SineCosine_animated.gif (http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~ttyrrell/152_spring_14/SineCosine_animated.gif)

http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif (http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 23, 2014, 05:15:25 AM
Hi all,

Do you think that Figuera tried to achieve a rotating magnetic field as NoMoreSlave proposed by placing the electromagnets at right angles (perpendicularly) and excited by a Sine and a Cosine Waves (90º unphased as Figuera explained) ?  (Sine + Cosine = Rotation , see NoMoreSlave´s post #1261 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400937/#msg400937))

Please comment.

See these gif animations (I do not know why these gif files are static when pasted into this forum):


Hanon;

 Your Gif's worked fine and i agree that the key to Figueras device was the rotation or the mimicking of rotation and it seams to me that the only way to accomplish this is through Sine-Cosine as NMS and your self have proposed. i think the transformer proposed by patrick rotates in a sense but it does not have the fluidity as does the 1902 patent shape. this is something i am investigating and will post findings soon but the darn Iron is so expensive and i will have to wait a few more paychecks for this.
Figueras was a well educated individual and i'm sure he was well aware of Tesla's accomplishments as most Professor's would be. if one would look around and observe nature here on earth and the cosmos, rotation seams to be the significant factor in the working of this universe. water traveling down hill picks up a significant amount of energy through spinning vortex's,  all the physical galaxy we are in is a gigantic spiral vortex.......ask your self why?  hmmmmm. spinning vortex-magnetics-electricity all are related and all we need to do is put the pieces in the correct order.


Randy;
i forgot to add that i also have a Owan oscilloscope that showed me my 555 was working and to set correct timing and the LED was used to make sure the 4017's were functioning properly.

Be Free Act Free and don't forget to get your Figueras grove on.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 23, 2014, 05:32:28 AM
So tell me why the rotation you have described would not work in this set up as proposed by Cadman. just something bouncing around my head.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 23, 2014, 06:15:24 AM
23 May 14 / 24:09:07
Hello All:
Does anyone know if a company makes transformers based on Patrick's transformer design? Using soft iron and no laminations...
If not does anybody where to get soft iron and in what shape or form?

MarathonMan:
Thanks for the testing procedures. I've got a working circuit with no transformers...

All the best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 23, 2014, 09:50:20 AM
Hanon, The rotating magnetic field which Tesla showed us is rotating inside and circling around the toroid core. 

Tesla quote: "Usually I operated quarter phase; that is, I generated currents of 90° displacement" (Tesla)
 
Tesla quote: "I employed currents of different phase. I had in my laboratory ,permanently, a  two-phase dynamo(Generator) and could get  phases  between; that is, from two phases , 90deg  apart" (Tesla)

The correct rotating magnetic field is the XXZ gif you have shown, 4 wound coils, divided into two primary for the 2 phase.
    Hi Stupify,   Can you post the reference to the Tesla´s article where he stated that? I would like to read the whole text. Thanks again for your help!!   Regards 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on May 23, 2014, 11:26:33 AM
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Aether%20Mage/Nikola%20Tesla%20-%20On%20His%20Work%20With%20Alternating%20Currents%20and%20Their%20Application%20to%20Wireless%20Telgraphy,%20Telephony,%20and%20Transmission%20of%20Power%20%28Leland%20I.%20Anderson%29.pdf

 ;D

    Hi Stupify,   Can you post the reference to the Tesla´s article where he stated that? I would like to read the whole text. Thanks again for your help!!   Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 23, 2014, 02:41:31 PM
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Aether%20Mage/Nikola%20Tesla%20-%20On%20His%20Work%20With%20Alternating%20Currents%20and%20Their%20Application%20to%20Wireless%20Telgraphy,%20Telephony,%20and%20Transmission%20of%20Power%20%28Leland%20I.%20Anderson%29.pdf (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Aether%20Mage/Nikola%20Tesla%20-%20On%20His%20Work%20With%20Alternating%20Currents%20and%20Their%20Application%20to%20Wireless%20Telgraphy,%20Telephony,%20and%20Transmission%20of%20Power%20%28Leland%20I.%20Anderson%29.pdf)

 ;D

Thanks Stupify  !!!  A great repository of information !!!

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/ (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 24, 2014, 04:21:26 PM
Thanks Stupify i thank you for the boat load of info. man i must of downloaded 30 PDF's ....well i have lots of reading to do.
Title: Why
Post by: Fernandez on May 26, 2014, 06:45:04 AM
Nobody has figured out the letter 'y' in the patent drawings. Figuera never speaks of it, for all the right reasons. Many have guessed it is simply the secondary coil. Nothing could be further from the truth. The 'y' is important perhaps much more important then the primary. You see, it is the 'y' that completes the iron magnetic circuit.

There are two circuits, one being an electrical circuit (the input power) the other being the magnetic circuit (this is where the energy has collected, runs and is released).
The 'y' in his patents is a 'yoke'. Electrically it is always abbreviated as a lower case 'y'. Ed Leedskalnin, in his Magnetic Current book, speaks of one to create 'more' light. However Ed does not use the term 'yoke' BUT you can see its effects.

This should shed some new light on this device.
 


 
Title: Re: Why
Post by: hanon on May 27, 2014, 12:54:09 AM
Nobody has figured out the letter 'y' in the patent drawings. Figuera never speaks of it, for all the right reasons. Many have guessed it is simply the secondary coil. Nothing could be further from the truth. The 'y' is important perhaps much more important then the primary. You see, it is the 'y' that completes the iron magnetic circuit.

There are two circuits, one being an electrical circuit (the input power) the other being the magnetic circuit (this is where the energy has collected, runs and is released).
The 'y' in his patents is a 'yoke'. Electrically it is always abbreviated as a lower case 'y'. Ed Leedskalnin, in his Magnetic Current book, speaks of one to create 'more' light. However Ed does not use the term 'yoke' BUT you can see its effects.

This should shed some new light on this device.


Following the previous post, I have found a reference within an old book (from those times) where "y"  means "yoke-piece", a piece to join both poles of an electromagnet. Maybe in Spain the "y" acronym was adopted from the electromagnetism books which were coming from USA and the UK.


I attach an image and the link :


http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33154/33154-h/33154-h.htm (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33154/33154-h/33154-h.htm)



"N S, Fig. 4, is the permanent magnet, which is bent into a U form in order to utilize both poles. N´ and S´ are short rods of soft iron fastened into a yoke-piece Y, also of soft iron. Coils of wire surround each of the rods as represented, the ends of the wires connecting with each other and with what is called a pole-changer. The whole of this part is capable of revolving upon an axis"


Also in the book "Manual of Magnetism" by Davis (1842)  I have found in pages 64 and 65 the attached image ("Y armature")


[size=78%]http://books.google.es/books?id=RCQQAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Manual+of+Magnetism+Davis&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KYZUUtTCJMeVhQe-5IGAAQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA (http://books.google.es/books?id=RCQQAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Manual+of+Magnetism+Davis&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KYZUUtTCJMeVhQe-5IGAAQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA)[/size]


I just copy here what I have found. It is an option that, at least, it is good to take into account and post here just in case someone find it useful.


Fernandez, Please specify if you have a clearer idea of the concept that you have posted before. Thanks

Title: Re: Why
Post by: Cadman on May 27, 2014, 02:41:28 PM
Nobody has figured out the letter 'y' in the patent drawings. Figuera never speaks of it, for all the right reasons. ...

Good grief, do you guys even read the patents?

Quote
Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y”
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 27, 2014, 06:50:52 PM

Figuera Spanish Patent # 30378
 5 September 1902

In the arrangement of the excitatory magnets and the induced, our generator has some analogy with dynamos...

In the winding of this induced wire, within the magnetic fields, are followed the requirements and practices known today in the construction of dynamos, and we refrain from going into further detail, believing it unnecessary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 30, 2014, 05:43:26 AM
Came across this circuit and thought some of you might want it.
Happy Figuering!
Title: Figuera Motor + Generator (Patent 30376)
Post by: hanon on June 02, 2014, 12:20:57 AM
Hi all,


Please see this link and the demo video included inside:


http://fuel-freetech.com/ (http://fuel-freetech.com/)


In the 1902 press it is mentioned that the Figuera´s apparatus "comprise a GENERATOR, a MOTOR and a sort of governor or regulator, and the whole apparatus is so simple that a child could work it"  (link (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/chicago1902.gif) to the press clipping)


I think that maybe the working apparatus in 1902 was related with the moving coil patent ( Patent No. 30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf) ). We have just focused into the motionless patent (No. 30378) but, maybe, the real  working apparatus was the one based on the moving coil patent.

Patent 30376 in pdf: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)

Maybe in 1902 the generator was based on the moving coil system, and, latter, in 1908, Figuera tried to improve it and, then, he moved the fields instead.


In the next link there is a list with 50 different designs for a motor + modified generator:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Motor-Generator_Self-Looped_with_Usable_Energy_Left_Over (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Motor-Generator_Self-Looped_with_Usable_Energy_Left_Over)


It is just a thought. Maybe we have overlooked the real important Figuera patent. Comments please !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 03, 2014, 09:44:41 AM
Hi,
 
This is how I think that the winding in patent 30376 (Figuera´s design with rotary coil) might have done . It looks like the “old drum winding” is different to our current concept of drum winding.
 
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 03, 2014, 10:01:03 AM
what is different ? I thought that drum winding can go in one way only ...  Cadman armature from the previous post with non-movable rotor and a drum with windings and a pulley connected with a ball bearing to the non-movable shaft and a tube connected to that pulley and to the drum . On the second side tube connected to another ball-bearings mounted on shaft, on that tube two sliprings are mounted where cables from drum coil are placed. In simpler prototype bearings could be ommitted.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 03, 2014, 02:02:35 PM
what is different ? I thought that drum winding can go in one way only ...  Cadman armature from the previous post with non-movable rotor and a drum with windings and a pulley connected with a ball bearing to the non-movable shaft and a tube connected to that pulley and to the drum . On the second side tube connected to another ball-bearings mounted on shaft, on that tube two sliprings are mounted where cables from drum coil are placed. In simpler prototype bearings could be ommitted.

Quoted text from patent 30376:
 
"The induced circuit formed by wires coiled in a drum type configuration
rotates around its axis, inside the magnetic fields"
 
"The inducer or exciter circuit is formed by two series of multiple electromagnets,
motionless them all, and conveniently placed so that each pole of a series will be
at short distance in front of a pole of opposite name in the other series. In the
small separation between the expansions of these electromagnets the induced coils
rotate, dragging, in its turn, the collectors and transmission pulleys."
 
 
   The drum winding explained in previous post show a wire encircling the whole core. It is not a wire doing loops in between the poles of both electromagnets. With the proposed drum configuration the induced magnetic field is at right angle to the magnetic field from the electromagnets, as shown in the sketch in prior post. I think this could help to cheat Lenz´s effect
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on June 03, 2014, 05:10:15 PM
Hello hanon,

I think the patent which Figuera explain on this quotes really match very well to the High Frequency Alternator/Generator in our term of Nikola Tesla.
quote]"The induced circuit formed by wires coiled in a drum type configuration
rotates around its axis, inside the magnetic fields"[/quote]

The design which I have read from Tesla the Magnetic fields is a Even pair of poles. Tesla start from 16 poles, 32 poles, 64, 128 until to 348 magnetic poles. I know exactly how did Tesla design this kind of machine which He always used to feed his Bifilar Tesla Coil. Tesla used this High Frequency Alternator/Generator which actually produced DC because of the Brush Commutation on this device.

Quote
"The inducer or exciter circuit is formed by two series of multiple electromagnets,
motionless them all, and conveniently placed so that each pole of a series will be
at short distance in front of a pole of opposite name in the other series. In the
small separation between the expansions of these electromagnets the induced coils
rotate, dragging, in its turn, the collectors and transmission pulleys."

This inducer or exciter circuit = Outer Magnetic Fields in the outer rim, it is wound in a Zig Zag style as Tesla showed on his designs, the purpose of Zig Zag is to make the iron poles pass by the 1  wound coil to be alternate North and South, the bigger the diameter the more Magnetic Poles Tesla could achieve. Yeah the outer Magnetic Field are steady and never moves- so we call it motionless.  The drum which rotate- the coils wound on each PIN is only 4 feet so Tesla could  achieve 0.04ohm on each wound Induced/Generating coils.

The way the Induced coils/Generating coils wound are just simply winding in a PIN that go thru the drum. The Induced Coils as per Tesla is only 4 feet = for 1/4 of an ohm as he stated.

Hanon, if your interested to really understand this machine I could give any information I have learned from this machine that I have understand reading from Nikola Tesla.  The drum is like a wheel of a bike or a motor which has grove inside so Tesla could wound a IRON Wire as a Soft Iron Core, then there are PIN which hold that Iron Wire, Tesla then wound the 4 feet Induced Coils on the PIN embracing the drum which is filled with IRON Wire as a Soft Metal Core on the Drum.

Hope this help.


Meow 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 04, 2014, 12:09:53 AM
It seems to me that both systems are being disgusted and it is quite distracting. it would be nice if you guys could pic one and go with it instead of bouncing back and fourth. we all know by now he had two different systems one moved and one did not, pick a system that moves the wire or pick the one that varies the flux.

ps. here is the power supply for the Sine Cosine circuit i posted on 1326. by the way that circuit was made with a quad op amp chip OP470GP.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 11, 2014, 05:56:45 PM
Waiting for more iron to build cores so i can begin testing and boy is it expensive. solid iron core are going to be very, very expensive so right now i am using Iron Electrode Strips. i hope this thread didn't die i rather enjoy reading all the wonderful information you guys have provided.
the cheapest wire i found is here.....https://shop.eis-inc.com/sap(bD1lbiZjPTAwMQ==)/bc/bsp/sap/zeis2/index.htm?prod_area=442  the sight is painfully slow though.

Here is the finished Sine Cosine Generator (improved) with the power supply mounted to the board with electrolitic caps installed. sorry the center tap power supply has no 3D model nor does the heat sinks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Paul-R on June 11, 2014, 06:18:22 PM
Waiting for more iron to build cores so i can begin testing and boy is it expensive. solid iron core are going to be very, very expensive so right now i am using Iron Electrode Strips.
I am not following this thread closely so I may have this wrong -

- but you may want to know that the Bedini people use R60 or R45 gas welding rods, available from suppliers like BOC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 11, 2014, 11:16:15 PM
R60 and R45 actually are very good for these types of experiments with very low carbon,manganese, silicon, copper and molybdenum. R45 has lower Manganese  than R60 but is copper coated and would have to be stripped.  R60 and RG60 are the same thing. the only difficulty is trying to form them into usable shapes other than a bunch of cut rods to form a core like in Bedini's case. i for one will not spend the time doing this besides the core losses from the space between the rods. this is why the late Robert Adams, Figueras and others chose solid iron cores. i am using Iron electrodes that are coated then pressed together until dry to form my core material. it is a lot of work but better than the welding rod gap in my case.  the reason why good quality Iron is so hard to get and almost impossible in the United States is from the many free Energy devises that (WORKED) used Iron and the powers that be know this.
 if you choose to do this with the rods then i wish the best of luck to all of you.
Happy Figuering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on June 12, 2014, 02:08:49 AM
Just some info from my next door neighbor. He has his own machine shop, and has worked with
metals for many years. He told me that the way to tell soft iron from regular iron is by drilling it.
Regular iron will try to come off in strips, while soft iron will come off in little flakes. He also said
that a good place to get soft iron dust (flakes) to mix with epoxy to make a soft iron core would be
from an auto mechanic shop that turns brake drums, as the drums are made of soft iron. I do not
know if this will help, but I thought it to be interesting.
Best of luck to all,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 13, 2014, 02:03:59 AM
12 June 14 /  20:02:01

Hello All

I found soft iron rather expensive too...

Iron Rod 0.125" Diameter, 3N5 Purity

12 Inches @ $28.50/Inch = $342.00

24 Inches @ $20.90/Inch = $501.60

All the best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on June 13, 2014, 04:36:24 PM
If you were to do as suggested in Reply #1336 above, it would be very cheap. The soft iron dust (flakes) can be gotten probably for free from auto shops, so the only cost would be the epoxy and your time. Plus you could make the core in any shape and size wanted.
Just food for thought,
Bob

Question about the above method. By making a soft iron core as stated above, would you be able to raise the frequency above that of a regular iron core transformer, or laminated core transformer? Or, would it still be restricted to operations below 1 KHz?
Thanks, and good luck to all,
Bob
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 13, 2014, 08:12:45 PM
I'm not trying to but in on a conversation but powdered Iron cores can hit frequencies in the hundreds of kilohertz but you have to take in consideration that you will have core loss compared to solid Iron as the Atom density is relatively lower in  powder than that of Solid so the amount of domains in alignment will be far less as will be the MMF strength.
i have 10 lbs of Iron powder, i wonder in i put it in a vacuum with induction and melt it to the shape i wanted. things that make you go Hmmmm.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 16, 2014, 01:01:04 PM
Hi

I have checked with a metallurgical professor who is very knowledgeable. He indicated that the soft iron core can respond up to 999 MHz and will stop responding only at about 1 GHz and above. The problem is of eddy current and core loss and in the Figuera set up soft iron rods have spaces air spaces between rods any way. However densly you pack the rods there is some air gap through which air can go through due to convection. How the 1 GHz was reduced to 1 Khz is not clear to me. Heat losses become irrelevant as they are dissipated due to convection of air. High frequencies input is lower amperage and output is higher amperage. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 19, 2014, 12:06:59 AM
"To fix ideas is convenient to refer to the attached drawing which is no more
than a sketch to understand the operation of the machine built using the
principle outlined before."from (1908) No. 44267.

 Sounds like the drawings are not design drawings but conceptual drawings to help understand the text in the patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 19, 2014, 04:39:54 AM
Doug i agree whole heartedly  those drawing have to be conceptual. i have been racking my brain with a good friend of mine and we or i agree something is amiss. i have been on a quest of the real nature of our working Universe not the crap they teach in school or College  and the info is being digested at a rapid pace. i did find out that the powers that be erased Faraday's equations that proves free energy is possible. every one including Heaviside  diminished his equations until the facts were  gone. the powers that be paid to have this information erased from history and it is up to the little people to bring it back. so every one on this web sight that is being suppressed i tell you stand your ground and say NO! i will not go silent through the night, i will stand up for my Human rights and be Herd by everyone. and if any one on this web site says anything contradictory to these facts or has a mouth to run i say bow to your knees and kiss my GOD given White ARSE !  cuz free Energy is alive and kickin! and i think a field goal is in the future for you and me.

Happy Figuering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on June 21, 2014, 07:49:05 PM
 This reply is to all. I've been contemplating buying the powder ferrite cores and winding some wire on those. I rewound the center core and hooked the five, 9 volt batteries up and got 40 volts coming out the batteries. The center core had fluctuating something coming to the power strip, not enough to power the led puc lights or the soldering iron. I'll keep tinkering and you all keep teaching and one day we'll all be free. Thank You. AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 22, 2014, 03:23:53 PM
Perspective is a b#tch. I wonder where the other sheets of the patent got off to. There is at least 2 sheets of drawings missing and it could be as many as 6. Does the patent office in his home country charge by the page or something?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 24, 2014, 12:58:39 AM
Unfortunately our lovely Patent Offices are owned by the same disgusting, unethical, thieving, Lying, Cheating type of people that own the CENTRAL BANKS and Corporate World. they don't charge per sheet because the missing sheets are in their safes at home for their own selfish use.
the only way to live free is to give freely so do not Patent your devices......give them to the world to stop the Tyrants of this world from controlling you and me.   ACT FREE, BE FREE, GIVE FREE, DIE FREE

Avengers...keep up the good work, looks good !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on June 27, 2014, 04:06:22 AM
marathonman, Thank you for the encouragement. I'll try to get more organized in my display, bit of a mess. I have a question. What do you think about the ferrite iron powder cores for sale.
Thank you.
AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on June 28, 2014, 01:41:58 PM
El generador de clemente figuera, solo es un transformador. Y el cachivache de resistencias (aparato de resistencias) es un inversor de CD a CA. Espero que lo sepan aprovechar.
Se basa en alimentar con CA ,14 o más electroimanes (con la electricidad para la que están hechos) y recoger la electricidad generada entre Ellos. (Campo magnético en movimiento)

Figuera generator merciful, just a transformer. And the gadget of resistance (resistance unit) is a DC to AC inverter. I hope you can seize.
Is based on AC power, 14 or more electromagnets (to electricity for which they are made​​) and collect the electricity generated therebetween. (Moving or rotating magnetic field)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 28, 2014, 09:15:36 PM
AVENGERS,

 i am sticking with The most pure Iron i can as very many free energy devices use it for it's inherent properties. i'm not saying Ferrite will not work but if you want the most bang for your buck i would stay with Iron. i am curious though if you do decide to pursue the Ferrite, Iron cores what would be the outcome as the MMF of Ferrite will be less than Iron.
Good luck. Happy Figuering!
 ignacio,
That is exactly as i have perceived the Figueras devise as a DC to AC converter.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 29, 2014, 02:52:41 PM
Marathonman what time zone are you in?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on June 30, 2014, 12:32:37 AM
solo es un ejemplo.
is only an example.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 01, 2014, 06:40:38 PM
Very interesting reading about Magnetism....makes a lot of sense when you think about the actions taking place.


PS. can some one please translate above, thanks!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on July 01, 2014, 08:20:56 PM
google translator
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 02, 2014, 06:03:15 AM
02 July 14 / 23:56:01

Hello All,
After finding some soft iron ( scam ) on eBay and having to send it back... I found a supplier, in NJ , that charged me 160.00 for 6 feet in 1/2 dia. form. A machinist friend stated that it is/was very hard for soft iron. So I have to write to the supplier and find out what else is in there... I did do a simple experiment with a magnet tho... when the soft iron comes in contact with a magnet it picks up paper clips...once the magnet is away from the soft iron the paper clips fall off...

All the best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 02, 2014, 04:16:56 PM
After all the research i have done over the last year i have come to realize that The people pulling the strings in Our Government have put a lock down on pure Iron because they are afraid we will get out from under there foot on our necks. quite a few free energy devises use Pure Iron and they (the Uber Rich) know this so they put the screws to Pure Iron. you best and practically your only bet is to purchase it from China or some other Country that isn't F-ed up like the US is. punch in Pure Iron in your search box and there will be quite a few from over seas then find one that does samples. this is what i will and am going to do with some Pure Iron Bars 1 1/2" to 2" in diameter. GOOD LUCK!
PS. be sure to tell them you need SOFT PURE IRON not hard.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on July 02, 2014, 08:54:17 PM
Basically pure iron is a refined product, the first stage is "iron ore" then "pig iron", pig iron is fairly high in carbon and has more
carbon than steel due to it being not refined.

In the past pig iron was refined to get "Iron" which still has some carbon (and other unintended or unwanted substances in very small quantities).
This Iron was used to make things like gates (wrought Iron) and nails ect. as well as used to make steel and other alloys.

To get "pure Iron" you would need to keep refining Iron from "pig Iron" to remove practically all other substances which will increase the cost, a lot.

The beginning product is not pure Iron from Iron Ore.

Because there is no real market for pure iron except specialist applications very little would be produced to be sold as Pure Iron.
Why go to all the trouble to set up a refinery when nobody buys much of it. People want steel to build things these days.

Electrical steel is usually high silicone steel as far as I can tell, and is used because it is better to use than pure Iron for whatever reason,
maybe iron is too soft. Something you don't want in a motor core, it must have strength enough to stay in shape, or it is useless.

If you want some soft Iron maybe the best bet is wrought Iron. But the problem is any time you heat up iron or steel using a
carbon fueled fire like a blacksmiths forge you add some more carbon to the Iron/steel. ie. "Case hardening" can be done by using
a "carburising flame" to add carbon to the outside of a piece of steel so it can be hardened as high carbon steel. Look it up.
So any wrought Iron "piece" may have more carbon in it than was in the original "Iron" which the piece was made from.

If you take "pure Iron" and smelt it in air then you will probably get carbon from the atmosphere impregnating the pure Iron while it is molten.

Now I challenge anyone to name a proven free energy device that uses pure Iron or even soft Iron, no such verifiable device exists.

Even one or two of the supposed devices that used these soft Iron cores would be good to see listed.
The claim is made so there must be evidence to back it up.

To say soft or pure Iron is being with held from us is crazy, if you want some pure Iron just take some steel and refine it to
remove all the carbon and silicone and other stuff, if there is a market for it then you can sell the stuff,
I'll bet it ends up being very expensive though.

Might be cheaper to buy some specialty stuff.

..




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 02, 2014, 11:11:26 PM
 I have read a lot of your post and it seams to me that all your really like to do is run your mouth. all you do is argue with people. do you get paid to badmouth people or are you just that F-ed up and think you know it all and every one knows nothing. do you really think i didn't know this information from all my research. oh and by the way everyone here has a smelting pot in their back yard....God what a moron.
and also have you actually built anything from this website. i have seen nothing you have ever disgust
PS.why don't you order all that Iron you so called exist here in the US.....oh that's right YOU CAN'T because it isn't here it's OVER SEAS. DUH! suppression at it's finest.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 03, 2014, 01:55:52 PM
How many people have experienced not being able to find their car keys because they were holding them in the hand? Or they were in your other pocket?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on July 03, 2014, 06:06:06 PM
RandyFL,

It's fairly easy to test the magnetic remanence of a piece of iron or steel. Put a small piece of it inside of a strong magnetic field for a bit then take it out and see how strongly it attracts a pin or paper clip. I use a 12vdc coil salvaged from an automotive starter solenoid for this and I think it gives a better test than sticking a magnet on.

@all
Here's something I find interesting. Many high power dynamos built a hundred years ago ran at a low frequency of 40 to 50 cps of the magnetic circuit in the armature. Soft iron was used in the armatures to minimize losses from hysteresis and eddy currents but the quality of the iron was always suspect so the engineers adjusted their designs to work with lower permeability iron. The inducing magnets and the yoke or frame were usually made from cast iron and limited the magnetic induction value to 13,000 to 13,500 lines per cm^2 in the field magnets. They did not worry about hysteresis in the field and yoke because that magnetic field did not reverse. The air gap flux was often under 8000 and the flux at the bottom of the armature teeth was restrained to about 20,000.

I think the sole reason that soft iron was emphasized in the Figuera patents was because it was not standard practice in that era to use it for the inducing magnets and yoke but his generator required it simply because his inducing magnetic circuit was of an alternating nature.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on July 03, 2014, 07:34:34 PM
From 1908
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 03, 2014, 09:38:36 PM
Good call cadman. It's also easy to see modifications could easily be made to adjust the windings to meet the core material but since the coil is assumed so can be the results based on assumed knowledge which so far is only with regard to transformers. Even though it is clearly and plainly stated "not a transformer".

  I wonder where the people of late 18th early 19th century looked for their research materials and so on back to a time when people were really smart because no ells was going to do it for them. Before the corruption began.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 04, 2014, 05:24:13 PM
It would be a good idea to render this device non patentable by making it legally open source. Im sure it could be defended as being expired in most countries under Tesla's patents and in Spain by Bufforn's collection on the device discussed.
 I think it needs to be declared by the person who started it.
It's quickly on it's way to a two year long thread and no one has fessed up to figuring it out but I do not believe that is the case and the silence would only be explained if someone was trying to lock it down with another patent to prevent anyone from using it effectively to compete with public Utility companies.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 04, 2014, 05:57:31 PM
Doug1
I think you are wrong. Patent cannot lock down anything, already patented but there is a known activity to patent slightly modified device to sold patent rights. Even Tesla mentioned that with his method of conversion, patented subsequently by others like Poulsen
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 06, 2014, 02:17:53 AM
Hello All

Who you talking about marathonman...?
I am not at the point in the conspiracy theory that big brother is keeping iron from us... I just don't think its used as much as it used to be which means its either being used for research or the availability of it went out the door because of its uselessness...steel on the other hand is used for everything and especially in laminations which causes its supply to rise = cheap...
But politically speaking I am against the govt. anyway and I think we're headed for 1984 and big Brother!

@Cadman: It probably is a better test ( I will setup the test on the next batch of iron )... I just wanna get to a end result with this project.
At this particular time I think the supplier is legit. And I will find out later exactly what else is in the iron I bought... The machinist  ( non professional ) I am working with stated the batch I bought from Ebay wasn't iron at all... I have read that steel is iron with carbon in it... and I remember that automobile engines used to be cast iron ( which shows how old I am :-) )
All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 06, 2014, 02:39:05 AM
Hello All

@ Doug1: I too... don't agree with you on the patent lockdown. Tesla complained ( but originally boasted about it ) about Marconi using his patents for his wireless radio ( or whatever his project was ). Tesla didn't have the money to fight Him in court ( as I understand it Marconi and His backers went around Tesla ). And when Marconi's Company ( if I have it correct ) raised the very issue up in Court the US patient Office went around Marconi's heirs and said that they were in deed Tesla's patents...
Even if a company massed produced the Fig. generator there still are sheople out there who would still pay the electric companies...
Finally if you or I don't like big companies or the way they do things... don't invest in them or as my next door neighbor says " you have the freedom to invest in a utility company or a big oil company if you want a return on investment " and I agree...
I want my utility bill lower and I still want to invest :-)... if you don't like the way our govt. is doing things.... don't pay your taxes... I'm just sayin.

All the Best
Randy
PS when you don't pay your taxes make sure other ppl are doing it too... Lois Lerner ( or whoever took her position ) would love to make an example out of you :-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 06, 2014, 05:30:37 AM
 Doug i agree with you whole Heartedly  in making Everything OPEN SOURCE . it is time to stop Corporate America and Corporate World in their tracks and believe in your Family, neighbor and your friends. i have unfortunately come to a hault on my projects as i lost my job and am broke. all i need is wire and it's on to continue but i don't worry cuz i will succeed.

 Randy no i was not referring to you.

unfortunately there are many pricks that want to make a bundle off any device. i on the other hand would love to see Corporate America and Corporate world get the winnie from the little man. just like Tesla said every home should have their own power supply.

HAPPY FIGUERING!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 06, 2014, 09:31:46 AM
@ Marathonman
Sorry to hear about your job... I am sure things will work out for you in the long run...
I agree everything thing should be open sourced. I also agree with you on the robber barons... Rockefeller, J P Morgan and other robber barons and their trusts and their heirs should have their wealth confiscated...
But whats even worst is their heirs and the Rothschild s have their greedy paws into our banking system at the tax payer's expense...
I think a flat tax would fix the corporate system.
And finally I agree on the fig. in every home would be great.

All the best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 08, 2014, 01:34:23 PM
Marathonman
 Sorry to hear about your work.The market for new jobs is very week. I ended with a lesser job and simply adjusted to it by getting rid of expenses I didnt really have any great need for. A simpler life with more time to do things money cant buy and to learn more then any college could have provided with snails pace at a premium of cost. It was a blessing in disguise which has proven to be of greater worth then money I would have made at my old job. What I learned is how to not waste money and to quit believing I deserve anything. Now I do it for myself and in doing that you really have to decide what you really need and want and what you don't. It's a rwal eye opener how much waste there is and foolishness to pursuits which you can not enjoy because your to busy working to buy more you have no time to use because your working so much.
  Good luck
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 08, 2014, 09:16:26 PM
I hear ya Doug to many people are wasteful especially here in the USA and don't appreciate what they have. it turns out that the 27.50 Hr job that slipped out of my hand was a blessing in disguise. i will be doing what i always wanted to do and that is working with servers, networking and Fiber optics installation and repair.  the money is way less of what i was making to start but i will have weekends off and time to finish my Figueras work plus they are sending me to school "BOOYA!
i am one of the few people that is happy with very little. i would make Swiss Family Robertson's look like week end campers.....just wish i could find a woman of the same ha ha ha!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 15, 2014, 03:47:43 PM
Has anyone made any progress with their projects.  i myself am at a stand still until i get more money coming in so all i can do at this moment is research and electronic study .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 15, 2014, 08:24:14 PM
Hello All,

Hello Marathonman,
Yes I have... Located my iron, had it milled, cut into the pieces that I needed... I am now filing the rough edges off. Will be wrapping some magnetic wire soon, then I will be putting the breadboard circuit onto a permanent position and then will connect the system and then hopefully experimenting in a short while.......

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 15, 2014, 10:40:25 PM
Awesome ! can't wait to see your work. just curious as to your type of timing you are going with. i will be using a nine and a two channel setup like Patrick's style and also Sine - Cosine  timing. then go from there. Good luck!
it's to bad square magnet wire is sooooo expensive i would love to get my hands on some 18 Aug
PS. where did you get your Iron and how good is the Quality?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 16, 2014, 01:16:33 PM
Of course. Spent 4 days working on the commutator over the week end of the 4th.Need about a week of good solid time to finish.Planning on another set of coils in the reverse config just for study. Running a little low on wire and it's hard to get here. Im not a big fan of buying wire I cant put my hands on first to examine it before purchase. Im not concerned about the core materials I dont think the magic is in the core so much as in the process of operation. It looks really nice, others have commented it looks like it was machine built,I guess Im getting better at it with practice.
  Not to show until a working unit is working with useful loads. I dont need LEDs I have a lots of flashlights and 6 oil lamps. I need something to reduce or remove the the tether to the power pole.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 16, 2014, 02:16:24 PM
I got the soft iron from Ed Fagan Inc., the machinist I'm working with said it was quite hard....  :)
I bought a piece that was 1/2 inch in diameter and 6 feet long... Milled and cut it into 7 parts and then cut them into 7 more parts.
I am using the 555 with two 4017B s and a 4081... I have to move the breadboard circuit ( which almost started a fire ) to a permanent setup with a case for the power transistors... I am in the process of cleaning the iron to remove hard edges and burrs...
I was in a rush in the beginning but not now... after seeing a wire and 555 chip melt before my eyes - I know this puppy works.
I have read up on Leedskalnin, Tesla and Figueras and this Fig, generator is a blessing for everyone...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 17, 2014, 03:33:51 AM
You might want to recheck timing circuit it sounds like your 555 is on continuous causing the over heat. NO 555 timer or wire should get that hot Randy. a 555 timer only takes ma to run and some micro a. i ran mine for hours and was barely detectable. what are your resistor and cap values....i am most certain they are wrong. show me your Schematic with figures. i'm sure you have seen mine posted.
also wrap a coil around your bars and power for some time then disconnect. if magnetism remains for a good while you were robbed (Iron is Soft) and retains very little magnetism.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 17, 2014, 11:16:15 AM
It was the 555 I was using... In the beginning of this project I was rushing... I bought the 555 s from RS and they weren't really the right kind of 555 s the circuit was Looking for... the package stated Low Power...plus their breadboards aren't the best either...
I was using a 9 volt battery and that particular 555 was doing fine until I hooked it up to a motorcycle battery... it went pzzzt! And melted   :D
All of the resistors and capacitors are the same as on the website ( PK ) and the circuit runs as long as there is juice to it. I will test the new soft iron from Ed Fagan Inc. whenst I finish cleaning them from the burrs...
My question to you is wire size... what size primary wire... and how many turns... I'm looking to replace 20 amp 120 AC in this project.

PM or email if you want/or keep it here...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on July 18, 2014, 04:32:51 AM
I was reading again trying to find what volts to start with and there it was 12volts. Here I am with all these 9 volt batts hooked together to make 40volts. No wonder I was smelling something burning, I thought it was the soldering iron, but it wasn't pluged in and then I put my finger on one of the 4017's, yep that stung a bit. So iam replacing all of those ic's and I hate rework. I feel I am close and when it happens, it's going big time and I'll have good pics and try to explain in detail so everyone can use it, copy it ,improve it. and give me pointers on how to make it better, even if you could make a small devise for every cicuit, istead of one big one. I hope you all do well in all your indevers.
AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 18, 2014, 05:38:45 AM
Rand: you must of been using a low power 555 as in 6 volts cuz a MC bat is 12 volt unless you reversed the polarity. i have a few of them that run at micro amps very low power they are CMOS versions. my whole boards i built run in the low milli  amp range at cool temps. all this powering transistors at 100 volt 1.5 amp. as for your wire size you need to decide how much amperage will be running through your coil wire then double it for safety reasons. there is a limit to how much flux that can safely run through an Iron core without melting it and i think i remember someone saying it was no more than 3 Teslas...IE (magnetic B field). below is a pic of the calculator.

Avengers: are you trying to set your house on fire or what ? if any thing you should of ran 9 volts to your circuit and 40 volts through your transistors n coils. 40 volts is fine for test purposes just male sure its not to your IC's. i am running my IC's at 5 volts and nothing gets even warm.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 19, 2014, 12:56:37 AM
Here is the calculations I have so far...
I am using 26 AWG for the primary
16 AWG secondary
Turns Ratio

Primary Impedance (Zpri) = .13 Ω
Secondary Impedance (Zsec) = 0.0148 Ω

Turns ratio = 0.337   ( 2.964 : 1 )

Primary turns (Npri) = 50
Secondary turns (Nsec) = 17

I used another calculator from the internet and got the ohms from PK website
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AnoBit on July 19, 2014, 04:00:21 PM
Hi.
After reading about 20 of this threads pages, i stopped, whincing at the pure quantity of text.

I'm an electronic engineer and would like to know which experiments had some success..
Could anyone who followed this thread from the beginning pass me a short summary?
I'm very sorry and there is no offense meant.. But reading all of these posts is quite annoying.

Have a nice day,
AnoBit
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on July 20, 2014, 11:00:00 PM
Hi all, Jon, new guy here. After doing a lot of reading, I decided to see if I can contribute, so pleasure to meet everyone. Honestly, been reading OU forum posts for the past few years since I discovered RexResearch.

I haven't gone through and read all 90-something pages of the topic, but I'm curious as to why the design has been 3 vertical coils, side by side. Is this what the consensus has determined as an accurate replication? It looks similar to the bi-toroid transformer design, which may give you positive results due to the multiple flux paths (primary coils aiding secondary self-inductance, instead of opposing), but at higher power levels the mutual induction between the coils will make it behave as a simple push-pull transformer, right?

I'm going to try to replicate a design with three coils, end to end, in a linear fashion. Looking at Figueras patents, that seems to be his method of obtaining the necessary phase lag between the first primary, secondary, and second primary.

Props to you guys using a 555. I've always fried them, so I'll be getting my 180 from a center-tapped, rectified transformer. Although, I won't be able to make it self-sustaining without a commutator or inverter (as we can see in the Figueras-Buforn patent that he loops the negative of the coils back to the commutator with a switch to make it self-sustaining.)

This may be a silly question, but has anyone replicated a working device yet?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 20, 2014, 11:59:26 PM
Spent 12 hours looking into the soft iron situation. There are very few mines still operating that mine iron and even fewer plants to process it. It just isnt used any more like it was a 100+ yrs ago. It rusts away quickly and has little strength on it's own so more exotic materials have replaced it.There are more copper mines then ore mines and those are very toxic compared to ores so it not a pollution problem which has curtailed ore mines. The little bit used today is expensive because of demand being so low it costs more to get it out of the ground on small scale then say coal or copper which is in demand but competitive with more operations or mines in service. Kind of sucks if your thinking that to save the world you need soft iron.
  Even if you find soft iron to be the magic bullet you will find it takes a pretty big order to get it cheap enough to effect the price. The pieces of rod used to calibrate compasses doesnt look like the type of material from a 100 yrs ago. It should rust quickly and leaving it on a store room shelf as inventory it would very much rust and not be nice a silvery looking.
  Soft iron is how ever very good at making a magnet from current.With that said it has not stopped electromagnet production or use because soft iron fell out of favor with industry. they just use more wire or core materials which are available to compensate the number of lines of force required.
  The patent is an abstract drawing to explain a process of operation. The method is the means not the material. Abstract like a f'ed up painting some mentally abused person turns into a story.Its not literal. No offense to any mentally abused art critics in the room.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 21, 2014, 12:53:52 AM
For some F-ed up reason that last sentence made a lot of sense .
so if it is totally abstract then we have been barking up the wrong tree from the git go.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 21, 2014, 12:59:06 AM
No offense to any mentally abused art critics in the room...
:-)
The stuff I got from Ed Fagan Inc. was expensive compared to steel...but the jury is out on how well it performs. I guess pure Fe comes in pellets.
Will find a source for it eventually.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 21, 2014, 01:53:47 PM
Randy
 when I was a kid I used to play along a rail way line that went through a woodded area with freinds. U,S, Steel would get shipments of lose balls of the stuff we used for shot in our slingshots. It looked like lava rock turned into 3/8ths inch balls.It was as hard as ball bearings but not perfect shape. Had I known then. Well any way it used to fall off the train cars a lot. But there is a place to look for some if you live near an old steel mill or you can try to research what rail lines that ran between mills and mines.Most of the old locations have been closed a long time now. Im not sure the stuff would'nt have lasted this long without rusting away.
  Marathonman
 When the impossible is removed what ever is left.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on July 21, 2014, 03:49:15 PM
Doug 1:
I am a lot older than I am willing to admit, however, way back in grade school, i learned that
steel was made for molten Iron ore that had oxygen blasted through it from the bottom. Here
is part of the definition from "Wikipedia."

"Steelmaking is the process for producing steel from iron and ferrous scrap. In steelmaking, impurities such as nitrogen, silicon, phosphorus, and excess carbon are removed from the raw iron, and alloying elements such as manganese, nickel, chromium and vanadium are added to produce different grades of steel. Limiting dissolved gases such as nitrogen and oxygen, and entrained impurities (termed "inclusions") in the steel is also important to ensure the quality of the products cast from the liquid steel.[1] There are two major processes for making steel, namely basic oxygen steelmaking which has liquid pig-iron from the blast furnace and scrap steel as the main feed materials, and electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking which uses scrap steel or direct reduced iron (DRI) as the main feed materials. Oxygen steelmaking is fuelled predominantly by the exothermic nature of the reactions inside the vessel where as in EAF steelmaking, electrical energy is used to melt the solid scrap and/or DRI materials. In recent times, EAF steelmaking technology has evolved closer to oxygen steelmaking as more chemical energy is introduced into the process."

Thanks to all for your efforts

Swamp

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on July 21, 2014, 04:06:34 PM
RandyFL:

If you don't mind, about how much did you pay for the iron bar stock?
It is totally OK If you don' want to divulge that information.
I have been trying to get a price from them on line, but, I haven't
called them.
I bought some small .5 inch round bar stock from one company
that, when tested my the "spark test" turned out to be polished
steel.
It worked as well as the "hot rolled steel" I used for my "Figeura"
project except for losses for being round instead of square that
fit the plastic spools.
In fact, I tried round ferrite, round steel, and square steel, and the
square steel won by a substantial amount. I am sure the reason
is that there was more steel in 1/2" square hole.

Good luck to all.

Swamp 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 22, 2014, 01:25:43 AM

I have been thinking that it is easier to get two signals 90 out of phase with an alternator than relying on electronics, which are difficult to design and implement (at least for me). I have 3 ideas which seems to be very easy to test with just an old car alternator from scrapping:


   *** 1) Rewind a common three phase alternator
(3 signals120º out of phase) in order to get a two phase output (2 signals 90º out of phase). Later each signals can be rectified with a diode to get two positive and opposite signals. Here I post links to two winding booklets (they are in spanish, but are easy to understand) with two phase winding diagrams for different number of poles and slots:

http://www.mediafire.com/?mleytebyse86ehk (http://www.mediafire.com/?mleytebyse86ehk)  (see from page 127 in the pdf file)

http://www.mediafire.com/?2rvgz46rkx5a8i2 (http://www.mediafire.com/?2rvgz46rkx5a8i2)   (see from page 60 in the pdf file)


   *** 2) Use a common three phase alternator and then use a Scott Connection (T Connection) to convert the 3 phase output to a two phase output. A Scott T Transformer Connection is just two transformers with intermediate taps connection (see image attached below). Also very simple to implement. Some links:

http://electrical-engineering-portal.com/scott-t-transformer-connection-overview (http://electrical-engineering-portal.com/scott-t-transformer-connection-overview)

http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html (http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html)


   *** 3) Use a common three phase alternator to feed the Figuera generator. Maybe taking two signals at 120º won´t get a 100% optimized output but perhaps it may work too. Who knows... It is worth to try it. As you guess this is also very simple to test.  ;)

I hope this could help everyone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 22, 2014, 01:36:24 AM
I paid 160.00 which included the shipping...
I'm about a couple of days from finishing up scraping the hard edges off...then I'll wrap them with 26 AWG ( primaries ) and 16 AWG ( secondaries )...
I still have a couple suppliers that I might approach if this batch of soft iron doesn't measure up.

Scrap yards still use electro magnets to lift scrap metal...
when the demand for soft iron comes back ( and I believe it will ). We will be on the fore front of the new wave of technology.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 22, 2014, 01:46:19 AM
Hanon,
I've been thinking about 3 phases from the Clemente Fig. generator...
there are 7 transformers ---------14 primaries and 7 secondaries

Can/could one of the 7 secondaries recharge the battery...and the other 6 be paired to a 3 phase motor with each pair tuned with enough resistance and capacitance to the correct phase....Hope I worded that correctly...

All the best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 22, 2014, 02:59:39 AM
Hello antijon - welcome

I built the solid state device using the 555...when I was satisfied with the results I started working on the transformers... And the quest for the elusive soft iron.

All the best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 22, 2014, 07:46:29 PM
easiest Quadrature i have found to date in one of my Electronic books. outputs are 90* out of Phase.
Sorry the preview was not that big!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on July 23, 2014, 02:53:01 AM
Thanks RandyFL... After seeing you guys talking about 90 degree phases, I think I was wrong about the phase lagging in the coils, but why 90 degrees? I thought the two primary coils were in antiphase.. fill me in?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2014, 03:11:29 AM
How much do you know about electricity?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on July 23, 2014, 03:21:36 AM
@RandyFL I'm a refrigeration tech so I know quite a bit from real world experience.. though my knowledge in solid state circuits is lacking, I can play safely with lethal voltage and currents. Why do you ask?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2014, 03:24:54 AM
The three-phase system was independently invented by Galileo Ferraris, Mikhail Dolivo-Dobrovolsky and Nikola Tesla in the late 1880s.
Three-phase electric power is a common method of alternating-current electric power generation, transmission, and distribution.

In electrical engineering, single-phase electric power refers to the distribution of alternating current electric power using a system in which all the voltages of the supply vary in unison. Single-phase distribution is used when loads are mostly lighting and heating, with few large electric motors. A single-phase supply connected to an alternating current electric motor does not produce a revolving magnetic field; single-phase motors need additional circuits for starting, and such motors are uncommon above 10 or 20 kW in rating.

In contrast, in a three-phase system, the currents in each conductor reach their peak instantaneous values sequentially, not simultaneously; in each cycle of the power frequency, first one, then the second, then the third current reaches its maximum value. The waveforms of the three supply conductors are offset from one another in time (delayed in phase) by one-third of their period. When the three phases are connected to windings around the interior of a motor stator, they produce a revolving magnetic field; such motors are self-starting.

Standard frequencies of single-phase power systems are either 50 or 60 Hz. Special single-phase traction power networks may operate at 16.67 Hz or other frequencies to power electric railways.

In some countries such as the United States, single phase is commonly divided in half to create split-phase electric power for household appliances and lighting


Part of the Electronics glossary:


 


In electronic signaling, phase is a definition of the position of a point in time (instant) on a waveform cycle. A complete cycle is defined as 360 degrees of phase as shown in Illustration A below. Phase can also be an expression of relative displacement between or among waves having the same frequency .

Phase difference , also called phase angle , in degrees is conventionally defined as a number greater than -180, and less than or equal to +180. Leading phase refers to a wave that occurs "ahead" of another wave of the same frequency. Lagging phase refers to a wave that occurs "behind" another wave of the same frequency. When two signals differ in phase by -90 or +90 degrees, they are said to be in phase quadrature . When two waves differ in phase by 180 degrees (-180 is technically the same as +180), the waves are said to be in phase opposition . Illustration B shows two waves that are in phase quadrature. The wave depicted by the dashed line leads the wave represented by the solid line by 90 degrees.

phase.gif (2316 bytes)

If the picture above doesn't show go here:
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/phase

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2014, 03:44:57 AM
so...
the 555 is an oscillator chip - meaning it pulses ( a wave form )...
the 12 DC volt battery ( or any voltage up to 18 volts ) is supplying the juice to the 555 which has turned the DC into AC pulses which pulses each transformer with two timing chips 4017 s in sequence...

It was explained to me...that all you have to do is excite the surrounding ether with these pulses and tap into the vast amounts of free energy at your disposal... The very Least that the circuit is a clever way of using all the energy of a 12 volt battery ( which satisfies me - but if it is true - eureka!).

I got very excited when I got the 555 and the 4017 s working... then the long pause for the quest for soft iron...
now I am back on track and waiting to wind the transformers

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2014, 03:56:12 AM
Before I forget...
What I asked this forum thread was...
If I combine two transformer secondary's together and put a resistor and a capacitor to slow them up... for a another combined transformer secondary... and then a third. Would I have a 3 phases to operate a 3 phase motor...

I am thinking to myself ( Yes )... but I am waiting for the electronic experts ( that show up occasionally ) to tell me how...

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2014, 04:13:24 AM
Oops AntiJon...
I thought you were asking about phase - from a beginners view point...
skip the Last 3 posts...
As I understand the circuit ( Fig. ) you can tap each secondary either in series or parallel...
And... the sequential firing of pulses to the transformers is in a waveform...
This is about as technically as I want to get...

Hope this helped.
All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on July 23, 2014, 06:04:23 AM
@RandyFL No, thanks for the refresher. Taking a second look, or third, Figuera's commutator does provide what would be the equivalent of rectified two phase. Well that's good to know. lol

As for your question, are you trying to run a 3 phase motor to do work? I'm sure you could offset the phases a number of ways, but the only thing I've ever seen is an off-the-shelf variable speed drive... if you're daring, I've heard about the rotoverter that runs from 120 volt http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Rotoverter
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2014, 10:35:01 AM
Yes,
I'm Looking to run a 30 HP(or more) AC 3 phase motor...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 23, 2014, 02:09:42 PM
Thanks RandyFL... After seeing you guys talking about 90 degree phases, I think I was wrong about the phase lagging in the coils, but why 90 degrees? I thought the two primary coils were in antiphase.. fill me in?

Antijon,

You are partially right: We need two signals so that when one is at maximun the other is at minimun. This is , as you said, antiphase (180º).

But we also need those signals to be always positive (at least that is what Figuera used in his 1908 patent)

With two 90º degrees out of phase signals, later we can rectify each one (using 2 diode bridges) in order to obtain the two opposite and positive signals required. (see image below)

Anyway, it is not bad to give a try also to two 180º out phase signals (although they are postive and negative = pole reversal), and see the results. These 180º signals can be obtained with just a center tapped transformer (as seen in this link: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html ) (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html)


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 23, 2014, 09:26:52 PM
Randy;
 most people use a rotary phase converter to convert single phase to three phase. this is accomplished by using a capacitor bank to take one leg out of phase by 90* in my understanding.
Quote;
"A rotary phase converter uses a three phase motor and a large bank of capacitors to combine a third tier of power with a single phase power source. The single phase source of electricity is attached to two of the three phase motor leads. The third lead to the motor is attached to one of the single-power source outputs in series with the group of capacitors, and the output leads from the rotary-phase converter connect to all three-motor terminals. In this way, the rotary phase converter generates a third of the source of power while simultaneously combining it with the other two currents from the single phase power source".

Read more : http://www.ehow.com/how-does_5007865_rotary-phase-converter-work.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 23, 2014, 10:03:06 PM
Randy;
I did find this though. i think it is much cheaper than the first. as i said a cap takes the phase 90* out....hope this helps
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 25, 2014, 12:13:33 PM
Yes it does...
I located a Baldor 3 phase 1/2 hp motor for around 200.00 - to experiment with.

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 26, 2014, 03:36:14 PM
Just remember those cap ratings are per HP so each additional HP will need more uf for start and run.(this is a must) no exceptions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 31, 2014, 05:11:16 AM
here is a pic of Quadrature and a Eric Dollard pdf that is fantastic. it starts with an interview with Tom Brown so skip it if you want to pdf page 13 the second pdf that's where it gets Awesome. do your self a favor and READ THIS if you haven't. you will have a better grasp on electricity and how it functions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 31, 2014, 05:12:53 AM
And here is pages 13 - 29 Please read !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 02, 2014, 01:13:10 PM
Dollards advice to turn off the TV and quit your job was pretty profound. Unlikely anyone would believe how much power is in that statement.
  It wouldnt work unless everyone did it together and that wont happen.It would be really funny to see what the reaction of the 2 percent'ers would be.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 02, 2014, 04:31:56 PM
Clemente Figuera explain in a detail variation on this patent. Hope that it will help you to understand this Figuera Generator guys. I know that a lot of you are confuse on the patent which Sr. Figuera has filed, this patent will explain the patent which Figuera lack in explaining on his patent. This one is the same with the device which the Coils are rotated.

The second picture will explained how to wound the coil which is in Series that project the Two Magnetic Pole like a PMotion Holder look, which is pretty the same to me. Just look carefully on the winding direction- like bending a straight iron core into a U shape core.

Just ask question if you still dont understand the patent. We should discuss this devices so we can share and understand deeper the principle behind on this Generator.


Enjoy..  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 02, 2014, 05:40:23 PM
Patente 1908 Better Explain.

 The Magnetic Pole is arranged in a Attraction on each opposing Exciter Electromagnets. N and S is only used as representation of Rectangle Electromagnets. The principle works on increase and decrease, this another variation on the Figuera Patente 30378 but works the same.

Take a careful look on the attached drawing and please review the Figuera Patent.


Meow   ;D


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 02, 2014, 08:21:46 PM
of course, this is the same device  ;)  just now instead of rotating drum coil there is clever switching device, got it ?  :P
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 03, 2014, 08:06:41 PM
A Simplified Method of Selecting Soft Magnetic Alloyshttp://www.cartech.com/techarticles.aspx?id=1624 (http://www.cartech.com/techarticles.aspx?id=1624)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 03, 2014, 08:16:26 PM
Hey everyone.
@hanon, thanks for the info. I have since been using capacitors in series with coils to produce a phase difference.

This is what I've been working with. Two E core transformers, sandwiched together, giving me a dual-primary transformer. I don't think this is the proper arrangement for the Figuera generator.

Results are:
1. As arranged in the schematic, with a capacitor in series with one coil, a phase lag is produced. Because I can't measure the phase lag, I can only say it's between 45 and 90 degrees. In this arrangement, the polarity of the coils doesn't matter. Just as with a two-phase motor, changing the polarity of one coil will result in a change of direction; in a two-phase transformer, the output will change by 180 degrees, but will be the same magnitude.

I have verified the phase lag by running the two primaries in parallel/opposition without a capacitor, which as we know will cause no output on the secondary because the two primary fields oppose each other. With the capacitor, the coils can be run in opposition or series, the polarity of the primaries doesn't matter, and an output is produced.

2. The output frequency is different than the input. My input frequency was 60HZ, but I assume the output will be a strange sum of 60HZ along with the lagging 60HZ, due to the mutual induction of the two primaries and secondary. This reminds me of Tesla's patent nu. 382282, http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-382,282-electric-converting-distributing , for which he states, "The inductive effect exerted upon the secondary coils will be mainly due to the shifting or movement of the magnetic action..." Which can be found here: http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1888-05-16.htm in the 15th and 16th paragraphs.

3. I have tried using two bridge/full-wave rectifiers to feed the two primaries, but produced little to no output. This was my attempt to use two, DC pulse trains, 90 degrees out of phase, as pictured in my crappy doodles below.

@stupify12, if you could please explain more as to what you think is the proper coil configuration, I might try to produce it, but as you can see, if the two primaries and secondary share the same flux path, like a transformer, I think the results will be the same as what I have achieved.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 04, 2014, 01:11:13 AM
In a spanish forum a user has suggested to use the attached scheme to get the  90° out of phase; it has two diode bridges to have just positive signals. It is easy to test it. What do you think of this proposal?

Antijon,  I think that Figuera configuration was with all the coils aligned without closing the magnetic circuit. Just as sketched in the patent drawing
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 04, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
@hanon, that's the circuit I tried... I'll try it again with more input power and see what I get. Thanks, I'll try also on a single inductor shaft.

I think you're right about the linear coils, but the statement that makes me wonder is, "The machine is essentially characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, between whose poles the reels of the induced are properly placed." Taken from http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm#patents Spanish Patent # 4426, Notes section. The "induced circuit" is the only location he refers to as a "reel" coil... strange, because he refers to the primaries as electromagnets. What exactly is a reel coil? He also says, "properly placed," which makes me think there's more to this than just the way the primaries are powered.

Any thoughts?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 04, 2014, 07:55:56 AM
Hey everyone.
@hanon, thanks for the info. I have since been using capacitors in series with coils to produce a phase difference.

This is what I've been working with. Two E core transformers, sandwiched together, giving me a dual-primary transformer. I don't think this is the proper arrangement for the Figuera generator.


@stupify12, if you could please explain more as to what you think is the proper coil configuration, I might try to produce it, but as you can see, if the two primaries and secondary share the same flux path, like a transformer, I think the results will be the same as what I have achieved.

Hello antijon,

I think all in this forum is very confuse on what is the actually operation of this Figuera Generator- it is because we think much more complicated theories and design of what we could think of. Actually the Figuera Generator is so simple that it follows the Faraday Law of Induction and re design the principles behind the rotation of the DC Dynamo Motor, and eliminating the rotation of either the Generating Rotor and Permanent Excitator Electromagnets of Stator in a DC Generator by using the Increase and Decrease Intensity of Magnetization on the Cores.

Think of this. The DC Generator has separated Rotor/Armature and Stator Permanent Magnet. So we will now put that in our Figuera Generator Design- The Excitator Electromagnets Stator should have a separated Laminted/Soft Iron Core from Induced Generating Coils. The DC Generator has 2 Permanent Magnet in a Magnetic Attraction position.
What we need to re produce Figuera Generator.

1.Because it is motionless. We need a 2 separated Electromagnets(This electromagnet is wound in a U shape form to project it's North in one end, and South in the other end. We need two of this U shape Electromagnet to make a attractive magnetic force between the 2 U shape electromagnets configure like this.

The 1st U North end will face the 2nd U South end.
The 1st U South end will face the 2nd U North end.
 U shape core / I think all of you already know the PMH= Perpetual Magnet Holder something like that.

The 2nd U North end will face the 1st U South end.
The 2nd U South end will face the 1st U North end.

How could Figuera imitate the rotation of Induced Coils with out movement? Well it is simple. The only special Figuera did is the Rotationg Variable Resistor. The two U shape core is being fed with a Positive Terminal  from the Commutator.
The feeding is like swiping the Variable Resistor from Left to Right/ Right to Left. The input of the Positive terminal is in the Mid Point of this Variable Resistor.

Let's say, that the 1st U shape core is on the maximum magnetization then the Induced Coils are now being cut with the flux of the 1st U electromagnet. The 1st U shape induced Maximum North- South flux on the Induced Coils, because of the variable excitation with the help of the Elementary Drawn Resistor, when the wiper is connected to the center of the Wire Wound Resistor there is now two equal flux the 1st U shape North-South and the 2 U shape South-North until the wiper pass the midpoint, Magnetizing the 2nd U shape South-North maximum flux while the North-South of the 1st U shape is on the minimum magnetic flux.

The resulting waveform on the Induced coils is now more like a Alternating Current. That is the reason Tesla had mention on one of his letters that he has long ago found the principles behind on Figuera Generator, which Tesla mean was the Alternating Current.

I hope that my explaination will not add more confusion on you guys. Happy to share this ideas and thoughts with others.

Meow.


Figuera Quote!
Quote
Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed
circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as
when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased
and reduced in intensity; since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing
a circuit is producing electrical induced current.

Figuera
Quote
It was considered the
possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of
movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase
and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the
electrical current which produces it.


Figuera
Quote
magnetize one or more
electromagnets and, while the current is higher or lower the magnetization of
the electromagnets is decreasing or increasing and varying, therefore, the
intensity of the magnetic field , this is, the flow which crosses the induced
circuit.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 04, 2014, 08:01:19 AM
@hanon, that's the circuit I tried... I'll try it again with more input power and see what I get. Thanks, I'll try also on a single inductor shaft.

I think you're right about the linear coils, but the statement that makes me wonder is, "The machine is essentially characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, between whose poles the reels of the induced are properly placed." Taken from http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm#patents Spanish Patent # 4426, Notes section. The "induced circuit" is the only location he refers to as a "reel" coil... strange, because he refers to the primaries as electromagnets. What exactly is a reel coil? He also says, "properly placed," which makes me think there's more to this than just the way the primaries are powered.

Any thoughts?

The two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit- is the picture on the above post. The reels is the Induced Coils/Generating Coils place between this two U shape Electromagnets.

I think you should focus on the Variable Excitation/Variable Resistance with Two Output on each end, the input Positive terminal is connected on the Midpin .


Meow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 04, 2014, 06:41:59 PM
A good site for inspiration http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/OnFailingG.html (http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/OnFailingG.html)

  Edison made 1000 not working light bulbs before the one that did. Without those failures it may have never happened and we would still be using carbon lights gas lights or candles.

 Go back to the beginning starting with the magnet. There are two inducer magnets and one induced coil. The inducers reprsent 2/3 rds of the device. Master the majority, the magnet.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 08, 2014, 03:05:12 PM
Hi all,

Good news!! I think I have solved the principle under one of the Figuera´s patent. I am referring to patent No. 30376 (year 1902), the one with the rotary induced circuit and stationary internal and external electromagnets (Link to pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)). This is not the patent from year 1908 with the variable fields. In this patent a SINGLE MOVING WIRE crosses between TWO OPPOSITE MAGNET POLES. According to Figuera´s patent text this configuration produces electricity without dragging the movement of the induced wire.

The key for avoiding dragging is the use of two opposite poles to generate the induction in the intermediate wire:  N -- | -- S  ; in contrast with common generators with just one pole exposed to the induced wire.

       1- A wire is moved between two opposite poles: North and South

       2- As a consequence an induce current will appear in the wire

       3- This induced current generates a magnetic field (B) around the wire

       4- One pole (let´s say  N pole) will repel the wire because of magnetic repulsion with the magnetic field in the wire (creating a drag). But the other pole ( S pole in our example) will attract the wire (magnetic attraction between the S pole and the wire)

       5- Therefore the net sum of both forces (repulsion + attraction) will be null and the wire finally will be moved without any drag while at the same time will generate an induced current.

I think it is as simple as explained here. Figuera also stated that he could not believe how such a simple principle had not been used before him.

All Figuera´s patents are based on the induction created between two electromagnets, instead of common induction with just one pole exposed. IMHO, This is the key of his discovery.

I attach a schematic of the generator (patent 30376) done by Ufopolitics (in EF forum). Also I attach an sketch with the representation of this principle. Please study this sketch and tell your comments.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 08, 2014, 07:06:11 PM
Yes, hanon. ;)  Precisely I think Figuera used already available dynamo machine and modified it to get slight space between armature coils and rotor, then rewound rotor to become strong electromagnet of the same strength as armature coils and placed rotating drum -output coils between them exactly in the center. The essence is good positioning.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 08, 2014, 07:34:48 PM
There you have it. Finally others are now starting to understand this invention. There is two of this Generators which is exactly the same with Nikola Tesla's generator. Either the Excitator Electromagnets or the Induced Close Circuit Coil is rotating which are both the same.

But I preferred the Nikola Tesla High Frequency Generator to be design like this. That machine is a beast on its own design, together with this robust  evolution.

Hope that you get soon to understand the Principle behind the Stationary Excitator Electromagnets and Induced Close Circuits Generating Coils. All are still the same following the Law of Induction which was discovered by Faraday. It is so simple that you should think like a box. Hehehehe. I think the patent from Stanley Meyer help alot in understanding this matter.

By the way. This invention was clearly described by Nikola Tesla on his modification of the Homopolar Generator on one of his books. It is cleary drawn in diagram  while Tesla describe how does it operate.


Meow..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 09, 2014, 12:43:11 PM
Hi all,

This same principle is also used into Hogan and Jakovlewich overunity generator  (see this link to the Hogan & Jakovlewich patent (http://www.overunity.com/14755/hogan-and-jakovlewich-overunity-generator/dlattach/attach/141451/) ). This generator also used TWO OPPOSITE MAGNETS sandwiching the induced wire to create induction.

It clear that some atipical behaviour happens when the induction is forced to occur between two opposite magnetic poles.

A press reporter who witnessed Figuera´s device in 1902 said that "the invention consited of a motor, a generator and a kind of governor or regulator. The whole system being so simple that a child could work it."

    - A motor --> to move the induced wire . Just a small motor , because the wire didn´t suffered from dragging

    - A generator --> a device as described in Figuera patent 30376
   
    - A governor --> maybe to regulate the motor speed, or to feedback the motor with part of the produced current

Please see in this link the thread of Hogan and Jakovlewich generator:

www.overunity.com/14755/hogan-and-jakovlewich-overunity-generator/ (http://www.overunity.com/www.overunity.com/14755/hogan-and-jakovlewich-overunity-generator/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 10, 2014, 04:06:24 PM
An Axial flux core-less gen does have drag on the windings caused by the output to load bmf. No overunity there.Your model does not include the effects of the field created in the induced coil by the loads attached to it.
  "When all ells fails try following the directions" I read that on a base ball cap somewhere.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Neo-X on August 11, 2014, 06:43:51 AM
@Hanon

I think its much better if the capacitor is placed at the primary of the transformer. If the primary of the transformer is tuned to resonance, this would produce 90 degree out of phase voltage in the output of the transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 11, 2014, 03:34:17 PM
Hello All,

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

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

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

Can anyone provide a definite answer from actual testing?

Thanks and Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 11, 2014, 05:57:20 PM
Hi Cadman, et all... That's a good question. Judging by the commutator and just taking a wild guess at the driving motors RPM, I'd say the output waveform of the inducing coils is less than 60HZ. Of course, that's not really pertinent info...

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

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

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

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

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

What do you think, guys?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 13, 2014, 10:12:27 PM
The Primaries do not change polarity just intensity only the secondaries change polarity,their would be to much loss if they were switching so that means that the primaries could possibly use Grain oriented Iron having good magnetic induction in one direction and poorly in reverse while the Secondary should be NON Grain oriented or Good Quality Iron to allow for good induction in both direction with little Remanence. at least that's my two cents worth.
Also the primaries are never zero volts so the output core will be less magnetic resistance than the opposite core then if there is Bemf in secondary the opposite primary core will be less resistance than the induced core thus absorbing any Bemf into opposite core being of opposite polarity.(Attraction mode)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 14, 2014, 07:30:09 PM
Hi everyone,

About the patent from 1908 with the variable magnetic fields:

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

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

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

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

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

We should try every possible pole configuration N-N, S-S, N-S,...  Remenber that Figuera did not stated explicitly the pole orientation. He used the notation "N rectangle" and "S rectangle" but he never said North nor South (which I found really weird). He did not clarified the exact pole orientation  in any part of the patent nor in the patent claims. ( Link to patent text (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf) )

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

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 14, 2014, 10:32:37 PM
Hanon we have disgust this set up before many moons ago. it could be set up with little to no cost to find out. everyone already knows that an Electromagnet is many, many times more powerful than a magnet can ever be. i just think that the bloch wall between the NN or SS should not be swung past the end of the coil. this would insure different polarities at coil ends (correct) so this means that the opposite inducer should never reach Zero just varying the intensity of the currant.
in the pic below is this what you are talking about.of course i don't have a core present though.
I will be ordering a 300 Watt Resistor with multiple taps from NTE this week end so i will test the viability of this set up. i can use my two channel or my 9 channel Figueras timing boards it makes no difference. i have a few variacs lying around so i can run it through a bridge rectifier for my 100 volts. i will post my findings as  soon as i can.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 15, 2014, 03:09:11 AM
Hey guys.
Hanon, nice vid, a good example to learn from. So what you and marathonman (pleasure to meet you, marathonman) are saying is that:
1. There is a single inductor, and all three coils are mounted on it axially
2. Primary polarities oppose and vary in current
3. Most importantly, length of the inductor, as well as size of the secondary, must be sized properly to the frequency and amplitude of the primary current.

Hanon, what are your thoughts about the pic I uploaded showing the different arrangements of the coils? It does look like all the coils could be mounted axially, but it also appears that the inductor overlaps the secondary, ya?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 15, 2014, 03:31:38 AM
http://youtu.be/-eTQ49RcFKM

Gotoluc's updated permanent magnet motor, showing the increase in motor strength with the addition of more flux paths. Haha, i think I just answered my own question, hanon.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 15, 2014, 05:03:27 PM
Antijon,

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

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

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

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

Two variable field inductor electromagnets one in each side and one intermediate induced coil.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 15, 2014, 06:00:11 PM
Hi everyone,

Thank you for your thoughts about the magnetic polarity change.

This may be another design concern with the 1908 design.

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

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

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

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 16, 2014, 04:13:52 AM
Hey Cadman. I don't think that modification would be necessary, and here's why. If you look at the photo that Marathonman posted, you see the fields "breaking out" at the center of the output coil. Now if the action that produces output is based on that "breaking out" point sweeping through the coil, then the amp-turns aren't as critical.

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

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

In my opinion, the action is incredibly simple. It can be produced in many ways. Say, with two permanent magnets, like poles facing, and two primaries being fed AC. Or with two DC coils and two AC coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on August 16, 2014, 05:37:46 AM
Little animation I made to demonstrate the flux cutting the coil
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2014, 05:50:21 AM
Antijon Good to meet you to! (Welcome)
another thing to consider is the two opposing polarities with sweeping break outs as you say will be doubled, both magnetic Flux paths added together as they are compressed  as it is swept from side to side so this also effects the amper turn ratio. my two channel board will slam this side to side faster than my 9 channel would so ill hook this up to an NTE 300 watt variable tap resistor. this will allow for some fine tuning on the sweeping width.
i think this is a critical tuning step as the flux can not be brought out to far....i think it should not pass up the coil as i think the currant will momentarily drop....hummm i will watch this carefully and post findings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2014, 04:53:57 PM
I got to thinking this morning and why can't we use a North and a South Pinch Effect core. the picture below should work if you ask me as long as the north and the south are in Unison (Correct) the output core will will be between the NN and the SS Electromagnets.
in this arrangement it could be modular and one could easily add more modules to get more output i.e. NN, SS, NN, SS, NN, SS.... get my drift..... with a core in between each one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 16, 2014, 06:14:52 PM
One small historical pearl from one of the Buforn patent's that you all will love.

INPUT: 100 Watts ( 1 Ampere @ 100 Volts )

OUTPUT: 20,000 Watts

In other paragraph of the patent, Buforn states that the output was 300 A. Therefore the final voltage delivered by the 7 induction stages in series was around 60 V, more or less 10 V per stage.
.
(Edited to reduce image size)
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 16, 2014, 08:54:33 PM
hanon


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


I think it is now quite clear how they worked, in theory.  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 16, 2014, 10:02:02 PM
hanon


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


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

Website site with all the documents:

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on August 16, 2014, 11:04:22 PM
Hey Cadman. I don't think that modification would be necessary, and here's why. If you look at the photo that Marathonman posted, you see the fields "breaking out" at the center of the output coil. Now if the action that produces output is based on that "breaking out" point sweeping through the coil, then the amp-turns aren't as critical.

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

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

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


Hello and welcome antijon!

Could you please tell where in your circuit is the input (AC mains) and where the N and S electromagnets are connected?
A full schematic would be awesome (just draw by hand, take a picture and upload).
Also, do you happen to have one of those energy meters to check out the consumption?
What is the resistance and power rating of the resistor?

I do experiments from time to time and would like to replicate this setup to see for myself what's going on and report any good results.

Thanks in advance.

Dann
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RMatt on August 16, 2014, 11:36:27 PM
Is there a cure for the post and pic's that are oversized???? I hope that I am not the only one that has to scroll right then left then down then right....... to read every post. It is quite annoying. Does anyone else have the same problem?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on August 17, 2014, 12:01:15 AM
Is there a cure for the post and pic's that are oversized? ??? I hope that I am not the only one that has to scroll right then left then down then right....... to read every post. It is quite annoying. Does anyone else have the same problem?

Yes. 
the solution is: If everybody were to upload pictures with max 800x600 pixel sizes (and not 1200x or higher) then the page would not be oversized horizontally and we would not have to scroll to the right.
Stefan Hartmann has already written this somewhere...

The remedy for an oversized picture would be to resize it for a lower pixel number by the uploader, within 12 hours after he or she posted it.  This would involve deleting it from the forum  (uncheck attachment) and after resizing it could be uploaded again.  After 12 hours the Modify button disappears and you cannot edit your posts, only the Moderator can.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on August 17, 2014, 08:53:28 AM
Is there a cure for the post and pic's that are oversized? ??? I hope that I am not the only one that has to scroll right then left then down then right....... to read every post. It is quite annoying. Does anyone else have the same problem?

Hi!

If you are a firefox user check out "Image zoom" add on. It lets you resize any image displayed just by holding down the right mouse button and turning the mouse wheel. So If the text is out of screen, you have to check the page for large images, right click and scroll on them and then you can read the page.
Here: https://addons.mozilla.org/sl/firefox/addon/image-zoom/

Not exactly a fix, but more like a remedy. Hope it helps

Dann
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 17, 2014, 06:49:08 PM
Yes i know i am guilty as charged and i will make sure from now on the pics are smaller. i just forget that my Monitor is 46 inch not 19 or 20. i don't ever run into these problems with a large screen. i use to have a 60 inch monitor but that's in the living room now.
So will the pic of the double pinch effect work or not i am curious to try though but i don't have enough core material yet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 18, 2014, 04:55:13 PM
Hannon,
 I thought Figueras devise put out 550 volts.? if you say less than 10 volts per coil then that is one hell of a loss coming from 100 volt @ 1 amp stimulating. to me this does not seem correct at all. at 550 % 7 coils is 78.5 volts. where do you get your figures. please explain!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 18, 2014, 06:43:19 PM
Yeah. 8) We got it guys. ;D It is as said by Senior Figuera, current can be produce by varying the intensity of the Exciter Electromagnets with the very well known principle of Increase and Decrease. The Exciter Electromagnets is the most crucial design so that this varying intensity of magnetism will be induced perfectly to the Induced Coils/Generating Coils.

It was clearly cited by Senior Figuera on all of his patents, one must think deeply to really understand those simple words/translation to fully understand this very simple concept which derive from Faraday.

The perfect design for the Exciter Electromagnets ;

1. Two Perpetual Motion Holder(PMH) facing each end-by using this kind of core the 1st Electromagnet is bend so end  of the U shape core will project South and North.

2. The Homopolar Design of Nikola Tesla with very clear winding direction and magnetic poles of the Exciter Electromagnets being of opposite pole while a disk is rotating inside.

3. The Patent 30378 is another best design for the Exciter Electromagnets of this Figuera Generator.

The rotating resistor is the swiping component that well make this Two Exciter Electromagnets vary in intensity. The 1st Electromagnet is being increase, at the same time the other Electromagnet is being decrease; vice versa. The Elementary drawn Resistor of Senior Figuera is being swipe from Left to Right and Right to Left. The input source on the Elementary Resistor is the Positive Terminal connected in each level of Resistance.

So we could say that when the Pin(Wiper) in the Middle of this Elementary Resistor  the Two Electromagnets are being power with the same intensity of Positive Terminal. When the Wiper is on the Left of this Resistor the less Resistance(e.g. the N Electromagnet= North + South) is on the maximum magnetic field while at the same time the more Resistance (the S Electromagnet=South + North)  Electromagnets is on the minimum magnetic field.

It is so simple as per Senior Figuera stated he just improvised how a rotating dynamo principle work into a Motionless device. We need a Two Electromagnet with two North and two South, if you could bend the core is much better.


Meow

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

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

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

In my opinion, the action is incredibly simple. It can be produced in many ways. Say, with two permanent magnets, like poles facing, and two primaries being fed AC. Or with two DC coils and two AC coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on August 18, 2014, 07:04:26 PM
All is the same with the Law of Induction. Put many coils on the Induced Coils connect them on parallel for more amperage output. Connect this coils in series for more Voltage output. As long as this Induced Coils are being cut with the lines of force of the Magnets/Electromagnets.

This coils can be cut with the lines of flux of Magnets rotating the Magnets or the Induced Coils.

Figuera's principle is of being born and dying Magnetic Lines= which is equal to Varying the intensity of the Exciter Electromagnets by feeding it with Increasing and Decreasing Magnetic Field.Sounds the same with the principle Approaching magnetic field and moving away Magnetic field.

One must understand how a DC Dynamo works to produce current, which is also describe by Senior Figuera on most of his patent. The same principle with this Figuera Generator it works on the DC Dynamo principle, a Coil wound in a bar of laminated iron, when the Magnet is passing with a magnetic pole of North on top and South in the bottom it moves away, and the Magnetic pole now approace the Coil with a magnetic pole of South on top and North in the bottom.

The same goes for the Figuera Generator instead of rotating the Magnets, the Wound Coil is being hit with the Magnetic lines of reversing Magnetic field; let say the 1st Electromagnet project North on top, and South in the bottom with Maximum magnetic strength, while the 2nd Electromagnet project not much on this cycle because it is on the Minimum Magnetic strength.

When the wiper moves to the Maximum Magnetic strength of 2nd Electromagnet which project South on top and North in the bottom. The Induced Coils now are already cut with the magnetic lines of Reversing field because the Induced Coils is stationary. The 1st Electromagnet project not much on this cycle because it in on the Minimum Magnetic strength..


Meow    :D :D






Hannon,
 I thought Figueras devise put out 550 volts.? if you say less than 10 volts per coil then that is one hell of a loss coming from 100 volt @ 1 amp stimulating. to me this does not seem correct at all. at 550 % 7 coils is 78.5 volts. where do you get your figures. please explain!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 18, 2014, 07:44:52 PM
Hannon,
 I thought Figueras devise put out 550 volts.? if you say less than 10 volts per coil then that is one hell of a loss coming from 100 volt @ 1 amp stimulating. to me this does not seem correct at all. at 550 % 7 coils is 78.5 volts. where do you get your figures. please explain!

Figuera obtained 550 volts and 15 HP as you said in his 1902 generator, as reported in the press from that year. The reference to 20 KW output ( 300 A  @ around 60 volts) is from the Buforn patent from 1910 which was a copy of Figuera 1908 patent. We dont have to mess it up between both different patents  from Figuera: he filed 4 patents in 1902, and he filed his last patent, the one with the commutator, in 1908. I think that concepts used in 1902 patents and sold to bankers are not the same than those issued in 1908
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 18, 2014, 09:00:16 PM
hanon

I see Buforn filled a lot of patents and had described a lot inside. Any chance to translate all those patents into English ? I'm especially interest if he directly or indirectly mentioned Lenz law and how he eliminated it in his setup. Is there any better automatic free online translator then "google translate" ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 19, 2014, 01:15:15 AM
Quote
One must understand how a DC Dynamo works to produce current

That is the foundation to build upon. If you understand how a dynamo works and the principals behind it then you see plainly how this motionless generator works. There is a wealth of information available that teaches the fundamentals and the mathematical formulas used in dynamo design.

The Figuera / Buforn design is founded on a modified standard dynamo design. The concept drawings below show how I think this generator evolved in their minds between 1902 and 1914. You can see how the 1908 version is just a representation of one magnetic circuit path of a standard generator. In the 1914 representation you can see how the field coils make use of both their poles, which a standard dynamo and the 1908 configuration do not. The 1908 and later patent drawings do not show the magnetic circuit because it was well understood and the point of the patent was the variation of the fields.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 19, 2014, 01:19:51 AM
The discussion about pole orientation comes from time ago. The problem is that Figuera in 1908 patent did not clearly stated the pole orientation (nor in the 1908 patent, neither Buforn did it in his latter 5 more patents !!!). I will copy literally what it is written in the 1908 patent (both in the text and in the claims) so that everyone may judge if this a properly way of defining the pole orientation or maybe it is just a patent notation “trick” using the letters “N” and “S”

IN THE DESCRIPTION: “Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and S. Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y” (small)”

IN THE CLAIMS: “The machine is essentially characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, between whose poles the reels of the induced are properly placed.”

What a way of defining the pole orientation if he is just calling them as "rectangles N and S". Note that Figuera left the claims open to any kind of orientation. Suspicious? ...

Buforn filed 5 more patents after Figuera's death in 1908. I have not translated them because they all are exact copies of the Figuera 1908 patent. More literature but the same device. You can see it by comparing Buforn's drawings with the drawing from Figuera in 1908.... almost photocopies.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 19, 2014, 01:38:01 AM
In dynamos and generators the induced coil itself determines the polarity of the field magnets. Picture a rectangular coil, one side of the coil must be induced by a positive field and the other side by a negative. If both sides are induced by the same polarity field coil the induced emf of each side will cancel the other and there will be no output. That is fact. Now whether or not each side of the induced coil may be induced by a double set of same polarity field coils is not mentioned and may well be worth investigating. However there is a point where the iron core or teeth of the induced can be over saturated and the induction currents produced in the induced fields can seriously counter the inducing field and lower the output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 19, 2014, 06:25:22 AM
Thank you Hanon for clarifying that.
I agree also with the rectangles, they are never called North and south just n and s. this leaves it to open for interpretation  even after reading it many, many times.
Cadman i am planning to pursue the double pinch effect as nothing else has worked very good to date for me so off i go again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 19, 2014, 01:49:41 PM
Hello guys,
I have to apologize because I been off the forum for so long but I am still very busy with other personal matters that require 100% of my time. Nevertheless, I took couple of weeks to write the paper being attached to this reply. It is my interpretation of how the Figuera's rotary generator might have worked. In summary, Figuera's teachings for this generator consists in constructing the induced coils with non-magnetic/non-metallic cores. Even though it is the simplest of his inventions, it took me longer to figure this device out. It is very interesting and it seems to me that this is the simplest of his invention, to date. A friend of mine is building this generator and he will post the results of the testing process. I estimate the results to be ready  by the end of this year, 2014.
Thanks, again. And good luck to all.
Bajac

I noticed that there are errors in the document:

Page 14: the third line of the middle paragraph should read "...the solenoid shown in Figure 6b can be as high as 2,500...", 

Page 20: lines 5 and 6 should read "...can run with only 2,000 Watts of input power representing a power gain of 250."

When the relative permeability was derated from 2,500 to 250, the input power becomes 2,000 W and not 400 W as stated in the first draft of the document.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on August 20, 2014, 01:10:05 AM
Hello All

Hello Bajac:
Its always interesting to meet people who contribute so much to this/these forum/s...
I downloaded your document and will study it at an opportune time.
I am in the process of building the Clemente F. and very much interested in someone who has built one...
I tell people in my Local area that the least I expect of the device is a useful way of using a 12 volt car battery. As most ppl don't know what overunity means...
My biggest problem here in Florida was finding iron...
Have you built the Fig. and have you had success with it?

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2014, 01:11:12 PM
Randy,
I have not finished the prototype of the 1908 invention. I did get some interesting results and learned some behavior of this apparatus by fine tuning, little changes, etc. Finaly, I realized that I have to rebuilt the unit with different specifications for the iron core. I have limited resources and I exhausted my budget for this year. I hope I can start the construction of a new one by the middle of next year, 2015. I have only built one section of the transformer. It is my understanding that each section should provide overunity. If I did not get the expected results from a section, I would not continue on building more sections. Does that make sense?
Meanwhile, a friend of mine was very interested in building the apparatus that I showed in Figure 9 but with the modifications shwon in Figures 11a and 11b. I gave this friend some sketches with dimensions similar to shop drawings ready for constructions. He promised me that he will post the results of this device. I cannot wait for them.
I also wanted to ask a question related to this website. How can I get the administrator to replace the file attached with my reply #1455 with an updated version?  I found out that the document needed more descriptions such as the application of equation 1.
Thank you!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on August 20, 2014, 01:36:01 PM
20 August 14       07:22:00

Hello All/Bajac:
Since I didn't/don't have a background in electricity or electronics I labored to get the solid state device to work ( I almost gave up, Patrick K went into retirement and my electronics engineer friend had died )...
I did the Edison approach until it worked for me. And when Patrick K advised me to hook it up to a 12 car battery my low current 555 melted and some of the breadboard...   :-).......I love watching things go pppppsssstttt.
Anyway as I have stated here before my biggest problem is/was locating iron ( who would have thunk... in America it would be hard to get iron ). Hence I have slowed down in my procedures and am taking my time...when you showed up.
I have wound all my transformers and will rebuild my circuit and will be ready to test somewhere down the road...
was wondering what experiences and successes you had...

All the Best
RandtFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
ATTACHED IS THE UPDATED VERSION! REVION 1.
The document was revised to correct some errors and to add more description on the application of equation 1.
Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2014, 06:53:04 PM
Hello all,
So what you are saying Bajac is that in figure 12 of your PDF that the output coil on the stator is wound on a non metallic bobbin as most are but that the bobbin is on  top of the stator not around it so that there is a gap between the rotor and the stator and that's where the output coil resides on the non metallic bobbin. (yes/No)
and thank you for the Flynn information to.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 20, 2014, 07:19:37 PM
Marathonman,
The center of the bobbin shall also be non-magnetic/non-metallic. I thought it was clear but it seems that it will need to be revised to indicate that the iron core does not penetrate the center of the bobbins.
 
Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2014, 08:25:09 PM
I got that and thank you VERY, VERY much Bajac and we (the forum) are forever grateful for you contributions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 20, 2014, 09:46:05 PM
Bajac,

Just some thoughts...

Have you taken into account the dramatic increase in reluctance and therefore the field coil ampere turns required for your designs?

For instance by my calculations, a field pole with a face surface of 44.61 cm^2 and an air gap in the magnetic circuit of 0.0254 cm (0.010”) will require about 176 ampere turns for a gap flux density of 7900 lines per cm^2 in my generator. The same surface with a gap in the magnetic circuit of 1.27 cm (0.50”) will require more than 8800 ampere turns on the field coil to produce the same flux density in the gap.

The reduced flux density cut by the induced may be part of the reason for the decrease in power consumed to rotate the induced, but since the E.M.F. generated in one conductor moving through a magnetic field is equal to the total number of lines cut per second, divided by 10^8, it seems like a poor trade.

I'm not trying to discredit your work, just curious about how you dealt with this. Or perhaps you already said in your paper and I am too dense to see it? :)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 21, 2014, 12:16:52 AM
Cadman,


I am not sure if I understood your question or concern. However, you need to compare apples with apples.


How come an issue related to the design and the construction details of the permanent magnets or electromagnets can invalidate or discredit the proposed concept for decreasing torque when using non-magnetic cores in the induced coil? The examples provided in the document do not explicitly take into account the power required to operate the magnets but the tolerance provided when the relative permeability was decreased by a factor of ten should be a good conservative contingency to account for any power consumed by the electromagnets. Anyway, it is a point well taken and I will include it in my next revision of the document.


On the other hand, I have the impression that you are giving up before trying. I really do not think that it will be that bad with the electromagnets. There are others important parameters that you are not taking into account. For instance, it is difficult to estimate how the cancellation effect of the Lenz's law will be present. As you already know, the induced field reacts to cancel the applied magnetic field which forces the applied magnetic field to be made larger. Because the induced magnetic field is substantially reduced when not using iron cores, then the cancellation of the fields should be smaller. The latter might allow operation with smaller magnets.


I am just speculating here but the final saying will be made by the results from the testing of a prototype. Remember that we do not really know this device that has been out of sight for more than a century. That is what makes it a challenge and exciting!


Thanks for your comments.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 21, 2014, 11:44:50 AM
Bajac,

Just some thoughts...

Have you taken into account the dramatic increase in reluctance and therefore the field coil ampere turns required for your designs?

For instance by my calculations, a field pole with a face surface of 44.61 cm^2 and an air gap in the magnetic circuit of 0.0254 cm (0.010”) will require about 176 ampere turns for a gap flux density of 7900 lines per cm^2 in my generator. The same surface with a gap in the magnetic circuit of 1.27 cm (0.50”) will require more than 8800 ampere turns on the field coil to produce the same flux density in the gap.

The reduced flux density cut by the induced may be part of the reason for the decrease in power consumed to rotate the induced, but since the E.M.F. generated in one conductor moving through a magnetic field is equal to the total number of lines cut per second, divided by 10^8, it seems like a poor trade.

I'm not trying to discredit your work, just curious about how you dealt with this. Or perhaps you already said in your paper and I am too dense to see it? :)

Regards

Valid points..though...can you answer how much of this 7900 lines of flux density is "consumed" to do work to break the magnetic dipole of two inducer cores many times per second ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 21, 2014, 06:53:06 PM
Hi Bajac,

I think I am not expressing myself clearly. That and my questions are more from a cost of construction concern than a theoretical one. No discredit intended about the concept for decreasing torque either, in fact I agree 100% with your reasoning there. And 100% agree the non metallic non magnetic core of the induced coils will result in much less force required to rotate it. Never the less it takes a certain number of wires or bars cutting a certain number of lines of flux per second to produce the desired output, so reducing the flux density has the effect of reducing the output. In my eyes moving the core of the field pole far enough away from the induced to insert the field coil (not the induced) in that space will have an adverse impact on the output. I am referring to your figure 8b and 12 concept designs by the way. There are ways to offset that impact for sure, but every one I can think of is costly. These are just my opinions of course.

Anyway I am not giving up. Just the opposite. I have been convinced of the validity of the Figuera and Buforn designs from the first time I read the patents. In fact the more I research the techniques and knowledge used to build dynamos at the beginning of the 20th century, the more certain I become because the patent designs fit and fit well.

The only reason I bypassed the 1902 design was for practical reasons, not having the resources to build it the way I think it should be built. Besides, someone more qualified is already working on that one. :)
I am going with the 1908 design because I believe a practical device with substantial output can be built for much less cost. It's past the investigation and analyses stage and I am close to finishing the first prototype calculations. After that the blueprints (now there is an obsolete term) and then construction.

You are right, it is challenging and exciting. I am very much looking forward to the tests of your prototype and hope it is a resounding success!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 21, 2014, 06:58:52 PM
Valid points..though...can you answer how much of this 7900 lines of flux density is "consumed" to do work to break the magnetic dipole of two inducer cores many times per second ?

Hmmm... my guess would be, none.

Cheers

Edit: That's a trick question, right?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on August 21, 2014, 08:18:00 PM
Here is a company that may have the iron we are looking for.
I haven't contacted them because I am working on another
project.

http://www.edfagan.com/vim-var-core-iron-rod.php

Sorry it didn't come out as a link.

Good luck all,

Swamp
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 21, 2014, 08:26:02 PM
Here's another one

http://www.mapessprowl.com/electrical-steel/

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 21, 2014, 09:26:16 PM
Hmmm... my guess would be, none.

Cheers

Edit: That's a trick question, right?

Yes and no and ..no really...It's just very different point of view  ;) It's like a problem of big stone, you have to push up to hill, while having superior method you can do the same using less force (using wheels). I think Figuera patented his design because he experimentally found and was sure that those lines of force you mentioned are not as a whole used to generate electrical output in ordinary generators !
That's the only resonable explanation imho...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 22, 2014, 07:49:28 PM
Thank you Cadman N Shadow for those links both seam to be very good quality Iron. i don't know About the quality of the iron from Cadman's link yet  as i haven't gotten a response yet but Shadows link has iron called Vim Var Core Iron that's 99.8% pure Iron which will make awesome outer core material.
even for you Robert Adams fans.
 THANK YOU BOTH!
"Correction both links are ASTM 848 same specs pure iron" Vim Var Core and Best Mag / Best Mag Strip.
As per Bajac below i will try. Y core might be bigger though ????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2014, 04:58:00 PM
Most of the inventors do not really know the broad principle of operation of their inventions. 95% or more of the inventors fail to answer the question of, what is the invention? The answers of these inventors almost always contain construction details that have nothing to do with the broad concept of their inventions but that really limit the scope of intellectual property in their patent claims.  When these inventors hire a patent lawyer to draft their patents, the lawyers also usually fail very badly in securing a fair parcel of intellectual property for these inventors.


What I generally see as the broadest claim in all these patents are what is called "picture claims." A picture claim is an verbal description of whatever you see in one of the embodiment drafted in a patent. A picture claim is very specific and has a very very limited scope of intellectual property. That is why is so easy for competitor to design around an original concept disclosed in a patent. Therefore, be very proactive in the drafting of a patent if you are using a lawyer. I have experience with that.


I am saying all of the above because the Figuera's 1902 patent disclosed a very broad and important concept such as "BUILDING THE INDUCED COILS OF ROTARY GENERATORS WITH NON-MAGNETIC AND NON-METALLIC CORES." If Figuera's 1902 patent had stated the broadest claim based on this concept, then, any patent such as Flynn, my embodiment presented in figure 12 etc., would have paid royalties to Figuera within the the 20 years of enforcement of the patent. It is very important if you invent anything to be aware of these issues. If you are interested in knowing more about patent claiming, you can read "Invention Analysis And Claiming: A Patent Lawyer's Guide" second edition, by Ronald D. Slusky. This book is a classic.


On the other hand, I do not have too much time left because I have to go back to my other chores. I want to finalize the paper posted last Wednesday 8/19/14 by next week. If you have a comment or concern, please, post it in this forum so it can be addressed in this last revision.


Thanks again to all.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 23, 2014, 08:44:00 PM
Maybe some inventors didn't knew exactly why their devices worked, but imho the reason for patenting such way is simple. You cannot patent a wheel, you cannot patent a method being underlying principle of all those inventions. You cannot patent explanation of mistake in physics law.
Am I right ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 23, 2014, 09:32:41 PM
forest,


You cannot patent the wheel because it is already known and invented.


But, you can patent all solutions to a problem you discovered, if no one else was aware that problem even existed. For example, Figuera did not have the right to patent all solutions to the problem of the dragging forces in an electric generator because it was a well known problem. However, he had the right to patent all solutions (method) for avoiding the drag whenever the solutions included induced coils with non-magnetic cores. No one knew that the counter torque in electrical generators could have been significantly reduced by using such method to the point of making said generators over unity.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 24, 2014, 09:46:52 PM
You have to be a complete Moron to back up your stuff on line. WHY! so every Government NSA agent and Hackers can dig through your Sh!t.......SORRY not me fella. to each his own but i back up on site.

I have a new proposal to Figueras Devise . it came to me when i was studying and doodled it down with paint program. can someone please tell me if BEMF will kill this or not. i think the output will not influence the input.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on August 24, 2014, 10:05:17 PM
There is no real direction on this thread for an individual to start experimenting. Those that think that core material is of paramount importance are moving in the wrong direction. This post is for those that have been searching for a low cost starting point. You need to start somewhere, here we have 99 pages, and as a joke I can say "we got 99 pages and a starting point aint one".

This all starts with the understanding of magnetic fields of the 3rd order. Every FE unit contains them to some degree. This post serves to introduce you to the concept. No electronics are needed just some coils. Most of you will disagree and will reply with something stupid as if you have any clue what it is your doing.

I do not reply to posts, it is below me, I only provide information. Those that try will learn something new, and be on the right path, those that don't have already decided there path. Lets start..........


Start by creating two coils, these will be called Coil A and Coil B. These coils (cores) are created with 1 1/4 - 1 1/2 PVC.

Coil A will consist of a PVC form roller of about 6 inches. On this you will roll 4 layers of #14 wire. Over the #14 wire you will wrap 4 - 6 turns of #8 wire. Note you can take #14 wire and bundle it together to create a thicker wire. It is important to know that thicker wire has more natural electricity then thinner wire. This to start will be an air core coil.

Coil B will consist of a PVC form roller of about 12". On this you will roll 2 layers of #14 wire. Over this you will roll 6 - 8 turns of #8 wire. Same applies as above, you can make thicker wire.

Connecting the coils:
First, it is important to understand that if Coil A is mounted horizontal then Coil B MUST be vertical and vice verse. The primary in Coil A should not influence Coil B in any way. Best to leave 1 foot distance between the coils to start. Also the primary and secondary of Coil A should not be grounded. Connect the secondary (#8 wire) of Coil A to the primary of Coil B (#14 wire). Remember this is NOT GROUNDED. The secondary of Coil B should be attached to a small load. This can be as simple as a small coil wrapped around a nail to check for magnetism. Also the secondary of Coil B should be grounded.

The primary of Coil A is connected as follows. Connect one side to a 12v battery, you will operate by hand the other side. Tap the terminal of a 12v battery with the other side. We are creating IMPULSES through Coil A. These impulses should be of short duration. Observe the results of the magnetism on Coil B. There is a difference between the impulses of Coil A and that of Coil B. Coil A is impulsed by the current of a battery and Coil B is impulsed by a magnetic field. The impulses from the battery are different from the magnetic field, here is where you need to observe and study. To recap the important last sentence. The impulses created from a battery are DIFFERENT then the impulses originating from magnetic fields. This is the only thing an FE experimenter should concern himself with.

Variations of the above experiment. Add iron to Coil B. To do this visit your local junk yard and get some "tire irons". With a hack saw cut the ends off and you will have good iron for electro-magnetic coils. Fill the inside of Coil B with this iron, re-test and record results of magnetic field. Remove iron and add to Coil A, re-test and record results. Increase the voltage of the primary and re-test. IDEALLY reduce the input voltage, of the primary, for the greatest magnetic effect.

There is enough experimental work here to carry the part-time experimenter for the rest of the year. Let it be known that you are experimenting with magnetic fields of the 3rd Order. These orders continue onward (4th, 5th, 6th ....etc) each with there own effect. An order is created when an ungrounded secondary is connected to the primary of another coil. It is up to YOU to experiment and find your own answers, I simple pointed you in the correct direction (after a lot of BS written here).


In conclusion......... written in one of the patents is a very, very, very small sentence that validates the above experiment. Much like the 'yoke' (y) it has eluded many.

Good luck.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 25, 2014, 01:46:25 AM
Fernandez,


Could you post pictures and videos of the device that is working based on the theory you just described? Because of the manner you expressed yourself, I can only assume that you have tested your theory. Otherwise, you would really have issues for calling other people's work BS.

It is my conviction that even if you are correct, you should be respectful with the people in this forum who are working very hard!


Thanks for sharing!


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 25, 2014, 04:47:11 PM
 I suspect Fernandez is close. Now lets see what becomes of his mental health.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 25, 2014, 08:18:03 PM
Hello again everyone,

Having convinced myself that the 1908 and later patents were based on the standard dynamos of their day, I threw out everything I thought I knew and started all over again.
I obtained a university level textbook on dynamo design published in 1908 and used the information and formulas from that book to create a design spreadsheet for the 1908 patent. Then I used the spreadsheet to create the specifications for a Figuera style generator with a gross output of 19 volt, 25 amp. All iron and electrical losses are included, even the commutator motor and a step-up transformer at 80%. The transformer was included as a loss in case it's use should be needed later.

The physical configuration of the generator is identical to a four pole dynamo except for the induced coils, which are located beneath the field poles instead of evenly spaced around the circumference of the armature. Also the armature does not rotate and there is no commutator for the armature. The induced coils are series connected with two parallel circuits, each one using nearly half of the armature circumference. It is self exciting through a step-up transformer with the field coil current varied by the separately driven commutator shown in the 1908 patent. Maximum field current regulation is via a separate shunt resistance. All iron parts would be insulated laminate construction.

The design results are rather eye opening.

Magnetic reversals per second: 60
Gross output: 19 volt, 25 amp
Net output: 18.6 volts, 10.13 amps

The most significant revelation in my opinion is this. It appears to be impossible to generate the output indicated if the calculated lines cut per wire, were only those lines passing directly through the unmoving induced wire from it's associated field pole. There simply isn't enough surface area per wire with the magnetic densities possible.

This leads me to conclude that the inducing magnetic field must rotate in order for the magnetic lines from every pole to pass through the induced wire each revolution as they do in a normal dynamo. Then the results I came up with would be produced. I believe Hanon posted about this a while back, that the 1908 commutator could produce a rotating field without using a 2 phase input. And didn't Figuera himself mention the egg of Columbus in relation to this device?

Stupify12, are you smiling from ear to ear?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 26, 2014, 04:45:41 AM
What kind of calculator can be used to calculate an unknown coil? Im not saying you dont know what your coils design is.Im saying you dont know what figuera's coil design is. If you did know you would know more important features of the design which would be the focus like how and where to close the loop so the power in from source is balanced with the power out from the induced coil so it would be able to run without the source after it starts up. Closing the loop is the only important part but the term closing the loop is a poor substitute that will have to suffice. The drawings are abstract to explain the process only.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 26, 2014, 05:31:42 AM
What kind of calculator can be used to calculate an unknown coil? Im not saying you dont know what your coils design is.Im saying you dont know what figuera's coil design is. If you did know you would know more important features of the design which would be the focus like how and where to close the loop so the power in from source is balanced with the power out from the induced coil so it would be able to run without the source after it starts up. Closing the loop is the only important part but the term closing the loop is a poor substitute that will have to suffice. The drawings are abstract to explain the process only.

Hi Doug,

The calculator is just a spreadsheet. The generator produces 19v 25a. The excitation current is about 2.15 amp. The net output is after the generator is 'looped', it is part of the losses calculated. There is nothing special about the coils in my design. The majority of the dynamos built were self-excited so it's not a new concept.

Regards


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 26, 2014, 03:19:39 PM
 It was not my original intention to publish the attached document related to air gap issues. I wanted to run some experiments first to validate this theory. I then thought that someone in this forum might have already come across with these issues. The question that I am trying to answer is, does the insertion of an air gap in an iron core substantially decrease the magnetic flux lines? Or, is this apparent reduction of the net field caused by a negative self-inductancion?
Please, let me know your thoughts. Thanks.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 26, 2014, 07:55:31 PM
Hi,

I agree that current theory is flawed. We are not going to obtain overunity devices using current equations and models. In some moment in history we chose an incorrect , or limited, theory.

An interesting read: https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html (https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 26, 2014, 09:37:59 PM
Hi,

I agree that current theory is flawed. We are not going to obtain overunity devices using current equations and models. In some moment in history we chose an incorrect , or limited, theory.

An interesting read: https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html (https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html)

Maybe the error was in other place ? How the incorrect theory would allow so much progress ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 26, 2014, 10:46:16 PM
...  The question that I am trying to answer is, does the insertion of an air gap in an iron core substantially decrease the magnetic flux lines? Or, is this apparent reduction of the net field caused by a negative self-inductancion?
Please, let me know your thoughts. Thanks.
Bajac

I am not qualified to give a definitive opinion but...

Could it be that inserting a gap does not diminish the flux lines created by the coil but instead there be a lack of additional lines supplied by the missing iron? And the greater the gap distance the more the lines are able to spread apart, thus diminishing the density per cm^2?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 26, 2014, 11:58:33 PM
A gap does not reduce what was made it allows an easy leakage. Magnetic resistance I forget what it is actually called maybe reluctance on the output load section pushes back giving rise to leakage of the input side. Isolation trafo and some welders use it to keep from burning up when the welding rod gets stuck to the metal being welding.
  Which also is unrelated to the idea of using two types of material one soft and the other medium to harder.
 The minuteman rocket has a power supply worth looking at if you can find a copy.
 In just thinking out loud say your finish device outputs 120 volts and 30 amps. You want to use 20 amps to run your working loads or do work leaving you with 10 amps to run your inducer magnets which have to plow through the resistance/reluctance of the 30 amp output. In other words you need enough magnetic flux from 10 amps at 120 volts to equal the amount of flux needed to pass through the output coil equal to 30 amps at 120 volts. Your inducer coils have to also run in both ac or dc mode from a dc battery/ies of unknown capacity. So constructed that their design functions as a diode valve to rectify the 10 amps at 120 volts coming from the output to run the inducers without the source.
 There is no such coil in any public domain or any publication in a form you would recognize. If you decide to run with the circular magnetic field in a annular ring like the later patent then your still have to satisfy the gain of a 10 amp input that makes as much flux as a 30 amp input would. So yet again, what makes a magnet stronger?
  The lies are in the foundation of the technical application of the science and math. That is how we have gone so far but no further. It was built-in from the beginning which would be 300 or so B.C.
 Taking into account the Bagdad battery which did not produce a lot of power I would speculate the discoveries of importance predate written history and they had vast amounts of electricity because they knew how to get it to work with gain before it had a singular name they just did not have much use for it. As a side note the old timers were able to construct electromagnets using 7 voltiac cells of copper and iron in acid in cups that could lift over 2000 lbs.All done by hand including the silk insulation and looked pretty rough and nasty.They estimated they could build magnets if provided with enough materials to lift 100 tons using some crappy home made batteries in jars. Does it not cross your minds there is something not right with this picture? That a century later with better materials and larger power supplies your magnets are laughable compared to our forefathers crude home made under worse conditions then any of use suffer with. Something to think about.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 27, 2014, 11:47:17 AM
 Hi everyone,
 
This is my personal impression about what I think it is the fundamental principle underlying in ALL Figuera´s patents.
 
I don´t know if you have noted that all Figuera´s patents are configured with TWO INDUCTORS -one in front of the other- and one “induced circuit” -as Figuera called- located at the center. The two machines from 1902 (patent 30376 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf) and patent 30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf)) and the machine from 1908 (patent 44267 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf)) all are based on placing two lateral inductors and one central induced circuit.
 
With this premise, I may guess that  Figuera was trying to get an special effect by the use of two inductors. For me this is the common principle which underlies in all his patents.
 
If it was not the case then Figuera could have designed his machines with just one inductor and one induced. As a first approach we may think that the use of two inductors could be related to:
 
     1-  As we have discussed previously, maybe in the 1908 patent Figuera was placing both inductors with like poles facing each other (N-N or S-S) in order to get two confronted fields and, therefore, being able to move the magnetic lines back and forth and then outside of the core and, thus, cutting the induced wires.
 
     2-  Another possibility is that Figuera was looking for some effect in both inductors so that the effect produced by the first inductor could be opposed and cancelled by the effect of the second inductor. With such a thinking maybe the Lenz effect could be mitigated (or reduced) in the system. This is what I think that Figuera looked for in his 1902 patents.
 
The effect of cancelling the Lenz effect by the use of two opposing coils reminds me the system invented (and tested) by Garry Stanley. He created an anti-lenz coil using two coils, one in front of the other so that the back emf created in his motor will be eliminated. His system is designed for motors but the principle could be extrapolated for generators. One coil (I think) was wound CW and the other CCW in order that the back emf suffered in one coil was opposed by the back emf of the second coil. The net back emf from both coils (in series) was then cancelled, and his motor required less force to move. I just put here a picture and link1 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5911-garry-stanley-pulse-motor.html) and link2 (http://web.archive.org/web/20070614222455/www.cable.net.nz/ou/Lenz.html) to Garry Stanley design in case someone could start to investigate this subject. There is much more info about Garry Stanley anti-lenz coil in the internet.

A very interesting video of cancelling effects using two opposing coils: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTykNjDD0CM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTykNjDD0CM)

I hope this helps. Regards
 
PS. I have noted that many users are proposing very different configurations to implement those devices. Many of that designs are far from the original designs proposed by Figuera. IMHO I think that we should adhere to Figuera´s essential designs first. Then, after testing the original designs,  we would have the opportunity to modify them (if required…).
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 27, 2014, 06:05:58 PM
Hello Hanon,

I respect your views and ideas. You and Bajac and many others have been very helpful to me. So thank you all.

A while ago you posted a link to an animated gif illustrating the vector sum of individual B fields at 90 degrees to each other and how they can combine to create a rotating field. I stared at that animated gif for a long time last night and it dawned on me that it's action could be exactly duplicated using the 1908 patent in my 4 pole generator design.

Having just reached the conclusion that a rotating field is needed, my intuition tells me this is not a coincidence.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on August 27, 2014, 07:19:46 PM
Just curious. Was ever issued a valid patent to Figuera/Blasberg? The so called "patents (30375, 30376, 30377, 30378 and 44267)" are only applications and not issued patents. They are signed by Figuera and not an official of the patent office.



 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 28, 2014, 02:50:26 AM
See attached sketches (3) showing the equipment I am building. Please, keep in mind that this equipment is for Research and Development purpose (R&D). The permanent magnets are N52 neodymium, 90Lbs. I am in the process of estimating the number of turns for the #16 AWG magnet wire. Notice that the coils will be sandwiched between two 1/8" Plexiglas boards. It looks of simple construction.


Thanks.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 28, 2014, 02:31:07 PM
Hi Bajac,
 
You last drawing seems to be quite more similar to the Flynn patent that you referred in your pdf document that to your own design of the Figuera patent 30376 in that document. I attach here a screenshot of your design of Figuera´s patent included in your document. I do it so that everyone could see it graphically. I have the opinion that many people do not get into pdf attachments and they miss the information there. I agree with your design which adheres to the original Figuera design. The difference between Figuera patent and Flynn patent is that in Figuera´s device just one wire is between both electromagnets (this also happens in Hogan-Jakovlewich patent) while in Flynn´s patent the whole coil cross between the magnets. Thus, in Figuera´s device the coil is oriented perpendicular to the axis between electromagnets, while in Flynn´s device the coil is collinear with the magnets axis. This could be a big difference if we are dealing with a different type of induction, not included in current equations.
 
I hope this helps. Regards
 
PS. Antijon: you posted a gif animation some days ago. The file size is around 75 KB but when I downloaded it just is 18 KB. I think the system is reducing the file size when downloading and I can not see the animation. Could you posted as a zip file or add a external link? Thanks!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on August 28, 2014, 04:04:51 PM
This design looks to me just like a "simple generator" design (conductor loop in a magnetic field).
The only difference is a magnet in the center. How will it overcome the Lorentz force to generate overunity?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 28, 2014, 04:51:54 PM
Hannon,
Electrically speaking, the only difference between the drawing I posted, which is kind of similar to the Flynn's device, and the 1902 Figuera's device is the number of turns. Figuera shows only a single turn while the coil in my sketches has many turns. you are mistakenly referring to the inductor in Figuera's device as "one wire" when in reality is one turn (two wires connected in series.)
Notice the following:
1.    Each of the two conductors for each turn in the coils shown in my sketches cut the two magnetic fields simultaneously at right angles, so is Figuera's. You will conclude that the angle is 90 degrees, if you draw the vector tangential velocity and the vector magnetic field, which is the same condition as in the Figuera's device. And,
2.    The voltage induced in each conductor of a turn (you call wire) adds up, so is Figuera's.
The big questions here are,
a.    Did Figuera refer to a single conductor for the sake of simplicity? Or,
b.    Is a single turn bieing shown in order to minimize the air gap as a way to maximize the applied magnetic field?
c.    Or, is a single turn configuration the key for this device to have over unity?
In accordance with the analysis in the paper I posted last week, a single turn configuration should not be the key for over unity. That is why the testing of the device in my sketches is so important to answer the above questions.
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 28, 2014, 07:34:09 PM
I just added more details to the sketches. See attached document.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 28, 2014, 09:30:46 PM
Bajac,

Nice design. I know you stated this was for R&D but why did you use a 30 degree coil pitch? A 60 degree coil pitch will double the output for the same number of turns.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 28, 2014, 09:39:59 PM
Cadman,
I placed the conductors of the coils radially so they intercept the magnetic field of the magnets at an angle of 90 degrees. Does this answer your concern? I am not sure if I understood your recommendation.
 
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 28, 2014, 10:39:42 PM
Bajac,

In generator design the pitch of the coil should equal the pitch of the poles. The pitch of the poles is the degrees measured between center lines of every two poles and they must all be equal. The coils have two sides, the degrees between each side of one turn is the coil pitch.

During rotation, the first side of the coil should be approaching one magnet pole, say a N pole, and the second side of the coil would be approaching a S pole. The two coil sides should pass the first edge of the N & S poles at the same time, this will induce current in both sides of the turn and they will add together.

The way you have it the first side of the coil turn will pass over one pole and immediately after that, the second side will pass over the same pole. The first side will be induced but the second side will not add to the induction. As your coil evenly spans your pole the two coil sides will be inducing at opposite signs and will cancel each other. As the second side of your coil passes over the same pole it will be induced, but at the opposite sign.

I hope I explained that clearly :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 28, 2014, 11:36:42 PM
Cadman you are spot on with the coil pitch, that was a good catch. i looked again at the PDF and the coil pitch is all wrong.  if the Magnets don't cross the coil sides at the same time it will produce jack of an output and the magnets should be placed evenly so that the transition between north and south are even one after another.
here is a paint i did to show the correct pitch and mag placement. Coils are turned the wrong way and spread out  for visualization purposes only.
I have redesigned the Flynn  to have 9 drive mags per rotor not two as shown in Patent but i did not post that pic until i am done with my figures. this is for driving a Generator.
Also iron ring is not shown connecting all mags back sides in each section for higher output nor is the drive section in which a two mag drive will work in this situation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 28, 2014, 11:55:38 PM
Cadman,


I can see the problem now. It was a very good comment, thank you!


When I was laying out the coils I thought about this issue but it seems that I did not get right. I will revise the sketches and re-post.


Regards,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 29, 2014, 01:27:13 AM
Cadman,


Please, review the attached revised sketches. Instead of changing the coils, I changed the pitched of the permanent magnets. This way requires a lower RPM to generate a higher frequency voltage. Thanks again.


Regards,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 29, 2014, 04:42:16 PM
Cadman,


I was still not satisfied with the pitch of the coils. If you notice, the previous pitch of the coils does not look like it quite match the pitch of the permanent magnets. Yet, I made another revision. Please, let me know if the attached sketches show a better design than the previous. I apologize for the number of revisions, but designing is an interactive process within a team - the forum members. There are so many details that it is almost impossible for a single person to get it right.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 29, 2014, 05:35:05 PM
Bajac,

Better, but the inducing action from each magnet pole is about the same as before, and this is due to the way the coil is wound,  judging by the drawing. The drawing below is how the coils should be staggered and overlapped, so the distance between 2 sides of one turn are the same for all turns. I exaggerated the space between the turns for clarity. See how this is different and affects the induction during rotation? Your pole and coil pitch is OK at 30 degrees.

If you are interested, there is a winding method I can show you later that provides overlapped turns and makes it easier to wind coils with the same number of turns, total wire length, coil depth, and resistance for each coil. It would also allow the coils to encompass almost the entire radial surface path over your magnet poles.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 29, 2014, 06:09:27 PM
I made a similar design time ago, and it showed a lot of braking (Lenz)
Revised it today, with 10 magnet (5 up and 5 down) for 4 coils, and got lesser draw but still very strong.
It makes me think that this is not any way different of known induction and its rules.
If the power needed to turn the rotors, has to be increased because of Lenz law, no way to get an excess of power out.
I am the first to be disappointed believe it !!!  :'(

cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 30, 2014, 12:12:15 AM
Cadman,
Thank you very much for your help! I really appreciate it.


Alvaro,
Could you post some pictures of the device you tested? Especially some photos showing the configurations of the induced coils and magnets, the testing equipment, etc. That is the reason why we still are reinventing the wheel because we keep the data and results of the experimentation for ourselves. Even when the experiment does fail, it is very important to publish the results because it is one configuration to be avoided and save limited resources.




Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 30, 2014, 06:43:51 PM
Bajac
I´ll post some pics tomorrow. My experiment and setup was not built to have accurate measurements,only to find if there was  a Lenz effect at full load (shorting the coils)
What I saw everywhere when describing types of generators, (or/and induction caused by magnets) was ONE magnet facing a coil (with /without ferro core) moving forward to the coil or going over at 90 degrees.
In the Muller dynamo, there is ONE magnet moving between two coils, but the only time I saw two magnets moving by both faces of a coil was in a video from a Russian guy. (will try to find)

Not wanted to discourage you, and even grateful for your contribution

It has been stated many times all along this thread that the grace of Figuera invention, was based in a way to generate electricity via induction WITHOUT the undesirable Lenz law effect.

Sooo, still a wide field for experiments.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 30, 2014, 08:38:09 PM
Thanks Alvaro.


We are going to build the machine as shown  in the attached document. We first are planning on running the machine with only two diametrically opposed coils. After recording the performance, we will move on with more coils. If over unity is still not achieved with this coil configuration, we will move on redesigning the shape of the coils to have one horizontal layer of coils similar to the one presented in figure 14 of Flynn's patent #5,455,474. A whole set of experiment will be run on this coil configuration. If over unity is yet not achieved, the coils will be reconfigured to have one coil turn overlapped another coil turn (not more than two layers something similar to the figure shown posted by Cadman on his reply #1502.


I am not being discouraged by the failure claimed by other people. Most of the successful inventions go through a similar process. What some people don't realize is that minute changes in the way the experiments are performed could cause extraordinary improvements on the results. That is why is important to share all the conditions and every detail of the experiment being carried out.


I also wanted to ask, why do you call the full load condition the same as the short circuit condition? The short circuit is a fault condition and the currents produced under it can be tenth or hundredth of times higher than the full load operation. The full load condition is the ampere value that keeps the temperature of the coils within rated values. Under a short circuit condition you can in fact experience great breaking forces. But it does not necessarily mean that over unity under full load cannot be achieved.


I also want to clarify that is not possible to avoid the Lenz's effect. We can only mitigate it.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 30, 2014, 08:46:35 PM
I missed the attachment!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on August 30, 2014, 10:37:34 PM
The pic below represents coil A. Coil B is almost the same as coil A. You need to use thick wire. There is no truth to a high voltage transformer giving FE. This includes flybacks and Tesla coils. The thicker the wire the more natural electricity it contains.

When you tie the secondary of coil A to the primary of coil B this will CLOSE the magnetic circuit. That's simple to understand, think of a closed iron ring. It creates a closed magnetic circuit. If you get offended too bad, be honest with yourself all ideas presented on this forum and others globally are the same re-hashed garbage that don't work.

I said, "Magnetic fields of the 3rd order". This is a NEW term to the OU community. Who else speaks of this......... nobody. Many of you think you are smart enough to figure this out by yourself. Sorry you are not. I have a team (and they disagree with this) Figuera had a team/co-worker. Tesla had brilliant assistants. The list goes on.

My second paragraph is important to all FE devices. As Figuera stated (and I will paraphrase) "The primary is an exciter coil and excites the secondary, and THIS is also a exciting coil"
Figuera was working with magnetic fields of the 3rd order, this phrase has been written out of history because its discovery contradicted some of Faraday's experiments. I' about talking about stuff written OVER 100 years ago and you will never find in todays modern writings.

Start simple, as stated in my last post. Dont get complicated and find a partner/team to work with. Keep it simple a battery and coils is all that Figuera had........Thats it.



   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on August 30, 2014, 11:00:16 PM
Let me add to my last post.

The core of coil A & B are of PVC. This allows for simple addition of IRON for experiments. Again I will say the best iron to use is the one found in the trunk of your car. Thats a tire iron, go to a junk yard and get as many as you can find. You will have a lifetime supply of cheap usable iron.

When you get to the point that you want to automate your impulses, and they MUST be impulses. DO NOT waste time building a circuit from scratch. Thats for people with WAYYYYY too much time on there hands. For $40 bucks you can get a Basic Stamp Homework board. Use this as your impulse driver. You only need to add transistors / Mosfets for the power drivers. To add to this you can pre-program numerous pulse applications and run over 100 test's in a matter of hours.

I have given more valuable and good direction then anyone else in the OU community. What you decide to do is your prerogative. Enough info has been given to keep you busy for the rest of the year......... So........ its your choice.

GOOD LUCK!   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on August 30, 2014, 11:02:21 PM
Bajac........... With all do respect. You will go nowhere with that build. But please dont take my word for it discover yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 30, 2014, 11:30:33 PM
Fernandez,


Why are you so emotional?


My only polite request to you was to present some concrete data of your experiments proving your claims. You have said a lot but I do not understand it, does anyone?


You can be sure I will not take your word. And there is nothing wrong with that. If you do not agree with whatever I stated or posted, it is ok with me. I consider it a good thing because if I am wrong, then you can correct me. However, there is a professional and acceptable way for doing it. Instead of going with personal attacks, why don't you present your finding to the forum in a clear form? Not the type of fuzzy statements you are making above.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 31, 2014, 01:03:52 AM
As Figuera stated (and I will paraphrase) "The primary is an exciter coil and excites the secondary, and THIS is also a exciting coil"
Figuera was working with magnetic fields of the 3rd order, this phrase has been written out of history because its discovery contradicted some of Faraday's experiments.

I have read dozens of times all Figuera's patents and he did not state that in his patents. Unless not in those words. If you want to paraphrase Figuera, do it right. Do not use Figuera to promote you 3rd order magnetic fields theory among us. I do not know if you are right or wrong. Your way of writing is as if you had already got overunity. If so share it with us, but do not use the so common here view of 'I give some cryptic clues and discover for yourself the rest of the game' There are many profets around this site. Sorry for been so unpolite. I love trasparent people. I have been cheated some times with such kind of claims.

About Figuera replicas: If Figuera used the "apparently inefficient" configuration of one conductor between the electromagnets was for some reason. He was no stupid for rejecting to use a whole coil between the inductors. In my opinion Figuera tried to get the minimun distance between both electromagnets. I guess he was not getting the results expected from our current view of induction.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 31, 2014, 10:19:32 AM
Bajac & Hanon
agree 100%

So many sages who know everything needed of our attention !!!!
They have already accomplished (and showed) full overunity, and their devices are the solution to all the energy needs of the world !!!. . . why don´t we praise their superb achievements ?. . . why are we not on our knees prying for them to enlighten us ???. ;D ;D ;D ;D

I also wanted to ask, why do you call the full load condition the same as the short circuit condition? The short circuit is a fault condition and the currents produced under it can be tenth or hundredth of times higher than the full load operation. The full load condition is the ampere value that keeps the temperature of the coils within rated values. Under a short circuit condition you can in fact experience great breaking forces. But it does not necessarily mean that over unity under full load cannot be achieved.


I also want to clarify that is not possible to avoid the Lenz's effect. We can only mitigate

My mistake, you are right.

In an intuitive way, I feel that the essence and behavior of permanent magnets and electromagnets is way different.
Do not recall the use of PM´s in any of the Figuera patents (just an aside consideration)

Attached pics of my setup (I wrote: similar) just to check if Lenz is manifesting. And it does.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 31, 2014, 02:33:56 PM
Thank you very much for sharing your experiments, Alvaro.


I would like to ask you if you can run some testing where you can measure the input and output power at different loads. For example, it would be interesting if you can perform testing for no load voltage, and slowly increase the current let's say to 0.25A, 0.5A, 0.75A, and 1A while keeping track of the input and output. I would like to see if the efficiency of the device changes or stays constant under different loads. What is the gauge of the wire being used?


Do you have a way of measuring the RPM?


Your device does not exactly replicate what I want to do but it is a good experiment.


Thanks again for the information. This is the way we should be working in this forum.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 31, 2014, 03:03:14 PM
 I was thinking about a law of physics this morning."Formally stated, Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." It's a basic law but it struck me that it may be over generalized. If filling my coffee cup with coffee takes a certain amount energy so would emptying it in the exact same way. If I turned the coffee to steam to do work by way of steam pressure to empty the cup are the actions of filling and emptying the cup still equal. Excluding the all other things and just working from the point of view of filling and emptying the cup?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on August 31, 2014, 03:23:13 PM
I was thinking about the same thing. But the reaction force is a also function of the acceleration, impetus, or momentous. A car crash at 10 mph produces different effects than a crash at 100 mph. In other words, the breaking of the Lenz's law is smaller for smaller current magnitudes. Could there be an equilibrium point?


Bajac




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 31, 2014, 06:14:51 PM
bajac:
I cannot do the tests exactly as you propose for lack of good testing equipment. (low budget)
I´ve got a power supply from a PC, modified in one of the 12V positive out wires with a variable voltage regulator.
Got only one analog ammeter up to 3 Amps, do not trust the cheap digital ones. (no oscope)

The test I did with this setup, was not intended for checking efficiency, but I noticed that in that fault condition (coil shorted),
the RPM of rotors decreased visibly, while the amps at prime mover input stayed same, 0.3A at 3V.
Also be aware that these rotors are metallic, so the flywheel effects have to be accounted in the equation.

Nevertheless, I´ll try to do some tests as accurate as I can in the direction you posted. Need some time next week.

Of course my setup is not a replica of yours, it was made long before when working with Adams motors. (see in the pic the tiny cubic neos around the upper rotor)
cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 01, 2014, 12:12:55 AM

When you tie the secondary of coil A to the primary of coil B this will CLOSE the magnetic circuit. That's simple to understand, think of a closed iron ring. It creates a closed magnetic circuit.

 
Fernandez,

Clearly you are writting about the patent from Daniel Mcfarland Cook (see image attached). I think that that design worked fine but till now none have been able to replicate it, but i do not see new information disclosed by you apart from suggesting us to test it. Maybe you are right, but I am not sure if Figuera 30378 is based on this design. I remember that user NRamaswani used a similar design.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 01, 2014, 01:34:59 AM
Nobody likes a "know it all" attitude!
However, I have learned to learn from my wost enemy. My worst enemy is certainly not Fernandez.
Anyway, when he stated that Tire Irons were made of Iron, I was extremely skeptical. So I got my
tire iron from my 2004 Ford pickup truck and gave it the "old" spark test. Sure enough, the sparks
are those from white or grey iron.

Good luck all,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 01, 2014, 01:37:28 AM
 Second try!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on September 01, 2014, 03:08:00 AM
McFarlande , Interrupt the feed of a DC motor with the secondary of a transformer , take the primary of that transformer and feed it to the primary of a second transformer, now run the secondary of that transformer to a bridge, collect the output for free.
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 01, 2014, 04:45:55 PM
Alvaro,
Because your device goes quickly into steady state, you only need a voltmeter and an amp-meter. These meters can take turns for measuring the input and output at different times.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 01, 2014, 05:11:36 PM
yes yes
I can do that,
I can feed the dc motor (prime mover) at different power levels (Volts & amps) not only amps.
Will do it with an inductive load (dc motor at output side) in which I can check the RPM, or with a resistor across the output leads.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 01, 2014, 05:37:46 PM
yes yes
I can do that,
I can feed the dc motor (prime mover) at different power levels (Volts & amps) not only amps.
Will do it with an inductive load (dc motor at output side) in which I can check the RPM, or with a resistor across the output leads.


Alavaro,


Use resistor loads only. Inductance brings issues of reactive vs active power. Thanks.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 03, 2014, 01:07:53 AM
I have been searching Youtube using the following keywords "coils permanent magnets lenz". I have found a lot applications that seems to support the theory in the paper that I posted couple weeks ago. One of them called my attention and I was wondering if it was ever built. The apparatus I am referring to can be found at this link:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue1qPgUCm5k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue1qPgUCm5k)


It is very close to what I described but still does not follows the recommendations derived from the Figuera's generator. Dan Frederiksen, the person who uploaded the video seems to have experience with this type of generators. In the description, he stated the following:

"The advantage of no iron would be low weight and high efficiency, particularly at low torque cruise which will be key for future vehicles."

Is this high efficiency due to a much lower drag? The problem with wind generator is that you usually do think of the output power versus input power. It is usually wind speed versus electrical power.

Did you know that the theoretical maximum efficiency for a wind turbine is only 35%? It only includes the blade mechanism. That is, about 30% of the wind energy may be recovered, only.


These two websites seems to be very aggressive on research and experimentation with free energy devices:

www.alt-nrg.org

http://www.overunitybuilder.com/lenzlessquale.html

They seem to be constructing and testing a lot of prototypes.

And this one is a good compilation of free energy news:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K2wm8tn088
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 03, 2014, 01:11:21 PM
What is the reason for making everything over complicated?Is the world population becoming ADHD?
  Side note wind is free ,part of the environment which does not get exhausted because someone stuck a fan in it's way.Hydro electric is far from perfectly 100 percent eff. The planets surface is mostly water which is stuck here so when do you expect to run out of it that you need to be 100 percent efficient using it to generate current? If you stop it all up except for what is released through a turbine you would cause a lot of droughts and kill a lot of life off.Greed from another point of view.

  You most likely shouldnt stop up large amounts of wind either at least not not at a volume that changes the local wind patterns. Efficient usage falls on deft ears unless you want to start at the beginning which is the magnetic field.A 400 hp sports car with square wheels will only be entertaining to watch not so much to drive yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 03, 2014, 02:10:54 PM
My point is that people are already using the benefits of the coreless coils but yet they have not realized its true potential. The reason may be because of the way they use the permanent magnets. The permanent magnets are being used the same way as illustrated in figure 10b shown in the paper. It is very inefficient because the net induced voltage is low due to the coil crossing the magnetic fields in two directions simultaneously.
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on September 03, 2014, 02:50:13 PM
@bajac
Take a look at this motor.
It's a 12 volt automobile radiator fan motor made by AC/Delco. No cogging or "coasting" drag when not powered, a fair amount of torque when powered.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: synchro1 on September 03, 2014, 03:43:42 PM
Fernandez,

Clearly you are writting about the patent from Daniel Mcfarland Cook (see image attached). I think that that design worked fine but till now none have been able to replicate it, but i do not see new information disclosed by you apart from suggesting us to test it. Maybe you are right, but I am not sure if Figuera 30378 is based on this design. I remember that user NRamaswani used a similar design.


This design includes a battery not shown in the design. Once again, this circuit needs a "Violent Field Collapse" to trigger the oscillation!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 03, 2014, 04:49:02 PM

This design includes a battery not shown in the design. Once again, this circuit needs a "Violent Field Collapse" to trigger the oscillation!

TinselKoala,
I had never seen a motor like that one. It looks very interesting.
Could you do a close up into the rotor? I cannot figure out the stator.
It looks to me that the rotor turns are short circuited and the stator is very closed to the rotor. Then, it should definitely have good torque. Because short circuit is a fault condition, I am guessing that the rotor turns shold be connected in series with some kind of resistor embedded in the rotor as a way to bring the current within acceptable margings. The rotor current is still expected to be high. Is that right?
 
Thanks,
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 04, 2014, 01:41:27 PM
Yesterday, I wanted to post a link but the website was down. Does anyone know what happen?
Anyway, I came a cross an ingenious coil design known as the "serpentine" coil. It is found in this webpage:
http://eaglesfeartoperch.blogspot.com/2013/05/homemade-axial-flux-generator-part-2.html (http://eaglesfeartoperch.blogspot.com/2013/05/homemade-axial-flux-generator-part-2.html)
You do not have to worry about soldering coils together or if a coil has more or less turns because it is a single large coil.
I was thinking about making one big round coil and then use a custom tool to push the edges inward to get the serpentine shape.
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 04, 2014, 10:20:16 PM
For my 1908 version, I think the last major piece of the puzzle is in place now.

:D

PS. Notice this is not the Tesla rotating field!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on September 05, 2014, 12:22:32 AM

TinselKoala,
I had never seen a motor like that one. It looks very interesting.
Could you do a close up into the rotor? I cannot figure out the stator.

I'm sorry, I don't have that motor here with me. These images are all I have available at the moment.
The "stator" is just the big slab of ceramic magnet material, and the green sheet shows how it is magnetized in sectors with the poles facing outward. I think the poles alternate N and S around the stator; the viewing film just shows the direction not the polarity of the field lines.
Quote
It looks to me that the rotor turns are short circuited and the stator is very closed to the rotor. Then, it should definitely have good torque. Because short circuit is a fault condition, I am guessing that the rotor turns shold be connected in series with some kind of resistor embedded in the rotor as a way to bring the current within acceptable margings. The rotor current is still expected to be high. Is that right?
 
No, as far as I can tell there is no resistor in the rotor, the "windings" are just all connected together pairwise at the inner and outer edges, and the brushes run along the flat central portion of the "winding" layer. Yes, the thing is very flat, the rotor disk is very close to the stator magnet when the case is assembled. No, the rotor current is normal for a brushed DC motor of similar torque with an iron armature and heavy cogging. The "stall" current is high of course, just as with any brushed DC motor.
I can't quite figure out how it works exactly either, nor do I know what to call the design. All I know is that it is a car radiator fan motor sold by AC/Delco and I bought four or five of them at the surplus counter at Princess Auto in Canada, five dollars each.
Ah... there is a little ceramic capacitor mounted outside the case, between the brush terminals. This is normal, to reduce sparking and extend brush life, in many DC motors.
Quote
Thanks,
Bajac
You're welcome, I wish I had the motors here to play with. I used them on a big Bonetti machine and the lack of resistance, non-powered, is important to show the "motoring" effect of the charged-up Bonetti machine, something that is underappreciated and not well reported.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 05, 2014, 03:09:18 AM
Thank you for the explanation, TinselKoala.


As I said before, I did not know this motor. I will Google it to see if I can find more information. It really looks different from any other motor I have seen. I am kind of puzzle with the application. Normally, fans do not have motors with brushes because they are required to be simple, reliable, and maintenance free. Using a brush motor for a fan application is something odd.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 05, 2014, 08:29:40 PM
Ever wonder what that other little wheel was for at the left of the Figuera commutator in the patent drawings?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Hexabyte on September 06, 2014, 12:39:22 AM
deciphered for ease of reasing.......

Dated: June 9th 1907
Uses Electricity Without A Medium:
Scientist Declares He Can Apply Atmospheric Current Without Motive Force
Was – Simple – Discovery
Senor Clemente Figueras, Engineer, of Canary Isles, Inventor of Method
(Special Cable To The Herald)


The Herald’s European edition publishes the following from its correspondent: -- London, Monday. – A most remarkable claim, the genuineness of which it is as yet impossible to test, says a cable dispatch published by the daily mail from its Las Palmas correspondent, has been made by Senor Clemente Figureras, Engineer of Woods and Forests in the Canary Islands. For many years professor of physics at St. Augustine’s College Las Palmas.

It seems that for many years he has been working silently at a method of directly utilizing atmospheric electricity – that is to say, without chemicals or dynamos – and making a practical application of it without the need of employing motive force.

A true revelation might rob him of his reward and even now, while he claims to have succeeded, he is silent concerning the exact principles of his discovery.
He asserts, however, he has invented a generator by which he can collect electric fluid so as to be able to store it and apply it for infinite purposes – for instance, in connection with shops, railways and manufacturers.
He says he expects its effect will be a tremendous economic  and industrial revolution. He will not give the key to the invention; but declares that the only extraordinary point about it is that it has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact.

He intends shortly going to Madrid and Berlin to patent his inventions.
In addition to the discovery, the Daily Mail says that, according to letters received in London from his friends in Teneriffe, Senor Figueras has constructed a rough apparatus by which, in spite of its small size and defects, he obtains a current of 350 volts, which he utilizes in his own house for lighting purposes and driving a motor of twenty horse power.
His inventions comprise a generator, a motor and a sort of governor or regulator. The whole apparatus being so simple that a child could work it.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on September 06, 2014, 07:16:48 AM
Attached is one of our preliminary circuits we devised. Its actually based on the study of Joseph Henry. We figured that Figuera lived in the era of Faraday and Henry. So logic would dictate that the answer would be found in one of there works.

This is a simple circuit that's EZ to build. Do what you want we are just presenting a starting point. Because we ALL know that STARTING is the hardest part. To understand the circuit (some of you will already know whats going on here) research the works of Joseph Henry. Add to the circuit as you wish. The goal is to reduce the input  current to achieve the greatest magnetic force possible (just as Henry did, its all documented over 100 years ago).

Criticize all you want, clearly theirs something we all all overlooked because its been over 100 years since Figuera. For starting, try winding 1:1 ratio's on the transformers (air core). The output transformer requires Iron. I have already disclosed a cheap usable source, do not waste your money on high end iron its simply retarded.


We believe the Georgian fellow uses the same technique as Figuera. We also believe that Henry stumbled  upon an interesting magnetic effect. However Faraday published his works first and Henrys work got buried by history thus falling by the waste side.

A starting circuit:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 06, 2014, 04:37:26 PM
Hmm..."atmospheric electricity", "aether"......it was used to fool people.  Only a few inventors said clearly , and it was Hendershot,Perrigo and Steven Mark. Read them and you will find the real truth which is crushing. For over 100 years we are paying for nothing....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 06, 2014, 04:44:35 PM
Fernandez
  Your pdf is a simplified version of patent 3815030 Square wave driven power amplifier Dated June 1874 owned by Westinghouse Electric company.
  Without the details of how to feed the output back into the inducers with the advantage of gain or leverage to increase the output while using less current and not burning up the inducers when loads are varied there is little chance of getting any design to self run. Even the patent mentioned does not go into or even mention the ability to do so in detail or concept. Only figurea gives mention to it being equal and suppressing the source which could then be removed. If that was known then it alone could dictate how to hack any device to operate off it self.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 06, 2014, 07:18:20 PM
Attached is one of our preliminary circuits we devised. Its actually based on the study of Joseph Henry. We figured that Figuera lived in the era of Faraday and Henry. So logic would dictate that the answer would be found in one of there works.

This is a simple circuit that's EZ to build. Do what you want we are just presenting a starting point. Because we ALL know that STARTING is the hardest part. To understand the circuit (some of you will already know whats going on here) research the works of Joseph Henry. Add to the circuit as you wish. The goal is to reduce the input  current to achieve the greatest magnetic force possible (just as Henry did, its all documented over 100 years ago).

Criticize all you want, clearly theirs something we all all overlooked because its been over 100 years since Figuera. For starting, try winding 1:1 ratio's on the transformers (air core). The output transformer requires Iron. I have already disclosed a cheap usable source, do not waste your money on high end iron its simply retarded.


We believe the Georgian fellow uses the same technique as Figuera. We also believe that Henry stumbled  upon an interesting magnetic effect. However Faraday published his works first and Henrys work got buried by history thus falling by the waste side.

A starting circuit:

Fernandez,

Thanks for taking the time to put into here your insights. I see that you have also opened a thread to suggest reading Joseph Henry writtings and his discovery of two types of dynamic induction, one of them different to Faraday´s discoveries. It has been always my belief that current electromagnetic theory is incomplete. Maybe the other type of induction is related to the longitudinal waves found by Tesla, waves that are not included into the current Maxwell equations. Also Weber, using Ampere experimental results, published a EM theory which was not in agreement with Maxwell theory.  http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/sci_techs/3415weber.html (http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/sci_techs/3415weber.html)

I see your good willing to share your findings. I really appreaciate it. Thanks!!

Also It is my belief that the concept used by Figuera in 1902 patent are different from those used in 1908 patent. As he sold his 1902 patent to a Banker Union perhaps he was forced to research for new concepts in order to get a new machine into the market without breaking the contract with the bankers.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 06, 2014, 10:53:59 PM
See attached PDF file showing the serpentine coil design. It is easier to construct than the individual coils. You just have to hammer a few nails on a board to have the wire former.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 07, 2014, 06:02:38 AM
Fernandez
  Your pdf is a simplified version of patent 3815030 Square wave driven power amplifier Dated June 1874 owned by Westinghouse Electric company.
  Without the details of how to feed the output back into the inducers with the advantage of gain or leverage to increase the output while using less current and not burning up the inducers when loads are varied there is little chance of getting any design to self run. Even the patent mentioned does not go into or even mention the ability to do so in detail or concept. Only figurea gives mention to it being equal and suppressing the source which could then be removed. If that was known then it alone could dictate how to hack any device to operate off it self.

Doug this is all very true. I accidentally stumbled on what is this Al Origin given by Figuera. If you recollect the Hubbard demonstration in 1919 He ran a boat for several hours using a self powered generator. Figuera has indicated that after the initial current is given then the current is taken from the source and initial current is removed. What is this source?. That is the key to replicate his experiement.

The source is Water or Earth points which are fully wet and kept wet. If a part of the secondary (really tertiary as there is a shunted coil between the primary and secondary to ensure that the phase of current is similar between the input and output) is given to two earth connections which are fully wet and the primary is also connected to it properly then the need is to give an initial current only. 

If there is a difference of potential artifically created or difference of voltages given between two earth points placed North and South then the points are in a position to take telluric currents. The output in that case will be higher than the input. If the earth points are very wet the primary can be also set to receive the current from the earth points.

The primary feedback input can be controlled by fuse and Metal Oxide Varistor and another fuse all in series for the feedback Unit. This can avoid the burn out problems of the device but the fuses can go out and need to be replaced.

Rest of the Figuera device is self explanatory. You can use both N-N-N and N-S-N type of connections. When using N-N -N connections the central N is simply an iron core. A torroid or square coil is wound on it in the shape of CW-CCW-CW-CCW to get the output. But the important condition is that this  toroid must be facing the magnetic field from the Primary magnets that surround it. Or in other words the primary magnet diameter must be much larger than the secondary magnets and the field from the primary should envelope the secondary.

It is very dangerous to test this at high voltage as the amperage can be very high.  You can try to build the Bob Beck Device for Blood Electrification device which produces 27 volts pulsed dc and keep the electrodes on the hand as Bob Beck advises. You would feel some itching of the skin depending on the type of your skin. But if you place the electrodes in two different water containers well insulated from the earth, the electrodes are separated and human body is the common electrode between the two water containers and you will soon start feeling the amperage increasing and raising from the water and raising through your hand and you will throw away the electrodes voluntarily. The source of free electrons is Water or watered earth connection or points between watered Earth or an Earth point and atmospheric Antenna or a water body. Too many patents there for this. One classic example is the German Patent of where the inventor produced 100 Kilowatts by floating balloons and connecting the wires to earth points. It was not followed due to lightening problems. But the Tesla patent is also there which shows many capacitors beting connected in series and the wires being connected to earth points. This is why every one claimed any amount of electricity can be produced any where in the world but did not disclose the secret.

You can try the experiment. I have fully reconstructed the Hubbard coil ( The construction details are wrongly given and there is a torroid coil in between the outer 8 small coils and inner large coils and the torroid is wound in top to bottom in CW-CCW-CW-CCW) and if we try to connect to the toroid to the primary as feedback there is a high possibility of the wire burning out as you say or the fuze burning out if we use the safety system I indicated above. Amperage build up is enormous and is dependent on Voltage present and wire thickness. If you use the above method even at lower voltage higher amperages would result. This is why Hubbard had 124 volt and 334 Amps coming out of his device.

The alternate safe method is to keep giving power from a battery and Inverter or UPS system and then to power the batteries back from the earth points by making the current output DC through suitable means.

It is as simple as that. I did the experiment with the Beck device as indicated above and seen for myself the result and then asked three other people to test it and all confirmed by promptly thowring out the electrodes as amperge increased. Beck output is 100 microampers ( Microamps is 1 millionth of an ampere). Any one can easily see that amps increase in this method dramatically. If you were to do this test, Do not try to be a Hero and throw out the electrodes for at 2 amps current an heart attack will happen.  I'm not suggesting nor asking you to do this experiment on Beck Device or any other device and if you do it you are doing it on your own fuly aware of the risks involved.

Never ever try to do it at high voltage and any one trying it at high voltage will be instanlly zapped to coal. Amperes here come from Telluric currents and can increase from 100 Amps to 1000 Amps easily. Earlier Atmospheric electricity experiments were based on getting a voltage difference using the difference in height and getting amps from telluric currents. This is why others were claiming we are living in a sea of Energy.

I'm not interested in any patent which will not be granted any way. An ordinary High voltage transformer subject to Lenz law will also work in the same way. ( Provided the primary and secondary wires are of the same gauge or the secondary wire is sufficiently thick to handle large amperages that would come) Figuera was kind of misleading by directing the attention to avoiding Lenz law effects which is true in N-S-N combinations as found out by us but he avoided the Al Origin secret from being disclosed to save his rights.

So this all remains a puzzle to this date. I hope I have cleared the mist.  But I'm not an Electrical Engineer and so I'm not carrying this forward. In any case none of the devices which use this are patentable. They do not violate the law of conservation of energy as the system is not a closed system. However even if we build a system and test it no Government would allow it and they would make it illegal by legislation. No point in trying to get it to Electic Cars when both US and Russia the world major powers are dependent on Oil and the powerful people control these companies.

So we will continue to be dependent on the Grid only. Nothing more and Nothing Less.

I'm not able to figure out how the cold electricity thing works. I have not experimented on that and it probably is based on radioactivity or uses the cosmic rays. My knowledge is zero there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 08, 2014, 12:58:43 AM
Hi all,

I have found another overunity device which also uses like poles facing each other. It is the Floyd´s Sweet VTA. It is very interesting that Floys Sweet also used TWO SIDE INDUCTOR and some intermediate collecting coils. The center coils were placed perpendicularily, but, apart from this, there are many similarities with the Figuera generator. Just see this video, where a relation between the VTA and the Kromrey converter is established because both systems runs with like poles facing each other:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiQClPZZYDc#t=01m44s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiQClPZZYDc#t=01m44s)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 08, 2014, 01:34:16 PM
I think there is only one method regardless of the device and a lot of ways to conceal the concept in order to claim it is different. No one inventor is willing to spill the beans because it will become obvious they all work from the same basic method.
  An endless list of devices and an endless amount of effort to make different looking devices with different smoke and mirrors to explain the way it works without explaining anything of importance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 08, 2014, 05:19:41 PM
I think there is only one method regardless of the device and a lot of ways to conceal the concept in order to claim it is different. No one inventor is willing to spill the beans because it will become obvious they all work from the same basic method.
  An endless list of devices and an endless amount of effort to make different looking devices with different smoke and mirrors to explain the way it works without explaining anything of importance.

Doug, I couldn't agree with you more. It's all a variation of a theme.

The generators and alternators like Figuera's and all the others work on the same principal; magnetic induction. At the most basic level it takes X amount of wires induced by Y amount of varying magnetic force per second to produce Z output. Every mechanical generator ever made uses an implementation of this fact and if the amount of wires and magnetic force is sufficient you get a working generator, provided you use the right materials in the right shape and proportions, and abide by the laws of induction.

On a different subject, I think this thread has gone way off track. Who is actually trying to recreate the Figuera device, besides myself?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 08, 2014, 06:48:02 PM
I think about it all the time and do nothing other then work on it in my free time. I did have a set back in sourcing magnet wire locally so I drove 900 miles each way to re-establish my source from years past so I could buy it in bulk at a much reduced price.
  I don't report until there is nothing left to learn or know. I do know one thing there is no violation of physics laws in this. If your own interpretation is correct then the math will have no exceptions and the way in which you return a portion of the output back to the origin will make sense and be easy to understand.Then you will begin to see how other devices/patents worked and how they applied smoke and mirrors to hide it. You will also be able to hack and alter known forms of generators to the same effect.Some will think it is not smoke and mirrors because intent is harder to prove then ignorance.In the end it is merely opinion.
 Don't be so surprised over silence, people take breaks to clear their heads of what did not work before formulating another method to try. I personally do not think the core or its shape are that important as long as all the processes are able to work with in a given design. I went through the hopegirl gen papers and picked out really quick where the designer failed to mention some important details that would keep it from working as hoped. I have a little bit of suspicion that the person who brought it to the public is not the one who originally figured out the concept. He may have seen one some where and made a number of wrong assumptions in reconstructing it based off what he saw and what he can remember of what he was told and is looking for some well to doer to fix it for him.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 08, 2014, 07:38:07 PM
We seem to be on the same track, basically, even so far as a source for wire which is still a problem for me. I would use the term obsessed by this generator to describe myself.

As for returning a portion of the output for reuse, the solution to this seems obvious. As the excitation current required for any generator is a small fraction of the output, all that should be required for the Figuera gen is an isolation transformer on the output and rectification back to DC, to be used by the exciter motor and transformed through the commutator back to 2 phase AC then re-fed to the inductor coils. I cannot see any reason why this method will not work. There is just no way the watts consumed are greater than the output even after adding in all the other normal losses.

Where you and I differ is that I believe the core and shape are just as important here as they are in a normal generator or alternator. :) But perhaps that is due to different designs.

Are you getting positive results in your efforts? Your words seem to indicate so.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 08, 2014, 10:46:05 PM
This link was posted by Hanon on another thread but i think it is very relevant to figueras device and was very informative.(THANKS HANON)
 A simple lecture table demonstration of the pure B x V field is illustrated in Figure 8. Two short similar bars magnets are spaced apart as shown. Midway between them a long, straight insulated wire (surrounded by a grounded conducting shield), perpendicular to the paper is fixed with its terminals connected to a sensitive galvanometer placed outside the immediate vicinity of the magnets, say overhead. The resultant magnetic flux density B from the two magnets, at the wire, is zero by the principle of superposition. If the magnet on the left be given a slow uniform velocity V and the one on the right a velocity V' equal and opposite to V, then one will note a deflection of the galvanometer needle due to the pure induced B x V field acting in the wire. Note that in this simple experiment we have two sources of B x V. Both the B and the V of each source are identical in magnitude but opposite in direction; therefore, since B x V = (-B) x (-V), the products are both positive and additive. The movement of one magnet alone will be found to yield a galvanometer deflection of half that obtained when both magnets are moved simultaneously. Note also that the wire is always in a region where B = 0, but where B x V is present and active.

One of the most fascinating aspects of our discoveries is that by the use of the phenomenon of superposition of fields, electromagnetic induction can seemingly be separated from magnetic flux energy. In other words, our all-electric motional electric field generator operates without the presence of detectable magnetic flux energy as such. It is a non-inductive device. The magnetic flux intensity has been reduced to zero by the principle of superposition, and the virtual undestroyed field associated with uncancelled flux is still active and present; hence, the name "virtual" is used to describe it. It is this virtual field which produces the pure motional electric field in the space surrounding the generator. This newly discovered pure B x V field is the most unique phenomenon known to electromagnetism because it is devoid of the electrostatic and magnetic field characteristics we have hitherto known. It is a B x V field with the resultant B = 0. Its immunity to shielding gives it a stature and a character of its own, beautifully unique and isolated from all hitherto known special fields! Our generator produces nothing but this pure previously unknown field!
Doesn't this sound like figueras device... no secondary core at all just coil.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 08, 2014, 10:48:58 PM
Cadman
"There is just no way the watts consumed are greater than the output even after adding in all the other normal losses."

 Not if you did it right.

 I will let you know when I'm done as stated before. Its the chicken or the egg. You cant answer questions if your working and you cant work if your answering questions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 08, 2014, 11:56:11 PM
all true, except it's not unknown field ;) when you remove all impossible , what remain must be the truth
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 09, 2014, 01:03:04 AM
Marathonman,

Yes. Floyd Sweet, William J. Hopper, Gennady Markov... all them talk about field superposition : two oposite magnetic fields which cancel each other. They also talk about a motional E-field where a relative movement (V, velocity) is required. Therefore the magnetic field must be moved.   

N ---->  <---- N


E = (B)·(V) + (-B)·(-V)  =  2·B·V

Floyd Sweet (in "Nothing is Something"): "If the direction of the two signals are such that opposite H-field cancel and E-field add, an apparently steady E-field will be created"

Simultaneous Bidirectional Flux Induction for New Transformer Technology
Novosibirsk scientist, Professor of Harbin Polytechnic Institute, Head of Research and Technical Center 'Virus' Gennady Markov came out with a suggestion that the electromagnetic induction law discovered by Faraday in 1831 is not actually a law. According to Faraday, a magnetic flux in a ferromagnetic core of the transformer can be induced only in one direction. By Markov's theory the magnetic flux in a conductor can be induced simultaneously in both opposite directions. After several years of experimenting and practical studies Markov managed to prove the validity of his theory, develop an operable transformer on its base and obtain several international patents for his invention. In contrast to regular transformer, Markov's transformer has a vertically extended form and instead of the primary and secondary windings it has two primary windings with oncoming magnetic fluxes. By the new induction law, 'new' transformers can induce necessary voltage even from 'the worst iron' and can have considerably reduced sizes.

( Source: http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm) )

(Sorry for so many theories in this post. It is just to support our point !!)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 09, 2014, 04:04:50 AM
I'm having a hard time reconstructing the real truth of Magnetism and electricity after our government, oil barons and the world bank have completely stripped Faraday's and others of the free energy equations. those bastards have had 100 years of stripping documents and rewriting everything they can to stop everyone from powering their homes with free energy. i wish with the bottom of my heart that i could take out a bunch of them so just a few can have free energy.
I will be able to post a few more times but my life was turned up side down when my truck blew up this weekend and i lost a high paying job i just started. i will be homeless in the next few weeks but i just wanted to say thank you all for your contributions to mankind and myself. i will always be greatfull for this time i spent on this forum.......I THANK YOU ALL ! and i hope i will be able to return to read all that was posted.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 09, 2014, 01:35:44 PM
Marahonman,
I am very sorry to hear that. I really wish your situation improve soon.
But, I wanted to ask you what makes you think that there is a conspiracy against you? When you say your truck blew up, are you implying that an explosive device was installed in your truck? Or, someone set your truck on fire?
Do you have any idea what could be the reason for such a conspiracy? For example, have you made any public presentation of a working prototype of a free energy device?
Is it possible to know what country is the authority that you are referring to?
I am just trying to find more evidence about a possible conspiracy. It is not clear from your statement that whatever happened to you is due to a government conspiracy.
Thanks for being a member of this forum and I wish you could worked out of the problems you are going through at this moment.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on September 09, 2014, 02:09:36 PM
Good luck to you. Homeless with no vehicle is bad news.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 09, 2014, 11:52:22 PM
Bajac

 The term "blown up" is more often a slang term meaning his truck is broken beyond repair.Blown engine or transmission or both.One can even blow up a toilet which is too say you better let the room air out for a while before you go in there. You can blow up a phone meaning people have called it non stop for too long. Of course the last one being someone used explosives and really did blow it up. It's actually best you don't spend too much time thinking about the terminology. It does not work well even here where the abuse began in the south. Same problem with yonder or piece being used as a measure of distance. A real good one is "a coons age" short for a raccoons age what ever the F### that is.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 10, 2014, 03:37:59 AM
Lol! My bad.


Like an engineer, I just took it literally.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 12, 2014, 01:42:04 AM
yes yes
I can do that,
I can feed the dc motor (prime mover) at different power levels (Volts & amps) not only amps.
Will do it with an inductive load (dc motor at output side) in which I can check the RPM, or with a resistor across the output leads.
@Alvaro,
How is the testing going? Did you measure the no load voltage?
I am kind of skeptical about the device due to the configuration and pitch of the permanent magnets and coils. Because the magnetic fields are configured in the same direction, if the magnetic fields cut both sides of a coil simultaneously, the induced voltages will subtract decreasing the net induced voltage.


@Marathonman,
I apologize for the misunderstanding. English is my second language and I learned it while attending college. The relation with my peers was purely technical and professional. I have had some funny situations because I was not exposed to the bad words that a person might learn while attending pre-school and high school. I also have a reduced English vocabulary for cursing. I guess  the reason could be that I have been very busy reading technical books, only. I need to read some novels.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 12, 2014, 08:56:44 PM
No one that has more than one language does not  have to apologize for anything. I can request a double room in German and maybe get breakfast. In France I could get an eclair and coffee with cream. I lived in Paris when I from age eleven to thirteen.
I admire every one of the people communicating in all forums that can communicate in English.

Thank you all,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 13, 2014, 12:06:54 AM
Hello bajac
I was very busy last two weeks, could not do the measurements.
I`ll try to do it next week.

Quote
"if the magnetic fields cut both sides of a coil simultaneously, the induced voltages will subtract decreasing the net induced voltage."
Quote

not sure of that, because the magnets are in atraction between the two rotors, so the coil is traversed by a manetic "buble" ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 13, 2014, 03:59:25 PM
Had an idea for materials this past week. Found a source of large starter motors for diesel engines. They starters are 5kw 4 pole big 25 or 30 lbs units being scrapped so I arranged to remove the stator blocks and windings which are held on with bolts.It's already good quality magnet metal all of the leads are big fat strap copper.Stacking them like pancakes and running bolts through the existing threaded holes should save a lot of work.Also snagged three big monster size alternators 200 amp 28 volt beasts with external regulators that convert the out put to 12 24 48 volt.
 Im hopeful the starter motor core blocks work out well since they are a replaceable part that comes already wound. It would be really nice if off the shelf parts could be modified a little bit or configured differently to reach the same goal. I dont expect them to handle any more the 1200 watts for any lengthy amount of time since they are made for momentary use to start a engine.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 14, 2014, 02:52:27 PM
Broke a few tools trying to separate these core blocks from the housing. They are glued with locktite of some form.With flush torx screws that will not allow a penetrating fluid to break down the glue so off to the oven to warm them up and hopefully that will allow the glue to soften enough to get them apart. Placed a neo magnet on the core blocks and it is harder to get the magnet off then on some of the other types of cores I had laying around. In re examining some generators/alternators I noticed the rotors are solid and stators are layered. the reasoning for the layered stators is to reduce eddy currents and wasted heating on the output side so why is it not used on the input side or the inducer magnet of a gen? Motors use layered rotors and layered stators while generators use solid rotors and layered stators. At least that is the case with smaller machines, not sure about magawatt generators since I don't have one of those. Ever since 9/11 you cant even get close to one of the power plants.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 14, 2014, 03:13:24 PM
Doug,


The generator rotor does not have to be laminated because its magnetic field is constant and does not move within the rotor iron part. The polarity and magnitude of the magnetic field within the rotor does not change. However, it does move (changing alternating magnetic field) in the stator iron core at the speed of the rotor RPM. Notice that for a complete rotation, each coil of the stator sees the north and south poles of the rotor magnetic field. This effect induces Eddy current and generates hysteresis losses in the stator iron core.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 14, 2014, 08:48:26 PM
So would it not stand to reason the inducer magnets would be solid and the induced would possibly be laminated?The rise and fall of current in the inducer creating a changing intensity of the mutual induced output coil. The eddy currents will happen where the induced happens,in the Y coil. Using laminated cores for the magnets may not nessesarily provide the strongest magnetic field on the pole face compared to it's ability to store the field . The only thing being removed is the motion of the rotor.It seems reasonable for it/them to still to have a very strong field projecting toward the Y coil and it's core.
 Consider the field is normally thought of as lines which may be just a two demensional view point and they may actually be cylindrical in reality.Then several layers of cyndrical field would cross the laminates twice each. Being of thinner mass each layer in the induced it may be each layer can reach saturation easier.Like working with batteries you can have voltages add together or amperage depending on how connect them.
 I know my communication skills suck and picture is worth a thousand words but I think you can draw a bulls eye and then draw straight lines up down or sideways over the bulls eye and then view what Im talking about.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 15, 2014, 01:03:56 AM
Hi all,

This is my new assembly. I hope to start doing tests soon. As soon as time let me do it. I have used 3 MOT (microwave oven transformers) to get the coils and steel. I have not took out the secondary coils from the MOTs because I am not very handy and I could spoil the primary coils. The secondary coil are wrapped with white paper but they are disconnected, so I hope those coils won´t do any bad there. My assembly is composed of two inducers coils and one intermediate induced coil. All three coils are in line in order to swing back and forth the magnetic fields along the intermediate coil.

One question: What capacity do I need in a condenser to unphase by around 90º a signal of 12 volt and 2 or 3 amperes?  I do not know how to calculate it. Will I get an unphased signal in the intensity or in the voltage?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 15, 2014, 02:45:14 AM
Hanon,
Could you post a diagram of the device you are trying to construct? From the picture, I cannot relate the apparatus to the Figuera's devices of 1902 or 1908.
On the other hand, before I start working on my second Figuera's 1908 device, I will run some more test for the device I built a few months ago. Until know, I have being testing the device with a minimum air gap but looking at Figuera's patent drawing it is noted that the air gaps are shown relatively big. For this option, I will need to induce a larger magnetic field in the primary coils by increasing the current. It does not make sense to me, but what the heck, I will follow the whatever hints I can observe from the 1908 patent.
I have also discovered from a practical point of view how a magnetic field flowing in the same direction is able to self-induce voltages of different polarities within the same coil. When I have the time, I will start putting together a draft version of the narratives and sketches explaining this interesting event, which I have never seen in any engineering books or literature. I think we need to decipher first how the magnetic circuits really work in the real world. Not just from formulas and mathematical concepts which do not always show the real picture.
Thank you,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 15, 2014, 09:21:50 AM
Doug, you are correct the primary cores are one way and the secondary are bi way so your assessment is correct. just make sure your secondaries are non Grain orientated laminates. I want to thank you for you contribution to this thread.
Hanon, is does not mater what size of cap it will unphase both as i understand it. it does not change intensity or voltage just offsets by 90%. just make sure the cap can handle the voltage and the capacity can handle the amp draw by double. it is good to see your work, progress is awesome and your contribution is highly regarded and appreciated.

Bajac, i have constructed circuits for both types of Drive for the Flynn type set up. one is by 555 timing and the other is by slotted disc. if any one wants the circuit just drop me a dime and i will send it to whom ever wants it with bom. both are shown without copper pour for clarity and are over constructed for Longevity. the circuit is for two drive pairs but one can only use what he or she wants except for the 555 circuit it has 4 but i can change for two if needed. the Patent shows only two drive mags but i figured it can be constructed for half of Stator mags. ie. if you have 8 Stator mags then the Rotor Mags can be 4. i have designed one for 16 Stator mags and 8 Rotor Mags that will turn big Generator head.
 thank you for your contribution....your insites are highly regarded and appreciated.

 tomorrow i will be homeless so i will get to it when i can. had big yard sale so i hope i will sell boat to by another car and get my good job back.
 "Happy Figuering"
Sorry pics are to big and not to clear i forgot to check size. (OPS!)
National Security Act of 1947 is a betrayal of American sovereignty and liberty and the main means for oppression of the American people.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 15, 2014, 09:23:33 AM
Bajac,

My device is as Figuera described it in 1908: One electromagnet down, One electromagnet up,  and One collecting coil  between their poles. For clarity I will attach an sketch that you will find familiar. I do not understand why you don not accept this scheme as the 1908 patent and you just accept the closed circuit  transformer type. We are dealing with different induction laws, not related to common physics!!  Hubbard coils, hendershot, VTA, Don Smith,...all of them uses open magnetic circuits.

Also for people who have not read the 1908 patent I want to clarify that Figuera did not tell anything in the text about air gaps. All the discussion about air gaps is derived from the drawing, where Figuera drew the coils with some separation.

Also I will copy the translation of a paragraph from the Buforn patent 57955 (year 1914) which states that those devices can be stacked up in order to use two poles from each electromagnet . THEREFORE, the basic configuration just use one pole !!!

PARAGRAPH FROM BUFORN 57955 PATENT (PAGE 14)

If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole
and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 15, 2014, 01:50:13 PM
Hanon,
No need to get defensive. I did not mean to upset you. It was just a simple and honest question.
So you are saying that your device follows the teachings of the 1914 Buforn's patent, right?
What I see from the picture is three (or five) coils wound in the same core. The core ends at two C-type cores oriented inward with two very large air gaps. Is the core something like this?
 
**********************************
*                                                                      *
*            **********          **********          *
*          *                *           *                 *          *
*         *                 *           *                  *       *
*****                   *           *                   *****
                             *           *                   
                             *           *                   
                             *           *                   
                             *           *                   
*****                   *           *                  *****
*        *                  *           *                  *       *
*        *                  *           *                  *       *
*          **********           **********         *
*                                                                    *
********************************** 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on September 15, 2014, 05:18:52 PM
with your permission hanon,
correct me if wrong
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on September 15, 2014, 11:03:24 PM
Hello everyone! Hello Hanon!

I'm still following this thread closely (from the begining), never got away from it, did some experiments some time ago, but nothing fruitful arose from them.

Since the Buforn patents were published on the internet, there is just one or two things not clear to me.
For the first, look at the picture below... so what exactly is that layer between the iron core and the induced Y?
Hanon, maybe you have an idea about this layer, since you read through the patents many times. Anyone else is also welcome to clear this up.
The second thing is about the battery - I assume that the small square thing with the tiny circle in it where one positive (going to the comutator) and the two negative lines (comming from the electromagnets) meet, is the battery - is that right?

Hanon, I wish you good luck with your new setup - looks awesome :)

Also everyone else, happy figuering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 15, 2014, 11:56:25 PM
Maddann,

I am happy to see you again around this forum. I can see that you have studied in deep the drawing. My intention with the last traslation was to put into consideration the configuration of the electromagnets.

In another paragraph of that patent, number 57955, Buforn states that you can put a second induced coil inside the first induced coil core in order to generate in this second circuit the signal required to excite the machine, being the first induced coil used completely for other uses. This is just an optimization step, no needed at this stage of our research. Anyway I am glad that you have noted it.

------------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSLATION OF PARAGRAPH ABOUT THE SECOND INDUCED CIRCUIT  (Buforn patent no. 57955, year 1914)

" Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the
large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want.

......

The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interpose between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire. "

----------------------------------------------------------------

Note also how Buforn defines the location of the induced core, and how he AGAIN mentions that the induced coil must be placed PROPERLY. Both Figuera and Buforn always stated that the induced coil must be placed properly. What is properly??? 

About the battery question I can not answer you. There is no further info into this patent.

I do not know if you have also noted the electromagnets N and S connections in the zoomed sketch in the post before this one: the connection is done in opposite sides of those electromagnet for any reason. If all the electromagnets are made (in factory) with the same winding direction (then always the same pole is always at the current inlet). Therefore, this connection also suggests that Buforn was using like poles facing each other:  NN or SS

Please revise again the sketch. Thanks for doing such a good zoom of this feature.

I attach a file with all the important parts of this patent translated into english. Basically all the Buforn patent are almost photocopies of Figuera´s 1908 patent but he was adding small details to optimize the system. Some of that details may help us to interpret the basic configuration designed by Figuera. This is my aim explaining in detail these paragraphs and drawing.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 16, 2014, 06:58:41 PM
Bajac, i have constructed circuits for both types of Drive for the Flynn type set up. one is by 555 timing and the other is by slotted disc.

Marathonman,
I do not see a need for a signal generator to test the device I am trying to build. Once constructed, I would only need a small motor to turn the permanent magnets, and test equipment to measure the output vs. input power. It is better to keep it simple when testing the concept. Does that make sense?
 
I think the Flynn's apparatus is way too complicated because of all the switches, transistors, and synchronism required to make it work.
 
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on September 16, 2014, 11:14:45 PM
Hi Hanon!

Thank you so much for the translation, now almost everything looks clear (at least to me, hopefully also to others).

Yes, the electromagnets are definitely placed NN, SS - like poles facing each other.

I would just like to mention that in the Figueras (1908) and Buforn patents the cores are simple iron pieces and not transformer like cores (not like shown in the PJK book) - at least this is my opinion.
I was suspecting this from the begining, but now i'm sure of it.
I'm thinking of doing an exact replica for quite some time now, but my budget is low right now and I have no job, so it will have to wait for better times  :) ...but I'm not here to feel sorry about myself, but to help as much as I can in achieving the common goal.

OK, now here is a quote to think about, from one of the Buforn patents - Figueras had a similar (if not exact) statement in the 1908 patent: "...since we have done a continuous and
organized variation we have achieved a constant change in the current which crosses the
magnetic field formed by the electromagnets N and S and whose current, after
completing their task in the different electromagnets, returns to the source where it was
taken."

Now if you are able to do this, you might be onto something - what do you guys think?

Thanks again Hanon for translating all this!

Good luck to all!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 18, 2014, 06:39:47 PM
I just wanted to post this link
 
http://www.mojaladja.com/upload/elmotor/276_EWEC2009presentation.pdf (http://www.mojaladja.com/upload/elmotor/276_EWEC2009presentation.pdf)
 
to a document written by Hideki Kobayashi. I still think that they have failed to realize the true potential of coreless coils because of the way the permanent magnets are used. It just does not follow the Tiguera's teachings.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 20, 2014, 12:03:30 AM

Marathonman,
I do not see a need for a signal generator to test the device I am trying to build. Once constructed, I would only need a small motor to turn the permanent magnets, and test equipment to measure the output vs. input power. It is better to keep it simple when testing the concept. Does that make sense?
 
I think the Flynn's apparatus is way too complicated because of all the switches, transistors, and synchronism required to make it work.
 
Thanks,
Bajac

True that would be the thing to do.  the ones i designed are for the drive unit just like the motor you are using but with mags.

I Disagree the Figueras Device is way more complicated. with Flynn i can picture the Drag cancellation coils interacting with the moving Magnets but with Figueras i am still clueless as to its true orientation and design as are many people here.
i have also converted a Ring Dynamo to be motionless and have just finished the timing board, coil, and core specs on it and am moving forward with the Manufacturing of the non grain oriented iron ring core at a friends house. for now the Figueras Device is on hold until more info is available to me or someone makes a break through. i just feel like i am beating my head on the desk every day with Figueras.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 20, 2014, 04:09:09 AM
i just feel like i am beating my head on the desk every day with Figueras.
You are not alone, my friend! We are all scratching our heads with Mr. Figuera. Because of the poor drafting of the patents, I tend to think that these patents were tampered with.


On the other hand, I am still researching for more information related to ironless coils. Today, during an internet search I came across with the U.S. patent #8,487,486 (http://www.google.com/patents/US8487486) awarded to Charles Stuart Vann on 7/16/2013. I just read the background and glanced at the drawings. I am convinced that the way Mr. Vann uses the coils and the permanent magnets is not the most efficient because most of the magnetic fields intercept the coils at an angle of about zero degree as shown in figure 4.
I am referring you to this patent because of the following statement in the background part of the patent:
"In addition, to the added cost of the cores, the introduction of ferromagnetic cores cause a problem called torque cogging, or just cogging. The magnet and core inherently attract each other, and considerable force must be expended to separate them or the rotor will not rotate. This is called cogging, and it is a major problem for generators. For example, considerable wind energy is lost to a wind turbine before the wind is strong enough to overcome cogging and self-start the generator. Cogging also causes instability, vibration, noise, and damage to generators. Since cogging is such a problem, considerable design and operational tradeoffs from optimum performance are made to reduce it."


My question is the following, why do many people think that the cogging issue is only inherent to the generators having rotors with permanent magnets? There is no difference in the magnetic field generated by permanent magnets and the magnetic field generated by DC current flowing in the coils of the rotor. The (cogging) attraction between the magnetic field generated by DC current flowing through the rotor coils and the iron poles of the stator can be easily tested when trying to turn the rotor under no load condition.
The ironless coils are not popular with standard generators because of the relatively larger air gaps, which require stronger magnetic fields to be applied to the air gaps. Is the minimization of the air gaps the main reason why Mr. Figuera showed the thickness of the generator coils to be of about the same of a single conductor?
Just a thought!
Bajac



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 21, 2014, 05:52:36 PM
Bajac

  If you are directing that question toward me and all those starter motors.Im not using the motor as a device Im taking the parts and making the stationary version using pieces that are rated for a known output 5kw. Inside the motors there are blocks which the windings wrap around that can be removed along with the windings and they to can be separated. The housing of the motor which looks a large diameter of pipe and the rotor are not getting used. Im not concerned with cogging since I don"t have a rotating rotor piece. Two inducer magnets and one induced coil is all Im making. The blocks will all join together they have two threaded holes to bolt them to the housing of the starter Im going stack them like pancakes.The starters are Leese Naville brand starters. The last one I will have to take a chop saw to get the end parts off. Cant find the right tool to fit the bolts on one of them.must be a custom torqs bit, the rest were hex bolts. the blocks are held on with star pattern torqs bit bolts,I have that tool.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 22, 2014, 12:20:19 AM
Hi Bajac,

About the patent with the moving coil, I posted my interpretation also in EF forum and a user called "Erfinder" replied to my proposal. My interpretation is not that the key is the coreless coil but the use of TWO POLES:  the dragging produced by one pole (repulsion) is compensated by the acceleration due to other pole (attraction). I based my idea on the common feature in Figuera and Hogan & Jakovlewich patents where two poles were used in both cases. Also this happens in Flynn´s patent.

Erfinder told this about my proposal:
Quote
I am not as versed as you are in the mainstream viewpoint.  Nor am I familiar with the Figuera patent.  The reason for my posting is to say that I agree with your present finding, using two poles instead of one. This is something that I have been advocating for some time now, unfortunately my ranting has been falling on deaf, or better closed ears.  One of the things that I have found is that in the gap we have a unidirectional flow.   How we interact is paramount!  The text book offers no direct suggestions, however, an open minded view of Faraday and Lenz's law reveals that a possible solution is in what we are discussing right now, namely, use both sides of the magnet, or use two poles when one both sides of the magnet aren't practicable.  It can also be suggested that we pay attention to the coils reaction to the magnet, for it tells us everything we need to know!   
 
 I built a motor/generator which capitalizes on one way flux.  The device operates as a reduced to drag free generator, or when operated as a motor, depending on the direction of rotation, the induced aids the supply.  If indeed we are talking about the same thing, and of this I have no doubt, Figuera and many others, had it right

 Thanks for confirming what I feel I have demonstrated to be true.  The only thing you have to do now is build it, verifying your theory!  I am looking forward to seeing what you come up with!

This is the link to this reply in EF forum:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-27.html#post262600 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-27.html#post262600)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 22, 2014, 02:06:34 PM
Quote

Doug,
If you are directing that question toward me
Doug, I was not referring to you when I made the question. I was thinking about other articles that I read from which I got that impression.
 
Quote

My interpretation is not that the key is the coreless coil but the use of TWO POLES: the dragging produced by one pole (repulsion) is compensated by the acceleration due to other pole (attraction).
Hanon, I do not understand when you refer to "one pole." To this date, it is impossible to isolate a single magnetic pole. Could you clarify?
On the other hand, the effects of the Lenz's law will always happen. That is, the induced magnetic field always opposes the inducing magnetic field or an applied force. For example, in the case of the rotating turn shown in figures 8a and 8b of the published paper, the induced forces will always generate a reaction torque that will oppose the applied torque. If one of the magnetic fields of the air gap is reversed, then the net induced voltage in the turn would be zero. The reason being that the induced voltage will always generate a current in the conductor that will oppose to the applied movement.
Bajac
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 22, 2014, 02:20:26 PM
To all
 If it is to be assumed that it is started on dc pulsed through a commutator type controller to power on the inducer coils.Then at some point a portion of the ac output is to be used to self excite the machine there must be a way to convert the ac to dc without exotic electronics.The method by which may lead to other clues less obvious when looking at the patent as to further construction details regarding the three coils as per the date of the patent back a few years for time to research and perfect into a working device. Even if you decide to use electronic power supplies in the end there must be some reasonable explanation as to how it was done during the time of the invention. With this information in hand you may likely eliminate some of the impractical considerations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 22, 2014, 03:32:17 PM
Doug,

The patents mention using a switch (commutator) rotated by the small motor to convert the output to DC if desired.

IMO the detail is left out of the patent drawings because there was more than one way to accomplish the task. Commutator, transformer, rectifier ….

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 22, 2014, 09:50:08 PM
Bajac,

Thought you might find this interesting.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 23, 2014, 02:50:08 AM
Cadman,
That is an interesting design. I performed an internet search but I was not able to find any information on this device. Do you have more information on the device?
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 23, 2014, 10:12:53 AM
Hi everyone, it's been a while, sorry for my absence. Just wanted to share something as to my hypothesis of the generator.

First of all, hypothetically, if you took a generator head, made the rotor stationary and powered it with AC, it wouldn't work. A least, the output couldn't power the rotor like a normal generator does. It just became a transformer, and you can't power your fridge with that.

When a coil is powered by DC, it's energy is converted to a magnetic field. After the field forms, the DC current will only see the resistance of the windings. With AC voltage, the field is constantly opposing current in and out, which gives you the reactance as well as the resistance.

The difference between a transformer and a generator. In the generator, the DC voltage only sees the resistance in the rotor winding. That's all. This explains why a DC coil behaves like a magnet, and why a permanent magnet generator can provide power for a lifetime without needing more power in the magnets. In a transformer, the primary coil sees it's own resistance, the reactive impedance, and also the impedance and resistance of the secondary coil... not to mention the core loses. No one's going to be going off grid with a transformer.

The Figuera generator is a simple circuit. From the point of the commutator, it's two series of parallel RL circuits. The input voltage is DC, and it maintains a DC voltage across the coils, even though the current varies. This means that the magnetic field never collapses, it only varies in amplitude. Without the collapse, the voltage will never see the high impedance. The load will never be reflected back like in the case of the transformer, but, like in a generator, the field strength may need to be increased to maintain output voltage.

The commutator provides two peaks, 90 degrees out, but the flux in the secondary will see that as 180 degrees. So to effectively create a generator that powers itself, we need: 1. two primary coils, opposing, that maintain a DC field. 2. a signal.

The pic I included is the setup I tried tonight. The parts were as follows:
12 volt peak to peak, center-tapped transformer.
2 diodes
12 volt DC supply
The Figuera setup I have is three matching coils.

I drew out the waveforms to show the DC bias with the pulse from the transformer output. The transformer, rectified to the center tap, only output 6 volts. Because the two DC fields opposed, you can imagine that they weren't even there, so the output waveform was AC. All three coils are the same, the output voltage was 6 volts. The proof that I have- without the DC bias, the impedance of the coils and lossy transformer was too large, and the output was hardly enough to strike an LED. With DC bias, the LED lit to full brightness.

My next step is increasing the power. Let me know what you guys think. ^^
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 23, 2014, 02:59:39 PM
Cadman,
That is an interesting design. I performed an internet search but I was not able to find any information on this device. Do you have more information on the device?
Thanks,
Bajac

Dynamo-electric Machinery by Silvanus Phillips Thompson. Published in 1893.

The Ferranti alternator starts at page 613 of the book, 226 pages into the volume 2 pdf.

Volume 1
https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm17thomgoog

Volume 2
https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm15thomgoog

They are free to download using the PDF link at the left side of the web page.

Enjoy. It's a good book :)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 23, 2014, 08:36:59 PM
Hi all,

We should check any possible coil orientation. Remember that Figuera just stated that the induced coil must be PROPERLY PLACED, but he didn´t specify how to place it. Suspicious...at least...

Here I attach a couple of schemes which may work with like poles facing each other (repulsion mode). Note in the second picture that the induced coil is perpendicular to the axis between electromagnet. Also note that the coil is moved laterally to one side. I think that if it were in the center there would not be any net induction because half coil will be in one side and the other part in the contrary side, and, therefore the total induction will cancel out. Note that in the VTA picture I posted some days ago the coil was perpendicular to the electromagnets axis.

As fas as my tests: I started with simple AC current (12 V and 2-3 A) with like poles facing each other. The configuration with the aligned coil do not produce any special results. When I started to test the perpendicular oriented coil my 12V transformed got burned. I could not test anymore. I had planned to test later with rectified AC, later on with rectified AC plus a DC bias, and later on with two unphased signals, possible from a car alternator (at 120º)

In summary: I could note that the induced current and input current changed a lot depending on the coil placement ( I move it up, down, and from the center to the sides). I also I noted that the input consumption with like poles facing each other ,under load, increased slightly compared with no load condition, but with unlike poles facing the input increased much more.

One question: can I build a center tapped transformer by connecting two single transformers?

Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Farmhand on September 23, 2014, 09:59:03 PM
Kinda yes, it all depends on what effect you're after. Two Mots can be operated as a center tapped transformer, with the primaries in
anti-series or anti-parallel and the two MOT cores electrically connected and grounded makes the grounded center tap with the
opposite polarity outputs at the HV terminals. However it isn't a single core transformer so it is different to a single core transformer,
in obvious ways, the magnetic influence of one core doesn't really affect the other core I don't think, unless arranged to do so.

People use paired and tuned anti parallel connected  MOT's for Tesla coil HV supplies.

HV MOT supplies. Might help.
http://www.kronjaeger.com/hv/hv/src/mot/

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 24, 2014, 07:37:23 AM
Hey guys, decided to make a small demo video. I think this proves the two coils opposing on the same core, and may open a door to better understanding, at least for me.  ;D
http://youtu.be/u10IjUTGS4E
@hanon yes, you can use two transformers as a center tap. As long as the values are very close. Nice setup, looks like you want to make some serious power.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 24, 2014, 02:07:59 PM
Dynamo-electric Machinery by Silvanus Phillips Thompson. Published in 1893.

The Ferranti alternator starts at page 613 of the book, 226 pages into the volume 2 pdf.

Volume 1
https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm17thomgoog (https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm17thomgoog)

Volume 2
https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm15thomgoog (https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm15thomgoog)

They are free to download using the PDF link at the left side of the web page.

Enjoy. It's a good book :)

Thank you! Cadman. They are pretty good books. I usually read these old books because very often I find them to have better descriptions and technical levels.
I am looking for any statement referring to the advantages of the Ferranti's generator. Have you found any?
 
Thanks again.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2014, 02:57:51 AM
I have researched the subject related to the Ferranti's alternator and I have to say that THERE ARE VERY PROMISING NEWS, especially in the absence of a prototype and experimental data. Notice that the Ferranti alternator is exactly the same machine that I proposed in the published paper. The main difference is that instead of rotating the induced coils I proposed to move the magnets. To me the latter makes more sense because it eliminates the flow of high magnitudes of the load currents through mechanical brushes and slip rings.
Most of the information I found was just a description of the alternator. Finally, I found some information related to the performance of the Ferranti alternator. The most important information about the performance of this machine was found in a technical paper THE ELECTRICIAN/ELECTRICAL TRADES DIRECTORY--1899 (http://books.google.com/books?id=dFA-AQAAMAAJ&pg=PR39&lpg=PR39&dq=advantages+of+ferranti+alternator&source=bl&ots=QVsY8VA-1t&sig=309BLVZPQhElP-Y5b2b0eFGzqMc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=orkiVIfxGpbDggSUkYDYAQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwBg%23v=onepage&q=advantages%20of%20ferranti%20alternator&f=false#v=snippet&q=advantages%20of%20ferranti%20alternator&f=false)  at the end of the first column on page XXXIX. This section reads as follows:


"THE ZIG-ZAG ARMATURE, WHICH WAS MR. FERRANTI'S FIRST PATENT, FOLLOWED, AND A COMPANY WAS FORMED IN 1882 TO EXPLOIT THE INVENTION, MR. FERRANTI BEING APPOINTED ENGINEER TO THE COMPANY WHEN HE WAS EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. IT WAS, HOWEVER, THEN DISCOVERED THAT SIR WILLIAM THOMSON (NOW LORD KELVIN) HAD INVENTED A MACHINE IN MANY RESPECTS IDENTICAL WITH THAT FOR WHICH MR. FERRANTI HAD OBTAINED HIS PATENT, AND ARRANGEMENTS WERE MADE TO PAY ROYALTIES TO SIR WILLIAM THOMSON, AND THE MACHINE WAS AFTERWARDS KNOWN AS THE "THOMSON-FERRANTI ALTERNATOR." THE FACT THAT THIS MACHINE GAVE FIVE TIMES AS MUCH LIGHT AS OTHER MACHINES OF THE SAME SIZE NATURALLY CREATED A SENSATION IN THE ELECTRICAL CIRCLES AT THE TIME. THE POWER DEVELOPED BY THESE MACHINES WAS FOUND TO BE ENORMOUSLY GREATER THAN ANYTHING PREVIOUSLY OBTAINED, AND MANY OF THEM HAVE RUN CONTINUOUSLY FOR THE PAST FOURTEEN YEARS."

It is clear from the above that there is something especial about the Thomson-Ferranti design. It also tells me that the theory proposed in the paper I published may be right on the money.

I may have to revise the published paper based on the new information found with respect to the Thomson-Ferrranti alaternator. It looks like Figuera was not the first to come up with the concept for using ironless induced coils. Everthing points to that others inventors deviced and built ironless coils generators prior to 1880.

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 25, 2014, 03:39:58 PM
Antijon,

Good video experiment. Thank you. Most of the circuits on this thread ignore the patent where it says the resistor is a splitter of current and shows the coils connected together through the resistor. Instead they use individual wires through separate resistors. You clearly show the benefit of connecting the two coils through one resistance.

Bajac,

From what I read the Ferranti alternator was able to run the rotor at much higher peripheral speeds due to the reduced mass of the ironless coils and this was a key to the high output.

Hanon,

If you are interested, volume 2 of  Dynamo electric Machinery has an entire section on “The Principles of Alternate Currents”. The subject of phase alteration with capacitors or coils is presented in depth.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2014, 05:17:12 PM
Quote
From what I read the Ferranti alternator was able to run the rotor at much higher peripheral speeds due to the reduced mass of the ironless coils and this was a key to the high output.
Cadman,
There are a lot of information that I found to be misleading. But, I will refer you to two sources that state the RPM for the Ferranti alternator to be about 200. This is a very low speed and it makes sense for salient poles or coils type of armatures.
First, the radius of the rotor for high speed alternators is usually small and of the type interior poles. The standard practice is to build the rotor of high speed generators to be like a cylinder with a small radius and axially longer. This is a very important criteria for high speed generators. The Ferranti's generator, on the other hand, has a relative large radius and a relative small axial dimension. If the Ferranti's alternator is run at high velocities, the tangential speed of the coils will be very high and the centrifugal forces can potentially deform or rip off the coils from the armature. That is why I am skeptical of any information implying this machine ran at high speed. To maintain a frequency of 50Hz, the Ferranti's alternator should not be run at high speeds because of the high number of poles.
Second, there was a test performed on November 18th, 1899, for a 300KW alternator. This information can be found on page 972 of the ELECTRICAL REVIEW [Vol. 47. No. 1,204, December 21, 1900]. The third paragraph reads,
 
"...,the whole designed to give 300 KW., 2,500 volts x 120 amperes, 40 periodicity at 200 revolutions per minute."
 
The last five paragraphs read,
"The mean H.P. shown by the indicator cards was 499 at the mean speed of 240.9 revolutions per minute, as got from the engine counter.

The combined efficiency of the engine and the alternator, taking the above figures for electrical output and indicated horse-power, was 84.6 per cent.

Taking the figures actually obtained, the steam per KW.-hour was 24.03 lbs., being practically 2 lbs. below that allowed by the specification.

I think this is very good; and if the vacuum had been 26 or 27, the result would, of course, have been materially better.

No special preparations were made to prepare the engine for this test. The steam was supplied from boilers of the dry-back marine type, and was not superheated."
 
As seen from the above, the speed of the Ferranti's alternator was about 200 RPM. It is very sad that this test was performed only on the steam-alternator combination. As we all know, the steam engines (especially from that era) are very inefficient, less than 50% (Carnot cycle). And,
 
Third, the third paragraph of the second column on page 511 of THE ELECTRICIAN, JULY 27 1900 reads,
 
"The machine is designed to give 286 amperes at 2,100 volts, the frequency of course being the same as the other two machines - viz., 50 ~ per second,....

The wheel on which the armature is mounted is made in one casting, and is of ample strength to withstand the stresses set up when running at 214 revs. per min."
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 25, 2014, 05:55:13 PM
Bajac,

Sorry, I didn't mean to confuse things.
I was referring to peripheral speed of the ones like the Deptford lighting-station machine.
1000 KW
Armature diameter = 15 ft
RPM = 120
Peripheral speed = 5850 feet per minute
48 poles
48 armature coils, 3/4" thick, with each coil generating 420 volts and 50-55 amps without over heating


BTW, not all Ferranti alternators used this design. Some were built with conventional designs.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 25, 2014, 06:24:07 PM
Cadman,
Still, I do not understand your point of view. For a 50Hz there should be an approximate number of the energy density for these generators. The efficiency and energy density should not change dramatically unless there is something out of the ordanry going on. I think the records showing the statments related to the enormous output power when compared to other generators of the time also included the salient poles synchronous generators. These synchronous generators usually have rotors with large diameters similar to the Ferranti's alternators.
 
I also suspect that the larger output was due to a much lower cancellation effects of the interacting magnetic fields. Recall that the magnetic field of the ironless induced coils should have much smaller magnitudes.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 26, 2014, 12:30:14 AM
Cadman,

I found it very suspicious that there is no testing data for the Ferranti’s alternator even though it was being sold in the market. However, we can do some detective work by performing an educated guess on the information we have collected thus far.
The statement


"The mean H.P. shown by the indicator cards was 499 at the mean speed of 240.9 revolutions per minute, as got from the engine counter.

The combined efficiency of the engine and the alternator, taking the above figures for electrical output and indicated horse-power, was 84.6 per cent.

Taking the figures actually obtained, the steam per KW.-hour was 24.03 lbs., being practically 2 lbs. below that allowed by the specification.

I think this is very good; and if the vacuum had been 26 or 27, the result would, of course, have been materially better.

No special preparations were made to prepare the engine for this test. The steam was supplied from boilers of the dry-back marine type, and was not superheated."


has sufficient information to estimate the approximate efficiency of the Ferranti’s alternator. We know that in the real world the efficiency of the steam engine is lower than 50%. If we add the gears, the cam, piston, etc. the efficiency of the steam engine and mechanical components should not be higher than 35%. If we assume a conservative efficiency of 40% for the the steam and mechanical systems, then the efficiency of the electric alternator may be calculated as


Steam_Mech_efficiency X Alternator_efficiency = 84.6% = 0.846
Alternator_efficiency = 84.6% / Steam_Mech_efficiency = 0.846 / 0.40 = 2.115,


That is, the alternator should have at least a COP of 211.5%. And this number can even be higher based on the statement in these paragraphs. The author seems to be amazed at the 84.6% efficiency of the steam-alternator combination. He also admits that the alternator was running with very low steam pressures – 2 pounds below – implying that the mechanical work transmitted by the shaft would have been lower than the required minimum.


 Bajac.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 26, 2014, 03:05:43 PM
Continuing with the story of the testing of the "TEST OF A 300-KW STEAM ALTERNATOR", the author N. Appelbee, an electrical engineer from Cardiff, wrote the following:
 
"The figures are sufficiently good to interest your readers, and the names of the gentlemen who conducted the tests are a guarantee of their reliability and accuracy."
 
When reading the above paragraph within the context of this article, the author really implied, you might not believe the results of the testing because they are not ordinary, but the results are guarantee to be valid since the tests were performed by engineers with recognized expertise in the matter.
Other interesting data from the testing are,
 
"The test was started at 9:15 a.m. and continued at full power until 4:00 p.m."
 
"The alternator was run on a water resistance;.." I think it means that the load were cool water resistors (PF = 1). And,
 
"The mean output of the alternator was 315 KW."
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 26, 2014, 08:55:08 PM
Hi,

I have found another device based on MAGNETIC REPULSION. It is called Gap Power.

The device consists of two lateral groups of permanent magnets and one intermediate permanent magnet in repulsion mode. It has two lateral coils with are fed with pulses in order to act as "magnetic switch" of the lateral permanent magnets field. The idea is to block the magnetic field of each group of magnets: while one group is pushing the other group is blocked. Then the action is reversed and the intermediate magnets is swung back and forth. The author states that it is an overunity motor. He calls the effect as Magnetic Amplification and Neutralization.

     - Two lateral magnetic fields (oscillating / alternating)
     - One intermediate device to capture those oscillation

Do you see, for any chance, some similarities with Figuera´s generator?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKigs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKigs)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 27, 2014, 02:52:47 AM
I performed more research on the overall efficiency of thermal power plants. There are three components of a typical thermal power plant: the boiler, the turbine, and the electrical alternator. The following estimate is used for today’s power plant, which are considered very efficient with the modern technology and control.


Boiler efficiency:
The boiler efficiency is related to the amount of heat used as input to heat the water flowing through the furnace and the amount of heat contained by the superheated steam flowing out of the boiler. Then, the overall thermal efficiency of the boiler is the product of the furnace efficiency and the boiler efficiency. The today’s boiler efficiency varies from 60 to 75%. When using economiser, air preheater, and advance control the boiler efficiency can reach 80 to 90%.


Turbine efficiency:
The turbine converts the heat energy and high pressure of the superheated steam to mechanical energy by expansion and cooling of the superheated steam. The turbine efficiency varies from 25 to 35%.


Alternator:
Takes the mechanical energy from the turbine as input and output electrical energy. The efficiency of today’s alternators varies from 94 to 99%.
The boiler and turbine combine efficiency can be estimated as


Boiler_Turbine_efficiency = Boiler_efficiency x Turnbine_efficiency = (80 to 90) x (25 to 35) %
= (20.00 to 31.50) %


Therefore, the 40% efficiency that I used in my previous calculation can be considered conservative.
And the overall efficiency of a typical thermal power plant is


Overall_efficiency = Boiler_Turbine_efficiency x Alternator_efficiency = (20 to 31.50) x (94 to 99) %
= (18.80 to 31.19) %


Notice that the overall efficiency of today’s power plants is not larger than 32%.


In the 1900s the efficiency of the boiler should have been between 60 to 75% for an overall system efficiency of 15.04 to 26.51%. If you compare the latter with the 84.6% reported by Mr. Appelbee in 1900, then you can understand why he seems to be excited with the test data that looked so unrealistic.
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 27, 2014, 04:38:13 PM
It's pulsed dc to ac like an inverter.The only questionable part is how he used such a small amount of the output ac after powering a load to cycle back to feed itself.
 If a simple commutator could do it ,then it would be well published already.Motor generators would have stumbled onto it already. It should not make a difference if your using a MOT or another type of core or even air core. If the method is sound then it would be only a matter of scale and the percentage of the output being used to excite the inducers so the power from the source could be removed and it run indefinitely. The rotating version came after the motionless one didnt it? so why waste time on the design that he used later after he sold the first one off to the bankers? The main feature was to not waste mechanical energy to rotate the iron pieces because the energy to do so cost more then the output could supply to even be unity.
 Once the method is found it would be more sensible to use a off the shelf inverter to produce mains voltage and work the trick in to remove the batteries.Then at least you have something of real use in the every day sense that could save you money.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 28, 2014, 05:46:20 PM
About the patent with the moving coil (patent No. 30376):

As you know I think that a wire placed between TWO POLES may create amplification. And it could be the principle used in that patent.

If not, look into the speaker diagram that I attach below.

A speaker is a kind of motor (a current is used to create motion in the cone). But perhaps you may also configure it as a generator: modulating the two magnetic fields in order to create a much amplified current in the center coil. This could be the principle used in the static patent.

Just some food for thought
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 28, 2014, 07:36:50 PM
Hey guys, thanks for the comments. Sorry the video was such poor quality.

I wanted to point out some things that make the Figuera gen. different from normal devices. most of this I realized after playing with a variable resistor.
First of all, the commutator acts as a current splitter. No matter what position it's in, the DC current consumed by the entire device is always the same. Secondly, even though the coils are arranged to oppose each other, according to Lenz's law, when one is decreasing, and the other is increasing, they both produce a current that moves in the same direction, in a mutually coupled inductor. Thirdly, if a constant DC current is applied to the commutator, but the commutator isn't moving, no output is created. This means, for 100% input power, we have 0% output power. According to Faraday's laws of induction, if I spin the commutator at 1 RPM, an output current is produced according to the rate of change. Therefore, if I spin the commutator at 100 RPM, the output current will be 100 times more powerful than at 1 RPM for the same amount of power in.

 Now, this is just food for thought until I or someone else makes a complete replication, but the main difference between this and an AC transformer is that, no matter the rate of change, that is the commutator switching, the voltage and current are always in phase. What that means- Faraday's law doesn't apply to AC through a transformer. Say that I have a transformer of a certain value, designed to operate at 60HZ. Being properly designed, I can have an output power near 100%. Okay, so, according to Faraday, if I double the frequency to 120HZ, I can have twice the power out, right? But no. The "resistance" of the inductor increases with frequency. Doubling the frequency will drop the output to 50% power. This happens because an AC voltage across an inductor will always cause the current to lag.

The question is, can this produce more power out than in. If anyone's interested, I'd like to share something I've been working on. The picture I included is a general rectifier circuit. We know that when the capacitor is fully charged, it will draw little current from the AC source to maintain it's charge. With a load attached, the capacitor will charge and discharge at a certain rate, determined by the capacitor size, load resistance, and voltage and current of the AC supply.

In the second image, Lenz's law states that an increasing and decreasing current in an inductor will produce a voltage that opposes the change. So, in place the load resistor, I added the primary of a transformer. As a warning in case anyone wants to try this, remember that a DC voltage only sees the resistance of the inductor- THERE IS NO AC IMPEDANCE TO LIMIT CURRENT. So, applying 120V DC to a 120V transformer will probably light it on fire. I did the experiment with line voltage, and a 40W bulb in series with the transformer to limit current.

The transformer output is very low, because it's determined by the charge and discharge rate of the capacitor. Now the interesting thing is that Faraday's law DOES apply. If you carry out this experiment, with a full wave rectifier like the image, you'll see a voltage output on the transformer. However, if you switch the rectifier with a single diode, you'll see twice the output voltage on the transformer. but you're decreasing the power input by half. This is because cutting the power by half increases the rate of current change through the inductor. Using a MOT transformer, a single diode, a MOT cap. rated at .0f mfd., and a 40W bulb acting as a ballast resistor, I had enough output power to light a 12in. fluorescent bulb, and it only increased the line current by 1 watt. If anyone's interested I can draw out a schematic, or take photos or video of the setup, but for now I'm going to try increasing the power out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 29, 2014, 12:28:52 AM
I have found more information related to the Ferranti-Thomson alternator unbelievable efficiency! However, I have not been able to locate the Thomson and Ferranti's patents related to this device.

I am attaching a color photo of this device. The air gap for this device was made adjustable.

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 29, 2014, 12:51:23 AM
Hey guys, made some new videos.
This first one just shows how much power is wasted when a magnetic field has to be created in a transformer. http://youtu.be/iauWEdb5LFc
The second actually shows the operation of the included schematic. http://youtu.be/BFUHg3NTR0c Sorry that I can be so long-winded.  :-[ Thanks.

@ Bajac, that's an amazing device. I wonder... because it has no steel rotor, I wonder how much electrical watts can actually come out of 1 horsepower...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 29, 2014, 05:18:46 PM
Hi all,

Madddann posted on the 25th of March a schematic to generate the two signals. I think it is useful to post it again to refresh our memories.

Basically it was based on created two opposite AC signals with a center-tapped transformer and adding to those signals a DC bias (by rectifying AC with a diode bridge)

Thanks Madddann for your circuit!!

http://s26.postimg.org/6a9a1xhdl/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg (http://s26.postimg.org/6a9a1xhdl/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on September 29, 2014, 05:19:07 PM
Bajac,

here is a serach-section :  http://www.mosi.org.uk/collections/explore-the-collections/ferranti-online/ferranti-collection-search.aspx (http://www.mosi.org.uk/collections/explore-the-collections/ferranti-online/ferranti-collection-search.aspx)

http://www.mosi.org.uk/collections/explore-the-collections/ferranti-online/timeline.aspx (http://www.mosi.org.uk/collections/explore-the-collections/ferranti-online/timeline.aspx)

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3519859?uid=3737864&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104241678261

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 29, 2014, 06:07:57 PM
... However, I have not been able to locate the Thomson and Ferranti's patents related to this device.


Thanks,
Bajac

Here :)

http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=00288316&IDKey=00188E8D6869%0D%0A&HomeUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect2%3DPTO1%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526d%3DPALL%2526S1%3D0288316.PN.%2526OS%3DPN%2F288316%2526RS%3DPN%2F288316

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 29, 2014, 06:26:58 PM
Thank you for providing the links to the patents.
 
I would like to say that you do not need to build any device in order for you to post in this thread. Very valuable contributions can be made by posting meaningful information. There is no need to send me a personal message. Just post it here.
 
I do not agree with threads that only persons building the devices are allowed to post, but I do respect their rights.
 
Thank you again for your contributions!
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on September 29, 2014, 11:49:21 PM
Hello everyone, hello Hanon!

No need to thank me. I just wanted to say that I built that circuit shortly after posting it here and it worked fine (the waveform on my scope also looked fine). The problem I was having was very low power on the output coil (induced), but that might be my fault, 'cause I wound the N and S coils with too small diameter magnet wire, so the coils at 36 ohm came out only about 500 turns instead of atleast few thousands and did not fill the bobin even by 1/3.
The other thing I did, I used a fixed resistor instead of the rheostat. The resistor (rheostat) in this circuit wastes quite a bit of power, so to avoid that you can order a custom made transformer with adequate output voltage (need to determine the voltage by experimenting) and use it as the second transformer in the circuit, than you can eliminate the rheostat and with it the looses (heat from it).

I might rebuild this circuit and retest everything, but gotta find the right wire size for the N, S coils.

Hopefully others will test this circuit too and post their results, so we can compare and come to a conclusion about if this circuit behaves right for the Figueras 1908 patent replication or not.

For thoose who want to test this circuit, please look at this post, there is all the info you need to replicate it:
http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/#msg394315

 If you have questions just ask here and I'll answer.

Happy testing everyone!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 30, 2014, 02:50:12 AM
Hey Hanon, I watched the Gap power video. haha, I like that guy. I don't exactly understand what he's doing, but it's generating so I'm liking it. You know, a lot of these devices seem "unworkable", like a generator that powers itself. But by studying Lenz's law, we may find that "100% efficient" is not as efficient as we think it is. Look at the illustration. At the bottom, I rotated the coils so the emf would be in the same direction. Now notice that the emf produced with a North approaching, and a North leaving is the same as a North and South approaching at the same time...   ??? Looks like modern generators might be grossly inefficient.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 30, 2014, 03:58:11 AM
Guys, I just wanted to mention that I re-tried 2-phase. Has anyone else tried this?

I was going over motor design, and I remembered about capacitive reactance, so I found this calculator- http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-RC.htm . If you want to try 2 phase, all you need is what's in the schematic. If your two primary coils are identical, then use the calculator to apply a matching resistor to the other primary to have a balanced set.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 30, 2014, 07:53:27 AM
Madddann,
I will build your circuit with 12 V outlet from the transformer. I already have the transformers, resistor and the diode bridge. I just need to know which condenser value I need to buy for 12 V. The problem is that I do not have and scope,I am doing it in the Figuera's way at the beginning of the XX century  :)

Your coils have a huge resistance , 36 ohms.. My last inducer coils are around 300 turns and 3 ohms. I guess that 12 V is fine to fire them.

Antijon, in your schematic, could you make a rough calculation of R and C for a value of L and 12 V?. It is just to grasp the equations
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 30, 2014, 04:27:51 PM
@ Hanon, well, I don't know about inductor size of L and honestly, I never learned much math. I can say a few things to make it easier to explain. In an AC circuit, a capacitor will always act as a resistor. In my supplies, the only resistors I have that can handle high power levels are 20 ohms. So to balance the two inducing coils power, I inserted the 20 Ohms in one, and tried to match the capacitor size. according to the calculator, that would be around 130 microfarad.

In motor design, sometimes they wind the "start" winding with a higher resistance. This lower self-induction and increases the phase lag. In our setup, it's fine if the two inducing coils are matching, but it's better if they have a high resistance.

@ Madddann, I did try your circuit, thanks for creating it. After some tests, I think there are a few parameters necessary to make it work correctly, but aside from that, it looks very promising.

So what I noticed, the DC voltage needs to be equal to half of the transformer total voltage. With a 12V center-tapped transformer, I have 6 volts on each side, so my DC voltage shouldn't exceed 6 volts.

Also, with high power levels, the center-tapped transformer should be loosely coupled to the AC line, like a ballast. The reason why is because the DC current moving through it will increase the current drawn from the line side. But, unless we're using a car battery for the DC supply, this still looks like a good driver for a Figuera generator. Like you, I need some higher resistance coils. haha
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on September 30, 2014, 05:01:06 PM
Madddann,
I will build your circuit with 12 V outlet from the transformer. I already have the transformers, resistor and the diode bridge. I just need to know which condenser value I need to buy for 12 V. The problem is that I do not have and scope,I am doing it in the Figuera's way at the beginning of the XX century  :)

Your coils have a huge resistance , 36 ohms.. My last inducer coils are around 300 turns and 3 ohms. I guess that 12 V is fine to fire them.

Antijon, in your schematic, could you make a rough calculation of R and C for a value of L and 12 V?. It is just to grasp the equations

Hi Hanon!

Please don't hook up 3 ohm coils to my scheme - it is the recipe to burn something up (unless you have a 120W transformer and a 450W one - for the first and second transformer... and a 160W 1.5 ohm resistor and a giant capacitor 35V)  :)

To build my circuit yor coils need to be in the range let's say 30 ohm to 60 ohm for the setup to give you usable strenght magnetic fields for testing (around 10W to 25W per electromagnet).

You could use your MOT secondary windings to apply to my scheme, but you would get only about 5W per electromagnet - which I think is too less to determine anything.

Also forgot to mention, when testing my circuit, put some protection before the transformers - a fuse or something, and check electromagnets, transformers and rheostat or resistor quite often for overheating.

The capacitor in my circuit is only to smooth the voltage - a 10000uF 35V or greater will do, but not too big of a capacitance.

For my tests I used the "I" laminations from a small transformer (I think around 25W) and contactor like sized coils to fit onto the laminations.



Hope it helps!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2014, 05:27:35 PM
Well, at least patent with rotating coil from 1902 seems clear enough and support Tom Bearden claims : don't kill magnetic dipole. Just my 2 cents...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 30, 2014, 06:47:56 PM
 Antijon,
 
I guess now I understand what you are proposing : in your circuit the impedance of one side (RL circuit) should match the impedance of the other side (LC circuit) in order to have the same quantity of amperes circulating in both side (but unphased). See the equations attached below.

For     RL impedance  = LC impedance:     

         R^2 + XL^2          =  ( XL - XC )^2

R^2 + (2·pi·freq·L)^2   =   ( (2·pi·freq·L) - (1/(2·pi·freq·C)) )^2     ---->  R = ...
 
Madddann, do not worry, your circuit design is with 120 V. I will do it with transformers to 12 V . Then a coils around 3 ohms will give me 4 amperes. Maybe I will add a resistor after the coil to decrease the amperage

Antijon, the gif animation that you posted some weeks ago does not work. I think this site convert the gif files into an static image. Could you post it in another external link, or zipped? Thanks!
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 30, 2014, 08:18:21 PM
Here there are more supports in favor of the ironless induced coils. The following quotes are taken from the ELECTRIC POWER journal Volume III, No. 27 and dated 1891, Caryl D. Haskins stated:
 
[page 97, fifth paragraph of the first column]
"I will now pass on to a description of some typical Ferranti dynamos. First among these a few words are due to the original form of Ferranti alternator, which, while is no longer manufactured, still, without doubt, was a machine of marked efficiency and great originality."
Again the efficiency of this generator is referred as something out of the ordinary. Was really this type of generator out of production by 1891?
 
[page 97, last paragraph of the second column]
"...The machines were originally designed to give current for 10,000 ten candle-power lamps each, but have frequently carried as high as 19,000 lamps without apparent effort."
This paragraph is interesting. The generator can handle effortlessly about twice the load that it was designed for. Was this performance intended in the original design? Or, was it something unexpected?
 
 [page 98, second paragraph of the second column]
"It has probably been already remarked that I have made mention of no regulating device for the dynamos. Mr. Ferranti makes no provision for automatic governing, nor is it needed. It must be remembered that there is absolutely no iron in the armature, and that the machine is, therefore, self-regulating to a very large degree."
The above statement is a heresy in today's electric generator field. It is well known that when a generator is loaded the rotor will break and tend to slow down, which requires the governor a) to increase the applied torque by increasing the fuel flow going into the internal combustion engine, and b) to increase the rotor magnetic field by injecting more current into the rotor coils. Why doesn't the Ferranti's alternator suffer from the break? As predicted in the published paper, the counter torque of ironless induced coils is less responsive to the load than induced coils having iron cores. The latter is a recipe for over unity.
 
Next step, build a prototype. I cannot wait!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2014, 10:02:02 PM
If I corectly understood that would mean Ferranti patented device with rotating ironless coils before Figuera ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 01, 2014, 12:32:34 AM
If I corectly understood that would mean Ferranti patented device with rotating ironless coils before Figuera ?
That is correct. The earlier core-less generator that I have been able to find is described in the patent from William Thomson.


The story for these ironless alternators has been so interesting that I have stopped any construction work in favor of reading those articles. The quotes that I referred to in the above post come from Caryl D Haskins, a person who worked with Ferranti. It is very entertaining. The narratives Mr. Haskins presents in this article for the Ferranti's electrical system cover Ferranti Methods of Distribution, Dynamos, Transformers, Fuses, and Meters. It looks like Mr Haskins was appointed by a committee to speak about the Ferranti' generator stations at Grosvernor Gallery and Deptford stations.

Why did a committee summoned Mr. Haskins to recall his experience with the Ferranti's company? I kind of think that there was a rumor about the extraordinary performance related to the Ferranti's alternators.  For example, in a paragraph, Mr. Haskins states:

[page 96, tenth paragraph of the first column]
"It has quite frequently been stated, I believe, that these two machines at the Grosvernor were run in multiple. This is in no sense true, though since the removal of these dynamos to Deptford station, they are to be connected in this manner, I understand."


My interpretation of the above statement is that the power output by the generating plant was too large to come from a single unit. The engineers did not believe it. What do you think?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 01, 2014, 08:24:33 AM
Bajac,

Firstly, english is not my language and sorry for any miscommunication. This is my first post here :D

My intention here is to tell you Bajac that I think you're on the right track. I cannot agree more with you about the ironless core..
I hypothesized months ago when you were off of the forum that the only secret about Figuera generator is the coreless armature or output coil, but I had no time to prove it because I was completing my engineering degree. Now I am graduated and have a lot of free time (and still jobless lol)..
I have built an extremely simple device the components of which I believe all of you guys already have them. If my measurement with a cheap multimeter is sufficiently accurate, then I can say that the hypothesis is valid. Before building it, I simulated the device in FEMM 4.2 and the result of my experiment agreed with the simulation.

I am sure that I don't fully understand it, but this is the concept I use to describe the mechanism:
We have to refresh our old lesson
-------------
Properties    Electric          Magnetic
Force            V (volt)            NI (ampere turn)
Flow             I (ampere)    Flux (weber)
Impedance   Z (ohm)        S (AT/wb)
-------------
Flux linking: V = d(flux)/dt ----> I tried to replicate 1908 patent so no flux cutting
-------------
A coil with a higher permeability core means that with the same magneto motive force/MMF (and with relatively the same power if hysteresis and eddy losses kept minimum) more flux will be created (more flow). Doesn't it sound that we get "free flux"? This is what contributes to overunity when it is coupled with an output coil with low permeability core or coreless.
In a conventional transformer while operating, both the primary coil and the secondary one have the same MMF, more turns less current, less turns more current. Since they are wound in the same core material and in a closed magnetic circuit, they will also have the same amount of flux. In other words, the primary is "armed" with high permeability core to induce a voltage in the secondary and unfortunately the secondary is also "armed" so that it can fight back. The counter attack from the secondary will reduce the self inductance of the primary (lower inductance L), therefore more current will flow in the primary which means more power dissipated to heat. That event is (in my opinion) mistakenly explained that the power of the secondary is coming from the primary.

Back to Figuera's generator 1908. It very similarly appears like a transformer. But here, we "arm" only the primary with a high permeability core and we keep the secondary "unarmed". With that arrangement, the primary is still able to induce a voltage in the secondary (although lower because of high reluctance and less flux) and the secondary with its induced voltage cannot fight back the flux applied to it, it needs a lot of current to fight the primary flux back. Therefore, the self inductance of the primary will be relatively constant and no more power will be drawn and we can say that the only factor which limits the output power is the resistance and strength of the conductor to carry the current. Less resistance will help to release more power.

Here are some results of my experiment (all in rms):
Vin = 220 V 50 hz (sinusoidal from line)
R primary coil = 6 ohms
D primary = ??
R secondary coil = 0.2 ohms
D secondary = 0.8 mm

Open-secondary:
Vout = 5 V
Iin = 1.52 A (magnetizing current)

Closed:
(I)
R secondary coil + load = 1.2 ohms (I used connector wire as a load lol)
Iout = 3.8 A
Iin = 1.53 A (insignificant increase)
(II)
R secondary coil + load = 0.6 ohms (more connector wire)
Iout = 7.9 A
Iin = 1.54 A (still insignificant increase)

I did the Closed I & II test no more than 10 s because the connector wire got really hot. You can calculate the COP by yourselves. I plan to do a self loop test but many things need to be calculated. I'll get a job first lol.


Good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 01, 2014, 05:07:21 PM
Hey Hanon, thanks for letting me know about the gif. This is it in a zip, but please note: This only shows the action of the driving circuit. If there was a load attached, the center coil would produce an opposing field each time a driving coil increased. Thanks for the formula and diagram. It's funny that I can understand just about any machine by looking at it, but I have a serious mental block with math. haha

Hey guys, in doing some tests with my 2-phase setup, I'm starting to see some strange things happening. And I think I see why the Figuera generator can produce more power than is consumed. If anyone is familiar with motor back-emf, please correct me if I'm wrong, but feeding a device like this 2-phase power, even with Figuera's 2-phase DC, creates a back voltage that reduces the incoming current. After all, the driving circuit can create a rotating field, just as Figuera described.

If anyone wants to try this, you can use two transformers instead of a dual-primary transformer. If you look at my 2-phase circuit, simply connect two transformers in series, then attach one side to the capacitor, the opposite transformer to the resistor, and then connect the two center transformer leads to the other AC input. Connect the two outputs in series, and to the load.

Interesting things that I've noticed: Loading the output increases the voltage on the supply side. I don't have any power meters, but this suggests that the current input is reduced, similar to a motor back-emf.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 01, 2014, 07:14:36 PM
Guys, this is an improvement to my last schematic. The two transformers can be shorted.

If we compare this schematic to a "permanent split capacitor" motor:
The transformer connected to the capacitor represents the "start" winding.
The transformer connected to line through the resistor represents the "run" winding.
The two transformer secondaries represent the rotor.

When the two secondary coils are wired in series, and shorted, this is like the motor running with no load. It creates a back-emf that cancels the incoming line voltage, and reduces current drawn from the line.


But still, I want to point out that the locked- rotor amps, or LRA, represents the current consumed by a motor when the rotor can't turn. This is normally near or more than 100 amps, in my line of work. This means that the motor is behaving exactly like a transformer with a shorted secondary. There is no back-emf being created, and all the current is being taken from line... which is exactly like what we do when we power a simple transformer from line. Think about it like this: motors actually do produce overunity. I say that because the electrical energy in the rotor never changes. So, we have a transformer with a shorted secondary that pulls 100 amps from the line, but by spinning the secondary, we can generate our own energy and reduce the line current to a mere 1/10 of what it was. So, a typical transformer with a shorted secondary that once drew 100 amps, now only draws 10, yet the energy in the rotor remains the same. However, we never realized this because we've never tapped the rotor current of an induction motor.

Anyway, this is all theoretical, but if someone has accurate power reading tools, and want's to try this simple circuit, I'd really appreciate any info. Thanks guys

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 02, 2014, 01:52:32 AM
A colleague of mine was very impressed when he learned about the absence of a governor mechanisms in the Ferranti’s disk armature alternators. He did not believe it and he proposed that it might be due to the inertia of the large diameter armature. I discussed this possibility and explained that the ironless coils make the armature less massive. I also indicated that if the armature coils were filled with iron, it will be heavier with greater momentum but the augmented reaction field will create a counter force thousands of times larger (as explained in the published paper) and without a governor, it will just bring the armature to a stop.
 
I then decided to search the historical records for any information related to the inertia of the armature disk of the Ferranti copper disk alternators.  Certainly, I found a lecture in THE ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, OCTOBER 14, 1982 from Professor George Forbes in which he explains the reasons why some alternating-current dynamos can function as motors very efficiently. In the first column on page 385, Mr. Forbes wrote:
 
“The only difference between the Siemens or Ferranti alternator and the Mordey alternator is that, in the one case, the armature revolves, and in the other case the field magnets revolve; otherwise they are practically identical, from an electrical point of view. Yet the Mordey alternator acts most admirably as a motor, and the Siemens or Ferranti machine does not work as a motor. The reason is simply this, that the power which is being given to an alternating motor is of course of a pulsating character, like the current; and there are moments when no power is given to the motor at all. If, then, the motor is doing work, it requires to have a considerable momentum to get over those dead centres, and to be able to continue doing the work, and to get pass those dead centres when the generator is given out no power whatever. Now, the Mordey alternator, in which the field magnets rotate, has an enormous momentum; but the Siemens or Ferranti alternator, where the armature rotates, has very little momentum indeed; and the consequence is that while the Mordey alternator works admirably as a motor, the Siemens or Ferranti alternator does not.”
 
The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jdavidcv on October 02, 2014, 03:43:07 PM
Ferranti useful information.


JD




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 02, 2014, 04:50:14 PM
... The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.

This may have a bearing on the subject, or may not.

The Ferranti coils are wound like capacitors and there is evidence that they had a more than average effect in his alternators. Ever hear of the Ferranti Effect? It's a phenomenon that became apparent after his alternators were installed at Deptford.

Also, alternators with windings that have capacitance can produce a motor effect. And we all know about the Tesla coil for electromagnets that demonstrate the affect capacitance has on coil windings.

Info on the motor effect can be found on pages 33-35 of the seventh edition of  Dynamo-electric machinery. Here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=p4TTAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR10-IA1&lpg=PR10-IA1&dq=%22Dynamo-electric+Machinery%22+Seventh+Edition&source=bl&ots=k5uEpzPlNH&sig=UNAvJT-5lWhdFE_uKtY2sCaUHlo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4lotVI3jC8T9yQS94YCIBQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22Dynamo-electric%20Machinery%22%20Seventh%20Edition&f=false

Cadman


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 02, 2014, 06:17:24 PM
Cadman,
 
I don't think I understand your comment completely.
 
But, the Ferranti effect shown in transmission lines has nothing to do with the performance of the generator. When I took the power transmission line course, it was modeled in three types: short, medium, and long. Long transmission line being the most complex. Basically, as the feeders get longer, the capacity effects of the line becomes more pronounced, which can cause reflection and standing wave issues. The result is higher voltages at the receiving end of the transmission lines. To stabilize the voltage, shunt devices are placed at specific locations of the transmission line.
 
I assume that Ferranti was the first person to experience this event in power transmission lines because he was the first to install relative long feeders at high voltages. I think he installed a 10KV line while most of the engineers of the time forecasted a failure because these engineers believed that it was about impossible to go over 2KV and trasmit the high power capacity of the Ferranti generators. I remember reading something about it.
 
Bajac
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 02, 2014, 06:42:09 PM
Something I have been trying to find is the reason(s) why the Ferranti type generators were abandoned. Maybe someone in this forum has come across with this info.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 02, 2014, 08:02:50 PM
bajac

Afaik it was simply due to ECONOMIC reasons !!!!  American electrical engineers were able to standarise production, lower costs and so won by price advantage !

http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 02, 2014, 09:07:37 PM
Cadman,
 
I don't think I understand your comment completely.

OK, but if you ever build one of these just give some thought about my last post. The Ferranti effect was the least of it. The point was to built-in capacitance and how it might be used to advantage.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 03, 2014, 12:24:03 AM
bajac

Afaik it was simply due to ECONOMIC reasons !!!!  American electrical engineers were able to standarise production, lower costs and so won by price advantage !

http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false (http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false)


Could you provide the specific page numbers showing the information?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 03, 2014, 12:32:54 AM
OK, but if you ever build one of these just give some thought about my last post. The Ferranti effect was the least of it. The point was to built-in capacitance and how it might be used to advantage.

Cheers


I still do not know what capacitance are you referring to and/or I do not see how said capacitance could help on the power performance of the generator. If your are proposing an idea or concept, please, take the time to develop and elaborate your idea. For example, it took me several weeks to prepare my concept for diminishing torque when using ironless induced coil in generators. It is not fair for others when a person proposes something that only he/she understands and then let others the work to figure it out. Otherwise, we will be killing the purpose and goal of the forum, which is to contribute and provide understanding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 03, 2014, 03:00:06 AM
Bajac,

Firstly, english is not my language and sorry for any miscommunication. This is my first post here :D

My intention here is to tell you Bajac that I think you're on the right track. I cannot agree more with you about the ironless core..
I hypothesized months ago when you were off of the forum that the only secret about Figuera generator is the coreless armature or output coil, but I had no time to prove it because I was completing my engineering degree. Now I am graduated and have a lot of free time (and still jobless lol)..
I have built an extremely simple device the components of which I believe all of you guys already have them. If my measurement with a cheap multimeter is sufficiently accurate, then I can say that the hypothesis is valid. Before building it, I simulated the device in FEMM 4.2 and the result of my experiment agreed with the simulation.

I am sure that I don't fully understand it, but this is the concept I use to describe the mechanism:
We have to refresh our old lesson
-------------
Properties    Electric          Magnetic
Force            V (volt)            NI (ampere turn)
Flow             I (ampere)    Flux (weber)
Impedance   Z (ohm)        S (AT/wb)
-------------
Flux linking: V = d(flux)/dt ----> I tried to replicate 1908 patent so no flux cutting
-------------
A coil with a higher permeability core means that with the same magneto motive force/MMF (and with relatively the same power if hysteresis and eddy losses kept minimum) more flux will be created (more flow). Doesn't it sound that we get "free flux"? This is what contributes to overunity when it is coupled with an output coil with low permeability core or coreless.
In a conventional transformer while operating, both the primary coil and the secondary one have the same MMF, more turns less current, less turns more current. Since they are wound in the same core material and in a closed magnetic circuit, they will also have the same amount of flux. In other words, the primary is "armed" with high permeability core to induce a voltage in the secondary and unfortunately the secondary is also "armed" so that it can fight back. The counter attack from the secondary will reduce the self inductance of the primary (lower inductance L), therefore more current will flow in the primary which means more power dissipated to heat. That event is (in my opinion) mistakenly explained that the power of the secondary is coming from the primary.

Back to Figuera's generator 1908. It very similarly appears like a transformer. But here, we "arm" only the primary with a high permeability core and we keep the secondary "unarmed". With that arrangement, the primary is still able to induce a voltage in the secondary (although lower because of high reluctance and less flux) and the secondary with its induced voltage cannot fight back the flux applied to it, it needs a lot of current to fight the primary flux back. Therefore, the self inductance of the primary will be relatively constant and no more power will be drawn and we can say that the only factor which limits the output power is the resistance and strength of the conductor to carry the current. Less resistance will help to release more power.

Here are some results of my experiment (all in rms):
Vin = 220 V 50 hz (sinusoidal from line)
R primary coil = 6 ohms
D primary = ??
R secondary coil = 0.2 ohms
D secondary = 0.8 mm

Open-secondary:
Vout = 5 V
Iin = 1.52 A (magnetizing current)

Closed:
(I)
R secondary coil + load = 1.2 ohms (I used connector wire as a load lol)
Iout = 3.8 A
Iin = 1.53 A (insignificant increase)
(II)
R secondary coil + load = 0.6 ohms (more connector wire)
Iout = 7.9 A
Iin = 1.54 A (still insignificant increase)

I did the Closed I & II test no more than 10 s because the connector wire got really hot. You can calculate the COP by yourselves. I plan to do a self loop test but many things need to be calculated. I'll get a job first lol.


Good luck


You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.


You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.

Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 03, 2014, 11:08:39 AM

Could you provide the specific page numbers showing the information?
Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 03, 2014, 01:47:30 PM
Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm (http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm)

No progress. Page 66 is missing. Could you summarize it?
 
I have a hunch. Before the electrical system was established there existed the big energy companies that provided fuel for the gas lamps, boilers for heating and steam engines, etc. I suspect that these companies bought most of the shares of the earlier electrical companies such as Ferranti, Mordey, Siemens, etc. and set the rules for what technology was supposed to move forward. A key investigation would be to identify all share holders of the earlier electrical companies and identify any conflict of interest of these people. The interest or benefit is the greatest motivator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 03, 2014, 03:05:39 PM

You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.


You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.

Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.


Bajac

I was aware that the software wouldn't calculate an overunity condition, I just wanted to estimate how much flux generated and the experiment result is the ultimate truth although the explanation is very often unknown.

Below I attach a picture showing my set up which is very simple to replicate. The dimension is 8x9x10 cm and between 3-4 kg's weight. I hope somebody here would replicate and then do a more accurate COP measurement, better yet make a self-running set up which will show obviously its overunity.

I did some more tests today and got slightly different results. Here are some of them:

SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A        Rin : 6.3 ohm        Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A      Rout : 0.5 ohm     Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W

My set up is very loose and vibrating violently so I guess that's why the result differed from what I posted here http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871 ..
If the reactance of the primary inductance is neutralized by using capacitor, Vin will need only around 11 Vac rms (for consideration when designing self-running set up)..

Good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 03, 2014, 06:37:29 PM

I still do not know what capacitance are you referring to and/or I do not see how said capacitance could help on the power performance of the generator. If your are proposing an idea or concept, please, take the time to develop and elaborate your idea. For example, it took me several weeks to prepare my concept for diminishing torque when using ironless induced coil in generators. It is not fair for others when a person proposes something that only he/she understands and then let others the work to figure it out. Otherwise, we will be killing the purpose and goal of the forum, which is to contribute and provide understanding.

I am referring to the capacitance of the coils in the generator, as I said earlier.

According to the Tesla patent 512340 Coil for Electromagnets, the capacitance of this type of coil can greatly reduce and even neutralize its self induction.

Yeah I know Tesla this, Tesla that, eyes glaze over.

Want an experiment that proves something?

Get a AA battery, a long nail 4 to 5 inch, and about 10 feet of 20 to 24 gauge magnet wire and two piles of paper clips. Wind 100 turns around the nail, connect the ends to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the first pile.
Now take two magnet wires side by side and wind 50 turns around the nail. Connect the inside wire at each end together to make it a Telsa coil. Connect the two outside wires to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the second pile.

Same battery volts and current, same amount of wire, same iron, much higher capacitance, roughly twice the magnetic flux.

Twice the flux linking with the induced = twice the emf.

The great increase in flux isn't even mentioned in the patent, and this experiment has nothing to do with the self induction of those coils, nor the resonant rise in output the ironless versions are capable of at the right frequency.

You have been marveling at the output of the Ferranti generator so earlier I was trying to point out some general ideas and similarities that occurred to me while reading up on it.
I thought the purpose of the forum was also to discuss and learn but if you only want proofs and don't wish to hear undeveloped thoughts and ideas then OK. It's your thread.

Regards, and good luck to you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 03, 2014, 07:41:12 PM
poorpluto,

Please try this arrangement of secondary coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 03, 2014, 09:53:13 PM
poorpluto,

Please try this arrangement of secondary coils.

Thanks for the idea but I tried that before with no voltage induced at the output. After reviewing Faraday's law, I had realized that the arrangement (the one you suggested) was appropriate for a moving coil or moving field (flux cutting) where two opposite magnetic fluxes were cut by a coil resulting in two additive voltage within the coil.

In my arrangement where there is only a changing magnetic without any moving part, the induction will occur only by the flux linking law d(flux)/dt. From that, I conclude that the cause of the absence of induced voltage is that the total flux which is changing withing the area of the coil is zero (two opposite fluxes cancel each other). This reminds me to someone in this thread who tried to replicate Figuera's patent No. 30378 (1902) before and placed the output coil in a similar way you've shown and yes he failed (so did I in my arrangement), I forgot what page he posted on. I believe that Figuera's idea is very simple and doesn't break any induction law but does break the energy conservation law  :)

Happy Figuering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 04, 2014, 12:12:14 AM
Poorpluto, thanks for replying.

You confirmed my experience with that setup although I was curious what result you would have with 220v input and large coil vs my 24v input and small coil. I came to a different conclusion though. I figured the flux linking with the wire did produce emf but it was so minuscule the meter wouldn't read it. If you calculate based on the flux area equal to the diameter of the wire x the length of the iron it crosses you will see what I mean. That made me want to try a rotating field but that doesn't work either. Even though the vector sums make it look like the field is rotating, it's not. As far as the wire under the pole is concerned it's just a varying flux and reacts just like those rectangular coils across the e-core.

If you wouldn't mind, could you measure the emf produced by each one of your 3 induced coils and let us know what they produce?

Thanks

Cadman


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on October 04, 2014, 12:14:57 AM

.....

Get a AA battery, a long nail 4 to 5 inch, and about 10 feet of 20 to 24 gauge magnet wire and two piles of paper clips. Wind 100 turns around the nail, connect the ends to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the first pile.
Now take two magnet wires side by side and wind 50 turns around the nail. Connect the inside wire at each end together to make it a Telsa coil. Connect the two outside wires to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the second pile.

Same battery volts and current, same amount of wire, same iron, much higher capacitance, roughly twice the magnetic flux.

Twice the flux linking with the induced = twice the emf.

The great increase in flux isn't even mentioned in the patent, and this experiment has nothing to do with the self induction of those coils, nor the resonant rise in output the ironless versions are capable of at the right frequency.

....


Hi Cadman,

I would like to comment your above post. I would also ask whether you yourself did the test or you referred to this web page? here: http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm

I am aware of at least 3 persons on this forum who tested the single and bifilar wound electromagnet tests with the nails and paper clips. None of them found any difference in the magnetic flux strength between the single wound and the bifilarly wound electromagnets. Here are the links:

1) http://www.overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg244189/#msg244189

2) http://www.overunity.com/13460/teslas-coil-for-electro-magnets/msg359705/#msg359705

3) http://www.overunity.com/13460/teslas-coil-for-electro-magnets/msg359725/#msg359725 

This latter 3rd link was my post and it included two links to my actual tests. In fact, I did two tests, one with lifting up paperclips and another one lifting up small nuts as you can see in the photo if you click on the second link in my post back then (i.e. the 3rd link above includes both of the links to my paperclip and nut lifting tests).

So I do not understand why David Thomson claimed in the bottom of this link ( http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm ) that the bifilar wound coil produced twice as much energy as the single wound coil did. It does not produce twice as much at all, it produces the same amount of flux.

I know about the Tesla's patent on Coil for Electromagnets of course.  He used the bifilar windings to increase the self capacitance of the coil and he fed such coil with an AC or pulsed AC current at a frequency where the self capacitance neutralized the coil's inductance, hence there were no any 'opposition' from such coil to input current as he had described.

Thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 04, 2014, 12:43:46 AM
Cadman
 Good job sparky. You get a cookie. Now can you pick up a basket ball without touching it using noting more then two drinking glasses? Its uncanny how much the two subjects have in common.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on October 04, 2014, 12:49:32 AM
Hi poorpluto,

Reading your posts on the tests, it seems to me that you consider the small change in the input power comsumption only when you load the secondary and then you seem to compare this small change to the secondary output power to get a certain efficiency or COP figure of your transformer.

IF my assumption is correct, then I wonder why you do not consider the total magnetizing current going into the primary coil from the 220 V mains (1.3-1.54 Amper in your first post data for instance).  To get a correct input power evaluation, we should consider the phase angle between the primary current and voltage of course, both in the unloaded and loaded secondary coil cases. But this is not the main issue though.

I understand that you suggested tuning out the primary coil reactance by a capacitor to get a resonace condition at 50 Hz. However if you think that you could benefit from the Q times increased circulating current of such parallel LC circuit at the primary, remember that the load from the secondary coil transforms back to the primary and ruin the Q,  especially when the load is a few Ohms or a short piece of wire.

Have you tested this situation?  i.e. when you mentioned 11 V AC rms instead of the 220 V input, you meant that the 11V AC voltage was coming from the secondary coil while another or the same secondary coil was loaded with several Ampers?

Thanks, Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 04, 2014, 01:03:42 AM
Hi Gyula,

I did learn of it at the site you mentioned and yes I did the experiment myself. I used a 1/4" x 3-1/2" grade 8 allen-head bolt instead of a nail though. Other than that, exactly the same. I used #20 wire. The straight coil lifted 4 paper clips and the Tesla version lifted 8 then dropped 1. Repeated several times and always got 4 to 7. What I didn't mention before was I switched the polarity of the battery to the coils several times between each test to try and remove any residual magnetism in the bolt and used different paper clip piles for the same reason.

Try it for yourself people, don't take my word for it.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 04, 2014, 01:35:49 AM
Cadman
 Good job sparky. You get a cookie. Now can you pick up a basket ball without touching it using noting more then two drinking glasses? Its uncanny how much the two subjects have in common.

Absolutely! I am also 8 feet tall and consume my enemies with lightning bolts from my ass

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 04, 2014, 01:42:17 AM
I am referring to the capacitance of the coils in the generator, as I said earlier.

According to the Tesla patent 512340 Coil for Electromagnets, the capacitance of this type of coil can greatly reduce and even neutralize its self induction.

Yeah I know Tesla this, Tesla that, eyes glaze over.

Want an experiment that proves something?


Thank you for clarifying it. Now I know what you were trying to say. I do not understand why you did not explain it like that from the beginning.


I always make an effort to reply to the posts even though I do not have too much spare time. I am getting behind on some of my other work because I have dedicated a lot of time to this forum for the last two months. I do not regret it at all, it has been too much fun learning about Ferranti and all others that had an starring role in the second half of the 19th century.

Quote
Get a AA battery, a long nail 4 to 5 inch, and about 10 feet of 20 to 24 gauge magnet wire and two piles of paper clips. Wind 100 turns around the nail, connect the ends to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the first pile.
Here you have a tight wound coil with low leakage and high self inductance or high linkage flux. Most of the magnetic flux of each wire flows through the iron nail. The nail should pick up a lot of paper clips.

Quote
Now take two magnet wires side by side and wind 50 turns around the nail. Connect the inside wire at each end together to make it a Telsa coil. Connect the two outside wires to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the second pile.
Here you have a loose inductor with high leakage and low self inductance or low linkage flux. The flux of the most outer wires may not even reach the inner turns because of the geometry (disk or pancake shape). The magnetic field in the iron nail should be weaker and should pick up a lower number of paper clips.


Quote
Same battery volts and current, same amount of wire, same iron, much higher capacitance, roughly twice the magnetic flux.
Have you measured the capacitance in these coils? It should be in the order of magnitude of nano Farads (10^-9 Farads or small microfarads). At 100Hz, these capacitance are not even worth of taking them into account because they result in very small time constants. Any transformer should have higher parasitic capacitance between turns, between coils, and between coils and the iron core. The capacitance of the coils that Tesla refers to becomes important at high frequencies, which correspond to the operating frequencies of the Tesla coils. I can tell you parasitic capacitance of the coils of the Ferranti alternators has no effect on its performance at such low frequencies.

Quote
Twice the flux linking with the induced = twice the emf.
The great increase in flux isn't even mentioned in the patent, and this experiment has nothing to do with the self induction of those coils, nor the resonant rise in output the ironless versions are capable of at the right frequency.
Because of the operating frequency of the Ferranti alternators, there is no possibility of having a resonant circuit.

Quote
You have been marveling at the output of the Ferranti generator so earlier I was trying to point out some general ideas and similarities that occurred to me while reading up on it.
I thought the purpose of the forum was also to discuss and learn but if you only want proofs and don't wish to hear undeveloped thoughts and ideas then OK. It's your thread.
It was not my intent to upset you. Maybe I got a little frustrated because I was not able to understand your point even though I was trying hard. I really apologize for any inconvenience.


I also want to say that I do not own this thread. Yes, I did started it, but I do not have the right to stop or prevent anyone from posting in this thread. We all just have a common interest, and we all are gentlemen.


I really appreciate your posts. I always look forward to hearing from you. Your participation has been very helpful indeed! Thanks to you, today I know about Ferranti.


Best regards,
Bajac


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 04, 2014, 07:54:34 AM
Poorpluto, thanks for replying.

You confirmed my experience with that setup although I was curious what result you would have with 220v input and large coil vs my 24v input and small coil. I came to a different conclusion though. I figured the flux linking with the wire did produce emf but it was so minuscule the meter wouldn't read it. If you calculate based on the flux area equal to the diameter of the wire x the length of the iron it crosses you will see what I mean...

I think lower input voltage would reduce the input current so would also reduce the output voltage. A smaller secondary coil will help to reduce the gap between E & I core (lower reluctance, more flux) but it has higher resistance which will reduce the maximum power out, maybe I'll try it some other time. I see what you mean by flux area of wire diameter, I agree there is a voltage but very tiny. Did you mean you had tried a rotating magnetic field? How was the set up (the output coil and the inducer)?

I've just done a measurement on 3 secondary coil separately, here is the result:
Center secondary coil: V = 3.7 V
The other two: 0.8 V & 0.75 V
(total 5.25 V approximately the same as the previous measurement)

Hi poorpluto,

Reading your posts on the tests, it seems to me that you consider the small change in the input power comsumption only when you load the secondary and then you seem to compare this small change to the secondary output power to get a certain efficiency or COP figure ...

I had shown the "secondary open" result in my second post to show the magnetizing current, is that what you mean? I don't know how to measure the phase shift between the primary current and voltage, that's why I use another way to calculate the power dissipated (I rms ^2 *R) and I think that's acceptable, right?

I don't understand Q (quality factor?) well. I meant that the secondary voltage must be stepped up to around 11 Vac, then the voltage would be sufficient to supply the magnetizing current (~1.55 A) in the primary in resonance while the load could still be connected to the secondary before or after stepping up. I haven't tested such arrangement I don't know whether it will be sufficient for a self-running test or not, any suggestion?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on October 04, 2014, 10:37:07 AM
...
Here you have a loose inductor with high leakage and low self inductance or low linkage flux. The flux of the most outer wires may not even reach the inner turns because of the geometry (disk or pancake shape). The magnetic field in the iron nail should be weaker and should pick up a lower number of paper clips.
...

bajac,
i think here is miscommunication, cadman refers to cylindrical shape bifi coil and not disk or pancake shape. 

gyulasun,
i see your bifi coil is not wound well, it should be side by side ,from front to end and each turn should not overlap each other. if it does then there is no different between single or bifi coil.

..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 04, 2014, 05:17:12 PM
C'mon Cadman
 I know you can do it your right there.If you go off on some stupid side track Im gonna get really grumpy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 04, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
Hello bajac.

I think we come up with the same ideas about this High Speed Alternators/ High Frequency Alternator(Tesla). Tesla mention on his diary(CS Notes) about his design with this kind of High Speed Alternators  which is exactly the same with those of Ferranti you have posted.

Tesla mention on his diary that the Induced wound coils is exactly 3Feet in length wound in each inserted PIN. I was referring to this patent
Quote
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,920-operating-arc-lamps?pq=YXJjIGxpZ2h0
, read it if you want to see the similarities of both machines(Tesla and Ferranti). I have read all High Speed Generators of Nikola Tesla, and understand it very well that you discussed about Ferranti is not new to me. Tesla has almost the same design of that High Speed Alternators either the armature are revolving or the Inducing Electromagnets are revolving.

I could say that Tesla also found that the Exciter/Inducing Electromagnet stationary(steady) on the outer ring is best design. The larger the radius or diameter of the High Speed Generators the more Zig Zag Exciter Electromagnet Tesla could put on the Outer ring.

There are two more patent which is exactly the same machine with those of Ferranti which Tesla have design.


Meow  ;D


Thank you for clarifying it. Now I know what you were trying to say. I do not understand why you did not explain it like that from the beginning.

I always make an effort to reply to the posts even though I do not have too much spare time. I am getting behind on some of my other work because I have dedicated a lot of time to this forum for the last two months. I do not regret it at all, it has been too much fun learning about Ferranti and all others that had an starring role in the second half of the 19th century.


I really appreciate your posts. I always look forward to hearing from you. Your participation has been very helpful indeed! Thanks to you, today I know about Ferranti.


Best regards,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 04, 2014, 09:54:57 PM
bajac,
i think here is miscommunication, cadman refers to cylindrical shape bifi coil and not disk or pancake shape. 


Yet, I do not see the relation with the Ferranti alternators.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 04, 2014, 10:06:45 PM
Hello bajac.

I think we come up with the same ideas about this High Speed Alternators/ High Frequency Alternator(Tesla). Tesla mention on his diary(CS Notes) about his design with this kind of High Speed Alternators  which is exactly the same with those of Ferranti you have posted.

Tesla mention on his diary that the Induced wound coils is exactly 3Feet in length wound in each inserted PIN. I was referring to this patent, read it if you want to see the similarities of both machines(Tesla and Ferranti). I have read all High Speed Generators of Nikola Tesla, and understand it very well that you discussed about Ferranti is not new to me. Tesla has almost the same design of that High Speed Alternators either the armature are revolving or the Inducing Electromagnets are revolving.

I could say that Tesla also found that the Exciter/Inducing Electromagnet stationary(steady) on the outer ring is best design. The larger the radius or diameter of the High Speed Generators the more Zig Zag Exciter Electromagnet Tesla could put on the Outer ring.

There are two more patent which is exactly the same machine with those of Ferranti which Tesla have design.


Meow  ;D

I read the Tesla patent No. 447,920 and I can tell you that this machine and the Ferranti alternator are two different animals. First, the generator in the Tesla patent does not use ironless induced coils. And second as stated in the patent, the goal of the generator is to produce a voltage source with frequencies higher then 10 KHz versus 50 to 100 Hz of the Ferranti alternators. The RPM of the armature of the Tesla device is 1,500 or more, versus 120 to 214 of the Ferranti alternators. The goal of the Tesla patent is to provide high frequency alternator voltages to eliminate the hum of the arc lamp of the time. At 10,000 Hz, the arc lamp turn off and on at a rate of 20,000 times, which is pretty much out of range of the human hearing.
The only thing they have in common is that they use a big flywheel. I am kind of disappointed with this comparison.

This is what I was referring to when I said take your time to develop and elaborate your idea. Otherwise, it just become a waste of time. Because at first sight the devices look similar, it does not mean they have the same principle of operation.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 05, 2014, 01:12:08 AM
...I see what you mean by flux area of wire diameter, I agree there is a voltage but very tiny. Did you mean you had tried a rotating magnetic field? How was the set up (the output coil and the inducer)?...

We took a couple of automotive alternators and made one stator out of two, about 5 cm thick. Wound 6 inducing coils, 100 turns #20 each, at 60 degrees pitch. The induced armature was plywood wrapped with steel banding with 6 rectangular coils, 14 turns #12 each, also at 60 degrees with one side under every third pole, and connected in series. We excited it with 24V 3 phase 4 amp.

Output? A whopping 1.03 volts. Tried both delta & wye field connections. So no way did the field actually rotate and the flux linking had to be only to the wire area.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 05, 2014, 11:45:51 AM

SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A        Rin : 6.3 ohm        Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A      Rout : 0.5 ohm     Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W


Hi poorpluto,

Thanks for sharing your results. You assembly is similar to patent 30378, from 1902. Nothin related to the 1908 patent, thay imho it is based on flux cutting. What happen if you use just one coil? Are you looking for any kind of cancellation by using the 3 output coils?

And lastly, why dont you calculate the power as P = V·I , in this case Pin = 220 volt· 1.5 A = 330 watts ? I suppose that if you requiring 220 volts is becaise the total impedance, not just resistance, of the inducer system requires such a big voltage.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 05, 2014, 05:25:52 PM
We took a couple of automotive alternators and made one stator out of two, about 5 cm thick. Wound 6 inducing coils, 100 turns #20 each, at 60 degrees pitch. The induced armature was plywood wrapped with steel banding with 6 rectangular coils, 14 turns #12 each, also at 60 degrees with one side under every third pole...

At least you got some lessons to learn sir :)
I have not learned about a rotating magnetic field by summation of several vectors so I'm in no position to give you some suggestions to try a new arrangement. I have not even proven what I believe to be the key of Figuera's devices, coreless induced coil in the strongest exciter magnet possible whether combined with a moving part (flux cutting) or a changing field (flux linking). I hope I have some luck to set my self-running test with of course the result we've been wanting but I'll be away for some weeks without access to my experiment equipments.

Hi poorpluto,

Thanks for sharing your results. You assembly is similar to patent 30378, from 1902. Nothin related to the 1908 patent, thay imho it is based on flux cutting. What happen if you use just one coil? Are you looking for any kind of cancellation by using the 3 output coils?

And lastly, why dont you calculate the power as P = V·I , in this case Pin = 220 volt· 1.5 A = 330 watts ? I suppose that if you requiring 220 volts is becaise the total impedance, not just resistance, of the inducer system requires such a big voltage.

Regards

Maybe you're right, mine is similar to the patent 30378 of 1902 but in my arguable point of view both the patent 30378 and the 1908 one have a very similar principle that is to put several coreless induced coils within changing strong magnetic fields without any moving part (output coil or inducer magnet). The moving part in 1908 patent is the rotary switch the purpose of which I think is to "increase the frequency", faster change of magnetic field results in higher output voltage.

I use 3 coils only to utilize all the magnetic field available in three legs then to increase the output voltage and also the output power (no wasted magnetic field). Using 1 coil in the center got only 3.7 V output (I posted the voltage of each coil before as Cadman asked).

Why not P=VI? Imho, the equation will give the value of apparent power, not the real power dissipated. Remember you can tune the input with a suitable value of capacitor then resonance will occur and you need only around 11 Vac (easily reached by the output) to excite the input 1.5 A. We don't really need that big voltage.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on October 05, 2014, 08:27:00 PM
There is no proof that the Figuera-Generator (1908) ever existed. Some people say that at the time Figuera filed his patents he had to show a model that works. But that is not the case. Figuera never showed a generator that worked. In my opinion he never got a valid patent for the "1908 Generator". Buforn filed a number of identical patents after Figuera died. This fact alone seems like a proof that there was never issued a valid patent. Buforn also didn't demonstrate a working model, he only had the "proof" that his machine works in form of a statement of an engineer.

In his patent application from 1910 Buforn makes the wrong statement, that the "ley de Lesez" ( obviously he means Lenz's law) only applies at movements and not at changes of the magnetic flux when there is no movement. Therefore he concludes (wrongly) that his (Figueras 1908) generator has to work.

This doesn't mean that Figuera patents are nonsense. Just want to say, that there is no proof, that a generator based on the Figuera patent of 1908 ever existed.

cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 05, 2014, 10:47:54 PM
There is no proof that the Figuera-Generator (1908) ever existed.

FALSE. He has many witnesses and press reporters watching his machine from 1902. You can believe it or not. Those people are not with us to verify it, unless any of then have more than 100 year old. It is true that there is no witness of the 1908 device. Maybe if Figuera had not died few days after filling the 1908 patent maybe now we have some press reports about his 1908 generator.I have always wonder if he died as consequences of natural causes or not....It is strange that in least that 2 weeks after his last patent Figuera was already buried literally... :o

Quote
Figuera never showed a generator that worked. In my opinion he never got a valid patent for the "1908 Generator".

FALSE. The 1908 was granted in november of that same year. I saw personally the old archives in the patent office. You can re-check the granting date in the oepm.es website --> Archivo Historico

Quote
Buforn filed a number of identical patents after Figuera died. This fact alone seems like a proof that there was never issued a valid patent.

FALSE. He filed 5 more patents from 1909 to 1914 (it is true that all of them are identical to the Figuera 1908 patent), and all those 5 patents were granted. Why did Buforn keep copying Figuera device until 1914 if it was an scam? ???

Quote
Buforn also didn't demonstrate a working model

FALSE. He presented a working model in 1913 certified by a engineer working for the patent office. Check the scanned document in the website alpoma.net . It is also translated into english



I love this disinfo agents. They just tell lies to discredit any devices with chances of sucess. Please, if you want to collaborate it is fine. If you want to tell lies this is not the place to do it. We are here to share experiences and to contribute to this project. 

I will not play your game. I wont reply again to any of your posts. You have 3 posts in this forum, and all of them are to discredit Figuera´s patent. So, you just logged on to discredit this project.

Bye bye.

As Don Quixote said: "The dog are barking. Therefore we are getting closer"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on October 06, 2014, 01:03:24 AM
Hi Cadman,

I do not know why you found in your tests the 4 to 7 difference, I did the tests twice (with paperclips and nuts) and found no difference.  While I accept that you found it,  and not counting my findings, the other two members, Barutologus and Magluvin found no difference either so I think we have to test more.

Maybe my 'uggly' winding method is to blame as member Marsing noticed, I do not know. I will repeat the tests with neatly wound coils as shown in David Thomson webpage.  In a few days time I return from a travel.

Gyula



...
I had shown the "secondary open" result in my second post to show the magnetizing current, is that what you mean? I don't know how to measure the phase shift between the primary current and voltage, that's why I use another way to calculate the power dissipated (I rms ^2 *R) and I think that's acceptable, right?

I don't understand Q (quality factor?) well. I meant that the secondary voltage must be stepped up to around 11 Vac, then the voltage would be sufficient to supply the magnetizing current (~1.55 A) in the primary in resonance while the load could still be connected to the secondary before or after stepping up. I haven't tested such arrangement I don't know whether it will be sufficient for a self-running test or not, any suggestion?

Hi poorpluto,

Yes I meant the magnetizing current in your second post.  IT is okay that it changes only a little when you short or almost fully short the secondary but the magnetizing current flows into the primary all the time from the 220 V mains and for input power estimation the total input current must be  considered, if it is 1.55 A or 1.6 A or whatever.
The phase shift could be measured with an oscilloscope, unfortunately, if you have one.  What you calculate from the (I rms ^2 *R) formula is the dissipated heat loss in the primary coil due to its wire DC resistance, that is all. It is different from the AC power going into the primary coil. The primary coil (like any coil) has an inductive reactance too, besides the wire resistance,  the two add up vectorially to give the total AC impedance for the primary. Here is a link to this: http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_3/3.html  and there are online calculators for this too.

When you feed the primary coil from 220V AC and it draws say 1.5 A, and you multiply them together to get input power, Pin, then you have to multiply this also with the phase angle between them, cos(phi). So Pin=Vrms*Irms*cos(phi)  this is why the phase angle would be needed to know.
Remember, the 1.5 A (or whatever) current flowing in your primary coil comes from the mains which was 220 V, so you have to consider this, when you wish to feed 11 V only to the primary instead of the 220 V: the 11 V simply will not be enough to maintain the 1.5 A and on the other hand the 11 V amplitude across the primary coil will be transformed to the secondary side with a much less secondary output amplitude if you compare it to secondary voltage the 220 V input normally gives (turns ratio for the transformer remains the same).

The Q quality factor for any coil is a ratio between the inductive reactance and the wire resistance, Q=XL/R. For a primary coil of a transformer, the transformed load resistance from the secondary coil side also appears in parallel with the primary coil, reducing the Z impedance of the primary coil.
When you use a capacitor to tune the primary coil to resonance with the mains, and you short or nearly fully short the secondary coil, then the transformered impedance across the primary reduces the Q so much that the benefit of the resonant tuning greatly gets reduced. This is why I asked whether you tested this.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on October 06, 2014, 02:23:19 AM
@ hanon

First it is not my intention to offend someone or to tell lies. It's my fault that I didn't realized that the 44267 patent indeed was granted and I apologize for that. I didn't want to tell „lies“.
I find it absolutely strange, that Buforn copied Figueras patent, filed it several times and got it granted. Unbelievable.

In the certification you are refering to, the engineer Gerónimo Bolibar certifies, that he has examined the original DOCUMENTATION and plans (but not a working model!).
Quote
Certifico: Que he examinado la documentación constituida por la memoria original y
plano correspondientes a la referida patente de invención, expedida en 6 de junio de
1910, por "UN GENERADOR DE ELECTRICIDAD "UNIVERSAL"

I am not convinced, that the 1908 Generator indeed existed. To me it seems that Buforn has not understood the Figuera Patent (1908) he copied and filed several times. He talks about the „ley de Lesez“ (Lenz's law?) but has no clue what Lenz's law means. Yes, IF Lenz's law only would apply to generators with moving parts his explanation would be right. But this is not the case. There must be an other explanation.

In my view the key to the Figuera 1908 generator is the constanly and reciprocal excitation of the „N“ and „S“ magnets. All tests must include this reciprocal excitation. Otherwise …......

Good luck to all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 06, 2014, 10:11:49 AM
Hey guys. Don't want to butt in here, but I also agree that the Figuera generator existed. After all the studying and experiments i've done, I can say that there is no other machine like this. in fact, i've never seen a machine that produces a waveform like this.

Figuera said, "It was considered the
possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of
movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase
and decrease, this is the variation of  the power of the magnetic field, or the
electrical current which produces it."

Talking about Lenz's law, I don't know if most people actually consider it... The driver for the Figuera generator produces, in the inductors, a change of direction of current every 90 degrees, electrically. Typical AC voltage does the same every 180 degrees. It also operates differently than a transformer, or AC current. The two inducing coils, or primaries, are polar opposites- north facing north. Because they are 90 degrees out of phase, when one is decreasing in intensity, and the other is increasing, they produce the same emf on the induced coil. This would be like getting two currents for the price of one. Just saying.

Anyway, just sharing something new. Today I built a commutator, though it didn't last long. haha So instead, I came up with a whole new driver. For those interested, this is powered by two phase.

As you can see from the left, AC, or line voltage, powers two transformers, one through a capacitor, to give the leading phase, and another through a resistor, matched to the reactance of the capacitor. Both transformers are center-tapped on the secondary side. I forgot the ground symbol on the Figuera section, but that's where they connect. As you can see, both transformers are fully rectified and feeding a string of resistors at various places. The effect is practically the same as the Figuera driver. It produces two, DC signals, 90 degrees out of phase.

It does produce some strange voltages on the resistors. In my setup, my two transformers are matching, 12V, 6V peak to peak, 1 amp rated. Even though the transformers are essentially in parallel, my max voltage at the resistors should be 6V. However, in some locations I was reading 20V AC, showing that back emf does have something to do with it's operation. In testing, I did remove one of the resistor taps that feed the generator. It did not drop the output voltage by a significant degree, so that's what makes me think that this setup doubles the current output. Another thing, I did try including a 12V DC bias between the center-taps and the generator, and it does increase output voltage.

Frankly, it's a really easy circuit to test. If I had three phase power, I could add another input transformer and make it smoother and easier to construct. Other than that, it produced good results considering i was using a 5mfd capacitor, and a 300ohm resistor to power it. If I can get some decent transformers, I might try running this on a generator rotor. ^^
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 06, 2014, 10:50:29 AM
I think Buforn really understood Lenz law perfectly. He is not talking about details but precisely mark the USAGE of Lenz law in dynamos generating strong magnetic attraction easily avoidable when using not movable coils. He kept own secret hidden , how to avoid OTHER negative factors of Lenz law in case of solid state device.Secret is hidden in some parts of his description like "in organized way". It may look like he don't know what Lenz law is about but he perfectly knew all effects of Lenz law and how to avoid them.

"According to this principle are founded all magneto or dynamo-electric machines from Clarke to the most perfect ones, and all have defect that under the law of Lenz, there are in them extremely strong attractions whose action or hindrance to the rotation of the armature is necessary to overcome.

The other way to archieve the same ends, is to  constantly and in organized way vary the intensity of the magnetic field, produced by electromagnets.

This procedure has the advantage of not having to overcome resistance of attraction (forces), there is no need to apply Lenz law and therefore not need any mechanical force to overcome this resistance."
Buforn first patent 47706

Again I feel that translating Buforn patents is important task.If there is anybody willing to make translation I may help a bit , even if I don't know Spanish language ;-).
I spotted in later patent there is only a few sentences changed which may be important to understand how Buforn improved Figuera device and which makes the task easier.
P.S. I have no  doubts the same concept was used by Hubbard later.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on October 06, 2014, 12:20:45 PM
I was only showing you the same big diameter drum generator. This is the real thing you are looking.
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,921-alternating-current-generator
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on October 06, 2014, 03:56:37 PM
I think Buforn really understood Lenz law perfectly. He is not talking about details but precisely mark the USAGE of Lenz law in dynamos generating strong magnetic attraction easily avoidable when using not movable coils.

Buforn mistakes Lenz's law and Lorentz force. Lorentz force is the force experienced by a moving charge when it moves in a magnetic field. Lenz's law tells the direction of induced emf.

He kept own secret hidden , how to avoid OTHER negative factors of Lenz law in case of solid state device.Secret is hidden in some parts of his description like "in organized way". It may look like he don't know what Lenz law is about but he perfectly knew all effects of Lenz law and how to avoid them.

Yes, something is hidden, but it's not Buforns secret, it's the secret of Figuera  ;)

Quote
"According to this principle are founded all magneto or dynamo-electric machines from Clarke to the most perfect ones, and all have defect that under the law of Lenz, there are in them extremely strong attractions whose action or hindrance to the rotation of the armature is necessary to overcome.

It's the Lorentz force and NOT Lenz's law that is responsible for the strong attractions in dynamos.

Quote
The other way to archieve the same ends, is to  constantly and in organized way vary the intensity of the magnetic field, produced by electromagnets.

This procedure has the advantage of not having to overcome resistance of attraction (forces), there is no need to apply Lenz law and therefore not need any mechanical force to overcome this resistance."
Buforn first patent 47706
That's plain wrong that there is no need to apply Lenz's law. There is no Lorentz force to overcome but the Lenz law applies.

Anyway, in my view Buforn is just an imitator who has no clue and not an inventor like Figuera.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 06, 2014, 06:06:41 PM
Hi poorpluto,

Yes I meant the magnetizing current in your second post.  IT is okay that it changes only a little when you short or almost fully short the secondary but the magnetizing current flows into the primary all the time from the 220 V mains and for input power estimation the total input current must be  considered, if it is 1.55 A or 1.6 A or whatever.
The phase shift could be measured with an oscilloscope, unfortunately, if you have one.  What you calculate from the (I rms ^2 *R) formula is the dissipated heat loss in the primary coil due to its wire DC resistance, that is all...

Thanks for the input.
Afaik, Vrms*Irms*cos(phi) is mathematically the same as Irms^2*R because Vrms = Irms*Z and cos(phi) = R / Z . You can prove it by yourself and do simple calculation, you can even calculate the phase shift and the inductance using all data I posted before (I understand we still need to measure to validate). The Irms used in my input power calculation was a total current including the magnetizing current. Therefore, the input power is merely the heat dissipated by the primary coil no more no less. Reactive power is an imaginary power. It can be eliminated in resonance condition, right? 11 Vac actually would be enough to supply that much current because the reactance is neutralized, I'll give a demo IF I have a chance and resource. I hope I can design a self-running set up soon to show the overunity, just wish me luck. Thanks again.

Happy Figuering
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 06, 2014, 06:35:30 PM
I was only showing you the same big diameter drum generator. This is the real thing you are looking.
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,921-alternating-current-generator (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,921-alternating-current-generator)
This is a very good device to compare with the devices we have been discussing!
 
I do not know how tjhe patent was awarded to Tesla since this device is obvious based on the available prior arts. The patent# 447,921 states that it is an improvement, I think an improvement on the previous patent# 447,920 that shows iron armature coils. However, the device shown in figures 1 and 2 is the same as the Mordey alternator, in which the ironless coils are fixed and the electromagnet rotes. And, the one shown in Figure 3 is the same as the Ferranti generator, in which the ironless coils rotates and the electromagnets are fixed. Notice the similarity of  this Tesla device and the Figuera 1902 device. The armature coil is a single (o small amount) wire rotating in a very small gap between the magnetic poles.
 
Something interesting that Tesla wrote is found on line 75 of the second column:
"In a machine thus constructed there is comparatively little of that effect which is knonw as "magnetic leakage," and there is but a slight armature reaction."
 
The armature reaction is what produces the counter torque I described in the published paper. When this reaction is minimized, it is possible to have an overunity condition. It also seems that Tesla wanted a piece of the cake that Ferranti, Mordey, and Siemens were enjoying in the form of ironless armature coils.
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 06, 2014, 07:47:28 PM
Hi all,

I have uploaded a video with the foundation of the Figuera generator based on two poles in repulsion mode. It is a very good video. I recommend you to look for 10 minutes to watch it. I explain why Figuera did not define clearly the pole orientation, and how he emulated a common generator in a motionless device.

The whole interpretation of a device to create a "virtual motion" by using the repulsion between 2 electromagnets and the movement back and forth of their fields:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 06, 2014, 08:15:07 PM
Is that really a Lorenz force which create drag in generators ? Was Figuera more clever then us today ?

What is the ratio of mass of rotor core to the rotor coils mass and where Lorenz force is acting upon ? in Figuera generator from 1902 when coreless coil is rotating in the gap between stationary stator and armature is there less or the same drag induced ?

Hanon, thank you for excellent video, however without clearing some facts about Figuera first patent with rotating coil we cannot progress imho.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on October 07, 2014, 12:04:38 AM
Hello Hanon

excellent video. Now I have uploaded a paper. Please login and go to the Download-Section here:

http://www.overunity.com/downloads/#.VDMOmH8w7CM (http://www.overunity.com/downloads/#.VDMOmH8w7CM)

and look for this titel

"INE-Newsletter March 1995, MRA-Devices (http://www.overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/580/)"

Got to pdf-page 8, scoll down until you see the header : "Sweet VTA Experimenter"

Here then and following the text to the upper right column you see two basic circuits with opposing magnets and a coil in the middle. The second circuit with the bifilar coil is almost exactly what you described in your vid. The coil moves the sensitive area where the opposing the fields are forced to bend back .
This circuit does not need any electromagnet, permanent  magnets will do. However a ferrite-rod is recommended.
There is one difference: The movement of the fields is done just by the one bifilar-coil, much simpler I guess as this coil is not only  controlling the field, it is also catching the energy and leading it to the load. Of course you can use two coils, one as the controller- the other the receiver-coil

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 07, 2014, 03:32:44 AM
I have to retract from my previous statement that the Tesla patent # 497,921 is obvious with respect to Mordey and Ferranti. I took a second look at this patent and found that it has its merits even though Tesla is using the same concept as Mordey and Ferranti. Tesla uses an electromagnet with a single or double coils and a continuous iron "H' with a saw-tooth configuration as shown in figure 4. Figures 1 and 2 illustrates a single coil for the electromagnet that does not rotate as in the case of Mordey's generator. Notice that Tesla does not use slip rings at all in these figures. The only thing that rotates is the iron of the electromagnets, and its coil stays fixed. I found this embodiment to be ingenious and could have non-obvious advantages with respect to prior art.

Figure 3 defers from the Ferranti alternators in that it only uses two coils for the electromagnets as opposed to using two times magnet coils as the number of armature coils in the Ferranti's embodiments. This Tesla structure is not obvious by looking at the Ferranti's alternators.

I got it wrong the first time I glanced at this patent.

Bajac

PS: I will be retiring from the forum. I just do not have the time to post. You have done a wonderful job at deciphering Figuera's patents. I also want to thank this website because it is the best place to discuss the overunity related issues. It is not like other forums in which the administrators have a hidden agenda and are too intrusive. Notice that this website does not require registration for downloading any information posted by its members. I might come back next year with the test results of the ironless alternator.
Thanks again to all of you and good luck!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 09, 2014, 01:25:15 PM
Hannon
  Good to hear your voice on your video. Nice job. I would like to point out something. When your describing the flux cutting in a normal generator showing the one side of the magnet pole cutting the induced coil where current is made.  You show the magnetic field of only one pole passing through the coil then back around to the middle of the magnet pole. It actually runs back to the opposite pole normally around the circumference of stator or other path. Iron as a path holds more lines of force with less leakage into free space where the field will spread out and become weak.
 For every alternate push the leakage has to be kept as small as physically possible to develop any appreciable output. Im not trying to be knit picky ,Im trying to keep you on the right mental image so when your scetching things and thinking about them you dont confuse yourself.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 09, 2014, 02:26:09 PM
I would like to clarify that I will keep you update with any development of the prototype and any important information related to the topics discussed in this thread. My retirement really means that I will keep the posting to a necessary minimum. I will reply from time to time and also post pictures of the progress of the ironless coil prototype.
 
I wanted to share with you another finding related to the efficiency of the ironless armature coils alternators. I found in this book
 
THE DYNAMO: ITS THEORY, DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE (http://books.google.com/books?id=EuIJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA468&lpg=PA468&dq=commercial+efficiency+mordey+37+1/2+KW+the+dynamo&source=bl&ots=4xhfN10h5i&sig=I_zQQGsBC78UeC4ALSLYEtyiZCw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Fnk2VN6jKsG0yASL8IHQDg&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=commercial%20efficiency%20mordey%2037%201%2F2%20KW%20the%20dynamo&f=false), By Charles Caesar Hawkins, 1893, page 469
the following information for a 37.5 KW Mordey alternator:
 
Mechanical friction ................ 1,120
Eddy-currents ......................... 1,120
Armature Resistance ................. 875
Excitation .................................  500
                                                3,615 Watts - total losses
 
Commercial efficiency = 37,500 / (37,500 + 3,615) = 91%
 
At first, I felt disappointed and discouraged because I was not expecting this low efficiency. Then I read it a second time and found a fundamental flaw in the way the efficiency is estimated. Even an overunity machine will turn out to have efficiency lower than 100% because of the approach used to calculated. The problem is that in the above calculation there is a huge and wrong assumption that considers the input power to be the output power plus the losses. Because all machines, including the overunity ones, have losses, then the above calculation is misleading. The true efficiency of the alternator should have been calculated as the output power 37.5 KW divided by the measured shaft mechanical input power.
 
I really wonder if all of this is part of a conspiracy!
 
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 09, 2014, 02:34:52 PM
COP=37500/3615=1037,3%  ::) is you NOT ASSUME that mechanical power is converted into electrical...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: oscar on October 09, 2014, 03:52:24 PM
Hi hanon,

Firstly: thanks for your  explanatory video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)

Second: According to that video it might make sense, that you build a quite LONG output coil/core (induced coil), to place between your two inductor MODs (microwave oven transformers).

Third: I think you should try with relatively low voltage in the two primaries, to avoid saturation of the core of that output coil

Fourth: Please consider this old post by cadman:
One of the most important things I learned from this build was the core/coil relation. It is exactly as the Buforn patent drawing shows. One center core (induced), with each end inserted about 45% into each outer coil (inductors).

To me this means you can not use the MODs, unless you remove their iron cores

@Gyula,
to again establish the truth behind the paper clip experiment, it may be helpful in your future tests of bifilar versus normal to make absolutely sure, that the core is not magnetically saturated, because that will make it impossible to see a difference (cadman used relatively large bolts).
Really low voltage may be key.

Good luck to good folk
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 09, 2014, 04:11:47 PM
 Doug,
 
I presented just some key concepts. As an implementation I think that we should try to minimize leakage of magnetic lines, as you suggest. A good idea is to enclose the whole system into a tube in order to create a lower reluctance path for the magnetic lines to come back again to the electromagnets. Please see the attached file.
 
I also think that we should try to minimize flux linking induction (which suffers from Lenz effect) and maximize the flux cutting induction. Therefore the key is to build electromagnets with low area (low flux linking induction,  emf = -N·A·dB/dt ) and high perimeter (high conductor length, high flux cutting induction, emf = v·B·Length ). We should try to use high ratio Perimeter/Area in the induced coil.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 10, 2014, 04:43:12 AM
Bajac, I also find that number misleading. A typical generator, even commercially, requires nearly double the mechanical power to operate at full load. So, as an example, my small 1KW generator requires a 2 H.P engine. Now if we assume that 1 H.P. is equal to 746 watts, then my generator requires 1492 watts of mechanical power to produce 1000 watts of electrical power. Wouldn't that be an efficiency of 67%?

The article also states that the same 37.5KW generator required a 3 H.P engine to run at full EMF. Not full load, but full EMF. This is important because, again looking at my generator, at full EMF it still requires nearly all of that 2 H.P. to run. And I want to make a distinction here, a typical generator governs the exciter current to improve efficiency, so at no load it may show full voltage, but it will not be producing the full EMF. Full EMF refers to the highest state of exciter current, and this state alone will require at least half of the mechanical power necessary for the generator to run at full load.

So to see that this generator required only 3 H.P. to produce full EMF is quite a surprise. I'd be willing to bet that at 4 H.P. it could produce at least half, or 18KW of electrical energy. If that were true, that would be an efficiency of 600%. haha

Speaking of that, I think new principles should be created to make a distinction between a motor and a generator. Most generators are in fact synchronous motors, and all motors also act as generators, but that doesn't mean they are the same. Taking Faraday's disk as an example, there is a generator that cannot function as a motor. Likewise with the generators that Bajac has been sharing with us. This proves that an EMF doesn't have a definite mechanical force associated with it. Because a motor consumes so much electrical power to produce so much mechanical power, doesn't mean that the same amount of mechanical power has to produce the same amount of electrical power. With this consideration in mind, a motor-generator set doesn't violate the conservation of energy, because we aren't using a generator that operates under the same conditions as a motor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 10, 2014, 02:41:30 PM
Please, let's forget about efficiency numbers. As bajac said they are meaningless for what we are trying to create.

For example, an imaginary Figuera generator

Gross output:
19 volts, 25 amp, 475 watts

Net output after all losses, iron, resistance, radiated heat, commutator motor, etc.
18.5 volts, 10 amps, 185 watts

475÷(475+290) = 0.620915033 = 62%

So even if the generator is producing 185 watts for free it's grossly inefficient. So inefficient it might be illegal to sell one in the US!




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 10, 2014, 04:44:35 PM
You know, beside the type and quantity of electrical steel, I am beginning to think the commutator and common resistor just might be one of the biggest factors in making this thing work, since the inductors are being excited with a varying current.

For one thing the magnetic collapse of one polarity coil might aid the current fed to the opposite polarity coil through the common resistor.

Not only that, the brush and commutator causes a pause in the frequency, since it ceases to change in amplitude for a brief instance every 180 degrees of rotation. When the change in amplitude becomes zero, the inductive reactance of the field coils would also become zero, and the duration of this condition would depend on the physical relation of the brush size to the number of commutator segments at  the same potential. Zero reactance, zero impedance, only the coil resistance and self induction is in play at that time just like a DC coil.

I have been giving myself headaches trying to figure out a way to reduce or eliminate the reactance and self induction and a big part of the answer might have been right in front of us all the time.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 10, 2014, 06:58:37 PM
Now your beginning to think Cadman.

  If you have an output of X value lets give it a number like 10 and you use most of it to do work like run a motor or light lets guess 8 of the 10.You only have 2 left to use from the output which has to in effect act like it is at least 10 even though it only 2.
 Yes, if you could do that why wouldn't you just up grade everything in its design  to run off the 2 and dispense with the middle man? Make a better motor or a better light. Who's to say they didn't make a better motor or better light, so if they did it should be all the more easy to make better power supply to go with them.
  There is but one answer to all this. There is a missing component, some type of understanding which is less recognized when recalling all the knowledge gained over the time period anyone has to work from. I don't think it is hidden per say I think it is just not recognized for what it is. Im reminded of the phrase "those skilled in the art". As it does not quantify itself there is a kind of magic as long as the audience is unaware of how the trick is done. Not unlike the story of Columbus's egg. How many are skilled in the art a million people or just one or a dozen. It must be a very few because the numerical odds of many people keeping it a secrete is very remote. So lets assume for the sake of argument we as a people don't know how to do anything and need to start from scratch with logical arguments. Of course it is still ok to still keep shooting in the dark if that is preferred.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 10, 2014, 07:40:04 PM

The whole interpretation of a device to create a "virtual motion" by using the repulsion between 2 electromagnets and the movement back and forth of their fields:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)


Hi all,

I attach here the slides of the video into a PDF file.

Just a funny coincidence: Have you notice that Figuera generator is like the Ying Yang?

Two opposite forces in movement but in balance: when one is at maximun the other is at minimun

Keep the balance !!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 10, 2014, 11:01:15 PM
Not a coincidence at all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 11, 2014, 04:16:06 AM
Bajac, I also find that number misleading. A typical generator, even commercially, requires nearly double the mechanical power to operate at full load. So, as an example, my small 1KW generator requires a 2 H.P engine. Now if we assume that 1 H.P. is equal to 746 watts, then my generator requires 1492 watts of mechanical power to produce 1000 watts of electrical power. Wouldn't that be an efficiency of 67%?

The article also states that the same 37.5KW generator required a 3 H.P engine to run at full EMF. Not full load, but full EMF. This is important because, again looking at my generator, at full EMF it still requires nearly all of that 2 H.P. to run. And I want to make a distinction here, a typical generator governs the exciter current to improve efficiency, so at no load it may show full voltage, but it will not be producing the full EMF. Full EMF refers to the highest state of exciter current, and this state alone will require at least half of the mechanical power necessary for the generator to run at full load.

So to see that this generator required only 3 H.P. to produce full EMF is quite a surprise. I'd be willing to bet that at 4 H.P. it could produce at least half, or 18KW of electrical energy. If that were true, that would be an efficiency of 600%. haha

Speaking of that, I think new principles should be created to make a distinction between a motor and a generator. Most generators are in fact synchronous motors, and all motors also act as generators, but that doesn't mean they are the same. Taking Faraday's disk as an example, there is a generator that cannot function as a motor. Likewise with the generators that Bajac has been sharing with us. This proves that an EMF doesn't have a definite mechanical force associated with it. Because a motor consumes so much electrical power to produce so much mechanical power, doesn't mean that the same amount of mechanical power has to produce the same amount of electrical power. With this consideration in mind, a motor-generator set doesn't violate the conservation of energy, because we aren't using a generator that operates under the same conditions as a motor.


Antijon,
You seem to have a good understanding of the generator subject. Thank you for the information.


Actually, generator manufacturers usually have a chart that shows how to size the internal combustion engine based on a given alternator capacity. And, you are right! They recommend a "rule of thumb" of two times the size of the capacity of the electrical alternator.


The emphasis that the technical literature of the time make about the small excitation power required by those alternators deserves some clarification. The excitation current of today’s generators changes in a very wide range. Why is that? It is due to the strong armature reaction! Recall that the armature reaction is no more than the magnetic fields generated by the induced currents when loads are connected to the generators. The effects of the armature reaction are to oppose and cancel the magnetic field of the excitation coils. Because the induced coils of today’s generators have iron cores, the opposition (counter torque) and cancellation effects are enormous. In order to maintain the peak voltage of the sinusoidal EMF induced in the coils, the excitation of the rotor currents must increase proportionally. This is a very dynamic process that not only imposes a high demand on the control system (governor) of the excitation current but increases the excitation losses considerably.


Because of the small armature reaction of the ironless induced coils, the interference with the magnetic field from the exciting coils is very small. It is so negligible that Ferranti did not even bother with providing a control system (governor) for the exciting currents. And, if a governor is provided, it is in fact of no complexity and simple construction.  The same book author recognized this feature as he stated on page 473 of the following book


THE DYNAMO: ITS THEORY, DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE (http://books.google.com/books?id=RUAOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false), Volume I, By Charles Caesar Hawkins, 1896,
“Owing to the low resistance of its armature, together with the fact that the reaction of the armature current on the field is small, the drop of volts between no load and full load under constant excitation is very small; or, conversely, to maintain a constant terminal voltage the exciting energy only requires to be varied between small limits, a feature of considerable value in central station working.”


Why did not the engineers and inventors of the time defend this outstanding technology with more determination?


I think we have opened a “Pandora box.” It looks like now all of you know the secret and history of the overunity rotating generators in the form of ironless disk armature coils. We started writing about Figuera, but our detective work has taken us to the origin of this story. A story that includes Ferranti, Mordey, Thomson, Siemens, and the greatest of all, Nikolai Tesla.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 11, 2014, 04:28:40 AM
At least you got some lessons to learn sir :)
I have not learned about a rotating magnetic field by summation of several vectors so I'm in no position to give you some suggestions to try a new arrangement. I have not even proven what I believe to be the key of Figuera's devices, coreless induced coil in the strongest exciter magnet possible whether combined with a moving part (flux cutting) or a changing field (flux linking). I hope I have some luck to set my self-running test with of course the result we've been wanting but I'll be away for some weeks without access to my experiment equipments.


I agree with you 100% that the concept of using ironless induced coils for rotating generators can also be applied to motionless induction apparatus such as transformers. I think you have an interesting device. However, Because your test results show marginal gains, I am not sure if you really got overunity. But again, your concept should be valid!


The only point of view that we do not agree is that figuera used ironless coils in the 1908 device. I think you meant to say that(?). His patents clearly show that all coils have iron cores. The only use of ironless coils that I know in the Figuera's patents is the rotating armature device shown in his 1902 patent.


Keep up the good work!


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 11, 2014, 04:32:32 AM
Has anyone downloaded this document? http://www.rexresearch.com/kenyon/kenyon.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/kenyon/kenyon.htm)


It claims an iron-free alternator with a COP of 125. I tried to download it but I got problems.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 11, 2014, 06:59:55 PM
Try to copy paste into a pdf program and then save it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 11, 2014, 08:15:03 PM
Bajac, I don't know about the application he's referring to, but based on his patent "US4438342 Novel Hybrid Electric Vehicle" he says
"The ironless windings in disc-armature alternators utilized in this invention are light in weight. These alternators maintain high efficiencies at all speeds. "

so this implies it's related to disc armatures like we've already seen. It's possible his patent wasn't granted because there was a similar patent already filed by someone else.

But what I find interesting, and a major part of this patent is, "it is possible to put the rectified output of such alternator in series with the battery pack powering the electric drive motor so as to give a surge of mechanical power without the magnetic saturation and loss of output which would be experienced if a conventional alternator were it to be utilized similarly. "

Putting alternators/generators in series with high current sources is unheard of. As a real world example, if I put a 100watt transformer in series with a 500watt, I won't get 600watts, I'll get a saturated (and fried) 100watt transformer. haha The same goes for a generator. This is a great example of the benefits of ironless machines.

And I just wanted to say, industrially, physicists don't get involved with the real world (maybe they learned from the Feynman and Papp incident). Yeah, sure, if I make a device that claims overunity and try to broadcast it to the world, every quack out there would start piping up. But if a large company produces a 100MWatt generator, and a power company puts it to use, everyone turns a blind-eye. It reminds me of Edison's generators. I can't remember the theorem, but there was something that stated you get the highest efficiency if the internal resistance of the generator matches the load. So, all generators were made with a resistance to match the load. If I had 100Ohms of light bulbs, I made a generator with 100Ohms of internal resistance. Sounds foolish, but that's what they did, and their generators had extremely low efficiencies. Edison was the first to ignore this "rule", and even though he was ridiculed, produced the highest efficiencies at the time. Now it's common sense to make a generator with a low internal resistance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 13, 2014, 04:39:56 PM
Hi all,

I have uploaded a video with the foundation of the Figuera generator based on two poles in repulsion mode. It is a very good video. I recommend you to look for 10 minutes to watch it. I explain why Figuera did not define clearly the pole orientation, and how he emulated a common generator in a motionless device.

The whole interpretation of a device to create a "virtual motion" by using the repulsion between 2 electromagnets and the movement back and forth of their fields:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)

Regards

I have also uploaded the same video with audio in spanish in case any user could be found it useful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM3gBmuChDA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM3gBmuChDA)


Also the video slides are in this PDF file:
http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/143225/ (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/143225/)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Feynman (Nobel prize winner) about the electromagnetic induction:

    "So the "flux rule" that the emf in a circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit applies whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the circuit moves (or both) ...

    Yet in our explanation of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases  E = v x B  for "circuit moves" and  E = -A· dB/dt  for "field changes".

    We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena. Usually this beautiful generalization is found to stem from a simple deep underlying principle. Nevertheless, in this case there does not appear to be any such profound implication. We have to understand the "rule" as the combined effects of two quite separate phenomena.

   The "flux rule" does not work in this case [note: for an example explained in the original text]. It must be applied to circuits in which the material of the circuit remains the same. When the material of the circuit is changing, we must return to the basic laws. The correct physics is always given by the two basic laws

F = q · ( E + v · B )
rot E = - dB/dt                                                    "

            — Richard P. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics,  Vol. 2 Ch. 17
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 13, 2014, 05:23:12 PM
@ Hanon, thanks for the pdf. I just wanted to reiterate your statement about the difference between flux-cutting, and flux-linking.

In the two images, we see two examples of DC motors. The first image is a car starter-motor. The second is a small induction motor. In the first, we can see that there are no windings, just conductors that cut the static B field. Because the velocity is related to current and length of the conductor, with high currents it develops a high torque. If it were longer, or the B field stronger, it could be much more efficient, but as it is, a small motor has enough torque to turn a V8 with high compression. That's pretty impressive.

On the other hand, an induction motor produces torque based on the amplitude of the magnetic fields. It's literally the pull and push of electromagnets that provides rotation. There is no flux cutting. Induction motors can be efficient at high speeds, but they produce little torque if starting under a load. To produce the same torque as a flux-cutting motor, it would have to be much larger. I imagine hundreds of times larger, or in the case of small motors, hundreds of times more windings.

Induction motor/generator, flux-cutting motor/generator. Quite a difference.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 13, 2014, 10:56:50 PM
Antijon
 Why do you think the starter motor rotor is cutting the B field? It's not a generator when used as a starter motor. Current is fed to both parts the rotor and the stator.Just more of it then in a small dc motor for continuous use. Starter motors are for short duration uses of a few seconds up to 15. They can handle longer so long as the battery's can supply the required current and it does not over heat.
  Small dc motors can utilize permanent magnets while car and truck starter motors can not. Some lawn tractors have permanent magnet starters but the torque is not very large to turn a small engine.
 When the B field cuts a conductor it induces a current on the conductor if it is a completed circuit. Two conductors with current being passed through both of them will tend to pull together or push apart depending the direction of current being opposite or the same direction in those conductors. The fields repel or attract,no cutting. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 14, 2014, 01:18:35 AM
Hey Doug, that's an interesting question. Personally, I think any motor that has a drum winding is cutting the B field. Flux cutting just means that a current carrying wire is moving a stationary magnetic field. I didn't mean to say that a starter motor was being used as a generator, but the same laws apply.

What I was trying to prove is that barrel winding motors and generators are a different breed than induction motors and generators. They both act like a motor, but are fundamentally different.

In your last statement, "Two conductors with current being passed through both of them will tend to pull together or push apart depending the direction of current being opposite or the same direction in those conductors. The fields repel or attract,no cutting. " do you mean there's a barrel winding in the rotor and stator?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 14, 2014, 05:18:43 PM
I figured we were missing something so I ran some of the patent text through a translator to see if anything turned up.

Surprise, surprise.

1902 patent
Quote

The procedure is thus reduced to establish an independent armature circuit, within the sphere of action or atmosphere formed between the magnetic pole faces of opposite name, of two electromagnets, or series of electromagnets driven by intermittent or alternating currents. ...
 


So, the inductors are facing each other N-S not N-N.

1908 patent
Quote

The machine is formed by a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores...
 

The inductors do have soft iron cores.

Quote
resistance is drawn in an elementary way to facilitate understanding of the entire system, and "+" and "-" the driving current is taken from a generator outside and extraneous to the machine...

...As seen in the drawing current once it has done its job in different electromagnets returns the generator was taken from,...
 

The “origin” is an external generator.

Quote
...This stream derives a small part and she excites the excitatory drive making machine and drives the small motor that spins the brush and commutator; power is removed and the machine continues its mission indefinitely without any help.

Well now, isn't that a kick in the rear? “she excites the excitatory drive making machine”

I don't ever recall any translation that says a portion of the produced power was used to excite a separate 'excitatory drive making machine'.
If that is correct, then there might be a separate motor/generator combo involved that produces the exciting current for the main generator and turns the commutator.

This could be very significant.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 14, 2014, 11:30:45 PM


Well now, isn't that a kick in the rear? “she excites the excitatory drive making machine”

I don't ever recall any translation that says a portion of the produced power was used to excite a separate 'excitatory drive making machine'.


The proper translation for that paragraph is the one that is included in the spanish patent translation:

"...current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely."

And in another parapgraph:
"From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely"

I think that this replies your question. The current translation included those sentences.
I think this translation in much better than the one you got from machine translation.

About your question about the pole orientation: It has been a doubt for me why Figuera in his 1902 patents used opposite poles facing (both in the motion device, and in the rotary coil device) and in 1908 he did not define it clearly. I think the 1908 patent is different to the 1902 patents. My interpretation of like poles facing each other is for the 1908 patent where Figuera was quite ambiguous. And also Buforn was ambigous in his 5 latter patents. Both of them just called "rectangles N and S" to the electromagnets. No mention to any polarity, nor they mentioned even North and South. Anyway, once we had a whole test device we must test any possible pole orientation.

Also remember that Figuera sold his patent to the bankers 4 days after filing the 1902 patents. Maybe he had already a contract to sell them and this could interphere in the final patent writings. His patent no. 30378 is not complete because he omitted to draw the induced coil which was mentioned in the test, as being drawn in reddish color, but this coil does not appear in the drawing. This make me think that the 1902 patents are not well defined, they do not include any detail.

Regards

I am just offering my interpretation after reading all those patent dozens of times and study them in deep. I am not settling a truth to be followed. I am just offering my ideas in order others may test it and create a healthy debate into the forum
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 14, 2014, 11:37:22 PM
An animated gif with my interpretation of the 1908 patent :

http://makeagif.com/i/K7jseC (http://makeagif.com/i/K7jseC)

In any case, we should try any possible coil placement and any pole orientation: N-N, N-S, S-S. My guess is that Figuera hide the real pole orientation by calling the rectangles "N" and "S". Apart form calling them "rectangle N" and "rectangle S" he did not mention any explicit reference to the poles of the electromagnets. For me "N" and "S" is the patent notation, just to mislead with the real pole orientation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 15, 2014, 03:52:29 PM
Hanon,

No disrespect intended but are you absolutely, 100%, no room for doubt, sure about your interpretation?

Using an external generator to excite the fields in an AC generator was the standard method used in 1908. An 'excitatory drive making machine' actually makes more sense than 'converting it in self exciting'. Converting what? The generator?  It's either built as self exciting or it's not.

What would the advantage of an external exciter be?

One of the things that has bothered me was the lack of regulation in the patent designs. A Figuera generator cannot use compound field windings. Having an external exciting generator with compound windings with the series portion of the current provided by the main generator load could provide  automatic regulation. More current load → higher flux on the exciter fields → increased excitement current for the main generator.

Everyone knows that a motor cannot run a normal generator in order to power itself. Suppose we solve the problems with the Figuera setup and we can create an externally excited motionless generator that produces 500 volts and 200 amps. The exciting current of that generator is 400 to 500 volts and 3 to 5 amps. With 500 volts and 200 amps available what reason is there that would prevent us from running a much smaller motor and generator that can only produce 500 volts and 5 amps for exciting the main generator?

This setup also fits the operating description in the patents. Apply external power, get the small generator and commutator motor up to speed, then remove the external power.

Hanon, I couldn't help but notice that you did not dispute the sections "the driving current is taken from a generator outside and extraneous to the machine" and "returns the generator was taken from"

Come on guys. Where is the flaw in my logic?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 15, 2014, 05:25:57 PM
Cadman and Hanon, I think it's probable that he required the external generator for the operation of the machine. Cadman, you're right that the device needed some type of regulation, but more than likely, the external generator was a necessity. The exciting current is DC, and without diodes he would need a DC generator.

A couple other things to consider- in the 1908 patent, the coil polarities ARE N-N. I can guarantee this. We can assume this because he says, "as the induced  is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one."

To have an AC output, the coils need to be arranged N-N. He also says, "naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted." When he says a switch, he must be referring to switching the polarities of the coils to N-S. When they're arranged like this, the output will be a pulsed DC instead of AC.

All in all, we don't need an external generator because we have solid state tech. We can simply rectify and regulate the output to feed the exciter circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 15, 2014, 07:49:09 PM
Figuera generator needed as external power:

1- Current to energize the electromagnets. This current mist be DC

2- Current to move the small motor which rotate the brush in the conmutator

Thus why Figuera just said that once the generator was running you could take a part of the output , and get rid of external power. The machine will be self-exciting and you wont need external power

The mentioned switch is another conmutator ised to convert the AC output to DC in order to excite the electromagnets and the small motor. No more no less. Do not look for weird designs. Cadman, the machine translation is quite wrong. If you do not trusty translation look for a friend who know spanish. I put the original text in spanish to avoid loosing the original text. Trust me it is simpler than you have thought with your machine translation.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 15, 2014, 08:44:11 PM
Hanon, you're correct in that, if he had a synchronous motor, he could make a commutator that produced DC. Otherwise, he would have needed a rotary converter, which is essentially an AC motor/ DC generator.

Coincidentally, I think I just perfectly replicated the effects of the driver circuit without needing a commutator, resistors, or even 2 phase. If anyone's interested, I can upload a schematic. It's incredibly simple.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 15, 2014, 09:02:06 PM
I think everyone is interested.
I am.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 15, 2014, 09:50:13 PM
Thanks Shadow.

Okay, the schematic, as pictured in the first image, is simply two transformers driven in parallel. They must be identical. To describe it, when they are both driven positive, one outputs a positive current, but the other is blocked by the diode. When the positive voltage reaches it's peak, then begins to drop, the second transformer begins to drive a positive current. This is similar to a clamper circuit.

The second schematic shows the driver properly attached to the Figuera generator. I know it appears to be the same as a center-tapped transformer with diodes at both sides, but because of the way the transformers are connected, it produces two separate currents. While one current is increasing, the other is decreasing.

I'm still running tests on it, but with two inducers, same poles facing each other, it works well.

I want to point out, when one transformer is positive, the back voltage created in one of the inducing coils directly opposes the incoming current. Referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem , I've been doing tests on cancelling reactance, but it's a two-edged sword. When we cancel reactance, we increase power transfer, but we also decrease efficiency. Anyway, a lot more research needs to be done, but I have to leave for work now.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 15, 2014, 11:48:12 PM
Thanks antijon for the schematics!!  I will test it. I think it is important to avoid reaching zero voltage in order to avoid breaking the swinging of both fields.

Also I wonder if this this circuit match perfectly the mechanical conmutator: Figuera´s conmutator has the current and the voltage in phase, because it comes from an original modulated DC current. I wonder if circuits based on AC may get the same results. I don´t know..

If you want to know my personal opinion I think that Figuera also kept secret the correct placement of the induced coil. Therefore, we should test any possilbe coil placement

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 16, 2014, 01:09:32 AM
Thanks Hanon. Honestly, I can't say that the action is exactly the same as a commutator. Because a commutator and resistor set may have some imperfections that don't produce a smooth current. It's possible that it can even produce a pulsating current as the brush moves. But I can say it produces the current he describes in the patent.. well it should, I don't have a scope to be sure.

Remember, as frequency increases, so does reactance. I originally thought the voltage and current were in phase, but that must not be so. As the rate of current change increases, back voltage increases. I did make a setup that canceled reactance, but it actually drew over 4 amps with only a 6 volt input. But that just proves Jacobi's theorem- as reactance decreases, power transfer increases but efficiency decreases. In this case, I think the back voltage decreases input current similar to a motor back emf, or a transformer- efficiency decreases as the load increases.

You're right, if you change the coil placements you can change the polarity. I imagine, if all the coils are side by side, like the last part of your video with the induced perpendicular to the inducers, then the polarity should be N-S.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 16, 2014, 02:53:27 PM
Alvaro,
 
How is the test of the generator going? I previously commented that I was concerned with the orientation of the permanent magnets. I found an article written by John Denham, which was read before the Cape Town local section of the institution of Electrical Engineers in August 1898. I agreed with the majority of his statements, especially the ones related to the polarity and pitch of the electromagnets with respect to the coils. Mr. Denham describes the design of the excitation coils and induced coils for disc armature generators but his concept may apply to any rotating generators using Faraday's induction law. The article titled "SOME NOTES ON ALTERNATOR DESIGN (http://books.google.com/books?id=IUc_AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA514&lpg=PA514&dq=electrical+review+volume+41+john+denham&source=bl&ots=OhYnqsSaq7&sig=3wDZJX8v9C1M0NF-eEqvveyJz6U&hl=en&sa=X&ei=37I_VMOYK4vIggTf4oHgCQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=electrical%20review%20volume%2041%20john%20denham&f=false)"  is found on page 514 of the ELECTRICAL REVIEW journal in 1902. In this article, Fig. 1 shows the configuration of the Ferranti alternators that use magnets of alternating signs and the number of exciting poles must be the same as the number of armature coils. Fig. 2 shows the configuration of the Mordey alternators that use magnets of same polarity (like the one shown in the Alvaro's photos of reply #1513 in page 101) and the number of exciting poles must be half of the armature coils.
 
Quotes for the Ferranti's alternators:
 
"Fig. 1 is a diagram of a six-coil disc armature machine, with six revolving poles alternately north and south. An equal number of poles of opposite sign would, of course, be immediately behind."
 
"...it is obvious that the coils in Fig. 1 cut twice the number of magnetic lines at the same speed of revolution as do those in Fig. 2. Assuming the magnetic leakage to be the same in both cases, the first machine [Ferranti's] would give double the output of the second [Mordey's],"
Quotes for the Mordey alternators:
 
"Fig. 2 shows a disc armature machine with the same number of coils as that in the direction, in which case there must be twice as many coils as polar projections, as the amount generated is due to the difference in the number of lines passing through the coils and not in their direction, therefore, three poles only are shown, those of opposite sign being behind."
 
"On the other hand, in certain positions the coils in Fig. 2 are not merely not being usually acted upon, but are in reality so much, idle resistance in series with the working coils. Practically only half of the coils are doing actual work in any period of the revolution, and part of the generated pressure [voltage] is consequently absorbed in the passage of the current through the remaining half of the armature."
 
"Furthermore, those coils not being usefully acted upon, would be as so many chocking coils in the circuit, which would reduce the effective voltage of the machine considerably."
 
As you can see from the above quotes, having the magnets with the same polarity is a less efficient design than the one having the magnets with alternate polarities. This was exactly my concern in my reply #1557.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 16, 2014, 08:11:35 PM
bajac
sorry to say, but when manipulating the rotors, a couple of magnets went loose and crashed together (hopelessly broken)
For the moment no funds available for replacement.

Anyway  insisting in my previous observations, Lorenz force (and Lenz effect) are present when loadding.

Have you visited the qantamagnetics page ? http://quantamagnetics.com/
There device uses a simmilar design (last version with 3 rotors 2 stators)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 17, 2014, 01:55:10 AM
bajac
sorry to say, but when manipulating the rotors, a couple of magnets went loose and crashed together (hopelessly broken)
For the moment no funds available for replacement.


I am sorry to hear that. I hope things turn around for you.

Quote
Anyway  insisting in my previous observations, Lorenz force (and Lenz effect) are present when loadding.


It is true for all coil currents induced by magnetic fields! The real issue and question are, how much? And the historical records show that the 10MW Ferranti's disc armature alternators were really especial and different from the iron core drum alternators.

Quote
Have you visited the qantamagnetics page ? http://quantamagnetics.com/
There device uses a simmilar design (last version with 3 rotors 2 stators)


I saw this video and I think it is way too complicated! The persons building these machines know that somehow using the ironless induction coils is a way for obtaining overunity. However, it is too complicated and inefficient because the operating principle for overunity is not clearly understood. Note that the magnetic circuit is similar to the wind ironless generator winding and equally inefficient.


Do you really understand the principle of operation of this machine or whatever is being explained?
My philosophy is "the learning process in a classroom consists of 90% responsibility of the teacher or professor for explaining the subject and 10% responsibility of the students or audience for paying attention." In other words, if you do not understand what is being taught, it is more likely the person explaining it does not understand it either. If the person really knows the subject, he/she must be capable of finding a way to bring it to your level. I have experiences with professors that gave the impression of knowledge and wisdom, but in reality it was all memorization and repetition. They just memorize the books in a mechanical manner. Like in the advertisement business, if it is repeated often people tend to believe that it is true.


What I proposed in the published paper is something simple. A method that was tested with alternators sized for 10MW without complicated electronics. True they did not say overunity was obtained, but there is enough information that directly refer to extraordinary performances of these machines. I am moving ahead with a construction and testing of a prototype.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 18, 2014, 01:40:10 PM
Hello all
@ hanon:Forgive me if this is out of topic (I thought to use this as input for a Figuera setup)

@ Bajac: thanks for your comments
here attached the setup I am testing now. It is similar to the previous one,but simplified


motor Input idle: 0.01A @ 4 V idle
motor Input in setup: 0.1A @4V (no load)
motor input in setup loaded: 0.3A@4v (load 100 Ohm 1/2W)

coil out rectified no load:DC 37V
coil out rectified loaded: less than 0.01A

edit:magnets are 10 mm diam. x 20 mm length (typo)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on October 18, 2014, 07:42:29 PM
What was it about the late 1800's that spawned so many self-exciting generators? What did they know that we today don't know or forgot. Even if the ideas didn't work what possessed  them to patent the concept. One can argue that Figuera's device can be classified as a "Self exciting electric generator" would anyone challenge that from his patents?

Having said that my post does not look to derail any currently working projects but to add to the knowledge OR better yet enhance the knowledge of the team. Some time ago I researched self-exciting generators, attached to this post are some very informative patents that should provide critical data to the Figuera device. Please take the time and review the devices they all have a lot in common with Figuera's device. Maybe they even fill in the missing data in his device.

.........FYI my personal favorite is the Moses device I had always suspected that a secondary coil could be omitted and energy extracted out of the iron core material.

Good reading:
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 19, 2014, 04:15:06 PM
Fernendez

  What makes you think these concepts dont work? The purpose of a patent is secure a persons idea so they can reap the rewards for their hard work. To prevent some conglomerate from capitalizing off it by way of theft. Even in a world of safe guards some thieves have the resources to get away with it in spite of the laws. Particularly those industries which have a monopoly in reality. 10 companies owned by one person or one family is hardly in moral compliance with anti monopoly laws. Then again morals are a abstract concept in themselves. The less a person is moral the more abstract becomes the concept.
   As to what you don't know, well that's hard to figure with out knowing what you do know to compare the two. What is or should be self evident is the foundation upon which modern knowledge is based is absent.People went the way of specialization so each person would become more dependent on each other for the sake of economics. You only need to know what is required for you to do your job. To learn for the sake,,,,, well nothing is socially unacceptable Every time you do more then you need to you make the people around you look bad. You need only compete with the people your surrounded by, your peers. It s a sliding scale  and doing less is rewarded by job security. It has crept into every corner of life and every way. If you go back into history into the time of B.C. we are pretty stupid today. Flawed in virtually everything of importance, so lazy that it would not be outside the realm of thinking that we would not survive in the past. Modern man would be the village idiot.
  Why would a person with a slide rule need a computer? Do you think a person from 100 yrs ago or more would spend so much money on a computer or the time to learn to operate it when they could just as easily go out and get a slide rule which requires no electricity and fits into a shirt pocket. Can go through washing process in ones pocket with out damage can be used in the rain.If cared for can last for ever and never need updating or become subject to hacking or viruses.
  How many people even know what a slide rule is? Everything is sold on the pretense of making things more easy and faster so people can be more productive.All they ended up with is more stupid and fat and less appreciative of everything because they did not have to work very hard for it and never have time enjoy it. They just think they are working hard because someone told them they are so they would continue to follow the prescribed path of an economic model. Why do something if you don't have to? Maybe you should be considering the source of that question. Would not a thief ask the same of looking your doors?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 19, 2014, 05:29:29 PM
As an example of being intelligent but senseless.
So far the focus has been on the power supply to the device to get even a meager reaction from two inducers sandwiched with a output coil between.

  Since the device is said to be able to self run once started. The start up is not as important as the continuation of operation after the supply is removed. Hell you could just plug into a mains supply through the output coil for as long as it takes to power up the process at which point running a load would not register from amp meter out of the mains it would come from the device.
 Any other device could be reworked to function on the same principles. Which would save a lot of work. How you start it is of little importance. Even if you get a reaction using known induction rules you are only left with a motor or a transformer and you dont need to do that. So wasting large amounts of time and effort toward making motors and transformers from scratch still will not yield anything useful in the end. There will still be the problem of getting it to self run which if it was solved would render the efficiency to not important either.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 19, 2014, 05:55:50 PM
For as long as I can remember people have said the output will always be less then the input because losses are unavoidable. The losses are man made which serve a purpose to some people. The industry of manufacturing builds into the product a life expectancy with sole intent of limiting the time something will last before needing to be replaced. If it lasts for ever your business will not. Conspiracies to some are simple good business practices to others. How would free energy be a good business practice? In fact it is bad business practice, it would be like making a car that could last forever. What part of society would support such a thing as it's own demise.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 19, 2014, 06:20:10 PM
Society must change . Labour is required for producing things , today it is known from producing money (which is nothing more then a piece of paper or electronic variable)  Money should be depreciated to the position it can still be usable but do not limit humanity. For example of radical change , if there is 100 electrical engineers in town but only 30 have job in their proffession then hire them all , to produce/ repair things faster and better. They would work just 4 hours a day not 8 and they would have plenty time for hobby/education/experimenting. Except, it require the reality change, when the real limitation is the natural resources limit, not just stupid economics. Consume less, produce better longlasting things, have more free time just productively used.


If Figuera/Blasberg/Buforn were right then maybe every generator on Earth is producing free energy but the construction is limited in such way that mechanical force applied is wasted for limiting the power production by creating not necessary drag.
We only need a proof....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on October 19, 2014, 08:08:39 PM
I keep going back to the design of a dynamo and trying to identify the differences between a dynamo (which works) and the Figuera device, which so far does not work.

My thinking is as follows:

One of the obvious things is the field coils in a dynamo develop their full flux and maintain it constantly, and the Figuera device constantly varies the flux from each field coil.

Constantly varying the current to the field coils brings extra losses, compared to a dynamo, because of Lenz and these escalate exponentially as the frequency increases.


The circuit below is an attempt to minimize the field coil losses.

This drawing represents a single field coil with a series bifilar winding on a common core of soft iron, with DC current.

The circuit resistance is always the same and current is never interrupted or varied in coil A. Once powered up, coil A will not be affected by Lenz.

By switching the connection with coil B we can vary the production of flux in the iron core to any of 3 states without ever changing the amount of current through coil A.

Coil B will still be subject to Lenz but since coil B is only half the turns on the field coil, Lenz will also be reduced to half compared to a field coil with a single winding.

Any thoughts or comments?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 19, 2014, 09:50:06 PM
Cadman, that's an interesting design. I think I've been doing something similar. You essentially have two coils, mutually coupled. I can see how this is similar to the stators in a generator... The only problem is the no flux state. When one coil tries to oppose the flux of the other, it's going to create a forward voltage to maintain the field. That will draw more current from the supply.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 20, 2014, 02:10:51 AM
Hey guys, I've been working on trying to combine flux. Here's a video of what I have, and a schematic of the setup. http://youtu.be/xW-NtfnHFGo

I don't know if these effects are due to some resonance in the primaries. You can see that the two primaries, and two capacitors, form some type of tank circuit. For now, I'm going to say that the voltage increase on the output is due to the addition of flux.

In the video, I also made reference to the Hubbard coil, and saying that it can possibly be multiple primaries and one secondary. Well, I just tried it out, and it's true. If you have two primaries on separate flux paths, like the outside paths of an E core transformer, when one primary is active, the flux through the center will only be 50% So, if I'm applying 24V on only one primary, the center will only see half of that, which is 12V. But, when both primaries are on, the flux through the center will now be both fluxes combined. So if I'm applying 24V to both primaries, the center will now see 48V of flux.

So.. this is what I'm thinking, and please correct me if this logic is wrong.

Imagine I have a transformer with a ratio of 1:1. Both the primary and secondary have the exact same resistance. So I input 10V, and I get 10V out. Now I add a second primary, and it has the exact same windings as the other two. But because the two primary coil's flux add together, if I add 10V to each primary the output voltage increases to 20V. But, if I wire the two primary coils in series, the input voltage, 10V, is shared and they both see 5V across them. But because the flux is added, my output voltage is the same as the input, 10V. But the difference is now- the primary resistance just doubled.

Hypothetically, if flux is perfect, and there are no losses, just imagine if I had 10 primary coils all wired in series. The input is 10V and the output is 10V, but your source sees the resistance of all 10 primaries, while your load sees a source with only the resistance of 1.

And keep in mind that the turns ratios still apply. I tried this with coils that had a 1:5 ratio. so normally, applying 24V gave me an output of 120V. With dual primaries, with one active, my output was 60V, but with both active my output was 240V. So imagine if I had a 3rd primary, my output would have been 360V.

Do you guys smell what I'm steppin' in?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 20, 2014, 02:02:26 PM
It is now clear to me that the motionless electric generator shown in Figuera's patent #30378 (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) is based on the same principle as the 1902 rotating electric generator. With this insight, the induced coils in the center must not touch the interior iron core. It is basically a transformers with an iron core primary and an iron-less core secondary. Therefore, in my previous proposed solution (see attached) for this transformer, the way I proposed the layout of the secondary coils is correct but these coils must be separated with non-magnetic materials from the interior and exterior iron cores. It is  not the perpendicularity of the coils!

Notice the similarities between the two 1902 Figuera's patents. It is practically the same structure except that the secondary rotates in the first one while it is fixed in the device of the later 1902 patent. That is why Figuera stated in the second 1902 patent that it was not necessary to have rotation or any movement at all. If you fixed the rotor wire of the Figuera's 1902 rotating patent and apply an AC voltage to the electromagnets you just get the second 1902 patent, which requires no movement. A true MEG.

I think with this post we completely deciphered Figuera's patents and their progressive improvements.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 20, 2014, 02:18:14 PM
Hi all,

Many months ago (as soon as nov-2012) a user of EF forum posted an interpretation of the motionless 1902 patent, patent 30378, also using poles in repulsion mode: N-N or S-S. In that time, as we were just looking for N-S poles, I missed that post because I could not understanding why he used two induced coils and why he confronted two North poles.

Now, while re-reading the forum, I found this post and now I can see his idea.

Basically this user is proposing to use also like poles facing each other (in repulsion) in the motionless 1902 patent. As the magnetic field crash in the central zone between electromagnets he suggests to place two induced coils. One at each side in order to capture all the magnetic lines which go to one and to the other side.

If you just use one induced coil the resulting induction will be null because one part of the coil is induced in the opposed direction to the other part. This is his explanation:

Quote
I am alternately powering the electromagnets because when the electromagnets are setup to be opposing to each other as one electromagnet starts to power down the lines of force shift toward it causing them to be pushed through the coil. When it is set up this way the electromagnets only have to vary in strength in relation to to each other to cause induction in the secondary coil. In the diagrams I have provided earlier in this thread I have shown how anyone can prove all this out. Also when you do it this way the wires in the top of the induced coil have an opposite sign as the wires in the bottom of the coil. This is why it is necessary to split the coil in the middle, and hook the wires like I did. When the  induced coil is used in this way it's flux can not effect the flux of the primary electromagnets.

I just post here this interpretation. Until now I was thinking that the this patent was different to the 1908 patent. Now I am not sure if they are equivalent or not.

One image is from that user. For clarity I have supperimposed his coil winding proposal into the patent diagram in order to grasp his idea.

I had always wondered why Figuera left so much room for the electromagnet winding at both side of the central core. Note that he left almost the same room for the wires as the diameter of the soft iron core.

Just for your study. Do you think it could work fine? Folowing this interpretation I think that a pancacke coil with an internal hollow as big as the soft iron core will also fit this requirement.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 20, 2014, 06:30:11 PM
If I were to take a guess it would be that your six months away from resolving the major problems. If you focus too much on design and not enough on operating principle you will miss the method to close the loop.
  Yea I said close the loop. The point where a little is fed back and acts like a lot.
If you want some light reading try Archimedes from 300 B.C.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 20, 2014, 06:32:11 PM
Bajac, thanks for the pdf, though I can't read it until I get home.

Hanon, it's interesting that you say that. There's a brilliant guy on YouTube that I started following. He made a transformer setup here- http://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE and though I didn't really understand, he does mention two secondary coils of opposite polarity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 20, 2014, 06:47:53 PM
If I were to take a guess it would be that your six months away from resolving the major problems. If you focus too much on design and not enough on operating principle you will miss the method to close the loop.
  Yea I said close the loop. The point where a little is fed back and acts like a lot.
If you want some light reading try Archimedes from 300 B.C.

Doug, I can not understand your post


Bajac, thanks for the pdf, though I can't read it until I get home.

Hanon, it's interesting that you say that. There's a brilliant guy on YouTube that I started following. He made a transformer setup here- http://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE (http://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE) and though I didn't really understand, he does mention two secondary coils of opposite polarity.

Antijon, Thanks for the link. It is interesting. It seems to use two induced coils in order to compensate their effects.  I don´t know how it is configured.

I tried to understand your last video but it is too complicate for my level. I will try it again this night
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 20, 2014, 07:04:11 PM
No worries Hanon. I was just proving that in a Figuera setup, or other similar design, the flux of both inductors add together. So, if 12V was the source, the combined flux would equate to 24V of flux. Essentially, the induced coil would have double the voltage output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 20, 2014, 10:15:13 PM
Well antijon congrats you found the secrete.
   How ever the object is not to just control the flux. If you treat each turn as an entity you can just as easily obtain the flux equal to 100 volts and thirty amps from only one volt and one amp. Or 120 volts at half an amp. It's leverage over the field by controlling the resistance in ever more taps on the coil. Let me squash the dumb arguments before they even start. A magnetic field of sufficient strength will appose the current in every way from opposing field of equal strength. As if the passage of current were being stopped with a great resistance or reluctance. Its more combination of the two. Now do you understand why I wanted to use parts from starters and alternators. I need big fat thick powerful inducers made from stuff that already has the values worked out.Anyone can wind an output coil but those beastly stators are made from conductors that don't cooperate. It's like trying to bend a nail around another nail. A 5 kw starter has 2 sets of 2 coils that handle 5 kw.
   The taps can be used singularly or in groups. Obviously if you go off the patent you view the seven N and seven S as taps connected to layers. If he had seven turns or seven layers the only difference would be the input voltage and amperage. How ever in your quest you need to find the smoking gun. The tap he used to close the loop. The input must equal the portion of the output to be used to self run. That may mean you have to use multiple taps, depends on how you build it. Ya know that old saying keep one hand in your back pocket when your handling electric. This would be one of those times you should adhere to simple safety rules. The more it draws the more it makes because it opposes the change. The state of equilibrium will be maintained even if it has to turn you into a burnt french fry to do it. 
    Im glad I cant be blamed for the destruction of the global economy all by myself.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 21, 2014, 12:02:39 AM
Doug,
Your dense text is difficult to follow for those as me with a mother language different to english. Besides of having good ideas it is also important to be a good teacher, and simplify things. Also it is imporant to have in mind that Figuera will help to avoid 2.8 million people dying of starvation each year, as happens nowadays. I always have that in mind in each post I write. We have to learnt to share the things we have in our wealthy world. They also deserve to have it. As Tesla said energy is the key for development.

About closing the loop I think it is not so important at this stage. Just a simple device (and simple to build) will be more than enough to start falling the dominoes pieces.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on October 21, 2014, 07:09:03 PM
I was just proving that in a Figuera setup, or other similar design, the flux of both inductors add together. So, if 12V was the source, the combined flux would equate to 24V of flux.
If the source is 12 V, the commutator is splitting the 12V in two parts for the two inductor coils (which add up to 12V). How can the combined flux add up to 24V? Is there an explanation?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 22, 2014, 12:04:35 AM
The VTA from Floyd Sweet seems to have used also two electromagnets in repulsion (North- North) to modulate the magnetic field and create a virtual motion of the field lines. Please check this link. It has some interesting sketches:

http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2018-01-10 (http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2018-01-10)

I copy here a couple of sentences from that page:

Quote

"No Lenz Law is exerted on the Input Coil from the Output Coil"

"Input is less than to be expected"

"We don't have the necessity of separating Flux (Flux Linking Law E=-dPhi/dt) we only need to modulate Flux (Flux Cutting Law E=B·v·l) and this can be done with very little power like Floyd said all those years back"


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 22, 2014, 08:40:36 PM
Hi Ovaroncito.. the commutator divides the voltage by phase, but it doesn't reduce the current to the individual inducers. They are run in parallel, so when the commutator peaks at one side, it is receiving 12 volts, and the other side 0. When I get home later I'll make a video to demonstrate the addition of parallel flux. Honestly, there may be a law in electromagnetics that allows this, but in all my experience I've never seen anything like it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 22, 2014, 10:16:23 PM
I'm not sure if I understood: two coils in series yet parallel to add flux ? Isn't that Tesla bifilar coil ? It may be useful in primary, but why you state it helps when used in secondary ? I'm working on exactly "opposite arrangement" ;-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 23, 2014, 04:49:24 AM
Hey guys, just posted a video. http://youtu.be/vAYTzatuq5E This should really cover all the bases. Sorry it's poor quality.. I'm exhausted and dealing with an inner ear infection. If you have any more questions, or any ideas, please let me know.

Hey Forest, I think I covered the difference between this and the bifilar winding. The video should give you a good idea of what I mean. What are you working on? O.O Care to divulge?  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 24, 2014, 12:24:06 AM
Antijon,

Thanks for the video. I love people who divulge his findings. It is the future of society: a collaborative society. As Tesla said the aim of science is the betterment of mankind.

Check this link for references to Gennady Markov, also using two confronting primaries. He found some kind of new law of induction not related to Faraday´s law:

http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2011-02-14 (http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2011-02-14)
Novosibirsk Scientist Refutes Physics Law Established about Two Hundred years Ago
Simultaneous Bidirectional Flux Induction for New Transformer Technology
 
Novosibirsk scientist, Professor of Harbin Polytechnic Institute, Head of Research and Technical Center 'Virus' Gennady Markov came out with a suggestion that the electromagnetic induction law discovered by Faraday in 1831 is not actually a law. According to Faraday, a magnetic flux in a ferromagnetic core of the transformer can be induced only in one direction. By Markov's theory the magnetic flux in a conductor can be induced simultaneously in both opposite directions. After several years of experimenting and practical studies Markov managed to prove the validity of his theory, develop an operable transformer on its base and obtain several international patents for his invention. In contrast to regular transformer, Markov's transformer has a vertically extended form and instead of the primary and secondary windings it has two primary windings with oncoming magnetic fluxes. By the new induction law, 'new' transformers can induce necessary voltage even from 'the worst iron' and can have considerably reduced sizes.


-----------------------

Quote

"In 1831 Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction - says Gennady Markov. - Then his ideas developed by Maxwell. After that, more than 160 years, no one was able to advance electrodynamics in the fundamental terms of a step. And eight years ago, I applied for an international patent, valid in 20 countries of the world, I created a transformer, which has already received four Russian patent. And my discovery was made "in spite of the laws of " the great physicists . Faraday , the magnetic fluxes in the yoke to successively shape - the contour in one direction. And only then works transformer . And I offered to do the opposite : to take the coil with the same number of turns and turn them towards each other . At the same time creates an equal number of turns and equal magnetic fluxes reaching towards each other, which cancel each other , but not destroyed ( as Faraday and Maxwell, they must be destroyed .) I discovered a new law : the principle of superposition of magnetic fields in a ferromagnetic material. The superposition - is the addition of fields. The essence of the law is that the magnetic fields that are mutually compensated , but not destroyed . And here is the word " but not destroyed " and is the key to open my law."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 24, 2014, 02:15:49 AM
Because of the information provided in my previous post, I am changing gear again! I will not pursue the construction of the rotating device shown in the 1902 Figuera’s Spanish patent #30376. Instead, I started the construction of the Figuera overunity transformer shown in his 1902 Spanish patent #30378.

As I already said, the devices shown in these two patents work on the same principle and have very similar structures. However, the overunity transformer is much simpler construction and does not required any type of electronic device or mechanical connections with motors. And, I already have all the components.

It is important to say that the feedback used for self-excitation should be decoupled. Otherwise, there would be a risk of voltage instability. For this purpose, I am planning on using a 1KW UPS that I already own. The feedback loop will consist of two connections, a connection between the output of the transformer and the input of the UPS, and the other connection being between the output of the UPS and the input of the transformer.

Let us see what happen!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Marsing on October 24, 2014, 03:33:43 AM
 
Hi antijon / all

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge#Tables_of_AWG_wire_sizes .
it say, with same numbers of secondary winding, bigger  wire or bigger diameter will also reduce the resistance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 24, 2014, 03:53:41 AM
I will need your English expertise to help me out on understanding the message of a discussion between Mordey and others in the year of 1893. During this time, there were a lot of discussions, arguments, and even jealousy among well-known engineers that resulted in the standardization of the performance of today’s electrical system and its components such as transformers, generators, motors, etc. I am specifically referring to the discussion for finding the best method to test the generators.

There was a race to be the winner of what would become the standard for testing the alternators. It seems that two of the pioneers of the generators with ironless disc armatures, Mr. Mordey and Dr. Hopkinson, were under the gun. For instance, Mr. Mordey was being heavily criticized for proposing a method consisting in configuring half of the coils of an AC alternator as a motor and the other half as a generator.
I am under the impression that the crazy results of the testing performed on the ironless disc armature alternators were not published because of the fear of making a public ridicule and lose the professional credibility. The following is a quote from an article published in the journal THE ELECTRICIAN, MARCH 17, 1893, and title ON TESTING AND WORKING ALTERNATORS (http://books.google.com/books?id=YIhDAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA573&lpg=PA573&dq=on+testing+and+working+alternators+the+electrician+march+17+1893&source=bl&ots=Dj3gGlNI1c&sig=_J1nu_th8SxLjbcSti8UHoS9uDk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q6VJVNeuDOm1sQSR1IHIDQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=on%20testing%20and%20working%20alternators%20the%20electrician%20march%2017%201893&f=false) found on page 574,

“Now it was to be observed in the interesting method which Mr. Mordey had described, and the extension of it described by Mr. Miller, that the stress on the shaft was not tested at all, and it might be that the shaft would be weak or the bearings might heat when the shaft was required to transmit 100 H.P., which would not come out at all in the method of testing described. It was quite clear that if one had not an engine giving more than 10 H.P. one could not in any way transmit 100 H.P. through the shaft. It might be objected that the method he had spoken of resulted in a distortion of the field, and the result would not truly represent what would happen if there were no distortion.”

I showed this article to a colleague of mine and he agreed with my interpretation that it kind of looks as if the result of the test was given much more power output than what was being input. What do you think? Do you agree? Or, do you have a different interpretation?

To the above criticism, Mr. Mordey replied on page 576 by the end of the article:

“Some two years ago he [Mr. Mordey] described an experiment with an alternator in which one coil was taken out of the circuit and merely connected to a voltmeter. The other coils were then loaded from nothing up to full load and the excitation kept constant. He took that to indicate that the reaction of the armature on the field was not appreciable. He thought Mr. Kapp’s curve was not a good curves.  It appeared that the machine was going to break out of synchronism at 2 ½ times the best current. In his curve he got up to 20 times and did not break out of synchronism. With reference to Mr. Harrison’s experiments, he (Mr. Mordey) had had a good deal of experience of alternators, and have tried to find the faintest difference o field-current when the whole of the armature-current  was thrown off suddenly, and had never seen in his own machines the slightest flicker in the exciting current. Mr. Swinburne had criticized the modification of Dr. Hopkinson’s method on grounds that were not quite fair. He was trying to test an alternator; he was not trying to test an engine, or a boiler, or a belt. Really the alternator had to be driven somehow, and for the purpose of his argument his machine might be direct-driven. As to the side pull of the belt, he did not think that was a very serious matter. He did not think the loss in the bearings was a difficulty, and did not think the reduction of efficiency by side pull of the belt was to be traced to the bearing, but the belt.”

From the above it is noted that the efficiency of these machines was too good to be true. Critics, who were also prestigious engineers, were looking for any other factors to discredit the test resulting in “unreal” efficiency.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 24, 2014, 02:17:10 PM
Please, note that today's generators use protective relaying systems for disconnecting a generator that is out of synchronism. Because of strong armature reaction caused by sudden overloads, the shaft can encounter a fast jump in the torque that may slow down the rotor to a point in which the frequency of the induced voltage is affected. If the frequency is affected, heavy currents from the electrical grid could circulate through the armature coils. If this condition is not addressed soon enough, it could cause considerable damage to the generator structure. In addition, because of the mechanical stresses that strong armature reactions impose on the shaft mechanism of today's generators, careful attention must be paid to the design of the rotating shaft structure.

Mordey was heavily criticized for not providing "adequate design" to the shaft of his alternators. However, because the armature reaction of the Mordey's alternators was very weak, the bearing losses became negligible and almost practically any decent shaft size would have done the work.

It really amazes me that the critics of the time, who were very good engineers, could not realize what was going on with the ironless disc armature alternators. And, it keeps happening today. If someone had come to me when I was fresh out of college to tell me about overunity generators, I would have considered this person crazy!
 
I am attaching two photos and two sketches of the Ferranti's alternators. I am not sure but I think they refer to a 5MW alternator. Note the relative small size of the piston shown in the first sketch.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 24, 2014, 04:35:28 PM
Thanks for the link Hanon. Actually, the principle that relies on opposing fields can be easily demonstrated. But, i think it's true that there must be an air gap or something similar to reduce the effects of one primary onto another. In my tests, two opposing primary coils will cause them to draw more current as one tries to reduce the field of the other.

Anyway, it is a completely different principle, just like the addition of flux that I demonstrated.

Oh, to build a generator on this principle, look at the illustration. With a three pole rotor, all North pointing out, the stator coils should produce an AC current. Because of the three poles, in operation, when one magnet is leaving a stator, another magnet is approaching the opposite stator. This will produce a combined EMF equal to a standard rotor with a north and south pole. The effect of Lenz's law will still produce a back-torque because the current generated will still oppose the change of the rotor, but because there is no North-South "locking" the rotor to the stator, the running torque will be much smaller. I like to think that this design will show that the back-torque of Lenz's law is really very small.

Bajac, for some reason I couldn't download your document. Could you repost it, please? And yes, it does seem that they were trying to make a fool of Mordey.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 24, 2014, 05:49:18 PM
Bajac, for some reason I couldn't download your document. Could you repost it, please? And yes, it does seem that they were trying to make a fool of Mordey.

Antijon,
Could you provide me with the reply number where the document is found? I am not sure which document you are referring.
 
Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: john-g on October 24, 2014, 10:49:10 PM
Hi

This may be helpful about the testing method used by Mordey:

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 25, 2014, 04:57:34 AM
Thanks Bajac, but never mind. I was able to download it with a different browser. That's the basis you're going to use in your device?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 25, 2014, 05:01:46 AM
John,

Thank you very much for the information!

It is interesting how the engineers of the time made a big effort for determining the heating losses of the alternators in order to calculate their efficiency. I have not seen a generator test performed to determine the efficiency as a function of the power output divided by the mechanical power input. All these efficiency calculations are based on the power output and the heating losses of the alternator only. My questions is, would you care to have an alternator with 30% heating losses and a COP of 400%? Such alternators would be self-excited and fuel free; and with a very simple construction, indeed.

Antijon,

If you are referring to the overunity transformer, yes! Later on I will post a diagram showing what I am planning to build for discussion. I already have rolls of silicon steel sheets. I will use a special scissors for making the lamination of the cores. For this type of AC device is recommended to use laminated cores to reduced the losses due to Eddy currents.

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 26, 2014, 02:49:34 AM
I wanted to show you one generator posted in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHSXSsNroho (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHSXSsNroho)
Can you see any similarity with the topic we have been discussing in this thread?

The device shown in this video is a degraded version of the iron-less coil armature principle used by Figuera, Ferranti, Mordey, Thompson, Hopkinson, and Tesla. Note that the above pioneers always had the induced iron-less coils in an air gap between a south and north magnetic poles, which is the setup that maximizes the magnetic flux in the air gap. The generator in this video is using one side of the magnet to face a side of the coil, only. Therefore, most of the magnetic lines of force stay closed to their magnets. Whenever you kill the dipole, the number of flux lines and magnetic intensity is decreased. Why do we want to do that? It is done that way because the principle of iron-less induced coil generators is not well understood.

Because a higher number of magnetic force lines are concentrated whenever there are two opposing magnetic poles, a much higher voltage can be induced when the coils travel through the air gap. It requires a stronger force to separate two opposing magnetic poles than the force required to push together two equal magnetic poles. In other words, the flux linkage is higher between opposing magnetic poles.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on October 26, 2014, 02:58:25 AM
The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant.  He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back.  Just an idea.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 26, 2014, 03:40:25 AM
The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant.  He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back.  Just an idea.
I am not sure I understand how your setup works. Do you have a sketch showing the expected magnetic flux lines between the inducing and induced coils?

What I was trying to say is that if you use a single magnet or two magnets with the same magnetic poles, you will get a much weaker magnetic field for the same gap than when using a magnetic field between two opposite magnetic poles. When you have an air gap in between two opposite magnetic poles, more magnetic flux lines cross the gap to merge and form continuous loops around the two opposite magnets. That is the intended message of "do not kill the dipole." Did I explain it in a clear manner?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on October 27, 2014, 12:21:52 AM
@BAJAC, I believe I get what your saying.  I had a minute so I whipped up another drawing with single loops no cores and vectors.  The red and blue coils are the inducers and the green is the induced.  I hope this helps a bit, again just an idea.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 27, 2014, 01:13:51 PM
Thanks Phoneboy. I hope to see your device built, soon.

I am very puzzled with the fact that the genius of the 19th century did not seem to associate the small armature reaction of the generators with the efficiency. How come something that obvious has been overlooked for so long? Ferranti, Mordey, Thompson, and Tesla new about the small armature reaction of the iron-less coil armatures but to my knowledge they did not relate it to the efficiency of the rotating generators. Everything points out that the only person who did relate it the small armature reaction with the efficiency of the alternators was Clemente Figuera.

I mean, if the input power is the torque times the RPM, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to know that a small armature reaction should have made an alternator more efficient. It can be concluded that conspiracy and suppression are not the only causes for not having over unity generators, today. The brilliant minds of the past and present times might have played a larger role.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 27, 2014, 01:34:44 PM
The other question you may have is, why did not Mr. Figuera explicitly mentioned the principle of operation of his device? Did he know about the principle at all?

My best guess is yes! Mr. Figuera knew about the principle of operation but it was against his economic interest to mention it in his patents. The reason is simple, if Figuera had mentioned the principle of operation of his device, the competitors would have just used the devices built by Ferranti, Siemens, and Mordey. The latter devices were more practical to build and did not have to pay royalties. In that case, it was more likely that Figuera would have not received the payment from the Union of Banks. In addition, Figuera might have encountered problems for getting the patent awarded based on the existing arts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 27, 2014, 08:53:27 PM
Hannon
  How would this help 2.8 million starving people to eat? How long would it be before they became 5.6 million? Even if it could help solve the food problem there is no free water generator so at some point you would still be in as bad a shape or worse when you run out of potable water. Just something I was wondering while repairing my pc which was hacked 20 minutes after my last post. Im not bothered by it much it provides a distraction from other things. Forces me to clean my drives.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 27, 2014, 09:38:32 PM

Oh, to build a generator on this principle, look at the illustration. With a three pole rotor, all North pointing out, the stator coils should produce an AC current. Because of the three poles, in operation, when one magnet is leaving a stator, another magnet is approaching the opposite stator. This will produce a combined EMF equal to a standard rotor with a north and south pole. The effect of Lenz's law will still produce a back-torque because the current generated will still oppose the change of the rotor, but because there is no North-South "locking" the rotor to the stator, the running torque will be much smaller. I like to think that this design will show that the back-torque of Lenz's law is really very small.


Antijon,
Could you elaborate a bit deeper your proposal? It seem to be interesting but I can not grasp your idea totally. Thanks. I think Adams motor and others overunity motors also used un-even number of stator coils and rotor magnets.

Doug,
With energy you can access many things. A  small pump in a small village in the middle of Africa may bring water to dry lands far from the river. Or pump water out of a well. Irrigation is much easier with free energy instead of depending on having a working gasoil motor that they can not afford or they do not have access to gasoil in those sites. Also with energy you can boil water and make potable water. Energy is directly related to the development of mankind. Tesla sacrificed money for the better of mankind.

The problem with free energy is that all inventor have sacrified the development of mankind for getting a lot of money. At the end all them have died poor and their designs are buried with them. I think they were not too smart.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 28, 2014, 01:29:34 AM
Hannon
  How would this help 2.8 million starving people to eat? How long would it be before they became 5.6 million? Even if it could help solve the food problem there is no free water generator so at some point you would still be in as bad a shape or worse when you run out of potable water. Just something I was wondering while repairing my pc which was hacked 20 minutes after my last post. Im not bothered by it much it provides a distraction from other things. Forces me to clean my drives.
 


Doug,


With such technology people would be able to grow plants in the deserts. The costs of running desalination plants would be ridiculously low. Think about it, potable water everywhere for drinking and growing plants. The Sahara desert can become the biggest garden. And, all of this can be done without adding pollution to the environment.

Sorry! I wrote dessert instead of desert. It might be that I was eating a cake while writing it. Ha ha ha.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 28, 2014, 02:24:27 AM

From Figuera patent #30378 (Motionless generator) (1902) (textual quote):

" In Gramme ring and in current dynamos, current is produce
by induction produced on the wire of the induced circuits while
its coils cut the lines of force "

........

" The inventors believe that is exactly the same that the induced circuit coils
cut the lines of force, than that these lines of force cross the induced wire.
"


Therefore:

1 - Figuera was searching for induction by flux cutting the wires.

2 - How did Figuera get to move laterally the lines of force and cut the induced wire?  ???   ...  I think I know it

For me this is the key of Figuera´s motionless patents: using two electromagnets to move the lines of force forward and backward.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 28, 2014, 12:01:41 PM
Hannon
 That is only a part of it which is very important in itself. It will not get it to work on its own. The intensity of the magnetic fields produced by the inducers have to be extreamly strong with a minimum of expended current. ie a better magnet. There is another oddity to his drawing in the patent of the motionless unit. The lines which everyone thinks are conductive leads are not leads at all. They show one half of the system running off the source, the N inducers and the other half running off the feed back from the output. It would be like drawing a circle around the respective halves one run off of outside gen and the other off the comutated resistance which also more of abstract notion then a model in the physical sense. Remove the lines going from the different parts to the other parts and start counting up parts and tell me there is not seven coils N seven coils S and seven possible resister connections but 14 commutator segments. The resister contraption is only there to show the device is resistance controlled but it does not exist in the sense of the drawing as a real physical part of the construction. The magnets them selves control the fluctuation and everything ells including rectification.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: john-g on October 28, 2014, 12:40:49 PM
Hi

Here's a short video by me with some ideas about the Figuera patent.  I think that the flux was directed through either an air gap or solid block, and the pickup wires were contained within then.  The main flux could be either from an electro-magnet or  a permanent magnet, and that flux is shifted by a secondary electro-magnet which may form part of a tank circuit.  Anyway, that's my thoughts for what they are worth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoZCGjQI3Dw&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoZCGjQI3Dw&feature=youtu.be)

Rds

John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 28, 2014, 01:43:14 PM
John,
I will watch the video after work. Thanks.

If you think about it, the progressive improvement of the Figuera's patents is very interesting. First, the rotating generator based on minimum armature reaction. Second, the over unity transformer type using very similar structure as the rotating one. And third, the induced iron core coil having strong armature (secondary coil) reaction separated by air gaps while using a scheme to control the direction of the reaction.

Figuera's last invention is an ingenious design that should have much higher power density than the devices shown in his two 1902 patents. Why is that? The issue with both 1902 patent is that whenever the number of turns increases to increase the power, the air gap must also be increased. In the 1908 device, the number of turns of the secondary can be increased without increasing the air gap distances. In addition, the induced power increases because of the iron core in the secondary. The issue with this device consists in diverting the strong reaction of the induced coils. The phases and magnitudes of the applied voltages must be just right. Based on my experience, if the reaction field starts opposing the primary field, it is difficult for the other primary field to pull it away.
 
What we need is a good two-phase voltage  generator for which the frequency, voltage, and phase angle can be adjusted. Once you have this source, you should be able to play with these voltage parameters and check for the performance of the device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 28, 2014, 03:09:31 PM
Hanon, it's just another way to build a generator. I made some images to show what I mean.

The first image is a typical generator. The rotor moves in one direction, so you can think- North is approaching one coil, South is approaching other coil. When the two coils are connected in series, they have a combined EMF. Or you can think, one coil is producing 120V, the other is producing 120V, and in series they produce 240V.

The second image shows two different ways to produce an EMF. The first is a North+South approaching, as in a normal generator. The second is North approaching+North departing. The EMF should be equal in both cases.

The third image I altered to include the South magnets. Imagine the South magnets move with the North magnets of the rotor. I added these mainly because others have mentioned the flux density, however, to simply envision a working model they're not necessary.

Oh, I want to add a link to another self-exciting motor/generator: http://pesn.com/2014/05/13/9602490_Video--Platinum-Invests_Building_Palladium-Magnetic-Generators/ Notice how the interior and exterior magnets move together. This is probably the same principle, and probably the same as a disk generator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 29, 2014, 06:14:15 PM
 Hi,
 
I have one doubt: Why the ironless generator in the picture below is not an overunity generator if it does not have a iron core to create drag in the movement? I am afraid that there is something else in Figuera rotary coil patent #30376 than a simple ironless generator.
 
As I posted a couple of months ago I think that the foundation of this rotary coil generator is that this generator have TWO POLES AT THE SAME DISTANCE TO THE CONDUCTOR.  But this is just my idea. In this case I don´t have arguments to support this interpretation. The conductor is just one single wire between two poles, and it creates a coil which is perpendicular to the magnetic field.
 
As I understand that patent, the effect created by one pole is compensated by the effect from the other pole. Let´s say that current is induced in the wire (as in any other generator). This current moves along the wire creating a magnetic field around the wire. Let´s say that the North pole attracts the magnetic field around the wire. The South pole will then repel the magnetic field around the wire. As the South pole  and the North pole are at the same distance to wire both effects will cancel each other (attraction and repulsion) and there won´t be any drag to the movement of the rotary coil.
 
If you want to test this Figuera patent I would just suggest to try first with Figuera´s original design. Do not try to invent without even building the basic patent device. Do not try to be more clever than Figuera. I guess you will lose against Figuera  :-[
 
I have devised a configuration of this patent where the net inducer magnetic field (B) which crosses the coil is null in the coil during a whole revolution of the generator (B_net=0). Therefore there is no induction due to flux linking ( emf = -d(Phi)/dt = 0) and there is only induction by flux cutting ( emf = B·v·l ). Is anyone interested? Are you wondering how can it be done? Just play a bit with the electromagnets shape and placement. This is novel as far as I know.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on October 29, 2014, 08:35:52 PM
Hi,
 
I have one doubt: Why the ironless generator in the picture below is not an overunity generator if it does not have a iron core to create drag in the movement? I am afraid that there is something else in Figuera rotary coil patent #30376 than a simple ironless generator.

hanon:
My level in theory is way under yours, but as far as my experience tells me, what I see here is that the force generated in one wire, is very low, and consequently the magnetic field around the wire is as negligible as its drag.
When a bunch of wires (turns) are used, both factors increase, (power & drag) even with no iron in the core.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 29, 2014, 08:39:59 PM
Hi,
 
I have one doubt: Why the ironless generator in the picture below is not an overunity generator if it does not have a iron core to create drag in the movement? I am afraid that there is something else in Figuera rotary coil patent #30376 than a simple ironless generator.
 
As I posted a couple of months ago I think that the foundation of this rotary coil generator is that this generator have TWO POLES AT THE SAME DISTANCE TO THE CONDUCTOR.  But this is just my idea. In this case I don´t have arguments to support this interpretation. The conductor is just one single wire between two poles, and it creates a coil which is perpendicular to the magnetic field.
 
As I understand that patent, the effect created by one pole is compensated by the effect from the other pole. Let´s say that current is induced in the wire (as in any other generator). This current moves along the wire creating a magnetic field around the wire. Let´s say that the North pole attracts the magnetic field around the wire. The South pole will then repel the magnetic field around the wire. As the South pole  and the North pole are at the same distance to wire both effects will cancel each other (attraction and repulsion) and there won´t be any drag to the movement of the rotary coil.
 
If you want to test this Figuera patent I would just suggest to try first with Figuera´s original design. Do not try to invent without even building the basic patent device. Do not try to be more clever than Figuera. I guess you will lose against Figuera  :-[
 
I have devised a configuration of this patent where the net inducer magnetic field (B) which crosses the coil is null in the coil during a whole revolution of the generator (B_net=0). Therefore there is no induction due to flux linking ( emf = -d(Phi)/dt = 0) and there is only induction by flux cutting ( emf = B·v·l ). Is anyone interested? Are you wondering how can it be done? Just play a bit with the electromagnets shape and placement. This is novel as far as I know.

I can answer to your question. First, the structure you show is not the same as the ones built by Figuera, Ferranti, Mordey, etc. Could you see the difference? And second, have you measured the torque in the coil you presented? How much larger will the induced magnetic field and the torque be if you introduce an iron core?
In addition, if you read the paper I posted you will find my complain in the way the force is derived. I asked the question, if the iron-less coil loop is air, how come the permeability of vacuum (air) is not in the formula? Is the classical derivation misleading?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 29, 2014, 09:35:31 PM
Doug1, hanon you are both correct, especially Doug tips recall me my thoughts from the past. Windings has resistance ! It is most natural to use such resistance by connecting coils to kind of commutator to direct current flow through them. Yes, only understanding first Figuera patent with rotating coil and then moving forward to solid state version may allow understanding.
First thing is (I may be wrong, but rather not) Ferranti and others carefully had placed coils so the inducing coil always cut magnetic field of inducers at right angle. That is maybe the difference. Second, magnetic field of stator coils is always taken from rotating armature via commutator so it is positive feedback. Figuera modified commutator and then converted it into outside part of device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 29, 2014, 09:48:05 PM
Hanon, I think I have an answer and explanation for you.

A simple answer is: according to Lenz's law, any generated current establishes a magnetic field that directly opposes the field that created it. This is typical for induction. Because this is flux cutting it is different, but we can assume that if there were no opposition, then there would be no generated current.

Looking at your illustration, if you push the wire down a current will be generated by flux cutting. As we see, the magnetic field above the wire, created by the current, opposes North, and the field below the wire is attracted to South. However, a couple of things happen to cause the wire to resist movement.

First, the field above the wire doesn't repel North. It cancels North. The current and magnetic field of the wire is a direct result of the outer magnetic field. This means that it must always be weaker than the outer field, and the two can never be equally opposed. Therefore, if we have a static field equal to 100, the wire field must be weaker, so a wire field of 99. The result is a static field of 1. As another example, if I have two batteries, one battery of 12V, and one battery of 6V. If I hook the two together with positive to positive, 12V+ - 6V+ = 6V+ in one direction. In the wire, this has the effect of weakening the magnetic field above the wire.

Next, the magnetic field below the wire doesn't attract the magnetic field. It adds to it in parallel. This has the effect of compressing the lines of force of the static magnetic field.

Now we can see that as we push the wire down, the induced current reduces the field above the wire, and compresses it below the wire. This is the same behavior as a motor. Because the field lines resist the compression, the wire opposes the downward movement.

Flux cutting and this motoring action are two different things that both affect the wire. I wonder if the conductor was a flat plate instead of a round wire, if the motoring action would be reduced.  ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 29, 2014, 11:17:59 PM

As I understand that patent, the effect created by one pole is compensated by the effect from the other pole. Let´s say that current is induced in the wire (as in any other generator). This current moves along the wire creating a magnetic field around the wire. Let´s say that the North pole attracts the magnetic field around the wire. The South pole will then repel the magnetic field around the wire. As the South pole  and the North pole are at the same distance to wire both effects will cancel each other (attraction and repulsion) and there won´t be any drag to the movement of the rotary coil.


Hanon,

It will never happen! What you asking for is against the Lenz's law. It is easy to test. For instance, if you change the magnetic field for one of the air gaps shown in the Figuera's rotating generator, the net induced voltage would be zero. The reason for it is that the induced voltage must always have a polarity such that the induced current produces a magnetic field that opposes the movement of the wire. It is true. The induced magnetic field will produce a force that always opposes the movement of the wire.

In other words, if the wire moves in a magnetic field, either there is no induced current or the induced current always generates a magnetic field that opposes the movement of the wire.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 29, 2014, 11:31:49 PM
Let suppose a simple test:

If a current is circulating along a wire when we approach a North pole the wire is attracted  toward the North pole (for example). Later, if we approach a South pole, the same wire is repelled from the South pole.

Therefore I think that is we approch both poles, North and South, to the wire at the same distance, their effects are cancelled (attraction - repulsion ) and then  there would not be any drag in the wire.

Am I right or wrong?

For me this could be the principle used for Figuera in his rotary coil patent: Common generators just use one pole, and therefore they show dragging. The other pole is much further than the first pole so ther is not compensating action to get rid of the drag. Figuera placed both poles at the same distance to the wire to create a perfect compensation of forces: atractive force and repulsive force are cancelling each other.

Alvaro: I said just one wire because Figuera did not place a whole coil between both poles (I think). If the principle with just one wire avoid the dragging then we just have to use many wires one after another!! I do not have solid theory background. I have just been studying and reading thing from the moment I met Figuera project, now two years ago.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on October 30, 2014, 02:09:59 AM
Hi

Here's a short video by me with some ideas about the Figuera patent.  I think that the flux was directed through either an air gap or solid block, and the pickup wires were contained within then.  The main flux could be either from an electro-magnet or  a permanent magnet, and that flux is shifted by a secondary electro-magnet which may form part of a tank circuit.  Anyway, that's my thoughts for what they are worth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoZCGjQI3Dw&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoZCGjQI3Dw&feature=youtu.be)

Rds

John


John,


I don't think I have never seen a device like that. Please, let me know how the test goes.


However, I may have to watch it again. I was not able to stop laughing the first time your dog started howling. I was wondering if you forgot to feed it or to take it outside for a walk.


It sounded like a nice dog, though!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 30, 2014, 04:36:58 AM
Hanon, I understand what you mean, but I don't think it will work that way.

Remember that the wire isn't attracted to either pole, it just wants to move perpendicular to the field. See this: http://www.tpub.com/neets/book5/15d.htm for an explanation of armature reaction. In the image, the generated current causes the magnetic field to compress directly ahead of the wire. This is the reason the wire feels resistance to turn.

I can think of only two ways to reduce the armature reaction of a wire, or ironless rotor. 1. Shape the wire to reduce the magnetic field ahead of the wire, or drastically reduce the wire's self inductance. Or 2. Possible but not practical, pulse the generator with an opposing current. This would cause the windings to behave like a motor.

I really haven't studied Figuera's rotating generator, but if it's an ironless core generator it would have little drag. Armature reaction on a naked wire is like farting into the wind- hardly noticeable.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 30, 2014, 02:25:57 PM
Hannon
 That is only a part of it which is very important in itself. It will not get it to work on its own. The intensity of the magnetic fields produced by the inducers have to be extreamly strong with a minimum of expended current. ie a better magnet. There is another oddity to his drawing in the patent of the motionless unit. The lines which everyone thinks are conductive leads are not leads at all. They show one half of the system running off the source, the N inducers and the other half running off the feed back from the output. It would be like drawing a circle around the respective halves one run off of outside gen and the other off the comutated resistance which also more of abstract notion then a model in the physical sense. Remove the lines going from the different parts to the other parts and start counting up parts and tell me there is not seven coils N seven coils S and seven possible resister connections but 14 commutator segments. The resister contraption is only there to show the device is resistance controlled but it does not exist in the sense of the drawing as a real physical part of the construction. The magnets them selves control the fluctuation and everything ells including rectification.

I can not grasp your proposal Doug. You are telling that the wires are not real wires and the resistor is not really used. Are you proposing that Figuera instead of a variable resistor used just a couple of electromagnets with 7 intermediate taps? Of course as B =Turns·Current  (N·I) then if you change the number of turns sequentially then you are modifiying the magnetic field. This appeared in the forum around may or june and it is a good idea.

What about your interpretation that half elements are fed from the source and the other half from the feedback ???? Which feedback ? I don´t understand it.  Could you provide a rough sketch or a picture of a handwritting drawing? Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 30, 2014, 03:51:36 PM
Maybe there is no resistors, just armature coils attached to commutator ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 30, 2014, 03:57:27 PM
Hi John, I had some questions for ya. I had to watch your video a few times to really get what you're thinking. It's a great idea. I can't believe you drilled holes into the core, that's ingenious.

About your working device, first, you're only using the conductors in one direction, right? So as the field is diverted, then back again, it cuts the wires. Have you ever tried just using AC on your "stator" coil? I'm really curious as to the results. Is an increasing flux that traverses the wires, the same thing as a flux whose lines move and cut the wires? See what I mean. I think there's probably a large difference.

Anyway, I had an idea from your demo. Since your device is practically identical to a DC generator, minus rotation, there should be a way to use both sides of the conductor. So in the image, I used "compensating windings". If a current is applied, the windings should divert the flux that crosses the induced windings. The red and blue indicates conductors and different current directions. The green indicates the flux.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 30, 2014, 07:51:09 PM
The design in the video by john-g is quite interesting. It is not Figuera´s design but it is also based on induction by flux cutting into a motionless device. I love it. But I see one problem: When adding the second electromagnet to modulate the flux  you are creating a bridge across the gap where the wires are located. I think that through this low reluctance path many flux will cross and it will not go across the induced wires.

Out off topic, I have one question: The information in Figuera´s forums is quite valuable. You know how internet behaves: Today everything is into one site and maybe in 3 years that site disappears and there is nothing. I am thinking about doing a back-up of all the info into this Figuera thread (also links an attachments) into my computer. Do you know any program that make this kind of forum back-up into PC files?  Thanks !!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 30, 2014, 08:44:52 PM
Hanon, I think you're right about the secondary path. When the coil is off, most of the flux will pass through the secondary because of the low reluctance. But, if the secondary activates in opposition to the flux, the sum of both will pass through the gap, similar to my experiments with multiple primaries. I'd really love to see a large, high-powered version.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 31, 2014, 11:40:00 AM
Hannon
 The lines that look like wires are to show the sectional.One half running from the origin the other half from the feed back. The lines encompass the output coils in the diagram each side. N plus induced  S plus induced. The magnets are already resistance controlled 7 layers series parallel. Length of wire and diameter of wire.
  Break down a simple coil into its turns 100 turns at 100 volts = one volt per tuen or a hundred turns with taps each given one volt. It's still the same thing as far as the magnet is concerned. Any combination of turns to give you the voltage you want to work with going in as the source on one set N or S  then a portion of the output into the opposite set with the correct turns grouping to reach the voltage equal to the portion used from the output coil. On a percentage based scheme the voltages balance out to zero difference form the view point of the magnetic field and induction so it can suppress the origin while providing the right  tap/s create the same flux from the lesser current being used off the output coil. Archimedes lever and fulcrum. The effect of a quantity of flux from two different values of current. The tesla patent called dc from ac currents uses the current in one direction to block the other direction by way of batteries or motors or permanent magnets or electro magnets. Pat 413353. I dont think the inventors of the past stuck everything in one place as a complete package. If you think about it that would not be very safe on any count.
     
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: john-g on October 31, 2014, 11:56:23 AM
Hi Antijon &Hanon

@Antijon, I think (could well be wrong) the key is to have an arrangement such that the fields do not intermesh with each other but rather push / pull / slide over each other, thus the controlling field is not effected by the pickup inductor.

@Hanon, re the bridge you are correct the main flux may see this as a preferred path, maybe the bridge should be an air core coil, firmly squashed against the core surface?

Out of interest, I did have a play using ferrite E cores with a groove ground into them for sandwiching the pickup inductor in; however running it at high frequency gave me a real headache that seemed to last for weeks. Also I found that the ferrite core seemed to magnetically lock up,  so that after a while pulsing the control coil did nothing – Maybe that is a gapping problem but I wondered if with 2 fields brushing against each, opposed in direction,  if magnetic whorls could be setup within the ferrite (like rolling a pencil between your palms, the palms being the field lines and the pencil the formed whorls)?

Rds

John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 31, 2014, 03:47:32 PM
John, I get what you mean. You want to reduce the mutual induction between the control and the induced. Eliminate that, and the only thing transferring energy will be the field coil.

In that case, the most efficient design may be 2 control coils with cores. One before the induced wires, and the other after the wires. But with the cores pointing perpendicular to the field. In this case, the control field should alter the flux path- like making it sweep side to side- but shouldn't change the energy or density of the flux that crosses the induced. I think you're really onto something here.

About the whorls, it's possible. But honestly, even if this device saturates I don't see why the output would stop. I mean, it works because of a static field... Maybe the effects were dependent on your particular setup, like some type of resonance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: john-g on October 31, 2014, 05:11:26 PM
Hi Antijon

I would tend to think that only one control is needed unless you are pull/pushing a field from both sides.  In your example above, why not have a greater depth to the top material with the pick up inductors placed in the lower portion of the airgap, then the control coil field is purely pushing against the main field.   But I believe you are correct in that the control field can be inline or across the main field.

Rds

John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 01, 2014, 05:20:07 PM
Hey John.. You're right that only one control is really needed. I was just thinking that after the induced builds up current and resists the movement of flux, the two controls would have more of an effect. The image I made is really out of scale. Kind of a rough idea. haha, I guess the only point I was trying to make is that it's possible to alter the primary magnetic field without creating a secondary, low reluctance path. I mean, the main field can only cross the air gap, because the two controls don't connect across it.

Doug, I was going over what you said about the multiple taps. If I understand correctly, it's really a brilliant idea. I imagine a transformer with multiple taps on the primary, all connected to the commutator. As the commutator moves, the resistance, and turns ratio, of the primary changes. So a single DC voltage can produce a varying voltage on the secondary. But this would only work if they were all wound on the same inductor. And if they aren't, and there's multiple secondaries, then you couldn't wire them in series or parallel.

Why do you suggest that the device is different from the patent image? The point of a patent is to copyright an exact device. They have to be very specific.

In order to privilege the application  to the production of large industrial
electrical currents, on the principle  that says that “there is production of
induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of
force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously
exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there
is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application
of said principle.

Figuera can't copyright an idea, because as he describes it, well that's every electromagnetic device in history. If the working model was in any way different from the patent, then he could never claim in court that someone copied his idea. He could never claim infringement, and he could never claim royalties. So in my opinion, the commutator and multiple-tapped resistor are real, and as I have already proven with a battery, variable resistor, and dual primary transformer, the device he drew can produce an AC current.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 02, 2014, 02:51:44 PM
Antijon

 The 08 pat says "This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of
induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to
privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large
industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but
transforming mechanical work into electricity.
Let’s therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior
principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is
the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on
this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form
and way that has been used to make the application.

 He is asking for a patent on the principal and follows with a description of a machine based on it. Not his ultimate finish product nor a actual machine. He does not use terms like "he uses to secure an effect in his machine". The principal can be applied to any type of machine or a number of designs. So I guess he was looking for something more then a plant patent of a specific design related to one machine.
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 03, 2014, 03:55:38 PM
The taps are powered sequentially. the order is left to experiment with. Different core types and materials behave differently. I still have not tried one pattern which will be hard to explain. I will try. If the first connection is on all the time with a week voltage and the remaining taps are fired one only one at a time on both inducers as if to push the steady state field left and right it would give some physical pressure to the field being swung left and right. So more lines of flux are trapped inside the moving bubble which crosses over the output coil situated in between the inducers. The required commutator would then be made from a barrel type with conductors traveling from the shaft on one end on an angle down the side of the barrel to the opposite shaft. So then the contacts would all be set in a straight line outside the barrel. as the barrel is turned the conductor being angled would only be making contact with one brush at a time or maybe two so the field would not have a chance to retard in strength as it is shifted. I made some pretty crazy commutators out of very expensive fans. It was a challenge to fine fans that had the right rpm and enough strength to over come the drag from the contacts. I would much rather use something that does not cost 3 to 4 hundred bucks for a commutator. Im leaning more toward free to maintain it being free all across the spectrum of arguments.
  Now keep in mind I still hold fast to the inducers being NN SS. It may work both ways but it will be easier for me to move a bloch wall back and forth an inch or two compared to reversing the poles on my set up and my opinion. The relative motion of the field and it's frame of reference compared to the output coil is what counts in induction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 03, 2014, 06:38:44 PM
I was aware that the software wouldn't calculate an overunity condition, I just wanted to estimate how much flux generated and the experiment result is the ultimate truth although the explanation is very often unknown.

Below I attach a picture showing my set up which is very simple to replicate. The dimension is 8x9x10 cm and between 3-4 kg's weight. I hope somebody here would replicate and then do a more accurate COP measurement, better yet make a self-running set up which will show obviously its overunity.

I did some more tests today and got slightly different results. Here are some of them:

SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A        Rin : 6.3 ohm        Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A      Rout : 0.5 ohm     Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W

My set up is very loose and vibrating violently so I guess that's why the result differed from what I posted here http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871) ..
If the reactance of the primary inductance is neutralized by using capacitor, Vin will need only around 11 Vac rms (for consideration when designing self-running set up)..

Good luck

Poorpluto,
 
The device you showed in your reply #1637 on page 110 could work on the principle that Figuera disclosed in his 1902 patent (motionless device.) If you follow the teachings of this patent, you can improve on your device. Note that, a) the conductors of the coils are placed in air gaps, and b) each coil turn is cut by two magnetic fields of additive polarities, that is, the induced voltages does not cancell each other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 04, 2014, 02:04:15 AM
Doug, great idea for the commutator. Now that I see what you mean, it looks very familiar to what i have been working on. But i still don't understand the arrangement with the output coil(s). Do you have multiple coils?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 04, 2014, 04:12:17 AM
Could you make an sketch of that commutator design? I really appreaciate it

Is it a kind of central shaft with a brush rotating inside a barrel with all the contacts in the circunference. Have I understood it fine?

A simpler design of the commutator would make easier to replicate this machine
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 04, 2014, 12:55:20 PM
Hannon
 The output coil is singular one that I pulled from a transformer 126T able to hold up to an input of 20amps at 120 volts when used on a laminated core. I try to keep to one size former or bobbin so I can pull parts off old small welders which happen to fit the winding bobbin size for the large starter motors from diesel engine trucks with a little bit of persuasion. I can use one more description to clear your image of the commutator. Think of it looking like the stripes on a barber pole or a candy cane and all the conductors are made from thick wire and terminate on a ring at the ends of the pole. The spacing is wider and the pitch less then a barber pole but that is the best way i can describe it. If the dwell is too short with thick wire then I will have to come back over it with flat ribbon copper to widen the time the contacts touch the copper.
  I could try to slow down the motor but I don't want any extra parts involved that have to be maintained. I pulled all my contact brushes from the starter motors with the spring assemblies ,they are really big as brushes go and the handle 2.5 kw per set of 2.each motor has 4 brushes in it. They are not carbon, they some kind of composite brass or bronze chips compressed with a carbon powder. Im guessing the are expensive since they came out of Lees Navile starters. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on November 04, 2014, 08:04:56 PM
Hi Doug1,

Attached is a simplified interpretation of your design. Is this somewhat close? It would be much more compact but for clarity it is expanded. The wires could be weaved back and forth to create a sweeping motion across the coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 05, 2014, 02:15:54 AM
I have to tell you guys, except from Figuera, I just cannot believe that such a basic concept relating the ironless coils and overunity has been overlooked by the greatest minds of the last 120 years.
 
I keep going back on reviewing the paper proposing the concept for overunity when using ironless coils and I have not been able to find a flaw in the theory. I also keep searching for any information related to the use of ironless armature coils. Most of the information related to these type of generators contain hints indicating that there is something especial with this technology. And, I have also found a small number of papers related to the wind generators with ironless coils, which have contradictory information. For instance, in one of the IEEE papers the efficiency was estimated to be smaller than 100%, however, the graphs plotted for the magnetic fields in the air gap (armature reaction) corresponding to the no-load and full-load conditions clearly indicates only minor differences between the two conditions. That is, the graphs show that the magnitudes of the torques at no-load and full-load are about the same. Then, how is it possible to have an efficiency smaller than 100%?

Am I missing something? I am still in a state of disbelief! :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 05, 2014, 02:23:28 AM
A user into the spanish forum about Figuera generator has posted this:

Quote
-- 14 electroimanes de inducción con núcleo de hierro dulce o (hierro colado) de unos 120*50*50 mm, con alambre esmaltado de 1 o a 2mm
-- 7 bobinas colectoras con el núcleo de hierro dulce o colado de unos 120*120*50 mm, con cable esmaltado de unos 2 mm
-- las medidas son aproximadas.
-- un regulador de alimentación, para controlar la electricidad de los electroimanes.
es para un generador de 5 o 10kw. Algo mas de 1000 €
estos datos que se los de un BOBINADOR O REPARADOR DE GENERADORES ELECTRICOS. el sistema es similar lo que cambia es la figura

"
- 14 induction electromagnets with cores of soft iron (or grey cast iron) about 120*50*50 mm with enameled wire from 1 to 2 mm diameter

- 7 induced coils with cores of soft iron or grey cast iron about 120*120*50 mm with enameled wire about 2 mm diameter

- an electrical input regulator, to control the electricity to the electromagnets

- the measurements are aproximate. It is for a generator of 5 KW to 10 KW. Around 1000 €.

Yo can ask more data to a man in charge of winding or repairing electrical generators. The system is similar but with a different arrangement."



This user also told that the cheapest site to get the electromagnets is in a junkyard from field coils coming from old motors or generators.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 05, 2014, 08:58:34 AM
bajac


Just guessing here ....
I saw somewhere (can't find the source) in old paper that generators like Ferranti and others used, with rotating ironless armature were called constant current generators. I'm not sure why they were called such but I feel it is related to the way they were powering field coils and the fact of no negative feedback. In common generators the more load applied to output circuit , the more current goes into field coils (via regulator like in Stanley dynamo for example), then the field is stronger which give more amps on output regulating constant output voltage at variable current. In the same moment the attraction between field coils and armature core is stronger which require more mechanical force to overcome exactly like Figuera described it.
If I'm wrong please correct me, because I'm not experienced in electrical science.
Now if I'm right, then maybe Ferranti and others generators had given constant output current (at variable voltage ?) which was considered as inconvenient for powering normalized loads ?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on November 05, 2014, 10:19:38 AM
The device you showed in your reply #1637 on page 110 could work on the principle that Figuera disclosed in his 1902 patent (motionless device.) If you follow the teachings of this patent, you can improve on your device.

Do you mean a set up like what Cadman suggested in post #1637? If so, it only yields a dissapointing result with a very low voltage induced (#1638) and this agrees with what Cadman got with his similar set up (#1652).

I have to tell you guys, except from Figuera, I just cannot believe that such a basic concept relating the ironless coils and overunity has been overlooked by the greatest minds of the last 120 years.
 
I keep going back on reviewing the paper proposing the concept for overunity when using ironless coils and I have not been able to find a flaw in the theory. I also keep searching for any information related to the use of ironless armature coils. Most of the information..

I did some similar journal search as you did and sadly found out that a coreless permanent generator (for example a wind turbine of NGenTec Ltd company) have a mechanical-to-electrical efficiency of under unity (95% max). Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation? But why did Figuera state in pat#30376 that if we only rotate the copper wire, it would not suffer any drag which result in overunity? Who's right? There must be one of them only.

By the way, how is your progress building the motionless generator doing? Did you already build it and post a sketch or picture of it? I really want to know because I want to propose another theory of operation so you could try it (I have no more resource to experiment, still jobless here)..

Another Theory of Operation (maybe not new, just reinvent the wheel like the title of the thread)
Here is my superficial intepretation:
- Varying MMF with one exciter coil or more with only 1 phase like in my set up would result in **transformer induction** (EMF generated by A-Vector Potential). That may be the cause why Cadman and I got a weak EMF in set up similar to what you suggested. B field have only two alternating direction with changing strength, no rotational movement simulated and no flux linking.

- BUT, varying MMF with at least 2 coils having certain deg phase shift (depend on the input waveform) placed perpendicularly would cause the B field to rotate physically (like a lot of tiny magnets inside the core are turning round their axes) and generate **motional induction**. This was many times stated by many like Stupify, Hanon, and others and here I attached my interpretation of how to drive the motionless generator 1902. Please pay attention to the poles arrangement and how to drive them alternatively. The same color coils are wound in the same direction and connected to the same voltage source, parallel or series connection doesn't matter. As stated by Figuera, there's no need for the core to be round since nothing moves. As for winding the induced coil, I have no any suggestion except the configuration which is used in a conventional generator. The magnetic field has to rotate 360deg by energizing one of the coil group alternatively in certain direction. To simplify the driver, one can use DC input with switching or commutator. Exciter coil inductance would have some role to determine the generated B field and the proper DC frequency. I hope someone with free time and enough resource would not mind to test this arrangement. If there's someone who did already, please post the result, picture, sketch and the input wavefrom so we can analyze.

Thanks

Poorluto
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 05, 2014, 12:59:53 PM
Thinkbuild
   Yes, but every other segment would be a dead space. The other option would be to use triangle shaped segments depending on the placement of the brushes. Nice picture.
    I cant stress enough how easily the device reaches oversaturation. with a dead 12 volt reading 4 volts at rest I was able to get up to 240 volts ac out.I only intended to for it to put out 120v ac so Im trying to figure out what I did wrong. There is no sparking since the coil is always powered up to some degree. It's just a manipulation of the resistance set up in the windings. The image I started to explain is just for a single inducer or coil.The system is made up of two inducers or driving magnets on the outsides. So the one commutator has to serve both magnets in opposition.
  If you can produce enough flux and control its movement with the least expenditure of input current then you have leverage to work with to take a feeble amount of the output back to the beginning
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 05, 2014, 02:28:47 PM
I saw somewhere (can't find the source) in old paper that generators like Ferranti and others used, with rotating ironless armature were called constant current generators.
Forest,

The Ferranti alternators are not constant current sources. Like any other rotating generator, the output current will increase as the load increases. They do have a much better voltage regulation due to a negligible output reactance (self-inductance.) This was one of the items used by the competitors to claim that the absence of the self-inductance did not allow for paralleling the disc armature generators.

Recall that the voltage at no-load condition for constant current sources must be zero. On the other hand, the no load current for constant voltage sources is zero.

I think you are referring to the current applied to the inducing electromagnets. Because of the low armature reaction, there was no need to regulate the current of these electromagnets. That is why Ferranti maintained the current of these electromagnet constant.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 05, 2014, 02:41:05 PM
Do you mean a set up like what Cadman suggested in post #1637?
Yes! It was what I was referring to. I also think that the problem might be the design of the exciting circuit. Have you test the magnetic field in the air gaps? It is very important to get this number right. Designing magnetic circuits with large air gaps is a challenge. That is why now I am using coils with much more turns and intermediate taps with thinner gauge wires.
 
I did some similar journal search as you did and sadly found out that a coreless permanent generator (for example a wind turbine of NGenTec Ltd company) have a mechanical-to-electrical efficiency of under unity (95% max).
We do not have to feel sad for finding out the truth. That is the main goal for this forum. I would encourage you, and anyone in this forum, to post the links to these articles. I would be more than eager to review them.   
 
Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation? Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation?
The Lorentz force should always be present but the electric field force can be considered negligible.
 
But why did Figuera state in pat#30376 that if we only rotate the copper wire, it would not suffer any drag which result in overunity? Who's right? There must be one of them only.
That is the million dollars question that we are trying to answer. Please, note that we may find literatures displaying low numbers for the efficiency of the ironless coils but I would always be cautious about it. I would check the testing procedures and assumptions for getting these results very carefully. Why? Well, the concept explained for having considerable lower torques when one of the coils have non-magnetic materials is simple enough and seems to make sense. Until someone reviews the theory and publishes what is wrong with the proposed approach, I would be kind of skeptical. And up to this point, I have been able to find questionable assumptions and calculations when estimating the efficiencies of these machines.
 
By the way, how is your progress building the motionless generator doing? Did you already build it and post a sketch or picture of it?
It is going slow for me. Presently, I have a schedule to have a testing unit by the end of this year. The reason for the delays is the same as anyone else, funding! I am prioritizing my limited resources in other personal businesses that have nothing to do with overunity devices.

I really want to know because I want to propose another theory of operation...
If you or anyone else have a different concept for the operation of these devices, please, post them in this forum. We can always learn from them through discussions.

- Varying MMF with one exciter coil or more with only 1 phase like in my set up would result in **transformer induction** (EMF generated by A-Vector Potential). That may be the cause why Cadman and I got a weak EMF in set up similar to what you suggested.
As I explained above, designing for these large air gaps is nothing easy. One of the reasons used by Ferranti's competitors to phase out the disc armature alternators was that increasing the power or making them three phase generators require a considerable increase of the air gaps resulting in higher electrical losses due to larger electromagnets. The issue of power versus air gaps was addressed by Figuera in his 1908 device.

- BUT, varying MMF with at least 2 coils having certain deg phase shift (depend on the input waveform) placed perpendicularly would cause the B field to rotate physically (like a lot of tiny magnets inside the core are turning round their axes) and generate **motional induction**.
It seems an interesting concept but I still do not understand completely. You can make a better argument if you provide all details how the signals are injected, what to expect in the induced coils, and why it is overunity. For example, the stepper motors use two signals shifted 90 degrees only. The signal you showed have an (absolute) time shifting of 180 degrees approx. Why do you think there will be a rotating resultant magnetic field? How will the resultant magnetic field produce overunity? Can you show a sketch with the sequence of operation expected for this device?

I had to fix the above quotes. Couple of them were messed up.

Bajac
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 06, 2014, 07:59:30 PM
Hi all,

Figuera used a conmutator composed by 7 incremental steps (contacts) in order to create a sinusoidal-type wave. Maybe just for having an AC type output. I think that a simplified version of this conmutator can also be created with just two contacts, creating two square wave signals: when one is HIGH the other is LOW and then the contrary. With this type of simplified commutator I think that we could also get the swinging motion back and forth of the magnetic fields.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 07, 2014, 01:04:24 PM
Hannon
 It would be a pure sign wave. If you redraw the wave form or graph and slice each cycle into 14 segments. 7 up and 7 down you can calculate the rate each section of coil has to be powered on. Looking at single inducer by itself you have a measure from neg to any one of the taps all with different values depending on the collective value. From pos 1 to neg from pos 2 plus 1 to neg. from pos 3,2,1 to neg.
 Each segment of coil receiving the same voltage and amperage adds incrementally to the flux in the core. The incremental additions will reach a value equal to the voltage by half. of the output voltage. If you want to run coils off 12 volt and have an output of 120 volt you have to find the taps equal to 60 volts in the 12 volt additions. Which would be tap number 5 on both N and S coils to complete the loop. I can make it more complicated if you need it to be and even throw in some made up verbage.
 Remember who told you.I only have one name,the one I use.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 07, 2014, 10:00:51 PM
A user in the spanish forum recommends to use an old motor commutator. You can rotate a brush around the commutator, which will be now static. It doesn't matter if this device has 12, 14, 18 ... contacts.

 Those commutators can be easily found into a car junkyard from any car fan motor.

I think it is a good idea to make easier the contruction of our Figuera commutator
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 08, 2014, 03:32:13 AM
I was just informed by one of the forum members that a prestigious professor with a PhD degree has agreed to review the document I posted explaining the principle of operation of the ironless armature coils.

This is all for the good! We need once and for all find out the truth! It is a good idea to forward these documents to college professors for consideration. For example, do you know if any professor from a high educational institution have ever reviewed the first paper I posted explaining the principle of operation of standard transformers?

The importance of taking the above approach is that these intellectuals do not believe in free energy devices even when watching a video or witnessing a presentation. They will always claim that it is a trick.

I think the higher educational institutions have the largest share of responsibility for the present state of the technology. These institutions are playing the same role played by the church during the dark ages.

These persons can be better persuaded by speaking their language, a language based on physics and mathematical analysis. That is why I always strive to figure out the operation from an engineering point of view. If these principles were explained using clear steps and using the classical science approach where possible, then, these devices will have a much better chance of being accepted.

A few years ago, the major issue I noticed when I started to think about the possibility of free energy devices was that none of the explanations given by their inventors for how these devices work made sense. And as I have said, if you cannot explain it in simple terms, then you do not understand it! It is the worst publicity!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 08, 2014, 08:02:47 PM
Hi all,

I have downloaded Visual Analyzer to use my PC sound card as oscilloscope (Visual Analyzer is a freeware program, you just need to use the microphone input in the sound card http://www.sillanumsoft.org/ (http://www.sillanumsoft.org/) )

I wanted to test some AC mains voltage because I am using some transformers, 220V to 12V, (building the circuit posted weeks ago by maddann) and the AC safety system of my home fired up.

What should I do to use this program with AC mains? Should I use any kind of device to reduce the voltage and wattage? Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 09, 2014, 11:53:14 AM
Isfex, Re: Inventor Clemente Figuera
 por isfex » Vie Oct 31, 2014 9:38 am
Exposes a video, with the resistive divider Clement Figuera for get a pure sine wave, stop eating the head with that item
-- to work on getting, using 360º magnetic field of the electromagnets
ok
Expone un video, con el divisor resistivo de clemente Figuera, obteniendo una onda sinusoidal pura, dejar de comer la cabeza con ese tema y trabajar en obtener el trabajo de los 360º del campo magnético de los electroimanes
http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=460
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 10, 2014, 12:20:48 PM
Hi all,
A new video from a guy trying to replicate the VTA. Two side inducer coils with same poles facing each other, and one intermediate induced coil. Any similarity with the 1902 patent???

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhQgch4L5XY (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhQgch4L5XY)

He just presents a demo. A 3.6 watt bulb is lighting full bright with just 1 watt input

http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2003-11-14 (http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2003-11-14)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 10, 2014, 04:12:05 PM
Hannon
  The person in the video could improve the output of his set up 100 fold if he used the same input the way I described. P = I R the current passing the turns of wire is reduced by wire resistance and self induction of the core. If every turn of his driving coil thought it was seeing a 100 times more current then it was, it would produce a magnetic field 100 times stronger using the same amount of input power as he used to power the full length of his primary coil in the video. Think about all the things which effect the creation of the magnetic field including the core and break it down to the scale of a single turn and the amount of core material which the turn of wire encircles.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 11, 2014, 05:54:01 PM
Pardon me for going off our topic briefly but I wanted to know if some of you have bought the Bendini SG books. If you did, do you recommend it? Was there anything knew you learned? Before I spend money on it I would like to hear from someone impartial to the energeticforum website.
Can we relate anything in the books to our effort in this thread?

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 12, 2014, 10:00:14 PM
“La sobre unidad de la maquina”, ¿¿¿¿ por –inducción de (inductancia, reactancia) resonante del bobinado????, así se entiende, hacer las bobinas colectoras idénticas, lo mismo con los electroimanes, cuando una cuerda entra en resonancia con otras vibran todas a la vez, Parece ser lo que se explica en la página HYIQ, me vale como respuesta a la sobre unidad
"The overunity on the machine," ¿¿¿¿ the induction of (inductance, reactance) resonant winding ?????, well understood, there are to do collecting coils  identical , same with the electromagnets.
 when a string resonates with other vibrating all the time.
 Seems to be what is described on page HYIQ, I better response to the overunity of the machine Clemente Figuera
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 13, 2014, 02:58:00 AM
Presently, only a person has sent me a PM telling about his experience with the books. It looks like the book was not what he was waiting for.
Thanks a lot to this person.


@ Ignacio,


Could you, please, post photos, diagrams, videos, etc., of the equipment you are referring to? I am afraid that most of us do not understand your concept.


Thanks for participating.




Ignacio,


Podria usted, por favor, publicar fotos, diagramas, o videos, etc., de el equipo a que se esta refiriendo? Me temo que la mayoria de nosotros no entendemos su concepto.


Gracias por participar,


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 13, 2014, 01:58:56 PM
This post is needed for clarification. As you already might know, my second prototype of the 1908 device was more disappointed than the first one. I hinted that my previous belief that the iron core would never saturate might not be correct. Well, today I am certain that the iron core will follow the iron saturation curve, which makes my second prototype a failure because I used a smaller iron core than the first one.

I am attaching a graph of a document I found in the internet showing how the iron core of the electromagnets saturates. I will eventually build a second prototype with much larger iron core but first I will test what I have for saturation. The test will consist on applying an AC voltage to the primaries, one at a time, and check for the voltage waveform induced in the secondary (centre) coil. When saturation appears, the induced voltage should flatten at the top.

Like someone once said, it is just another way of not building the device. This time, I will not make the same mistake as with the first prototype, I will not dismantle it.
Thanks.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 14, 2014, 02:09:40 AM
Parece que hablamos idiomas diferentes.
   El que diga yo, que los de hyiq.org den una alternativa al funcionamiento de la maquina, no es otra cosa, que, el funcionamiento tiene algo que ver, con lo que he leído en internet, del funcionamiento de los tubos fluorescentes, la función de la reactancia y el cebador, (¿una reactancia funciona igual que 7 reactancias?). Es la alternativa que más me ha convencido.
   En cuanto a la onda de alimentación, con el video de ixfes está aclarado, es una onda sinusoidal pura, que reproduce el cachivache (en aquella época empezaba la corriente alterna). Si la ca son dos cables, cuando uno está en 1 el otro está en 0, si uso uno ¿tengo la mitad de siclos?¿tendré que usar 50hz100 o 60hz120)? Que tenga que jugar con los siclos, ya que se alimenta con una parte del siclo, es otra cosa. (casi todos los aparatos que me han dejado o fabricado, los he quemado o roto (creo que por los retornos, chapuzas)
   Que si son polos enfrentados o no, no tengo ni idea, cada vez que hago pruebas, cambio los cables según de más o menos corriente, ya os digo, que no tengo ni idea de electricidad (para el chicharrero, soy un tenique o velillo = piedra o roca, tronco), no me planteo la polaridad de los-as bobinas y electroimanes.
   Por lo visto hay algunos que esto lo tienen como trabajo, (trabajo = dinero o contraprestación), “el jugar” la única contraprestación es el entretenimiento y “conocimiento”, así a los que lo tengan como trabajo, va siendo hora de que se pongan a trabajar y tengan una contraprestación razonable (unos cuantos millones como mínimo, no una miserable limosna) no ha esperar que otros le den soluciones (parecen políticos).  esto les dará una idea a los que nos gusta jugar con estos cachivaches.
It seems that we speak different languages.
-- I say who hyiq.org they give an alternative to the function of the machine, the operation has something to do with what I read on internet, the operation of fluorescent tubes, reactance function and primer, (!1 reactance works equal to 7?!). It is the alternative that has convinced me.
-- Power wave with video ixfes (cacharreo) it is clarified, is an pure sine wave, which produces the gadget (antique, started alternating current). If ac are two cables, when one cable is in 1 the other is 0, if I use one cable do I have half shekel will I have to use, 50hz-- 100 or 60hz--120? Have to play with the shekels, and if it feeds a part of a shekel, is another thing. (almost all devices that have left me or manufactured, I've burned or broken (I think, for the returns ac, bungling)
-- What if they are confronted the poles?, I have no idea, every time I tested, It change the cables, when of more or less electric, and I say, I have no idea of electricity (for chicharrero, I'm a Tenique or velillo = stone or rock),  coils and electromagnets I don't consider the polarity, to tested.
-- Apparently there are some that this will be it as work (work = money or consideration), "to play" the only consideration is the entertainment and "knowledge". To those who have it as work, it is time to be put to work and have a reasonable consideration (at least a few million, not  alms misera) must not expect to others, to give solutions (political speak).
This he will give them an idea to play with these gadgets. I hope, does not you does pictures or video lack
--- only resistive drive was patentable in the time of Clement Figuera, the rest could not be patented because it is free energy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 14, 2014, 09:09:16 PM
Well,

There is a thread showing a running generator with no back emf, surely based on the same principles as the Figuera patent with the rotary coil, patent #30376 . Please reviw this link:

http://www.overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/ (http://www.overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/)

http://www.overunity.com/15088/new-generator-no-effect-lenzlaw-give-more-detail-in-pcture/ (http://www.overunity.com/15088/new-generator-no-effect-lenzlaw-give-more-detail-in-pcture/)

It has some interior static magnets, and instead of rotating the coil, as Figuera did, this design rotates a soft iron plate around the interior magnets
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on November 15, 2014, 01:21:06 PM
Well,

There is a thread showing a running generator with no back emf, surely based on the same principles as the Figuera patent with the rotary coil, patent #30376 ...

Cannot agree more with you on this one.. But unfortunately NO one here (afaik cmiiw) has ever replicated rotary coil in patent #30376, has anyone?

@Bajac

The Lorentz force should always be present but the electric field force can be considered negligible.
I know Lorentz force is always present but I doubt how strong its magnitude in generator whether conventional or Figuera's.
You may take a look at this video to see what I meant with Lorentz force (back torque) www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1PWnu01IQg
For example, in a generator, a conductor 10 m is moving through a B field 1 T with velocity 10 m/s --> V induced = B v l = 100 V
then we draw 10 A therefore the power out is 1000 W. Here comes Lorentz force directed by Lenz law trying to to stop the conductor. The current in conductor will experience a back torque, F = B I L = 1 x 10 x 10 = 100 N acting in velocity of 10 m/s, so P counter = F v = 100 x 10 = 1000 W, this is what we have to input, no excess energy.
IF the formula of Lorentz force on current-carrying conductor which is F = B I L is true for both conventional generator and Figuera's rotary coil, then there's no way we can reach overunity. Figuera's rotary coil generator will give an overunity only if F = B I L is not applicable to it. Regarding Hanon's concept that using two opposite poles will cancel the drag, I don't see it true, applying simple right-hand rule still result a drag.

It seems an interesting concept but I still do not understand completely. You can make a better argument if you provide all details how the signals are injected, what to expect in the induced coils, and why it is overunity. For example, the stepper motors use two signals shifted 90 degrees only. The signal you showed have an (absolute) time shifting of 180 degrees approx. Why do you think there will be a rotating resultant magnetic field? How will the resultant magnetic field produce overunity? Can you show a sketch with the sequence of operation expected for this device?

At this time, I can't give the explanation in detail since it's a half baked idea and yet unproven. Instead, I'm trying to give a simple principle behind that: to induce a voltage with flux cutting, something must rotate. If the thing which rotates is physical, it will suffer a back torque. But if the rotating one is only the field, it won't suffer any back torque (Hanon once posted about D. RAFAEL MARTINEZ GUTIERREZ's patent somewhere here which utilizes a rotating field principle) and we don't need any rotating part.
But apparently the back torque can be minimized even if we use rotating part like in syairchairun (see Hanon's link above), James W. German, Ecklin-Brown Generator, and of course in no-one-replicated Figuera's rotary coil. Thanks in advance.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 15, 2014, 01:52:14 PM
????????????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 16, 2014, 02:06:15 AM
According to the image attached in the previous post by the user Ignacio, there are three possible methods to excite the two series of electromagnets:

1- Using the conmutator described in the 1908 patent

2- Using a pure sine wave DC-AC inverter adding a diode (I suppose that the diode is used to eliminate the negative part of the signal)

3- Using a system of relays (that I can not understand as it is described in the image). I suppose that the output signal from the relay system is a pulsed signal.

Note: As I can guess from the image, the drawing of the circunference and the ondulated line inside ,which is the international symbol for AC current, seems not be used here with that significance, but just to represent a variable signal.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 16, 2014, 11:14:31 AM
According to the image attached in the previous post by the user Ignacio, there are three possible methods to excite the two series of electromagnets:

1- Using the conmutator described in the 1908 patent

2- Using a pure sine wave DC-AC inverter adding a diode (I suppose that the diode is used to eliminate the negative part of the signal)

3- Using a system of relays (that I can not understand as it is described in the image). I suppose that the output signal from the relay system is a pulsed signal.

Note: As I can guess from the image, the drawing of the circunference and the ondulated line inside ,which is the international symbol for AC current, seems not be used here with that significance, but just to represent a variable signal.

1- Powered by  half of pure sine wave, described in pat. 1908
2- Using half of pure sine wave, an inverter it changed to 100 or 120hz
3- relay set  to cut electricity network, for feedback
4- Note: they are symbols of ac, in the 1- is wrong because it is half wave

1-   Alimentado con mitad de la onda sinusoidal pura, descrita en pat. 1908
2-   Uso de la mitad de onda sinusoidal pura, de un inversor o invertir
3-   Juego de relé, para cortar la electricidad de la red, para retroalimentación
4-   Nota: son símbolos de ac, en el 1- está mal, ya que es la mitad de la onda
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on November 16, 2014, 03:17:00 PM

hanon: I've had a nagging doubt about the Figuera patent for a while now and it stems from a genuine misunderstanding I once had with an import export mess-up from Spain.
I mean that words have different meanings in different cultures.
Is it possible that Figuera was referring to the fact that he could get AC from DC very
simply using his method?
At that time most generating plants would be on DC, and it would cost a fortune to
convert to AC.
Figuera's device as an industrial grade DC to AC converter would have been worth millions anyway.
Could you re-examine the patent from that point of view?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 16, 2014, 04:16:35 PM
hanon: I've had a nagging doubt about the Figuera patent for a while now and it stems from a genuine misunderstanding I once had with an import export mess-up from Spain.
I mean that words have different meanings in different cultures.
Is it possible that Figuera was referring to the fact that he could get AC from DC very
simply using his method?
At that time most generating plants would be on DC, and it would cost a fortune to
convert to AC.
Figuera's device as an industrial grade DC to AC converter would have been worth millions anyway.
Could you re-examine the patent from that point of view?

-You're absolutely right, Clement F. uses the gadget to generate AC, to boot from DC. Being the only patentable.
-Tienes toda la razón, Clemente F. utiliza el cachivache para generar CA, para arrancar desde la CD. Siendo lo único patentable.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 16, 2014, 04:23:34 PM
El dibujo de energía libre es simpático
The drawing of free energy is friendly

---- Cuando genera electricidad. El relé corta la electricidad de la red.
----When generating electricity. The relay cuts the electricity network.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 17, 2014, 12:50:30 PM
Hi all,

I have found this interesting explanation about defeating the counter emf  (Lenz effect) into a moving system. This is derived from the patent US5191258 by James W. German http://www.google.com/patents/US5191258 (http://www.google.com/patents/US5191258) ("Electric current generator including torque reducing countermagnetic field")   

http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/olaf.htm (http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/olaf.htm)

Maybe some skillful users as Bajac and others may find interesting to read it. Could it have any relation with Figuera rotary coil patent?

a.king: I guess you haven´t read the 1908 patent yet. Take half an hour of your time, read it, and judge for yourself. For me and for hundreds of people is crystal clear the meaning of the GENERATOR described, and patented as that,  in that document.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 18, 2014, 02:10:32 AM
Drawing legend
Can you say the differences between this picture and the others what I have exposed.
This is the design of Clement Figuera.
If you realize is a broken generator, the nuclei are not set, the drawings are Doug1
Works as ballasts!?!¿
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 18, 2014, 01:09:01 PM
ignacio

  That is not how it should look.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jdavidcv on November 18, 2014, 04:54:26 PM
@ Ignacio


Is this the patent design of Figuera 1908 ?

Thanks


JD
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jdavidcv on November 18, 2014, 06:08:59 PM
@ Ignacio


Or this?


Thanks




JD
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 18, 2014, 06:42:04 PM
I just wanted to share the following with you. The Lenz's law refers only to voltages and currents induced by magnetic fields. It does not make sense to use the Lenz's law in systems that use permanent magnets and pulsed electromagnets. When we apply a voltage to a coil and forces it to interact with a permanent magnet of another energized electromagnet, there is no voltage/current induced by a magnetic field, and therefore, Lenz's law does not apply per say. You just have two sources of magnetic fields interacting with attaction or repulsion forces similar to the case experimenting with two permanent magnets. Based on the above, it does not make sense to cite the Lenz's law for systems such as the Lutec shown in the following links:
 
http://www.rexresearch.com/christie/christie.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/christie/christie.htm)
http://www.free-energy.ws/lutec.html (http://www.free-energy.ws/lutec.html)
 
You can argue that disturbing the magnetic field of an electromagnet changes the inductance of the magnetic circuit and it might be translated as an induced voltage. Nevertheless, for systems such as the above (Lutec) any induced current by the magnetic field may be considered negligible with respect to the current generated by the voltage source connected to the coils.

I also wanted to add that based on the above, the Lenz's law applies to induction motors but not to to synchronous motors. Induction motors operates by applying a voltage to the field coils and inducing a current in the rotor coils. However, in the synchronous motors, voltage is applied to both, the stator and rotor coils. The interaction of the external voltages generated magnetic fields is what produces the torque in sychronous motors.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 18, 2014, 11:18:12 PM
Es imitar un generador convencional, uno Norte el siguiente Sur.
En un generador que tengo (18 huecos) trifásico, 18/3 =6 bobinas por fase, cada una de unas 240 vueltas +o-, 6*240=1440 aproximado. (Los bobinadores lo calculan según tipo de hierro y tamaño). 4 electroimanes = 2 Polos, de unas 200 vueltas cada uno. (No he contado las vueltas, me lo dijo un colega)
Como dices que tienes algunos trastos, al igual tienes algún generador (viejo o roto), se cortan los cables que llegan a las delgas (recolectoras) y  alimentas los electroimanes con el cachivache que tengas, te va a dar una idea de lo demás…  Puedes con el voltímetro medir, para unir terminales… (Aprovechando a su vez el bobinado de excitatriz, si lo tiene)
No siempre los que decimos que ayudamos, aunque aparente hacerlo?????? 
Lo que obtengas, es por merito tuyo solamente y no le debes nada a nadie, aunque lo aparente.

Aunque Figuera no lo especifica en dibujo de patente, si lo dice en escrito.
Although not specified in Figuera patent drawing, if it says so in writing.


It mimic a conventional generator, one North follows South.
In a generator that I have (18 holes) triphase, 18/3 = 6 coils per phase, each about 240 laps + o -, 6 * 240 = 1440 approximately. (The rewinders as calculated by type,  size and of iron). 4 electromagnets = 2 poles, about 200 rounds each. (I have not counted the turns, he told me a colleague)
As you say you have some stuff, lf a generator (old or broken) cables leading to the segments (collectors) and feed the electromagnets with the gadget Clemente, you will give an idea of what other ...  can be measured with the voltmeter to bond terminals ... ( exciter winding, if available)
What you get, is yours alone merit and does not owe anyone anything, it is apparent.


Interezante exhibition of Bajac:
Reactancia o balastro: Desde el punto de vista de la operación de la lámpara fluorescente, la función del balasto es generar el arco eléctrico que requiere el tubo durante el proceso de encendido y mantenerlo posteriormente, limitando también la intensidad de corriente que fluye por el circuito del tubo. Solo fue una idea que se me ocurrió, al ver la página de hyiq.org.

Ballast: From the viewpoint of the operation of the fluorescent lamp, the function of the ballast is to generate in the  tube the electric arc required for the ignition process and keep subsequently, also limiting the current that flows through the circuit tube. It was just an idea that occurred to me, seeing hyiq.org page.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 19, 2014, 04:55:53 AM
"It mimic a conventional generator, one North follows South."

  No.

  North and south pole are one magnet in normal gen. Path of magnetic lines is from end to end of magnet. Pick up coil is placed so as to be between the magnetic path as the magnet passes around or by the pick up coil. In some way the magnetic path is a complete circle.

  Stated in the patent not a transformer nor a moving generator, only the field moves.
  Normal example of induction is a rotating magnet the field swaps end for end as it rotates past the output coil. The coil sees nsnsnsns.... Without using a transformer nor a rotating magnet how do you imagine you can make the output coil >>>see<<< or be influenced by the same field motion as nsnsnsnsns......Keep in mind nothing is moving not anything physical. If you think your going to set it up n/s and just power it up and down with your pick up coil in the middle it wont put out much. Just like it would act with a permanent magnet and coil. You would have to push the magnet all the way through and back all the way through the other way which is the same as rotating end for end. That wont work unless you can cause the pick up coil to see a reversal where one does not exist.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 19, 2014, 01:00:47 PM
Figurea uses a clever method to fluctuate the field strengths with his commutator and a number of brushes. The connections to the brushes are most likely the resistance if he used undersize wire. The inducers are standard.
  I chose another way to do the same but used the coil design to do the same thing just because I felt like it and its easier for me to calculate.
  The picture I posted before was for a method to wind a single magnet or inducer.It is a all one length of coil made up of segments which have taps at points where the wire resistance will be reduced due to an apparent shortening of the length of wire as the same current, one source is connected in sequence to the additional taps.
  Aka what makes a stronger magnet? More turns ,more current, better core. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 19, 2014, 04:48:17 PM
Figurea uses a clever method to fluctuate the field strengths with his commutator and a number of brushes. The connections to the brushes are most likely the resistance if he used undersize wire. The inducers are standard.
  I chose another way to do the same but used the coil design to do the same thing just because I felt like it and its easier for me to calculate.
  The picture I posted before was for a method to wind a single magnet or inducer.It is a all one length of coil made up of segments which have taps at points where the wire resistance will be reduced due to an apparent shortening of the length of wire as the same current, one source is connected in sequence to the additional taps.
  Aka what makes a stronger magnet? More turns ,more current, better core.

Doug, si se quiere cambiar el flujo del campo magnético, solo hay que cambiar los cables de un juego de bobinas, el de la derecha se mueve a la izquierda, y viceversa.  El sistema es inmóvil.

Doug, if you want to change the flow of the magnetic field, you just need to change the wires of a set of coils, the right wing is moved to the left, and vice versa. the system is still, or the system it is static.

Mientras que un set de bobinas esta en play y el opuesto esta en apagado.
While a set of coils is in play and the other is on off

Hay un video por Isfex (vimeo.com), que muestra el cachivache de Clemente Figuera, solo hay que conectarlo a los set de bobinas, se ve la onda sinusoidal pura, cuando un terminal esta completo, el otro terminal esta al minimo.

http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=460

There is a video by Isfex (vimeo.com), showing the gizmo Clement Figuera, is pure sine wave, you just have to connect it to the sets of coils, when a terminal is max, the other terminal  is minimum.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 20, 2014, 01:04:28 PM
ignacio

 As far as I can understand from the web site you pointed to in Spanish. From the drawings and a few words here and there I did not see any design where the opportunity to close the loop would present itself. Moving the field by turning it off and on left and right with the left being made of two sets and the right being made of two sets using normal coil designs should function more like a complex transformer or a magnetic amplifier. I did not see where any advantage could be exploited to provide gain over the input quantity or to exploit an advantage of gain from output to result in having enough to run the load and itself. Granted I don't speak Spanish but as so many have stated before a picture is worth a 1000 words and some words I can figure out.
   I do agree the device does not have moving parts with exception of the controller which is by description a commutator with brushes which works as a series of switches that can be controlled by the speed of a small motor used to turn the sets of brushes around the outside of the commutator. He does'nt even bother to just turn the inside part like you would find on a motor. Do you not find that strange and more likely a difficult method. I would question why a person would use that method over recycling a motor commutator where the brushes are stationary and the commutator turns.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 21, 2014, 07:58:19 PM
Hi all,

Mechanical conmutator, as the one described by Figuera, are difficult to built because rotating the brush will require a great mechanical precision to avoid creating sparks.

I include here two options to get a commutator where brushes are static as in any common motors or generators.

OPTION 1: Suppose that over a rotating axis you install a 14 or 16 contact commutator (recovered from and old motor or generator). Then you install a rotating cylinder where you put the 14 resistor segments around its perimeter. Each 7 resistor you take an connection out to one splip ring. Therefore you will have two slip rings connected each 7 steps achieving the same results as Figuera did. Each slip ring is connected to each row of electromagnets through a brush.

OPTION 2: Installing a rotating axis with a 14 contact commutator connected to 7 slip rings, each one connected to one of the resistor segments as in Figuera patent.

With both of these options you could get a commutator with static brushes. The aim is to build an easier commutator with static brushes to avoid having sparks. Comments?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2014, 03:22:27 PM
There is a reason he did not use a motor comm. Here is a pic of simple version with only 4 brushes and the source is noted in the pic along with page # in the book and pg # in the pdf file. So you can get right to the reading part. You can scour the net for patents of the day which confirm the method during the time period.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 22, 2014, 08:25:36 PM
As an educational exercise, it is interesting to correlate the alternators built by Ferranti, Mordey, and Siemens with the generators built by Figuera. For example, in theory the Figuera's 1908 device can also work as a rotary generator if each of the lineup of N, S, and Y electromagnets are placed in a disc configuration. The N and S discs shall be fixed with respect to each other and rotate relative to the Y electromagnets. In addition, the DC voltage applied to the N and S electromagnets should be continuous or pure DC voltage, instead of the two 90 degrees shifted full wave rectified voltages used in the 1908 motionless generator. However, the N and S electromagnets shall be geometrically spaced such that the induced voltages are shifted 90 electrical degrees with opposite N and S magnetic polarities.

The above proposed iron core rotating alternator, based on the Figuera's 1908 apparatus, should not carry over the problem of increasing air gaps for increasing power that was inherent to the ironless disc armature altenators built by the end of the 19th century. Said iron core generators would have been the next step improvement over the Ferranti, Mordey, and Siemen's alternators. The power of such iron core generators can be increased by increasing the iron core, wire gauge, and turns of the Y electromagnets while maintaining the air gap length with the N and S electromagnets to a minimum.

Of course, it is much desirable to have a motionless generator than a rotating one.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 23, 2014, 09:43:51 PM
Hi all,

I want to recall you that in nowhere in the 1908 patent Figuera defined the real pole orientation. He did not use the words "North" and "South" in any sentence of the patent. He just called "renctangle N" and "rectangle S"

In the description:
"Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and  rectangles S"

In the claims
: "...characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, ..."

Where did Figuera used the words "north" and "south" in the patent?  Please re-read the patent and tell if you can fin them...

As you know I am almost sure that Figuera used poles in repulsion mode: like poles facing each other in order to swing the magnetic field back and forth. I will post some interesting results in my next post.

By now I just attach a couple of images. We must test every possible configuration: pole orientation, coil orientation (aligned, perpendicular,...), ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 23, 2014, 09:50:36 PM
Hello all,

 It's good to be back among the living and working.
this is off topic but i am working on a rotating ring dynamo that i converted to motionless using electromagnets with the timing board similar to figueras timing board used by Patrick. board is finished waiting for Two more pay checks to order core material.
here is pic of ring dynamo.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 23, 2014, 09:55:38 PM
Oh man i am sorry for the Huge pics i forgot about resizing , i am so sorry.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 23, 2014, 11:00:07 PM
Marathon,

I am happy to see you back and fine!!.

The motionless dynamo you are building seem to be based on intermitent fluxes between poles.
IMHO oppinion this is not the same as moving the field as I think that Figuera tried to do. The aim of Figuera was to get flux cutting
Therefore you need to move the lines laterraly across the wires, not crossing along as the motionless dynamo
I don´t know if in your time off the forum you could watch a very interesting video that I uploaded:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)

Regards!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 24, 2014, 12:20:48 AM
I am amazed with people still insisting that the N and S labels of the electromagnets shown in the Figuera's 1908 patent were not meant to be North and South magnetic polarities. Since the beginning and way before Figuera, the standard polarities of electromagnets have always been 'N' for North and 'S' for South. How are we supposed to advance in figuring out Figuera's patents if we do not accept something as basic as the polarities of electromagnets? If Figuera meant to have equal instead of opposite poles, then, why do his patents show N & S? Figuera would have to be very dumb to label the electromagnets N-S when he meant S-S or N-N. It is just non-sense! To label electromagnets with N and S for magnetic North and South has been the standard for so long and it is so obvious that there is no need to call them out explicitly.


Why would Figuera have wanted to risk the possibility of losing his patent rights or the cancellation of his patents? If Figuera had wrongly described his invention, it would have been a justified excuse for competitors to manufacture the correct version of the invention without paying royalties to Figuera. We need to clear our heads and get back on the right track.


Just as a curiosity, how many of you think that the N and S shown in the Figueras patents were meant for magnetic North and South?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 24, 2014, 12:22:04 AM
Hello all,

 It's good to be back among the living and working.
this is off topic but i am working on a rotating ring dynamo that i converted to motionless using electromagnets with the timing board similar to figueras timing board used by Patrick. board is finished waiting for Two more pay checks to order core material.
here is pic of ring dynamo.


Marathonman, it is nice to see you back!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 24, 2014, 01:28:24 AM
Thank you both:
Hanon my design is not based on Figueras design... like i said (off topic). i just wanted to convert a rotating Dynamo to motionless to see if i can. Sorry!
i don't have enough info to proceed any further until there is a breakthrough with Figueras but i am following the thread. i am just as confused as i was when i started.
Pretty board huh!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 24, 2014, 11:25:38 AM
Hi all: 

I divide my post in two parts. The theoretical part may be arguable. The experimental data are real results from my tests.

THEORY:  In this thread there are many points of view, I am just offering my interpretation of the Figuera patent. I am just telling that Figuera did not use the words "NORTH" and "SOUTH" explicitly in the 1908 patent. He just called "RECTANGLE N" and "RECTANGLE S", as he could also have used "rectangle A" and "rectangle B". For that reason I was copying literally those paragraphs in my previous post, in order that each one may judge for themselves. Patents have a legal background, therefore if he did not use the words "north" and "south" then the patent is protecting all possible pole orientation. Which one is the fair configuration? I am not completely sure, but I bet that he used the electromagnets in repulsion mode and he just moved back and forth the fields.

EXPERIMENT: I had been testing some configurations. I have tested the configuration with poles in repulsion mode (North-North and South-South), and between them I put two induced coils perpendicularly, as represented in the attached picture and the attached sketch. I powered the system with AC (12 V)

I can tell you that the input consumption was not altered when adding a load in the induced coils, nor when I shortcircuited the induced coils. This a good starting point. I got under-unity results, I mean, the output power was lower than the input. But the importat fact is that input power (12VAC, 0.18 A) did not increase when having a load in the induced coil. Period.

This is a simple test which may be replicated in minutes by anyone. Please post your results if you decide to replicate this simple test.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 24, 2014, 05:17:05 PM
Hi all: 

I divide my post in two parts. The theoretical part may be arguable. The experimental data are real results from my tests.

THEORY:  In this thread there are many points of view, I am just offering my interpretation of the Figuera patent. I am just telling that Figuera did not use the words "NORTH" and "SOUTH" explicitly in the 1908 patent. He just called "RECTANGLE N" and "RECTANGLE S", as he could also have used "rectangle A" and "rectangle B". For that reason I was copying literally those paragraphs in my previous post, in order that each one may judge for themselves. Patents have a legal background, therefore if he did not use the words "north" and "south" then the patent is protecting all possible pole orientation. Which one is the fair configuration? I am not completely sure, but I bet that he used the electromagnets in repulsion mode and he just moved back and forth the fields.

EXPERIMENT: I had been testing some configurations. I have tested the configuration with poles in repulsion mode (North-North and South-South), and between them I put two induced coils perpendicularly, as represented in the attached picture and the attached sketch. I powered the system with AC (12 V)

I can tell you that the input consumption was not altered when adding a load in the induced coils, nor when I shortcircuited the induced coils. This a good starting point. I got under-unity results, I mean, the output power was lower than the input. But the importat fact is that input power (12VAC, 0.18 A) did not increase when having a load in the induced coil. Period.

This is a simple test which may be replicated in minutes by anyone. Please post your results if you decide to replicate this simple test.

Hi Hanon ,
Very usable your test .
 Can i ask if you see any type of increase in the magnetic field perpendicular to main coils ?
Did you consider try to connect the main input coils in bifilar mode and pulse them?
Based in some tests that i did , i think you can achieve best results pulsing the main coils with DC at higher frequencies that 50hz .
I make some tests that can be usable to you .
one more time very thanks for your work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRjGMCBAh0




Thanks for your work.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 24, 2014, 06:29:10 PM
I was reading the book "Ferranti and the British electrical industry, 1864-1930, by J. F. Wilson, and the following called my attention. It is a statement found in the last paragraph on page 26,

"It is interesting to note that it was from his childhood 'bible', Ganot's Treatise on Physics, that the germ of the Ferranti meter was born, proving that his grasp of electro-magnetic theory had improved significantly since early stumblings with a perpetual motion machine in 1879."

It would be important to find more information about this claim, but this is the only reference I found connecting Ferranti with overunity generators. If you take into account that by 1882 Ferranti was heavily involved in the design of novel electric power plants, then, it was not that long ago when he was claiming overunity machines. This answer a question that I had about if Ferranti ever knew the overunity capability of his generators. Was Ferranti forced to keep his mouth shut in this regard? 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 24, 2014, 07:38:09 PM
"Just as a curiosity, how many of you think that the N and S shown in the Figueras patents were meant for magnetic North and South?"

  No not ever. There is a relative motion of the magnetic field from the perspective
of the induced coil which implies a direction of the inducer fields relative motion compared to the coil and core which it occupies which is independent in both inducers and induced. Each set being two inducers and one induced are all independent fields. The two inducers impart their motion separately to the Y induced so they can conserve the input of current rather then directly transform it into the Y coil as would by transformer action.
  The N and S only to define individualism other wise there would be the corresponding pole for each coil to indicate the orientation of each coil with a complete NS Y NS or NS Y SN. The ends of the coils which are tied to the resistive controller + are so positioned to indicate the magnetic orientation of the coils if they were static devices which they are not so it does not make any sense to dwell on that. They may maintain a north and south pole which increases and decreases but from the point of view of the Y coil (induced) the relative motion is reversed.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 24, 2014, 07:58:55 PM
Hanon

 How many turns do you have on your coils? How many volts/amps per turn? Number of turns divided by the volts and amps powering the coil?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 24, 2014, 08:25:19 PM
bajac

I think we are progressing so fast we need a quick look into the past and connect dots.
I strongly suggest this is  related (somehow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY
and this also http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 24, 2014, 08:33:58 PM
nelsonrochaa
I'm really interested in Your ideas about how this type of energy is created, what is the source ?
There must be a source, I don't believe physics laws to be so incomplete.
Who can prove what is the source of excess energy ? Figuera stated it was magnetic field (not just conversion of mechanical energy into electricity).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 25, 2014, 12:34:39 AM
nelsonrochaa
I'm really interested in Your ideas about how this type of energy is created, what is the source ?
There must be a source, I don't believe physics laws to be so incomplete.
Who can prove what is the source of excess energy ? Figuera stated it was magnetic field (not just conversion of mechanical energy into electricity).

Hi Forest ,
I really can not honestly answer your question ...I am curious as everyone in general who frequent this type of site and study this kind of things.
My findings from the research on this subject are based on experimentation like most people.

Now my thoughts and my interpretations:
Electricity is a form of conversion of energy and i think the first and most important thing is improve the actual systems of conversion  because don’t have efficiency in the conventional way.

If we collect  a magnetic collapse of a coil to a cap, the collected result is proportional with the magnitude of the coil magnetic field magnetization. To generate this magnetic field you need current circulating in coil by a source dipole.
Now if you increase the magnetic field of the coil, the  magnetic collapse when you shut off the main power source (State 0),  will be produce at higher voltage and electrostatic current in the cap, greater than main source .
The charge of capacitor will be more faster than you charge with conventionally power source.
 
And how to use this, to increase the magnetic field without increase the consume of current in main source ?
You need a way to create a fast pulse of high current with the collected power of magnetic collapse coil, and storage in a cap , to create a rapidly discharges of several pulses of high amps much higher that  main source can provide, combined with high voltage pulse that can be provided by other coil  with BEMF.

The effect of the combination of high current pulses combined with a source of high voltage causes the particles of the atomic nucleus exchange states very quickly, negating the disintegrating forces of positive energy of the protons. At one point, a proton has a positive charge, and a neutron has
neutral charge. and the next moment, a neutron is replaced by positive charge and the proton is replaced by a neutral charge. This exchange of states occurs in unimaginable speeds, thereby nullifying the repellent forces of the same load elements generating a cancellation in the repulsion of two equal poles in the coils. For me is the reason to explain the green gap that occur in my tests.
I think  this gap color result is a Cherenkov radiation .

Read about Tesla colorado springs notes and Ev gray circuits and see the similarity in the effects.
 
This excess energy or what we can call in my opinion never will be possible measured correctly by conventional tools  because  one of the points used in the conventional measure instruments, (resistance,) seems to be in some form ignored in this type of circuits because their high impedance , caused by the differential of potential in circuit and the reactance  of the coils.

I'm just with my thoughts  and puzzle what I read and test man :) Man people say that im crazy

Ps -Sorry for the English I wish you can understand what I try explain.

Thanks and good work
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 25, 2014, 03:45:00 AM
bajac

I think we are progressing so fast we need a quick look into the past and connect dots.
I strongly suggest this is  related (somehow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY)
and this also http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html (http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html)


Forest,


I think you are right!


I am doing a lot of research and it is a slow process. I try to be very careful when reading the articles. You never know when they could be related. For example, I was performing an internet search using the following keyword "Ferranti" + "perpetual Motion", and found the following article from The Electrical Engineer - Volume 3 (http://books.google.com/books?id=QKzmAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA201&lpg=PA201&dq=%22ferranti%22+perpetual+motion+machine&source=bl&ots=zQM4nGcvXA&sig=8eDc6gaOlQGd1zNRMiFa7WuBIic&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9GxzVOqSIcfOsQSnjYDgCA&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAw%23v=onepage&q=%22ferranti%22%20perpetual%20motion%20machine&f=false#v=snippet&q=%22ferranti%22%20perpetual%20motion%20machine&f=false) on page 201 and dated 1889. This article recounts the story of an appeal against the revocation of a patent application that involved Messrs, Gaulard, Gibbs, and Ferranti. I found the following quote taken from the second column to be interesting and with merits for further investigation:


"The specification as it originally stood, it was argued, seemed to assert that any number of induced currents could be produced by the high-tension current in the main wire without loss of electric energy in the main current - a claim which the petitioner's counsel said amounted to an assertion that the inventors had discovered perpetual motion."

At this time I am trying to find the letters patent No. 4,362 of 1882 and the provisional application No. 15,141 1885. These document may show more details of the patent application such as original drawings and the specification.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 25, 2014, 08:53:50 AM
Hi Hanon ,
Very usable your test .
 Can i ask if you see any type of increase in the magnetic field perpendicular to main coils ?
Did you consider try to connect the main input coils in bifilar mode and pulse them?
Based in some tests that i did , i think you can achieve best results pulsing the main coils with DC at higher frequencies that 50hz .
I make some tests that can be usable to you .
one more time very thanks for your work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRjGMCBAh0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRjGMCBAh0)




Thanks for your work.   

 Hi Nelson,
 
Your videos are very interesting . I guess that you are pulsing two coisl and you are collecting the induced magnetic field into a bifilar coil. Is that this way? I have some questions: how are your inducer coils configured: with like poles facing each other or with opposite poles? What method do you use to pulse those coils? (I would like to know this method to use it in my test. Thanks) What is the function of the capacitor? In summary I would like if you could explain shortly the setup shown in the videos. They are really very interesting!!! Thanks. 
 
Have you tested to collect the induced field with some iron core in the induced coil? If you do this test in the future please tell us which is the results. Also try to test with different induced coil orientations..

 
In my test: I am sorry but I did not measure the magnetic field perpendicular to the inducers. It was a basic configuration just to measure the induction and see the effect of a load in the input power. How can I measure the magnetic field? Which device should I use to measure it?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 25, 2014, 10:17:15 AM
Hi all,

Important video to watch and digest:

A user in the spanish forum (link) (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&p=6697#p6696) has uploaded a video with the induced coils placed perpendiculary to the inducer electromagnets and using like poles facing each other (N--induced--N) (repulsion mode). Powered with AC from the mains.

See the results: the input is not affected when adding a load in the induced circuit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs)

Thank you very much to this user for noting this effect when testing his devices some time ago.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 25, 2014, 01:17:14 PM
Hi Nelson,
 
Your videos are very interesting . I guess that you are pulsing two coisl and you are collecting the induced magnetic field into a bifilar coil. Is that this way? I have some questions: how are your inducer coils configured: with like poles facing each other or with opposite poles? What method do you use to pulse those coils? (I would like to know this method to use it in my test. Thanks) What is the function of the capacitor? In summary I would like if you could explain shortly the setup shown in the videos. They are really very interesting!!! Thanks. 
 
Have you tested to collect the induced field with some iron core in the induced coil? If you do this test in the future please tell us which is the results. Also try to test with different induced coil orientations..
In my test: I am sorry but I did not measure the magnetic field perpendicular to the inducers. It was a basic configuration just to measure the induction and see the effect of a load in the input power. How can I measure the magnetic field? Which device should I use to measure it?

Hi Hanon,
In the video i put a single turn of cable only to show how the type of connection (Bibfilar or normal) can improve the capture of induced currents. But the power collected is not by induction :) is only the result of magnetic collapse in the coils , and electrostatic currents.
I use the relay in auto-oscillation because the relay will provide the oscillation to the coils in core ,and can manage in their contacts the combination process of combine the large current collected in capacitor with the BEMF coil of the relay . Will give you the green flare as you see in my video , but the curious is how the magnetic field will increase  much higher.
I will try to make a diagram simplified to try explain better.
Thanks Hanon
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on November 25, 2014, 01:26:31 PM
Hi all,

Important video to watch and digest:

A user in the spanish forum (link) (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&p=6697#p6696) has uploaded a video with the induced coils placed perpendiculary to the inducer electromagnets and using like poles facing each other (N--induced--N) (repulsion mode). Powered with AC from the mains.

See the results: the input is not affected when adding a load in the induced circuit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs)

Thank you very much to this user for noting this effect when testing his devices some time ago.

Regards

Hi Hanon,

Let me show you a similar principle which has been 'dormant' for some years on this forum:

http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772 (http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772)   

Member DMMPOWER wrote in Reply #4:
 
"Yes what I have found, is when you use a permanent magnet  with a moving coil you always produce emf.
But  when you use two coil that oppose one other with the same oscillating magnetic force they will cancel each other's  BEMF."
   

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 25, 2014, 02:51:04 PM
Hi Hanon,

Let me show you a similar principle which has been 'dormant' for some years on this forum:

http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772 (http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772)   

Member DMMPOWER wrote in Reply #4:
 
"Yes what I have found, is when you use a permanent magnet  with a moving coil you always produce emf.
But  when you use two coil that oppose one other with the same oscillating magnetic force they will cancel each other's  BEMF."
   

Gyula

Hi Gyula yes that right ! , (But  when you use two coil that oppose one other with the same oscillating magnetic force they will cancel each other's  BEMF).

This technique , for me  is what the most machines that reclaim overunity use at many years. I think this part is the first stage to improve in efficiency of our circuits.
I think we should improving efficiency first,  the rest will came after , step bye step. 
Its very easy to anybody test this basic circuits and configurations . But is important that people abstract of how things work conventionally and observe , compare, test ....
 
like   Chris Sykes say :
The old world is gone and the NEW World is here, let the transition be a relatively easy one.
(www.hyiq.org)

Very thanks for the information.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 25, 2014, 05:00:27 PM
Hi Hanon,

Let me show you a similar principle which has been 'dormant' for some years on this forum:

http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772 (http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772)   

Member DMMPOWER wrote in Reply #4:
 
"Yes what I have found, is when you use a permanent magnet  with a moving coil you always produce emf.
But  when you use two coil that oppose one other with the same oscillating magnetic force they will cancel each other's  BEMF."
   

Gyula

 Hi Gyulasun,
 
Thank you very much for the info.
 
Note that the this BEMF MAGNO MOTOR is also based on poles in repulsion mode (N-N or S-S).
 
The concept is used for motors, not for generators, but the underlining principle should be applicable also to generators. I copy here the sketch posted in that thread.


Please replicate the experiment shown in the video posted  before and tell you insights. Thanks!!



Regards

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on November 25, 2014, 05:46:42 PM
@Erfinder
thanks for sharing your point of view
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 25, 2014, 06:33:10 PM

With relation to the highlighted, through experimentation, I have found the sited claim is as far as I am concerned 100 percent accurate.  The phrase "high-tension current" is misleading (but is your best and only clue...) however, in my opinion it is the perfect way to describe the "current" in question, but owing this manner of phrasing, identifying the nature of the beast, and or the mechanism at play and the specific relations necessary to practice the claim is next to impossible.  I recommend you spend as much time as you feel necessary in this regard, this is one of the few ways forward


Regards

Thanks for the info. I was able to find the patent and other documents related to this case.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 25, 2014, 06:49:20 PM
It is my opinion, one supported by experiment that the attached image is an aerial view.  It is my opinion that the inventor is calling our attention into three specific locations and asking us to consider the relations between the three. 

Regards

Erfinder,
 
If we refer to the diagram you posted in your reply, I agree that it is a kind of a plan view. If you assume all electromagnets - N, S, and Y - are wound in the same direction and also that each N and S lineup are connected in a similar fashion, then the battery connections and polarities of the electromagnets shown by Figuera in this drawing make sense. The top electrogmagnets will always maintain a south pole at the top of the iron core while the bottom electromagnets will maintain a north pole also at the top of their iron cores. The electromagnets in the centre labeled as Y, do not have a fix polarity because the voltages and currents induced are AC.
 
To me, the scope and intent of the 1908 patent is clear. If others want to claim that Figuera meant a different design or that he was trying to hide the true concept of his invention, then it is their interpretation. However, the description and drawings in the 1908 patent are vey clear and unambiguous.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 25, 2014, 11:04:08 PM
Hi Forest ,
I really can not honestly answer your question ...I am curious as everyone in general who frequent this type of site and study this kind of things.
My findings from the research on this subject are based on experimentation like most people.

Now my thoughts and my interpretations:
Electricity is a form of conversion of energy and i think the first and most important thing is improve the actual systems of conversion  because don’t have efficiency in the conventional way.

If we collect  a magnetic collapse of a coil to a cap, the collected result is proportional with the magnitude of the coil magnetic field magnetization. To generate this magnetic field you need current circulating in coil by a source dipole.
Now if you increase the magnetic field of the coil, the  magnetic collapse when you shut off the main power source (State 0),  will be produce at higher voltage and electrostatic current in the cap, greater than main source .
The charge of capacitor will be more faster than you charge with conventionally power source.
 
And how to use this, to increase the magnetic field without increase the consume of current in main source ?
You need a way to create a fast pulse of high current with the collected power of magnetic collapse coil, and storage in a cap , to create a rapidly discharges of several pulses of high amps much higher that  main source can provide, combined with high voltage pulse that can be provided by other coil  with BEMF.

The effect of the combination of high current pulses combined with a source of high voltage causes the particles of the atomic nucleus exchange states very quickly, negating the disintegrating forces of positive energy of the protons. At one point, a proton has a positive charge, and a neutron has
neutral charge. and the next moment, a neutron is replaced by positive charge and the proton is replaced by a neutral charge. This exchange of states occurs in unimaginable speeds, thereby nullifying the repellent forces of the same load elements generating a cancellation in the repulsion of two equal poles in the coils. For me is the reason to explain the green gap that occur in my tests.
I think  this gap color result is a Cherenkov radiation .

Read about Tesla colorado springs notes and Ev gray circuits and see the similarity in the effects.
 
This excess energy or what we can call in my opinion never will be possible measured correctly by conventional tools  because  one of the points used in the conventional measure instruments, (resistance,) seems to be in some form ignored in this type of circuits because their high impedance , caused by the differential of potential in circuit and the reactance  of the coils.

I'm just with my thoughts  and puzzle what I read and test man :) Man people say that im crazy

Ps -Sorry for the English I wish you can understand what I try explain.

Thanks and good work
 

Thank You Nelson. I doubt it is related to atomic change, however. I think it is simply electrostatic force being not static. High frequency magnetic field disturbance, maybe caused by cosmic rays.So called radiant energy. There are other possibilities also but not so many and all lead to external power source. The simplest idea is magnetic field being whirl of energy so magnetic field CAN do work and Figuera proved electricity comes from magnetic field not mechanical power.
I see you are far ahead of us here, and I must state I'm jealous. I was not prepared in 2005 when I found radiant energy emanating from my car coil experiment and precharging all metal objects in nearby. :'( Unfortunately I was working with low frequencies circuit at 200Hz so it was dangerous (at 20kV!!!). I was lucky (to stay alive)  and unlucky. Now I know your explanation is perfectly clear . Thank You.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 26, 2014, 12:30:15 AM
Hi Forest ,
I really can not honestly answer your question ...I am curious as everyone in general who frequent this type of site and study this kind of things.
My findings from the research on this subject are based on experimentation like most people.

Now my thoughts and my interpretations:
Electricity is a form of conversion of energy and i think the first and most important thing is improve the actual systems of conversion  because don’t have efficiency in the conventional way.

If we collect  a magnetic collapse of a coil to a cap, the collected result is proportional with the magnitude of the coil magnetic field magnetization. To generate this magnetic field you need current circulating in coil by a source dipole.
Now if you increase the magnetic field of the coil, the  magnetic collapse when you shut off the main power source (State 0),  will be produce at higher voltage and electrostatic current in the cap, greater than main source .
The charge of capacitor will be more faster than you charge with conventionally power source.
 
And how to use this, to increase the magnetic field without increase the consume of current in main source ?
You need a way to create a fast pulse of high current with the collected power of magnetic collapse coil, and storage in a cap , to create a rapidly discharges of several pulses of high amps much higher that  main source can provide, combined with high voltage pulse that can be provided by other coil  with BEMF.

The effect of the combination of high current pulses combined with a source of high voltage causes the particles of the atomic nucleus exchange states very quickly, negating the disintegrating forces of positive energy of the protons. At one point, a proton has a positive charge, and a neutron has
neutral charge. and the next moment, a neutron is replaced by positive charge and the proton is replaced by a neutral charge. This exchange of states occurs in unimaginable speeds, thereby nullifying the repellent forces of the same load elements generating a cancellation in the repulsion of two equal poles in the coils. For me is the reason to explain the green gap that occur in my tests.
I think  this gap color result is a Cherenkov radiation .

Read about Tesla colorado springs notes and Ev gray circuits and see the similarity in the effects.
 
This excess energy or what we can call in my opinion never will be possible measured correctly by conventional tools  because  one of the points used in the conventional measure instruments, (resistance,) seems to be in some form ignored in this type of circuits because their high impedance , caused by the differential of potential in circuit and the reactance  of the coils.

I'm just with my thoughts  and puzzle what I read and test man :) Man people say that im crazy

Ps -Sorry for the English I wish you can understand what I try explain.

Thanks and good work
 


Nelsonrochaa,

I find your description very interesting. I also did some research on this subject. I published a paper proposing what I believe to be the bases of operation of the Edwin Gray tube and devices that use only coils. I posted this paper back on 2012 at this site. You can find a copy of this paper in this link

http://www.scribd.com/doc/205259930/Tesla-Gray-Mark-Meyer-R04 (http://www.scribd.com/doc/205259930/Tesla-Gray-Mark-Meyer-R04)

I think what you stated is very close to what I proposed in the paper. Have you read this document?

Thank you for your help on this thread!

PS: for some reason I can find the document in this site.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 26, 2014, 04:08:15 AM
It is my opinion, one supported by experiment that the attached image is an aerial view.  It is my opinion that the inventor is calling our attention into three specific locations and asking us to consider the relations between the three. 

Specifically our attention is directed downward, into what is commonly referred to as the North pole, and into what is commonly referred to as the South pole.  It must be noted that the polarity of the middle winding is not indicated, and I believe the lack of polarity here is saying as much as would be said if there was a polarity indicated.  I am of the opinion that the polarity isn't present because the coil is not oriented like the other two coils.  I am of the opinion that coil "y" is arranged in such a manner that the flux spinning around N and S "run into and through" "y" from one end to the other.  When viewed from the perspective of spin directions we find that at the location between N and S the flux is unidirectional.  Here we find "y" is cleverly positioned in the location of not only unidirectional  flux, but also maximum flux density.

I gather from the disclosure that the inventor assumes that the reader of the document is aware of the spin directions associated with N and S.  This, my perspective on this changes things, (they did for me anyway) there is a very specific message being shared by the author, and to me it appears he is demonstrating that a specific geometry is required to capitalize on his invention, very simple but specific relations.  This disclosure shows me that the inventor had a very deep understanding of the fields, and knew how to relate the inducing to the induced.  The block diagram is just that, a block diagram, one which points us "a" direction.  As far as I can tell, after much reading through this thread, this particular direction, the one I am suggesting, has not been considered.  I hope that my perspective, aids one or more of you who are desirous of seeing something materialize out of the effort going into this area of research.



Regards
I agree,
i think there  is a reason for the opposite wiring of the Primaries. the spin direction is a viable  and rational  aspect of the Figueras devise  and it could quite possibly be a missing key to the figueras devise just so easily overlooked .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 26, 2014, 01:30:09 PM
Thank You Nelson. I doubt it is related to atomic change, however. I think it is simply electrostatic force being not static. High frequency magnetic field disturbance, maybe caused by cosmic rays.So called radiant energy. There are other possibilities also but not so many and all lead to external power source. The simplest idea is magnetic field being whirl of energy so magnetic field CAN do work and Figuera proved electricity comes from magnetic field not mechanical power.
I see you are far ahead of us here, and I must state I'm jealous. I was not prepared in 2005 when I found radiant energy emanating from my car coil experiment and precharging all metal objects in nearby. :'( Unfortunately I was working with low frequencies circuit at 200Hz so it was dangerous (at 20kV!!!). I was lucky (to stay alive)  and unlucky. Now I know your explanation is perfectly clear . Thank You.

Hi Forest,
I Want to tell you that you never achieve some relevant result in this matter if you use low frequency 200Hz . You need to start at 1kz  at least.

When you say : " and all lead to external power source" -----Yes you have true ! you need ever a power source to drive circuit parts. but in this stage is not the point !
Think in this way:
Imagine you need drive a motor 12v  1000w . You need 1200A of current to drive the motor at best ratio ok ?
Now if you have a method to create the equivalent magnetic field using not 1200A in the load but only 10A, how you will consider this ? A overunity machine ? or a efficiency  method to drive a 1000W motor ?

You say " I found radiant energy emanating from my car coil experiment and precharging all metal objects in nearby"

Yes it true . I observe the same . I can tell you a curious thing that happened with capacitors charge.  The capacitors charges without  noting difference in polarity .
A example :
If you put a electrolytic capacitor to charge you have to respect  their +- configuration. But i can assure you  that cap will charge rapidly without distinguish - or + in their charge.   

 You say " electricity comes from magnetic field not mechanical power"
Yes  it true ! Figuera use a form of magnetic amplification with blind eye schema  CW-CCW coils annulling the repulsing NN confrontation field forces of coils.
The  output power comes from the magnetic field generated in the process not from source.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qW2YVh044JI

I know it's hard to understand sometimes what I say and show in my videos with my crap circuits :)
Thanks and good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 26, 2014, 01:38:43 PM

Nelsonrochaa,

I find your description very interesting. I also did some research on this subject. I published a paper proposing what I believe to be the bases of operation of the Edwin Gray tube and devices that use only coils. I posted this paper back on 2012 at this site. You can find a copy of this paper in this link

http://www.scribd.com/doc/205259930/Tesla-Gray-Mark-Meyer-R04 (http://www.scribd.com/doc/205259930/Tesla-Gray-Mark-Meyer-R04)

I think what you stated is very close to what I proposed in the paper. Have you read this document?

Thank you for your help on this thread!

PS: for some reason I can find the document in this site.

Hi Bajac,
I read a lot, and of course I've read many articles about the subject GRAY.
Unfortunately never read the document that you generated.
If you have way to provide me would be grateful for'll share your thoughts.
I can not download without paying in scribd. :)
Thanks
My email is nelsonrochaa@gmail.com
my  Youtube Channel  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8Bo71izl8948rCESU6x8Lg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 26, 2014, 02:41:42 PM

You are the first person I have seen who like myself refers to CEMF as the soul of the machine, and who seems to have found what I have found, but in a different manner.  Namely, you appear to be demonstrating the blending of the  two special case voltage and current sources, special case because they have the ability to seemingly overcome any impedance offered to them.  Specifically, you have a voltage source that overcomes impedance combined with a current source which overcomes impedance.  You are combining the voltage generated by an inductors opposition to change in current, with the current generated by a capacitors opposition to changes in voltage. It feels good seeing you do this, and doing so with relays.  I don't think folks really appreciate or realize what you are showing, I do, and am glad to finally see someone else doing it.  I think Ismael Aviso was one of the first to do something similar, but he never showed anyone any specifics.


Keep up the excellent work.

Regards

Hi Erfinder ,

I am pleased to know that someone really knew what tries to pass through my videos and sharing the same line of thought.
Your explanation is perfect :) taking one point or another :) but all paths give rome :)
I do not care about the popularity of my videos or that they are ignored by some people. My reward comes at the end of the day, when I analyze and compare what I learned that day.

I use relays and other savaged parts to show that is possible make work with low resources and unused parts, the important is know the main concept how it work.
I receive visits on my youtube channel,for  more than 90 different countries, where in some of these countries have not resources available, and to me is a way to promote and contribute to this type of research showing that can be done with limited resources.
But in my intimate, I believe that deep down even those shown skeptic, are curious about what I do.

If you want share some information call me nelsonrochaa@gmail.com
Thanks
Thanks and good work
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 26, 2014, 06:11:26 PM
bajac

I think we are progressing so fast we need a quick look into the past and connect dots.
I strongly suggest this is  related (somehow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY)
and this also http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html (http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html)

Forest, Thank you for the references. They are very interesting.

I am convinced that the device shown in the Cook's 1871 patent works on the same principle of ironless induced coils (or low self-inductance induced coils) used by Ferranti, Messrs, Siemens, Mordey, and Figuera.

I will not write a paper for this device so I will try to explain it in this post. I am also attaching a copy of the Cook's patent No. 119,825 for reference.

The basic inventive concept of this patent consists of an over unity transformer having a straight iron core configuration. This is totally different from today's standard transformers which have a closed iron core configuration. If you remember a paper I posted about three months ago, I explained that coils having straight iron cores have very high self-inductance similar to the high inductance of the coils having closed iron cores. The three elements used to build this over unity transformer are shown in figure 1 of the patent as the straight iron core 'A', the primary coil 'B', and the secondary output coil 'C'.

The key to this invention is to have the primary coil 'B' tightly wound to the straight iron core 'B' and the secondary coil 'C' placed concentric with the primary coil but keeping a small gap or non-magnetic separation between the two coils. To create the gap, you can use non-magnetic materials such as thin cardboard paper, etc. The gap needs to be optimize so that the magnetic field of the primary coil 'B' is strong enough to induce a voltage in the secondary coil 'C' but not too close so that the small magnetic field of the induced current in the coil 'C' interferes with the field of the primary coil 'B' (similar to the armature reaction.)

By following the above recommendation and the instructions from the patent, you will end up with an over unity transformer having a primary coil 'B' with a high self-inductance and a secondary coil 'C' with very low self-inductance (similar to the ironless coils).

The ingenuity of Cook's design is that the power of the transformer can be increased by just increasing the length of the straight iron core 'A' and the number of turns of the primary and secondary coils. This device does not have the drawback of the devices built by Ferranti, Messrs, Siemens, Mordey, and Figuera, which require an increase of the air gap for increasing power.

The way the Cook's device operates should be as follows:
When an AC voltage is applied to the primary coil 'B', a strong magnetic field is created around the primary coil 'B' and the straight iron core 'A'. This strong magnetic field can be created with a small electric energy due to the high permeability of the iron core 'A' causing the high self-inductance of the primary coil 'B'. When this magnetic field travels through the non-magnetic gap, it induces a voltage in the secondary coil 'C'. If a load is connected to the secondary coil 'C', a current will circulate through this coil. However, because of the low self-inductance of the secondary coil 'C', the induced magnetic field should be weak minimizing the current reflected from the load back to the primary coil 'B'. That is, an increase of the load current should not considerably affect the primary exciting current. As a result, this transformer should experience a power gain.

Now you may ask, what is the big deal with the device shown in figure 2?

To answer the above question, you need to take into account that in the 1860's Mr. Cook did not have a source of AC power to feed his transformer. The only reliable source of electrical power was provided by DC batteries or chemical reaction. Faraday's principles was in its infancy and there was a race to invent a practical dynamo (if I remember well.) That is why I interpret the following statement "...in such a manner as to produce a constant electric current without the aid of a galvanic battery." as a statement of a self-excited generator. In other words, once excited, the external DC power supply can be disconnected from the generator.

In addition, a few weeks ago I commented that the Figuera's 1902 motionless electric generator or over unity transformer should not have a direct feedback from the output back into the input coil. I mentioned that it was required to decouple the input and output voltages.

Then, how did Mr. Cook solve the problem of self excitation? As shown in figure 2 of the patent, he just cascaded two over unity transformers in a closed loop configuration. Because each of the transformers shown in figure 2 should have over unity, the output of one transformer should be able to supply the small excitation input power of the other transformer and yet have spare power to drive a connected load. The device shown in figure 2 should be able to power two loads, each load connected to a secondary coil 'C'.

The way Mr. Cook excited the device shown in figure 2 is explained in the last paragraph found on page 2 of the patent. He used a battery to excite the circuit. Once excited, the circuit was able to maintain an AC voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 26, 2014, 11:58:58 PM
I like the way this thread is heading. We are really making some progress.

Now, we know that the concept for using low self-inductance induced coils was not the original idea of Ferranti or Figuera, but Mr. Cook.

Figuera's 1908 device is very peculiar because is the only overunity generator that uses high self-inductance induced coils, that is, induced coils with high permeability iron cores. To make it work, Figuera devised an ingenious method of pulling the strong reaction of the secondary induced coils away from the primary inducing coils.

There are still considerable information that need to be analyzed from the Cook's patent. When I read it the first time, I did not quite understand it. I will be posting some quotes from the patent so I can get your input.

Notice that the claim from the Cook's patent only recites the combination shown in figure 2. If you get a patent today with such claims, you would have given your invention freely to the competition. Your competitors can just use a single over unity transformer invented by you without paying royalties. I understand that during Cook's time it was not possible to use a single transformer because there was not AC power source. However, the responsibility of a lawyer or whoever is drafting the claims is to anticipate the future by claiming first the essence of the invention, which is the inventive concept. Think about it, an invention is a concept, an abstract, an idea. The embodiment happens to be a way to implement the concept. The implementation of the embodiments changes with the technology, but the inventive concept does not.

To date, Cook's over unity transformer is the simplest of all I have seen. :)


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 27, 2014, 01:22:54 AM
Hi Bajac,
I read a lot, and of course I've read many articles about the subject GRAY.
Unfortunately never read the document that you generated.
If you have way to provide me would be grateful for'll share your thoughts.
I can not download without paying in scribd. :)
Thanks
My email is nelsonrochaa@gmail.com
my  Youtube Channel  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8Bo71izl8948rCESU6x8Lg (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8Bo71izl8948rCESU6x8Lg)


Nelsonrochaa,

I have attached the latest version of the document to this post. I am also attaching a paper that I wrote back in 2012 for the overvoltage induced in ungrounded power systems.

For more information, you can also refer to the following threads related to this document:

http://www.overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VHZnWU10zIU (http://www.overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VHZnWU10zIU)

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11291-tesla-father-tpu-part-2-a.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11291-tesla-father-tpu-part-2-a.html)

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 27, 2014, 04:45:24 AM
Bajac Cook,s patient is not complete it is missing part D in which i have not been able to find anywhere. the patient has been stripped of the rest of parts that are essential for operation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 27, 2014, 05:18:58 AM
Nice thread.
Does anyone have a link to the complete Buforn 1910 - 1914 patent? I know sections have been translated however I am interested in the whole document(in English). Google translate doesn't do a good job.

Thanks for any help.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 27, 2014, 05:28:28 AM
Bajac Cook,s patient is not complete it is missing part D in which i have not been able to find anywhere. the patient has been stripped of the rest of parts that are essential for operation.

Marathonman,

Thanks for your comment.

I also noticed it. It was my first impression that this patent was tampered with. However, it looks to me that we should be able to figure it out based on the specification part. I have confidence that we can make the connections. For example, we can find out how the device was excited with the missing battery circuit, which includes resistors and switches.

I would like to have a prototype to see how the system behaves from the excited part to the steady state mode. I expect to see a sine wave. But, what would be the frequency? What are the factors for predicting the operating frequency? Etc.

Before we go crazy with the system shown in figure 2, I think we should do baby steps. First, let us just test a single transformer for over unity.

OMG, I really love this detective work! 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 27, 2014, 11:19:08 AM

Nelsonrochaa,

I have attached the latest version of the document to this post. I am also attaching a paper that I wrote back in 2012 for the overvoltage induced in ungrounded power systems.

For more information, you can also refer to the following threads related to this document:

http://www.overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VHZnWU10zIU (http://www.overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VHZnWU10zIU)

Hi

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11291-tesla-father-tpu-part-2-a.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11291-tesla-father-tpu-part-2-a.html)

Bajac

Hi Bajac ,
thanks for the information i will read :) . I read a loot .
One more time thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 27, 2014, 06:01:40 PM
If someone tells you perpetual motion is not possible do you not consider that at some point in time everything even fire was at one time or another impossible?
  A law exist which states it is not possible. If it is not possible would you need a law to state the obvious.
  Is the law to state a fact or to control a behavior? If it is a description of nature then you are stating you know everything about everything and there is no question you can not answer. Yet history would clearly indicate that through out time people have claimed to know everything based on the observations possible at the time in question, which change with advances in technology over time. In other words, most  don't know shit and just want everyone to think so.
  There is a lot I don't know or even want to know. I do know one thing.The distance between point A and B is not etched in stone and if you decide to take the longest route possible you better have a good pair of shoes. Every distraction will lead you further away from the shortest route.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 27, 2014, 08:01:07 PM
Doug1

Exactly ! the amount of strange patents prove something is fishy inside our books, incomplete.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 28, 2014, 12:40:06 AM
Nice thread.
Does anyone have a link to the complete Buforn 1910 - 1914 patent? I know sections have been translated however I am interested in the whole document(in English). Google translate doesn't do a good job.

Thanks for any help.

This is the only file with Buforn´s patents. It is the original spanish text. There are not translations into english

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf)

I have read them and all Buforn´s patent are exact copies one on the other and all are copies of the Figuera 1908 patent. You can see it just by comparing the figures in Buforn´s patents and the figure in Figuera´s patent

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 28, 2014, 01:16:37 AM
Hi all,

Important video to watch and digest:

A user in the spanish forum (link) (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&p=6697#p6696) has uploaded a video with the induced coils placed perpendiculary to the inducer electromagnets and using like poles facing each other (N--induced--N) (repulsion mode). Powered with AC from the mains.

See the results: the input is not affected when adding a load in the induced circuit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs)

Thank you very much to this user for noting this effect when testing his devices some time ago.

Regards

Does anyone try to replicate this important test ??  Please comment

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 28, 2014, 03:55:35 AM
This is the only file with Buforn´s patents. It is the original spanish text. There are not translations into english

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf)

I have read them and all Buforn´s patent are exact copies one on the other and all are copies of the Figuera 1908 patent. You can see it just by comparing the figures in Buforn´s patents and the figure in Figuera´s patent

Regards

Thanks for the reply. My Spanish is not that good and I was able to fumble through some of it. Figuera patents aren't that long, Buforn's is over 100 pages. From what I was able to make out he starts taking about the energy from the sun and the magnetic field of the earth. I was hoping to save myself some time and maybe get a translated copy.

What I find strange in  both patents is that they state "....and this current that traverses a magnetic field originates the induced current" Taken from page 95 bottom paragraph. Here they are stating that the alternating current is traversing a magnetic field. Whats strange is "how does the current traverse a magnetic field?" If the alternating current is creating the magnetic field how can it also traverse it?

Its the age old question "What came first, the magnetic field that created the current or the current that created the magnetic field".

Anyway, I built a horseshoe electromagnet and added a closely spaced armature. On this armature I wrapped a heavy gauge coil. The electromagnets are about 800 turns of 22 gauge. Pulsed the magnets in series and parallel. The only interesting anomaly was that when I touched the armature with a ground wire I was able to create a heavy spark that jumped to the core on the horseshoe electromagnet. At one point I created a small flame that shot out from the air gap between the armature and the electromagnet.

This was short lived, after about 5 minutes the effect disappeared and I have not been able to manifest it again. The air gap between the armature and the horseshoe is a little thicker then a credit card.

I am in the process of revamping my rig to allow for a greater flexibility when it comes to experimenting. Like everyone else I dont have much time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 28, 2014, 04:15:03 PM
A quote found in the first column of the Cook's patent reads:

"The iron core A may be a solid bar or a bundle of iron wire, the latter giving higher tension to the current with equal length and fineness of wire."

Why is that?

Well, the laminated or bundle iron core decreases the magnitude of the Eddy currents induced in the iron core. But we only think of the Eddy current losses as an energy loss in the form of heat - Joules' losses. The truth is that the Eddy currents are created by the action of the primary magnetic field and as such they also must follow the effects of the Lenz's law. In other words, the Eddy currents in turn generate a reaction magnetic field that will tend to cancel the magnetic field that produces it in the first place. That is, another effect of the Eddy currents is to reduce the magnitude of the primary magnetic field.

Based on the above, do you understand now why Mr. Cook made that statement? Mr. Cook discovered the magnetic reduction created by the Eddy currents by experimentation. This magnetic loss is in addition to the magnetic hysteresis loss.

The effect on the primary magnetic field due to the Eddy currents is to reduce the magnetic field, which in turn reduces the induced voltage in the secondary coil resulting in a decrease of the KW generated by the device. It is not really a loss that affects the efficiency  but the output capacity of the transformer. It is interesting because I do not remember reading that information from our college or technical books, which relates the Eddy current losses to heat only.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 28, 2014, 06:47:39 PM
Bajac
 Heat in windings is bad,heat in cores is sometimes not bad depending on the material.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 28, 2014, 06:57:51 PM
Whats strange is "how does the current traverse a magnetic field?" If the alternating current is creating the magnetic field how can it also traverse it?

Ustedes tienen que entender que en 1900, la electricidad era algo nuevo, no se conocía, eran sus propios maestros, etc. Para traducir, no es solo el idioma, son los conceptos de la época.

You have to understand that in 1900, electricity was new, it was not known, were their own teacher, etc..
To translate, not just the language, are the concepts of the time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 28, 2014, 09:53:00 PM
I do not know if you have already seen this type of generator but it basically is a magnet rotor sandwiched in between two sets of plates containing ironless induced coils or induced coils with very low self-inductance. Click on these links for the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5Ln5hogw6Q&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5Ln5hogw6Q&feature=player_embedded)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8VdsWn-Q9Y (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8VdsWn-Q9Y)

I have no doubts that the key for overunity for most of these electric machines is the low self-inductance of the induced coils. This simple concept takes the magic or weirdness out of the electrical equations.






























 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 28, 2014, 11:11:52 PM
Ustedes tienen que entender que en 1900, la electricidad era algo nuevo, no se conocía, eran sus propios maestros, etc. Para traducir, no es solo el idioma, son los conceptos de la época.

You have to understand that in 1900, electricity was new, it was not known, were their own teacher, etc..
To translate, not just the language, are the concepts of the time.

I disagree, Buforn's patent was written 1910. By that time the electron had been discovered over 10 years ago, induction had been discovered 80 years ago, Albert Einstein had made a name for himself and Tesla's Wardencleffe tower had already beed shut down 5 years prior.

 Too add to this most, if not all, electrical laws had already been written. To imply or suggest that electricity was "new" and "not known" is simply incorrect.  Buforn was no idiot, there must be a very good reason why that phrase appears numerious times in his patent.

Interesting side note:
Speaking of Tesla, Buforn makes reference to Tesla's work in the patent. There is a section in which he mentions Tesla's work on "Transmitting electrical power without wires" and atmospheric electricity. It appears also that Buforn also speaks in length about ionization energy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 28, 2014, 11:56:50 PM

"  SUPPOSE THAT ELECTROMAGNETS ARE REPRESENTED BY RECTANGLES 'N' AND 'S'.    "  (Figuera patent, 1908)

Please try to find the words "North" and "South" in the whole text of Figuera´s 1908 patent
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ovaroncito on November 29, 2014, 12:40:30 AM
IF we assume that all the Figuera Patents are based on the same principle, than it's obvious that "Rectangles 'S' and 'N'" means North and South.
In the patent No. 30378 from 1902 Figuera and Blasberg are describing their invention as follows:

Quote
"Los inventores que suscriben, constituyen su generador, de la manera siguiente: Varios
electroimanes están colocados uno enfrente al otro, y separados sus caras polares de
nombre contrario
por una pequeña distancia."
(The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several electromagnets
are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole faces separated by a small
distance.)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 29, 2014, 12:53:41 AM
"  SUPPOSE THAT ELECTROMAGNETS ARE REPRESENTED BY RECTANGLES 'N' AND 'S'.    "  (Figuera patent, 1908)

Please try to find the words "North" and "South" in the whole text of Figuera´s 1908 patent

The only time the words North and South appear are in Buforn patent. BUT he is referencing the North hemisphere of his discharge wheel. Aside from that its just N and S. Kinda strange to use N and S and not imply North and South.

Regardless all that debating is useless, simple build a rig that allows for the most flexible modifications. My test rig, shown below, allows me to change direction of the current by simply moving the wires. So, I can use N - S, N - N, and S - S.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 29, 2014, 01:06:56 AM
Your translation is incorrect.
Quote
"Los inventores que suscriben, constituyen su generador, de la manera siguiente: Varios
electroimanes están colocados uno enfrente al otro, y separados sus caras polares de
nombre contrario por una pequeña distancia."
(The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several electromagnets
are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole faces separated by a small
distance.)

Highlighted above reads "Various electromagnets are setup one in front of the other" and not as you stated "arranged opposing each other".

Not trying to be a wise as$


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 29, 2014, 01:34:54 AM
Guys, we should stop wasting our time with the North and South non-sense.

There are people who believe that in the Figuera's 1908 device the N and S were meant to be N-N or S-S. If you already have one section of the 1908 device constructed, you can just interchange the wire connection to the DC power source and test it yourself. I will not do it because I am 99.999% convinced that N was meant for North and S was meant for South.

This NN, SS, or NS discussion is becoming annoying and boring! It is just getting in the way of our progress and preventing us from moving ahead!
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 29, 2014, 02:40:51 AM
The only time the words North and South appear are in Buforn patent. BUT he is referencing the North hemisphere of his discharge wheel. Aside from that its just N and S. Kinda strange to use N and S and not imply North and South.

Regardless all that debating is useless, simple build a rig that allows for the most flexible modifications. My test rig, shown below, allows me to change direction of the current by simply moving the wires. So, I can use N - S, N - N, and S - S.

Maverik,

I just read your post and saw that my comment was just a duplicate of what said. It feels good to see that we are on the same track!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 29, 2014, 12:11:24 PM
Guys, we should stop wasting our time with the North and South non-sense.

....

This NN, SS, or NS discussion is becoming annoying and boring! It is just getting in the way of our progress and preventing us from moving ahead!
 

I always refers in my posts and images to the patents, in order that anyone can judge for themselves.

Bajac:  You were convinced of the success of your air gap design. Noone till nor you have reported any result which may be repeated by everyone. Later came Ferranti, and now Cook patent seems to be the one to follow. I guess you sucess , but you should recognize that are also offering diferentent interpretations.

I wonder who is "getting in the of way of our progress" ?? Because I am just helping
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 29, 2014, 01:35:13 PM
I always refers in my posts and images to the patents, in order that anyone can judge for themselves.

Bajac:  You were convinced of the success of your air gap design. Noone till nor you have reported any result which may be repeated by everyone. Later came Ferranti, and now Cook patent seems to be the one to follow. I guess you sucess , but you should recognize that are also offering diferentent interpretations.

I wonder who is "getting in the of way of our progress" ?? Because I am just helping

Hi hanon,
I wish I could help more but I can not add much more than I'll say for professional reasons.
However warn of the lack of objectivity of thought, distraction and misinformation of people in general.

you're right, Figuera just used the letters N and S to describe the magnets in patent.
What Figuera found, was not needed to use the mechanical work to generate power as a conventional generator does.
  Electricity is a form of energy conversion!
What are the factors on which they depend to a current generation alternator?
Number of turns, magnetic field; The rotor movement will induce every 360 degrees in the stator, the movement of electrons in the stator coils thereby generating current.
These factors are present in conventional generators.

Another way of generating power more efficiently, us that would eliminate the friction and the rotor Lenz effect.
Figuera discovered another way to induce movement of the electrons much more efficient than conventional.
How can vary given magnetic field without the mechanical work to cut the magnetic lines?

The figuera device using a switching system in which the resistance varies in intensity over the 360 degrees.
This current variation will create the necessary movement in the magnetic field.
The configuration of the coils must be oriented NN repulsion CW -CWW.
And why? Every 90 degrees north-east from coils, changes to North-South
this and the reason why the capture coils are oriented between the coils CW CWW.
I hope you take something out of my thoughts.
greetings
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 29, 2014, 01:43:45 PM
Hi hanon,
I wish I could help more but I can not add much more than I'll say for professional reasons.
However warn of the lack of objectivity of thought, distraction and misinformation of people in general.

you're right, Figuera just used the letters N and S to describe the magnets in patent.
What Figuera found, was not needed to use the mechanical work to generate power as a conventional generator does.
  Electricity is a form of energy conversion!
What are the factors on which they depend to a current generation alternator?
Number of turns, magnetic field; The rotor movement will induce every 360 degrees in the stator, the movement of electrons in the stator coils thereby generating current.
These factors are present in conventional generators.

Another way of generating power more efficiently, us that would eliminate the friction and the rotor Lenz effect.
Figuera discovered another way to induce movement of the electrons much more efficient than conventional.
How can vary given magnetic field without the mechanical work to cut the magnetic lines?

The figuera device using a switching system in which the resistance varies in intensity over the 360 degrees.
This current variation will create the necessary movement in the magnetic field.
The configuration of the coils must be oriented NN repulsion CW -CWW.
And why? Every 90 degrees north-east from coils, changes to North-South
this and the reason why the capture coils are oriented between the coils CW CWW.
I hope you take something out of my thoughts.
greetings


I forget a thing :

They find that the functional circuit is just what shows in the patent?
For sure, only describes the main concept and most important.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 29, 2014, 03:22:57 PM
I always refers in my posts and images to the patents, in order that anyone can judge for themselves.

Yes, but that is not enough! Whenever a person proposes a new layout or idea, that person should justify through explanation why whatever he/she proposes will work. What I seen from you until now is "this device is similar to this one and it should work."

As we should already know, the big majority of the patents do not provide a justification for the operating principles of whatever they claim. It is done like that because in addition to running the risk of screwing up the patent if they are wrong, a theory of operation is not really necessary for securing an invention. Unless you are 100% sure that you are right, it is never recommended to add formulas and/or theory explaining what makes your invention work. You could do that in papers or journals outside of the patent businesses. That is why the Buforn patents are so bad. He added a lot of stuffs that in addition to be wrong, they are not required to get the patent. By the way, If you asked me I would say that I consider Buforn to be a charlatan and a thief. Not only Buforn tried to outsmart his master Figuera by later adding a lot B.S. not needed information in the Figuera's patents, but this guy tried to take away from Figuera the name of the invention. In 1908, the patent called the device "Figuera's generator." Then after Figuera's death Buforn wanted to change it to "Buforn's generator." I consider it an act of treason.

All of the Buforn applications(?) are obvious copies of the Figuera's 1908 patent. In any other patent office, those are not valid applications. Did Buforn ever get a patent on them? It is clear to me that Buforn was not smart enough. Buforn was trying to steal Figuera's 1908 invention and He thought it could be done by adding an explanation of the operating principles.

Bajac:  You were convinced of the success of your air gap design. Noone till nor you have reported any result which may be repeated by everyone. Later came Ferranti, and now Cook patent seems to be the one to follow.

And I still are! At least I have given the reasons by using a mathematical and/or logical approaches to explain how overunity migh be achieved. If I am not correct in the interpretation, you should prove me wrong. True I have built couple of prototypes based on Figiuera's teachings, and I have failed. But it does not mean that Figuera's device does not work. I did learned two ways these device should not be built. And I shared this information with the forum. For example, I warned the members of the forum that I was wrong when I considered that the Figuera's generators did not need a sufficient amount of iron core. I consider it a contribution even when I failed! Building an apparatus is not an easy task and if I can help people by saying "this is what I built and it did not work", then I am making an important contribution.

v
I guess you sucess , but you should recognize that are also offering diferentent interpretations.

Yes, but there is a difference in our methods. I have never said "I think this device I am proposing should work, go ahead and build it for me." It is not fair for the forum members. It is up to each person to build whatever device he/she is convinced would work.

There is nothing wrong in proposing an apparatus. However, it is not a good idea to direct people to build it for you especially when a logical explanation for why that apparatus should work is not being provided.

I wonder who is "getting in the of way of our progress" ?? Because I am just helping

YOUR CONTRIBUTION HAS NEVER BEEN IN QUESTION!
Hanon, your help on disseminating the Figuera's work is recognized by me and by all people in this thread! And for that, we all feel in debt with you. I apologize for offending you. I guess I got frustrated and I was carried away for what I thought was a waste of time, :-[
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 29, 2014, 04:17:06 PM
Bajac: I won´t answer your statements about me. I will just quote here a paragraph from the 1908 patent, for your consideration:

"
The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several
electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit,
also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly
placed. As neither of the two circuits spin, there is no need to make them
round, nor leave any space between one and the other.


"

This is what patent says. The rest are interpretations.

I understand that my view is "annoying" and "boring". Sorry for "annoying" you. Sorry for "boring" you. Sorry for quoting the patent literally.
 
I won´t repeat again anything that I had already posted before. I just tried to get people aware of that. You won. Now you have free way to "get ahead in the progress" of your proposal.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 29, 2014, 04:39:43 PM
It's Quite obvious that when someone repeats what they have said before, that person thinks it is of importance and maybe it is worth our time to direct our attention toward the repeated information. things that make you go HMMMM!

Recognising the importance of the A Vector Potential:
The A Vector Potential is significant to understanding Magnetisium. We may or may not be looking at an entire picture of Magnetisium but this is instrumental and experiment supports this important concept.

Richard Feynman:
In the very famous "The Feynman Lectures on Physics (3 Volume Set)" by the famous Richard Feynman, he dedicated an entire lecture and chapter, (Chapter 15 - Vector Potential), to the Vector Potential. Richard Feynman made the Vector Potential standard Science, showing it's importance in Math and explaining where it lay with its brother the component Phi. Listen to the Audio Lecture: Click Here

Dynamic Magnetic Field (B):
An inductor, or solenoid, will take time to charge and reach its maximum magnetic field potential for a given input. The Time Constant is t = L/R. It takes 5 time constants to charge an Inductor to 99.5% of its total capacity. At this point, any input you put into your inductor is not stored in the form of a Magnetic Field, your input just supports the Magnetic Field and is classed as an IR loss, typically lost in the form of heat.

Where: N = North Pole. S = South Pole. A= A Vector Potential.

Please Note: A Permanent Magnet has a Static A Vector Potential, Not Drawn in the above diagram.

The above illustration shows the difference between a static Permanent Magnet and the dynamic charging of an inductor. The reverse is true when the Inductor Discharges.

The Sine of the A Vector Potential:
The sine, or direction of the curl, of the A Vector Potential does not change unless the Magnetic Field Changes Sine or direction. Its classical Right Hand Rule, that applies to the configuration you are working with.
The A Vector Potential is Electrical in Nature:
Richard Feynman has shows in his lectures that this is true, the A Vector Potential is the Magnetic Fields Electrical Component if one were to think of it this way. Tom Bearden has described two types of the A Vector Potential, the known Mathematical Term for the equivalence of B to A is:

EQ: 1

Tom Bearden explains the Time Rate of Change of the A Vector Potential:

EQ: 2

Tom Bearden may well be describing the leading edge of the A Vector Potential as it is dynamically moving. The above leads one to think that the Electric Field surrounds each Magnetic Flux line out in space at the same time that exhibits the same Curl characteristics as we have also seen above.
What is above is as is below:

I personally think we have been looking at this all wrong and this information is down right interesting.

I love this guy  http://www.hyiq.org/Research/Details?Name=A%20Vector%20Potential
see web site for equations.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 05:44:23 PM
 I can prove my points just by asking you if you agree or disagree with some images and statements. Then in essence you will be answering your own questions.
  Like: do you agree with this image as being a electromagnet and the method by which it works as described by every text book you will ever find?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:03:15 PM
Would agree or disagree that if I were to place a section of core made from the same material as the magnet core onto the end of the magnet that the magnetic field would be attracted to the additional piece of core and flux lines would go through the extra piece and out of the end of it causing it to stick to the magnet which really only supports the idea that the lines of force have or are traveling through the extra piece making it part of the magnetic circuit there by making it stick together. Agree or not?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 29, 2014, 06:08:46 PM
I can prove my points just by asking you if you agree or disagree with some images and statements. Then in essence you will be answering your own questions.
  Like: do you agree with this image as being a electromagnet and the method by which it works as described by every text book you will ever find?

Doug, I think I do! I wanted to ask if you see the application of the electromagnet shown in your figure to the transformer shown in the Cook's patent. One interesting thing is that today's closed iron core transformers induce the voltages in one part of the secondary winding only. But the straight iron core electromagnet shown can induce a voltage in all parts (360 degrees) of the turns wound on top of it.

I also wanted to clarify that I am not saying that what Hanon is proposing will not work. As a matter of fact I agree that N-N or S-S could work. Though, less efficient than the one shown by Figuera's patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:20:27 PM
 If I had two electromagnets one on either side of the extra piece of core and the magnets were turn on and off successively the fields from those electromagnets would traverse the extra piece of core in the middle. Agree or not?

  If the arrangement was the from the left coil north to south and the right coil north to south the same way and they were turned on and off successively  the field going through the extra piece of core would always see the same field orientation. The left side of the extra piece would be south and the right side would be north. So there would no change in the extra piece of core as one magnet is going on the other is going off and so on always keeping the one in the middle the same. Agree or not?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:22:12 PM
 I will show this is a one trick pony that changes how you see everything.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:38:31 PM
 The single magnet is made of a number of turns around a core. The field is around the wire which is transferred to the core. The center of the field inside the coil is stronger then on the outside.Why? I strongly suggest you learn how to do what a child does best, asking why.
  It is contained against itself. Why? because it has two motions against a frame of reference. The spin around the wire and the direction the current is traveling from one end of the core to the other. How do you know? Go flush your toilet and you tell me what you observe.
   The magnet is made of turns over a core and the number of turns gives the current more times to circle the core effecting more domains ,but the longer the wire the more it resists the current and the lower the current becomes that can pass through the turns of wire.Otherwise looked at as consuming less current. Agree or not?
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:47:51 PM
Conversely a stronger magnet requires a stronger current travels around the core more times which is like saying it needs to be both hot and cold at the same time.
  So lets dissect it.
 A coil with a core of a 1000 turns supplied with 100 volts at 10 amps. Produces a field of strength equal to A.
 The total of A is equal to the current going round the coil on the core. Lets dissect it some more. How is the 100volts distributed through the coil on the core where it converts the random domains into a direction which makes the magnet?
  100 volts divided into 1000 turns and the magic number is? .1 volts per turn.
 agree or not?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 29, 2014, 06:51:17 PM
The single magnet is made of a number of turns around a core. The field is around the wire which is transferred to the core. The center of the field inside the coil is stronger then on the outside.Why? I strongly suggest you learn how to do what a child does best, asking why.
  It is contained against itself. Why? because it has two motions against a frame of reference. The spin around the wire and the direction the current is traveling from one end of the core to the other. How do you know? Go flush your toilet and you tell me what you observe.
   The magnet is made of turns over a core and the number of turns gives the current more times to circle the core effecting more domains ,but the longer the wire the more it resists the current and the lower the current becomes that can pass through the turns of wire.Otherwise looked at as consuming less current. Agree or not?
   

I am not sure I follow you. But you are right, I never thought of comparing an electromagnet with my toilet. I will pay a much closer attention to my toilet the next time I flush it.  :o

Are you referring to a type of vector curl operation?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:55:45 PM
Yes but that is not the important part. It will eventually come together.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:57:00 PM
It would be helpful if you actually state agree or not.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 06:58:38 PM
Do you agree that the sum of the current is divided between the number of turns of a coil on a core?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 07:00:23 PM
Would agree that sum of the current in each turn is less the total current being placed into the coil as a whole?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 07:02:45 PM
my patience is imaginary ,you imagine I have some while I imagine it will run it shortly
quick short answers. I have stuff to do.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 07:06:22 PM
Would you agree that if I had 5 small magnets and each magnet could lift one ounce and placed them end to end to end that they will be able to lift five times as much?
 The answer is no agree or not? Why?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 29, 2014, 07:06:27 PM
It would be helpful if you actually state agree or not.

Doug, I am not sure what to agree or disagree. But, please, go ahead and complete your explanation. It may be easier for me to understand it before I take a time off from this forum.

I feel that I have nothing more to contribute at this time and would like to go into the construction part without interruptions from any kind. posting takes a big chunk out of my time.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 08:18:35 PM
The trick is not a trick at all. Your magnet regardless of what form it takes only works one way. Current travels around making a field around the wire making the core magnetic. There is only an advantage to how you make the current travel around.
  There is but very little current contained in each turn. .1 volts at .01 amps. Treat each turn as its own magnet. Power each turn or group with it's own connection to the supply and a common ground for all the groups.Tuning is in the timing of each group as it comes on or off within a single magnet the supply is very small that is needed. It's easy to over power it.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 08:57:20 PM
If you have a core and a winding with a know output ,that is to say it was used for something ells.Say a welder or microwave oven. you have the mains coil which is a number of turns that can handle a number of amps in.It should have no problem giving that back as an output coil. The measure of that coil in terms of turns will have a value per turn in its function with an alternating current coil.
 in order to power the coil to its max flux linkage break down the current going to each turn and half that to divide it between two inducers that will be powering it the other way. the reason it does not normally work is because your not paying attention the current per turn in the inducers. You cant use the inducer as a single coil end to end. It has to be made up of a group of windings that are then grouped into a complete coil. So you can get a small amount of power to run the little groups in one inducer which collectively equal half the cycle of the Y coil. Then when you connect to the output and rectify it it will have enough power to run the little groups so they can work together to make the same amount flux as the whole inducer coil would have if you ran it end to end with a higher potential. The other option is the commutator which is harder to me but the com I posted before has four brushes. Its a simplified version. Between the brushes is a small wire of high resistance. The resistance is reduced as more brushes come in contact with the same segment more current can get to the magnet.The wire to the magnet off the last brush or first brush in a set has to able to handle all the current from the brushes in that set in total. The image shows two brushes each set but you can use as many as you feel like fooling with. the use of three segments to the commutator is a very curious and dubious design. pay attention the resulting wave form it would create in a nn or ss situated magnet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 09:14:16 PM
 The curve of induction in the wave form image sliced up into time may as well be the order of the groups of windings as they turn on and off or incline and decline. The speed is screaming. Each slice of time being a slice of a cycle that happens 50 or 60 times a second. each group of windings with in the total coil controlled to come on or off just like that but at a voltage and amperage equal only to the turns equivalent according to the grouping of turns. Not a lot of power being used at all to make the same effect as wastefully pumping power against the wire resistance of the entire coil and the reluctance of the core.
 Now do you still think it is hard? Do ya want to argue some point in particular?
 Go back and read your text books and what ever.Not only do they not lie sometimes they hint around to it. Teslas patent A better coil for electromagnets. Bet your gonna look at that a little bit different now.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 09:37:35 PM
Do you have a head ache yet? Silvanus and Thompson already wrote up the experiments which support all this in 1891. From then on it just got more diluted to gear it toward an economic engine to produce a lot of money for the few who had the means to construct machines that could be metered so they could charge for it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 09:47:50 PM
 This controller is on the border of being both bat shit crazy and pure genius.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2014, 11:45:56 PM
The crickets are chirping in the silence.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 30, 2014, 12:54:30 AM
Doug,

I am trying to understand this, are you saying that every turn of the primary coil should be feed independently? Do you have/or are/ working on a proto-type on this theory?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on November 30, 2014, 01:04:22 AM
The crickets are chirping in the silence.


You got me on this one, Doug.


I read it couple of times but still I was not able to get your message or what connection you are trying to make with whatever was being discussed before. I am not as smart as you. Thank you anyway for the effort!


I WANT TO THANKS ALL THE PEOPLE OF THIS FORUM FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS. NOW I WILL GO INTO RETIREMENT. I AM OVERDUE FOR RETIREMENT FOR THE LAST THREE MONTHS. IF I COMPLETE MY TEST WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, I WILL POST A LINK TO THE RESULTS. THANKS AND GOOD LUCK!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick~ on November 30, 2014, 01:50:05 AM

..........IF I COMPLETE MY TEST WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, I WILL POST A LINK TO THE RESULTS. THANKS AND GOOD LUCK!

Excuse my ignorance, what model did you target or are you targeting. I recall you mentioned a few when I read this entire thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 30, 2014, 06:08:44 AM
Maverick
  It would not be practical to power each turn separately even if if you could, you can power groups of turns with taps. The long coil can be broken up along it's resistance or length. the current need only be the same per turn with the same number of turns added together for the same length of coil to obtain the quantity of field equal to a long coil with lots of turns and lots of current.The turns are still there, the flux is still there but the input power is far less. Same way with using a commutator and multiple brushes to function as a controllable resistance. look at the number of segments marked out on the figurea's commutator. They start at one and run around to 16 or 17 but there is no place where it shows a segment connected to the center shaft just a pos sign near the center shaft. The circle is drawn with straight lines across the circle. It was normally assumed those lines some how connected the segments but it doesnt make sense because a lot of them are not connected to anything except the one opposite it in the circle if you think the lines connect them together. Look at the circle again, does it not look like a disk or wheel made from flat pieces of material stuck together and cut into a circle with a shaft for it to be spun on? So how would one turn that into a variable resister? You make it into a revolving rheostat or use a rheostat  and revolve the brushes around it. Using a single conductor zig zag or serpentine around the circumference with only one point of contact to the supply on one end of the wire. The block with the coiled resisters enables him to adjust the amount of current going to the inducers so he can even out the strength of the current in the two coils so they will be even when they are in action against each other. One of the tests is the force pushing the magnets apart needs to be equal between the two inducers when they are supplied with equal current at the same time. there wont be any induction in the Y coil when you null out the fields but there will be physical repulsion which can be measured using on old fashion ballistics rig to make the adjustments. Also described in some of the old books as to how to build one.
  I have a lot of resentment for prototypes.Is it easier for you to build tiny versions of something before you build the full size one? That seems very wasteful to me both in material and time. Not everything scales up evenly when your dealing with materials that deal with stress. Its more important you try to find the flaws in what I presented. Then after that is exhausted you can start thinking about the math to determine the materials required to build something of use.Of course you can always wing it if you like to do things that way also. I have no more use for a prototype then I have for a matchbox car on the hood of my actual car.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 30, 2014, 06:40:15 AM
Maverick you should first determine who's theory it is before you assign it to me.


 Last night I found the paper that someone ells wrote a theses on how people learn. In it was how this theory was tested by Joseph Henry first who lived from 1797 to 1878 on how to improve the effects of electromagnet without increasing the length of wire or the current. The writer repeated the experiments to the best of their abilities even going so far as to locate the iron for the magnet from Albany N.Y. at a pig iron factory which had since become a nail and copper sheet factor. It provided enough history to further research the subject. The information was then compared against all other information including the works of all the writers who wrote technical manuals which have been mentioned from time to time in the this thread plus a variety of patents and books I keep in my files.
  I only needed two simple experiments to verify it ,one using a volt meter the other using a ballistic rig to test field strength acting on a permanent magnet with a normally wound magnet and the modified version.  I reused the coils in the final device after modifying one more coil to complete the two required by the patent.
   Does that answer your question.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 30, 2014, 04:46:01 PM
Doug,

As far as I have understood, you are proposing a method to increase the efficiency to excite the electromagnets without needing the resistors array (and then saving the heat dissipated in those). Am I right?

Are your proposing an electromagnet composed of several independent coils that you are firing sequentially to increase the magnetic field?

In that case you are increasing the efficiency of the input current? It is an optimization. I suppose that Figuera just used the resistors.

-----

Another subject: In this page, there is a design, by a person named Ignacio, with the induced coil perpendiculary to the electromagnets. Just for your consideration. We should test every possibility.

http://www.electricidadbasica.net/energias-renovables.htm (http://www.electricidadbasica.net/energias-renovables.htm)


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on November 30, 2014, 05:01:29 PM
Maverick you should first determine who's theory it is before you assign it to me.


 Last night I found the paper that someone ells wrote a theses on how people learn. In it was how this theory was tested by Joseph Henry first who lived from 1797 to 1878 on how to improve the effects of electromagnet without increasing the length of wire or the current. The writer repeated the experiments to the best of their abilities even going so far as to locate the iron for the magnet from Albany N.Y. at a pig iron factory which had since become a nail and copper sheet factor. It provided enough history to further research the subject. The information was then compared against all other information including the works of all the writers who wrote technical manuals which have been mentioned from time to time in the this thread plus a variety of patents and books I keep in my files.
  I only needed two simple experiments to verify it ,one using a volt meter the other using a ballistic rig to test field strength acting on a permanent magnet with a normally wound magnet and the modified version.  I reused the coils in the final device after modifying one more coil to complete the two required by the patent.
   Does that answer your question.

Hi Doug1,

Thank you for your more objective point of view regarding this issue.
The most important thing in my opinion about figuera patent, is to realize that there are more efficient ways to generate current.
The figuera circuit though ingenious, is not 100% efficient :) Even using this method! Still always had needed a "buffer" to keep the circuit operation can not be considered a overunity device in my opinion.
However we consider that the method shown by figuera, will be able to lead us to other perspectives on how to improve the efficiency of a generator circuit.

In my opinion this patent, in that it is so simplified compared to other patents that use the same technology, facilitates the understanding of the functioning of this concept.
  The method shown here was also described by Tesla, Smith and many others, there may be some differences fine, but always with the same principle.
Above all I am sure it was not time lost everything that was discussed on the subject.

thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 30, 2014, 08:14:04 PM

In my opinion this patent, in that it is so simplified compared to other patents that use the same technology, facilitates the understanding of the functioning of this concept.
  The method shown here was also described by Tesla, Smith and many others, there may be some differences fine, but always with the same principle.

thanks

Nelson,

In your opinion, which is the principle underlining in this patent?

Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 01, 2014, 07:02:18 AM
Hanon

 "As far as I have understood, you are proposing a method to increase the efficiency to excite the electromagnets without needing the resistors array (and then saving the heat dissipated in those). Am I right?

   The resister array doesnt block off the current in the same way a resister would in a normal circuit. It directs it to one or the other inducer but always it has someplace to go with little resistance. The internal resistance of a battery if that is what is used to start it depending on design still has to follow the rule of the device having slightly more resistance then the source. The method I described as the one I prefer. Uses the length of winding in total broken into groups to act the same way as the resister array but the commutator is still required as  it controls the timing of the brush sets connected to the taps of the coil groups. Which works the same as the resistance being placed between multiple brushes.

Are your proposing an electromagnet composed of several independent coils that you are firing sequentially to increase the magnetic field?

   Sort of ,Im not sure on your meaning of sequentially. If there are 7 layers of turns with ten turns per layer and each layer has a tap but it made up of a single conductor through out. Each tap would come on in order until all of them were on and then go off in the opposite order one at a time. If that is what you are saying then yes. The actual effect is inverse but from the observers point of view it will look like it happened the other way.The observer being the Y coil. Imagine your source is 4 volts again but your using a coil built to be used with a 120 volts ac. 4 volts will produce a very week magnetic field across the entire length of wire used for the coil. the taps shorten the length of the wire increasing the voltage per turn without increasing the voltage source.On the other hand I can combine taps and change the voltage to any multiple of the value within the groups the same as a multi voltage transformer uses it's output taps.

In that case you are increasing the efficiency of the input current? It is an optimization. I suppose that Figuera just used the resistors."

 He did not limit himself to the resisters at all he used it to describe the principle of operation for ease of comprehension. I can only imagine what he would be saying today watching this. Im sure it would be colorful. I would not call it an optimization exactly. The same amount of current has to traverse each turn of the coil as would have if the coil was powered from its ends like normal. The difference is that by subdividing the coil so a lower voltage can be used to get the same effect through out your left with options not otherwise possible. The same goes for the mutli brush method with the resistance placed between the brushes.
 Think about now a little bit of complexity.If you have a portion of output being used to run the device it will be at the voltage it is designed to put out say at 120volt ac but at maybe 1 amp(the portion). You have to figure out how to regulate or limit the portion to that amount without wasting a lot of power in the process or ending up with some unstable form of regulation.
  Like everything ells there a number of ways to do it.
  Some of the early brush designs used layered brushes, alternating between insulating layer and conductive layers in a single brush. Some books state it was purely for strength and longevity but I personally doubt that was the only reason taking into consideration the materials used. There is no way to stress enough that the total real resistances in the device have to be less then the total resistance in the load placed on it at any given instance of time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on December 01, 2014, 04:59:30 PM
Doug1,

What you are saying is described in just about every old book I have on dynamos. “If 200 ampere turns are required to produce the required magnetic effect in the iron, then it matters not whether there is one turn of wire carrying 200 amps or 200 turns of wire carrying one amp. The effect is the same.”

I'm speechless.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 01, 2014, 07:19:45 PM
Cadman

 Imagine that.


  Sorry, you stepped into it.lol
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on December 01, 2014, 08:06:10 PM
Nelson,

In your opinion, which is the principle underlining in this patent?

Thanks
Hi Hanon, forget for the later response ,
The principle in my opinion is generate currents without mechanical motion. You eliminate friction , and lenz law with this type of configuration, so the generation of currents will be improved without the same losses of a conventional alternator. At this point we have a improvement right ?
Now about the NN or SS configuration in the coils .Seems that repulsion of poles of North /North or South/ South can be not totally but 90% canceled ( I say by my observations)  .
This effect will alternate  ever 180 degrees in one side of the coils N and and in the other 180 degrees the other side of coils S by the commutator , increasing the current in one part of the coils and decrease in the other part of coils generate the virtual motion needed to induce a  current in coils Y.
Figuera use a combination of resistors in commutator to vary the current in coils right? So we can improve their system with a lc tank system discharging in the coils. ;)
You should collect the magnetic collapse of the coils to fill the caps in lc tank circuit.


 

make the same thing but much more efficiently that Figuera did. 
 Note that Figuera say that coils can be replaced by a permanent magnets. In my point of view only one part of the coils can be replace by the permanent magnetic but i'm study this subject in present moment and a don't want to talk about this .
Tesla present us with a similar circuit  present in patent US381970. If  you know this patent you will find much similar concepts in relation at CW/CWW effects and the motion without mechanical movement.

Hanon what i want to say is that patent is the simplest way to learn this concept , unlike other  patents produced by other inventors and more complicated.
I think people in generally only want to see objective things that can be explained by the conventional laws not for something  that there is no explanation and people cant control.
But these people think they control anything?

 Thanks

   
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 01, 2014, 08:26:52 PM
Question????????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 01, 2014, 08:40:47 PM
Here is a better perspective of the circular thing I refer to as the commutator and of the version which uses split brushes. Maybe it will help you to wrap your head around it easier.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 01, 2014, 09:40:24 PM
 Now what of this crazy thing. How could you utilize it as it is drawn?

 It may be assumed that all these lines connected the two together actually exist all at the same time. Not so, the represent positions to connect to that move current a little more or a little less to either the N coil or the S coil. Why ever would you want to do that?
  Could it be that if you were drawing a portion from the alternating current and converting it to direct that in that case you will unbalance the wave form of the alternating current?
   If that is the case, which it is.That should lead to you to figure out how he is rectifying the output so as to limit the alternating current being used to excite the inducers that came off the output before it enters at the same inputs as did the battery which started it. Another clue is the current from the battery will be equal to the current from the part or method to rectify the output.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 01, 2014, 10:21:31 PM
simil
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 01, 2014, 11:04:32 PM
As
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 02, 2014, 04:26:23 AM
Ignacio

 How do you adjust the current going to the inducers to re balance or compinsate for the rectified feed being used to replace the battery as a source? Both the working load and the power back in dc are off the output.

  You picture of the truck with the magnet pulling itself? How much $$$ do you want to spend to make one?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 02, 2014, 09:14:51 PM
Ignacio

 How do you adjust the current going to the inducers to re balance or compinsate for the rectified feed being used to replace the battery as a source? Both the working load and the power back in dc are off the output.

  You picture of the truck with the magnet pulling itself? How much $$$ do you want to spend to make one?

¿Cómo rectificas la corriente de alimentación en los alternadores de los coches?
Estas imágenes me gustan. Je je  je

How can you rectify feed stream the  alternators in cars?
These images I like. Heh je je je
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 02, 2014, 11:18:57 PM
Yes but the 6 diodes in an automotive alternator waste a lot to heat thats why the diodes are mounted to heat sinks and the alternator has a fan on the front. Even with that if the regulator over powers the field winding the diodes will cook and fail.

  I like your drawing to.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 03, 2014, 12:07:05 AM
I have found a reference to the induced coil orientation in the Buforn´s patent No. 47706 (year 1910), the first of the 5 patents that Buforn filed copying Figuera´s 1908 patent. It is the only reference to the induced coil placement I could find in those patents.


"Our invention is also based on that other reasoning "If several spirals or loops are placed within a magnetic field in the plane of the magnetic meridian, from the time they start to rotate a current with weak voltage will appear, and those voltages will add up when the loops are placed one after the other."

Note that Buforn is referering to "the plane of the magnetic meridian". I suppose that the meridian is the line which joins both poles (as the geographical meridians join the Earth Poles).

It seems to suggest that the induce coil is placed perpendiculary to the electromagnets.

Could it be possible? What do you think of this?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 03, 2014, 03:49:44 AM
Hanon,
 very good detective work i might add. it seems that Mr Buforn spills the beans more than we knew.
it also states that they do not need to be separated in any way like a III situation. the flux will transfer or rather be attracted to the iron core next to it. maybe they are just straight cores placed next to each other and the week sum of all cores add up to the total that one needs for his or her application .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 03, 2014, 04:10:55 AM
Hanon,

Look at this for some info.
Not just earths field but any magnetic field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 03, 2014, 05:21:30 AM
Yes but the 6 diodes in an automotive alternator waste a lot to heat thats why the diodes are mounted to heat sinks and the alternator has a fan on the front. Even with that if the regulator over powers the field winding the diodes will cook and fail.

  I like your drawing to.

Ese problema lo resolvieron Tesla, Clemente F., etc. Hace más de 100 años, sin transistores, triac, diac ni diodos,
Mucho material quemado en mi casa, je je. Soy torpe y chapuzas

This problem it did resolved Tesla, F. Clemente, etc. Does over 100 years without transistors, triac, diac or diodes,
Much material burnt in my house je je,  I'm very clumsy and Tinker
Hasta pronto, certeza certeza certeza fe alegria y paz
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 03, 2014, 12:13:49 PM
Ignacio
 Look at how Tesla converts ac to dc without diodes, he has used motors but he also uses some designs that use a battery and an electromagnet and one of them is pair of transformers. The need for balance in the current is absolute from the ac input in order for the method to work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 03, 2014, 08:05:41 PM
And so it remains loaded the other wire, taking into account the ohm of electromagnets game, for it be feed. if the N = 4 ohm, R = 32 ohm, = for S
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 07, 2014, 02:27:43 PM
sigo con preguntas tontas, ¿tiene algo que ver el rozamiento electromagnético?
I'm with stupid questions, do you have anything to do with the electromagnetic friction?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 08, 2014, 11:01:50 PM
Have anyone read the patent US3879622 by John W. Ecklin?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 09, 2014, 12:02:12 PM
Hanon

 No I cant say I have seen that one. The date on the patent was for 1974. That wasn't that long ago. The only problem I would see right off the bat is joule heating of the shields as they spin past between the perm magnets. Maybe that is lower in his configuration of NN facing poles, not sure. Permanent magnets might become demagnetized after a while using them that way also but it is interesting non the less. If you search Eklin on google and switch to images there are a lot of images so it has been tried a number of times. I dont have time this morning but I would be interested to see the patents he cited in the list of citations on his patent. Sometimes that method of researching yields more then the patent in question.
  Are you still trying to find other situations of people using NN SS in other devices?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on December 09, 2014, 07:14:00 PM
Ran across this from 1842. It looks like Hanon may be onto something with NN or SS after all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on December 09, 2014, 10:28:39 PM
Back on 11-25 Bajac made a post about about a patent dispute between Gaulard, Gibbs, and Ferranti.  http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg424526/#msg424526

I did a lot of google searching that day for the transformer of Gaulard and Gibbs and found a photo of the device http://catalogue.museogalileo.it/object/GaulardGibbsSecondaryGenerator.html
I also found and bookmarked a patent that described the construction of this transformer or secondary generator. It was basically a stack of copper rings with a split from the center hole to the outside edge, separated by insulation.

Later, I read an article on the worlds most powerful electromagnet and noticed it was built exactly like the Gaulard and Gibbs device (with the addition of cooling slots and silver plating). They call it a Bitter electromagnet now.
Today I went to look up the Gaulard and Gibbs patent bookmark and it is gone. I checked my history for the google searches that led me to the patent and they are all gone too, no trace of them.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 11, 2014, 07:57:57 PM
Cadman,

Try this,
I can't figure out how to get a hyperlink?

Oh well

http://www.google.com/patents/US316354
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 12, 2014, 12:05:14 PM
Cadman

 Florida state university hosts one of the biggest platter magnets 45 T. I do not remember exactly what TV program it was that aired a segment on it "How it's made" or Discovery. It is worth watching just to watch the guy who assembles the plates. Takes about 6 months to do just one layer. The really big one is made of 5 layers of magnets with the last outer one around 4 or 5 ft diameter. No recording devices can survive being in the building when the largest one is fired up,lots of restrictions for safety reasons. Uses as much power as the entire town around it uses.I think they ended up building their own power plant to run the 45T. The cooling system is the bulk of the space taken up in the building to run it. The smaller versions where used to float frogs and other objects you may have seen pictures or videos of one time or another. I dont think your aiming for one of these monsters but they do give up a few construction details in the documentary. If you want to see it or use it you have to get on a list just to make an appointment and it's expensive. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 12, 2014, 08:43:37 PM
Hace algún tiempo alguien menciono que querría decir CF, con la (y), y ahora con el rozamiento electromagnético, se me ocurre que con dos (doble T) una bobinada en un sentido y la otra en el otro, se podría aumentar o disminuir el rozamiento, y el N y S seria más efectivo. Solo es una idea.
Creo que con las medidas que di en su día, añadí que se consultara a alguien que trabajara en motores o bobinados.
Perenquen me dice que los estoy liando demasiado, que son demasiados datos sueltos. Disculpen.

Some time someone mentioned that would mean CF, with the (y), and now with the electromagnetic friction occurs to me that two (double T) a coiled in one direction and the other in the other, could increase or decrease ago friction, and the N and S would be more effective. It's just an idea.
I believe that the measures I gave at the time, added that consult someone working on motors or windings.
Canary Island wall gecko tells me that I'm messing too, that are too loose data. Sorry.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 13, 2014, 08:38:10 PM
I need all of your help Please. The volts are not moving back and forth across the resister. I noted on the paper what the readings where, hope its not to blurry. Thank You for your help in the past. I didn't burn them & I have the BDX53C transistors hooked up correctly this time. The 555 area has 7 volts and the two 4017BCP's have near 12 volts as well as the 4081B. I didn't install the 10,000uf, 25V Capacitor as Anonymous didn't have it installed on his circuit.
Thanks Again, Hope you all do well.
AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 14, 2014, 07:23:29 PM
A very important read

GUIDE TO BUCKING COILS,     in hyiq.org.

I think that Figuera also used this principle.

Direct link to pdf file:  http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/Guidelines%20to%20Bucking%20Coils.pdf (http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/Guidelines%20to%20Bucking%20Coils.pdf)

Link to webpage:  http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2030-11-14 (http://www.hyiq.org/Updates/Update?Name=Update%2030-11-14)

I attach here the current version of this document. Please have a look to this info!!

I have looked for synonyms of "buck":  to oppose, resist, combat, go against, withstand, dispute, fight

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 14, 2014, 09:52:24 PM
hanon

Thank You. This is good stuff.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 14, 2014, 11:46:29 PM
Avengers,

I think you are referring in one of your previous post to the circuit included in Patrick Kelly book. I can only recommend you to check step by step each part with an oscilloscope. If not you can not detect if your circuit is fine or if it has a problem in any part (555, CD4017,...). Apart from that, it is imposible to guess which your problem is. I don´t have an oscilloscope and I feel really limited to test any kind of electronic circuit.

From your pictures I have seen you are testing a kind of configuration as the one included in Patrick Kelly book. I recommed you to test a different setup with all coils aligned:  ---- ----  ----

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 15, 2014, 02:08:17 PM
Avenger

  The two recycled coils on the outside you have marked with N and S  cw. May be the source of your own confusion. If you had taken each coil and placed them in the same orientation and supplied them with a couple volts one at a time and used a compass to mark the pole direction  on the sides of the coils and marked the leads + and - so you would have reference to both the pole directions and the corresponding connections to cause that pole direction.
  The way it is now it looks like it would cut out the center output coil all together by locking the two fields together into a single field around the outside of the former. Im not sure if just changing the wire connections of one winding would flip the poles without having to flip the coil so the leads are facing the inside leg facing down. It's hard to see how the coils are wound with regard to the layers of the coil.
 I cant speak at all for your pc board ,I like analog and stay clear of Ic's at all costs because I cant make those myself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 15, 2014, 02:43:22 PM
A user in the spanish forum uploaded what, I think, is the better commutator design so far. This design uses a commutator (collector) from an old motor or generator and two static brushes touching this collector in opposite sides, one going to each serie of electromagnets. Then a rotary cylinder contains 8 resistors to emulate the Figuera´s 1908 design.

I post here this design because it could be useful for everyone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 15, 2014, 02:55:07 PM
Investigating around bucking coils, following the clue given in hyiq.org,  I have found some interesting similarities between many overunity devices:

http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm (http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm)

Maybe we should add to this list the Figuera generator
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 15, 2014, 08:48:35 PM
hanon


The only problem is that Figuera primary is made from two series of coils while secondary are single series (or rather connected in parallel).
Please downsize pictures
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on December 16, 2014, 11:57:38 AM
Investigating around bucking coils, following the clue given in hyiq.org,  I have found some interesting similarities between many overunity devices:

http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm (http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm)

Maybe we should add to this list the Figuera generator

Hello Hanon,
as already had occasion to say in another post,
the poles really have to be opposed North North, and thankfully you realized that this configuration is present in most circuits claiming excess energy production.
The patent Figuera we discuss here is not even 100% efficient however is of extreme importance the concept that explains figuera!
I also think that few people understand how to use the capture coil.

In my video showed that with only one turn, it was possible to capture bifilar 2Amp the generating coil, which means that the generator coil induces in each turn of a coil bibifilar 2Amp.
therefore if would add two independent loops  in parallel these same loops would capture 4A .
It is obvious that the coils being in parallel with resistance not risen,
what Figuera tells us is that we can put several independent coils and sum
the product of the catch coils.

bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 17, 2014, 01:04:49 AM
Hello Hanon,
as already had occasion to say in another post,
the poles really have to be opposed North North, and thankfully you realized that this configuration is present in most circuits claiming excess energy production.
The patent Figuera we discuss here is not even 100% efficient however is of extreme importance the concept that explains figuera!
I also think that few people understand how to use the capture coil.

In my video showed that with only one turn, it was possible to capture bifilar 2Amp the generating coil, which means that the generator coil induces in each turn of a coil bibifilar 2Amp.
therefore if would add two independent loops  in parallel these same loops would capture 4A .
It is obvious that the coils being in parallel with resistance not risen,
what Figuera tells us is that we can put several independent coils and sum
the product of the catch coils.

bye

Hi Nelson,

I suppose that you are referring to this video that you uploaded some weeks ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI)

Please could you describe in some detail the test you did in that video in order we could replicate your test. I can see that you used a stator from an old motor.

I suppose that you wired the coils to be facing North-North and then you placed a bifilar coil (with one turn) in the middle. Could you tell us some more data? What input pulsed DC current did you use? Input:V=12 Volts, I=0.55 Amps, right ?
I think you pulsed the input current, am I right?, What frequency of pulses did you use? What are those capacitors for? (sorry if I am asking any silly question)

What happen if you do not use a bifilar coil and you just use a single coil? Did you have to move the induced coil in order to find the best place to collect that energy? What is the meaning of the measure of 44 Amps when you clipped the iron core? (I don´t understand this part)

Thanks in advance. I really appreaciate your help and your wise tests !! Thanks


Avenger: I have watched carefully your photos. What value of the 8 resistors are you using? Maybe your are using a very high value in those resistors. As a rough guess: if each electromagnet have 3-4 ohms of resistance then you can use 8 resistor each with 3-4 ohms
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 17, 2014, 02:55:43 PM
hanon,

After reading the "bucking."
I think I needed to wind one half of the two opposing coils opposite to each other?
The center coil does not matter?

Has anyone done this?

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on December 17, 2014, 05:50:44 PM
Hi Nelson,

I suppose that you are referring to this video that you uploaded some weeks ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI)

Please could you describe in some detail the test you did in that video in order we could replicate your test. I can see that you used a stator from an old motor.

I suppose that you wired the coils to be facing North-North and then you placed a bifilar coil (with one turn) in the middle. Could you tell us some more data? What input pulsed DC current did you use? Input:V=12 Volts, I=0.55 Amps, right ?
I think you pulsed the input current, am I right?, What frequency of pulses did you use? What are those capacitors for? (sorry if I am asking any silly question)

What happen if you do not use a bifilar coil and you just use a single coil? Did you have to move the induced coil in order to find the best place to collect that energy? What is the meaning of the measure of 44 Amps when you clipped the iron core? (I don´t understand this part)

Thanks in advance. I really appreaciate your help and your wise tests !! Thanks


Avenger: I have watched carefully your photos. What value of the 8 resistors are you using? Maybe your are using a very high value in those resistors. As a rough guess: if each electromagnet have 3-4 ohms of resistance then you can use 8 resistor each with 3-4 ohms

Hi Hanon,
I now my english is not the best but i will try to respond to your questions.

The two main coils in the stator are not bifilar.
One of this coil have more turns like other 1:3 ratio in relation to the other.
The connection of this coils to each other is CCW CCW.

The  bifilar white turn that is near the bigger coil is not connected to the circuit , is only to show how much current is possible capture by a single bifilar turn .
I show in the video the meter measure the core to show what figuera explain in their patent ; if we put a coil made my 100 single turns bifilar in parallel not in series, we will sum all the inducted power in ever single turns of the coil without drag the system . See the collector coils like a cell that you have to combine like a battery cell ;)

Yes is pulsed dc 12v battery and the frequency is about 1 to 3 khz but will depend of a mechanical relay :) so is not linear. But observe quite well
in this video the shape of shot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SALlSg972y8. What you see ?  the square wave generated by the relay carry a modulated wave pay atention  i know the video is not the best but i think you will see :)

The caps :)  How can you storage radiant energy ;) in a electrostatic container :)  .
Like i say before the figuera patent is only good to understand some principles . 

PS- in relation at using a resistor at commutation system is better replace the resistors by coils with the same value . Trust in my tip

I hope a can help with my contribute .
Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 18, 2014, 05:31:39 AM
I found the bad solder connection, I missed something somewhere, every component connection has 12volts, plus or minus half a volt, even the coils, but no electro magnetism. When I disconnect from the board and put + & - to one of the coils I get a strong electro magnet. All comments & suggestions & advise are always welcome.
Thank You, All
AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 18, 2014, 05:28:33 PM
 Avenger,
 
You are using as resistor 10 Kilohms and 5 Kilohms  ¼ watt. This is not good!!  You should design the resistor value to let circulate as high current as you could. For example a range between 0.3 A as minimun and 3 A maximum. Let suppose you have all the resistor with 5 ohms. The minimum resistance will be with zero resistor and just the resistance of each electromagnet: let say I = V/R = 12 volt/5ohm = 2.4A. The maximum resistance will be when crossing the 8 resistor + electromagnet resistance : 8*5 + 3 = 43 ohms. Then I = V/R = 12 volt/43 ohm = 0.28 A. The wattage of the resistor must be calculated as : P =I^2·R = 2.4^2·4 = 29 watts.
 
With your resistors with 10000 ohms, you will just get a current of I = V/R = 12/10000= 0.0012 A just with just one resistor!!. Not good. Please upgrade your resistor to something in the range of 3- 4 – 5 ohm
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 18, 2014, 10:49:15 PM
You guys are never going to get any where if you keep pissing with 12 volts. use 100 volts and buy a 225 watt 1000 ohm vitreous edge wound adjustable resistor with multi taps and get some real electromagnetism going on. use a variac and a bridge diode to get your 100 volts, then smooth it out with a cap. 12 volts---BA HUM BUG!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 18, 2014, 11:24:43 PM
Hi,

I have done a test pulsing a DC current with a car relay. I used three primary coils from MOTs. The DC input is 24 volt (got from 12 volt AC + voltage multiplier with some diodes and caps). The electromagnets are connected in series.

I think that this way to feed the current give very little current (just 0.23 A, the clamp measures 2.3 A because I put 10 loops in the clamp). Maybe it will be much better to feed from some batteries to obtain a higher current to excite the electromagnet.

I could test that when short-circuiting the output the input did not increase, even it decreased from 0.23A to 0.20A. I am not sure if my measures are right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlcJl4EM5uE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlcJl4EM5uE)

Please comment. Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 20, 2014, 02:04:50 PM
Hanon
   
   If you were able to count the number of turns on your inducer coils which you have to guess at now because they are preformed and baked. Then take your voltage and amperage and divide it by the number of turns. 12 vdc .2 amps by 130 turns(?). You could try to guess at it by taking the number of turns you can count up from center and across the top to get close.
  .092 vdc
  .0015 amps
   Per turn
   With so little current per turn the field around each turn of wire will be very week. The counter effect of induction onto the core may even be greater then the forward effect of making any reasonable amount of field in the core/s non existing.The best you could do with that layout is an unsafe transformer if you were to give it enough power to cause an effect.
    You dont seem to be thinking about cause and effect.
  If your mots were designed to run on 220 vac do the same math again and figure what the current per turn is supposed be when it is running from a proper ac source then cut that in half because your working with two coils N/S,only half the current is used in each coil when it is done as dc. This is just to give you a rough idea of what you will need per turn to cause an effect of making a magnetic field of enough strength. At 220vac it would be almost 2 volts per turn or a little less then 1 volt per turn if you pulsed it with dc.
 I dont know how many turns are in your coils you have to do the math yourself by examining the coils and figuring out how to estimate the number of turns.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 21, 2014, 03:32:39 PM

Bucking Coil 3D Visual - Opposing Magnetic Fields

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ucgue7eH_4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ucgue7eH_4)

by hyiq.org

http://makeagif.com/_TLO23 (http://makeagif.com/_TLO23)
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 21, 2014, 04:38:23 PM
Hanon
I cant listen to that automotron voice for an hour without killing myself sorry. I will quote Breaden "If it works it was right,if does not work it was not right."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 21, 2014, 09:30:25 PM
hanon
I'll start with ( six@4k & 0ne@2k ) that should get me in the ballpark & get the pc board working. I used my best guess from page#194, 3-26 of pjk e book.
Thank You, AVENGERS

marathonman
I would be glad to use more volts and purchase the vitreous edge, I need a sketch to go by, could you provide one , please.
I would just wind up smoking more components.
Thank You, AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 21, 2014, 10:55:24 PM
Doug1
Thank You for the compass direction. I have labeled the coils and the cores, when applying small volts to the PLUS and the poles do reverse when applying volts to the NEGATIVE of the coils.
I rewound the Y core with one wrap of #6 stranded (awg) 600 volt wire, just incase something large comes out.
AVENGERS

hanon
I have cut that small (secondary )wire that is attached to the transformer, thinking I can leave it and not bother removing it from the core, still makes a nice strong electromagnet. Separating the I from the mounting plate is tricky, I found the safe way to keep the individual plates from coming apart is to grind each weld down far enough, Tape the core together for insurance, and chisel the plate away from the I core a little at a time. The I core on the left in the pic, did come apart as I wasn't using tape yet. I taped it up and flattened it out the best I could and smoothed it out on an inverted belt sander.
The pc board will be easy to change values of components. no need to de-soldier.
Thank You all for your help

AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 22, 2014, 05:21:13 AM
hanon
I think I have it now? 6 each 4ohm, 10watt resistors and 1 each 2ohm 10watt resistor.
Thank You, AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 22, 2014, 12:19:18 PM
Hanon
  I finally looked over the bucking coil pdf.Glad it was the same info as the youtube automotron voice.Reading it works better for me any way. I dont agree with it entirely but I see it is the inverse method where the leverage is being used in the output coil and the input coil.
  I would think the figurea method having the ability to tune the two inducers with a balance input is a improvement since in the real world stuff happens. When the writer of the paper speaks of keeping the two primary fields separate is where I have a problem.If they are NN or ss they keep themselves separate. He also speaks of the fields growing and collapsing at the same time. I take that to mean he is placing them both in the power on position at the same time when he gets zero results. Im reasonably certain that was his mistake, I do not recall ever reading that both inducer coils were powered on equally in time. Just from the physical construction taken from the drawings it would be clearly offset N and S inducers being powered 180 degrees apart from each other.In themselves each inducer is a complete individual field. The induced coil or pick coil is stationary so the field is what has to move and since they are same poles facing each other the only way for the induced to see relative change in motion is for one of them to collapse enough for the other to expand over the induced coil and then for it to switch back and forth. That way the induced coil sees a relative change in the direction of movement even though the pole faces are the of the same sign. Another advantage in the pole orientation is that as one is falling off the force against it from the opposing magnet will add to the force of the other in its collapse by a small amount. Going back the paper and ref the floyd sweet gen I would have to guess it was not very good without a load. It was not meant to sit idle which may not be important to anyone at first but in practice things change in a hurry.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 23, 2014, 09:05:32 PM
Ever read the long diatribe on increasing the human condition by Tesla ,Leedskinin wrote one as well.
Convert it to math and apply that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 24, 2014, 07:43:08 AM
AVENGERS:

Here is a quick sketch i made for you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 24, 2014, 10:43:22 AM
Hi all,

I want to wish you a Merry Christmas and a new year, hopefully, full of energy.

Best regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on December 24, 2014, 06:20:08 PM
Hi Everyone
I have been reading the Fiquera papers and thought that I would try this circuit.
Ill keep you posted!
Gregg

Sequential LED flasher



Parts List:
    U1 = LM555 timer/oscillator
    U2 = 74LS190
    U3 = 74LS42
    U4 = 74LS76
    P1 = 10K, potentiometer
    R1 = 10K
R2-R11 = 220 ohm
    C1 = 100nF, ceramic
10 LED's, ultra-bright
Notes:
U1, the 555 timer/oscillator clocks a 74LS190 up/down counter (U2). The 74LS190 drives a BCD decoder driver 74LS42 (U3). The 74LS76 has as task to reverse the count on 0 to 9 to 0 and so on. P1 sets the up/down counter speed. R2 to R11 are all 220 ohm carbon-type resistors.
You may have noticed in the diagram it does not specify the 'LS' (Low Schottky) IC types but done for simplicity reasons. If your circuit is powered from a battery you definately should use the LS versions as the current draw is significantly less and so your battery pack will last longer. Same for the 555; use the cmos version to cut down on power.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AVENGERS on December 25, 2014, 01:44:36 AM
marathonman
 Thank You, AVENGERS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 26, 2014, 08:49:51 PM
These f-in banner adds are flat out annoying and i hope someone chokes on them..... anyways i just found the most ridiculously cheap PCB manufacture if any one is interested. it's so cheap i ordered all my big board designs...Here is the Link....enjoy!
http://www.pcbway.com/
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 27, 2014, 03:37:17 PM
 I wish all success using IC's but I personally dont see how it would function the same way as analog systems would. The manipulation required to create the magnetic field of equal strength from two different value inputs into the inducer coil is not explained nor obvious using ic's. The incremental increase and decline is there but it is a singular coil input. Imo it will not be able to run without the source to operate the ic's because the portion of the output to be used over again will be lower or lesser then the source regardless of how it is converted. An increase in voltage potential will come the expense of amperage and visa versa.
  Im not saying anything is impossible, just that I don't see it using ic's.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 31, 2014, 07:53:17 AM
JUST REMEMBER THE OUTPUT COILS CAN BE SERIES AND OR PARALLEL TO ATTAIN YOUR DESIRED VOLTAGE  (ISN'T THAT WHAT fIGUERAS SAID)
the first pic is food for thought from above.
the second pic is my two channel board  (very rugged little sucker)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 01, 2015, 05:05:52 PM
A very enlightening video:

Bucking coils:

http://youtu.be/Z-V1z2TdQJA (http://youtu.be/Z-V1z2TdQJA)

Happy new year!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick.~ on January 03, 2015, 08:30:15 PM
A very enlightening video:

Bucking coils:

http://youtu.be/Z-V1z2TdQJA (http://youtu.be/Z-V1z2TdQJA)

Happy new year!!

The hard part with excepting this setup is that people have been chasing FE for decades. Some of these people are extremely talented and educated in the art of electronics. What would be the odds that over the last 30+ years the hundred of thousands of people who experiment haven't tried this winding setup?

Are we really looking to maximize output of a coil? Wouldn't a coil itself be limited if it were the source of additional energy? If we say that coils only serve the purpose to extract energy then something else must harness the energy. I dont know the answer, but what I do know is that history has shown that people have tinkered with different coil combinations for the last 30+ years. All the results are basically the same......... nothing.

My avenue of approach is a bit different then others, I am suspecting that vibrations in the actual iron core play a large role. As a general example we know that if we add iron to an air core coil we magnify/strengthen the magnetic field. So what if the iron was conditioned more. If the magnetic field originates from the iron what if there was a way to precondition and/or explode the magnetic field outward and inward.

Like everyone else I'm still on "square one". I have taken the advice of people here and built a very flexible setup for experimenting. Having said all that ...... keep up the good work, I'm sure we will succeed. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 07, 2015, 05:12:56 PM
Hello everyone,

I like the set up of "Bucking Coils" and the intensity is raised and lowered by the resistor Transistor combination but my only problem i have is how to reverse the polarity of the coils. just raising and lowering the current will not give me AC in my output coils, the north stays north and the south stays south. if i can come up with a circuit that reverses the polarity i or we rather will have it made.
can someone please help!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 07, 2015, 05:45:12 PM
 Hi Marathonman,
 
The Figuera design did not reverse the polarity. It just changes the strength of the field but without reversing the polarity. In every moment the current has the same direction, therefore there is no reverse of the polarity of the poles. We do not need to reverse the polarity to induce a current. We just need to vary the strength of the magnetic field up and down to create induction.
 
 
About the bucking coils: it is just an idea to test. But just for the 1902 patent.  The 1908 patent creates two different fields which move the field back and forth. However, in the patent from 1902 Figuera stated that he just used intermittent current : if we align the poles N-S and one induced coil then we just got something similar to a normal transformer. If we align the same poles facing each other: N-N or S-S then , as both fields has the same strength during the pulses the fields are inducing in opposite directions. Therefore , as I have tested, the induced voltage is almost null with just one coil, because the induction in one part of the coil is contrary to the induction in the other part of the coil.
 
For me using bucking coil just may have some meaning in the case of the 1902 patent, using pulsed current to excite the electromagnets, and, with same poles facing each other. It is just to collect the induced current in each bucking coil. Later those coils should be connected to add their voltages. If the video from hyiq.org is right then both counter-magnetic field should get compensated in order to cancel the Lenz effect. It is just a matter of testing this configuration and see the results. Just in case it could be useful.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 07, 2015, 06:32:46 PM
Here is some very good reading...... MUST READ!. i don't remember if this was previously posted but here it is anyways.
Guidelines to Bucking Coils.Lenz’s Law Free Power Extraction.

http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/Guidelines%20to%20Bucking%20Coils.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 07, 2015, 06:40:46 PM
Hanon,
 Thank you for your information.
i see i made a mistake on my drawing. the coils are raised and lowered together not separate.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 07, 2015, 07:04:50 PM
So does that mean this picture is a possible set up or am i delirious.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 09, 2015, 01:20:52 AM
Marathon,

The bucking coils are refering to the induced coils, not to the electromagnets as your previous image shows. Electromagnets must be just oriented to give a certain polarity. Bucking coils are two partnered coils to collect the induced current.

 As I told before IMHO this possibility could only have some meaning in a pulsed device as the 1902 patent. The 1908 patent, which has a method to move the fields, do not requiere (IMHO) two bucking coils, but just one coil. Just my thought..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 10, 2015, 02:04:36 PM
Please see this video, and othersvideos, from this Youtube user. Very interesting. Its include an sketch of the configuration

http://youtu.be/jkCeTFQgeRI (http://youtu.be/jkCeTFQgeRI)

From the video:  "coil  blocks are serially and oppositely connected"



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DIHN on January 18, 2015, 03:01:21 PM
Hi all seekers of free energy!
My name is Dima.
I'm from Russia and don't speak English, sorry.
I recently learned about the patent "Klemente Figuera" beach and decided to try to repeat it.
Stumbled upon this forum, although I knew about it.
Please tell me, somebody has managed to achieve some results?

I currently managed to make a circuit of the generator: (in Attach)

Best Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on January 18, 2015, 08:49:29 PM
Hola Dihn, el circuito oscilador es solo pana conseguir una onda sinusoidal pura, para alimentar los electroimanes (corriente alterna de la red),  en la Pat. de 1902 son 4 juegos (2 electroimanes inductores, 1 recolector, cada juego) y en la Pat. de 1908 son 7 juegos.
Solo es imitar un generador, moviendo el campo magnético, alternando la electricidad de alimentación.

Hello Dinh, the oscillator circuit is only pana get a pure sine wave, to feed the electromagnets (alternating current network), in Pat. 1902 is 4 games (2 inducers electromagnets, one forager, every game) and Pat. 1908 are 7 game.
Is only mimic generator, moving the magnetic field, with alternating electricity supply.
<http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=740>
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DIHN on January 19, 2015, 03:14:59 PM
Hello ignacio, I think the most correct and uncorrupted by letters patent - the patent 1902, and still did to achieve results as Klemente Figuera?
I'm going to start building the core for the coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 20, 2015, 12:28:32 AM
Hi all,

I have found this video where this youtube user lights up a 300 W lamp just by using a simple system with 3 coils and he only applies 0.4 volts. I suppose that that coil is not able to have more than 2 or 3 amperes along that it at that voltage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsg4qzm3Fdc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsg4qzm3Fdc)

This youtube user has more videos about this system. Maybe any of the russian guys around here could translate what he says. It seems to be related to the winding procedure of the intermediate coil.

Could it have any relation to Figuera 1902 system?

Thanks

DIHN: Welcome to te forum. As far as I know there is not yet any successful replica. About patent: I can not tell which one is better: IMHO both could be valid if we click on the right configuration. I guess they work under different principals

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 21, 2015, 01:31:22 AM
Why did Buforn change so radically the writting about the placement of the induced coil comparing his patents from 1910 and 1911?

Could he try to hide the key feature for running the generator? It got me thinking... ???


1910: Induced coil core not touching the electromagnets cores

1911: Induced coil core always touching the electromagnets cores

.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 21, 2015, 10:07:25 PM
Hanon,
 Very informative video , would like to know more about this set up. watched other video's he had but this was the best....just wish i knew what he was saying.
as for the last two comments try the opposite like i do with Obama since he is a know pathological liar.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 22, 2015, 12:18:19 AM
Here is what Iv'e been doing with the Figuera circuit.
I don't see a lot of interest on the multiple taped resister.
I know now that it needs to be a sine wave. And I have that hooked up.
And you have to have various values or you just have a saw tooth wave.
Now Iam putting together a three part transformer and see the results!
Here is a pic.
Gregg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 23, 2015, 02:38:55 PM
 Hi all,
 
A new thread has been opened to discuss about bucking coils: two coils wound in opposite directions (CW-CCW) in order that the induced field of one coil will cancel out the other coil induced field. This thread is promoted by the owner of hyiq.org and hi is proposing a simple design to test and see the results . I like this subject because it appears in many overunity devices, and who knows if it could not be used in Figuera´s 1902 motionless patent
 
http://overunity.com/15395/partnered-output-coils-free-energy/ (http://overunity.com/15395/partnered-output-coils-free-energy/)


Regards



 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 25, 2015, 04:12:59 PM
Hi all,

I want to tell you one story: I started with the Figuera project in october 2012 when I read in many general forums a user posting many times the same message. Just google: Clemente Figuera canarion    ,and you will see.  In summary he told that the system works and that we should replicate Figuera´s patents. I got intrigued because that man was very enthusiatic and open to tell it. In one forum I got his email by contacting with the webmaster.

We maintained a email thread for some months and then suddenly he stopped sending me emails.  In those emails he told me that the system is very simple and that using 12 V and 3A, pulsed with a VFD or similar, as input he got around 3000 watts in the output. He was using one electromagnet and in each side he placed one induced coil. I got surprised because this was not the Figuera design. Figuera always used two electromagnet one in each side and the "induced circuit" -as he called it-  was in the middle.

He also sent me some more designs with two electromagnets and the induced coils in the middle . This was Figuera design. The amazing thing is that those designs had TWO INDUCED COILS in the middle . Why two coils and not just one?, I thought. He also told me to put an aislant between the electromagnets and the coils (the same that it´s being suggested now in the thread of bucking coils  with the loose coupling concept). He also told that I should move the coils in order to find the correct place. Even he told me that the induced coil must have an small angle with respect to the electromagnets. As I didn´t understand why he used 2 induced coils or the aislant I didn´t take care of that design because I thought it was against the logic and it was nonsense. I did not replicate that design. Now in the bucking coils thread I see many similarities with this design. 

I attach here the sketches that he sent me (I already posted this info in a pdf many months ago but probably nobody remember that right now) . In one email he sent one sketch but few minutes later he sent me a second email with the wiring changed and he said to be correct now. He never told me precise data, for that reason I don´t know if the electromagnets polarity was North-South or North-North. He was very cryptic.

In sumary: I think that using two inducers (one in each side) and two induced coils in bucking mode, with those inducers facing North-North then you will have that each inducer field just reach one of the bucking coils. In this case you could excite each induced coil with one inducer field and the induced current in both coils will add up perfectly and maybe the Lenz effect in the electromagnets could be reduced.

I stronly recommend you to follow the thread about bucking coils because it could have some keys for replicating the Figuera 1902 patent

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 25, 2015, 06:10:58 PM
Hanon,
 Thank you for your contribution to this cause. and yes i will follow the new thread along with this one.

Hey gregg2597 if there is no interest in the multitap resistor that changes currant intensity with DC then why is there almost 1500 people that says your an uninformed troll.
Ps. stop posting irrevelant Material and put your money where your mouth is.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ~Maverick.~ on January 26, 2015, 04:29:26 AM
Hi all,

I want to tell you one story: I started with the Figuera project in october 2012 when I read in many general forums a user posting many times the same message. Just google: Clemente Figuera canarion ...............

Hanon, with all do respect these forums are littered with individuals that supposedly "solved" the enigma. I sure as heck don't blame you for wanting to believe these people beyond a shadow of a doubt. However these people all follow a particular pattern, they speak as if they posses knowledge above everyone else. Yet they show no pictures or video's of a working device. We all are guilty of wanting to believe these people because we all want to see this in our lives.

BUT, we need to take a step back and understand that the more we allow ourselves to follow these people the more we divorce ourselves from our own ideas. And when we divorce ourselves from our own concepts and ideas we start chasing our tails because we have no direction other then what was stated by the so-called "enigma" solver.

I am not stating that the bucking coil concept is invalid, I hope to God that someone had this concept prior to hearing about it. That there is the root of invention. I myself have taken a different angle to solve this and have been building custom components to test the concept. It's slow going but I am progressing, I believe that electricity can be pressurized much like water and air. I don't mean a step up transformer.  My concept involves using longitudinal waves in the iron core to manifest this.

Regardless, as always best of luck to everyone.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 26, 2015, 08:00:04 AM
The Graff represents the resister values.
And the leds show the results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on January 26, 2015, 07:30:40 PM
That looks good to me.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on January 26, 2015, 11:17:20 PM
Histeresis
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 27, 2015, 12:50:48 AM
Thank You!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 27, 2015, 12:55:34 AM
Iam going to have to get that translated!
Iam va a tener que conseguir que traducido!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on January 27, 2015, 11:54:40 PM
gregg2597 y demás foreros, donde mejor explicado esta, es en las patentes.
El ahorro que se produce (¡histéresis!), es que no haya cambio de polaridad, ¡por eso la configuración en las patentes! El que un hierro (núcleo) tenga que cambiar su polaridad en el tiempo, cuesta mucho trabajo (tanto que no le da tiempo a las moléculas de asimilarlo) Por lo tanto, se induce con los electroimanes una alternancia con solo una polaridad y sin que tenga que cambiar la polaridad de la bobina (¿electroimán?) inducida.
Hay que dar sin esperar nada a cambio, y sigo sin tener idea.

traductor google:
gregg2597 and other foreros where this is better explained in patents.
The savings occurs (hysteresis!) Is that no change of polarity, so the configuration patents! Whether an iron (core) have to change its polarity in time hard time (while there is no time to be assimilated molecules) So is induced by the electromagnets alternating with only one polarity and without having to changing the polarity of the coil (electromagnet?) induced.
You have to give without expecting anything in return, and still have no idea.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 28, 2015, 12:56:06 AM
Thank you for your reply.
I think I understand now.
Gregg
Gracias por su respuesta.
Creo que entiendo ahora.
Gregg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 28, 2015, 01:04:59 AM
Thank you shadow119g
Since  the leds are fluctuating with the different resister values at each output , that tells me the Ardurino program is working.
Now I can setup the transformers. Small of course, but with this setup it should have a noticeable output load.
Gregg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gregg2597 on January 28, 2015, 01:12:16 AM
Hanon
Arn't we all striving for a workable complete free energy device?
A step at a time.
I see the Figuera device as 3 parts and its all about the transformers, in 3 parts.
2 primary's cross linked and the secondary load.
Make that happen and we all get a free energy device.
Gregg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on January 28, 2015, 02:36:59 AM
Recortes mezclados = mixed Scraps
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 02, 2015, 04:42:10 AM
Just found some very interesting reading and a light bulb lit up.
Atoms of iron are a 'medium' which have a peculiar capacity to capture and convert ZPR into
magnetic flux, which is always a secondary product of current. This means a magnet polarizes and
unifies the tubes of force associated with the independent ether carriers. In the manufacture or
formation of magnets—either in industry or in nature—the atoms (or molecules) of very hot or
molten iron, which are in a state of flux, are aligned by an external magnetic field or electric
current, whereupon the atoms are cooled and 'frozen' in aligned state, in a semi-permanent
population inversion. Since the magnetic field remains when the external electric or magnetic field
is removed, a magnet exists in an unbalanced relationship, 'needing' an electric field or current to
accompany it. This imbalance continues because the magnet apprehends the magnetic portion of
the ZPR, exposing its electrical portion, disturbing its equilibrium, wherever magnetic flux
permeates. By alternating a magnetic field perpendicular to a pole-piece, or alternating an electrical
current at right angles to a pole piece, an iron core will oscillate magnetically, producing rising,
saturating, falling, and reversing magnetic flux which may then be used to create alternating
current in inductance windings. The potential for these processes to operate ova unity is not
generally understood or accepted, though there are numerous ways to operate electric and
magnetic devices in ways violative of the law of conservation of energy, according to the version
misinterpreted by the power cartels and their dupes in the field of science.
It stands to reason that if energy is the "ability to do work", and work equals "force over
distance", that energy equals "force over time". These distinctions have been obliterated and
concealed by the Illuminati, which has taught us to view energy as something which comes out of
a gas tank and is "used up"

Maybe this is what Figueras found out and implemented in his design having the current at right angles to a pole piece (inducers), an iron core will oscillate magnetically, producing rising, saturating, falling, and reversing magnetic flux which may then be used to create alternating current in inductance windings. (Induced)  and he accomplished this with alternating the current of DC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on February 02, 2015, 05:15:07 AM
@marathonman

                   Be it known that I, NIKOLA TESLA, a subject of the Emperor of Austria-Hungary, from Smiljan, Lika, border country of Austria-Hungary, residing at New York, in the county and State of New York, have invented certain new and useful Improvements in Electric Generators, of which the following is a specification.

This application is a division of an application filed by me May 26, 1887, Serial No. 239,481.

This invention is an improved form of electrical generator based upon the following well-known laws: First, that electricity or electrical energy is developed in any conducting-body by subjecting such body to a varying magnetic influence, and, second, that the magnetic properties of IRON or other magnetic substance may be partially or entirely destroyed or caused to disappear by raising it to a certain temperature, but restored and caused to reappear by again lowering its temperature to a certain degree. These laws may be applied in the production of electrical currents in many ways, the principle of which is in all cases the same—viz., to subject a conductor to a varying magnetic influence, producing such variations by the application of heat, or, more strictly speaking, by the application or action of a varying temperature upon the source of the magnetism.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 02, 2015, 04:23:28 PM
What you said and what i said are two different things (rather copied) read it again and listen what the man say's.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 02, 2015, 06:18:21 PM
marathonman
---(These distinctions have been obliterated and concealed by the Illuminati,) We are the ones we hide reality,
---(Estas distinciones han sido borradas y oculto por los Illuminati,) . Nosotros, somos los que nos ocultamos la realidad,
---(Atoms of iron are a 'medium' "the iron, if we observe the formation of the stars, as soon begins producing iron, starts stoping formation star, (the formation of iron absorbs huge amounts of energy !!!!!), can I use, energy?
--- (Los átomos de hierro son un "medio"). En cuanto al hierro, hay que observar la formación de las estrellas, en cuanto comienza a producir hierro, se inicia el apagado de la estrella, (la formación del hierro, absorbe enormes cantidades de energía!!!!!) ¿Podemos utilizar?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 02, 2015, 10:33:14 PM
ignacio,
(we are the ones we hide reality)  really! can you explain this one as i would really like to hear this one?
(Atoms of iron are a 'medium' "the iron, if we observe the formation of the stars, as soon begins producing iron, starts stopping formation star, (the formation of iron absorbs huge amounts of energy !!!!!), can I use, energy?.....what in the world are you talking about? and what does this have to do with this statement..
 By alternating a magnetic field perpendicular to a pole-piece, or alternating an electrical current at right angles to a pole piece, an iron core will oscillate magnetically, producing rising, saturating, falling, and reversing magnetic flux which may then be used to create alternating current in inductance windings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 03, 2015, 12:40:55 PM
When all ells fails,follow the directions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 03, 2015, 06:53:50 PM
marathonman
yo busco, el porqué, de la sobre unidad de la máquina de C. F. Cualquier posibilidad, por pequeña que parezca, es bienvenida.

I seek, why, of over unity machine CF. Any chance, however small it may seem, is welcome.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2015, 01:08:00 PM
 
I have found this in a video on the delay that occurs in the magnetization of a metal core. As you see in the video, the magnetic field is delayed as a probe is moved away from the inductor's until reaching 180 degrees compared to being in phase (0 °) for short distances. This is called Delayed Lenz Effect . If the delay in the magnetization of the core makes this field to be delayed half wave, imagine: the magnetic field is delayed half cycle. If in that postition you place one collector coil and induced current is generated. The induced field would take another half cycle to return to the electromagnet and affect it: 1/2 cycle + 1/2 cycle = 360º. Thus, instead of opposing to the electromagnet it could be coupled to it and amplify the effect. It is the case of a swing: If the swing, in the return way, just change direction at the time that a force is applied the effect is amplified effortless ... you should calibrate the timing to push the swing to give the boost at the right time, otherwise you could brake it. I could be wrong but apparently it seems that between being the inducers and the induced close (with offset 0 °) and suffer the effect of the law lenz opposing, and being away (offset 180º) maybe that effect serve to "help" rather than to brake.

I mention this in order to document the forum. For now I will not try all these things. But it seems to me curious as one user who said to get it running said he had to move the induced coil , also in the forum about bucking coils people are using insulation between coils (plastic spacers) (loose coupling) , Buforn and Figuera were cryptic about the placement  of the coil: the coil has to be "properly placed" as literally they wrote on all patents since 1908, also I have seen a video where in Hendershot generator the distance between coils had to be adjusted. It seems like there's a spatial issue (placement) which is beyond our understanding ... Anyway, here I put it to have it documented, who knows if someday someone will come and find all these useful. Please see the video, it is very interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ5xnyj7xe4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ5xnyj7xe4)


Source: http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE22en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE22en.htm)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 10, 2015, 01:12:01 PM
Hanon
 The spacers are for more then that.They reduce the end to end potential by breaking it up to reduce the risk of a arch over between turns and also provide a rigid support to fight against the force acting on the coil. Same movement you would see in a audio speaker that moves the cone. The pounds of force can become large acting on the coil which would cause it to vibrate or shift and sometimes become distorted as the joule heating increases the wire becomes more soft and pliable. It is less of a problem on small low power models but a big problem on high output larger systems. Maybe you should go back and read some of the Silvanus phillips thompson  books and not skim or hand pick what you think matters from the directories. The books do not mention the use of thicker wire for the self supporting benefits or the use of square wire or flat ribbon. You have to figure that out on your own.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 11, 2015, 01:20:34 PM
Doug, I already posted this a month ago or so, and has relation to my last post:


Why did Buforn change so radically the writting about the placement of the induced coil comparing his patents from 1910 and 1911?
Could he try to hide the key feature for running the generator? It got me thinking... ??? 


1910 patent: Induced coil core without touching the electromagnets cores


1911 patent: Induced coil core must always touch the electromagnets core


Both patents are exact copies of the 1908 Figuera patent. The only difference between 1910 and 1911 patent is this feature. I tend to think that maybe Buforn filed a new patent in 1911 in order to hide the key features of this device...Why if not did he changed the patent just in that feature? He could have said that the device works in both ways...Just a thought


Note: the 1910 patent is the only patent which was audit by an agent of the patent office and got a positive review of practical implementation
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stupify12 on February 13, 2015, 06:39:30 AM
Hello everyone,

                         Tesla 
Quote
"If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.”

                      Figuera's Patent
Quote
Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed
circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as
when, this circuit being still and motionless, the MAGNETIC field is increased
and reduced in intensity; since any Variation , occurring in the flow traversing
a circuit is producing electrical induced current
 

Tesla  answer
Quote
By varying the relative position upon the commutator of the respective brushes automatically in proportion to the varying electrical conditions of the working-circuit the current developed can be regulated in proportion to the demands in the working-circuit.

Figuera's Patent
Quote
It was considered the
possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of
movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase
and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the
electrical current which produces it.

Tesla Patent
Quote
If, for instance, the commutator-space between the brushes a and c, when the latter is at the neutral point, is diminished, a current will flow from the point Y over the shunt C to the brush b, thus strengthening the current in the part M', and partly neutralizing the current in the part M; but if the space between the brushes a and c is increased, the current will flow over the auxiliary brush in an opposite direction, and the current in M will be strengthened, and in M' partly neutralized.

Figuera 1908
Quote
Therefore it
matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of
the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them;

Tesla Answered
Quote
It will be apparent that the respective cores of the field-magnets are subject to the neutralizing or intensifying effects of the current in the shunt through c', and the magnetism of the cores will be partially neutralized or the point of greatest magnetism shifted, so that it will be more or less remote from or approaching to the armature, and hence the aggregate energizing actions of the field magnets on the armature will be correspondingly Varied.

Figuera
Quote
Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current
which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance,
through which circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets, magnetize one or more
electromagnets and, while the current is higher or lower the magnetization of
the electromagnets is decreasing or increasing and varying, therefore, the
intensity of the magnetic field , this is, the flow which crosses the induced
circuit.

Tesla  Patent
Quote
The relative positions of the respective brushes are varied, either automatically or by hand, so that the shunt becomes inoperative when the auxiliary-brush has a certain position upon the commutator, but when said auxiliary brush is moved in its relation to the main brushes, or the latter are moved in their relation to the auxiliary brush, the electric condition is disturbed and more or less of the current through the field-helices is diverted through the shunt or a current passed over said shunt to the field-helices.


Now look for the Tesla Patent that start with 369, I think we can find 2 Patents which explain how to Vary the Intesity of Magnetism.


Meow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 13, 2015, 03:29:15 PM
Hanon
I think he did mention the shape and space do not make a difference because it is motionless. The only reason for the additional patents I dont think he was confident in the patent system. There are two types of patent the lessor being a specific design which someone can make a few minor changes to and get their own patent on your idea. I dont remember the actual names of the types of patents. Im pretty tired after driving 11 hours.
  Stupify
  I think you got the numbers wrong on your Tesla patent you referred. Its a regulator for electric dynamo machines #336961. The resistance can be a built in feature of the brush or of the wire connecting to the brushes. Brushes can be made from layers of materials with different resistances some of Tesla's older works define that method but it seems more complicated then it is worth compared to working the wire connected to the brush. Old resistance wire of the period was a lot different then nichrome wire of today. Last I looked at different materials for short distance medium resistance the only one I found effective was an old metal file that had been forged into a knife. The repeated heating in the process of forging may have effected the resistance compared to a not altered file. The thing that may work in favor is that as the temperature of the wire increases the resistance will as well increase so maybe soft iron wire will work if it is allowed to heat up first. It would also act as a fuse link to afford some protection.
   Stupify I guess you picked up on the winding configuration lol. Pretty funny how  there is more then one way. I attached the pat file in .pdf. That way Hanon wont have to go through all the steps to find it.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 13, 2015, 11:59:19 PM
Hi,


I collect here an idea that already appeared in the forum about generating the two signals for the Figuera 1908 patent with a very simple method.


Suppose that each inducer is composed by two coils: One coil feed with DC current and the other coil feed with AC current. In inductor 1 you could place both coils so that both magnetic fields (from the DC and AC) add up in the first half cycle of the AC signal. In the inducer 2 you could place both coils to subtract their magnetic fields in that half cycle. Later, during the second half cycle, the polarity of the AC signal will reverse and in the inducer 2 both fields will add up while those fields will cancel in inductor 1.


With this layout I think you could get both opposite signals with a very easy setup. I post here an sketch in order to make it clearer for other users.


Regards



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 21, 2015, 02:45:50 PM
Hanon
 You continue to neglect time. The time it takes for a magnetic field to reach a number of lines for lack of a better description. The time being partly effected by voltage core size and amperage windings. The dc side is slower then the ac side. Granted it is a measure of fractions of a second. The amount of field or strength or number of lines produced per watts in for the two different types of input will not be equal in time to reach the same level of saturation in the time between pulses of dc and cycles of ac in the model. The induced output will not be equal for the two different inputs. The output would have to equal the sum of the two inputs.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 21, 2015, 03:20:10 PM
Doug1:

Posting after a long time..You are correct on patents. There is no patent for a basic principle. However devices that use the basic principle are patentable again and again and again with various modifications as long as the modification results in an improvement over the earlier apparatus...The patents are very clear and unambigous..Principle is very clearly explained in the patents. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 21, 2015, 08:17:02 PM
Hanon
 You continue to neglect time. The time it takes for a magnetic field to reach a number of lines for lack of a better description. The time being partly effected by voltage core size and amperage windings. The dc side is slower then the ac side. Granted it is a measure of fractions of a second. The amount of field or strength or number of lines produced per watts in for the two different types of input will not be equal in time to reach the same level of saturation in the time between pulses of dc and cycles of ac in the model. The induced output will not be equal for the two different inputs. The output would have to equal the sum of the two inputs.


Doug,


In my last proposal I am suggesting to use normal DC in one coil, and normal AC in another coil of each inducer. I am not saying to use pulsed DC as you seems to have understood. Just normal DC + AC. My scheme in that post is quite clear. We shoudl thnik about the resulting magnetic field strength from one coil (DC) plus the second coil (AC)


For those interested I attach here my last design. I have to add yet the second coil to each side inducers. Work in progress...



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 22, 2015, 04:48:25 PM
Hanon
  You might be building a magnetic amplifier. I tried to upload the file but it keeps giving me fits. So here is a link to a declassified paper which gives a pretty good account of them and their history. Make a note of the dates. They were were once called power regulators.You can also look back into some early versions of self regulating generators and dynamo's of the early 1900's.

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjw1.OlUYakAIaEnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEzMW0yNTZkBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1lIUzAwMV8x/RV=2/RE=1424648374/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2farchive.org%2fdetails%2fMagneticAmplifiers/RK=0/RS=R7.h1h2BrcmtGxwmRFAM9LDu1ns- (http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjw1.OlUYakAIaEnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEzMW0yNTZkBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1lIUzAwMV8x/RV=2/RE=1424648374/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2farchive.org%2fdetails%2fMagneticAmplifiers/RK=0/RS=R7.h1h2BrcmtGxwmRFAM9LDu1ns-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 22, 2015, 05:04:17 PM
One of these things looks like the other as the song goes. http://teslapress.com/magamp.html (http://teslapress.com/magamp.html)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 25, 2015, 08:37:23 AM
Hanon:

The device you are trying to build is different from the one shown in the Figuera patent of 1908. That is what comes to my mind after reading the patent. May be you are doing a different thing which might well work but it is not what is stated in the Figuera patent of 1908.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 25, 2015, 12:22:59 PM
Nrswami
   Hope you have been well,nice to see your still around.

  Hanon
  http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm (http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm) Has a nice demo of building basic amplifiers from inexpensive transformers pretty easy to make on a small scale to play around with. Very few parts required. Im not sure how how fast they can operate but at least you can play around with the set up without spending a fortune or a lot of time trying to wind new ones. I will try to find the books he references over the next couple of days if we get the upcoming snow storm.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 25, 2015, 12:31:50 PM
Sweet mother of pearl this guy has a library. http://www.tubebooks.org/technical_books_online.htm (http://www.tubebooks.org/technical_books_online.htm)

 Imagine what he may have that is not parked on the net.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2015, 06:54:59 PM
Doug1

Thanks  for the kind words..

I wil rebuild the Figuera system again in a safe way. Will try to see if I can replicate it exactly.

Patent explains eery thing but hides the secret in saying that the coils are properly placed and in not precisely identifying the pole positions and in not being clear about how the system would keep on running.  I have done the first two last one I need to confirm.

I will come back after a month or so as I have to focus on survival rather than verifying what has been done. Without Hanon I could not have even started this.

Output is pulsed dc. DC motors run very very smoothly in pulsed dc.

will come back again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 27, 2015, 07:39:04 PM
NRamaswami Dont assume figurea could not draw or made a bunch of mistakes in his drawings.
  No one has actually followed the directions yet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 28, 2015, 01:12:09 AM
Doug1

I never said that..
When we draft patents  we must provide full informatio so that  another skilled person can replicate the invention. ..But at the same time make it open to different interpretations.. As  we can see it has been accomplished..even after 100 years..Figuera clearly describes the principles. I have built modified devices and they work as stated by him. But in his days the best mode of invention need not be disclosed.  It is a requiremement that came later. We have experimented and found that he is giving a working device but he is also disclosing the weakest mode of invention in the patent..
However the principle is the same for the best mode and weakest mode. He claims Patent for all devices based on the principle but that is not possible as improved devices are entitled to patent.  So Buforn kept modifying them again and again and filed the various patents..
Put very simply Figuera concept is this..In a step up transformer you step up the voltage but amperage is reduced..In a step down transformer voltage is reduced but amperage is increased.. But how do you increase both the voltage and the amperage..in the secondary..This is what he has described..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 02, 2015, 01:31:33 PM
NRamaswami Dont assume figurea could not draw or made a bunch of mistakes in his drawings.
  No one has actually followed the directions yet.


Doug, 


Why do you say that none has actually followed the directions yet?
Which are the directions in your opinion? What is lacking in our replicas?


BTW, I am not bulding any king of magnetic amplifier. Magnetic Amplifiers are built to regulate a high power AC signal with a small DC signal. As I posted many months ago a magnetic amplifiers may be developed to create the signals required for Figuera 1908 patent but you will need to have a source of high frequency AC to be controlled by a 50 Hz signal, in order to modulate it and later rectified to get the final positive signals. A conceptual sketch is posted long ago but I am not building that right now because I feel I don´t have enough skills to do it. I am just building the two signals as a composition of DC magnetic field and +/- AC magnetic field. I think this is simpler to do: the first signal is DC+AC magnetic field  and the second signal is DC - AC magnetic field. Then you get two opposed signals in the magnetic domain (as required)


All this take me to consider again the main doubts I have about the Figuera generator: Why did he Figuera required two unphased signals in his 1908 patent? Why did Figuera required two inducers in his 1902 patents when he just feed both inducers with the same intermittent signal? Are 1902 patent and 1908 patent equivalent or not?  Why do all Figuera patents require two inducers coils?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2015, 05:25:06 AM
Hanon:

Why two inducers..

it is so elementary Hanon..

Lenz law does not apply between the magnetism that flows between opposite poles. That is North Pole and South Pole. The flux in this case becomes an additive flux..This is called as electromagnetic momentum..

In 1902 patent many coils are copper wire are wound around a drum shaped cage like structure But they were rotated inside the attractive poles which are kept apart by the bearings that held the rotating drum..

In 1908 patent the coils were taking the feed the magnetic flux between opposite poles. The secondary coil was smaller for it needs to take the magnetic flux that travels through the iron of S1 but also the magnetic flux between the iron cores of P1 and P2. I think Marathonman posted the pictures of such a configuration earlier.

The principle in 1902 used rotating coils. In 1908 it used stationary coils. Other than that the time varying magnetic field and the magnetic flux are both the same..otherwise no electricity would be induced..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 03, 2015, 01:19:35 PM
" The flux in this case becomes an additive flux..This is called as electromagnetic momentum"
  It also describes one of the types of magnetic amplifier that uses feed back as the control current.
   Moving the wire not the iron structure is a type of motor ,For the life of me I cant remember the name of. It was used in the drive wheels of one of the mini lunar exploration vehicles. The wire cage was the rotor and did not have a movable core structure. I think it may have been called a basket weave something.

   My comment about time was regarding the time difference for a dc magnetic field to develop on a coil over core magnet. Its slower then the equal power in ac. Something to be accounted for or engineered out of the design to be capable of fast enough switching on and off. It being slower it will be harder for it to reach the same peak values in the saturation desaturation curve. which brings it all back around to a low resistance dc winding that would need to have resistance controlled outside of the coil.Not by the length of the wire in the windings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 03, 2015, 05:44:41 PM
Doug:

If positive feeback can be applied where is the need for a COP>1 device.. Every device will be outputting hundres or thousands of times the input. The only problem is how to provide controlled positive feedback current. If we master this..then there is no question of energy crisis..I have not even tried it. Have you tried it. If you know how to do it please pm me. No milliamps and millivolts devices but high voltage and high amperage output will need to be given as controlled positive feeback to the primary input. That is where every device that worked has worked. I have neither the knowledge, nor the funds, nor the working space nor the money to hire competent hands nor can I take such risks at this time. So I have not tried it. Figuera device and most ordinary transformer type of devices can be made to cop>1 some thing easily. This I have done. The two inducer model of Figuera has got some thing in it. Some unstated principle is involved.

I tested an ordinary transformer single core kind of thing.. Let us say lot of turns and lot of wires. Input was 220 volts and 15 amps. Output at the load was 300 volts and 10 Amps. The load was 17 x 200 watts lamps. Now let us not say that the 17x200 watts lamps means that it should be 3400 watts. 200 watts bulb will glow well at 140 watts input. Higher the voltage higher the brightness.

Now it is a simple transformer like device. The core was a plastic tube solenoid filled with soft iron rods and we would the secondary and primary on this plastic tube and that is it. What is the efficiency. 3000/3300*100 as measured on the meters.

COP of about 0.91. Now there is another variation which drastically reduces the input and increases the output. COP>1 in that device let us say.  But I do not know why the device would consume less in the primary but provide more in the secondary when the design is altered..What we did was nothing. To build two similar devices and connected them in series and put a secondary in the middle between opposite poles of P1 and P2..The primary input dropped. The secondary output incrased. Why?? I honestly do not know..

What are the values obtained. Let me simply say it is COP>1. I would like the give the honor of explaining how the whole thing works to Hanon and how it is constructed to Hanon for it is he who dug up the old patent and brought all this to light and he must get the credit.

Figuera device works. As intended. he has used controlled positive feedback to increase the output. That is very very clear from the description. But how do we do it..This is not known to me. I'm not willing to take risks.

The Electronics models are a waste. They would not work. You need coils of wire to send Electricity. Not chips that will vapourise if you send high voltage and high amperage. We must avoid thinking that 100 years back they did not have electronics and so Tesla and Figuera did not use electronics. They used what worked. They were very clear on the principles.

Figuera device works. I can tell you that. But the secret of getting 100 times or 1000 times or 20000 times of the input in the output is in the controlled positive electromagnetic feedback circuit. That is what I'm not able to do so far. It is the same principle used in Amplidyne and same principle used in Magnetic Amplifiers.

With controlled positive electromagnetic feedback current, any cop<1 device will also produce 1000 times the power output as the input. This is the area to focus on for getting results.
o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 10, 2015, 11:15:15 PM
Hello All

Finally got my 555 and 4017s running correctly...Bit of a delay from surgery and then laziness.
I randomly used 6 100 ohm resistors and 1 50 ohm resistor for the 8 resistor collector connections...
I am using a 12 volt 300 CCA lawnmower battery to power the - + rails
I used two breadboards ( one for the 555, the gate and the 4017s and one for 8 BDX53s and 7 resistors )

results.... :-[
I failed to achieve anything from the home made transformers ( 26 awg magnet wire )
so I used two miniature step down transformers and reversed connected them...
I got 1.5 - 3 volts ac...

I don't know whether to go celebrate with champagne or go drink vodka at the nearest bar...

All the Best
RandyFL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 11, 2015, 07:55:22 AM
Hello All,
I got the info I needed from reading the previous posts here...
Thanx for keeping this forum going.

My two issues were the power resistors ( to many ohms ) and the thickness and number of turns for the primary transformer wires...

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 13, 2015, 10:10:53 PM
RandyFL

You are way off..

Thick wires have low ohms. Thin wires have high ohms. Resistors have higher ohms than wires.

There is no specificied thickness or turns. This is a concept which will work if you properly do what Figuera disclosed in the patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 13, 2015, 10:50:12 PM
thanx NRamaswami ...

Hello All,
Got a reading in the secondary. Ordered low ohm high watt resistors. I also ordered 14 and 18 gauge magnet wire.
555, 4017s and BDX53s all working in order... Back on track.

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DIHN on March 17, 2015, 01:38:10 PM
Hello All
AVENGERS, what resistors you used between transistors in front of coils?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DIHN on March 17, 2015, 02:40:31 PM
and still, what you think according to this video?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 19, 2015, 04:21:20 PM
I simply want to post some thing here..

We all know how to build a step down transformer.

Now instead of E and I core used to build the step down transformers let us use a single plastic tube. Let us say about 2 and half inches in diameter and 8 inches in length. We can put soft iron rods or any magnetisable material inside the plastic tube to produce the electromagnet. This is a solenoid of course.

What would we do to build a step down transformer on the solenoid.

Wind thick wires in the inside with fewer turns and thin wires on the outside with higher turns. Let us say we provide 220 turns on the primary outer side and then the inner side would need to have 50 turns on the inner thicker side secondary to produce 50 volts. 220 volts is stepped down to 50 volts. Amperage changes are based on wattage input but some current is lost in eddy currents and so we would have a lesser output than the input. If you do this in the way instructed above the result would be perfectly in line with theory. I have coducted this experiment and I know it to be correct.

Now instead of using thicker secondary and thinner primary what would happen if we use the same gauge wire and use a larger number of turns in the secondary. Voltage increases but amperage is reduced.

if we use a number of turns of thicker wire than in the primary what happens. Efficiency of the tranformer increases to almost 105% or 106%. Assuming that our meters are not correct we can see that efficiency has increased from the normal model.

What is the reason for the efficiency increase? That has overcome the eddy current losses in what would be a a theoretically a very inefficient system..

The reason is simple. By creating a large number of turns we have increased the magnetic field strength.

Magnetic field strength = Number of Turns per unit length x Amperes

This result comes after we wind about 12 layers of the secondary. The secondary is made up of thick insulated wire and the wires are closely wound.

( either induced or supplied or sum of both) ( Please note that I have not studied Electricity and Magnetism and am a Lawyer).

You can do this test yourself on this first device. Feel satisfied about what I say. You can put any magnetisable material. It is not necessary that soft iron should be used and any magnetisable material is fine. Transformer cores show low magnetism and so in this model may not be that efficient. But they are very expensive and I have not tried it.

Now to continue further what we have seen is a simple principle in action.

If the number of turns + Magnetic field strength + thickness of wire increases the amperage in the secondary increases along with the voltage. It can reach a point of COP=1 or very close to 1 or slightly above 1.

Let us now make another modification of the device and let us run the secondary inside the primary and along with the primary and outside the primary. We are not following the transformer rules here.

Secondary is made up of thicker wires. Primary turns are lower compared to secondary turns. So secondary is a step up transformer and must increase the voltage. However secondary is not made up of thin wires but made up of thick wires. The results are again showing to be closer to 1 when the same gauge wire is used but slightly above 1 when a thicker secondary wire is used.

Magnetic field strength= No of turns per unit length x Amperes

We have thus far increased the number of turns. We can increase the initial amperage by giving the current from a step down transformer with reasonable voltage About 50 volts is fine and about 16 Amps. You do the experiment and let me know the result.

However when we make one modification the output increases..

The thick secondary wire is wound first on the solenoid.

This is then followed by a thick bifilar coil.. This coil is wound as a proper bifilar coil except that both wire is shunted or shorted. End of wire 1 is connected to begining of wire 2 and end of wire 2 is connected again to beginning of wire 1.

Several layers of secondary are surrounded by several layers of bifilar coil and the primary is given from the outside. Always current flows from the outside wire of the primary towards the primary wire inside the inside.

The COP is now >1.  It is determined by the number of turns and the layers of the  thickness of shunted coil and the current flowing in the primary coil and the number of turns and layers and thickness of the secondary coil.

As the voltage increases the amperage in the secondary also increases. You can clearly see this in demonstrations.

This can be seen by building two of these solenoids as P1 and P2 as indicated for the single coil above but using about five inch thick plastic tubes for P1 and P2. And then putting another secondary wire between the North pole of P1 and south pole of P2 using several layers of thick wire in the 2 and half inch plastic tube so as to intercept the manetic flux between the irons of P1 and P2.

The primary of P1 is connected to the Primary of P2 and secondary of P1 is connected to the secondary wire in the middle and then the secondary of P2.

The COP now is above the COP>1 level. Higher the voltage in the secondary, higher the amperage in the secondary. This can be given to a load and can be tested.

If you use a multifilar coil to surround the central core, the resistance increases and so the frequency of the primary increases and this decreases the input amperage. In one modification of understanding what happens, we put several iron rods in between each layer of the multifilar coil to test what happens to the magnet. The magentic field strength reaches the saturation point. The magnet roars but electricity output from the wire to the load bulbs is nil. Some thing happens that so much of resistance is there to the flow of current that the entire electrical energy supplied is converted to magnetic form  and there is zero volt going to the load bulbs. Now even a 12 volt milli amps light would light up. We used 11 parallel wires to build the multifilar coil and had 18 to 19 layers of wire built in the way of a bifilar coil.

Either we are not given information on Electricity and magnetism or are taught the wrong principles or none is allowed to do research on this subject for some reason.

I'm not an Engineer. I'm not a scientist. Out of my contact with Patrick I did these experiments and found that building a cop>1 device is very easy.

Now in this device the primary and secondary are separated by the shunted or shorted coil. Therefore the primary and secondary are or must be in phase with each other. Therefore we must be able to provide a feedback from the secondary to the primary. Even if they are not in phase by using a variac with adequate capacity we can ensure that the primary is given  feedback energy. Once feedback energy is given the output can increase to COP=10000 times. This has been stated in the Amplidyne device.

However I must admit that I have not done any feedback of the current myself. Shortage of funds, lack of technical expertise and other problems are the reason.

I would explain the Hubbard coil now.

Hubbard coil is wound in the same fashion as the single solenoid. However Eight solenoids are arranged and connected to form a circle which makes them a larger solenoid. The secondary inside is connected in series and then given to the coil surrounding the central core. The Coils are arranged in this fashion..

Coil 1 - CW wound - 0'
Coil 2 - CW wound -90'
Coil 3- CCW wound -180'
Coil 4-CCW wound -270'
Coil 5- CW wound -45'
Coil 6-CW wound -135'
Coil 7-CCW wound -225
Coil 8-CCW Wound -315'

The bifilar coils surrounding the secondary are shunted at the end and beginning of coils 1 and 8.

The primary coil of the Hubbard is the outer coil that surrounds the shunted coil that covers the secondary. The primary can be given sufficient amperage and voltage to increase the magnetic field intensity to produce results and the resulting secondary output is far in excess of the input that a part of it is given back to the primary.. it is this part that is difficult to do for me. I have not done it so far.. But achieving COP>1 is very easy.

Any one can do it and the law of transformers specifically reduces the magnetic field strength in the name of increasing the efficiency by using lower magnetisable materials. Soft iron rods have far greater induction and eddy currents than transformer laminated cores. So without the increase in the magnetic field strength you cannot go COP>1

The other forms of devices that claim to achieve COP>1 use permanent magnets only for this reason. They increase the magnetic field intensity or magnetic flux by putting in a permanent magnet.

Once the principles are understood then many iterations or obvious modifications of the devices are possible.

Figuera appears to have used many primaries in series as a long multiple primary multiple secondary pole. The principle of varying the strength of current given to each primary reduces the secondary output. The secondary output is maximum when the opposing primaries are are of equal strength.

The transformer principle are inconsistent. They state that if you do like this voltage will be stepped up.

If you like this voltage will be stepped down. But what will happen if we put a larger number of turns thicker secondary wires is not answered in the transformer lessons. And what will happen if connect many step down transformers searially is also not stated. Voltage should go up and amperage remains constant. What would happen if these transformers are arranged to form a concentric ring in the center of which another multilayered thick wire is given and is connected to the serially connected step down transformer. Hubbard device is the result. COP>3 are normally claimed for this device but because you need to give only the initial input the cop is deemed to be infinity.

The bifilar shunted coils I guess act like capactors. Once the current is given the coils charge up. And once it stops the coils discharge inducing further current and the process continues.

When the feedback from the secondary is cut off this process is stopped.

The same principle has been stated by Daniel MaFarland Cook, Figuera and Hubbard.

I have not studied the other devices. Daniel Mcfarland cook patent drawings appear to be altered. But he states the same principle as figureas principle. It is possible that the patent text is also altered. But the Figuera patent and especially the BuForn patents are clear that they avoid the use of Lenz law.

Lens Law is avoided only when electricity flows between opposite poles of two magnets.

I still do not understand why when we use P1-S1-P2 in series the primary input drops and why it increases when P1 alone is used. This is some thing that I'm not able to understand.

If the Hubbard coil device I have mentioned above or the Figuera long pole shaped device is placed between two electrical poles and the high voltage electricity that is transmitted is sent via the outer primary coils an enormous amount of energy can be generated easily.

Now what is electricity and how is it produced? I think given my lack of theoretical knowledge and my experimental observations electricity appears to be generated by magnetism or osciallations of magnetic field. It can be done by rotating the magnet or it can be done by generating a rotating magnetic field. Enormous amount of current called Telluric current is supposed to flow between the North Pole and South Pole of the Earth under the Earth. At every point on the earth. Does it has some thing to do with this? We do not know.

We do not need to convert mechanical energy to Electrical energy. That thought process or teaching appears to be wrong. We only need high magnetic field strength and the magnet need not rotate and can remain stationary and still produce electricity. This is what is done in transformers but the transformer theory does not teach what would happen if the experiments are carried out in the manner done by me and explained above.

The experimental results go against the theory. No professor who has been informed about it would even send any email about it. Why? I really do not know. No one even wants to mention that they are curious or would like to check the facts. Again I do not know why.

It appears to be a cursed field. People who try to do this kind of experiments have suffered and so I'm simply giving up.

Buforn Patent Last Patent Last Page is the one that shows the best mode of the Figuera device. Rest of the types of not efficient through they can work.

These are my experimental observations and any one can easily replicate it. The secondary and primary and the shunted coils are all wound in the same direction. If the winding is shown as CW all are CW. If the winding is shown as CCW all are shown as CCW.

It look correct to say that if you put one liter of water in you can only take one liter of water out. But What exactly is electricity? Where does it come from? why rotating a magnet and putting a rotating magnetic field and putting a conductor in the rotating magnetic field should produce electricity?.Why it cannot produce otherwise?

And where is Electricity coming from are questions that are not answered. The only understanding we have at the moment is that electricity is connected some how to magnetism and higher the magnetic field intensity, greater the amount of current produced and vice versa. Since Magnetic field strength is based on the number of turns and the number of turns of shunted coils can be increased to any number we do not need to provide a large amount of input energy to create a large amount of magnetic field sterngth. It can be altered at our will.

Since the the idea that putting one liter of water in a water bottle can give us only one liter of water back does not apply to making a powerful magnetic field strength, COP>1 devices are very easy to produce. If we master feedback it looks like any device can be made to output easily hundreds of times of input energy. But I do not have the technical or financial resources to do it.

Since I have given the info to one member of the forum it is fair that I give it to all. Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on March 20, 2015, 05:44:00 PM
NRamaswami

Thank you very much for posting details of your experimental results and observations. You've included some concepts that I'll be interested in trying for myself.

all the best,
tak
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 21, 2015, 06:41:09 PM
21 March 15   13:30:00
Hello all,
Results...
My commercially made electromagnet performed as expected...pullin a piece of metal back and forth ( pulsating from the semiconductors) and producing small voltages in my analog multimeter. When my lower ohmed resistors arrive Monday I should be able to get better results.

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 21, 2015, 08:17:54 PM
Tak:

You are most welcome and many thanks for the kind words. If any thing is not clear just pm me and I will explain.

We used about 360 meters of primary wire and 720 metres of secondary wire.  For each Pole primary coil of Figuera I would think you would need about 3 coils of 6 sq mm wire and for the central core you would need about 2 coils of 6 sq mm wire in total about 8 coils of 90 metres length.

Shunted coil was 6 layers on each primary.

For the Primary you would need two coils of 4 sq mm wire each. We used quadfilar primary. Output was very significant in ourexperiments and so I would suggest that you use lower voltage and higher amperage stepped down input. Higher the voltage in the secondary higher is the amperage obtained as seen on the load lamps.

In total the number of layers on the Primaries would need to be about minimum of 20+ layers for you to see good results.

Daniel McFarland Cook states this that a minimum of 1000 feet or more of wire is needed. That the coil ultimately had a diameter of 24 inches.  I think he meant that he has placed a capcitor of copper plates continuously rolled with two insulating sheets in between the outer primary and inner secondary. The Poles were placed NS-NS from his description and it cannot be like that as they opposite poles would move towards each other and must have been separated by a iron pole that transferred the magnetic flux from one primary to the other. This is the secondary shown in Figueras patent.

Figuera did not disclose the shunted coil or the capacitors but used the word properly wound to describe the reels of coils.

Additionally the size of the magnet matters. Bigger the size and length of the iron, more powerful is the magnet and more amperage is needed to make it a powerful magnet. This is common sense. But Daniel McFarland Cook states that the size of the Primary iron is 2,3 or 6 or more feet of iron for each primary. Diameter of resulting Primary coil is 24 inches. He is talking about a circuit D which is not shown in the drawings and I guess that it may be a kind of safe positive feedback mechanism when he suggests the use of a rheostat. I think it is like the variac controller to regulate the voltage or current but I'm not sure. If positive feedback can be done along with what I have done the problem is solved. Naturally bigger the size of the iron core greater would be the input needed to achieve high magnetic field intensity. Output would also be higher only with biggre cores.

If I have not described things properly please ask me any time. I will do my best to clarify.
 

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 22, 2015, 12:37:42 AM
Look a little more at the resister contraption. Why would he make two parts?one that rotates and one with all those connections to a resister cascade type thing? Is it a three dimensional object using two views in two D or is there really two parts?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: sm0ky2 on March 22, 2015, 12:47:53 AM
Look a little more at the resister contraption. Why would he make two parts?one that rotates and one with all those connections to a resister cascade type thing? Is it a three dimensional object using two views in two D or is there really two parts?

It looks to me like a variable resistor (think radio), with multiplicative values of::

0 , 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 13 respectively.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 22, 2015, 03:14:02 AM
Isn't it the way they used to describe resistors...
All I know is the commercial electromagnet receives pulses of energy...and when I change the 6 100 ohm resistors to 2 ohms 25 watt there will be much stronger pulses...

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 22, 2015, 09:04:45 PM
Isn't it the way they used to describe resistors...
All I know is the commercial electromagnet receives pulses of energy...and when I change the 6 100 ohm resistors to 2 ohms 25 watt there will be much stronger pulses...

All the Best
Randy

 Yes, but why are you guessing what size resister you need? Break down the Hysteresis curve into time increments for the core your using. Work only in the bread and butter part of the curve where change is greatest. It's not nice to hoard the world supply of resisters.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 23, 2015, 02:55:11 AM
well at this point I can't figure why I'm getting DC voltage instead of AC...and the DC voltage is miniscule on a DC analog meter in the DC meter range of .25...
There's no instruction manuals on this approach...I was going along blindly to the video by woopy  " Generador Fiquera Approach 1 " on youtube. I used the circuit diagram on Kelly's website and got nice pulses in the primaries but hardly anything in the secondary s... Reading further into Wonju's posts He stated using 14 and 18 AWG and 300 to 400 windings He also stated that the resistors are going to get very hot as that's why Figuera used wire... So I am " assuming " smaller ohms and higher wattage lets in more power from the BDX53 s which in turn leads to stronger pulses in the primary s which in turn creates a greater magnet field which in turn leads to a voltage that could possible be around 20 volts with 5 amps in just one transformer........................
To clarify... I have the circuit ( with the 555 the gate and the 4017s ) and agree with Patrick that the semiconductor approach was/is superior to what Fiquera designed... but... and its a big butt for me is to show that the secondary in the transformers produces more energy than the primary s are using......I have to see it ( I'm from Missouri )...

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 23, 2015, 01:58:01 PM
Randy:

If you are giving a current that will cause a Magnetic Field strength of around 2.7 to 3 Tesla and if your secondary is thicker than the primary and has sufficient number of turns to work like a step up transformer then you will see the output to be higher than the input.

The exact schematic for achieving this posted. I do not have any pictures of the device with me now.

You need only a step down transformer to give higher amperage input to the primary. Shunted coil will automatically increase the magnetic field strength. The secondary inside will get the benefit of the magnetic induction and would produce higher voltage due to higher number of turns. But because it is thicker it would also produce higher amperage. Total watts produced is always a function of magnetic field strength.

We used a quad filar coil primary in the P1 and P2 indicated. A quadfilar coil is supposed to increase resistance and increase the voltage and frequency. Increasing the frequency results in reduced amperage at the input. I can confirm that using a single primary the coil is able to draw up to 15 Amps and using a double primary as indicated reduces the input amperage to just 7.

Primary quadfilar layers are 4. Secondary layers on the primary cores are 3 they are connected to the secondary layers in the middle secondary. The layers of secondary in the middle coil are either 5 or 7. The wires prevent the iron from the magnetic cores from coming towards each other and are wound slightly above them. All inside the three cores is only soft iron rods.

If you use a step down transformer the quadfilar coil is not needed and you need to provide only a single wire coil of adequate turns that can withstand the input voltage and amperage. Higher the voltage, higher the turns in the primary needed.

If you try to get the higher result from the central coil alone you would need to build several coils. It is not necessary to ignore the secondary that can be developed from the primary coil. This is not indicated in the Figuera drawings but covered by the term reels of coils properly wound.

The essential point here is to increase the magnetic field strength. Nothing more. That can be done by increasing the layers of the middle shunted coil and can be varied at your will. It is so simple really.

If time and money permits I would redo the experiment some time in the future and and try the controlled positve feedback. I believe it is doable. But I lack the technical knowledge, human and financial resources now.

I can personally confirm the above details. We have checked on a single coil primary alone with 12 layers of secondary and found that it was able to provide an efficiency of 3300 watts input and 3000 watts output and was able to light up 17x200 watts lights brightly.

Fortunately for me I'm a dummy who has no knowledge. For you a lot of theoretical knowledge of why it cannot happen is available. So you are not doing it.

I of course lack knowledge in Electronics and do not understand the need for it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 23, 2015, 05:16:32 PM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/):
3,300 watt input and 3,000 watt output is not ou and is nothing special.
Can you explain a bit better please?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 24, 2015, 02:27:01 AM
Hello All
3000 watts in 3000 watts out...4 winters ago I had a space heater that was 2 stages...The first stage was 600 watts and heated our bedroom up nicely so I figured the 2nd stage was going to be even nicer...the 2nd stage was 1200 watts I think. when I turned it on it blew the circuit breaker...my point is this...why are you working with so much power...My basic Electricity book states '' when measuring circuits over 300 volts, do not hold the test prods "... why do you think that's relevant? I built the 555 and the gate and the 4017 s with a 9 volt battery...and most of the time the battery was three quarters dead anyway...when I got the Johnson cascade running...it ran for days with a dead 9v battery. That stage is over... this stage of the Figuera I'm using a half charged lawnmower battery...the BDX53s get real hot ( to the touch with no heat sinks ) with a 12 volt lawnmower battery...I imagine the resistors that came in today are going to get hot too...if a retired civil engineer (p. Kelly ) didn't know what resistors or what configuration to use them...its up to me to get the right configuration...

All the Best
Randy
ps I'm not downing anyone just Looking for " safety first " approach...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 24, 2015, 04:01:20 AM
@King

That is for the single primary..3300 watts in and 3000 watts out.

When you connect the two primaries in series resistance of primary wire goes up and input goes down to 220 volts and 7 amps or 1540 watts. Output in the secondary is 620 volts and 20 amps. Secondary truns are higher and secondary gets additive flux fr om  the central core. Experimentally
verified.
I believe the same results could be obtained by using a step down tranformer and giving 12 volts and 16 amps and replacing the quadfilar with a single wire of adequate thickness.
Earlier we had an insulated room where the walls were pated with thick paper and card board and ground was coverwed with platic sheet and one inch thick plywood. We had rubber chappels and occassionally gloves. Now that has been removed.
We had used volt meters and ammeters to take readings and Engineer who took measurements had other devices tomeasure input and output. He is no more.

I can personally confirm that greater the no of coils in a multifilar coil greater is the resistance. and amperage diminishes at the input. The magnetic field remains powerful.  and can be used to produce electricity.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 25, 2015, 11:32:32 AM
Randy
  You might want to look into making some of your own parts so you control the specs. Mass produced stuff is great for the people it employs and the owners of those companies but the bottom line is,they have a bottom line.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 26, 2015, 01:36:07 AM
Hello All,

Doug...
I bought " soft " iron and wrapped it with 26 awg magnet wire... but I didn't wrap very many turns... maybe 100 turns and used a larger gauge magnet wire and maybe 25 to 50 turns in the secondary........................................
I just received 18 gauge magnet wire and 14 gauge magnet wire for the secondary...
I will wrap:
300 to 400 turns of 18 gauge magnet for the primary s
200 turns of 14 gauge for the secondary...
I will also use:
six 2 ohm 25 watt wirewound resistors
one 1 ohm 25 watt wirewound resistors

and see what the results are...
I also have to use heat sinks on the 8 BDX53s ................................will post results as they arrive.

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 26, 2015, 06:09:12 AM
Randy:

Yours is a classical step down transformer set up. You need to double the length and turns of the secondary as the primary. Otherwise you are not going to get any results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 26, 2015, 07:30:31 AM
26 mar 15   02:26:00

at this point... I'm just trying to get A result.
oh by the way... do you know how hard it is to wrap 14 gauge wire around a half inch too small piece of iron...

randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 26, 2015, 09:55:31 AM
1/2 inch diameter iron..What is the length? I have used all types of wires up to 6 sq mm wire and we have 14 gauge magnet wire as well.

Please go here..

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html

Calculate the number of turns needed and amperage needed to be given to reach 2.7 Tesla..

The input should not exceeed 2.7 to 3 Tesla range. Even earlier than that the iron will become very hot. You must also cover the iron first with a plastic sheet or paper to insulate it. Otherwise it can result in the circuit breaker or fuze being blown out due to the eddy currents in the iron and the induced current in the secondary short circuting each other.

Your turns may be very high for the iron core size. Never exceed 20 to 25 turns per inch unit length depending on the input.

I have used 4 inch dia and 6 inch dia cores packed with iron rods. And they were 18 inch long. If the Magnetic field strength goes up very high iron will become so hot it can melt. So calculate the number of turns, the input amperage given, voltage and then proceeed.

If you are using a 6 inch long iron as I suspect from your 1/2inch dia iron..then the number of turns are very high unless you intend to give very minor voltage and amperage. That may not have any effect really. Some amount of voltage and amperage is needed to be given.

There is no need to duplicate what I did and please proceed at your own pace.

Best of Luck to you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 26, 2015, 12:10:42 PM
3/8 inch square
2 1/2 inches long...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 26, 2015, 12:17:18 PM
I wrapped insulating electrician's tape around the square iron...
In hind sight I should have left the iron round on the inside and squared the ends off ( with a bevel finish )...........
2 1/2 inches is hard to wrap anything with as its too small to handle...
plus if I need to have a gap between them... it changes the finished product...

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 26, 2015, 12:44:05 PM
Randy:

2.5 inches long is how long?. It is just as long as a finger size for most people in the world. Slighly above the length of a standard 9 volt battery. Half the diameter of a 9 volt battery. What can such an iron do?

With due respect, What are you going to do with that size..Are you going to send milliamps of current through the wires. Most of the current will be wasted in the wire itself due to heat.

If you put a permanent magnet on the wire properly in the central core you are likely to get more output than input for the permanent magnet properly placed will increase the magnetic field strength. No air gaps are possible between two opposite poles of a magnet.

Minimum size should be 2.5 inches dia and 9 inches long. This will make a lot of noise when the number of layers exceed 8. A 4 inch dia and 18 inch long core would create a lot of noise when the input amperage is 16 and the number of turns exceed 12..The wires we normally used are 4 sq mm insulated wire.

You are talking about a table top model.For it to work you need to put a permanent magnet in the proper way on the secondary in the middle. Otherwise nothing will happen.

The devices that I built weighed not less than 150 Kgms and are intended for actual use. I now understand how do you expect the Electronics based devices to work.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 26, 2015, 06:53:54 PM
I didn't have any references to go by...
the soft iron came round and I had a machinist square it... I should have left it round in the middle and squared the ends...
I also should have had the two transformers made not all 7...

Et All
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 27, 2015, 03:05:16 AM
so using the transformer turns calculator and the iron and 28 gauge magnet wire that I have...
150 turns in the primary
200 turns in the secondary

12volts turns into -------> 16 volts

150 turns in the primary
225 turns in the secondary

12 volts turns into----------> 18 volts

correct?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 27, 2015, 10:31:02 AM
Randy:

I'm sorry I'm unable to help you.

What we have seen is that in the Figuera set up transformer laws or principles do not seem to work exactly. If you take one single core it is applicable to a certain extent. If you have two primary and second secondary in between the two opposite poles of two primaries the laws or principles of transformers do not appear to apply. But I must confess that my knowledge of transformer rules are very very elementary.

What we have done is simple. we have understood that the magnagetic field strength affects the output. Greater the magnetic field strength and greater the length of the wire ( so naturally turns of the wire and layers of the coil) and thickness of wire greater is the output wattage. So in a way we have kept on increasing the magentic field strength and explored the methods of obtaining higher magnetic field strengths at lower inputs.

Since I cannot see what you are doing and the sizes that you are mentioning have no relationship to what we did I'm unable to help. I can however say that if you increase the magnetic field strength the output wattage will increase.  That is the only conclusion that I can assure.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 27, 2015, 11:40:54 AM
27 Mar 15   05:51:05

the Laws of God don't change...
the Laws of Nature don't change...
the Laws of Man always change!
my point is this... magnetism and electricity aren't going to change just because were downsized or enlarged...
over unity isn't going to change just because we Live in Florida or India...
Patrick told (emailed ) me and stated there isn't such a thing as  " free " energy... you have to spend money to obtain the materials...you have to build it and you have to maintain it...

the circuit that's on Patrick's website I built... it works! I have 7 of the transformers in soft iron... I have electrified the soft iron with nine volts and they pick up paper clips and drop them when the electricity stops...they are electro magnets...
I have a 1 Lb. of 28 gauge magnet wire.... I can wrap 100 turns or any turns until it runs out...
I can step up or step down... or step around in a circle if you like...

I have felt the surge of pulsing electricity (magnetism) with a commercial electro magnet...
I have used a commercial miniature transformer and have seen the analog multimeter move on the lower scale of a dc range
But what I haven't seen or witnessed is 12 volts turning into 13 volts etc.............

I am getting ready to switch out 6 100 ohm 1 watt resistors to six 2 ohm 25 watt resistors and 1 50 ohm one watt resistor to 1 one ohm 25 watt resistor...
which is going to send up to 9 amps of power to ? turns of magnet wire around a FE core...with ? turns on the secondary...
so 100 turns of 28 gauge magnet wire on a primary should turn 12 volts into 12 volts on a secondary with 100 turns of magnet wire eh?

incidentally...
there is free voltage coming from the earth... :-)

All the Best
Randy

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 27, 2015, 03:16:05 PM
I'm sorry I'm not able to understand your post. I do not understand the need for electronics and did not use it.

It is a well known thing that two different earth points will show a small voltage difference. Longer the distance between the two greater will be the voltage difference. This is not new. And is very well known.

You may please see the attached 1893 patent on producing 3 kilowatt of Electricity from Earth continuously. No electronics again needed here but wet ground is needed and all equipment is buried under the earth. At that time the device must be demonstrated to work. Look at the specific voltage and amperage given by the inventor in the patent.  Of course this is actually a part of electrochemistry combined with geomagnetism and the Figuera device is totally different.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 27, 2015, 03:28:45 PM
that's fine...

Thank you for the info... I will study it this weekend.
I also understand your position of not using electronics... if it works for you. I on the other hand am/are committed to finishing this project with the electronics...it either will show results or not...

anyway...
have a great day/night and I will be posting results and exchanging info as they come

All the best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 29, 2015, 12:46:16 AM
Ok folks here is a nice easy site on how to make your own resisters. Scale to fit and mod as you see fit.
  http://www.cappels.org/dproj/DIY_Copper_Wire_Resitors/DIY_Copper_Wire_Resitors.html (http://www.cappels.org/dproj/DIY_Copper_Wire_Resitors/DIY_Copper_Wire_Resitors.html)

  Funny thing this winding technique, nothing is written in stone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 29, 2015, 01:30:33 AM
that's nice to know in a pinch...

interestingly... Tesla and Figueras must have had their own means of resistance...
I like the fact of knowing I can get semiconductors at digi key or mouser online and egad s " radio shack ". I wonder what you do when the 555 or the 4017 s blow?

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 29, 2015, 03:04:21 PM
Randy
 What did people do before IC's? Life did not begin with nor will it end with or as a result of not having IC's.

 I have a couple of prep'er friends you remind me of them. They have lots of stuff stock piled. They could defend off a small army and live off their food stocks for a long time. They ask me what I have done about food storage? I tell them I have invested in skills rather then stock piles. They look at me confused. Then I explain the benefits of primitive weaponry and practice with silence and stealth and having a few prep'er friends who have stock piles of stuff. It's a joke but the look on their face is priceless. Then they start to think about it a little more but they never seems to take the hint that with out skills there is no reason to stock pile. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 30, 2015, 03:07:18 AM
I was able to convert the spanish pages of the Buforn patents to English and read a few pages that are of interest to me. I have not read them all.

One clear thing that emerges is this..The inpur source was a battery or combination of batteries. Initial power source was a battery.

The DC power from the input was interrupted by the rotary device. It was very difficult to make for us first and then we made it after a student has studied making brushes and bought carbon brushes. As the sparks were high we used a step down pulley system to reduce the sparks.

Now if we use a thick wire the amperage that goes through the wire is high. A low ohm wire or copper coil or rod could have acted as the resistor easily to send significant amperage through the coils. The resulting magnetic field must be varied to create induction. It is here that the rotary device was used to create interruptted DC.

Output should have been either pulsed DC or AC.

Buforn patent explains that a coil of wire of sufficient length and thickness was put on the secondary in the center and that was used to keep the battery charged.

The output from the feedback coils should have been converted to pulsed DC or DC before it was feeding the battery. Not clear to me if Figuera had access to diodes in 1908 but he was a leading professor in the world and should have had access to it.

The entire set up should have been present before the current was switched on. Once the power is started the battery is not needed as the induced power from the feedback coil keeps flowing to the primary. The circuit looks deceptively simple and easy.

There has been a calculation that the AC to DC conversion and DC to AC conversion losses are to the order of 50% when the usage at the instument level was taken. This has led to some innovations here that use only off grid dc power for dc based appliances.

I cannot say if my understanding is accurate. I have used AC and I have rectified it to pulsed DC and obtained results. This looks like being totally based on DC input and pulsed DC or interrupted DC to create the induction. If the resulting feedback voltage was higher than the battery input voltage no current would flow from the battery and battery becomes redundant.

But I still doubt if a small input reported at 100 volts and 1 amp can cause this kind of a claimed result of 20000 watts. I find it very difficult to believe. If at all it was achieved it would have required an enormous amount of wire and iron.

The largest electromagent I made was 18 inches in diameter and we took 4 mandays to build that. 11 filar coil was wound on iron and plastic for 18 inches length and 18 layers and 18 inches was its width. That was all the wire we had. No current went out of the coil although the input showed 220 volts and 0.5 amp and the magnetic field was very powerful. Almost near saturation levels and the magnet was screaming. This is what I called magnet eating electricity in the first of my posts last year..

I thought we found some thing new... Nothing..resistance was more than 220 ohms or higher and so it was not sufficient for any current to flow while the input significantly magnetized the electromagnet. If the wires are used to make two such electromagnets and the secondary is placed in between them the secondary must produce more than the input. I accept this as doable as I have done it but it still is very unbelievable that such a small source of input as 100 watts can be used to create 20000 watts of output. But with electricity and magnetism I have learnt that the theories or our beliefs do not exactly work and what we observe in practical experiments are different. So I cannot rule it out either. Please give some allowance here to me as I did not have any guidance or background education in this field.

Apparantly Prof Figuera had a sizable funding for his experiments as did Tesla. These are very expensive experiments. Very very expensive and very very time consuming. It has drained me a lot of money and time.

Whether electronics or otherwise unless we use significant wires and number of turns and amperages it is not possible to achieve this kind of results.

Honestly I do not think that Figuera needed resistors to vary the current to vary the magnetic field. That could have been easily done by varying the turns and layers of coils in each electromagnet. Magnetic field strength = Number of turns per unit length X Amperes.

You vary either the number of turns or the Amperes and it is not as if the Amperes alone needed to be varied. That explanation is not credible.
Secondly in practical experiments we have found that only when the two electromagnets are either equal or nearly equal in strength we got significant output. The fundamentals cannot change.

I hope that the information I have provided is useful to others.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 30, 2015, 03:24:29 AM
@ Doug... its nice to have friends...to barter with...to help in a pinch...to call a friend is to break bread with...you can never have enough friends...
I'll stock pile the 555 s and the 4017s... when the grid fails...or whatever... I'll ride my bicycle to my friends houses (carrying my gun or whatever...)

@Ramaswami...still thinking and pouring over circuits.

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 30, 2015, 10:29:13 AM
NRamaswami


Thank You for detailed explanation. I also translated some parts of Bufor patent into English but not the whole. The interesting point is how many times he is talking about Earth magnetism.
I have no slight doubt that Figuera used coils resistance and tapped coils in various points instead of resistors. Basically it's simple, and he had no much funds also - he re-used the AC generator he had from rotary device he patented in 1902 (that one with stationary armature core and field coils while rotating only copper coils of rotor).


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 30, 2015, 03:53:51 PM
Forest:

I thank you for your kind words. I'm obliged.

I have read some documents that say if we create an artificial voltage differences between North and south direction placed points through coils of wires wound Natrually in East and west direction..with the earth points being preceeded by a bank of capacitors it is just enough if we create potential difference once and it will keep on flowing through the coil which can be taken from the coil without any interruption. I have not done these experiments. It appears that high voltage differences have to be initiated for this to happen and wet points must be put at both ends.

In Figuera patent it looks that the primary ends are connected to Al Origin. It is naturally the negative of the battery. Possibly it can also mean an an initial earth connection in addition to battery negative and the positive connection can be given to the rotating positive point through another earth connection. It looks feasible but not indicated clearly nor have I done these experiments.

It looks easily doable if we give the feedback coil to the primary in a pulsed DC device. Whatever be the increase in the voltage or amperage can be made to safely go to earth. The device will not burn out. We can have circuit breakers and resistors and metal oxide varistors and capacitors in series to control the votlage and amperage. It looks theoretically correct.

However I have found that whatever theory may say need not be practically observable. If any one has told me that current cannot flow through a wire and an electromagnet can convert the entire energy in to magnetic energy preventing the current from flowing through the wire I would not have believed it. Similarly I have made many devices that produced between 105 to 116% of input energy. Same device produced different amounts of output based on the input voltage fluctations from the mains. In general higher the input voltage and higher the output voltage greater has been the efficiency. The maximum efficiency we have observed is COP>8 but much more could be theoretically produced if the earth connections are present or if the earth and atmospheric connections are present. But these are very risky experiments. We really do not know what kind of amperage increase may come ( or may not come). If low voltage and high currents to be employed we must use very thick wires and highly insulated coils the kind of insulation of multi core cables. Secondary coils must be thicker than the primary coils. Secondary turns must be more than the primary coils. Secondary length should be longer than the primary coils. 

In general I have observed that higher the insulation higher is the amperage that is consumed by the coil. I do not understand this as well at this point of time.

If you wind a coil of secondary first and then continuing to wind the secondary start winding the primary and then still continue to wind the secondary you have the secondary running along with and adjacent to and covering the entire primary. I have seen that we can easily see COP>1 measurements in such devices. Always I have used only a plastic tube to build the devices and I have not used the transformer cores and I have used only soft iron rods and not laminated transformer cores which are less magnetic than the soft iron.

Unless some one is well trained in safety aspects we should not and cannot do these experiments. The possibilty of attracting telluric currents with high voltage differences between two earth points is theoretically very high. It is not prudent to take risks when I'm not trained in these aspects. Therefore beyond a point I felt that we would be taking way too high a risk.

Hanon has asked me to build and demonstrate a cop>1 device. Any one can easily build that based on the experimental results I have posted. It is not a question of one doing it for others to verify it. It is a question of any one being able to replicate the results that would convince the usual doubting persons.

Increasing the output is a question of increasing the magnetic field strength and increasing the number of turns and thickness of wire in the secondary and of course my experiments were conducted only with insulated wires and not with enamalled magnetic insulation. The plastic insulated wires were capable of withstanding 2000 volts easily though they are rated for only 1100 volts. I would estimate that the cables can withstand any thing around 10000 volts althrough it is rated only at 3300 volts.
 
I'm posting these results for there is no point in pretending the wrong way. Only now people are studying again Magnetics in India and believe me the rules and Laws of Magnetics will change and new devices will come. We built rockets and nuclear bombs and missiles from scratch. The magnetics field is nothing compared to what has been done by Scientists in India.  The studies are being made by a number of individuals as well as institutions. It is a matter of time before these devices become common place all over the world.  You may even soon see transparent windows and glass walls of buildings acting like electricity generators. That day may come in less than 10 years.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 30, 2015, 04:36:47 PM


The DC power from the input was interrupted by the rotary device.

.....
It is here that the rotary device was used to create interruptted DC.


Ramaswami,

I think you are mixing the design from the 1902 generator with the design from the 1908 generator. The 1902 works with pulsed DC ("intermittent , or alternating in sign current" as Figuera mentioned in 1902)

But the 1908 generator works with two signals. The two signals coming from the rotary conmutator. The conmutator was not delivering pulsed DC as you said. It create two continuos signals. Just see two literal quotes from Figuera 1908 patent:


" ... the commutator bars embedded in a cylinder of insulating material that does not move; but around it, and always in contact with more than one contact, rotates a brush “O” "

and, later Figuera states again:

"the brush “O” rotates around the cylinder “G” and always in contact with two of their contacts"

Therefor he was trying to get a make-before-break contact. Therefore each signal is continuous in the 1908 device.

I hope it helps


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 30, 2015, 08:30:41 PM
How can it make and break if it is always in contact? Dont you think maybe it just sends the current more to one set then the other then back again by blocking the flow with more and less resistance as the brush/s travel around the circle? It's a drum by the way with the resister array wrapped around the side of the drum. The Lines of confusion show where the resistive wire connects to the contact bars that make up the commutator. Only the beginning and end of the resistance wire connect to the N and S magnets. not all those additional lines. the more sets of resistance arrays and contact sets ,the more times it will shift the field per second for a given RPM. Maybe I forgot to mention that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 30, 2015, 08:52:50 PM
It's important to recall what Figuera tried to do - to move magnetic field lines instead of moving coil in space.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 31, 2015, 03:04:58 AM
So what you're saying is Fiquera tried to obtain it...and not obtained it...or did I interpret that incorrectly...

I am learning a lot about electronics whilest trying to obtain it too.

:-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 31, 2015, 10:57:21 AM
We did not use the rotary switch. Gave the power from the mains. We also built the rotary device which always touches the two adjacent points. very heavy spark comes if only one point is touched. I have even posted a video of it earlier. I'm not competent to discuss the circuit. And we did not use the circuit. Circuit appears to me to send power from top and bottom alternately and simultaneously. Total Resistance on one side is higher and lower alternately but I do not understand the circuit and cannot comment as we did not use it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 01, 2015, 08:37:53 AM
Here is a clarification on the COP>8 output obtained. There were lot of questions earlier how did we measure the Amps to be 20 and Amps cannot be 20 when we have not connected to any load and only voltage without load can be seen. Easy friends. 620 volts and 50 Hertz current is deadly. Can we take a risk. We cannot. We must give it to a step down transformer and step it down and then give it to the load. But we did not give to the loads for we did not have a step down transformer. So how can we measure or see Amps in the Ammeter. This was the question and I elected not answer that in my earliest posts.

It was a common sense decision. We cannot take a risk with high voltage.

We connected the two ends of the secondaries two earth points about 7 feet apart. Nothing more. Ammeter immediately showed 20 Amps and the volt meter showed 620 Volts. Load was provided by the earth between the two points. I do have a doubt that if we provide the frequency at about 7.8 to 20  Hertz we will be creating a resonant frequency to the frequency of earth. At that point the wires must be able to tap the telluric currents. If the distance between the two points is higher the resistance of load is higher and more amperage would be shown.

I have seen other earth based generators that are cop>1 but it seems to me that by connecting a high voltage transformer having thick wires and giving to the two wet earth points we should be able to take power from the earth points. High amperage is possible if we use thick low resistance copper poles inserted in to earth and connect it to step down transformers to get 220 volts.

Figuera shows clearly that the primary negative wires goes to Al Origin. It is deemed to be battery. It can also be two earth points connected to battery negative. Once current is taken from the positive the output from the secondary can be given to the positive and a very low amount of input is enough to rotatethe rotary device. It uses a small DC motor and uses a small batttery.

This is how we achieved COP>8.. Figueras Al Origin means the source. The primary wires take negative charges and the source of Biggest negative charged body we know of is,  Planet Earth. So he has connected the primaries to Two earth points. This is my feeling but we used only AC current from mains. The device is of the type where increasing the voltage increases the amperage without being connected to earth. It is possible that by increasing the turns and giving to a step down transformer we may be able to reach 20 amps naturally and earth points may not be needed and if that is the case a self sustaining generator using a battery, inverter, modified Figuera device, step down transformer and connection back to the inverter to recharge the batteries and excess output may well be possible. But we have not tested it. We have achieved cop>8 results only by connecting to Earth.

Barbosa Patents also show very thick wires being connected to earth.  The Peter Grandics Patent also connect the high frequency high voltage secondaries to two earth points to claim a cop>100 output. It is possible that ths method takes the amperage from the telluric currents.

I'm convinced that the primary being connected to Al origin is nothing but two wet points. The two primary wires are shown in the drawing well separated indicating two earth points at a distance. The device has been shown to work as claimed and inspection certificate was also provided. This is a device any one can make cheaply.

In my case the initial voltage was quite high. 220 volts. Hanon has repeatedly indicated to me that the input was 100 volts and 1 amp only and output was 20000 watts as stated in BuForn Patents. Without the earth connection I'm not able to believe that it is doable. 'With the earth connection yes more than that is doable. it is a known science. Known fact. Too many patents are out there and no patent can be obtained nor granted for such devices.  I have seen comments did Figuera did it or not? Really very insulating to the Genius of the Man. Hanon must be complimented for bringing out full details of a real working device that can be replicated by a dummy like me. I had to spend a lot of money.  A small device can show cop>1 performance easily. I'm not inclined to build it for whenever we have tried after learning this some staff get injured.

I have provided full information. Tariel Kapanadze devices also use two earth points but that is very high frequency I guess. He is dipping in to Telluric currents. And wet points are essential for that. There is nothing else.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 04, 2015, 08:33:04 AM
Hi All

This thread seems to be dead and no replies. Any way I will post this info here. Patrick Kelly felt that the information is given in several posts of mine and it is difficult for any one to comprehend that. So he has asked me to create a comprehensive file.

The attached file shows how the device was wound and constructed in experiments conducted in July 2013. The output was cop>8. I do not have pictures and videos and so we will rebuild that device and post pictures and videos.

This file will also be given to many others. In view of the fact that I only replicated what Prof Figuera and Buforn did in the 1908-1914 and I only replaced the interrupted DC given from the battery by them to AC, I'm not filing any patents for this. This info is open source.

I have made other devices that can be made based on the same principle. I have also found that it is possible to create a manifold increase in the cop>8 device if the input is given through a spark plug. That becomes high voltage high frequency current. Output current is also hi frequency and it needs to be brought down to low frequency. Tariel kapanadze device is based on the high frequency input. High frequency current is not dangerous. It will not penetrate the body due to skin effect. Hi frequency pulsed dc current can in fact kill all parasites, virus and bacteria in the body and that is what is used by the Violet Ray deviec and the zapper device of Dr. Hulda Clark.

Patrick Kelly helped me prepare this document. He did not provide any direct guidance and he did not take part in the experiments. We learnt this all by winding ourselves. One of the persons in my team who worked on this project died out of illness. He was advised that his life span is short and he had gone through three intestinal surgeries before joing this work. He was not married and passed away due to stomach complications after being treated in a hospital about a few months after we did this experiment. I had gone in to poor finances as we did this experiment and we felt that this is a cursed field and avoided doing this experiments after that. Patrick and Hanon provided some financial assistance after this to motivate me to redo the experiments and when we restarted an experienced carpenter got hurt in the eyes on another project. I was so frightened that I stopped. We did not receive any threats from any one.

Though I'm a Patent Attorney I do not feel it is ethical to modify the device and file any patents for this device. I have only replicated what Prof Figuera and especially BuForn another Patent Attorney did in 1908-1914. Figuera did not disclose the best mode of operation of the device. BuForn did in his last patent and discussed extensively that the device functions due to its ability to attract and focus the Geomagnetic waves flowing from North Pole to South Pole.

I will post photos and videos on how to replicate if time and money permits.

I must give credit to Patrick J Kelly for compling his book. Without that I would not have studied this. I must give Hanon the main credit. He wanted to revive a hero in Prof. Clemente Figuera. Without the efforts of Hanon it would not have been possible for Patrick to put the information on his book. Without the two I would not have felt it to attempt to redo this experiment.

I'm not asking any one to replicate my experiments as the output is very high and comes at dangerously high voltage at low frequency current. if you are attempting any replication I'm not responsible for accidental injury or injury that you may suffer due to poor insulation or carelessness. The attached material is for educational and clarification purposes only. Do not touch the iron rods in empty hands. The iron rods in the magnetic core also carry high current. We have done our experiments after insulating the rom very thick papers and card boards on all the walls except the ceiling and insulating the ground with a  thick plastic sheet first and then put two 3/4 inch thick ply woods one on top of the other on the earth when we did the experiments. No water was allowed inside. Apart from taking these precautions we used rubber chappels and rubber gloves and kept one person to switch off at any instant as a safety measure. If you use the information in the attached document and do any experiment you are responsible for the consequences. If you are located in different places this device may produce higher or lower outputs based on the windings and number of turns and length of the wire and the magnetic field of the earth present there. I'm not assuring you that success would automatically come and if you are doing any experiment you are doing so at your own risk.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 04, 2015, 10:55:16 AM
Hello All,
We're not dead...
I have been studying air gap cores...and have also been keeping my chair warm...

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on April 04, 2015, 11:49:51 AM
Nramaswami: I see no reason why your device cannot operate at much lower power levels.
Congratulations on going big. That took a lot of guts.
In fact your project scares the hell out of me!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 04, 2015, 12:53:07 PM
A.King21.

Thanks for your kind words. It is possible to bring down the input by using very large core for primary and using a very large large number of parallel coils and large iron. It can be brought down to significant levels that the input would be only about 110 watts. If you use lower voltage then very very thick wires will need to be used. Lot of wires and lot of turns and then it would also require more iron. Thicker wires have lower resistance. So can carry more amperage. But again in order to get the turns needed you need to have a lot of wires. It will cost a lot of money.
We have stopped doing this. As I found every one doing this stuff suffers from poor health and their finances suffer. I was no exception.

Transformers are built for low cost and are a trade off. For lower cost they create as much of power as possible. They are very very leaky by their design. The square plates leak magnetism to the maximum possible extent. The induced current is minimum. But all this ensures a very long trouble free life for a transformer. So the design was one for the lowest cost, long life and stable operation and effiency was traded off. They were not intended to be generators of electricity. if we modify them they can be used as generators.

If the device were to be built for lower voltage in mind, then the amperage should be higher and the device needs to be bigger. Possibly it can work at lower voltage and higher amperage using a shunted coil design as it is obvious to me. But we have put this info as open source so others can do it. We are not keen to redo all this. We have had enough..No more of it.

When we use a solenoid structure reverse is true. Magnetic losses are minimized and they are lost only at the poles of solenoid. Not all around.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 04, 2015, 02:29:01 PM
You should have incorporated the magnetic amplifier control method to control the output to a safe level. You did a great job by the way. It's unfortunate you keep trying to quit experimenting. I hope you know that wont work. It's an addiction to which there is no recovery program. I suspect you will take a vacation from it and come back to build the dc input resistive unit to start it up with out an inverter.

 In addition the 08 version uses 7 sets of magnets instead of one giant set. The outputs were combined and there for controllable by simply not connecting any more then needed for a given use.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 04, 2015, 04:41:46 PM
Doug:

Thanks for the kind words and I hope I have shifted the addiction to others. Economy is bad and I have no funds to do any thing here. So that is a very effective anti-dote to this addiction. Secondly we need to come out of the fear that if we do this we will suffer and staff will suffer.     

We have tried several small cores being joined etc concepts and they did not work. We are dealing with cheap to obtain low cost soft iron rods. They need some size to produce results. A cat size device cannot work like a Tiger. If you want a Tiger you need to build a Tiger sized device. Small size devices will not have the magnetic field strength. That is not stated in the formula but it is common sense. This is why other devices use permanent magnets. I have found that if we are use smaller length cores bigger diameter of the tube is needed. That does not reduce the weight of the device involved and it is easier to handle a long tube and then wind insulated wires on it.

Possibly not knowing any thing we did it all wrong as per theory but ended up producing results. Other skilled people can now redo this with significantly reduced size and input. I would request you to recognize that when I first started this in February 2013 I did not know what is the difference between voltage and amperage. How in six months we did it is not clear to me. But we kept trying and Hubbard was the most difficult one to do. We found that the straight pole design to be the most effective one. So we made things simple and wound a large one.

I have tried to reduce the output voltage and increase the amperage but those efforts were unsuccessful. I have checked the voltage on lamps up to 300 volts and it does not work. So an excess output voltage than the lamps are designed to stand is needed to create the COP>1 effect.
I have also tried to reduce the input voltage and that was also unsuccessful. But I must concede that it must be possible for a well trained and well educated scientist to outperform us easily. Ignore the Law of conservation of energy and focus only on Magnets and then it becomes easy. I have tried explain to the best of my understanding but I could be wrong in the explanations.

I believe that if we have used very thick wires like the wires that can handle 100 amps or more, then it would or could have been possible to use lesser turns and give more current to get the same effect. But we invested in 4 sq mm wires that can carry 24 amps and stuck with them. I must also say that the formulas of magnetism are not accurate at all times to all things and shapes. We calculate some thing and do it and the result does not come. So we do the opposite of what is expected to be done and results do come. It is very strange. Therefore I cannot make any assertion that thick wires and lower turns would automatically work.

Fortunately I'm not a scientist nor an academic. I was using my own funds so I could afford to fail. I have actually asked one of my clients who owns many factories but his Electrical Engineer refused to believe us and so he did not do any thing and did not even care to come and check the facts. So what can I do? The device we did is entitled to be patented as I have eliminated any moving parts. But for my own reasons I avoided filing any patents in India or elsewhere and made it open source. If we give some thing good to the community, good things must flow towards us is a rule of nature. So I have made this open source.

One knowledgeable friend did have a look at the device when it worked. He said that the result is not due to magnetism but due to an isotopic conversion of the iron and that it needs to be investigated. But he will not touch the project himself. So what can I do? Rather than leaving it all to dust I have made it open source so others can build upon this. I may well be wrong in the statement that you need to reach beyond the 300 voltage to achieve COP>1 effect and it may be due to the shape of the device and the material used or the wires used. But that is what we observed. Others can now take it forward.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cap100nf on April 06, 2015, 06:25:56 PM
Hello Ramaswami.




Thank you very much for the compilation of your research, and for making it available for every one.
Can you please answer a few questions please.


1. In the compilation it is stated 85-90 turns for each single secondary layer. Is it valid for all secondary layers?
2. The primary layers are they also 85-90 turns?
3. Finally it is stated that the soft iron rods shall not be insulated, but in an earlier post here you stated that if they not is isolated they will
    get extremely hot and even can melt. What is right?


Thank you.


/ Kent
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on April 06, 2015, 07:10:35 PM
hello NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/),
I assume you know that your work is on Patrick Kelly's web site. Are his drawings and text correct? When you measured your device working, did you measure the output voltage at the same time that you measured the current with the amp meter. Both my digital amp probe and my sixty year old analog amp probe give erroneous readings anywhere near a transformer. Were your meters far from the  coil arrangement?
Thanks for your time.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 06, 2015, 09:37:34 PM
Thanks for the questions.

The room where we did these experimepnts is a small 7 feet by 10 feet room.  Therefoe the measuring meters all analog only were at a distance of a maximum of 2 or 3 feet from the coil. Not more. I have checked up to 300 volts and 10 amps using a single primary butthere we had 12 layers of secondary wire on the inneride of primary alone. Electrician refused to allow checking on load after that. The output of 620 volts and 20 amps was measured when we connected the secondary to two earth points separated by a distance of about 7feet.  They are placed East to west. I can measure the distance between earth point and tell you if you want.

Ammeter and voltmeter readings were taken at the same time. You connect the Ammeter in series and voltmeter is connected from one point of Ammeter to the other wir so it is in parallel. You can go to www.tmptens.com and see the way measurements are taken for the water turbine. Same electrician measured the 620 volts and 20 amps iutput.

No of turns on the central secondary are lower. 85-90 turns are for the secondary in the primary coil.
Even here depending on whether we used Aluminium or copper wires number of turns varied as 4 sq Al wire is thicker. Secondly number of turns also varied from one layer to another as we were winding by hand. Wires are insulated wires and not enamalled magnet wires.

Actually there is nothing muc here. Use multi layered coils to reduce input but create a large sized magnet.  Use a lot wires and turns to take electricity from the rotating magnetic field.

Regarding the rods they were never insulated but if you excced a certain number of layers for a coil diameter the iron makes a lot of noise and both wires and iron become hot. For a 2.5 inch plastic tube it happens when reach layer 9. Up to 7 layers it can work efficiently and without much of heat. Whatever be the length. However the number of layers increase for this effect to manifest at larger diameter tubes filled with iron rods.

I had been advised i should insulate the wires but I could not afford it.I have stiff opposition from my family an d staff who feel that this project has brought us some kind of bad luck. Whatever photos are available we can post. No videos were taken. Mainly because we were afraid that the magnetic field may affect the equipment used.

If at all there is any thing to say amount of electricity is directly proporyional to amount and diameter and length and so mass of iron used. I do not know why but this is an observatio n made by us


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 06, 2015, 09:58:23 PM
http://www.linux-host.org/energy/smoreland.html but I don't think it's about radioactive material.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 06, 2015, 11:23:49 PM
Congrads Ramaswami...
I hope it helps everyone that uses it...

It is your belief that semiconductors and the apparatus that Clemente used to power the Fiquera are not needed... but the principal of iron with turns of copper wire around it...

I see the comment about " addiction " pertains to all of us who dabble with " free Energy ".......................................

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cap100nf on April 07, 2015, 07:32:40 AM
[size=78%]Ramaswami


Thank you very much for your answers.




With Kindly Regards


Kent /

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 07, 2015, 07:49:20 AM
Randy:

I do not understand why feel that a particular mode of doing things is needed. What matters is the principle of operation behind any device.

Look at Figuera's own words as translated and shown at http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

I believe this is done by Hanon.
----------------------------------------------BEGIN------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION

Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns,  while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic  field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced  is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.

Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased and reduced in intensity;  since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical  induced current .It was considered the possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the electrical current which produces it.

The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.

Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.
In order to privilege the application to the production of large industrial electrical currents, on the principle that says that “there is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application of said principle.

This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

Let’s therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form and way that has been used to make the application.
------------------------------------------END-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now look at what I did. I sent primary current from the first P1 to the P2 and then back to the mains neutral. But It is AC current. Every second it changes direction 50 times. The only difference is I have used quadfilar coils to ensure that the current flows first in the primary four times and then moves to the second Primary where it again rotates four times before it changes its direction.

When the current rotates first in P1 the first primary is stronger than the second primary. But when it rotates in P2 second primary is stronger than P1. Now for every second P1 and P2 alternately becomes stronger and weaker because what we used is AC from the mains.

If you look closely at Figueras circuit it is intended to make the current flow first in one direction let us say from the head to the tail portion in Let us say P1, P3,P5 etc and then in P6,P4 and P2 by using the rotating contact device. He has given the current from a battery and so it is a direct current going one way only and it needs to be pulsed and so the circuit is given.

That arrangement is subject to the wear and tear of the rotary contact or commutator brushes.

I have simplified the whole thing because 1. I did not and could not make commutator brushes that can withstand the sparks that come and 2. as you know well I do not understand the circuits.

But as you can see the principle has been implemented in the modification made by me. We found that the straight pole is the best one.

Actually Figuera hides several trade secrets.

a. What is the pole between the primaries. That has been an intense discussion here and I had to tell that if you show identical poles against each other the result will be zero voltage. Why and how I could say that? Hands on experience without theoretical knowledge. I have tried myself identical poles to face each other and got zero voltage. So I could describe it.

b. Figuera hides what is the method of making the coils.. He simply says coils properly wound...What is the proper winding..We had to figure it out.

C. Figuera hides what is the core size..to be used.

d. Figuera also hides that the secondary has to be wound on the primary core also. Otherwise it goes waste. We are all aware that transformers are the most efficient electrical devices and they are normally about 98% effiecient. So if we wind a secondary coil in Primary core we must get 98% what is supplied. It is simple common sense that if you wind it on two primaries and then use the magnetic flux between the two opposite poles of the two primaries you are going to have more than 100% of the input.

What we did not realize is the fact that if the wires are of identical size in the primary and secondary, doubling the voltage, also doubles the amperage. At 300 volts we could generate 10 amps. At 620 volts it became 20 amps. But 300x10=3000 while 620x20= 12400. An almost four fold increase in power output. Voltage developed is based on the number of turns. Amperage is based on the size of the wire used and the magnetic field strength and (I believe or assume frequency..If the frequency were higher Amperage would have been higher too. I think this is what Don Smith is saying. But he is using very high frequency high voltage units that is frightening to replicate...I cannot confirm it as it is my assumption)

Figuera gives only an indication in the statement that reels and reels of coils.. That alone gives the hint that a lot of wires and turns are needed.

We have determined that the core size matters. You must have a minimum of 1.5 feet of iron rods and bigger the diameter of the primary the better it is. Actually bigger the diameter of the iron and higher the mass and higher the number of parallel wires the lower the input. What I have done at 1540 watts input can also be done with an input of 110 watts. and possibly more output in the secondary may be the result.

What I do not understand is this?

We understand that conducting metals are without any life.

We understand that conducting metals will generate electricity when they are subjected to a rotating magnetic field.

Not otherwise..

Now where is this Electricity coming from? What exactly is this electricity. Why and how a metal knows that it is in the rotating magnetic field and why and how it produces electricity and from where does it come..Answer...We do not know.

Now If we take a permanent magnet near an electromagnet the permanent magnet begins to oscillate violently. It has no life. Nothing. Strangely it does not jump at the electromagnet. it is very agitated but it does not jump at it. To the contrary if you take a permanent magnet near another permanent magnet it immediately changes the poles and dives at the other magnet. We all know this also.

I have checked once by winding some coils on an agitated permanent magnet to see if it produces voltage..I may be wrong here.. For I have done it only once..But there was no voltage.

I do not know if the rotating core of the turbines is given DC current to make them permanent electromagnet. A rotating permanent magnet induces electricity. We know it from the dynamo.

It is not necessary to rotate the core if you are giving it Alternating current. But the core size should be very large and iron should be in the 2.7 to 3.7 Tesla ranges. I preferred a lower range due to heat issues. But even without heat issues by supplying a lower input and having a large core we should be able to generate substantial current.

The secret of the Figuera device is that it used both Lenz law obeying coils and Lenz law denying coils in between the opposite poles and then ensured that the output is higher.

I have tested with smaller cores but I have realized that we add more and more iron around smaller cores output voltage goes up. That was against common sense but then I realized that the size of the core matters.

You can have very large but smaller power electromagnet that avoids the heating issues but still can produce lot of electricity. When we built the very large electromagnet that prevented the current from flowing out there was no heat but the magnetism was significant. 

So you can provide even much smaller input but the core size must be big. Daniel McFarland Cook gives the details of the length and minimum diameter of the iron needed. I would say a L:D ratio of 2:1 may be used to produce the best output for the primary and the secondary can be of the 1:1 size..

Smaller the distance between the two opposite poles higher is the mangetic flux and higher is the output in the secondary.

There was a question last night if I have seen that my device is posted on Patricks website..He is the person who has trained me up and motivated me to do these experiments. He has the moral right to post it. I have not studied it yet. He has all the information with him.

If there are any other questions I will gladly answer them.

I hope we have provided sufficient information now. Please ask if there is a need.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 07, 2015, 10:14:56 AM
I must apologize for one mistake in the post I made last night.

The iron rods are uninsulated rods. When the question of the heating of the rods came up Patrick suggested that we can use some kind of insulating material to keep the iron rods becoming hot. I obviously could not afford it. So the iron rods were uninsulated in all my experiments.

2. I wrote uninsulated wire. It must read as uninsulated rods. My apologies for the typo.

3. It has been the persisient demand from all to make the secondary high voltage a shunted coil and then wind a smaller number thicker wires on it to get the output. That is shown in the document. This is common sense but I refused to do it for it is very dangerous to do it. It is a very high voltage transformer and standing near it is suicidal. I do not have people who are trained to handle high voltage.

4. A custom made step down transformer is very costly. We could wind another solenoid type step down transformer ourselves. It is no big deal but we were afraid of the high voltage and amperage. So we stopped at that point. In fact one of the forum members has criticized me that having gone so much I must do the step down transformer part and then provide the feedback coil. But as I did these experiments my finances came down and the Electrician who measured passed away and another contract carpenter got hurt in the eyes. He now refuses to even come to my place. In any case I have provided full information, made the information open source so any one any where in the world can use it and improve upon this.

So rather than keeping all these things secret and the amount of work done going waste ( I'm aware it will not be granted a patent - No point spending money on that. If some one were to buy from us it will go in to the trash- will not benefit any one).

Finally I'm not a very intelligent person by my own estimation and I'm aware of many people who are far more intelligent and capable than me. If I could do so much other intelligent people can do much better and they can do the self sustaining part. That again would be denied the patent on the ground of perpetual motion machine.

This device requires a lot of iron to avoid heating issues and then it can produce at lower magnetism levels higher outputs. Input amperage can be brought down but input voltage must be higher. This is another secret no one would reveal. If you look at Don Smith and Tesla and Tariel Kapanadze devices they are all high voltage and involve a spark gap. A spark gap will need high voltage. By giving high voltage and using multifilar coils the input can be brought down very significantly but the output is based on the mass of the iron or the frequency of the current in air core transformers. But the primary and secondary should be both of the same gauge or the secondary should be thicker than then primary.

A small device with lower voltage and higher amperage will have the heating issues. Maintaining it can be a problem to be solved. A large core avoids that and a large core can make a very powerful magnet at lower input. The large core would avoid the maintenance problems and the holes in betweent the iron rods would provide the ventilation.

But we are not prepared to test any further. Please take it forward yourself.

I have given it to an Instituion and if they are interested in building it and seek my assistance as they build it I will post photos and videos. I can provide step by step photos for any one to do it as well.

I believe by using very thick secondary coils it may be possible to get higher output even at 220 volt-300 volt levels but we are in no mood to do these things. That is the main reason for making all this an open source material.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 07, 2015, 11:05:53 AM
Ramaswami,
In your guestimation ( if there is such a word ) is/was there air gaps in your apparatus ( the rods )...

There is no Logical mystery in Fiquera's transformers ( IMHO )...the larger the air gap - the less magnetism. The smaller the air gaps the larger the iron and more turns in the coils = greater magnetism - more output... / each to one's needs and expectations.............

hence... My opinion on size and amount of electricity is the same... ( I intend to stay small until I get the results I am looking for )...
My view of OU is keeping a 9 volt battery charged up whilest using 10 volts...

Lastly...I agree with Patrick - that all we have to do is lightly tap into ZPE ( zero point energy field ) and we will be rewarded...

All the best
Randy
ps keep moving forward or gravity will prevail :-)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 08, 2015, 08:22:22 AM
Randy:

In my case the air gap is the gap between the two primaries set to a feet length. shorter the distance greater the magnetic flux and hence the production in the center coil. I will need to try to give lower values and get lower outputs. I cannot rule out any thing and things can be learned only by practical hands on experimentation is my humble observation. Calculations do not work. That is another problem. Possibly it is due to my lack of theoretical knowledge.

I'm actually thinking of rebuilding the device and giving it to some testing lab so they can test it and certify what is the input and what is the output. We will do some time in the month of June after the vacations here in May are over.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 08, 2015, 09:57:40 AM
Ramaswami,

Thinking about gaps in the conventional sense ( as I eat a bag of jelly beans )... two thoughts come to mind as I have looked at gaps on the internet... the bigger the gap the less magnetism...commercially made transformers use gaps like resistors...and/or the lessen the chance of saturation...which could lead to heat or possibly fire....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on April 08, 2015, 09:36:59 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vHhgYW3GDI


You should take a look at this.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 09, 2015, 09:16:37 AM
a.King21

Thanks for the link. I do not understand circuits and I'm not able to understand it. A similar old patent is GB191301908A of Roy Meyers. We cannot use permanent magnets to generate electricity like this. If they are heated they would lose their magnetism. This is why you do not see the commercial use of the table top devices that produce COP>1 results. The moment significant current is produced permanent magnets would be heated and then they would lose their magnetism.

I have tried the replication of Roy Meyers device and we felt that the electricity coming out is probably due to the fact that of the wires in the building. If we place it near some electrical wire or electrical appratus the output is higher and if we take it out to the terrace there was no electrical output. So we gave up. In the video it is seen a lot of turns are present and secondly it is near an electrical appratus even through it is not connected. So unless the device produces a lot of electricity that cannot be accounted for by the usage of electrical usage at the place where it is conducted we cannot be sure.

One academic friend who visited us even checked what is the distance between the nearest transformer and the device. He found it to be 300 feet away and only then he felt that isotopic changes might be taking place. Another Chemistry academic ridiculed that idea saying that it is easier to transmute one higher element to a lower element than to convert one isotope of one element to another sotope of the same element. Both of them would not allow me to name them. I personally do not know why and how the result is taking place. My simple understanding is that it is very easy to create a powerful magnet with rotating magnetic fields and when the opposite poles of two such electromagnets are used along with the normal way of using the lenz law abiding coiling type the output significantly increases. The transformer equations do not hold here and even lesser turns are able to produce higher output. That is also a big mystery to us.

As far as I can see the only clean unquestionable use of Permanent magnet motor that can work is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBRDvwrFwVo The person doing the experiment is correctly doing the unipolar magnetic motor and then use that rotation to rotate a normal alternator to generate power. This is some thing that can work. Magnets will not be heated. He is very clever. He claims to be from Pakistan but the emails to him went unanswered.

Permanent magnets are very dangerous and they will happilly jump at opposite poles and creating a magnetic shielding requires a lot of knowledge and effort but it can be done. It is another jinxed field. We had our accidents only when we tried this. I will not touch permanent magnets ever again.

One of my clients had a factory and did a lot of research of LENR devices and Permanent magnet motors and he has gone in to business ruin and poor health and sold away all assets. Another client built a self sustaining generator based on some principle that he refused to disclose but it had flywheels. I had advised him that if he does not disclose fully patent will not be granted. He refused to disclose and wanted to sell the idea to some one else for a very high fee. In one of his experiments the flywheel weighing 18 kgs broke loose and flew and hit him and moved away. The man was hospitalized for a few months.

The main reason why I open sourced my work rather than filing patents is to get out of this mess.  I have ensured that my efforts and knowledge are at least given as Knowledge to others and I have used this forum for that purpose.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 09, 2015, 10:09:27 AM
A.King21
I watched it a few times... His toroid is from steel laminate which keeps its magnetism after the power is turned off...which may/or may not keep tapping into ZPE. Which leads me to think about the inefficient grid and inefficient motors and appliances we have in our homes...parity is reached by investing in those companies ( but that's not the scope of this forum ).

Interestingly...since we don't know what electricity is and conventional science doesn't recognize Tesla, and his apparatuses, or Clemente...I'm sure research scientists, military Industrial complex and various govt. interests know what is useful in keeping us slaves...

I keep reading and re reading Patrick's website and marvel at the useful things you can do with electricity, magnetism and ZPE. When I first stumbled onto his website I was very much interested in scalar waves ( and I still am ) and whenst I finish with the " Figuera " if I finish...there's plenty of other paths to go down...

NRamaswami
......"We cannot use permanent magnets to generate electricity like this. If they are heated they would lose their magnetism. This is why you do not see the commercial use of the table top devices that produce COP>1 results. The moment significant current is produced permanent magnets would be heated and then they would lose their magnetism. "....

 to add to your statement...that's why figuera used the transformers the way He did...the heat is generated in the resistors ( wires )...He also had access to students ( since He was a well respected Professor ) and He had access to equipment to teach and do His own research...


My progress report...I am meeting with a co conspirator this morning over breakfast to discuss ways of securing my iron 2 mm away from the other iron to get the magnetism to effect the secondary...my progress has slowed to a snail's pace because I am on the verge of vacation next week and reconstructive foot surgery next month...hopefully by the middle of summer I should be getting good results hopefully.............
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 09, 2015, 01:38:24 PM
Thanks Randy;

I have request to all Forum members..

We are aware that permanent magnets are agitated when they are brought near an Electromagnet and it starts happening at a significant distance of 3 to 4 feet from the electromagnet or more based on strength of the electromagnet.

Now a rotating permanent magnet is able to generate electricity. However I have not been able to get a voltage by winding coils around small permanent magnets and bringing them near electromagnets. Can others check this. The permanent magnets I had are very small and the windings were few. Can some friend check this and find out and advise if the permanent magnets that are kept at a distance from an electromagnet produce electricity in coils wound around them. This then would act as a source of substantial energy. I do not know why this has not been done. Was it because the permanent magnets are different from electromagnets..Can some body check and advise please.

I used neodymium magnets. That need not be the case with this experiment and we can simply use iron magnets that are large. Even if they are demagnetized, remagnetizing them is quite easy.

May I request the other members to try this and advise. what happens. If there is no voltage developed then it would mean that permanent magnets can produce a rotating magnetic field only by physical rotation. Please do experiment and post results. I'm obliged. Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 09, 2015, 01:47:32 PM
if I'm right it is even simpler then "so simple you would laugh"  :P   Every transformer should be 200% efficient or in other words the current generated in secondary has the mirror energy of current flowing in primary.Energy is created in exact and opposite manner. Period. Faraday law of induction is flawed or incomplete. Newton III law is complete and most basic law of nature.
There are two reasons why free energy is no available widely :
-  it doesn't exists
- it's un-patentable idea so simple that a 5 years child can build device and make it running


What would you like to choose ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 09, 2015, 01:51:35 PM
Kunel patent  ;D  Willis patent is a modified copy of this.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 09, 2015, 05:19:35 PM
NRamaswami,
I will try the experiment...un fortunately not today tho...my wife's day off is today so I might be able to do it tonight...
I found a youtube video that is interesting...about magnets inducing electricity

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

on another note...I found someone to state categorically that magnetism will jump an air gap ( and yes I thought it did before I asked ) I will ask another question more to the point...the mathematics involved ( and yes I know about the turns ratio ).

ciao
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 09, 2015, 07:39:20 PM
Randy:

Thank you so much.

On another note I believe that I have substantially disclosed all that I learnt. Specifically that there are two methods of doing this.

a. Wind a secondary thick wire first on the insualtion on the iron core and then wind a shunted coil and on the shunted coil wind the primary wire. This is one variation of Primaries.

b. Wind the secondary thick wire first on the insulation on the iron core and then wind the multifilar primary coils.

C. Transformer turn ration does not apply here. What matters is magnetic field strength. Do not go by your transformer turns ratios.

d. Use the magnetic flux available on the primary and in between the opposite poles.

e. connect the secondary in series.. Series can be direct from Primary to central secondary to Primary 2 and so on or alternately all secondaries on all primaries first and then all secondaries on the middle coils. I prefer the primary-middle secondary-primary2 and so on type of winding of the secondary coils.

f. This device cannot be used for powering automobiles. If you want to power automobiles you need to use smaller cores and higher saturation iron which carries with it, risks of saturated iron working for long time and may result in fires. Try to make as big a primary electromagnet as possible and use it to generate power. 

g. I have avoided dislosing the risky parts. There are certain things that can be done by taking some risks but it is not prudent to take such risks if you are not trained nor equipped with specially trained people or environment for high voltage operations. That I have avoided and I have specifically requested all not to attempt that part.

h. For my own reasons I may not post further on this forum. This is due to the need to focus on my work and for ensuring that I'm able to pay my staff and run my family. Not for any thing else.

Patrick J Kelly agreed with me. I would avoid posting but once in a week or so I would watch the forum. If any one needs any clarification while doing the replication they can always ask me by pming me here. I will watch the messages once in a day and will definitely respond. It is certainly possible that because of the lack of photos or detailed pictures except in the document, some doubts may come and I would be happy to explain to the best of my understanding.

I'm a Lawyer and I do not know much about Magnetics or Electricity. I studied Patricks book in February 2013 and contacted him first on February 3, 2013. He agreed to guide me to build the hubbard device and created an electronic circuit for that. The device was built to the specifications given by Patrick based on some information received. The device did not work. Then Patrick retired. Unable to do any thing I prayed to Sri Namagiri Lakshmi Thayar of Namakkal in Tamil Nadu, India to give me the knowledge and promised to make the information public if the knowledge is given to me. Sri Namagiri Lakshmi Thayar of Namakkal is incidentally the family Goddess of Mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan and she appeared before his mother and directed her to permit her son to go to England. She gave the wisdom to Ramanujan. After my prayers within a short time the Figuera device was done. The COP>8 results were obtained. But I was shocked by the passing away of the Electrician who did this experiment within a very short period. He passed away on 6/9/2013. Very short period.

You can see the Electrician Narayanan The Green shirted bespectacled man in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=196&v=79Z6Z0BpcOY

He has earlier went through three intestinal surgeries and was advised that his life span is short and so has avoided marrying and died at the age of 48. Came to the office on 3/9/2013 complained of stomach pain and I had him dropped at his home and on 4/9/2013 he went and met the doctor and then was hospitalized and went in to a coma on 5th and passed away on 6th. He is the person who measured the 630 volts and first and then stopped the experiment and then disconnected the secondaries and connected them to earth and saw that it showed 620 volts and 20 amps. Refused to go any further and stopped the experiment immediately. That was a major shock to us. When we recommenced at the instance of Patrick another carpenter had an eye injury and I had him treated. From that time he refuses even to come to my office.

I have discussed with Patrick and he has agreed that I must focus on work. Why this kind of power devices did not come to the market is simple. This is some how a jinxed field. people who venture in to this suffer. I have personally suffered severe financial losses.

I have provided full information and maintained my promise. I was thinking that I can take it forward and can replicate what figurea did and improve upon it. I did make an improvement by avoiding the rotary disc and the complicated circuit arrangement. But this is due to the extensive availability of AC power today. I was able to figure out how to create a large magnet using the smallest input possible and created a kind of a very large device.

In my honest opinion you should study Daniel McFarland cook Patent and Figuera Patent. At that time all you needed to do was to build a working device and take it to the Patent office and demonstrate it. Full disclosure or what is called as sufficiency of disclosure or written description requirement and best mode disclosure was not insisted upon as done now but a working model was demanded. If the working model was there even if the description is cryptic it was granted. So many early patents suffer from this problem. Also the words had a different meaning at that time. We may not understand it correctly.

I do believe that we did could have been done in a better way. And I do believe that better variations are certainly possible. But I'm satisfied that I have maintained my prayer and had made full disclosure as far as I can see. Should any one have a doubt please pm me and I would respond within 24 to 48 hours. I wish you all success in your replication efforts.





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 10, 2015, 06:29:06 PM
I am pleased to say that two form members have informed me and Patrick that they are going to try to replicate the device. One friend asked some clarifications and I have given some how to construct  instruxtions. I will post the instructions tomorrow.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 11, 2015, 02:21:25 AM
Hello All

Ramaswami,
I too am still interested in this...but I still have to finish with what I started...

My co conspirator and I soldered the iron parts that I bought last year from Ed Fagin...and now I have to test it ( the test where you use it as a electromagnet and it picks up paper clips and whenst the electricity stops the clips drop ). The iron from Ed Fagin has been very good but very strong ( it was hard to machine in a lathe )...my error was I had the iron cut too small...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 11, 2015, 11:26:37 AM
Thanks Randy

Hello All

Here are the construction details I provided in the email to the friends who are attempting to replicate the device.

There are three components here.

P1 core - A plastic Tube about 18 inches long and 4 inches in diameter. Larger the diameter the better. I used a 4 inch diameter tube.

P2 Core - Similar to P1

S1 Core - A Plastic tube about 12 inches in length and 2.5 inches in diameter.

1. First wind the Secondary coil on the P1 core. This was an plastic insulated 4 sq mm wire. It is not the enamalled magnet wire. For reasons that are not known to me thicker the insulation greater is the amperage  produced in the secondary or drawn from the mains in the primary. The wire coil was either aluminium or Copper insulated wires. Aluminium wire is 5 times cheapter than copper wire but not knowing this I initially bought copper wire and later on started purchasing Aluminium wire. So the winding was partly copper and partly Aluminium.

2. Please wind three layers of the secondary wire first on the primary coil P1. If the starting point is the North Pole or Head the end point is the South Pole or Tail.

3. Then wind the quadfilar wire. The quadfilar wire is not the four core wire you buy in the market ready made. We bought four wires and duct taped them and then wound them over the secondary. It came to about Four layers of the primary wire wound over the secondary wire.

4. Now connect the end of the first wire of the Primary to the beginning of the second wire of the primary and the end of the second wire to the beginning of the third wire and end of the third wire to the beginning of the fourth wire.

5. Current to be given from the outside to the inside. Please provide a circuit breaker or fuze of 15 amps.

6. Please check the voltage and amperage drawn in the primary and the voltage and amperage produced in secondary after placing iron rods in the P1 core. P1 secondary should produce at least 200 volts on its own. If it does not please unwind and add more turns to the secondary. 

7. Please create a similar P2 core and check as in step 6 separately. Do not worry if the values are different. Windings are all in the same direction always.

8. Please connect the Two primaries and two secondaries of the primaries and check voltage and amperage drwan by primary. The voltage and amperage drwan by the primary must now come down. The voltage of the secondary must go up if connected to load. Check what is the voltage of the secondary. The connection is made NS-NS

9. Now build a five to seven layer secondary on the middle smaller diameter tube. 

10. Connect the secondary wires in P1-S1-P2 in series. NS-NS-NS. Plese check the voltage of the secondary without connecting to any load. If it is about 600 volts please connect to the two earth points and note down the voltage and amperage readings. The resistance provided by the earth will show the amperage in the meters. Please note down the voltage and amperage. Please see what is the input wattage in the primary and what is the output wattage in the secondary.

11. Please do not wind excessively. If your input is about 220 volts the first P1 alone would draw between 15 to 18 amps maximum. When you connect the P2 the amperage drawn is reduced to about 7 to 8 amps. If you add the Primary P3 the amperage drawn further reduces. This is due to the increasing resistance of the primary wire.

12. Secondary voltage keeps increasing and along with voltage the amperage from secondary also increases. This is best seen by first connecting to two earth points. You can independently check this on the secondary in the middle alone.

13. It is not clear to me as to why this happens. Are we drawing Telluric currents by having two earth points with different potential difference? Are we createing current because the wires are made up of different metals? Are we creating two rotating tubes around the central secondary and is there a low pressure area that attracts more elctrons to the secondary in the middle. Is this is due to the attractive force of magnetism between opposite poles? Or is the quadfilar produces a strong magnetic field which creates a powerful magnetic field in the central core and is this powerful magnetic field is responsbile for the power output?. I do not know really.

14. We have seen that the 4 sq mm wire develops about 10 amps in the secondary at the 300 volts level and develops 20 amps at the 620 volts level.

I5. If you are connecting to a step down transformer please take from the earth points and test and also test directly. That will tell us what is the source of the excess current. Step down transformer may have to be custom built to meet the output of secondary.

16. As you add more primaries power drawn from the mains must reduce and the secondary output must increase. This is some thing too difficult to believe but is the design characteristic of Figuera. However if you are going to reduce the power input then the number of wire turns on the primary must be increased. Maintain the magnetic field strength and use thick secondary wire and increase the number of turns to increase the voltage and the amperage developed in the secondary is what this design does.

I have requested the friends who intend to replicate to go step by step and not to rush. Measure the input and output and be careful every step of the way. Nothing more. The design as verified by me works. It needs to be replicated and validated independently by others.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 13, 2015, 09:22:30 AM
Hi All

I have been asked to reconstruct the prototypes so it can be tested in an independent high voltage lab that has the facilities to measure the input and output. Attached are the pictures of the first layer of secondary on P1. This may look very crude and rudimentary at first sight but you can see that there are 85 turns to the secondary in the first layer on P1. Since it is hand wound for every layer the turns are reduced by 1 turn. As you can see the wires have been wound again and again and so have lot of insulation tapes on them and when completed before winding the primary another insulation layer or thick plastic sheet is put on the secondary before we wind the primary. I'm sorry the other devices shown here look very sophisticated and this is not but ultimately what matters is the principle of operation and not the look of the coils.

I have also included the photos of two 9 filar primary coils inside which we put the 2.5 inch dia secondary coil with 5 layers. Output wattage is far less than a normal transformer. We have done several experiments before coming to the conclusion that the magnetic flux on the two primaries as in a normal transformer and the magnetic flux between the two opposite poles all need to be used to generate the output to be higher than the input.

Hanon can certainly ask why you have not put 7 such devices in series as shown in the patent..No funds to do that is the real answer. Every one of these efforts has cost me personal funds. I have no students who would do project work for me, no institution that would give me funds to do the research and I'm not getting paid to teach the students like a Professor in working Instituion. And they are all dismissive of that this is not worth even looking at. Only one professor has now very kindly agreed to take a look at this and ask his students to study this if and only if I reconstruct the device and get it certified from an independent lab of his choice. So I'm reconstructing. Photos will come slowly.

I have built five secondary layers on P1 and five secondary layers on S1. They are indicated in the document as S1 and S5. We will now need to wind the S2 coil and then wind the primary coil and then test each one of the cores P1 and P2 separately and then join all of them and note down the output voltage and amperage separately.

I will keep you posted as we do the work but the next post may come after one week.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 13, 2015, 12:03:13 PM
Ramaswami,
You don't need a Lab to verify the results...if you have seen the results, its posted on Patrick's website and you've warned about the experimentation... so be it. If you used the " mains " to start it up...disconnect it on video and if it keeps running " overUnity ". Case over.
IMHO its a waste of time and money to pursue it any further. When I first got started building the circuit part of the figuera I realized some of the connections on Patrick's website were wrong I almost gave up half way thru it...bottom Line...I didn't and learned a lot about circuits and electricity and human behavior in the process...now there's arduinos and raspberry pi s to play with and other paths to go down....

Provide electricity to your family, friends and pass the knowledge to whoever is interested.

All the Best
Randy
ps its been a chaotic weekend and I'm behind on everything
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 13, 2015, 04:10:27 PM
Randy;

I apologize. I do not claim to have made a self sustaining Generator as of this moment. This is demonstrated by Tariel Kapanadze only in videos posted on the net as of this moment and I do not include the Permanent magnet based devices in this list.   

All I have said is that we have measured COP>8 in the device but it came only at high voltage and since is risky we stopped it. It is theoretically possible to give it to a step down transformer and give the part of the output back to the primaries. This must ensure that both the input voltage and amperage and feedback voltage and amperage are same and are given through a make before you brake kind of a switch. I felt it is risky and have avoided it.

The other option was to give the power from a UPS and then keep the UPS to be powered and recharge the batteries of the UPS from the step down transformer through suitable means. This is a reasonably safe approach. But this will require facilities and trained hands for which I do not have the money to pay nor the facilities to do at this time. Secondly what I'm saying is against the theories. When we say some thing against the theory it must be validated by an independent laboratory as correct before we can ask for Research and development support or grants or ask Universities to study this subject. Only when such a report is available others will start taking a series look at the whole project and would support it or it will die a natural death. If I do not do this, the time and money invested and knowledge gained would become a waste and will not be useful to any one. I will be seen as some one making tall claims without verification. Both replication and verification are essential for any statement to be acceptable.

It is possible that I might hold some information but it is not because of any reasons to keep things secret. We are dealing with High voltage, high amperage and low frequency electricity and it is dangerous. Tariel Kapanadze's device is a high voltage and high frequency device. High Frequency high voltage current is not dangerous as most of the time the amperage is in milliamps and the current will not penetrate the body due to skin effect and is dangerous only if you are standing on wet earth or are connected to earth.

Let me again state categorically that I have not built a self sustaining generator. I'm far far away from that stage. That I have never ever claimed. Even Tesla has never claimed it in any known patent. I do have a suspcion that he has done it in 1887 to 1889 but he does not disclose this. The only persons who have claimed or are reported to have demonstrated such devices are Daniel MaFarland Cook, Prof. Figuera, Hubbard, Hendershot, T.H. Moray and Joesph H. Cater  and Ed Gray sr and the permanent magnet based devices and (possibly Don Smith) Tariel Kapanadze in that order. The Moray device is reported to be based on radioactivity. I also suspect that beginning from Hubbard secrecy directions may have been imposed on full disclosure patent applications. Tariel Kapanadze's patent suffers from lack of sufficiency of disclosure. All I have done is to see a COP>8 effect at usable levels of power supply.  Nothing more.

Thank you for asking this question and this has enabled me to clarify things clearly.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 18, 2015, 10:42:19 PM
It's not baked till the fat lady can self run. All notable effects mentioned and aside for now. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 19, 2015, 03:45:50 AM
Thanks Doug

I will first replicate the performance in a reverse mode using 12 volt and 16 amps transformer and build the secondary as a step up transformer. Let me see if I can get 220 volts and higher wattage than provided. If it does then I should be able to take power from a UPS and feed the UPS from the ouput and also light lamps. Let me see if it is doable in a few weeks and if I can do it post the video
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 19, 2015, 04:39:52 PM
I think your hourglass shaped core is providing a large portion of advantage to prevent flux leakage. I dont know how ells to describe the shape.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 20, 2015, 02:20:57 PM
Doug:

Thanks. Honestly speaking, I really do not know. Retaining the magnetic flux and preventing it from leaving the system creates heat and that is quite undesireable as the wires and the iron become very hot. we always leave little gap in between the P1, S1 and P2 cores so that the iron is exposed to the air to venitlate the heat. Only then the iron is not heated much. In any case the gap occurs as the winding is done manually and there is a one turn less as we move up in the layers. So I'm not sure if what you say is correct. This time of the year is the vacation season in India. I have a good idea of what to do but it will cost me significant money to experiment, find out how to reduce the output to 220 volts and then increase the amperage. I believe that we would be able to maintain the output voltage at 220 volts and increase the amperage but I need to wait and see. Many calculations have gone wrong and different results come in experiments.  I will post here after about 15 to 20 days if we have done any experiments. At the moment we are not doing any and I have nothing to post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 21, 2015, 01:12:04 PM
NRamaswamiI clipped this image from your pdf. It is drawn as a continuous core with a narrow section in the middle. Like an hourglass. Are you saying the core has complete breaks between the three sets of coils or is this an image of a single core and coil to which three of them will be placed in alignment?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 23, 2015, 10:33:44 AM
Doug:

I apologize for the delay. One Picture is worth 1000 words. One video is worth 100,000 words.  I will put up both pictures and videos next week.
Your picture is correct. My understanding of the whole thing is as follows. I may well be wrong.

When permanent magnets are made, they require a one time input and keep magnetism intact. But their field is stable. So to get a rotating magnetic field we need to rotate the permanent magnet. This requirs mechanical energy. Such rotation leads to Lenz law effects and so the output is less than input. With Electromagnets we get automatically rotating magnetic fields. As I have seen it is not necessary to give a huge input to create a large and powerful electromagnet. About 110 watts is sufficient. But if the design of the device is made properly the secondary will have a lot of turns. This causes the voltage in the secondary to increase. If we avoid Lenz law effects and increase the number of turns of secondary and use wires that are at least as thick as the primary, then we have a situation where more current is produced due to higher voltages. Voltge should be necessarily higher in the secondary than in the primary for this to happen.

I'm going to check whether it would be possible to give lower voltage and higher amperage input and then get the same result by giving low voltage and high amperage input. Then it would enable me to count the turns and reduce the output to 300 volts and then that can be given to loads. We will check whether it is doable.  We will also see what further improvement can be made and then we will provide the devices to the lab.

Unfortunately it is not possible for me to fund for all devices and so we need to make one device and give it to the lab and take mesurements and then reuse the wires and then take the next measurement. I will put up a video and photographs and gauge of wire used and number of turns and length of the wire so it can be replicated.

If I succeed in the present attempt then it would enable me to use a simple UPS system and connect it to a step down transformer and then feed the device and take the output and keep the UPS system powered by the output voltage. Let me see it if can be done. And what is the usable output. Since there is no conversion from AC to DC except inside the UPS system to power the battery I think the losses can be minimised and let me see what happens. I will post information when it is available which may take two or three more weeks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on April 28, 2015, 11:20:13 PM
@NRamaswami
Many, many thanks for your detailed contribution! :) I got knowledge via the P. Kelley publication of your device and am very interested to try a replication. This is my first post in this forum but I am no newbie in matters of free energy. I am sure to have plenty of questions but first I want to reread all your contributions (English is not my native language).

As I am a trained electrical engineer I agree with all warnings regarding dealing with lethal voltages. Folks, take it seriously! We need all of you in order to have success!
On the other hand I need to "de-learn" lots of stuff in order to get free view on what you report. In this respect you might be far in advance compared with trained individuals. Hence sharing knowledge and open minds is the receipt for overall success.

Two question in advance:
- Did you use standard PVC isolated wires like used by electricians? In some areas it is very difficult to get massive wire in 4 square mm. Do you feel that speaker twin cable (litz wire) will do the job?
- What kind of iron rods did you use? Was it oxidized annealed soft iron? What diameter? Did you use welding rods. Bedini likes them. But the copper plating fosters eddy currents on their surface.

I feel as first setup we should try to do a replica as close to yours as possible in order to get not too many unknown parameters involved at same time. Enhancements can be done only AFTER we have a functioning prototype - not before like many individuals try.

@ALL
Just some common hints:
1.
Aluminum wire has a resistance 1.5 times of copper. Hence the cross section needs to be increased times 1.5 in order to have same resistance. On the other hand aluminum tends to break far earlier if being rewound repeatedly. Regarding these facts the cost calculation needs to be revised.

2.
Incandescent bulbs are good means of electrical load but it is very difficult to check their intensity. Fortunately it is an easy and cheap means available to measure it.
Any solar cell (e.g. from calculators) can be connected to digital multimeters directly while setting them in µA range. Solar cells behave quite linearly in respect to light intensity vs. short circuited current.
Knowing this fact we can compare light intensity:
1. Calibration: Connect the bulb to mains and place the cell on top of the bulb. Measure mains voltage / amperage and µA from solar cell. Commercial bulbs have great variation. Therefore it is important to use one individual bulb and a individual cell and calibrate this setup.
2. Setup: Avoid any light from environment. You may prepare an empty tin can with a hole for the cell can and cover the bulb.
3. Document: Take notes of the values measured.
4. Measure: Whenever you use this bulb as load you can measure µA and have an understanding of the ratio between calibration and load condition. So you can know for sure if  your calibrated bulb lights in normal intensity.
5. Bonus: I you own an variac you can generate a chart along different voltages. Calculating the power (V*A) you can know the power dissipated from µA reading only.
6. Hint: Do not let the cell get hot because of accuracy issues at heat. Perform momentary measurements only. Same principle can be applied e.g. at 12V or 24V bulbs as well.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 29, 2015, 01:32:49 PM
I have not posted in a while and i see this POST or thread was high jacked by NRamaswami. this post is about FIGUERAS not NRamaswami..... you should of started a NEW THREAD. i see even Patrick's PDF linked your project to this thread( SHAME ON YOU)
NO WONDER all the heavy weights left this thread and stopped posting because of  (PEOPLE LIKE YOU!)     KISS MY BACK SIDE NRamaswami !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 29, 2015, 02:05:02 PM
Hello All...
Let me be the first to weigh in on the Last comment...
I too thought about the divergence from Fiquera to this type of experimentation...but in essence I haven't seen anybody that has come in with a working model of the " Figuera " or the knowledge of a working model... Even when Patrick was answering my emails He stated that no one had reproduced the figuera exactly like the representation on His website...
Hence...if what ramaswami has to offer brings me closer to getting results to the figuera so be it...
I welcome everybody that has some thing to offer...

RandyFL
ps besides the traffic is moving at a snails pace anyway :-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on April 29, 2015, 09:09:52 PM
@marathonman
At first glance you might be right. If you reread the posts of Nramaswami (what I do just now) you will find his reference to functional principle of e.g. Figuera devices not being disclosed in the patents. Hence the Ramaswami device might be much closer to Figuera than expected at first glance - if we grasp it. Read his first post http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg387668/#msg387668 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg387668/#msg387668) being dedicated to Figuera only.
Quote:  "I can confirm that we built an exact replica of Figuera and it did not work and then we modified it and the device worked perfectly well in that the output current was far higher than the input."
And please keep polite. Your insult is neither suitable nor true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 29, 2015, 11:00:45 PM
I don't think that hijacking this thread for posting real data about real device is a bad thing. The only problem is when people waste time with impolite comments and flooding thread with useless data.
We should learn from each other rather then fight ...
I have a question about NRamaswami device and/or Figuera device : is output the DC kind and if it could be DC then how to protect this kind of circuits ? I assume something which I need confirmation : if such output is connected to big capacitor electrolytic as storage and then negative part of all circuit is grounded then it can be safer ? I mean - this way the only way to be killed is by connecting positive output of device ?? Is that an improvement ? How such DC kind circuits could be protected against incidental current thought the body of experimenter - I'm insterested much in this knowledge , please help . I' working with other devices but all of them works the best with DC output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 29, 2015, 11:55:42 PM
Hello All...
Welcome aboard JohnMiller...
If I may ask where or when you were employed ( the reason I ask is everybody that I have come in contact on the traditional side of energy has laughed or scoffed at free energy )...as you state you're well informed in free energy ( have you had success in the ZPE field )...my 84 yr old electronic engineer friend had died 2 Christmases before I finished building my circuit for the figuera transformers... He frowned upon free energy... An acquaintance that I just met is a professor at a University... who stated that my best option is to use electrical steel instead of the metal that I have been using... the metal ( iron mixed with something else ) that I am using is very strong but it magnetizes easily and drops paper clips as soon as the electricity is turned off... so I'm leery of traditional science...per se. Since you're in the business whats your view of iron and/or other metals...lastly whats your view of gaps in iron?

RandyFL
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 30, 2015, 04:52:47 AM
Iron used was soft iron. What type..I do not know..

Secondary wire should be at leat as thick as primary or thicker than primary. I have used about 30-35 kgms of wire in each primary core or more.

Output is AC or it can be pulsed DC. Input can be AC or pulsed DC or if you use a rotary device DC also. Output can be converted to DC.

Please read Figueras patent and focus on the principle and not on the example given.

Let me quote Figuera Here again from http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 and I assume that the Translation was done by Hanon.

Quote Begin....

"The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.

Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.
In order to privilege the application to the production of large industrial electrical currents, on the principle that says that “there is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application of said principle.

This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

Let’s therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form and way that has been used to make the application.

DESCRIPTION OF GENERATOR OF VARIABLE EXCITACION “FIGUERA”

The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit, also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly placed. As neither of the two circuits spin, there is no need to make them round, nor leave any space between one and the other.

Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current which drives the electromagnets"

Quote End-----------------------------

So this is where you have not considered the requirement of several reels of coils. The coils should be properly placed is another requirement. This placement of several reels of coils will create a varying magnetic flux or a rotating magnetic field through the input.

Figuera gives an example of a device which uses resistances and a rotary contact device. The input was from a battery and the circuit and the rotary switch made the direct current to behave like an alternatiing current. Since I gave from the mains the need for resistances and rotary switch was removed. The rotary switch and circuit would be needed if we use a battery to power the circuit but it is very cumbersome and sparks come out of the contacts unless the device is very slowly rotated. Doing so would reduce the frequency of the electricity generated and how to bring it to 50Hz is another problem. Of course by increasing the number of contact switches even at 1 RPM we can have a 50 Hz current but it all costs a lot of money. Feeding from the battery creates another problem of low voltage. It works like the input from a step down transformer. Low Voltage High Amperage leading to core magnetization. This is what would normally be done. Here Figuera hides his trade secret by using the term reels of coils that are properly placed.

I have used in the primary shown about 800 meters of wires in my estimation. It can be from 720-800 meters of wires. When properly connected this can give an output of about 900 volts and 30 Amps at the output. 

I have posted some pictures and will avoid posting here.

Mr. John Miller says that we need to unlearn...Not necessarily..Keep an open mind.. If you look at a solenoid you are taught that the maximum magnetic field strength of the solenoid is in the center of the solenoid. This is correct.

If you look at a motor repulsive forces are used to rotate the core in the center of the Motor. This is again correct.

Where we have gone wrong is that if you rotate the motor faster than the input current, the motor would start behaving like an Alternator or generator. So let us rotate the core to generate the current is the accepted norm. This is quite ridiculous..You can test this easily by winding a solenoid with the primary in the center and the secondary on the outside. What will happen? The secondary will be in the weakest portion of the magnetic field strength and so the secondary would produce less than the optimum. Try placing the secondary inside and primary outside and see the difference. In a generator the rotating part that induces current should have been placed at the outside and the generating part must be placed in the inside. But in our current machines we do it upside down.

But going upside down is beneficial to manufacturers of machines and this creates an endless demand for their products. Devices like the Figuera would enable any one to produce any amount of needed current any where in the world with a very minimum investment. So this knowledge is not taught..I have found that we need a theoretical input of 6 watts to a practically observed 110 watts to be the needed force to start the output. Output can be controlled to our desired needs. It can be any amount of electricity required. The device is modular in construction and can be scaled up to power large factories and power small homes. The problem is that the device weighs about 250 kgms at the minimum size out of which 80 kgms are just wires alone. These are thick wires and need to wound manually.

In general try to use as thick wires as possible. Thicker insulated wires have an advantage over magnet enamalled wires. I do not understand the science but we need to use thick, if possible very thick insulated wires.

I have not prevented any one from posting here and in one of my posts even corrected and guided Mr. Marathonman that if he uses identical poles he will get zero voltage. I do not think my posts appear to be useful to others. I would request the forum owner to delete all my posts and info provided by me. I was under the impression that this forum is intended to share the results of experiments done by each one so mistakes can be avoided.  I will ask Patrick to remove the information about the device from his book and I do not want any controversy.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on April 30, 2015, 10:36:22 AM
Oh, NO! Don't do that. PLEASE! Please continue discussing with those being open minded. I know how you feel but unfortunately those controversies are usual at any forum from time to time. Ravens exist and you can't prevent them from flying around your head. But you are not forced to follow them and you are not supposed to allow them nesting on your head.
I myself want to try a replication. I ordered first materials.
I am one decade older than you and I know that I will loose my job within a year. Then I will have plenty of time for experiments. Just preparing for that time. I have few mechanic skills in terms of precision and no friend with such skills. Therefore I look for simple devices like yours. Only those devices can serve poor regions in the world. I want to contribute.

Rgds John 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: BANDI on April 30, 2015, 02:02:39 PM
NRamaswami,
Please don t do this !
We are a group of people who try to replicate this,whe almost have all the materials and  really need your help.
For now we have a small scale prototype and behaves exactly as you say.
Those who do not like these posts, simply  skip them and save  time and bad taste comments  .
Here are much buffoonery  than real work.
Please dont pay attention , not worth it.

Regards,
              Bandi.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on April 30, 2015, 02:32:51 PM
NRamaswami
Please do not listen to the naysayers on this forum. They attack others because they themselves have nothing to offer. You have been very upfront about all your answers and spent many hours just in replies to this forum. Most of the people here are sincerely interested in what you say. It is my hope and that of my family that you continue to help and ignore those who would bury this information. The last person to understand this died in 1908. Will the world have to wait another 107 years to get free of the slave masters?? Gandhi did not run when the British mocked him. He was one man who changed not just your country but the world. I am a retired man with a limited income but when I feel I understand this well enough I will build your device. Thank you
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on April 30, 2015, 05:46:26 PM
If I may ask where or when you were employed ( the reason I ask is everybody that I have come in contact on the traditional side of energy has laughed or scoffed at free energy )...as you state you're well informed in free energy ( have you had success in the ZPE field )...... Since you're in the business whats your view of iron and/or other metals...lastly whats your view of gaps in iron?

@RandyFL:
Thanks for welcoming me :-)
Sorry for not introducing me before. I am intrigued by free energy matters since 4 years. I tested some minor setups but was not pleased with results. Therefore I extended my lab and workshop and red plenty of sources in order to grasp some common properties of this physics. Playing in both camps (traditional and border physics) is mainly not a matter of education but of mindset. But it is effort to strip down mainstream knowledge in order to add additional knowledge being not common. New things need to be approached with a humble mind. Else the main facts might be overseen.

In order to explain on what verge we stand today I want to tell how our ancestors began with electricity. Back in 1450 only one electric effect was known: rubbing amber (Greek = elektron) on silk or fur generated static effects. Hence "electric" was initially a party gag. Ladies rubbed their amber collier on their silk skirts and charged the amber. Then waiters brought frogs on a try and ladies touched them with the charged amber. Then they watched which frog jumped the greatest distance.
Later on scientists rolled a ball of brimstone in a wooden box and when others touched the ball their hairs stood straight up.... This shall indicate on what verge we stand today compared to the facts that can possibly known.
Later on those great minds like Faraday started thorough scientific investigations and tried to find out some novel effects. Maxwelll added the math to the experimental results.
[Of course at that time naysayers were present like today. They are undying and never will expire. So we shall learn to live with them but prevent getting controlled by them.]
The gathered knowledge of later great minds like Volta, Galvani, Ampére, Ohm, Hertz .... added all their share to our knowledge. And indeed we have great products today being based on their contribution.
I cannot understand why some minds believe today that we are ready and they know the limits of science. The only limit is in the human understanding and mindset. This never will change. Hence scientific limits never were known by anyone. But the great minds only understood that and expressed it in particular.
Back to Nrmaswami device: He is one of those "tinkerers" like B. Franklin who was laughed when he "tried to catch lightning bolts" ha ha ha ..... Let's continue welcoming what he shares and we will add our penny.

-----------------
Of course conventional science states that  electric steel is he best choice in terms of getting maximum magnetic flux. But having no closed magnetic circuit like at standard transformers the maximum flux never can be achieved. And we have no high frequency power equipment like used at miner equipment and air plains. So what?. Bedini likes to use welding rods out of mild steel? Nramaswami uses cheap and fat iron rods of unknown quality and he got effects we are still after. Further notions will be issued if we have assembled some kind of spec. So why should we "put our cloth on with tweezers if we can do it quite genuinely"?

A scientific approach is to replicate a running setup as close to the first prototype as possible. Any pre-replication "enhancement" might be a drawback. It is a blind flight or scientific roulette. Of course nobody will have the exact materials like the prototype but perhaps close to.
And if somebody wants to try an own approach (e.g. scaled down device): so what? It is his money, his time spent and he might detect novel effects.  I feel it is not helpful to conduct discussions fundamentalisticly. As long everybody extracts knowledge shared and shares his experience we are on the right way. The magic might be in the plurality of minds and approaches.

--------------
I myself imagine lots to improvements but I refuse to share them because they might detract and confuse and I definitely still do not know on how this device works exactly. So I vote to be blind in these matters and how can I dare to advise others. I am supposed to learn.
My focus is on a first replication and I do not worry to demonstrate a closed loop. It is too early for that. Some chains of 220V incandescent bulbs or several 2KW heaters in series will very well demonstrate COP factor.
Any further enhancements NEED to be tested in comparison to the FIRST working setup. The human mind is not made to deal with more than 7 parameters at same time. So let's keep thinks adapted to our limits.

My personal approach will be:
- Scan all contributions regarding this device and extract those sentences that contribute to any kind of specification. (BTW I am trained in requirement engineering as well and therefore I am used to stick on every possibly distant ambiguity)
- Ambiguities need to be resolved first - if possible. (no distrust to you nramaswami - just a matter of human communication issues...)
- Setup a calculator (Excel) for spool dimensions and wire length in order to perform some predictions of materials needed.

OK. Then let me retract to start my work.
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 30, 2015, 06:20:23 PM
Hello All,

John,
so what exactly is electrical steel...
I understood it to be iron + carbon = steel + silicon...
I purchased my iron from Ed Fagan, Inc.
http://www.edfagan.com/
As I stated before the iron I purchased when electricity passes thru it it magnetizes and whenst it stops the metal clips fall off...

Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on April 30, 2015, 06:51:55 PM
Electrical steel:
It is rolled sheet metal (never rods) and the grains (polycrystaline structure) are optimized for magnetic conductivity and low residual magnetism. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_steel  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_steel) BTW: It is very difficult to machine.
But please do not think, that cheap Chinese transformers are made out of such material.
Even electrical steel will have some small so called remanence -> residuing megnetism. That is normal. Do not worry. Bedini uses welding rods and even they have remanence.
edfagan have soft magnetic alloys. But I do not think specialized materials are necessary. I have some annealed soft iron wires available.
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 30, 2015, 11:51:35 PM
Hello All

John
The iron that I bought from Ed Fagan came in a 1/2 inch rod and I had a friend with machinists tools ( Lathe ) square it and its now alittle larger than 3/8th inch thick and was cut to make 7 transformers...In my enthusiasm I sloppily wrapped 100 turns on the primaries and 50 turns on the secondary of 28 gauge magnet wire to see what would happen and got very poor results...after that I realized I never had gaps in the iron...
I'm satisfied with the iron I have but whats your view of the gaps and whats needed to jump the gaps

RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 01, 2015, 01:15:00 AM
NRamaswami (http://www.overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/): 
You belong to that dying breed of men who are honorable and honest.
It is refreshing to see your sincerity and experimentation on this forum.
I can  also assure you that if you built a 1 kw device there would be many on this forum who would purchase such a device.


I have spoken to Patrick Kelly many times and he would purchase a working device also.


Please don't be downhearted by bad people. They hide behind internet names and think they are anonymous.
They can easily be tracked down, as we all can.
I think you have made a great contribution to the Figuera thread by working with early 20th century type materials.
It is an art long forgotten in the affluent West I am afraid.






Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 01, 2015, 06:39:28 PM
I am honored and do not have words to express my gratitude.

Fortunately I started without any knowledge and realized how to make manets and understand them is the first task. When I understood that other xperiments followed. But this was very expensive and labour costs are very high. I have not done many experiments that are needed to be done. But the economy ois down here and I have to focus on practice. I will share what little I observed with replicators through personal messages. For the moment let me take a vacation for a month and then come back if I am able to raise finances to do any experiments.

I am very obliged for the very kind words.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on May 01, 2015, 11:37:46 PM
...I'm satisfied with the iron I have but whats your view of the gaps and whats needed to jump the gaps...
RandyFL
@RandyFL:
- Nramaswami talked of gaps between coils. Another time he stated that he has no gaps in the steel except when he had a break of length and continued with another rod. He obviously hammered last ones into the pipe in order to get them press fit.

- Be careful with square rods being machined! Round ones have few area where they contact and come with oxidized surface. So few eddy currents can flow between rods. If you pack square rods being machined recently you will have perfect electrical contact and perfect eddy currents. Those differences can possibly make a replication useless. In your case I would like to paint them before assembly. You may buy black paint for exhausts being resistant up to 400°C.

@ALL:
- I verified the dimensions of the core. Patrick has it correct in his book. Other dimensions were discussed in early stage but are not valid now. No gaps in the iron material provided!

- Currently verifying the wingdings. Some hints are missing there. My current calculation gives about 1200m (56 kg) of wire. (4 square mm copper = 2.5 mm diameter = 4 mm diameter including PVC insulation). This wire can be bought in 100m rings or 500m spools. I will come back with data required. Give me some days of study and communication. (about 200 contributions submitted by Nramaswami!)

- Please understand and accept if Nramaswami needs a break. He gave much more of his life and money many of us will ever dare to.
Rgds
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on May 02, 2015, 10:33:36 PM
Primary P1:
Wire:                  4 square mm (ca. 2.5 mm diameter) multistranded
Layers:               3 tight packed  continuously wound: e.g. left -> right / right -> left / left _> right
                           It is recommended to start at outer end and finalize at inner end of coil
                           in order to have a short connection to the center coil.
Turns per layer: Maximum 92 possible at original setup
Turn direction:   Does not  matter. But ALL winds following shall be performed in SAME direction. 

Note:
- I will clarify the outer diameter of the original cable (seems to be about 5mm)
- Magnet wire gives less or no performance as the thickness of insulation matters. This fact is not understood but was experienced.
- In Europe (220V mains) the cable specified has an outer diameter of 4.2mm and is specified up to 1000V (but not to touch!!!). For 110V regions please check the conditions and post please!
With this 220V cable about 108 turns per layer should be possible.
- I strongly recommend to add to the wires between screw terminals and coils a sleeve out of plastic material (e.g. PVC hose from fishkeeping shop or silicon hose). Norms specify that for safety reasons two independent insulation layers need to be applied if a cable can possibly be touched.  And we shall not argue on how many bucks a life is worth!!!!
- Prepare to mount terminals in a plastic case (e.g. like hoaushold plastic boxes) if you have no professional and certified boxes available. This measure is requested by safety norms as well. Rationale like above.

                                                                                 ~o0o~
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on May 02, 2015, 11:16:31 PM
2.5" core
Material:                    soft iron rods
Diameter:                  6 mm
Rods in a 2.5 " tube: 60
Total length of rods: 73.15m
Weight:                     ca. 16kg

Note:
- Rods come usually coated with iron oxide because of production process. Do not attempt to remove the iron oxide. This measure will increase eddy currents (losses) considerably.
- Last few rods may be hammered into the tube in order to get them tight
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 02, 2015, 11:26:01 PM
Hello All,

John:
Ramaswami Project.. He was using multistrand and in mm s
Figuera project... I am using AWG 18 AWG magnet wire for the primary and I think 14 AWG magnet wire for the secondary...
I still have red primary flame retardant paint that I used for my original steel transformers...so what you're stating is minimal gaps using paint as a insulating material ( plus flame retardant if the iron cores heat up? ... which I don't at this point thinks get hot...but saturation...? )
In your estimation how much power is needed to jump the paint gap?
( I can push 9 amps into each pulse into the cores I believe... 9 amps 12 volts = 108 watts )

ciao
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on May 03, 2015, 12:17:41 AM
Randy:
- Normal paint is not heat resistant. We know that cores can become very hot in this device and therefore I would use a paint being resistant up to 150 °C - just for safety.
- Eddy currents do not develop high voltage. Imagine the core to be one single turn. Therefore the paint does not need to be high voltage resistant.

BTW: I diligently try to find out the smallest details of the original setup and be sure I find many! It might be not the best one that can be built ever but it is one that does what we expected. Any difference we introduce ourselves might cancel the effect - possibly. This way we add additional complexity and we need to deal wit possible drawbacks. Anyway the 6mm iron rods did work in India and they will do it all over the world. So please be very sensitive at modifications of your own and double check if it is worth.
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 03, 2015, 03:51:11 AM
John,
I will try all of what I have learnt here in the forum and will post my results as they come...I unfortunately will have surgery next week and so...my progress will be slow...

Good luck in your endeavors...

Ciao
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 04, 2015, 07:30:22 AM
Please find the the two primary coils and the secondary coil not wound as shown in the drawings. This type of winding the central secondary is a failure and performs poorly. The secondary must be wound to lie within the core diameter of the 4 inch pipe in the intermediate 2.5 inch pipe. This is not the way we did the tests in July 2013 and I would posts other photos later. The coils had been recently wound again for third party testing and before we give it to them we will test.

The rods as you can see are simply hammered in to the pipes. They are round rods and however you hammer them and tightly pack them there is a small gap. When the iron is heated air must flow through the iron to cool it and possibly gets ionized. However I really do not know.

I'm not a person trained in Electrical Engineering and I am unfortunately unable to explain or handle technical questions. I apologize that I cannot pretend to know a subject which I actually do not know and cannot pretend or give wrong or misleading answers.
 
I would request any one with a technical question to contact either Mr. John Miller or Mr. Patrick Kelly.

I have written elsewhere that if we keep adding plastic-iron-plastic between the layers of the multifilar coil and if the number of coils are sufficiently increased then a very low input of 110 watts is sufficient to create a lot of magnetism and current will not be passed from the primary even to the test lamps directly connected to the primary as load. My understanding is that when we add coils like multifilar coils the resistance increases for every coil by 3.2 times. The resistance of a 100 meter long 4 sq mm wire is 0.495 ohms or about 0.5 ohms. When you add another coil to it to make it a bifilar coil the resistance or impedance probably increases to 0.5x3.2 times or 0.5x3 times approximately. For every additional wire in the same coil we need to multiple by a factor of 3 to 3.2 and arrive at the approximate impedance or resistance. For a quadfilar coil this turns about to be about 13.5 ohms to 14 ohms and for two such quadfilar coils connected in series it becomes 27 ohms or 28 ohms and so for a 220 volt source the coils are able to draw a maximum of 7 to 8 amps alone and remain stable. When the coils are increased to 11 coils they are able to draw from the mains only 0.5 amps. Not more. So the increasing impedance by actual impedance x 3 or 3.2 is correct as observed in experiments.

When we add thick insulation through plastic sheets or thermocoal of about 3 to 5mm thick, and iron sheets or iron rods in between the layers  of the plastic sheets and interpose them all in between the layers of the primary the resistance appears to increase. This also results in the magnet becoming nearly roaring and the magnetic field can be felt at a good distance. I do not have any Magnetic field strength meters with me and we estimate the strength of the magnetic field from the sound the iron makes and the luminousity of the tester when the tester touches the iron rods. The iron also oscillates due to the way it is packed and as it is made up of a large number of 6 mm iron rods.

The coils are heavy. Each primary coil without iron may weight between 25 to 30 kgms. The iron we estimate is about 170 kgms. We bought about 200 kgms of soft iron rods and most of it goes inside the pipes.

The basic principle on which this device operates is apparant. The Lenz law effect is absent when the coils are placed between two opposite poles. usually the opposite poles of two magnets will jump at each other and the momentum keeps increasing until they join and disappears once they are united. If you keep the two at a distance and place the coils in between them the coil will be subject only to the flux between opposite poles and it is a powerful force. Lenz law supposes repulsive forces only or the charges to be identical charges and Lenz law is not applicable to attractive forces between opposite poles. This is what is written in BuForn patents and this is logical and correct. We have tried to place iron between the primary and secondary on the primary cores as well but it requires additional iron to be bought and it increases the weight of the iron by another 150 kgms. It is very difficult to wind manually with so much of iron. Also costs are eating funds and even with the small core we have achived the needed results.

I'm grateful to Mr. A. King for his very kind words. As you can see this device requires a lot of iron and coils. The difference in cost between a device that would produce a 1 kilowatt output and a 100 kilowatt output is marginal. There is no complicated Electronics here. In any case I cannot understand much of circuitry. I'm unable to see how I can make a small device. With two 18 inch Electromagnets we get good results when the intermediate electromagnet that does the trick is between 6 to 10 inches long. But the magnetic field strength of the two opposite poles must envelope the coils in that smaller intermediate core. Otherwise it does not function as desired. Possibly other competent technical people can bring down the size of the cores but I do not get results when I have attempted. The minimal primary core length needed is about 12 inches and to make it a powerful magnet I have tried giving power from step down transformers and it only results in the iron becoming very hot. This needs to be avoided as the system then cannot work for long time. 

When Eddy currents come we actually get good results. Presence of eddy currents indicate that the magnet is powerful. The transformer cores are laminated iron sheets and their magnetism is very low and they may not be suitable here. I may well be wrong here but strong magnetism is needed for this device to work.

I apologize if the device looks crude and unsophisticated. But it does what it is expected to do. We hope to get third party validation soon and then I will post those results when they are available. When funds are available I expect to buy a custom built step down transformer and hope to see if the device can be continuously powered from a UPS in the UPS-device-stepdown transformer-to UPS and load fashion. But this can be done only with competent technical help who can handle high voltage.

We normally put a plastic bucket to cover the iron rods that protrude outside. May be laughable but it gives good insulation..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on May 04, 2015, 09:37:45 PM
Thanks very much NRamaswami for your disclosure and information.
Question:
What do you refer to "thick" iron sheet? How many layers?
Is the plastic on both sides for insulation only?

@ALL:
I remember a Tesla patent where he defined an iron shield between primary and secondary. Has somebody the patent number at hand? I would like to study it again.
Rgds
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 04, 2015, 11:01:54 PM
Sorry, but I don't believe it will work effectively.Can it be scaled down for testing ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 05, 2015, 09:17:19 AM
@John Miller.

The plastic sheet is about 3 mm thick very strong plastic sheet. It is better to duct tape iron rods of 6mm type on the plastic sheet. Iron sheets are thin and they get heated. Insulation is on both the sides of the iron sheet or iron rods. The results are better when we use iron rods. I have read about the placement of insulation and iron between adjacent layers in Joesph Caters books Awesome Life Force and Ultimate Reality. But if we do not place insulation sheets on both sides of iron, the iron sheet as well as the wires get hot. Insulation appears to increase the output in secondary but this is some thing I do not understand.

@forest

Please see the two intermediate coils we use in the center. The longer coil has more wire and more turns and so we will normally conclude that the longer coil must produce more voltage and more wattage as the wire thickness is same. However in practice the smaller coil is as effective as the longer coil because the attractive field is stronger when it is closest to the two opposite poles.

I fully respect your disbelief. I understand it. This appears to be some thing that is not done in practice. This is why I'm fully disclosing it to all and check for themselves. I graduated in Chemistry in 1983. Had I told my professor that some thing like Internet would come and we will be able to speak to people through video conferencing through some thing called skype and other applications and that this can be done free of charge my professor would have probably called my parents and complained to them that either I'm taking drugs and blabbering or would have advised them to take me to a pyschiatrist. At that time it was very difficult to get a phone at home and only the privileged could get a phone at their home. I completed Law in 1987 and my dream was to have a phone in my home cum office. My younger brother who studied computers advised me to learn computers and said they will play a major role in law later. He was marketing computers at that time. I had laughed at him myself as to what use computers are to Lawyers. Today I have a web admin and we have to build customized software for my office.

I do not think (I may well be wrong) that we can downsize the device. We can have a shower and bath at home. Water pours on us and we get wet. We can go to a water falls and stand below it and same water falls on us and we also get wet. The experience is different. The effect is different. I do not know how it can be downsized to get the same effect. I may well be wrong in this but please forgive me I'm not trained in making small devices and then simulating what would happen if the device becomes big. That is not my area of competence.

However you can easily check the effect of the attractive poles alone using two small primaries and a small secondary in between the iron cores of the opposite poles of two primaries. You cann also try to extend the length of the secondary and see that the smaller secondary does better. This can be tested easily with small devices.

Some how no one appears to do R& D in generation of Electricity through Magnetism. Though all types of turbines whether they are thermal, hydro or Nuclear all end up with rotating a core to generate a rotating magnetic field to induce electricity. Transformers do create a rotating magnetic field without movement but we are taught that transformers have to be built this way to be step down transformer and build this way to be a step up transformer to produce expected results. That is the specific design of that device for that intended purpose. It does not mean that we cannot modify the device to create a large rotating magnetic field without movement. And this has been validated in 1908, displayed before the spanish office in 1910 and certificate of performance has been issued as well. This is what prompted me to check this. I have looked at the principle and not at the specific device and I found that patent hides several things as trade secrets. So I used common sense to find out.

There are only four variations that we could have done in July 2013. We are going to test all four variations in a High voltage laboratory of a third party. There is one more method of coiling and I expect that it would produce significant output but I have not dared to test it. So without observations I need not say my imaginations here.

I have given the information here so others can replicate. I'm also putting it to a third party laboratory to test and certify. Then I believe that others will take up the subject of generating electricity using a rotating magnetic field without the need for rotating a large core. I will certainly post the results from the Lab when they tests are done. This month is the vacation time in India and it may be tested only in June. If it is tested early I will post the results.

I had been very transparent and honest in this disclosure so others can take it forward. While I respect your belief, assume for a moment what I disclosed is correct data. Then it opens the possibility for a lot of employment in all countries and reduction of pollution in all countries. I'm sure once the inquriy begins and some one is able to replicate a lot of others will start researching and a lot of benefits are likely to come.

If in 1983 had you been told that mobile phones would come to all and we can access Internet, talk and look at others in other parts of the world and get news instantly of what happens any where in the world would you have believed it? Tell me please. Let us keep our minds open and investigate this.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 11, 2015, 08:28:09 AM
@All:

I had made initial contact with the High Voltage Laboratory in the Institute. The Professor there had little time o speak to me. According to the professor the amperage of 20 Amps shown is acceptable but the voltage is not. Because they consider Earth as Neutral the impedance between the two different earth points needs to be ascertained and then calculated to see if the 620 volts figure can be arrived at or not. They considered the secondary coil only as a shunted coil and so they would agree the Ammeter reading of 20 Amps but not the voltmeter readings. They are having exams and have vacation and may not agree to do any tests till June. And naturally before they do any test they would also check that the rods are normal rods and would check the windings.

Today the Professor suggested that If I'm in a hurry we can do the same setup with another coil wound over the central core to produce 220 volts output at higher amperages and test it ourselves. Unfortunately we had removed the insulated room arranged for the experiments and no space is available. Secondly I do not personally have any knowledge in making electrical connections. The issue of liability in case of accidents is also there. The danger of High voltage electricity is always present. So I would prefer to do it in a Government Institute even if it is going to cost more money and more time.

Because these experiments are costly I think only one friend who received information from me may do this. Even he is not willing to confirm.

Even at the supposedly low costs of India it has cost me a lot of money. On wires alone I have probably spent about $1000 and for 200 kgms of iron we spent around $300 including transportation charges. I'm not disclosing the labour costs and specialized electrician costs and the time I needed to spent.  All transformers bought by me for these experiments are gone. Labour costs and peripherals for about 9 months were the heaviest cost for me as I realized that the weakness is in the lack of knowledge of any one as to how to make magnets, how to make powerful magnets and how to make powerful electromagnets by giving little amount of  electrical input. This essentially is the secret of this device. You must make two or more very large and powerful electromagnets by giving minimal input of power and then place the output coils in between the opposite poles of the iron cores of two electromagnets. The additive flux there is not dependent on the input current but on the magnetic field strength and the intensity of the additive flux. If we use this to produce electricity, there is no connection between the input current and output current. It has cost me enormously to reach this stage but I'm unable to do further experiments. Even when I go to the University depending on their costs, I may have to apply and wait for a Government grant to do further experiments. I was crazy to have spent so much on this project.

Prof Figuera shows about 14 Large electromagnets and 7 small electromagnets. He describes the small electromagnets as reel and reels of coils. We can visualize the size of the large cores. It is possible that I have made only one of the seven sets.

Doug1 has suggested the use of Magnetic Amplifier and we had done it already without knowing what is a magnetic amplifier. But it results in a lot of heat and excessive heat conditions form after a few minutes and this needs to be avoided. There have been other suggestions to miniaturize the core but my lack of knowledge and funds limits this. Any one doing this project must and would realize that the size of the iron core matters. Greater the iron greater the output.

I apologize that I'm unable to go further than this due to my personal constraints at this time. I have done my maximum and made very transparent and honest posts and I have come very close to proving that achieving higher output than input without complicated systems is possible. Of course I followed Figuera and only avoided the rotary device due to availability of AC supply which was not present in his days. It is possible when they test the University may find that the output indeed exceeds the input. I will post at that time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 11, 2015, 11:14:57 AM
Hello All,
Surgery is finished. Recoup ing at home... thanx for the cards and well wishes...

Ramaswami,
So let me get this correct... So what you're saying is that I can disconnect my " Figuera transformers " and connect to your apparatus and receive results? And if I wanted more energy...connect more transformers ( more of your apparatuses )...

Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 11, 2015, 01:50:37 PM
Ramaswami

  While I admire your achievements so far I do not believe you made a magnetic amplifier or you would have been able to control the input from your mains down to where it did not over heat the core. I wish you all the happiness you can find in your future for both you and your loved ones.   
  Even I have decided to take some time off and work on projects which have been neglected. A bird in the hand is worth ten on the internet and all that. It wasn't until I fried my computer monitor for a couple weeks that I realized how much time was being wasted. Its still broken with a knife jammed into the power sup to make it work while I await the arrival of the new one just to get a few moments of time to check emails.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 11, 2015, 02:24:02 PM
 Hello,
 
Although currently I am not doing experiments there is no day when I do not think about the Figuera generator. But I am reading many things trying to find similarities that give clues and help solve the puzzle.
 
For a month now I've been reading things about Gennady Nikolaev, Russian scientist who proposed an amendment to the electromagnetic equations of Maxwell to include the existence of longitudinal waves. He demonstrated experimentally the existence of these waves (there are several videos on Youtube but they are in Russian ... and I do not understand). They are longitudinal waves are those waves used in Tesla´s power wireless transmission. This scientific postulates that a second magnetic field, a magnetic field scalar not predicted by the current equations which predict only a transverse magnetic field. This field is the one that says that accommodates all overunity systems. It seems that his designs to get this field require two magnets with opposite poles very close.
 
For me what Figuera´s patent have in common (both 1902 as 1908) is that in all of them Figuera always used TWO electromagnets. Among them, in the center, it is placed the induced circuit. Using two magnets located very close is related to the proposed Nikolaev ideas.
 
Look what Nikolaev tells us:
 
Top photo: "In the middle of two magnets with the opposite poles (situated in one plane) the total vectorial magnetic field vector is zero, which is proven by the absence of magnetic interaction between magnets and a ferromagnetic material. This ferromagnetic material is placed in the space where usual magnetic field is zero. However, in the space where the total vector magnetic field vector of the two magnets is zero, the total value of the scalar magnetic field of the two magnets is maximum. In spite of this fact, the magnetic scalar field between magnets is maximum, this field does not interact with ferromagnetic materials. That is why the ferromagnetic material on the tray is not attracted to magnets. However if we create electric currents (or equivalent Amper´s currents of this double magnet) in this space, where usual magnetic field is zero, than under the action of longitudinal interactions of these currents with the total magnetic field of the magnets scale the forces of attraction or repulsion appear"
 
Bottom photo: "It is a device to demostrate the existence of longitudinal electromagnetic waves. Two loop antennas are emitting the antipodal waves. That is why the total signal of transverse electromagnetic waves in the plane between the loops is equal to zero. However, the longitudinal electromagnetic waves have the maximal value in the plane between the loops. These waves are easily recorded by the loop antennas, even in spite of fact that the plane of the loop antennas appears to be perpendicular to the plane of polarization vector of transverse electromagnetic waves. Any registration of transverse electromagnetic waves is impossible in this case. "
 
----
This scalar field is allowing this rare effect between three magnets: the creation of a magnetic coupling or well where the attraction and repulsion are canceled: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtiMQPeYJrQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtiMQPeYJrQ)
Also look at the zoomed picture that I post below
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 11, 2015, 03:36:43 PM
Doug1:

Thanks for the very kind words. I concede that we did not do any controlled magnetic amplication.  We did not even know about Magnetic amplifiers when we used the shunted coils to increase magnetism. You are quite correct that it was not a controlled magnetic or variable amplification. I probably would need to have people with competent skill sets or acquire knowledge and experiment. But I'm in the Take Rest If you must but don't you quit situation. The University will need to check and find out what is the output and whether the insertion of the middle coil along with the Lenz Law complying secondaries can suddenly boost the wattage,  This is vacation time in India. Let me take a vacation. I have done my duty and also brought it to the attention of very competent Professors who had turned out hundreds of Master degree students and thousands of Engineers in their carreer and have their students placed in all large companies all over the world. If the results are indeed good, these professors will try to carry on with the research. In a way I'm afraid that making this all open source may prevent them from going forward but the information has been given to a number of people. So in a way it may go forward.

Randy: Congrats on your Surgery. I'm very Happy that you are back. I'm not making any suggestion. All I feel is that Figuera had significant money due to sale of 1902 patent and so might have been able to make a much lower cost, motionless system in 1908. He sold his 1902 patent for US$230,000 or 2.3 million or so. These are 1902 Dollars. Do I have access to that kind of money even today? No. So I only guess that I probably have made only one of the 7 modules shown on the Figuera patents. Nothing more. No suggestions.

Let us have a good and Happy Vacation Now.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 11, 2015, 10:58:03 PM
Hello all,
I think we're talking about two different things here... When you start talking about scalar and Tesla its my opinion...you're using capacitance as the transmitter and receiver and tap into the earth's static  electricity. When you make a Fiquera you're inducing a DC electromagnetic pulse to do what a AC transmission transformer does...recall when you first started the Fiquera replication it's either mechanical or a electronic device that replicates the wave pulse...
Hence...I think Fiquera reached the conclusion first that magnetism is in everything...every piece of matter has its building blocks rooted in magnetism...and there is no such thing as a magnetic insulator.

Just thinking out loud
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 12, 2015, 12:35:19 AM
John Miller
  Not one hundred percent sure which patent you are looking for. Found one I keep on hand that matches your description. #382,282   2nd page of written part. Line 60 through 70. Is that the one or similar. You can use the numbers sited in the text if it is close and maybe find the right one if it is not.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 15, 2015, 07:45:58 PM
Hi guys,


After many tests, prototypes, different interpretations we keep without solving Clemente Figuera´s puzzle. IMHO the key is the coil arrangement that Figuera kept for himself, ans just said "properly placed" (literal quote from the patents text). After all, the only objective information that we have are the 5 patents that Figuera filed in 1902 and 1908. The rest are just our own views and interpretations. I  attach the patents here as a backup.


Good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 16, 2015, 01:10:48 AM
Hello All,

Ramaswami,

Your statement...
" I do not think (I may well be wrong) that we can downsize the device. We can have a shower and bath at home. Water pours on us and we get wet. We can go to a water falls and stand below it and same water falls on us and we also get wet. The experience is different. The effect is different. I do not know how it can be downsized to get the same effect. I may well be wrong in this but please forgive me I'm not trained in making small devices and then simulating what would happen if the device becomes big. That is not my area of competence. "

I'm just weighing in your statement...
bath and shower are two different meanings... a bath consists of filling a bathtub with hot ( if you prefer ) water and bathing yourself... a  shower is a stall ( maybe called something else in India ) where you stand and hot ( if you prefer ) water sprays you with water...
the water falls 1. you can't stop 2. its cold ( even if you wanted it warm ) and you're subject to who or whatever was dumped up stream...
my point is... you have the convenience of wetting yourself with hot ( if you prefer ) water and stopping the flow of water then suds zing and then rinsing with hot ( if you prefer ) water to save money on a water bill... you can slow the rate of the flow of the water to wash just your feet or whatever............
just as resistors are used to control a circuit

all the best
RandyFL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 16, 2015, 01:18:17 AM
Hello All,

Hanon,
what are your results...how did you deal with the gaps...
if you have publish ( in here ) what post was it so I may comprehend them... I have seen your videos and whoopys but I don't know what your results you got...what size wires...the whole nine yards.

all the best
RandyFL



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 17, 2015, 05:44:45 AM
I've read the patents.


The one fact everyone seems to be not aware of is that they disclosed how the coils
are to be wound.


They are  Ruhmkorff coils.
The correct winding is discussed here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_coil

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Daniel_Ruhmkorff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Daniel_Ruhmkorff)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 17, 2015, 05:46:08 AM
.
If the winding is exactly as specified then several additional factors come into play:


Namely the interrupter and capacitor. They together with the coil form a "tank circuit".


Tank circuits have been known to produce reactive power in excess of input power.


Conventional theory holds that you cannot get this reactive power out, because to do so stops the
process that creates it.


I don't subscribe to this view.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 17, 2015, 12:37:01 PM
Hello All,

a.King21,
So what you are stating is the Figuera is using a induction ( Ruhmkorff ) coil as a step up process...

I refer everyone back to what Whoopy produced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlOGEnKpO-w

and what KehYo produced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs

both on them produced results visually... when they took the secondary s out...the primaries were still functioning normally...

when I built my first 555 and 4017 circuit I used a low voltage 555 ( and forgot that I was using it ) and when I hooked it up to a 12 volt lawnmower battery the first thing I spotted was the spark from the battery...I thought that spark ruined the 555 ( it scared the crap out of me )...but the 555 was ruined because of being a low voltage 555...subsequently each time I use the lawnmower battery I get that spark...and now I just momentarily just tap the battery before using it...that spark is what fascinated Tesla into designing the ac motor ( or whatever He invented first ) that spark is the zero point energy field letting you know visually that its there...

Gentlemen/women...
I say go back and either build the rotary, the arduino or the circuit that Patrick designed and get the results that woopy or Kehyo got...
then increase the secondary windings...that spark is waiting for you.

Lastly...
when you look at the videos that woopy produced...look at the magnet wire He used and how many windings He turned...
when you look at Kehyo's video look at the resistor He used ... He states its a .01 ohm resistor
my point is... you have to have enough room on " your " transformer/s to allow at least 9 amps ( 12 volts ) to go thru the magnet wire...anything smaller isn't going to produce the " work " that you want. The resistors have to have at least 100 watt ratings...the power transistors and the resistors will get hot - maybe they could be used to heat up water or coffer but that's for another forum... :-)

All the best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 17, 2015, 02:43:55 PM
It's really hard to listen to woopy's videos.He sounds like one of those commercials on the spanish TV channels. Very dramatic sounding. Or the guy on the movie Bird Cage who cant wear shoes. Then I start picturing him singing "she works hard for the money" in the movie and my brain shuts down.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 17, 2015, 03:59:17 PM
On a serious note...

I'm picturing 3 dancing bears on the Ed Sullivan show dancing to the tune " she works hard for the money"...
so in other words... Doug... you can't look at the video of poopy/woopy because of all the points in your last post... which I might remind you those are his good points lol...

Lastly...Patrick actually put His video on the website along with the data...and Kehyo actual repeated the results...

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 17, 2015, 04:36:19 PM
Here's another view of it with no one speaking...

The Figuera experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s

The guy named Harry Hasler... produces a transformer with no gaps and then supplies the gap himself by scraping...technically you just need to insulate the primary, with tape, air maybe even bubble gum, away from the secondary...

My question is... Is Tesla's radiant energy part of the ZPE field or something different...and does a magnetic field dissipate into the ZPE field if it has no other place to go...as a magnet field doesn't disappear.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 17, 2015, 06:45:16 PM
Im not knocking his work. Just saying it is hard to hear his voice and not be distracted by it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 18, 2015, 01:18:13 AM
Here's another view of it with no one speaking...

The Figuera experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s)

The guy named Harry Hasler... produces a transformer with no gaps and then supplies the gap himself by scraping...technically you just need to insulate the primary, with tape, air maybe even bubble gum, away from the secondary...

My question is... Is Tesla's radiant energy part of the ZPE field or something different...and does a magnetic field dissipate into the ZPE field if it has no other place to go...as a magnet field doesn't disappear.
This guy is nearer the mark. You need to understand interrupters, var, hf oscillations circuits produced by the tank circuit.  I am not into this configuration but feel that builders need to understand the principle. I believe  NRamaswami found a solid state way to produce the effect. I would really like to see NRamaswami's  scope shot and I'll bet it's full of spikes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 18, 2015, 01:46:27 AM
patent from 30378  quote:

In the arrangement of the excitatory magnets and the induced, our generator
has some analogy with dynamos, but completely differs from them in that, not
requiring the use of motive power, is not a transforming apparatus. As much as
we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the
construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of
these coils which differs completely. It has the advantage that the soft iron core
can be constructed with complete indifference of the induced circuit, allowing
the core to be a real group of electromagnets, like the exciters, and covered
with a proper wire in order that these electromagnets may develop the biggest
attractive force possible, without worrying at all about the conditions that the
induced wire must have for the voltage and amperage that is desired. In the
winding of this induced wire, within the magnetic fields, are followed the
requirements and practices known today in the construction of dynamos, and
we refrain from going into further detail, believing it unnecessary.


So Figuera gives some clues here as to the coil construction.  Obviously it's not a classic induction coil as it differs completely. But the basis is a Ruhmkorff coil.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2015, 06:51:53 AM
Here's another view of it with no one speaking...

The Figuera experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s)

The guy named Harry Hasler... produces a transformer with no gaps and then supplies the gap himself by scraping...technically you just need to insulate the primary, with tape, air maybe even bubble gum, away from the secondary...

My question is... Is Tesla's radiant energy part of the ZPE field or something different...and does a magnetic field dissipate into the ZPE field if it has no other place to go...as a magnet field doesn't disappear.

Hilarious! Notice how he switches the meter from a Volts range to a Current range without changing the connections! This is the "Steve Spisak" method of measuring current: simply put your near-zero resistance Ammeter directly across the output terminals of your device, just like you would use a high impedance Voltmeter!

The "scraping" is producing an intermittent contact, turning on and turning off the current to the coil. The voltage induced in the "secondary" is proportional to the time rate of change of the magnetic field produced by the turning on and off of the current in the "primary". The sharper the cut-off, the higher the voltage induced. This is just ordinary induction at work, there is no need to invoke "ZPE" or any other hypothetical construct. Where does the magnetic field go when the current producing it cuts off? It goes back to the same place it came from: charge in motion. The moving charges created the magnetic field, and the collapsing field tries to keep the charges moving in the same direction, hence producing sparks and higher-voltage spikes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2015, 07:02:14 AM
This guy is nearer the mark. You need to understand interrupters, var, hf oscillations circuits produced by the tank circuit.  I am not into this configuration but feel that builders need to understand the principle. I believe  NRamaswami found a solid state way to produce the effect. I would really like to see NRamaswami's  scope shot and I'll bet it's full of spikes.

Here's a "solid state" way of producing ... wait, what effect are you talking about? Voltage amplification by rapidly collapsing magnetic fields, in a resonating tank circuit full of reactive power? Ok, we've got that covered:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeQ5WnziKBA

(30 VDC input at less than 2 amperes)

Sorry... I'm not about to connect my Ammeter _directly across_ that output ....    ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 18, 2015, 09:05:26 AM
So.........
accordingly the 555 pulses the power transistor to open the gate to let a 9 amp spike to invoke a magnetic field that jumps a gap and invokes a magnetic field into the secondary and ( if not connected to anything ) goes.........where?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 18, 2015, 12:41:53 PM
So.........
accordingly the 555 pulses the power transistor to open the gate to let a 9 amp spike to invoke a magnetic field that jumps a gap and invokes a magnetic field into the secondary and ( if not connected to anything ) goes.........where?

Not quite. There is a 555 but it only provides the "gating" at audio frequencies. The actual resonant oscillation driving the system is produced by a Phase-Locked Loop circuit that keeps the oscillator tuned to the resonant frequency of the secondary. The PLL chip (4046) picks up the e-field oscillations by an antenna loop at the bottom of the secondary, and this is used as feedback by the PLL circuit. The pulses from the PLL are connected to a current amplifier to drive the Gate of the single mosfet power transistor. The secondary circuit is operating at about 736kHz, and changes by a few kHz either way as the PLL circuit keeps the coil in resonance. The 555 timer just gates the output of the PLL circuit in order to produce the staccato sparking sound at audio frequencies. It is not involved in the actual resonating of the circuit, and without this gating the arc is constant and silent.
If nothing is connected... the frequency and voltage are so high that the environment itself completes the circuit, either by direct ionization or by capacitively coupling between the top of the coil and the Earth.
Yes, you could think of it as a magnetic field from the primary, "jumping the gap" to the secondary. Since I am using air-core coils, there is no magnetic core saturation or power wasted in eddy currents heating the core to worry about. The collapsing field from the primary, each time the mosfet turns off, induces a voltage in the secondary, and since it is tuned to resonance, the secondary voltage builds up to a very high value-- as high as possible, in fact, limited by the spraying off of charge from the top terminal as corona.
The input voltage is 30 volts DC and the output voltage is just over 30kV, as measured with a sphere gap: a voltage amplification of over 1000x. The "turns ratio" is only 84 to 1.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 18, 2015, 02:28:38 PM
TinselKoala,
To clarify... I am specifically referring to the circuit Patrick Kelly has on his website for the Figuera the 555, 2 CD4017B s and the gate CD4081................

If you have a specific circuit diagram that you're using I would gladly like to pe ruse it...

I particularly Liked His circuit as it was easy to build, I didn't have an arduino ( Yet ), and I didn't want to go down the road of using a UFOpolitic motor or contraption as I am easily diverted into re wiring the RS motor ( I still am waiting to re build it )...

Lastly...in dealing with air gaps...is it better to use an air gap or an insulation ( tape, paper, paint or whatever )...how do you calculate the gap...and will the iron saturate to point of heavy heat ( fire )...

all the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 18, 2015, 07:23:23 PM
@A.King

Sir..Thanks for pointing out 30378 where the poles are defined as opposite poles and also for providing for the attractive forces. Whereas the induction coils are based on repulsive forces the Figuera Generator is based on Attractive forces. You are quite correct in your statement about the interrupter but where is the capacitor in the Figuera patent. I do not see any capacitor arrangement there and no tank circuit there..I apologize if there is a mistake on my part and it is due to my lack of knowledge. I do agree that I modified the primary to have a higher frequency so the input cannot go up beyond calculated limits but I do not understand where is the capacitor in the Figuera circuit..Please advise. Actually this is the patent that convinced me that we must use only opposite poles and not identical poles and in any case I was not getting any voltage in identical pole arrangement of NS-SN-NS as suggested earlier in the forum..I then used not only the attractive force but also the repulsive force to make the modified device. I do not have any oscilloscope and I'm a poor researcher using my own small money to do these things but I cannot afford any thing any more..I came out of the vacation to thank you for your postings on this point.

@TK..You seems to be the most prolific poster knocking out free energy device claims but thanks for acknowledging or indicating that while the input wattage is around 60 watts the output wattage would be far higher in your demonstration of the Tesla Coil..Can you please do an experiment..Put Water in a copper cylinder with open top and surround it with plastic and then copper and secure it well.. Place the water container at some small distance to the Tesla coil so the spark will hit the outer copper. Take a very thick probably 6 inches thick copper rod well insulated and put it to ground. Make the ground point also wet. Can you find out what is the Amperage and voltage from your 60 watts input..I think it will not be 60 watts but way more higher..Do you disagree? Be careful though. I have made a low voltage high frequency circuit of Patrick and we did not find any current coming from the two electrodes.  Then I put two Tens carbon electrodes and held them in my hands and nothing and let the electrodes slip..You know what the carbon electrodes got fire and burnt to my shock. While High Frequency electricity is safe even at high voltages a slight drop of water can change all that and can make deadly current..Water contains a lot of amperage and you may please test it and tell the forum if this is true or not..May be Ramaswami is bluffing you see..It is your equipment..your place and your measurements and Ramaswami cannot deceive here..But please be careful..High Frequency or otherwise once the circuit contains water the electricity is deadly..So please be careful if you elect to do this experiment. I do not have the facilities to do these things.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 18, 2015, 07:56:11 PM
Hello All,

@TK..You seems to be the most prolific poster knocking out free energy device claims

Rams,
There is a phrase from the State of Missouri and it goes like this... " show me "... when I was building the circuit in November 2013 my electronic engineer friend examined the papers that I had copied from Patrick's website... He too told me it wasn't overunity as He calculated with calculus the circuit and the transformers...subsequently I couldn't get the circuit to work and rebuilt it only to lose Him to a rehab from Hell...Anyway my point is this...my circuit and your apparatus is just a claim until you/we prove it with scientific tests...and I really don't care about scientific tests if my electricity bill goes lower.........:-)

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 19, 2015, 02:20:26 AM
Hello All,

http://www.loneoceans.com/labs/ignitioncoil/
Here's a simple car ignition coil setup to deliver a spark...

So...what you're stating is having 7 of these circuits to deliver a spark across each of the 7 transformer's air gaps...?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 19, 2015, 07:04:45 AM
NRamaswami (http://overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/):


Let us say you wanted to use a transformer but just had a battery.  It will not work.
You need either pulsed dc or ac.
The Ruhmkorff coil used pulsed dc.
So they used an interrupter switch similar to an old electric bell which turned the battery on and off very rapidly and automatically.
They then put a capacitor across the interrupter to decrease the sparks and at the same time increase the oscillations into the mhz range at each interrupt.


Here's a circuit diagram https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_coil
A tank circuit creates reactive power. It is usually much higher than the input, but to get it out means you have to switch off the input. - Or so the science tell us.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 19, 2015, 08:28:55 AM
No, that's not quite correct, you don't have to "switch off the input" to extract real power from that which is stored as reactive power in a tank circuit. My video demonstrations of wireless power transfer and the microQEG illustrate this quite well. What is necessary is that you don't extract real power faster than it is being replaced into the tank circuit by whatever is oscillating it. Because if you do, then the stored reactive power will collapse until it's replaced by the source.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 19, 2015, 10:13:41 AM
No, that's not quite correct, you don't have to "switch off the input" to extract real power from that which is stored as reactive power in a tank circuit. My video demonstrations of wireless power transfer and the microQEG illustrate this quite well. What is necessary is that you don't extract real power faster than it is being replaced into the tank circuit by whatever is oscillating it. Because if you do, then the stored reactive power will collapse until it's replaced by the source.


So how much power did you extract vs input power?


ps I stand corrected.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 19, 2015, 11:27:31 AM
but....

How much power do you need to jump the air gap?
the BDX53 s provide up to 9 amps and the 2N3055 s provide up to 35 amps
100 watts or 400 watts
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 19, 2015, 08:49:55 PM
Here is the circuit:

C:\Users\Owner\Pictures\Fig26.gif

And here is how it is laid out:

C:\Users\Owner\Pictures\Fig369.gif


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 19, 2015, 08:50:12 PM
Hi RandyFL,

Please let me chime in and say that the correct question to ask is how much voltage do you need to jump the air gap, ok?

It is the electric field strength which counts when a spark gap fires, besides of course the size and other properties of the gap and its close vicinity.

And it is another question how much power you use to create a certain voltage to jump, to fire a certain air gap. Of course a voltage source can be a ready made one, you do not neccessarily have to create it.

And yet another question is how "beefy" the source of the voltage, i.e. when you load it directly or indirectly with a near short circuit a fireing air gap represents, then how much current the voltage source is able to maintain, directly or indirectly, via that near short circuit (i.e. via the ionized air or gas), ok? 

And the power used in this process depends on
- the inner resistance of the voltage source
- the inner resistance or impedance of the circuit (if there is a circuit) used to create the voltage for the air gap
- the resistance of the near short circuit i.e. that of the ionized air (or gas) after the gap just fired
- and the resistance or impedance of the load of course

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 19, 2015, 09:27:48 PM
Gyula,

I'm trying to stay in the parameters of 12 volts...auto battery...
magnet wire 10 AWG or 12 SWG = max amps 15....but that's on the high end ( 14 or 16 AWG is what I have )
and solid state... as per my last post

as I delve into the air gap info... an air gap is the equivalent of a resistor in a magnetic circuit...mmF = E..........and Flux = current
BDX53 s --->9 amps = 108 watts, 2N3055 s --------> 35 amps = 420 watts....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 20, 2015, 12:01:18 AM
Hi RandyFL,

Sorry, unfortunately I answered as if you had asked about a spark gap power but you asked on a magnetic air gap power.  :(

My mistake came from that the two posts preceeding your post of the air gap power question were involved with extracting reactive power from LC tank and somehow I associated your question with power extraction via (spark) gap from the tank.

Re on a magnetic air gap and how much power it may have: it more or less corresponds to the input excitation power defined by the 12V and the input current to the coil what you considered as the 9A or the 35A, and this given amount of input is divided into two parts: the one which is in the ferromagnetic core (or coil if there is no core) and the other part is in the air gap.
It can happen easily that the air gap power or more precisely the magnetic energy in the air gap (out of the total input) can be higher than the magnetic energy in the core, this depends on the magnetic path lengths of the core and how  that compares to the length of the air gap. 
See the example at very bottom paragraph of this link:
http://www.vias.org/matsch_capmag/matsch_caps_magnetics_chap3_17.html

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2015, 12:24:32 AM
Gyula,
I am considering painting the cores with a red flame proof manifold paint...but its after I actually have experienced what the figuera does...
for now I will just consider insulating paper, wood or leaving it open ( but that entails clamping so that would be a last resort ) I probably will go with insulating paper I bought last year..........fish paper I guess they call it ( fyberoid fish paper )...

anyway...
its a vicious circle I think...the more turns on the primary to jump the gap...means a bigger transformer...then bigger coils...then bigger wire...then who knows in the secondary s ....... 01 AWG ----------------->how the hell would you wrap that around a iron bar....LOL

Lastly...my question is about Woopy and Kehyo ( who actually got results - look at my previous posts ) why didn't they pursue forward...they started something else.......

all the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2015, 02:11:26 AM
Gyula,
That was a very inspirational piece of info. so inspirational I'll add it here:

 " Although the air gap has a volume of only 1.1 percent that of the iron, it stores 24.4 times the energy stored in the iron. However, as the iron becomes saturated its permeability decreases and the ratio of the energy in the air gap to that in the iron also decreases..."


http://www.vias.org/matsch_capmag/matsch_caps_magnetics_chap3_17.html


All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 20, 2015, 09:18:03 AM
What about the saturation of iron core in the form of  straight  bar ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2015, 09:56:13 AM
my take on saturation...
Professor Figuera probably understood saturation...
maybe saturation is alleviated because of the way it enters the 7 transformers...
I would imagine that the resistors ( wires that He used ) got extremely hot----------->maybe to heat up water or coffee :-) 
my results were quite scientific....the BDX53 s ( power transistors that I used ) were measured for heat.........by my fingers LOL
I didn't use heat sinks because I could disconnect the power easily.......

I am going to do a rebuild of the circuit ( with Heat sinks and lower Ohm resistors ) soon...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2015, 10:06:04 AM
Forest,

" In electronic circuits, transformers and inductors with ferromagnetic cores operate nonlinearly when the current through them is large enough to drive their core materials into saturation. This means that their inductance and other properties vary with changes in drive current. In linear circuits this is usually considered an unwanted departure from ideal behavior. When AC signals are applied, this nonlinearity can cause the generation of harmonics and intermodulation distortion. To prevent this, the level of signals applied to iron core inductors must be limited so they don't saturate. To lower its effects, an air gap is created in some kinds of transformer cores "

From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturation_(magnetic)

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 20, 2015, 10:40:45 AM
Hi RandyFL,

I think it is a good step to isolate your iron cores with paper or paint as a first step before jamming them into the coils, this helps reduce eddy current loss in the iron.

Yes, to reduce losses of all kinds we tend to increase the overall size or volume of transformers but for testing purposes one should decide about the sizes as per his means make it possible. You are to decide as per what you can afford, no need to go for extra large or small sizes, the most important is to reduce eddy losses what you already correctly decided.

On Woopy or Kehyo: perhaps a kind inquiring personal message to each of them could bring you answers?

On the quote you repeated from the link: please keep in mind that it is the input energy which supplies BOTH the magnetic energy in the core (or coil) and the magnetic energy in the gap. It is fortunate that in the air gap (which is made in an otherwise closed magnetic circuit) more magnetic energy can be found than in the core, the sum of the two energies makes up for the total input, (minus the losses).

to Forest:

A straight bar or I core has an 'infinite' air gap around it so it is hard to excite into saturation. Of course it can be done, a mere question of AmperTurns.
However, when you arrange straight bars close to each other, conditions for saturation may change, depending on how the magnetic circuit can develop towards a possible closed or closed-like  circuit, and in this case you can reduce saturation by decreasing input current, either by reducing input voltage amplitude by a Variac or connecting one of the input wires to a tap on the input primary coil (if you provided some taps beforehand, that is).

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 20, 2015, 04:00:05 PM
Gyula,

On Woopy or Kehyo: perhaps a kind inquiring personal message to each of them could bring you answers?

Isn't that what the forum is for...to share ideas...to inform.../... I thank you for your willingness to share.


On the quote you repeated from the link: please keep in mind that it is the input energy which supplies BOTH the magnetic energy in the core (or coil) and the magnetic energy in the gap. It is fortunate that in the air gap (which is made in an otherwise closed magnetic circuit) more magnetic energy can be found than in the core, the sum of the two energies makes up for the total input, (minus the losses).


How can a air gap have more energy than the primary core...in a magnet circuit... air gaps are to be considered the resistor ( reluctance ) in the equation

A straight bar or I core has an 'infinite' air gap around it so it is hard to excite into saturation. Of course it can be done, a mere question of AmperTurns.
However, when you arrange straight bars close to each other, conditions for saturation may change, depending on how the magnetic circuit can develop towards a possible closed or closed-like  circuit, and in this case you can reduce saturation by decreasing input current, either by reducing input voltage amplitude by a Variac or connecting one of the input wires to a tap on the input primary coil (if you provided some taps beforehand, that is).

Wouldn't the secondary " load " be drawing energy and Flux ( or is that a figment of my imagination )...?

Where does the spark come from ( the Lenz Law ) when you connect up to a battery or when you connect a line cord up to the mains as you enter the socket there's a slight electric spark...Tesla was fascinated with that spark....

Lastly...the 12 volt lawnmower battery provides the current, the 9 amps ( per BDX53 ), which is delivered to the primary and the " gap " as energy to create a magnet flux.........which causes a magnet field...........but where does the energy come from in the secondary s... ( one is either in the free energy camp or not :-)

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 21, 2015, 09:31:59 AM
Gyula, Randy:

The objection by Randy is to this portion of Gyula's reply.

On the quote you repeated from the link: please keep in mind that it is the input energy which supplies BOTH the magnetic energy in the core (or coil) and the magnetic energy in the gap. It is fortunate that in the air gap (which is made in an otherwise closed magnetic circuit) more magnetic energy can be found than in the core, the sum of the two energies makes up for the total input, (minus the losses).

I see that there is nothing wrong in the statement per se. However there is an exception to this general rule. The exception is that when the opposite poles of a magnetic core have an air gap, the energy in that part is not dictated purely by the input. It is dictated by what is the strength of the opposing magnets and how close they are to each other or how short the air gap is. In this case the energy in the air gap is not purely based on the input.  I may possibly be wrong if you conclude that the energy of the magnets is due to the input only. However if the magnetic power goes up the power in the gap that can be extracted also goes up by 24.4 times. The air gap probably contains ionized air and that carries more power than what is in the magnetic core itself. I really do not know.

However Gyula never ever indicated that the output from the secondary that can be taken cannot be more than the input. A very ordinary coil arrangement can produce more energy than the input. Figuera demonstrated two such coil arrangments using opposite poles. Similarly Gyula never indicated that you cannot make a very powerful magnet by providing less energy. If the magnet is more powerful the air gap between the opposite poles is also more powerful.  This I have found possible in my experiments. I have already posted how to provide as low as 110 watts and provide a very powerful magnetic core. It is not just ampere turns but the number of parallel and mutually aiding rotating magnetic fields that are responsible for the magnetic field strength. Greater this number of rotating currents greater is the magnetic field strength and for this you do not need a high amperage input.

A.King

Sir..Thank you very much for your post. .basically you appear to say that the higher the frequency higher the output but that output cannot be taken out without switching off the input and so never be obtained is what is disclosed or stated in books.

Higher the frequency lower the input amperage. If the frequency is higher, input amperage cannot go high. It will come down. Let us forget the design of devices and look at principles only.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

We do not need a LC Tank circuit for increasing the frequency. Simple wires can be modified for this purpose and frequency can be easily increased. The energy can be taken out without swithcing off the input. Both the output voltage and amperage can be increased easily and can be higher than the input. I have found it to be true in my experiments.

A normal transformer type of coil will however give only the equivalent of input minus losses in the secondary and you need to use the power between opposite poles to obtain higher output than input. Modifying the coils more can give so much of voltage and amperage that the secondary wire can also burn out..How..

We know that charged contra rotating plates like in Wimhurst generators will provide enormous amount of voltage without amperage.

Now if we put in between two opposite poles of electromagnets a coil of the following type we get both higher voltage and higher amperage.

The coil is first wound along with the primary to increase the magnetic field for two layers - single wire. Coil No. 1

The two wires are wound like a bifilar wire Coil 2 and 3..

Here the difference is the end of coil 2 is connected to end of Coil 3. So we have the coil 2 increasing the magnetisation and coil 3 cancelling out the magnetization. This coil 2 and coil 3 are charged contra rotating spirals.
Then the beginning of Coil 3 is connected to beginning of Coil 4 which is wound as in coil 1 and 2.

This arrangement sits in between two opposite poles. The contra rotating spirals cannto cancel out the magnetization or the attractive force between the two opposite poles of two electromagnets but they would increase the voltage as the contra rotating spirals are present. Since the increase of voltage must result in the increase of amperage when the coil is placed between opposite poles the output would be far higher than the input..

You can reduce the input by using normal multifilar coils but increasing the number of coils to above 10 would prevent you from taking from the primary any thing above 100 to 110 watts. It is not possible to more more current. If you put Plastic iron rods and plastic between each layer of such multifilar coils the magnetism would be tremendously increased because the number of mutually aiding rotating currents or rotating magnetic fields is very high and it increases the magnetic field strength. Each iron core placed between the different layers also incresases the magnetisation and in the center of the core you have tremendous magnetization. This is some thing I have found in practical application. You simply need to make two such giant cores and put a smaller core to connect the centers and then wind the coils 1,2,3 and 4 as I indicated above to get a tremendous output from the output coil than the input.

It is not in dispute that the coils get the energy from the input but the resulting magnetic field can be easily strengthened with less input and as the secondary output is based on the magnetic field strength the output is not connected to the primary input.

There is no violation of law of conservation of energy here. The air gap between the two cores contains 24 times more energy than what is contained in the iron core..I do not dispute it. Closer the air gap greater the attractive force. It is the law of nature. When you wind coils in this space you are able to take more power out of the secondary. This is what is indicated in the patents of Figuera both in the 1902 and in the 1908 patents. I have simply followed him.

I understand that the concept of electrostatics and electromagnetics is not combined in any device to produce higher voltage and higher amperage. I suspect that when contra rotating charged wire spirals are subjected to opposite magnetic fields both voltage and amperage would go up. In this arrangement the contra rotating spirals cannot cancel the attractive force between the opposite poles created by the primary.

This is an experiment I have not done. I do not have the facilities for this but I suspect that unless we can calculate and reduce the output voltage the output wire may burn out due to very high current.

You can easily check by winding a multifilar wire of 200 meters and each wire being for 15 meters wind about 13 or 14 coil multifilar wire and see that is the amperge taken. A small device can be used for this and the input amperage will not go up beyond a particular point. You can make a simple transformer arrangement and give a lot of load and you would find that whatever be the load on the secondary the primary cannot draw more power than its limit.

The primary multifilar coil impedance can be calculated like this..

Resistance of wire No.1 x 3 for coils 2 x3 for coil 3x 3 for coil 4 etc.. For a 100 meter 11 filar 4 sq mm wire I found that we have some thing like 29524 ohms and the primary would not consume more 0.5 amps when connected directly to the mains and the primary coil end when connected to load of lamps will not show any current not even milliamps at the output. This is because the frequency has gone up tremendously in the coils or let us say the resistance or impedance has gone up tremendously in the coils. You can replicate the experiment and see for yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 21, 2015, 10:41:59 AM
Rams,
I'm merely stating what I experienced ( in the beginning ) a spark ( that scared me - whilest the 12 volt battery burnt out my low power 555 - from Radio Shack )...

that spark is what gave Tesla the inspiration to go into AC...

My question to Gyula or anybody...
Is that spark the " Lenz Law " ( the opposing force - or whatever its called ) is it sitting in the air gap whenst the 12 volt battery energy goes to it...

My second question is... In the magnetic circuit the air gap is " reluctance " = resistance in the electronic circuit
put another way its...

V I R ( Volts Amps Resistance )  =   mmF  Flux reluctance  ( mmF = amp/turns ) Flux = current  reluctance = resistance...........
I hope that's clear :-)

going back to my second question... how is the gap reluctance ( resistance ) stated...
( Rams...I am answering my own question Lol.........the " Gauss meter " measures how much pull from the amp/turns...the Mu is the permeability of metal ( iron or annealed sheet steel )... they reach a saturation point and re adjust ( bigger iron or more laminations )
the air gaps are used commercially as a way of dealing with saturation - wider gap more resistance....................................
that's why transformer manufacturers don't want to hear about Tesla and/or Figuera....they either don't know ( cuz its not main stream science ) or they know it would effect their bottom line = profits...

Here in America...you produce something that's unique and esoteric ( they buy you out ) or call the men in black as a security issue or fire hazard to the local authority  ( Rams whats it like there )...

In conclusion...whether you're building the Ramaswami apparatus or the Figuera the amp/turns is the key... and in the Figuera the gap is your friend..........in the primary that is .......who knows what going to happen in the secondary.........stay tuned....

we return you to your regular scheduled program ( the outer limits ) OMG I'm getting old...

All the Best
Randy ( not my real name ) ( My real name is *7887NNN****xxx ) LOL

ps I think I need some more sleep
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 21, 2015, 02:45:23 PM
....
How can a air gap have more energy than the primary core...in a magnet circuit... air gaps are to be considered the resistor ( reluctance ) in the equation
....


Hi RandyFL,

Consider an electric heater connected to the AC mains, say 120V. Suppose the heater is rated at P=1kW.
Now find its electrical resistance, that is R=V*V/P i.e. 120*120/1000=14.4 Ohm   
Now ask yourself: how it is possible that 1000W heat is generated in a 14.4 Ohm resistor while the wires leading to the mains and the wires in the wall leading to the utility source do not warm up significantly?
The answer is the wires are chosen to be good electrical conductors and the heater is the "roadblock" in the closed flow of energy between the AC source and the heater.

The same is true for a magnetic circuit with an air gap: the cores with a decent magnetic permeability can guide magnetic flux with small loss but the air gap cannot, hence the input energy "has to" accumulate in the gap, it is available there for usage but keep in mind it came from the input energy.  It is correct to consider an air gap as a resistor (indeed a reluctance).

Re on the spark: I assume it is due to Lenz law when you connect a circuit to a voltage source, many circuits are inductive in our household enviroment. 

Re on where does the energy come from in the secondaries: all I can tell you is it must come from induction between the primaries and the secondaries
In case of the Figuera setup, accepting his setup really had extra output, then he did not include the how to. IF I knew, I would tell you.  :)

to NRamaswami

Thanks for your thoughts, indeed you correctly understood what I meant. Considering what you wrote as a possible exception, I think you meant to add permanent magnets to the core of electromagnets, is this correct?  If you did not mean that then I am not yet sure how you meant...  ::)

Greetings,
Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 21, 2015, 03:53:00 PM
Gyula:

Thanks for the message..I did not include the possibility of any permanent magnets. They are not needed.

You can wind two identical solenoid coils in identical manner and then connect the two to single source of AC supply. Now the Bottom of coil No. 1 is the opposite pole of Top of Coil No. 2. In between these two coils you have an opposite pole situtation. Figuera did not hide any thing in the patent and I'm really surprised that you consider that he has some how hidden some thing. The only thing that he has hidden is how the coils are wound to increase the magnetic field strength at a low input and that I have found out and put it in the public domain already. I have also eliminated the rotary commutator device which made an interrupted DC current function like an AC current. I think you may have to do the experiments to understand how simple it is. He indicates that the small secondary contained reels and reels of coils which indicate the size of the device.

In fact Pulsed DC behaves strangely. You can simply wind a coil  where each turn is spaced out to  1000+ turns and give pulsed dC from a variac using a diode bridge rectifier and when the input voltage goes to 250 volts the output voltage on a load of 5 x200 watts lamps connected in parallel becomes 270 volts. In the same coil. This is not shown when we apply AC where the voltage goes down when load is given on the load meters. Why this is so is not clear to me. And this does not happen even in pulsed DC until we provide 250 volts from the Variac. 

Similarly it requires four times the length of wire and turns to create a stable electromagnet at 50 volts for pulsed DC than the the number of turns required for AC at 50 volts. I do not understand these things.

Randy:

Hurrah Baba..We are all most humble, most loyal and most obedient servants only..No threats are needed..If some one is willing to send me $25000 I will happilly ship the coils, rods etc etc that I have here to him so they can test it themselves..India people would simply deny loans or funds if one were to do these things..Not that there is money available any way..Banks will either lend to people who would not pay and then write them off or would not lend to people who would properly pay..If you deny funds then that is more than enough..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 21, 2015, 11:01:29 PM
Hi NRamaswami,

I am afraid I did not do my 'homework'  in this topic correctly, sorry for this, in fact I follow this thread only occasionally.
So I went back and did some further reading and I find your posts  #2129,  2133,  2134 (and some more recently) where you described how you built your setup and attached some pictures. I will return to this in a few days with some questions.

Now I would like to ask what switch did you use to have the pulsed DC and approximately at what frequency did you operate the switch. If you are not at liberty to tell this, that is fine with me. To clarify what you did, let me say what I think you did:
you made a coil with 1000+ turns (I assume you used the 6mm OD iron rods for the cores) and you simply connected 5 lamps of 200W each in parallel with this coil. And you connected this coil to the 250V DC voltage source (you described the source) via a switch and you got 270V across the coil i.e. across the paralleld 5 bulbs. Is this correct?

Thanks, Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 22, 2015, 01:47:45 AM
Hi Gyula

I do not know at which frequency pulsed dc was given at 250 volts.
I do not know much about terms so please forgive me if I make mistakes.
In India we get 220 volts and 50 Hz current from mains. Voltage fluctuates.
We connected the variac to mains. Output from variac was connected to a diode bridge rectifier which converts AC to sign wave pulsed DC if I understand correctly. Upto 220 volts from variac there is no change. But when we go above 240 volts the output voltage goes higher than input voltage and varia is limited to 250 volts and when we reach maximum the output voltage on load increased to 270 volts but when weremoved the diode bridge rectifier and gave AC this was not repeated and voltage decreased in the load.  The coil was wound with gaps ad in the gaps we put a lot of iron powder and paste
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 22, 2015, 01:52:26 AM
We were trying to make a Cater Hubbard device and that is the device that produced the re did not build it properly is my feeling and the construction was wrong. I can post pictures if you want.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 22, 2015, 02:18:14 PM
Hello All,

Rams,
I'm sorry... I didn't realize you were doing this in DC...I assumed you were just connecting to the AC mains...In the States we receive two wires of 120 and a neutral and each house is grounded in a single phase system... our main electrical appliances Air Conditioners, clothes dryers, stove tops and hot water heaters use 240 and everything else is 120 at 60 hertz ( sine waves )... I would imagine everybody else in the world is using 240 at 50 hertz ( cycles ) hence your DC cycles are 50 cycles ( hertz ) the unique thing about the circuit that Patrick used is that you can use any amount of DC current you want... for ex. I am using one 12 volt lawnmower battery... you could have endless current by adding in series batteries...

Gyula,
not to beat a dead horse... so what you're stating is everything is based on the input ( lenz law, flux, induction, gap potential and secondary  )...
X amount of energy from the source is going to produce Y amount of energy... no more... no Less...
is that correct...?

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 22, 2015, 02:25:19 PM
Randy;

The modified Figuera device we did and I have explained was given AC input from the mains.

The pulsed DC input was given for the Cater Hubbard device we built earlier and which did not work. You have seen those photos already. We have not tested the figuera device with the pulsed DC. We will test in future and post the results.

Joesph Cater explains in his books that Coils have no impedance to Pulsed DC. I do not know if it is correct but it is a fact that 50 volts stepped down input it requires 4 times the number of turns and length of wire to hold an electromagnet stable. If for example you would need 160 turns of wire to hold a stable electromagnet at 50 volts AC, for pulsed DC you would need 640 turns of the same gauge wire wound on similar dia coils.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 22, 2015, 10:15:08 PM
Rams,

Electrical impedance is the measure of the opposition that a circuit presents to a current when a voltage is applied.

In quantitative terms, it is the complex ratio of the voltage to the current in an alternating current (AC) circuit. Impedance extends the concept of resistance to AC circuits, and possesses both magnitude and phase, unlike resistance, which has only magnitude. When a circuit is driven with direct current (DC), there is no distinction between impedance and resistance; the latter can be thought of as impedance with zero phase angle

If for example you would need 160 turns of wire to hold a stable electromagnet at 50 volts AC, for pulsed DC you would need 640 turns of the same gauge wire wound on similar dia coils.

You could use a relay (s) to whatever amperage you wanted to make up the difference in turns... the problem in mains ( in the states ) the 120 AC comes in 20 amps and the 240 comes in 40 amps... but as I stated before any number of batteries in DC series could amp up any device ex. electric cars, trains and whatever...

All the Best
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 23, 2015, 01:16:16 AM
...
In fact Pulsed DC behaves strangely. You can simply wind a coil  where each turn is spaced out to  1000+ turns and give pulsed dC from a variac using a diode bridge rectifier and when the input voltage goes to 250 volts the output voltage on a load of 5 x200 watts lamps connected in parallel becomes 270 volts. In the same coil. This is not shown when we apply AC where the voltage goes down when load is given on the load meters. Why this is so is not clear to me. And this does not happen even in pulsed DC until we provide 250 volts from the Variac. 

Hi NRamaswami,

IT is a strange behaviour for sure. Things to consider: when diode bridge is not present in the circuit and the Variac is cranked up to give the 250V AC output for the load, does the 220V voltage  at the Variac input also go down when the 250V goes down across the load?   How low does it go down? from 250V to how many volts?
On the diode bridge:  what is its voltage and amper rating? maybe type designation if you do not know the ratings?


Quote
Similarly it requires four times the length of wire and turns to create a stable electromagnet at 50 volts for pulsed DC than the the number of turns required for AC at 50 volts. I do not understand these things.


Would like to understand what you mean on a 'stable' electromagnet? And what is it like when not 'stable'?  And you are speaking of the same coil here which was used in the pulsed DC coil, to which the diode bridge was connected with the lamp load?

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 23, 2015, 01:23:02 AM

....
Gyula,
not to beat a dead horse... so what you're stating is everything is based on the input ( lenz law, flux, induction, gap potential and secondary  )...
X amount of energy from the source is going to produce Y amount of energy... no more... no Less...
is that correct...?
...

Hi RandyFL,

I do not know if there is a dead horse or there isn't.  What I wrote earlier to you was meant specifically for your question, and please interpret it in that connotation,  and NRamaswari also explained to you in Reply #2175.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 23, 2015, 02:53:01 AM
Gyula,
Sorry I must have missed that...
Will go back and re read...

Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 23, 2015, 07:40:03 AM
Gyula:

Your Questions:

when diode bridge is not present in the circuit and the Variac is cranked up to give the 250V AC output for the load, does the 220V voltage  at the Variac input also go down when the 250V goes down across the load?   How low does it go down? from 250V to how many volts?

Answer: The Input from the mains to the Variac does not go down. The diode Bridge consumes as I estimated approximately about 20 to 22 watts. It is a 35 Amps 1000 Volts Diode Bridge Rectifier. At the load the voltage went down to 220 if my memory serves me right. This was an experiment done in probably April 2013. We Considered the device to be failure as it did not get magnetized. We tried to make an electromagnet by connecting the device to the variac (2 amps maximum and it fumed and so we immediately stopped) and connected to the load.

Stable Electromagnet: A stable electromagnet is one where the coils can receive the input and work as an electromagnet. At higher voltages We need a lot of turns and length of wire to hold the magnet or otherwise either the fuze blows out or the office circuit breaker which I believe is rated at 35 Amps blows out. If the fuze does not blow out and the electromagnet can remain available to perform its intended function it is a stable electromagnet.

I have my own questions..

What is Pulsed DC? The Analog voltmeter which can show both DC and AC voltage readings showed 270 volts. But the digital multimeter showed 220 volt AC and 90 Volt DC. Now Patrick has taught me that pulsed DC is nothing but AC without the negative or bottom wave while Randy says it is DC. I'm very confused on this. My understanding is that it is a kind of interrupted DC and it goes in one way only with positive sign wave only when we used the diode bridge. That way it differs from AC but with the sign wave it differs from DC which has a square wave.

I do not have the variac in working condition. I think it is gone. You may wind a coil with space of one wire each between each turn and complete about 1000+ turns. And check this yourself. Please put plastic iron sheet and plastic between each layer when you wind because that is how that device was wound.

In India we have a problem of spurious components. The fuse that was rated at 1 amp did not blow out even at 7 amp input the otherday. The variac was made only for 2.25 amps input limit I think. It is a 500 watts Variac. So the fuse must have allowed more current to flow through and it should have caused the variac to short at some place. I think it can be repaired but there is no use for it now.

One of the forum members is replicating the device described by me. Let him complete and verify if the results are replicatable. He lives in a rich country and has heating equipment that can be heated by the device output and can measure what is the input and what is the output on load. He also has the facilities for testing.  So I would request others who want to replicate to hold until he finishes.

I think if the secondary is a thicker wire or as thick as the primary wire, then at a certain length and turns of the secondary and at a certain voltage level we are able to reach COP>1 level. But this can never ever be achieved if we use the transformer design where the Lenz law effect is predominant. But after crossing this voltage level it the COP level suddenly shoots up. I have checked for a 4 sq mm wire ( which is not used normally for wiring) up to 300 volts and it did not cross COP=1 level itself. But when the voltage has gone to 620 it was COP>8. I think all our equipment are rated to fail below this voltage level and are designed for this purpose.

Similarly I have seen that a very thick insulation plays a very important part for the output. I do not even understand why but you can check it for yourself with a three core or four core cable which has a very thick insulation and use it to make an electromagnet and use ordinary wires and alternate the cable and wire for the primary and secondary and you can see the difference. I'm not able to really explain but thicker insulation and thicker wires provides better performance. I think if we use 10 sq mm wire the COP>1 results may come even at 300 volt levels but we never ever would that wire for normal wiring purposes.

When I read transformers I asked why the secondary should not be wound with a lot of thick wire and a lot of turns and length? I felt that both votlage and amperage should go up.  What will happen if it is wound like that and did not find the answer any where and so I did this arrangement. Unfortunately the higher gauge copper wires are so expensive I could not check them for the secondary performance. Similarly I do not know why thicker secondary wires are not used in Tesla coils. It will be bulky and uneconomical perhaps but a thicker wire in the secondary of a Tesla coil must provide for higher amperage and if the turns are the same as the smaller wire the voltage cannot go down either. Why no material which can stand high frequency is put inside the Tesla coil?  May be I do not have the brains to understand that this will not work but I do not hesitate to ask questions and investigate. This is how I tried.

Randy:

Thanks for the explanation. Please keep in mind that I'm not trained and may use phrases that are not used normally. Like the stable electromagnet above for which I had to explain to Gyula.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 23, 2015, 01:09:55 PM
Rams,
What is Pulsed DC? The Analog voltmeter which can show both DC and AC voltage readings showed 270 volts. But the digital multimeter showed 220 volt AC and 90 Volt DC. Now Patrick has taught me that pulsed DC is nothing but AC without the negative or bottom wave while Randy says it is DC.

I would stick to transformers and bridge rectifiers...I would also go with what Patrick stated about DC... AC comes in from the mains as a sine wave and goes thru a transformer which either steps up or steps downs or is a 1:1 for special purposes...then thru a bridge rectifier that converts it to just positive ( slices the negative out )...the circuit that Patrick provided... the 12 volt battery powers the 555 ( IC ) oscillates it to pulse 3 volts of square wave ( the variable resistor in the circuit provides a way of increasing the frequency - very handy )...

Gyula
My question is...( because I have never done it ) when you connect an analog Multimeter to rectified DC does the needle go back and forth... LOL ( my assumption is that the needle doesn't have time to swing both ways...)

Also...what is better...clipped off DC from a bridge rectifier or a oscillating half square wave from a 555 ( or arduino or etc.. ) which is more efficient...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 23, 2015, 02:52:06 PM
It appears that there are some misconceptions forming in this topic.

First, a fullwave diode bridge does not "slice out the negative" of the incoming AC waveform --- see the graphic below. Rather, it takes that negative portion and flips it over to become a positive portion in the output waveform. If the input is "50Hz" then the output will have 100Hz peaks.

Second, the "220VAC" that the wall plug provides is 220 V RMS. This means that the _peak_ voltages are quite a bit higher: about + and - 310 V.
When this is run through an unflitered Full Wave diode bridge, the DC Peaks as shown in the waveform below will be at +310V, minus a little bit for the fed voltage drop of the bridge. An averaging meter will then knock off some more from this value -- 270 volts DC might well be an indicated "average" from this kind of waveform. Once this DC output from the bridge is filtered by capacitors, the voltage will be steady and near the _peak_ value of the AC input... not the RMS value. So it is not surprising that a bridge rectifier can put out DC voltage measurements that are much higher than the "nameplate" voltage input (which will usually be an RMS value.) I think this fully explains the Variac results reported by NRamaswami: nothing unusual happening, just some misunderstandings about FWB action, RMS vs. Peak values, and the averaging functions of meters.

Third... DC pulses most certainly do interact with the inductances of coils. One common form of inductance meter stimulates the coil-under-test with square wave pulses at a given frequency, then looks at the ringdown frequency of the coil's response and computes the inductance from that. If the coil didn't respond to the DC impulses in the first place, this couldn't happen. As long as there is a _change_ in voltage, for example at the leading and trailing edges of a DC pulse, the inductance "feels" this change.

Fourth... what is AC, what is DC? You will find that even trained engineers will argue about this distinction. In my opinion AC requires that the direction of current flow changes, so an oscillating signal must go below the zero baseline level for at least part of a cycle. Others will say that simply oscillating voltage magnitude is enough to call it "AC" even though the current _direction_ may always be going in the same direction, while only the magnitude fluctuates. For example a 5v peak-to-peak sine wave with a 7 volt positive offset would still be called "AC" by this camp. I don't happen to agree with this view myself since the direction of current in such a signal does not change direction.

(EDITED to remove the "wrong" FWB diode diagram! I got that image from the internets and didn't notice it had the diodes mixed up until just now. Sorry about any confusion that might have caused...    :-[    )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 23, 2015, 03:08:34 PM
TinselKoala,
Thanks for clarifying the bridge rectifier part...😊...sometimes I just glance at the pictures and keep going...kinda like filling up my car with gas and not knowing how the ICE ( internal combustion engine ) works...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 23, 2015, 05:08:20 PM
Heh... you should be even more confused... since that silly drawing I got from the Internet doesn't even have the FWB schematic correct! I just noticed this myself...

The waveforms are correct but the diode configuration isn't.

Here's what it should look like:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 23, 2015, 07:07:32 PM
TK,
Oops...sorry I just glanced at it and assumed it was right 😊
How do you feel about transformerless power supplies...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 24, 2015, 01:02:27 AM
Hi NRamaswami,

Thanks for your answers, and regarding my answers, here are some of them, I will try to consider the rest of your further questions in your Reply #2188 tomorrow.

With the electromagnet coil of 4 times as long wire for the unfiltered DC output of the diode bridge (you use the expression "pulsed DC") you increase the DC resistance of the coil also 4 times. This insures that the fuse or the circuit breaker would not blow out as you defined the condition for a stable electromagnet.

Without the diode bridge, the electromagnet coil receives normal 50 Hz AC voltage, the coil's inductive impedance is already high enough not to blow out the fuse, so you do not need to use 4 times as long wire for the coil like for the unfiltered DC output of the full wave bridge.

Notice that the output of the diode bridge feeds the coil with a DC voltage too because the positive sine wave peaks have an average DC value which amounts to 63.7% of the peak AC value. This means that in case of a 220V AC input, the positive peak value of the sine waves at the output of the diode bridge will be about 310V (neglecting diode losses) and the average DC will be 0.637*310V=197.5V  this DC voltage biases the electromagnet's core of course with a certain polarity and heat dissipation takes place in the DC resistance of the coil which you increased 4 times for this diode bridge fed case.

See info on the average DC output of a full wave rectifier for a resistive load:
http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html (http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html) 

I attached the drawing taken from the link to show the average DC value with respect to the peak sine wave amplitudes at the output of a full wave rectifier (i.e. diode bridge).  In the link, the effect of using a puffer capacitor at the diode bridge output is also shown.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 24, 2015, 06:08:12 PM
5V-transformerless-powersupply.png


If you have a switch, plus a 2 amp circuit breaker and a .500 fuse in line...would that be safe?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 25, 2015, 12:33:39 AM
Hi NRamaswami,

First some additions, these are needed because the info below may seem to be in conflict with my previous attached figure which showed the resulting output voltage waveform and the level of the DC voltage it averages to at the output of a full wave rectifier. While this can be true, we have to consider we have an L inductance across the output as a load.
When you connect a coil to the output of a full wave rectifier, in fact this is not exactly a resistive load because of the inductance part of the coil is present in series with the wire DC resistance.
I mention this because yesterday I considered the coil as if its resistive value only which increased when you increased the wire length 4 times to work for you as a 'stable' electromagnet, but of course the longer wire involved an inductance increase for the coil too.
I referred to the output voltage of the diode bridge as an unfiltered DC voltage and normally a puffer capacitor is used to store voltage (charge) between the sine wave peaks, to minimize the voltage amplitude fluctuation.
When you connect a coil across the output of the diode bridge instead of a puffer capacitor (so no capacitor is present but the coil), it should be the current peaks which average out, the coil functions as a current choke (regardless of its assigned electromagnet role). The output voltage of the diode bridge still remains fluctuating between a zero and a positive peak amplitude, while the coil fights against any current change as usual for a coil, this is why it is the output current which can average out and the higher the inductance of the coil, the less fluctuation the current will have, hence the output current can become a cleaner and cleaner DC current with less and less ripple value.

You asked what a pulsed DC was. Because we know you used it to refer to the output voltage coming from a full wave diode bridge rectifier, we know what you meant but if this reference is not stressed or included, the term pulsed DC may be misleading, it means for instance a DC voltage periodically interrupted by a switch, i.e. a series of pulses. (This is why I asked you about a switch if you recall but of course you did not use any switch.)

A 'pulsating DC' could be a much better term instead of the 'pulsed DC' to use, conventional electrical engineering normally uses the term unfiltered DC for naming the voltage or current at the output of a rectifier (both for a half wave or full wave one).
And depending on what kind of load you hook up to the output of a full wave rectifier, now you know when using a coil it is the output DC current which averages, or when using a puffer capacitor it is the output DC voltage which averages, both the output current and the voltage will have less and less fluctuation i.e. less ripple, when the coil's L inductance or the puffer capacitor's C capacitance is increased, respectively.
When you use a purely resistive load across the diode bridge output, both the current in the resistor or the voltage across the resistor remains fluctuating between a zero and a peak value (i.e. as per the series of the positive sine wave peaks show for the voltage in the previous attached figure),  none of them can average out to a clean DC quantity with a minimum ripple (of course the heat dissipated in the resistor averages to a certain value in this case too).

To be continued tomorrow.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 25, 2015, 08:09:37 AM
Hi TK

I'm very grateful and am obliged for the answers and clarifications provided. I agree with your explanations No. 1 and 4. I am not able to understand the clarification No. 3.

I most respectfully beg to disagree with you on the clarification No. 2

Here is your clarification No. 2

Second, the "220VAC" that the wall plug provides is 220 V RMS. This means that the _peak_ voltages are quite a bit higher: about + and - 310 V. When this is run through an unflitered Full Wave diode bridge, the DC Peaks as shown in the waveform below will be at +310V, minus a little bit for the fed voltage drop of the bridge. An averaging meter will then knock off some more from this value -- 270 volts DC might well be an indicated "average" from this kind of waveform. Once this DC output from the bridge is filtered by capacitors, the voltage will be steady and near the _peak_ value of the AC input... not the RMS value. So it is not surprising that a bridge rectifier can put out DC voltage measurements that are much higher than the "nameplate" voltage input (which will usually be an RMS value.) I think this fully explains the Variac results reported by NRamaswami: nothing unusual happening, just some misunderstandings about FWB action, RMS vs. Peak values, and the averaging functions of meters.

I apologize to disagree with you here but effectively what you are saying here is this..

a. There is no loss in the Variac and it is a 100% efficient device. Not true.

b. There is some loss in diode bridge which you acknowledge and it is around 20-22 watts as measured by us. (Does it include AC to DC conversion losses? Here in India it is normally rated at 15% of the input as a thumb rule.. I'm afraid that You do not provide for this)

c. There is no loss in the coil due to either resistance or inductance or eddy currents or heat dissipation..All these losses are there

d. The losses due to the 5 x 200 watts lamps in parallel are not considered.

e. And after overcoming all the above the FWB (full wave diode bridge rectifier) can on its own increase the output voltage which is DC to 270 volts. In DC V=IR So if V increases I also should increse as the resistance if fixed. If both of them increase wattage should increase. So if I agree with you a simple FWB can act as a device that can save not only a lot of energy but can boost the energy output as well when connected directly to mains.

f. Please connect a FWB alone and let us remove the variac and the coil and see if you can get 220 volts to be increased to 270 volts..It should happen if what you say is correct. It would not.

Most times theoretical explanation is correct. Some times practical observations differ from theory. With due respect I would request you to check if you are able to practically observe if connecting the FWB to the mains at 220 volts automatically boosts the output voltage in the meter to 270 volts. It would not. There is another phenomena that is involved here in my very humble opinion and observation. But I do not know if it correct also and it is only a guess. I would post my guess after Gyula has completed.

I again remain very obliged and am grateful for your explanations. My knowledge is not sufficient to understand what you have stated in No. 3 of your explanation and I apologize for my lack of knowledge at this time.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on May 25, 2015, 10:55:38 AM
Hi TK

I'm very grateful and am obliged for the answers and clarifications provided. I agree with your explanations No. 1 and 4. I am not able to understand the clarification No. 3.

I most respectfully beg to disagree with you on the clarification No. 2

Here is your clarification No. 2

Second, the "220VAC" that the wall plug provides is 220 V RMS. This means that the _peak_ voltages are quite a bit higher: about + and - 310 V. When this is run through an unflitered Full Wave diode bridge, the DC Peaks as shown in the waveform below will be at +310V, minus a little bit for the fed voltage drop of the bridge. An averaging meter will then knock off some more from this value -- 270 volts DC might well be an indicated "average" from this kind of waveform. Once this DC output from the bridge is filtered by capacitors, the voltage will be steady and near the _peak_ value of the AC input... not the RMS value. So it is not surprising that a bridge rectifier can put out DC voltage measurements that are much higher than the "nameplate" voltage input (which will usually be an RMS value.) I think this fully explains the Variac results reported by NRamaswami: nothing unusual happening, just some misunderstandings about FWB action, RMS vs. Peak values, and the averaging functions of meters.

I apologize to disagree with you here but effectively what you are saying here is this..

a. There is no loss in the Variac and it is a 100% efficient device. Not true.

b. There is some loss in diode bridge which you acknowledge and it is around 20-22 watts as measured by us. (Does it include AC to DC conversion losses? Here in India it is normally rated at 15% of the input as a thumb rule.. I'm afraid that You do not provide for this)

c. There is no loss in the coil due to either resistance or inductance or eddy currents or heat dissipation..All these losses are there

d. The losses due to the 5 x 200 watts lamps in parallel are not considered.

e. And after overcoming all the above the FWB (full wave diode bridge rectifier) can on its own increase the output voltage which is DC to 270 volts. In DC V=IR So if V increases I also should increse as the resistance if fixed. If both of them increase wattage should increase. So if I agree with you a simple FWB can act as a device that can save not only a lot of energy but can boost the energy output as well when connected directly to mains.

You are apparently agreeing with something that I never said. A FWB has losses, as you have noted above, and the more current you draw through it the more heat (power) it will dissipate. Voltage is not energy, current is not energy, power (especially peak power) is not energy. Every stage in your system has losses: the Variac, the FWB, any coils connected, the interconnecting wiring, and of course the power dissipated in the load. I am trying to explain the _voltage readings_ you have reported. I have not dealt with any losses caused by load connections or wastage in the bridge, except to point out that there will be a slight drop in _voltage_ below the peak value due to the forward voltage drop of the diodes in the bridge. The _energy_ available at the load will be less than the _energy_ delivered by the mains to the system, because of the losses in the bridge, Variac, wiring and other components. The peak _voltage_ can be much greater than that delivered by the mains. Instantaneous output current, and instantaneous output power levels, can also be higher than the average, or RMS values at the input. This does not mean that energy is increased.
Quote
f. Please connect a FWB alone and let us remove the variac and the coil and see if you can get 220 volts to be increased to 270 volts..It should happen if what you say is correct. It would not.
I suggest that YOU do this test yourself, and report your results. You may be surprised.
Quote
Most times theoretical explanation is correct. Some times practical observations differ from theory. With due respect I would request you to check if you are able to practically observe if connecting the FWB to the mains at 220 volts automatically boosts the output voltage in the meter to 270 volts. It would not. There is another phenomena that is involved here in my very humble opinion and observation. But I do not know if it correct also and it is only a guess. I would post my guess after Gyula has completed.

I again remain very obliged and am grateful for your explanations. My knowledge is not sufficient to understand what you have stated in No. 3 of your explanation and I apologize for my lack of knowledge at this time.

I suggest you try the following test yourself, and report your results here completely.

Simply connect the AC input to the FWB to your mains supply, not using a Variac. Then read the DC output voltage of the FWB (no load) using your meter. Does it read "220 VDC" or something higher?

To measure the voltages and power balance properly in circuits such as you are working with, you really need an oscilloscope and the skill to use it correctly. Meters are a poor substitute and have often led people astray in these matters.

As far as the #3 goes, the issue of DC and inductances... as I have tried to explain, the leading and trailing edges of a DC pulse will indeed interact with inductances in the normal way. As the current through the inductor increases at the leading edge of a DC pulse, the magnetic field builds in the inductor and this takes a certain amount of time (more inductance, more time, and vice versa) and as the current decreases at the trailing edge of a DC pulse the magnetic field collapses and tries to keep the current going, and this also takes a certain amount of time. At the trailing edge of the DC pulse, the energy that was stored in the magnetic field of the inductor can "ring" by passing back and forth between the inductance (magnetic field) and the inherent capacitance of the circuit (electric field) and will produce a characteristic "ringdown" waveform. The frequency of this ringdown waveform can then be used to calculate the inductance of the inductor.  Perhaps the following video will help to clear up this idea:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx3B89379eQ

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 25, 2015, 06:13:23 PM
Hi TK..

Thanks for your reply.. I will test it without the load and with the load for we got the 270 volt reading only with all the 5 x200 watts lamps on. However it will not be before Sunday. As I'm not trained in electricity I do not make the connections myself but ask an Electrician to do it. He will come here only on Saturday or Sunday. Then we will measure the no load and on load conditions and report here fully and truthfully as usual.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 26, 2015, 08:13:12 AM
Hello All

Quote
To measure the voltages and power balance properly in circuits such as you are working with, you really need an oscilloscope and the skill to use it correctly. Meters are a poor substitute and have often led people astray in these matters.

So how did Tesla / Figuera get test results
I'm sure He/they didn't have an oscilloscope or semiconductors...

For me personally... I use a 12 volt car battery...if the apparatus performs " work " and keeps the battery re charged...end of story.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 26, 2015, 01:17:28 PM
 "So how did Tesla / Figuera get test results" They did more of the doing and less of the talking and asking other people what they thought about an idea. They expanded their own knowledge and didnt care so much about the base of knowledge of others who had different motivations then their own. If you ask your tail to lead you will eventually run into some crap,it's just the way it is,it's not personal. Do more ask less.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 26, 2015, 01:54:38 PM
"So how did Tesla / Figuera get test results" They did more of the doing and less of the talking and asking other people what they thought about an idea. They expanded their own knowledge and didnt care so much about the base of knowledge of others who had different motivations then their own. If you ask your tail to lead you will eventually run into some crap,it's just the way it is,it's not personal. Do more ask less.

Doug1,

" Measure " test results
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 26, 2015, 10:23:28 PM

....

I think if the secondary is a thicker wire or as thick as the primary wire, then at a certain length and turns of the secondary and at a certain voltage level we are able to reach COP>1 level. But this can never ever be achieved if we use the transformer design where the Lenz law effect is predominant. But after crossing this voltage level it the COP level suddenly shoots up. I have checked for a 4 sq mm wire ( which is not used normally for wiring) up to 300 volts and it did not cross COP=1 level itself. But when the voltage has gone to 620 it was COP>8. I think all our equipment are rated to fail below this voltage level and are designed for this purpose.

Similarly I have seen that a very thick insulation plays a very important part for the output. I do not even understand why but you can check it for yourself with a three core or four core cable which has a very thick insulation and use it to make an electromagnet and use ordinary wires and alternate the cable and wire for the primary and secondary and you can see the difference. I'm not able to really explain but thicker insulation and thicker wires provides better performance. I think if we use 10 sq mm wire the COP>1 results may come even at 300 volt levels but we never ever would that wire for normal wiring purposes.

When I read transformers I asked why the secondary should not be wound with a lot of thick wire and a lot of turns and length? I felt that both votlage and amperage should go up.  What will happen if it is wound like that and did not find the answer any where and so I did this arrangement. Unfortunately the higher gauge copper wires are so expensive I could not check them for the secondary performance. Similarly I do not know why thicker secondary wires are not used in Tesla coils. It will be bulky and uneconomical perhaps but a thicker wire in the secondary of a Tesla coil must provide for higher amperage and if the turns are the same as the smaller wire the voltage cannot go down either. Why no material which can stand high frequency is put inside the Tesla coil?  May be I do not have the brains to understand that this will not work but I do not hesitate to ask questions and investigate. This is how I tried.

...

Hi NRamaswami,

Unfortunately, I cannot really comment your above observations meaningfully because I did not do such tests with thick and long wire for secondary coils, where the insulation is also very thick for the wire. It is surprising that as you transformed up the input voltage in the secondary and went up with it well over 300 V to 620 V, then it was COP>8. This result was meant for your own winding style and transformer setup and not for a normal transformer of course.

All I can say and perhaps suggest is that all measurements should be done and be performed precisely and evaluated correctly, and then the device be checked by another team to verify your findings if possible. I know this takes time and more resources.

This concludes my comments. I wish you further persistence and good luck.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on May 26, 2015, 10:47:31 PM

My question is...( because I have never done it ) when you connect an analog Multimeter to rectified DC does the needle go back and forth... LOL ( my assumption is that the needle doesn't have time to swing both ways...)

Sorry I have almost missed your question, have been busy. Yes the needle has it own inertia, however small mass it may have and it may be trembling at a specific deflection and staying there trembling.
There are analog meters which are not based on a moving coil deflection system for an input current (voltmeters also deflect for current initiated by it in the coil)  but they have an iron piece to which the needle is fastened and the iron piece can move into a stationary coil.  In this construction the overall moving mass may be high enough (due to the mass of the soft iron piece) so the inertia is probably higher than for a moving coil, meaning less likelyhood to follow the amplitude changes of a 50 or 60 Hz AC wave.

Quote
Also...what is better...clipped off DC from a bridge rectifier or a oscillating half square wave from a 555 ( or arduino or etc.. ) which is more efficient...

Question is what you wish to use the two waveforms for? If you drive a MOSFET switch with them, then the square wave is always better for switching to close and open the switch suddenly.  It is another question what you control with the switch.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 26, 2015, 11:48:36 PM
Question is what you wish to use the two waveforms for? If you drive a MOSFET switch with them, then the square wave is always better for switching to close and open the switch suddenly.  It is another question what you control with the switch.
Gyula

I originally was going to run a stand alone portable AC ( air conditioner ) 120 volt ac 60hz...

On another subject...I was going over the schematics on building AC or DC power supplies and have been fascinated by transformer less power supply circuits...I might just settle for something that's already built ( and not live dangerously )...

Lastly...I have started building a new circuit ( 555, 4081 and 4017 s ) with the correct ohms and heat sinks to test a transformer that was wired with either 14 or 16 AWG magnet wire ( 400 turns )...

I wonder if Wonju is ever coming back...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 27, 2015, 12:02:27 PM
Gyula:

I thank you very much for your kind words. Yes it will need to be given to third party audit and measurements and we have to find out how and why AC input was able to suddenly gain so much output. Secondly as noted by the Professor we need to check whether the voltage and amperage readings would still apply if given to a load. If it still shows then it is a significant thing for solving the energy problems of the world. Others are also replicating the device and I have provided practical construction instruations to them and some of these are competent electrical engineers. Let us wait and see if they can apply it to loads and provide information whether the output is higher than the input.

On Pulsating DC device I have no doubt in my mind that the output is higher than the input. The reason is simple. The coil was wound with air gaps between adjacent turns. This has allowed to air to move in to cool the heated iron plates and coils and in this process the moving air molecules get charged. When we increased the voltage to 250 volts and gave the current through diode bridge rectifier the frequency increased to some thing around 116 hertz at 250 volts. This is one way pulsating DC.  This was sufficient to exceed the ionization potential of some molecules which became ions and provided extra electrons to the coil as the air moved through like a spiral along with the helical coil and this excess electrons came out of the output. This is why even after counting all the losses we had a higher pulsating DC voltage at the output than the input. A higher voltage in DC essentially means a higher amperage. This is the first device described by Cater and for input from a battery Cater indicates frequencies in several hundreds would be required. He indicates a range between 25 Khz to 50 KHz.  Probably there is a frequency voltage curve just like the ampere turns curve for the ionization potential of air molecules and if we provide pulsating dc at higher frequencies a lower level voltage and amperage would do to create a higher output. When the frequency increases the input amperage goes down and the output amperage would go up if the voltage increases. One of the easiest ways to do that is to use just two wires as a bifilar coil and send pulsating dc through it at higher frequencies. I have already tested these things. Unfortunately the Electrician who did all this along with me is no more. If he is available I would be able to give more explanation and practical demonstrations. There are patents on using the ionization potential of gases for reducing pollutions. I cannot give more accurate information on this though for professional reasons. There is no violation of law of conservation of energy as the excess energy came from the ionized air molecules moving along with the wire. The air gap between the wires is responsible for this. This actually provides a method for reducing electricity bills at our homes and offices. It is not a self sustaining generator or self looped back generator but is a device that provides higher DC output than input. Nothing more.

Regarding the AC input device we need to give it tot he lab and measure the results. This will be done some time in July.  I again thank you very much and post the results if the High Voltage lab confirms or if the replicators in different countries who are far more competent than me are able to report their findings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 28, 2015, 01:57:47 AM
I skipped the 10k resistors to the BDX53 s and went for 4.7K resistors to the BDX53 s on my original build... I have 2.2K resistors for my 2nd build and I have ( will ) put heat sinks on each BDX53... Also on the 2nd build I will include seven .2 OHM resistors and one .1 OHM resistor after the BDX53 s ... that should give the transformers enough juice to the gaps and the secondary s...

I have concluded that a 10 position dual wire terminal block with 2 sets of 5 position terminal jumpers ( Molex ) is the way to go for the 10 watt resistors... I have wound a set of transformers with 14 AWG magnet wire ( 400 turns )...

I might have to buy another 6 foot iron rod from Ed Fagan Inc. and just make one transformer... overkill... but I'm getting impatient...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 30, 2015, 02:56:38 PM
Randy
  If you had an E I core transformer, and you wanted to use the I to measure the strength of the field by using weights to see what weight the I section would be pulled apart at Im going to guess you could do that set up. If then you wanted to see how many different winding set ups you could make to get a specific holding power say one pound. How many different winds or portion of wind could you come up with using different sources of power to operate the coil and get a one pound lift/hold?Depending on the wire size and input it would be a lot of possible combinations. Late 18 early 19 hundreds they did not have all these exotic electronics to work with. Until you figure how it was done in the past to find out what it is your actually trying to do in the core there is little point in working on the exotic.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 30, 2015, 03:28:28 PM
Spot on...!
That's an excellent idea... Thanx Doug1. The obvious isn't always see able when you're focus on something else.

It wasn't the circuit... it was the cheap parts.
Here's the circuit1 running.

IMG_1918Circuit.MOV
IMG_1919Circuit2.MOV

And the second circuit...
My point in this is to show you can run the circuit with 9 volt batteries... the circuit1 the battery is almost dead... and Circuit2 you can barely see the leds light in front of the BDX53 s...

I have an order that was shipped out Friday from digiKey that has 9 position dual row barrier blocks and jumpers plus ten 12 volt red leds  for the transformers... I also have six 10 watt .2 ohm resistors and one .1 ohm resistors for the barrier blocks... the transformers have been wound already...

If after all that...If I don't get the results I get more iron ( bigger )...I will test everything I can with the circuit Patrick designed...If it still doesn't work after all that...I will be happy to try the " other " apparatus...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 31, 2015, 01:39:35 AM
It only counts if you can get it to run off itself and power a load.ie disconnect the input power.
 

 "As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns
to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be
a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if
wanted. From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely."
   
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 31, 2015, 03:14:03 AM
what I would like to see at this point is 9 amps from a 12 volt lawnmower battery going to the 1st position of the 7 resistors....

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 01, 2015, 02:49:06 PM
Randy

  You could save yourself a lot of extra work following simple rules that never wear out. The shortest distance between two points is straight line and so on. Square wheels suck but if you feel you have to experience it for yourself you might find the number of people who willing to ride with you are limited. On the other hand the number of people willing to watch will be limitless. 
  A good self test is can you apply and identify how the process would work in any device that works off of induction by being able to explain it to yourself and verifying it with known proven rules. When you run out of arguments with yourself and the rules then maybe it is time to apply an understanding to a real and physical experiment to verify that established understanding. If all goes well, then it is time to work out the bugs in designing a useful practical device that does something useful. Never trust the cool aid.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 01, 2015, 04:42:47 PM
 One of the statements in the patent which seems simple and more then likely not even given any attention :Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion,". Close examination,formulate methods to see what normally is not visible.Know what your trying to do before you start.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 01, 2015, 10:12:47 PM
Hello All

The BDX53c  s are 8 amps actually...
so I would expect... 12 volts DC 8 amps 1.5 resistance at 96 watts of power. So tomorrow I will measure what comes out at position 1.

After some additional checking I would be getting around 1 amp as I am using 22 AWG solid hook up wire...
so 12 Volts 1 amp current 12 ohms resistance and 12 watts of power...
and the breadboards have 36 volts 1.5 tolerance

Lastly... I might have to mount the BDX53c on separate 3 position dual row barrier strips to get more than 1 amp to the coils...

All the best



IMG_46641Ax
IMG_46651p.MOV

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 04, 2015, 03:15:02 AM
Hello All,
update...
when I connected the circuit up to the 12 lawnmower battery...
it blew the 10000 microfarad cap and the 555... and who knows what else went south. On Patrick's website on page 3-21 He has a fuse then a switch then a diode...maybe I should have a smaller fuse before the 555 ( or I'll be changing these semiconductors often )...I have a bigger amperage fuse in the connection positive wire ( maybe it lets in too much amperage - as the breadboard is rated 1.5 amps )...

thinking out loud:
Plan A: Use a run battery ( smaller 12 volt battery ) and use the Lawnmower battery for the transformers...
Plan B: smaller fuse at the connecting wire with a smaller fuse after cap.
Plan C: DC power supply that slowly builds up voltage and current...
Plan D: Start using the Arduino
Plan E: skip all this and start on the Ramaswami apparatus...
Plan F: Go fishing more often and skip OU... LOL

what would " you " do

All the Best
Randy



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 04, 2015, 10:12:44 PM
After a day of fishing make a battery rig out D cells that you can add to as needed to reach the right voltage amperage and power the transformer with a second power supply. I havent been fishing for a long time too much to do in the garden, finish building a shed/workshop/green house all into one building.
  A person at work showed me news article about a lady who went off grid completely in Florida and was and is being drug through the courts.They have taken her dog and boarded up her home yet she will not leave. Some towns seem to be outlawing going off grid. She has been off grid for a number of years and no problem till she did a interview with a local TV news. Go ahead and save the world,see where that gets you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 04, 2015, 11:05:02 PM
Her name is Robin Speronis...a secret shared by more than one person is not a secret...she should have kept quiet.

Logically the BDX53 s will have to be taken off the breadboard and be secured on 3 position barrier strips ( actually a 6 position barrier strip for 2 BDX53 s ) and for the emitter's to be hooked up to a larger battery and the collectors to the figuera...that should get the max amperage out of the BDX53 s
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 05, 2015, 11:45:53 PM
Hello All

built another circuit and tested all of the connections...just two Led s that light up the sequences of the two 4017 s...the first led is the beginning and the 2nd led is the end before it starts the sequence again ( hope that makes sense ). Secured a fuse from digi key that is 1 amp and some 12 volt red Leds that don't need resistors ( for the transformers down the Line )...

I will have to move the BDX53 s off the breadboards and connect them to barrier strips ( blocks ) and lead the emitters to the 12 Lawnmower battery and see how that works out...

all the best

IMG_1932june5.MOV
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 11, 2015, 09:28:46 PM
Hello All,

Update...
Have tested this circuit ( in the video ) its the last remaining breadboard circuit ( I have to order more parts ). In the video the 8 flashing led s represent the " base " for the 8 BDX53c s power transistors... I disconnected the 2nd breadboard with the BDX53s along with the resistors and will start placing them on the barrier strips ( blocks )... I will have a run battery for the circuit and a charge battery for the power transistors... I kept blowing out parts ( in the videos my parts are sticking up and could short if ( when ) leaned on ). In the future I guess I'll have to solder them... but for now bread boarding is very easy...

On another note... " fuses ". I will start using 1 amp fuses in the breadboards ( circuits )...I have been told that the fuses protect against fires not components...and I'm still not convinced that components can't be protected with fuses...

All the best


IMG_1971June11.MOV
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on June 14, 2015, 12:14:25 AM
Why bother re inventing the wheel ??? I do believe that was already mentioned ! Is it worth the bother I don't think so ! So a frequency pulse wave and a tiny motor hahahahahah OK HAHAHAHAH r u planning on planning on powering a super slow car toy hahahahahahah
It would be far more productive if you were to study more the principle of such a thing and see if it has any maths that will make sense of it.. The term P wave compression will help first discovered in 1786 or round about that time but they were using water sending a wave from two ends that would meet in the middle forming a P wave dynamic . As the waves pass they continue without loss of speed the drop off is when the wave collapses. I made one with a cylinder under the P wave with a spring on a piston. The piston head was connected by long arm to each end of the water canal stimulating many waves after say 1 minute there were P waves along the canal of water... The P wave under the piston never stopped functioning. That was good enough for me but I could off added more pistons ect. 

Gravity was the main energy input but in the micro generator it is bosons filling up under the wave functions and bosons are tiny but there are many of them to many to count.... The point is find the source of the energy its mass and what stimulates it to function than stop and truly think it through. The micro generator will not loop over infinity its to dam small with a rather high resistance. Not enough particles in the stream to be of any real use.. But there is a tiny amount of free energy but it comes from somewhere so is it truly an O U technology..

It is not as good as a capacitor super flux electron field compressor that is self charging and lasts forever or a simple alpha particle feed transformer or even a unified field oscillator or a static pump....

You guys are so stuck with playing with words and never no formula ?????? You read to many terms in electronics and dream of a self powering lap top sorry its all been done .! But not like that !

IT IS FAR MORE IMPORTANT TO FORMAT THE FORMULA THAN THE BUILD OF THE HARD WEAR . The language you are using is wrong its all mumbojumbo its not in a energy language and that is because you don't understand particle physics and are stuck with circuits and little bits and bobs ...... Don't be offended please tel me or yourself how many electrons in 1 amp and what is a volt ? Why does ohms law not permit a free energy equation over resistance ? What does the threshold peak wave harmonic mean and why can you not do this trick with a square wave ????

What is the correct priming point in the wave to stimulate the advanced frequency you hope to gain ??? Evan the so called inventor cant answer these questions and is why he never got passed the first prototype. I am not trying to be cleaver but in truth sometimes I am a bit scatty all over the place but like all theories in chaos there is always a point of rest and this is one of the points in time and space I set most proudly on... I has now got my detailed focus ! 

Keep twitting around with tinkering hahah that will cost you a lot of time ! Time is worth more than money ! knowledge is worth more than time. Draw up each wave paten please don't bother with all those O S pictures they don't show you the mass just the crest of the wave....

The kinetics of energy in the stream are not at the speed of light but voltage is with the particle mass lagging behind as not all the mass of the wave is equal even if your O S looks like it is ..... There are holes in everything including an electron wave and no electron is equal in distance to each other the O S DOES NOT SEE THAT BECAUSE IT IS ONLY FILLING THE WAVE ! NOT SEEING IT !

So this is a secret and knowing where the heave waves are is where you place your input pulse hahahahahah ! Also electrons have strangeness they do strange things they are not rolling they are quantum jumping in and out of space time, The real value of electrons is always half when in the currant and twice that at the load...

Its a bit tricky trying to find where an electron will pop up hahaha But one can always know where the heavy wave is along its harmonic try study the 5ths of scale as all strings have them. Do it on a piano hold down the 5th note of the scale than play the 1st note of the scale and both string will resonate.... Its the same thing but with a piano hahah

All events are all natural laws what you find in electronics you will also find in the natural world and this is the best way to study quantum events at the micro level or even the plank level , if it does not exist in the natural world than it does not exist in electronics physics or chemistry ect ect .....

This will help you leaps and more leaps hahahah If your really lucky you will measure you will measure the length of the wave function and not just count the peaks than you just look at it like a guitar string where the frets get larger at one end and smaller at the other it is with the bass that the string has more energy and sounds the loudest. ALSO ELECTRONS HAVE X Y particles that construct there mass hit at the right point and they will separate for a fraction of time creating a void that time and space will fill up with neutrinos bosons some gravitons and as the door closes some electrons try and jump into the void.....

Count them !


GOOD LUCK

ATOM1





 





     





 





 


























       






     
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 14, 2015, 12:35:09 PM
Hello All,

The last base is taken out of sequence and fed into another breadboard which feeds a PN2222a ( general purpose transistor ) with a second 9 volt battery as shown in the video... I think the BDX53 max s out at 9 amps and the 2N3055 s max out at 15 amps ( I have to check again )...

All the best
PS the Video... is over the picture.

IMG_1988June14.MOV
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NickZ on June 14, 2015, 04:24:17 PM
  Check this out:
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK9yVl8xw-g
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 14, 2015, 04:52:22 PM
Hi Randy,
are you still struggling with your circuit? There are some more prameters to obey at use of transistors. PLease understand you cannot change parameters and expect Patricks circuit to behave same.
Just now I am not aware of what voltage und what base resistors you run your driving circuit. What voltage is at your load circuit, What load (LEDs, coils ??)

I am willing to calculate if I get those data (alternatively a current circuit diagram).
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 14, 2015, 05:00:08 PM
I would like try one of those...
where can I sign up?

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 14, 2015, 05:10:25 PM

My build is exactly as Patrick's schematic portrays... using BDX53C s ( 8 amps ) which is on the last schematic on the webpage under Figuera...
In my haste to build it on breadboards ( the last one I think I leaned in on the 10000 uF 25 volt cap and blew the whole board )
if you look at the video above the photo of the last ( my ) post you'll see that I took off the last base wire right before the led s
that shows the circuit working plus the PN2222A is flashing on another breadboard where I will put a single BDX53C in next time
I work on it...

Update... I replaced the PN2222A with the BDX53C which is on this video...

All the Best
Randy

PS My build is going to be in a two stage mode ( I may or may not keep running the circuit on 9 volts - but I don't think I'll be hooking up to the 12 300 CCA lawnmower battery ) a run battery and a charge battery like woopy has...

IMG_1996june14b.MOV
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 15, 2015, 12:50:03 AM
Atom1,
1. Haven't seen anybody replicate the Figuera yet... I've seen the video of Woopy and Kehyo where they demonstrate with one transformer but neither one has completely built the Figuera that's on Patrick's website...

2. Have you built the Figuera... If you have... show us... if you haven't...how do you know it won't function as its suppose to...

3. I have built the circuit ( its in the videos ) they perform like they are suppose to. The BDX53C s lights up ( in the last video )...
My next step is to put the BDX53C on a barrier strip. Wire it to a 1.5 ohm 100 watt resistor and connect it to a 12 volt 300 CCA lawnmower battery. And if the BDX53C is indeed pushing 8 amps into the resistor I am going to hook it up to the transformer I made.
If it works so be it... If it doesn't work I have lost nothing ( I have learned a lot about electronics ). Also if it doesn't work I'll invest in the electric companies (If you can't beat them join them ) its called a return on investment........

4. If it doesn't work...I'll build the Ramaswami apparatus...but I have to see if this " doesn't " work first...

5. My arduino and raspberry pi 2 came in Last week ( I can see robots and drones in my future ) the 555 circuit is/was a stepping stone for them...

Lastly If it does work...nothing is free... you have to buy the parts / build it / and maintain it...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 15, 2015, 09:42:12 PM
May I ask if this suggestion is a good idea for replication of a solid state Figuere device (see attatchment).
If we cut state of the art transformers like depicted (shaded area cut out) then we can assemble a device with original windings in place. Of courese we would use only the low voltage windings for test.
Due to the air gaps I believe that we will not enter in saturation issues at all and then core cross section will be of less importance.
At standard transformers the area of center limb is larger than peripheral limbs. Therefore we should cut the area of air gaps at least in the size of center limb or more - in order to get more tuning opportunities.

Hint:
- I run some simulations that point out that all 4 air gaps are essential. It is not suffitient to have only two of them like some replicators tried. Therfore my idea with cut transformers.
- While the primary windings will get only a unidirectional field the center secondary gets an alternating field.
- Please regard the static remanence field in your mind that is left after first magnetization.  Next cycle will get higher flux.
- Cross section of limbs seems not to be dominant but air gaps are an essential tuning element. My suggestins will allow easy tuning procedures.
- I ponder if the air gap might be tuned in order to pertain Leedskalnin horse shoe effect (a differnt even higher remanence effect in case of closed loops) on the verge of field collaps. (Just a sudden idea !?!?!)


@Randy: If you deal with Arduninos: You easily can output correct sequences for Figuera device at Arduino and you do not suffer on weak drivers like standard CMOS (20mA  and not 3mA). Additionally you may decide to program varying PWM driving using only two outputs. Then you can drive the device along two transistors and two diodes only. Schematic on request - if you can't figure it out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 16, 2015, 12:11:04 AM
JohnMiller,
At this point 8 amps is enough for me ( I may in the future go with the 2N3055 ( 15 amps )). As I stated in the last post ( and showed ) the BDX53C is working as planned. My next step is to transfer the BDX53C to a 6 ( or 3 ) position barrier strip and test

All the Best
PS please send the schematic of the arduino as I would like to see it ( PM )...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 16, 2015, 09:14:54 AM
@Randy: Please regard that standard CMOS can drive 3mA only. That might not be enough for 8A. Transistors tend to reduce their amplification factor considerably if collector current increases. You shall calculate not more than factor 250. That is 4mA for 8A.
If you use darlington drive they eat up about 1.2V of the 5 V driving voltage. So you shall calculate 3.8V only for the base resistors.

Conversely Arduino can drive up to 20mA per port.

1. You replace the CMOS electronic with Arduino.

2.  Use the circuit below at Arduino twice. It is just principle. You might decide for darlingtons or FETs. Program: Write a table with values for PWM corresponding to sine values e.g. for every 10 degree. Change values on a regular timer base.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 16, 2015, 01:58:15 PM
Interesting...

The PN2222A will handle 1 amp?
And lets calculate the BDX53C at 2 amps.......
Give me the calculations and when I come back this evening I'll set up to test.

All the Best


PS did you email Patrick and tell Him His circuit won't work....
I am very interested to see what his response is going to be...

btw the schematic could also have a relay in it to open a path to let Larger current usage ...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 16, 2015, 03:02:30 PM
Well, Patricks circuit is OK. But it cannot scaled deliberately. This circuit envisions very clearly on how to control the device with non mechanic means. With the upcoming Arduino technology being available for everybody things change and can be done more easily. Patrick's book can't care for all refinements possible and necessarily leaves the responsibility in the hands of replicators..

Some primer for transistors:

First of all please understand that absolute maximum ratings are not recommended operation conditions. Manufacturers state that components will not degrade or be destroyed if suffering these conditions for short time (sometimes only once!). And please regard that only one parameter is accepted to be in absolute maximum stat at same time. e.g. 1A and 150 °C is a no go .....

Additionally: There are plenty of other parameters manufacturers do not mention in their data sheets. I high school electronics some guys might compose some strange circuits that seemingly violate all data. But that is high school. All others shall obey data sheets.

Current amplification of a transistor is severely dependent on collector current and it depends on temperature as well.. E.g.: 2N2222:
IC [mA] -> hFE
10 -> 180
40 -> 200
100 -> 170
200 -> 150
300 -> 125
1000 -> 20

Collector losses increase with collector current in a non linear way. E.g. 2N2222: Up to 200mA we will measure below 0.2V. It increases to 0.4V at 400mA and 2V1 at 1A. Weak base current causes the voltage between collector and emitter to increase considerably even at low collector currents.

Darlington Circuit: When composing darlington circuits the parameters from both transistors interact and need to be treated as set. So every operation outside the tested one needs to be checked. Please understand that teh twin 2N2222 and 2N3055 were very early components and were readily used as very convenient combination.  With the advent of commercially available power darlingtons things went better.
BDX53C will survive below 100V emitter voltage and will support a current amplification of max. 6000 at 2A. But it will decrease down to 1000 at 8A. Other manufacturers might offer even less amplification.


Reliability of data: Manufacturers state that their data is the minimum they guarantee for series. So most components are better - much better. But if you have one setup a build a different one it might fail if you have other electronic individuals. Therefore it is not recommended to rely on uncomputed experimentals of one single setup.


Your setup:
If you decide to go with Arduino you might replace CMOS logic with Arduino and use BDX54C. Then you can calculate a conservative design.
Calculate with amplification of about 800 @ 8A in order to be safe in case of absolut maximum collector current.
You need  then 10mA of base current. At darlingtons and 5V logic you have a net diriving voltage of 3.8V available.
Base resistor: 3.8/10mA = 0.38 KOhm so use 390 Ohm
Still staying conservative please do not load  the transistor with more than 5A or 6A. This conservative approach is like driving your car at adequate speed and not at maximum ratings.
If you are more keen then you can calculate at 2A collector current with factor of 6000. That gives 0.33 mA of base current -> corresponds to about 10K.
IF you want to use those 3 mA from CMOS logic then you use a base resistor of 1.3K (OK: 1.5K -> 2.53 mA -> will give about 3A (non conservative))

Hint: I inventively gave not on answer in order to get you ponder and understand your design. And please come back and ask if you need more to know.

 
State of the art circuit s along Arduino can be seen here: https://arduinodiy.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/using-mosfets-with-ttl-levels/
And please do not expect his knowledge from Patrick's book. It is out of scope. That's why we discuss in this forum.


Sorry - no simple answers available but plenty to learn for life time.
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 16, 2015, 08:18:58 PM
After thinking about what you stated...
I think I would like to try the Arduino on this project...
How do I get started... send me anything you like...PM or other wise.

But to my question before... why couldn't the pn2222a or any transistor not trigger a relay ( to let any configuration of voltage and amperage )... wouldn't take work?

All the best and I thank you for your future help
Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 16, 2015, 10:19:44 PM
Randy:
Honestly I do not understand what the relay should do and how it should be connected. If you expect the relay to switch the primary coils - NO! It is too slow and would wear out vey fast. And of course it produces a lot of noise as well (acoustically and radio).

What help do you need for Arduino? Are you a complete newby? Have you ever programmed a microprocessor.
If you are newby please search internet for a primer . This forum is not dedicated to extend to details of Arduino. But its use at Figuera we can discuss.
I myself am a very louse programmer and currently have no time to dive into. Maybe others can support you in order to get a short and fast program along variable frequency being controlled via pot.

Solution 1:
Use restors and transistors but connect Arduino I/Os instead CMOS control logic.
Connect a Pot to Arduino analog port.
The program shall read the analog value of the pot and convert that value (0 ...255) to a timer value defining the time delay between stepping of transitors.

Solution 2: Will perform similarly but do the performance of resitors by pulse width modulation (PWM). Please vote the schematic below as example only. Components need to be selected as to have the correct rating.

Are there others in the formum who want to perform Arduino? Then we should start a common discussion.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 16, 2015, 11:50:42 PM
John,
Yes to your question about being a nooby in Arduino...But I am sure I can muddle along into it.  I will note the schematic to try when I have my Arduino up and running... thanks for your consideration into this.

Good Luck in your endeavors

All the Best
RandyFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on June 17, 2015, 12:57:14 AM
Micro processors as a system of energy production ????? interesting transformer but the coils don't hold a charge so you keep using batteries and hitting the field frequencies with code ??? hahahahahahah Come on people please where are you hahahahahahahaha
A computer is a computer not a generator ! I except that some people just love data ping pong but that is never going to teach you particle physics ..... You need to look at theses transformers again they can hold and sustain a high frequency and you don't need a computer or an OS.

Every metal has a natural harmonic emf resonance set up from super nova ! Its life is as long as a proton 36 billion years ! Electronics is not he language for energy its ok if you want to build a robot ect ect ....... For get all these circuits resistors ect ect ect  When you find the natural harmonic in a coil than you begin to make it do work ...

My new transformer spins up from the back EMF and works as a generator ! But you want a motionless generator with a computer why ?
If you just mess around with no set formula than there a trillion experiments to do and if your lucky the last one will work hahahaha

Why build a processor ? just use your lap top ! And all these other so called systems where are they ??? on the internet hahahahahahah

Put this wire here some resistors there add a battery plug it into a processor ??? Electronics is not that different than plumbing and simple wave dynamics , you wont get much from that , You need formula than build the formula and switch it on and bingo it works first time...

Tel me your formula for 1 amp at one volt please !

ATOM1



 





 






     
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 17, 2015, 01:13:33 AM
As I  :D understand it hahahahaha... you just have to dc pulse your way into the ZPE field and hahahahahahaha  :D and then you're hahahahahahahaha there. ;D
I think Tesla hahahahahahaha had a radiant energy machine hahahahahahaha  :) that tapped into it.....
but what did he know........hahahahahahahahah
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 17, 2015, 01:32:23 AM
Hello friends!
I will not be answering questions because I do not want to infuriate the KNOW-IT-ALL haters who build nothing and only enjoy criticizing others in a non-constructive way such as attacks of the personal level.
First of all, I wanted to say that Randy has motivated me to do some postings. Randy, I really admire your dedication. If you keep going like that you will be a genius in a few years.
I have substantially completed some personal projects and now I have more time to play around with the FE devices. My personal workspace has improved orders of magnitude since my last post in this forum. I have my own space furnished with a good electronic workbench equipment and a very small machine shop that allows me to the drillings, cuts, etc. See the photos of my updated place. I have to say that I am very happy with my new place and more motivated to build these toys.
I am also attaching some pictures of the coils I am building. I am half way of the construction of the 1981 device shown in the patent No. 119,825 by Daniel McFarland Cook. I have not finished it yet but I have discovered important facts when building this type of devices. The most important fact is the unexpected surprise I had after I assuming that building a solenoid should be a straight forward endeavor.  I said “it is a simple device and all formulas are in the text books and published literatures.”
Boy, I was far from reality! I have all the physical parameters to calculate the self-inductance of the solenoid. I reviewed the calculations dozens of times, and even used different web based calculators. All the calculations showed an inductance between 15 and 25 Henry. After the construction, I performed the inductance test. The meter indicated 8 mili-Henry only! I could not believe it. I thought that the meter was defective and ordered a second inductance meter from Japan. The second meter indicated about 7 mili-Henry. I was not able to find out what was going on. Why was the measured value thousands of times smaller than the predicted one?
I went into full gear doing research and I even bought a very expensive book about inductors design. In that book, I was able to find the most accurate formula and model for estimating the self-inductance of a solenoid or electromagnet. And still, it was thousands of times larger than the measured value, about 3 Henry.
What I learned from that experience is that designing magnetic circuits with air gaps is a major problem because the mathematical models are not that accurate. I am sure that it is the main reason why we have failed duplicating all of these devices. The existing magnetic models are pretty good for magnetic circuits having closed iron cores. The existing mathematical model of the solenoids become more accurate as you add layers to the coils. The problems of the single layer finite length solenoids is that the magnetic dispersion substantially reduces the flux linkage within the turns. This effect is clearly shown in the pictures CookCoils3. Note how the compass needles start turning toward the coil way before reaching the ends. This also is the main reason why Mr. Cook recommended the coils to have six (6) feet in length. The longer the coil the more it behaves like an infinite long solenoid.
I wanted to have a strong self-inductance with the primary coil so as to produce a higher induction of the secondary voltage. It seems that I will have to compromise. I will just add more layers to increase the inductance. There is a compound effect on the interaction of the coil layers. It seems that the magnetic field of the upper layers provide a shield that forces the magnetic field of the lower layers to extend toward the ends, increasing the self-inductance exponentially.
I was not able to upload the photos in one post. Refer to the following posts for the rest of the photos.
I will let you know how the experiment goes.
Thank you,
Bajac
PS: Randy, I will respond to your personal message as soon as I get more time from work. Please, forgive me for the delay.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 17, 2015, 01:34:46 AM
Photos for lab and machine shop!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 17, 2015, 01:35:40 AM
Photos from Coils!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 17, 2015, 02:33:51 AM
I do not know why the pictures got so huge! At least, they are shown enormous on my scree. The resolution, perhaps?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on June 17, 2015, 03:10:22 AM
"Perhaps...."
Yes, that's right, YOU posted them at full resolution of 1935.96 kB, 3264x2448 pixels.

YOU can, for a brief time, go back and remove them from your posts, and use your favorite graphics application to shrink them down to a _maximum_ of 1024 pixels wide, or even better 800 pixels wide, and repost them. Then people won't have to scroll back and forth trying to read comments like yours... and this one.

Better hurry though because YOU can only edit your posts for a limited time. After that, we are stuck with your supersized pictures and hard-to-read posts, unless Stefan edits them for you or we roll over to a new page on the thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 17, 2015, 04:22:48 AM
Bajac,
That's huge... 8). My poor little work space the kitchen table is jealous... I will be moving my stuff eventually. As soon as " the warden " ( my wife ) gets fed up with my working on it...
You know I have to ask the question ( yeah yeah I know you have limited time )did you abandon the Fiquera transformers that you originally made or are you doing something as a add on...basically are you experimenting on something to come back to the original design...the only reason I stopped working towards Tesla's stuff is... as I was emailing Patrick I told Him Tesla's wireless had limited distance and He pointed me towards the Figuera and I started from scratch...and I will stay on it until something " doesn't work " then I will move on...
And thank you for the kind words...

All the Best

PS I take the picture on my apple iPhone and then email it to myself... when I hit send it asks what size and I always enter small... so I don't go into gigantic space

wait wait wait... Hey I spotted the breadboards right next to the black and decker box...you can't put those things on like that it will never work. You're wasting precious time using breadboards in that fashion...the millivolt will never accept a milliamp and run a 2n3055 or BDX53c ...did I ever tell about the time I was in industrial Education class and put cigarette foil into the 120 volt socket both sides...we had do detention for a whole week for that stunt................
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 17, 2015, 01:09:41 PM
@Randy:
You might start with the Arduino built in LED blink program. It lives at every brand new Arduino when purchased. Reading this tutorial will give you a grasp on how to extend it to driving your bunch of transistors for Figuera device.
http://www.arduino.cc/en/Tutorial/Blink
Just set a port wait a time reset it and set the next one .... At end you jump to the start point.
It is exactly what Patrick's circuit does but programmed and it can be modified.
Programmers will do it even simpler but this naive approach will work for now excellently as well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 17, 2015, 01:28:03 PM
"Perhaps...."
Yes, that's right, YOU posted them at full resolution of 1935.96 kB, 3264x2448 pixels.

YOU can, for a brief time, go back and remove them from your posts, and use your favorite graphics application to shrink them down to a _maximum_ of 1024 pixels wide, or even better 800 pixels wide, and repost them. Then people won't have to scroll back and forth trying to read comments like yours... and this one.

Better hurry though because YOU can only edit your posts for a limited time. After that, we are stuck with your supersized pictures and hard-to-read posts, unless Stefan edits them for you or we roll over to a new page on the thread.


How do I send request Stefan? Those large size photos are annoying. I apologize for the mistake!


Bajac,
That's huge.... My poor little work space the kitchen table is jealous... I will be moving my stuff eventually. As soon as " the warden " ( my wife ) gets fed up with my working on it...
You know I have to ask the question ( yeah yeah I know you have limited time )did you abandon the Fiquera transformers that you originally made or are you doing something as a add on...basically are you experimenting on something to come back to the original design...the only reason I stopped working towards Tesla's stuff is... as I was emailing Patrick I told Him Tesla's wireless had limited distance and He pointed me towards the Figuera and I started from scratch...and I will stay on it until something " doesn't work " then I will move on...
And thank you for the kind words...

All the Best

PS I take the picture on my apple iPhone and then email it to myself... when I hit send it asks what size and I always enter small... so I don't go into gigantic space

wait wait wait... Hey I spotted the breadboards right next to the black and decker box...you can't put those things on like that it will never work. You're wasting precious time using breadboards in that fashion...the millivolt will never accept a milliamp and run a 2n3055 or BDX53c ...did I ever tell about the time I was in industrial Education class and put cigarette foil into the 120 volt socket both sides...we had do detention for a whole week for that stunt................


I have not abandoned Figuera's devices. I am doing parallel research on several of them. But, it is my opinion that Cook's apparatus is the simplest device to test the concept used by other inventors such as Figuera.

The board you see on the photo is the driver for the Figuera's device.  I am using an Arduino controller and two PN2222 transistors to drive the IGBTs. But I will modify it to use only one PN2222 and invert the logic of the program.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 17, 2015, 03:14:27 PM
Bajac,
I remember reading about you helping Laurent with the programming of the arduino... at this particular time I'm waiting on tests to do on the driver for my transformers...
I am " very " curious on your research there in the " new " abode...keep us informed.
I did some preliminary simple ( visual ) tests with a 1/2 dead 9 volt battery ( I am going to have to break down and get a power supply or build one ) this morning... I got the results with which I was looking for in the pn2222A from the low side of a 9 volt... but I want to see what it'll do on the strong side ( what it will tolerate - with out frying :-) or smoked as they say )...
I will pick up a few books this weekend on the arduino and raspberry pi 2 and on programing...the guy I fish with every Monday is ex NSA and ex City of ( X ) programmer I am sure He can set me on the right path for building drones and robots :-)...

All the best kiddo

PS and remember for every question you answer of mine theres 10 right behind it...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 17, 2015, 03:41:12 PM
Hi all,
I did some simulations on Figuera drive circuit like proposed by Patrick. I feel it is good to have a visual representation of behavior.
Circuit feed = 24V
Resistors = 100R
Step = 1 ms
Inductors = 1mH

!!! Hint regarding simulations: They can show up KNOWN facts only and help to understand  facts that are too complex to grasp them by looking at a schematic. Let's look at it like a kind of prosthesis for our brain. It will never deal with unknown science. That is the privilege of real experiments only. But simulations may help to get a more rugged setup with less invisible uncertainties.
So please do not ask anybody to simulate the magic of Figueras device before we have a formula.

I did another simulations where I modeled the flux by electric current, the ampere-turns by driving voltage and the permeability by resistors (see diagram with black background). This is an accepted way to do rough simulations in magnetics.
I did the simulation with triangle shaped drive in order to see the basic behavior. If operated with sine shape with offset (still no flux reverse) the result at center coil exercises a sine signal as well.
It seems that all air gaps are essential in order to provide for feedback another flux shape than for driving (but just a feeling).
An of course I cannot simulate the Lenz feed back behavior.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 17, 2015, 03:43:08 PM
Sorry! Two diagrams disappeared before.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 17, 2015, 03:43:58 PM
Wow! Only one pic per post accepted !?!?!?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on June 17, 2015, 07:17:24 PM
What is this ?????? Compression fields for ??????

ATOM1
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 17, 2015, 08:04:17 PM
Please resize images. !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on June 18, 2015, 04:39:36 PM
I have been going over the info in the Kelly guide about the replication by N. Ramaswami. There are a lot of theories about how the extra amperage is created, but I did not see any mention of this. That is the difference in the core diameter of the inducing coils vs the core of the induced.

If the outer cores are 100 mm diameter and the center core is 65mm the area of the outers is 7854 and the area of the inner is 3318.315. A ratio of 2.3668 to 1. If the magnetic flux density in the outers is 1, then the flux density through the center secondary core 2.36.

As long as the center core is not saturated, wouldn't this increase in flux density produce a correspondingly greater increase of amperage in the center secondaries?

Mack
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 19, 2015, 01:27:16 PM
Mac
  I mentioned the hour glass shape of the cores a while ago. Think in terms of fluid dynamics.The choke point would have to produce a greater passage speed or a compression of the field inside the winding. I was always under the impression a magnetic field is not compressible. Excluding distortions, a core can only hold so much and that's it. It start to turn to heat in the same way an induction heater works. The only exception I was able to find is when coils are wound with a subtractive cancellation winding like used in some mag amps. Feed back can ether add to or subtract from. Sometimes its called biasing but it all boils down to a conserving application of the output against the input. Even in a dynamic microphone using electrets as the static field. If there is no polarization in the form of a field you have to use some energy from some where to produce one in order to have a reaction.Even a iron core has a  state of being regardless of it being polarized or not. The wire not so much without a charge moving. I have never found a permanent copper "magnet" wire in the past.
 The focus continues to be on everything except how to make it self run. It's the only thing which makes it different from any other common device. How did Church Hill put it? The right thing in the end after every other possible wrong thing is exhausted. So be it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on June 19, 2015, 02:57:26 PM
Hi Doug,

Thanks for commenting. I follow what you said.

If I model the cores Mr. Ramaswami used, the flux lines do increase in density through the smaller center core. Greater number of lines per cm^2, same total flux. If I understand what I've read it is the number of lines per cm^2, or gauss, that indicate the magnetic field strength. So it seems to me that the two end transformers are sharing flux through the center core and the magnetic field strength or gauss through there is more than doubled, so the center coil should be capable of producing higher current.

I'm curious. This makes logical sense to me so what am I missing?

Mack
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 20, 2015, 01:03:46 PM
Mack
  Mr. Ramaswami  is working on proof of concept for the coil core relationship. It's a part of a device not the entire device. Im sure he would have been pleased as punch if it was all that was needed, plug and play.
  Does the coil/core in question explain how your going to get 200 percent out and how your going to use half of that to suppress the input from the source to get a self sustained run?
  As far as Patrick goes I do not subscribe to him or his ideas. He does a lot of rewriting based on his own assumptions.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 20, 2015, 02:31:08 PM
I would like to know why Woopy or Kehyo didn't finish their builds...Woopy stated...its for free in the secondary... Bajac is the only one that I know that has built a complete transformer apparatus... but He stated that He took it apart. He has also stated that He is working in parallel by building a solenoid... The math has to be right on this side ( the eight cylinders ( transformers ) have to be firing correctly ) of the fence before the " free " side gives up its secrets... if it has any. " My " basic assumption is that whatever is out there ( if its out there ) will work on a small scale just as well as on a big scale. As far as any " genius " status...I would prefer the " free " status any day of the week...

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 20, 2015, 04:07:34 PM
Doug, Mack:

Without going in to much, what I have done is this..

a. Create a primary..

b. Take a permanent magnet and measure at what distance the permaent magnet does not oscillate in your hands by the EM wave from the primary core.

c. bring the magnet towards the core of the primary so permanent magnet will start oscillating increasingly violently.

d. Identify the distance at which the magnetic oscillation does not increase.

e. Divide this distance by two.

f. Build the middle coil for this distance.

g. Keep the middle coil at half or slightly more than the diameter of the primary core. 

h. Wind the coils on the middle coil to prevent the iron rods of opposite poles of primary from crashing in to one another and so build the middle core to be slightly above the primary core size alone.

Results:

a. For a single module the output of middle core alone is less than the input of the primary. But irrespective of the load on the middle coil primary input is constant. Primary does not care whether you load the middle coil or do not load the middle coil. Therefore the secondary is Lenz law Free.  For this to happen one thing must be done but I'm not disclosing it..You can find it in the Patent of Figuera but he feels it is not necessary to disclose it.

b. you continue to add modules. As primaries are added their resistance increases and so input decreases. As secondaries are added their voltage increases and so output increases.

C. Continue  steps a and b above.

Problem with Figuera device is that this requires a lot of iron, lot of coils, and not infrequently the brush of the rotary disc goes. It needs to be very sturdy for long term use. You need multiple modules which costs lot of money.

Within my budget I modified the device and the results were available.

I'm working with a group of like minded replicators and what we are doing and what are the results I cannot disclose without their consent.

It is not impossible to get the center core output on its own to be greater than the input. But certain conditions need to be fulfilled for that. They are so obvious that I'm not going in to them and I consider that disclosure unnecessary.

I'm a very ordinary man without much of knowledge. Until I started I did not know the difference between voltage and amperage. Until very recently I did not know the difference between and implications of connecting in serial and connecting in parallel. So actually when I started I did not know that this kind of device cannot be done. So I ended up listing the conditions needed to create the device and I ended up doing it.

These are the conditions.

1. Primary input should be low

2. Avoid back emf

3. Create Lenz law free output.

Figuera patent does all that and it is very well explained in the patent how to do all this. Unfortunately he is very cryptic. That is the problem. I do not intend to post on this as I have given all info needed to replicate already. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 21, 2015, 07:30:36 PM
@ALL
I posted recently (post: #2227)a suggestion on how 3 ordinary single phase transformers can be cut in order to build a Figuera device. Even a single 3 phase transformer can be cut in this way. I ask you all to think on it and say if it seems viable. In case answer is yes, we have an easy way to generate setups like in Figuera patent. The implcation is that we really need to apply all 4 air gaps in order to direct flux as requested.

If anybody is a good programmer of Arduino microcomputer I have advice on what behavior to program in order to  control the primary coils. such a program could help all others to get en easy repliction.
Rgds
John
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 22, 2015, 01:48:05 PM
Hi ALL:
I found an Arduino program that does exactly what we want in order to controll the Figuera device along two field effect transistors. It resembles the rotary switch signal but along nice sine control via PWM. (I had no time to test it myself up to now.) As far I understand the program you download from Arduino IDE and can start instantly.
http://www.edaboard.com/thread250505.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 22, 2015, 06:48:14 PM
Hi,


I just wanted to do a kind of brainstorming with the Figuera's device. After posting the paper describing the anomalies of the air gaps when going from a closed iron core all the way to a straight iron core (solenoid), I began to think that one important aspect of the invention might be the detail of a cross-sectional view of the Figuera's apparatus. In that paper I tried to explain why a C-type core should have a much lower inductance than, i.e., a straight solenoid iron core. Making the connections with the Figuera's plan drawings, it looks to me that the intent on the patent is to have the south and north cores built as close as possible to a solenoid.


For example, refer to the attached PDF document that contains two plan views of the 1908 and 1914 Figuera's devices. From these sketches showing plan views, it is clear that the cores on the sides cannot be a pronounced C. That was my first impression of the patent, which I disclosed in my original paper. I originally drafted the cores on the sides to be more like solenoids.


If that is the case, then, my device does not follow the Figuera's teachings as outlined in the patent.


Bajac.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 22, 2015, 07:04:27 PM
Dear All:

This is my interpretation of How Figuera's invention worked. I believe I'm substantially correct.

The Figuera Invention as the Patent drawing shows consisted of several Electromagnets arranged in series in one row called N and parallel to that arranged in another series called S. In between these two cores small cores electromagnets extended between N and S magnets. For each N and S electromagnet there is a small Y electromagnet in the middle.

The currrent was sent through a rotary device which was connected to the positve of a power source (supposedly a battery or bank of batteries) and sent through the rotary device. The device had contact points and the brush is always connected to two of the points. Odd points connected to N magnets and Even points connected to S magnets.

Current was split in two two pairs this way. This spliting the positive made another thing. Current was sent to the N1 magnet in one direction and was connected to the S7 magnet to come in the opposite direction.

I believe that some people have more information on Figuera device than what is actually disclosed.

It is substantially correct that one pair of Elecetromagnets let us say N magnets were coiled in the CCW direction  and the S magnets were coiled in the CW direction.

Therefore majority of the forum members were earlier saying (including Doug himself) that the polarity of the poles was not defined and it was a secret kept by Figuera deliberately and that the identical poles faced each other. It would appear to be so from the CCW and CW windings. But my experiments showed that if we place the y magnets between the N and S magnets with the identical poles facing each other there was no voltage due to cancellation of magnetic fields.

If on the other hand opposite poles were shown there was voltage in the middle coils.

I therefore came to the conclusion that Current was sent from the Inner to the outer in CCW winding in the N magnets and sent from Outer to the Inner in CW wound S magnets from the opposite side.

This essentially means that the poles are NS-NS-NS or SN-SN-SN only and the middle coil would work.

By arranging the current to flow in opposite direction and then to flow from inner to outer and from outer to inner in opposing magnets Figuera completely cancelled back emf. This is a method of cancelling out back emf. The coil placed between opposite pole would have no Lenz law effect.

The current given was interruptted DC or pulsed DC or Pulsating DC whatever you call it but the resulting wave was not a square wave. It is believed to be a full sign wave never reaching the zero but starting from the +5 to the crest and then falling again back to the +5 position.. It never went to zero. This is done by the Full Wave Bridge Rectifier and with the help of circuits now available.

The problem with the circuits available today are they are low amperage devices. They do not work at high amperages. This is some thing that I have seen repeatedly.

The problem with the rotary device was that the brush had to be very sturdy and it frequently goes.

One easy possibility is to use a step down transformer and use a diode bridge rectifier and then split the positive and give it to the two input points.

The output of the current was possibly given to a transformer and then was given to the brush source or used a phase correction capacitor and given back to the brush source.

Therefore all that is needed to do the Figuera device is to arrange the series of several electromagnets as indicated above and keep adding the voltages using thick wires in the middle. Pulsed DC has its own problem of core saturation and to avoid that large cores of iron rods are required. Using several such large cores is very expensive. For example I have already bought 200 kgm or Iron and I may have to buy another 200 kgm of iron just to manage two of the electromagnets. But I have seen that soft iron is available in plenty in the Estates of my clients and there are tons and tons of soft iron material which is also rusted available very cheap. Rust though dangerous is a good insulator.

So Figuera used this method to power the electromagnets. I believe that to avoid a runaway current situation Figuera connected the primary end points to Earth and not to battery minus. Once the secondary started working the secondary current at a higher voltage than the battery started operating the device and the feeding battery source was withdrawn. It can be done even today with a let us say 50 volt step down battery source. If you are going to provide 50 volts and 20 amps in pulsed DC it is capable of saturing a large amount of iron core.

Figuera says that the small intermediate y magnets had reels and reels of coils placed in them. From this description you can understand how much of coils were used by him in the primary and in the secondary.

My good friend Doug keeps saying that it is not doable. it is easily doable and any one can do it at point on the earth. The only condition is that it is a huge device weighing a lot and it required two or three earth connections.

There is nothing more to the Figuera device. I have tested all these things earlier. I have made absolutely Lenz law free currents in the middle core. But I found it to be very unsatisfactory from the rotary device point of view and a step down transformer and a Full Wave diode brige rectifier were far better solutions and there were no moving parts at all in the device.

One single core of Figuera to provide the output in excess of the input must have the primary about 24 inches in diameter in the core size and the secondary Y magnet in the 6 inch diameter core size. The Primary must be at least 36 inches or 3 feet long and the secondary must be at least 18 inches long for the number of turns to be present. Then this huge device can provide a higher output in the center coil than the input. You may have to have about 24 to 30 layers of wires in the center and this also presents the problem of the center core attraining saturation and so to avoid it using multiple cores is the best option.

I found the Figuera method to be unsastisfactory from another point of view. He created a back emf free output but the output was very low in each secondary coil and the combined output alone was far higher than the input. The best outputs came when both the primary coils were of equal strength. I think that this was not disclosed as a trade secret by him or possibly he considered it an ideal solution to avoid back emf.

There is nothing more to the Figuera Patent. It can be done by any one.

However I have received warnings from at least two senior members that doing so would essentially means drawing the power directly from the environment without the middle source of generators or batteries and when we do this the environmental energies tend to like the device and enter them some times with full force. They are called Longitudinal waves or scalar waves by these senior members and the transverse waves are the normal electricity that we use. I have received specific warning that the possibility of lightening strikes cannot be ruled out if we use this method. So I have avoided this.

I just want to let you all know that I have done all these things including the rotary switch and due to the advice of the Two senior members I have avoided doing the self sustaining part. it is easy it can be done but I cannot act in an irresponsible way. My electrical knolwedge is almost near zero. I always employ people to get things done and if they are hurt I'm responsible for them. Their families and this is some thing on which I cannot take risks. So I have specifically avoided that part.

Lenz law does not apply to Figuera device. So a small input can in fact create a lot of output.


Where is that energy coming from is a question asked again.. This shows how poorly informed people are. The entire electricity that we get comes only from three sources. Magnetism of the Earth, Solar radiation, Cosmic radiation and the energy stored in the atmosphere due to years of bombardment. For example wikipedia says that the Northern Polar lights carry millions of volts and millions of amperages. We have lightenings hit the earth every second in some part of the world. Do you mean to say that there is no energy or elctricity in the wind? How do the wind turbines operate then..The rotating magnetic field acts as a gateway to attract the electricity present in the atmosphere and this is how electricity is induced in the conductors subjected to time varying magnetic field.

This is what I have realized through personal experiments. I have then modified the device to be a much more compact one and had already released it for others to replicate and some are replicating it. I expect them to post their results in the forum some time this week or next week.

it is not as if the method is not figurered out but I'm sorry, I'm not a hero and I'm an ordimary man and I do not want to take risks. People who had been hit by lightenings and suffered are said to include one inventor in US by name Bob Boyce, Don Smith and many during the period of Tesla. I cannot afford to take irresponsible risks.

I beleive I have fully disclosed the information for any one to carry out the Figuera device. Randy my good friend is requested to check what is the amperage coming out of the electronic circuits and then simply use a step down transformer and a Full Wave Diode Bridge Rectifier. You should be very careful in doing these experiments as increasing the frequency can increase the output manifold and so it is better to be cautious than to achieve things.

I apologize if some of you think that I should have posted this earlier. Though I had been as polite as possible in my writings, I appear to have antagonized some for pointing out that electricity would not be induced if the middle coil is placed between identical poles and so I was very reluctant to post all these details.

I hope Doug my good friend is now satisfied.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 22, 2015, 07:57:29 PM
#1 I confirm that the air gabs need to be enclosed in oposite poles. I did simulations and found same like Ramaswami: alike poles produce 0 flux in secondary coil.
#2 The signal being applied to primary coils are a rough resmebly of sine halves. Different from some statements  the signals are not phase shifted but 1:1 inverted to each other - never inverting flux direction.
#3 Result from #1 and #2 is that there is a closed unidirectional flux around the outer core shape  -no direction change. Due to the fact that teh primaries forward their leading funcion as flux generator to each other  -> the center core gets a true reversing and alterning flux field. But it is generated by a pulsating unidirectional field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on June 22, 2015, 10:41:14 PM
A repost.

I have found a simple way to do the coil driving with Arduino![/size]All you need is:1. ONE 10k/100k Ohm potentiometer. Connect the middle leg to Arduino's "A0" analog input. The other two legs of the pot goes to +5V and GND on Arduino.2. TWO Logic Level MOSFET transistors to do the switching (Logic level - like in IRL series -  means that a mosfet is in a conduction saturation state at just +5V put to its gate). Connect the Gate of one mosfet to "Pin 3" and the others' gate to "Pin 11". Sources go to the "GND" of the Arduino board.3. Connect +(positive) from a battery to both "North" & "South" coils and their ends to both drains in the two mosfets and -(negative) to the Arduino's "GND" close to the Source legs of mosfets.4. Connect fast shottky diodes across each coil to do the freewheeling of current.Program description:Arduino is generating a digital signal at 32 kHz frequency using 2 PWM outputs. The value for each "sample" is taken from the sine table. There are 256 values of resolution for the "shape" of the sine wave and 256 values of amplitude. You can change phase shift by changing "offset" variable. Potentiometer allows to set the analog frequency from 0 to 1023 Hz at 1 Hz resolution...NOW copy the code below to Arduino IDE window and save it to the microconroller and HERE YOU GO! 

Quote
/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
 * modification by kEhYo77
 *
 * Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
 * http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/ (http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/)
*/




#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM




// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {
  127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
  242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
  221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
  76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
  33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124




};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator




int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase




double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6;      // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;




// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count;              // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator;   // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m;  // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.




void setup()
{
  pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT);      //sets the digital pin as output
  Setup_timer2();
 
  //Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
  cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0);              //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
  sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2);              //enable Timer2 Interrupt




  dfreq=10.0;                    //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
  tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //calulate DDS new tuning word
 
  // running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
  bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
  bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);




}
void loop()
{
        apin0=analogRead(0);             //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
        if(dfreq != apin0){
          tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk;  //Calulate DDS new tuning word
          dfreq=apin0;
        }
}




//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM,  16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
  // Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
  sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);




  // Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0);  // clear Compare Match
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
  cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
  sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
 
  // Mode 1  / Phase Correct PWM
  sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20); 
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
  cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}








//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
  phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
  current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24;     // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information                     
 
  OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
  OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC70s3tYaGs)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 23, 2015, 12:48:00 AM
Hi,[/size]


 Currently I am not able to tell which is the proper configuration. I have not succeded in my test so I can not tell who is fair in his interpretation. I always recall to everyone to go to the original source ( patent text ) and implement your experiment based on the original patent texts. I tend to think that Figuera was using an open magnetic path in the same way as Hubbard generator, Hendershot generator or Don Smith devices . I refer to way open systems in opposition to closed magnetic path (as a transformer) or also an air gapped system which can considered an almost-closed magnetic system. In this sense I agree more with NRasmawani interpretation because of the use of long solenoids instead of using transformer cores. Figuera in no place of his patents makes any reference to a transforme core type, nor any air-gap. He always refered to electromagnets. We do not know if he required or not any separation between coils. Maybe he placed the coils way apart in order to grasp any kind of effect (lastly I am reading text about G. Nikolaev scalar magnetic field and maybe this could be another effect search by Figuera...who knows...). I stopped doing experiments some months ago because of lack of new ideas and results.


I want to recall also that Figuera filed a patent for a generator in 1902. Later, in 1908 he filed another generator patent. Whether those both patents are based on the same principal or not is yet to be clarified. Maybe  both have the same foundation, maybe they are different in concept. Maybe he was forced to develop a new device to patent a different system to the 1902 sold to the bankers, or maybe it was just and optimization over the same fundamental idea. I do not know. My proposal of pole location was just for the 1908 patent with the two lagged signals ( instead of moving the magnet, just moving the fields: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s) ) but, the 1902 is clear that worked with just one signal and opposite poles as written in the 1902 patent text. IMHO I see many differences between both patents, so in my view it is better not to mix both patent


I just think that Figuera system worked in the beginning of 20th century. Any day , someone,  will find the key and will build a system based in those principals, and that day the world will be a better place for everyone. I hope it will be in few years.


Regards



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on June 23, 2015, 01:41:29 AM
I added a second pot and a couple lines of code to kEhYo77's program sketch above to allow varying the phase difference "on the fly" without having to reprogram.

The code doesn't actually put out sine waves, but rather cycles the PWM outputs on pins 3 and 11 from 0 to 100 percent duty cycle and back, on a sinusoidal time frame. The PWM voltage is constant but the duty cycle varies, so after applying the low-pass filter the voltage signal should be approximately sinusoidal.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 23, 2015, 02:27:13 AM
Dear All:

I saw the posts of Hanon..Most of them have quit after the identical poles did not provide the results. In Tamil We have some Proverbs..

Efforts Never Fail.. Even if your efforts have not succeeded they have taught you what will not work and what must be avoided.

Efforts will lead to success. Not taking any efforts will not get you any where.

Even if God cannot give the results, efforts will give results to the extent your body aches from the effort you have put in for the cause.

In English it is simply stated as Winners Never Quit and Quitters never win..We will make an attempt avoiding the complex rotary switch and the resistor array.

I will try to see if I can get hold a 12 volts and 16 amps transformer or a Variac and will use the Full wave Diode Bridge so that the one way positive current is sent to the earth as indicated in my earlier post.   

I will arrange a few small size devices to be built. We are set to buy a lot of iron for a different project and from the old stock I can manage a few large primary solenoids and we will see  if it works as predicted. However Lower voltage and amperage is used so that I can follow ampere turns and small coils can be used for the primary cores and we will check if the secondary cores are able to produce  more than 200 watts at the input. It will be a small scaled down set up that will show that with a small input of about 200 watts it is possible to get about 500 to 600 watts. Let us see if the Lenz law free effect comes and whether the small transformer is able to do its intended part. It will be a small set up and so do not expect a lot of power to come. We will have about 7 cores each providing about 40 volts and so the output would reach 280 volts  in a 4 sq mm wire. Let us see what is the output wattage. We will put a small 1 amp fuse on the transformer so that more than 220 watts cannot enter the systerm through the transformer. Let us see within a week if this works or not..

It is an extremely simple system. Made unnecessarily complicated. I of course will not run the self sustaining part.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 23, 2015, 11:05:59 PM
I tried to run the program above but get errer mesages.  I use the Arduino IDE - just new installed.
Do I need any additional library or .h file. I am no programmer and feel very disabled.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on June 24, 2015, 01:58:00 AM
I tried to run the program above but get errer mesages.  I use the Arduino IDE - just new installed.
Do I need any additional library or .h file. I am no programmer and feel very disabled.

What are the error messages you are getting? The code compiled and ran for me with no problems using a genuine Uno.

You should be able to copy-paste it into the IDE window, and verify, save and run without any additional library or .h files, the IDE is supposed to gather those together for you automatically if it's installed correctly.

What version of the Arduino board are you using? Can you get any of the example sketches in the IDE to run? Look in File>Examples>01.Basics>Blink, see if you can get that Blink sketch to compile and run. Under Tools>Board, make sure you have the right type of Arduino selected that matches your board.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 24, 2015, 02:46:46 AM
A repost.


Hello KEhYo77,
I re watched the video that you made showing your version on the Figuera...I am sure you have watched " Woopy's version " using the arduino... " He stated that the ghost trace was for free "... A. would you agree with that statement. B. Did you get the same results...or did you get different results. The video that you made was two years ago... C. Have you made any more experiments on your apparatus... Its been stated here, in the forum, that by using the arduino you can get a stronger current... D. Do you agree with that statement... E. have you used a stronger current F. Do you plan to use a stronger current... Lastly what do you consider wrong with the figuera on the Kelly website... 1. Is it missing some secret " ingredient " that He wasn't divulging or died too soon to reveal...and where did you get that ball cap............... :) I thank you for your answers in advance....and get back to work on the Figuera! ;)

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 24, 2015, 03:23:14 AM
Hi,

I just wanted to do a kind of brainstorming with the Figuera's device.
Bajac.

Hello Bajac,
I assume you are using both the arduino version and the 555 4017 s and 4081 version in your parallel work...whats holding you up... the amperage at the gap ( the BDX53c gives 8 amps - the 2n3055 gives a higher amperage ).......................Is it the iron...? iron with some carbon in it = steel.......steel with some silicon in it = electrical steel.....the iron that showed up at my house was round...and me like a clown had it squared and made 7 tiny transformers out of it....I should have left it round and had the ends squared and made two transformers....sheesh! Whats your views on the difference between a coil and a solenoid...

A solenoid is a type of electromagnet when the purpose is to generate a controlled magnetic field. If the purpose of the solenoid is instead to impede changes in the electric current, a solenoid can be more specifically classified as an inductor rather than an electromagnet.

An electromagnetic coil is an electrical conductor such as a wire in the shape of a coil, spiral or helix. Electromagnetic coils are used in electrical engineering, in applications where electric currents interact with magnetic fields, in devices such as inductors, electromagnets, transformers, and sensor coils.

Lastly are you prepared to do the math...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/indcur.html
I understand some of the mathematics...as I stated before the mathematics have to be spot on this side of the equation.......After " it's for free " who knows...

All the Best

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 24, 2015, 08:52:19 AM
@TinselKoala
Thanks for help! :-)

Arduino UNO R3
Other sketches do well

errors:
sketch_jun24a:17: error: 'prog_uchar' does not name a type
In file included from sketch_jun24a.ino:11:0:
sketch_jun24a.ino: In function 'void __vector_9()':
sketch_jun24a:133: error: 'sine256' was not declared in this scope
sketch_jun24a:134: error: 'sine256' was not declared in this scope
'prog_uchar' does not name a type

Seems to refer to this line:
                   PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {


---------------------------
The output is not expected to produce sine wave directly at Arduino pins. It is designed to act similarly to a SMPS.
The primaries will get a diode in parallel and they will integrate the variable PWM signals to a sine current. And while current is directly proportional to flux we will get a sine shaped flux.
So the question is regarding your setup: Do you see at scope the pulse width changing (OK) or are pulses stable (wrong)?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on June 24, 2015, 10:19:24 AM
@TinselKoala
Thanks for help! :-)

Arduino UNO R3
Other sketches do well

errors:
sketch_jun24a:17: error: 'prog_uchar' does not name a type
In file included from sketch_jun24a.ino:11:0:
sketch_jun24a.ino: In function 'void __vector_9()':
sketch_jun24a:133: error: 'sine256' was not declared in this scope
sketch_jun24a:134: error: 'sine256' was not declared in this scope
'prog_uchar' does not name a type

Seems to refer to this line:
                   PROGMEM  prog_uchar sine256[]  = {


---------------------------
Ah... perhaps so. The only way I can reproduce the compile error messages you've got is to corrupt that line somehow. Even by commenting out the
#include "avr/pgmspace.h"
line my sketch still compiles without errors.

What version of the Arduino IDE are you using? I'm using version 1.0.2, and an Uno R3.

You could try putting

const prog_uchar sine256[] PROGMEM = {

instead, which seems to be another preferred syntax for the PROGMEM modifier:
http://www.arduino.cc/en/Reference/PROGMEM

I don't know what else to suggest at the moment. I don't think the issue is in the following parts of the array declaration; errors there produce a different complaint from the compiler.

Quote
The output is not expected to produce sine wave directly at Arduino pins. It is designed to act similarly to a SMPS.
The primaries will get a diode in parallel and they will integrate the variable PWM signals to a sine current. And while current is directly proportional to flux we will get a sine shaped flux.
So the question is regarding your setup: Do you see at scope the pulse width changing (OK) or are pulses stable (wrong)?
Yes, the pulse width changes smoothly between 0 and 100 percent,  at the frequency that is set by the potentiometer voltage on pin A0, varying from under 1 Hz to over 1 kHz. The phase of the two signals is controlled by the value of the "offset" variable, which in my sketch is also controlled by another potentiometer on pin A1 and an analogRead statement. In the scopeshot above, one channel's PW is increasing and the other is decreasing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 24, 2015, 12:47:59 PM
Thanks for help. I will try it ASAP. My installation IDE 1.6.5
-------
Your report indicates: the sketch seems to work correctly at your setup. If you drive FETs with those signals and put at each inductance a diode in parallel (kathode to + / anode to FET) - then you have your Figuera drive perfect.

You should know that Figuera mechanic wave form generator did not generate sine but half sines: see my post #2248. It is a true simulation of the original circuit.
But with Arduino we can check all possible wave forms by changing the contents of the array.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 24, 2015, 01:33:55 PM
To those people having problems with arduino, I highly recommend to first, copy the code from this forum and paste it into a Notepad application. Second, visually inspect the code to look for any suspicious character not present in the original program copied from the forum. If found, make the necessary corrections. And third, copy the program from the corrected Notepad version and finally paste it into the arduino environment.

In the past, I have gone mad because of errors showing up in arduino after copying and pasting the program. The problem is that different word processors have characters that are similar but they have different ASCII code. For example, I recall an issue with double quotation marks. After three weeks of craziness, I discovered that the symbols were slightly different. The one being copied had a small sloped profile, which has different ASCII code than the one used in the arduino environment.

The Notepad is a simpler application that does not have all the processing and special characters as other applications such as MS Word. Any strange character will show up in Notepad.
I hope the above can help you.

@Randy,

I am only using arduino. The transistors driving the coils are IGBTs rated 600V@20A.

My latest thoughts of the Figuera's apparatus tell me that my set up does not really follow the teachings of the patents. as I indicated before, the shape of my coil cores does not seem to be a match with the cores shown in the patent.

See attached document. When I first posted the paper, I visualized the cores as shown on page 3. This was my impression from the plan view shown on page 1. On page 4 I am showing the cores used in the device that I built. I used these cores because they were already available from an old transformer. HUGE MISTAKE!

I will redo the cores to look more like the ones shown on page 3 of the attached document. I am planning on using cores with a length of approximately 12 inches long with a cross-sectional area of about 2" x 2".

Bajac.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 24, 2015, 03:29:17 PM
@bajac:
Well, this line in sketch works well for compling:

const byte sine256[] PROGMEM = {

Is there any issue to apply it?

.....................
Core shape:
- Wondering on why you have no primary coils at outer limbs of your core!

- As core permeability is 1000fold compared to the air gaps (like 1kOhm to 1 Ohm) the influence of core might be minute.
The flux from primaries operates the center limb asymmetrically while Lenz backlash hits primaries symmetrically both outer limbs. But one primary is just increasing in flux and the other one is just decreasing in flux.That  might be the clue we search for. (Just an idea I want to look at if I have my setup running.)

-I will compose it of cut transformer segments like posted recently.
A three phase transformer needs to be cut 4 times only (left/right + top / bottom around the center limb.

- What Figuera does not mention: if he used bi(multi)filar windigns at primaries. Did anybody try this? Hints from Ramaswami indicate to look at this detail.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 24, 2015, 07:44:19 PM
I always recall to read the original patent text in detail to look for the right coil placement. It is not fair to read the patent text just partially, or just trying to read what you want to be read.


In the 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955 and filed by Buforn, a partner of Figuera) you can read:


"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.


With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force."


--------------------------


Please explain how your proposals may fit (if possible) this coil arrangement.


For me it is clear that all electromagnets are arranged in a linear way (bar core type), as NRamaswani has designed. Therefore you can use with this design both poles of each electromagnets in contrary to the use of just one pole of each electromagnet as in the original 1908 design.


For me it is clear that electromagnets are just solenoids , not any kind of transformer core type. Please open your minds and recall the generator from Hubbard, Hendershot and others where the cores are not forming any king of close transformer.


I attach the partial translation of the 1914 patent (sorry but it is 30 page long and it is too much time for me to translate it completely, more when it is practically a copy of the 1908 design plus some improvements as the ones explained in the translation that I attach)


Regards and good luck to everyone

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on June 24, 2015, 10:14:30 PM
@bajac:
Well, this line in sketch works well for compling:

const byte sine256[] PROGMEM = {

Is there any issue to apply it?

(snip)

That change works for me, without errors. The program appears to function correctly,  just as before.


NOTE: The problem seems to be that the data type "prog_uchar" has been deprecated in the later versions of the IDE, it is no longer included in the AVR library.

Google "arduino prog_uchar" and you will find lots of links from people encountering similar problems, with explanations.


ETA: Here's a scopeshot showing the sinusoidal variation in pulse width, of the Pin 11 output. I've got the thing set to the maximum frequency here, which is about 1020 Hz.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on June 24, 2015, 11:25:22 PM
TinselKoala
Thanks! You are right. My nano runs fine along IDE 1.0.6. I refused to update the IDE at this PC
Would you please post your extended program?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on June 24, 2015, 11:46:37 PM
TinselKoala
Thanks! You are right. My nano runs fine along IDE 1.0.6. I refused to update the IDE at this PC
Would you please post your extended program?

To give Phase control: Add another potentiometer, connect wiper to Pin A1. Both Phase and Frequency potentiometer values can be 100K or other.

In the sketch, in loop() add the line
offset=(map(analogRead(A1), 0,1023,0,127));

You may need to experiment with the values in the map statement. There may be better ways to do this, I'm still experimenting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kEhYo77 on June 25, 2015, 03:41:00 AM
Quote
I re watched the video that you made showing your version on the Figuera...I am sure you have watched " Woopy's version " using the arduino... " He stated that the ghost trace was for free "... A. would you agree with that statement. B. Did you get the same results...or did you get different results. The video that you made was two years ago... C. Have you made any more experiments on your apparatus... Its been stated here, in the forum, that by using the arduino you can get a stronger current... D. Do you agree with that statement... E. have you used a stronger current F. Do you plan to use a stronger current... Lastly what do you consider wrong with the figuera on the Kelly website... 1. Is it missing some secret " ingredient " that He wasn't divulging or died too soon to reveal...and where did you get that ball cap...............  I thank you for your answers in advance....and get back to work on the Figuera!]


Hi RandyFL and All.
The "ghost trace" from Woopy's video is the BEMF of the output coil finding an alternate flux path to close the magnetic loop, and it is not through the EMF core side but the other one that is inactive hence the ghost.
My progress is slow with experiments as the parts, cores etc are quite expensive and I cannot afford frying mosfets. Plus, I am running several projects in parallel. Some times I get distracted for months with something completely diffrent and thera times where I'm just lazy. :)
My little lab space NOW has enough components, modules and universal building blocks to do various stuff and I want to make things right.
I am more active 'this stuff' during the cold part of the year. Summertime is here in Poland and I live on the Baltic coast so I get sidetracked.
I plan to investigate Figuera more, All I can say is that it looks promising to me.

Thanks TK for helping with troubleshooting the soft and stuff.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 25, 2015, 09:17:48 AM
I have seen the comments of Hanon..The last Patent of BuForn as we found was the most efficient or best mode of operation of the device.

I'm fairly ignorant and so If I make mistakes it may please be ignored. I'm really not able to understand much of the discussion here.

As I understand electricity is induced when a conductor is subjected to a time varying magnetic field. The time varying magnetic field can be a rotating magnetic field without the core moving as in transformers or by rotating the magnet as in Dynamos and alternators and turbines. Figuera device used a Motionless rotating magnetic field.

As I see it Figuera device used a pulsed DC current input. The positive was split in two halves.. One was made to enter the N magnets from the left hand side as I type it and move towards the right hand side. The other positive was made to enter the S magnets to enter on the right hand side as I type this and to move towards the left hand side.

Our understanding is one was wound CW and other was wound CCW but current was given in one to move from inner to outer and in the other to move from outer to inner. We further understand that the strength of the magnets from N1 to N7 were decreasing while the strength of the magnets from S1 to S7 were increasing. Simply if N1 is the strongest amont N magnets S1 was the weakest among S magnets and so due to this kind of increasing and decreasing magnetic field flux was produced in the center which is between opposite poles and so is immune from Lenz law and the combination of the voltages resulted in the large output reported while the usage of the multifilar coils reduce the current flow to minimum but increased the magnetic field.

I'm not able to understand how my learned friends here can say that they would small cores and would give pulsed DC current to it in 9 amps or 10 amps..What is the voltage you are going to use? What is the number of turns? What is the magnetic field strength you are going to create to make an impact on the central secondary?

Please see here to calculate the Magnetic field strength of a solenoid..

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html

As we have seen using pulsed DC requires 4 times the wire needed for the same amount of AC wattage. Similarly if you are using Pulsed DC iron gets saturated almost immediately and makes a roaring noise and that can be avoided only by increasing the core size.

I'm not even sure if the learned friends here have used Pulsed DC to create electromagnets..I started without knowing what is Voltage and what is amperage and then I learnt that the weakness is not knowing how to make magnets and so I have learnt to make permanent magnets and electromagnets and I have used DC. Pulsed DC and AC all..Pulsed DC is a beast..It requires massive amount of iron to avoid saturating the core and I do not know if the learned friends who tell me that I do not understand that things can be miniaturized have created electromagnets using pulsed DC..

My understanding is that Figuera has used about 100 watts input and generated about 20000 watts output. My further understanding is that he used pulsed DC whether it is half wave, full wave, interrupted DC..Whatever be the wave form, pulsed DC would require 4 times the same amount of iron and coils that AC requires to avoid saturation.

If iron gets saturated it gets very hot and the system cannot continue. You need to stop. To avoid that if pulsed DC is used large quantity of iron is needed. I could not afford the iron and coils and so elected to use AC and used a large single coil..

I had been criticized for using a large single coil but the advantage in AC is current goes like this ----> 50 times a second and then at the same time it goes like this  <----  50 times every second. So in my coils P1 and P2 alternate in strength every second and the variation in magnetic flux takes place.

If we are to use Pulsed DC P1 will remain stronger always and you need to use multiple large iron cores and the purpose of spliting the positive was to make alternating stronger and weaker iron cores. The patent is very clear. The experience teaches me that without massive quanity of iron and coils that I cannot afford pulsed DC cannot be used.

It is not clear to me how my learned friends are going to defy this nature of electricity and come up with a small device that will replicate the performance of Figuera..I'm really not able to figure it out..Of course my knowledge on electronics is zero. My mentor Patrick Kelly literally tried to hit electronics in to my head with a Hammer and Nail but it would not go in and gave up..But I do not understand what Electronics has to do with generation of Electricity..Really confused here..Please guide..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 25, 2015, 06:38:36 PM
Quoting another paragraph from the 1914 patent:


" Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the
large induced one
. In these second group of induced an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want. "


--------------


Why is required that the induced coil for the self-sustaining to be of equal or greater length than the coil for electrical output ?


I have a theory for this: Maybe the patent require this configuration because both induced coils are having induction done by the flux cutting the wires (as in generators), not by flux linking (as in transformers). If induction is done by flux cutting (as consequence of the moving magnetic fields from one side to the other) then, the coil for the internal consumption of the machine is better to have a longer length to assure a continuous production of electricity, avoiding any instant without wires being cut by the lines of force, as may happen with a shorter coil while the magnetic fields are moving. All this is just my guess. In other case I can not explain why this configuration is required.


Any other ideas?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 25, 2015, 10:15:53 PM

Hi RandyFL and All.
The "ghost trace" from Woopy's video is the BEMF of the output coil finding an alternate flux path to close the magnetic loop, and it is not through the EMF core side but the other one that is inactive hence the ghost.
My progress is slow with experiments as the parts, cores etc are quite expensive and I cannot afford frying mosfets. Plus, I am running several projects in parallel. Some times I get distracted for months with something completely diffrent and thera times where I'm just lazy. :)


Hello All,

kEhYo77,
So basically what you're stating is... All the energy that has been used and produced is accounted for...the secondary s are receiving the Bemf. That if the primaries are/were wound with 16 awg magnet wire and the secondary s were wound with 14awg magnet wire there wouldn't be large copious amounts of free energy.

Cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 26, 2015, 09:15:01 AM
" Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the
large induced one.

--------------------------

So, Hanon the induced Y coil is not a small coil but a large coil with reels and reels of coils as originally disclosed in the 1908 patent. I agree with you that it is placed between the opposite poles to receive the magnetic waves. That essentially means that the N and S magnets are much larger and Y core also should avoid saturation..

While agreeing with your views I believe that the electromagnets N and S were quite large ones.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 26, 2015, 02:11:34 PM

I'm not able to understand how my learned friends here can say that they would small cores and would give pulsed DC current to it in 9 amps or 10 amps..What is the voltage you are going to use? What is the number of turns? What is the magnetic field strength you are going to create to make an impact on the central secondary?

It is not clear to me how my learned friends are going to defy this nature of electricity and come up with a small device that will replicate the performance of Figuera..I'm really not able to figure it out..Of course my knowledge on electronics is zero. My mentor Patrick Kelly literally tried to hit electronics in to my head with a Hammer and Nail but it would not go in and gave up..But I do not understand what Electronics has to do with generation of Electricity..Really confused here..Please guide..

Hello All,

Ramaswami,
the only analogy that I can give you is... A. stream in the woods... B. And a concrete dam..............................in the case of the stream high up in the mts. ice is melting one drip at a time... it collects and gravity is slowly pulling it down stream pass the woods past the country side to where it rages as mighty river... on the other hand is the big and mighty damn dam... over time it develops a crack and single drip.....the drip becomes two drips...three drips....4 drips.....etc...... until one day the damn dripping causes the damn dam to give way............................the mighty water causes everything to be washed away........................if you go back high into the mts. you can still see it dripping..............................in the case of the damn dam..............you go past the broken dam way high up to the source of water and you will see it drip drip dripping.........................................................................................

I for one am looking for the damn drip..........

All the best...
 :D

Randy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 27, 2015, 09:35:20 AM
Oh Randy..

That drip sits right before your nose in the form of Air..Lot of electricity is present in air..If it were not for the air that you are able to inhale and the electricity that goes in the form of negative charges in the air to our lungs, none of us can remainn alive.

Since I started from zero I learnt what are the methods of Generation of Electricity..

a. Electrostatic Induction machines - Not used
b. Electromagnetic induction machines (used mostly everywhere) (hydro, Thermal and Nuclear - all use only a turbine that rotates to generate electricity and is subject to Lenz Law)
c. Nuclear Battery ( Not even known - used only in Satellites) - Banned under statutes
d. Chemical Batteries (lead-acid and our normal 9 volt batteries Lithium ion batteries used in cell phones etc)
e. Thermoelectricity using thermocouples - Not used due to inefficient production
f. Photovoltics - Solar Cells
g. Electricity from Sparks -- When different metals constitute the spark plug a type of plasma condition is generated and excess ions are released but capturing it is not that easy and it is not taught in text books. This is not well understood yet.
h. Electricity from water - No one talks about this - Not much of knowledge is there about the subject
i- Electricity from Ground - Earth batteries - Forgotten technology.
j. Diesel and Oil based Generators -- You get it every where
k. Transformers - using rotating magnetic fields but the core itself remains stationary and the electricity is generated by flux linking which is again subject to Lenz law. Used every where. Not considered to be a method of Generation but only as method of transmission. More electricity is given to the transformers in the Primary than taken out at the secondary because current is lost by Eddy currents due to heat generated in the core and so current is lost though transformers remain the most efficient electrical machines. Efficiencies of 99.6% are reported and accepted using very expensive materials.
l. Capacitors - Not considered to be capable of generation but only as resistors placed in series for transmission.

Probably there are other methods but the above the methods of Generation of electricity the main forms investigated over the years.

Most of them use the Electromagnetic Induction which is subject to Lenz law by using a rotating magnetic core which is surrounded by coils. While easy to construct this is subject to Lenz law and requires more input than output. When the magnetic core rotates electricity is generated in the coils and this tends to block the rotation of magnet and so more input energy is needed to get lesser output. This is what is taught in textbooks. This is the root cause of the energy crisis..

Figuera method as Hanon pointed out avoids the Lenz law effect by using the method of flux cutting the lines between the opposite poles. 
It provides less input and claims to take out more output. The Patent itself has gone in to archives to be forgotten but has been brought out by Hanon..So is this really possible? Is this true? If so how can it be done?

If you go through the Ramaswami Power Transformer book and the above the drip will be there before you..I hope you can open your eyes and mind and open the windows and let fresh air and light come in and then you can see the drip immediately right before you..I suggest that you follow the nature rather than putting up artificial constraints.. If you watch catch big fish go to Oceans and don't go to a pond and then say I will wait here till the whale or the big shark comes to this pond and keep fishing in the pond..If you want to catch the big fish, you need to go where the big fish is and that is where the drip is present..



 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on June 28, 2015, 05:29:57 AM
You can create a simple motor effect with a magnet, piece of iron and a battery. Take a strong magnet and place the iron on one of the poles. For this you can use a 16 penny nail. Connect the iron(nail) to the (-) side of a AA battery. Take a small wire from the (+) side of the battery and touch the bottom end of the magnet. You will see that the magnet rotates.

In this case two magnetic fields are created in one object. That object is the magnet. The current from the battery slightly distorts the magnetic field from the battery. Prevent the magnet from rotating and quickly introduce and remove the current from the battery the magnetic field distorts and springs back. In this experiment you end up moving a magnetic field with a current.

This effect can be amplified with electromagnets. Build a coil with iron, tire irons work well. Spin a coil on it, start light say 12 vdc. Connect wires to the iron core and pulse the iron core with 12 vdc. Secure the iron core from wanting to rotate, when this is done again you are creating a Locked Rotor effect as seen in a stalled electric motor.

Find a way to get the distorted magnetic field to do work, shouldn't be that hard. Give credit where credit is do.

- Fernandez
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 29, 2015, 11:42:17 AM
You can create a simple motor effect with a magnet, piece of iron and a battery. Take a strong magnet and place the iron on one of the poles. For this you can use a 16 penny nail. Connect the iron(nail) to the (-) side of a AA battery. Take a small wire from the (+) side of the battery and touch the bottom end of the magnet. You will see that the magnet rotates.

In this case two magnetic fields are created in one object. That object is the magnet. The current from the battery slightly distorts the magnetic field from the battery. Prevent the magnet from rotating and quickly introduce and remove the current from the battery the magnetic field distorts and springs back. In this experiment you end up moving a magnetic field with a current.

This effect can be amplified with electromagnets. Build a coil with iron, tire irons work well. Spin a coil on it, start light say 12 vdc. Connect wires to the iron core and pulse the iron core with 12 vdc. Secure the iron core from wanting to rotate, when this is done again you are creating a Locked Rotor effect as seen in a stalled electric motor.

Find a way to get the distorted magnetic field to do work, shouldn't be that hard. Give credit where credit is do.

- Fernandez


Fernandez, Sorry but I do not get to understand your post. Are you suggesting to connect the electromagnets core to a battery? What kind of effect are you looking for?


Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 29, 2015, 01:25:34 PM

Nobody has say a a word about my previous post, copied below.


How can you use both poles of each electromagnet if you pile the coil as :N--y--S--y--N--y--S--N--y--S   as the 1914 suggest?


Any other option apart from using straight bars cores in all "N/S" electromagnets and "y" coils?




   (====N====) (===y===) (====S====)

  ^                       ^                   ^                        ^ 
  |                         |                   |                         |
  |                         |                   |                         |
  |                         |                   |                         |

pole                  pole              pole                    pole




I always recall to read the original patent text in detail to look for the right coil placement. It is not fair to read the patent text just partially, or just trying to read what you want to be read.


In the 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955 and filed by Buforn, a partner of Figuera) you can read:


"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.


With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force."


--------------------------


Please explain how your proposals may fit (if possible) this coil arrangement.


For me it is clear that all electromagnets are arranged in a linear way (bar core type), as NRamaswani has designed. Therefore you can use with this design both poles of each electromagnets in contrary to the use of just one pole of each electromagnet as in the original 1908 design.


For me it is clear that electromagnets are just solenoids , not any kind of transformer core type. Please open your minds and recall the generator from Hubbard, Hendershot and others where the cores are not forming any king of close transformer.


I attach the partial translation of the 1914 patent (sorry but it is 30 page long and it is too much time for me to translate it completely, more when it is practically a copy of the 1908 design plus some improvements as the ones explained in the translation that I attach)


Regards and good luck to everyone
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on June 29, 2015, 01:40:27 PM

Fernandez, Sorry but I do not get to understand your post. Are you suggesting to connect the electromagnets core to a battery? What kind of effect are you looking for?


Thanks

I will have to take a pic or make a video to funny understand.
In essence you are building a motor less all the internal parts. There is only one magnetic part the other magnetic element comes from the current that traverses the iron core.

The effect I described above used a permanent magnet to view the effect. So you only have 1 robust low cost magnetic field. The second magnetic field comes from the current passing through the core material (at 90 degrees) this flash of current distorts the larger magnetic field. When the current is removed the larger field springs back.

If you hold the current steady your magnet or electromagnet will try to rotate. This is because it has been disturbed off its natural position and tries to find equilibrium.

I will post a pic next weekend as I am busy this week.

-Fernndez
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 29, 2015, 02:19:48 PM
I don't understand...

We went from the " Figuera " being the next best thing since sliced bread back to wrapping a coil around a nail...

btw...Did you know that Patrick Kelly took down most of what was on the " Figuera " in His eBook.

Whats next... the arduino electrifies the coil around nail....  :D

All the Best
PS I am going back to the videos of " woopy " and " Kehyo "

Lastly...Fernandez this isn't a dig or anything derogatory against your work ( please keep working and sharing your results and your thoughts )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 29, 2015, 04:16:11 PM

btw...Did you know that Patrick Kelly took down most of what was on the " Figuera " in His eBook.



Randy,


I will tell the story of Figuera description into Patrick´s ebook: In october 2012 Bajac published his descrption of the Figuera generator (the one in post #1 in this thread). Later this interpretation was copied by Patrick´s into his ebook. Therefore the description included into the ebook is just the description delivered by Bajac


After studying in deep the text of the Figuera´s patent I can not agree with the interpretation of Bajac, based on transformer-type cores and air-gaps, both concept not mentioned in any place of the original Figuera patent text. For me this is a genuine design , but not related to the original Figuera intentions. This is my guess, I am not sure because I don´t have a crystal ball nor I have succeded with my other prototypes. If you have not read the original patent text I will encourage you to do it with open mind and not trying to fit it into the split primary transformer. If this is not the right configuration then it is doing more bad that good because now everyone read it and try to fit into that model (except for NRamaswami that has gone into using straight solenoids, which for myself is more similar to Figuera´s ideas)


In my case I always quote the text from the original patents. I just quote the Figuera/Buforn text and I try to give and interpretation of what I read or what I see that is lacking. It is up to you to read the original patent text or just the interpretation included in the ebook



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 29, 2015, 05:04:38 PM
Hanon,
This is not something ( that I state ) against you or anybody else that comes into the forum to share ideas, thoughts or to show their work...

I asked Mr. Kelly which apparatus should I build and He stated... The Figuera. I built the apparatus that Mr. Kelly designed and it works ( I have showed that ) I have seen the videos, as you and others have, that Woopy ( Laurent ) and Kehyo have made. I asked Kehyo his perspective on it and you have it here in previous posts...On the 1st video that Woopy made... its self explanatory... His power supply ran the apparatus and His 24 volt battery ran the transformers and in the secondary s produced light on the Led s...

My point is this... I don't think Bajac's interpretation ( or anybody else's interpretation ) is wrong until.... UNTIL its proven wrong. I say we keep working until we find what works... and I would be the first to suggest it be put back until proven other wise...IMHO.  :D

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on June 29, 2015, 05:52:31 PM
Nobody has say a a word about my previous post, copied below.


How can you use both poles of each electromagnet if you pile the coil as :N--y--S--y--N--y--S--N--y--S   as the 1914 suggest?


Any other option apart from using straight bars cores in all "N/S" electromagnets and "y" coils?




   (====N====) (===y===) (====S====)

  ^                       ^                   ^                        ^ 
  |                         |                   |                         |
  |                         |                   |                         |
  |                         |                   |                         |

pole                  pole              pole                    pole






hanon,


The patent shows the electromagnets in what is assumed to be plan view as just rectangles, and I've yet to see any explanation or drawing that makes sense to interpret that to mean he used "C" or "I" or bars. Very common back then is the horseshoe shape and it fits with the illustration and description, so the "rectangles" would be the ends. Just an observation ....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 29, 2015, 08:49:04 PM
I think we are missing the whole picture. Figuera went from the original idea of modyfying dynamo generator to the final arrangement which is in his latest patent and which is not explained clearly enough apparently.In meantime he patented two other designs using two different principles. In all cases the essence is what he understood with his first rotating machine.
He used both opposite and the same magnetic poles, depending on design, he also used phase change probably to shift opposite poles Bloch wall in one of his patent.If I could have resources I would start from the beginning, trying to find what kind of dynamo he modified in his first patent...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 29, 2015, 09:51:58 PM
In all cases the essence is what he understood with his first rotating machine.

That is my point... I think Woopy captured that basically in his first video on the Figuera...Had Woopy used thicker wire or used all of the transformers we would have seen this whole picture clearer...

I think its just a matter of time before Bajac posts His results and adds another piece of the puzzle...

Cheers

PS could I have all the patents location so I can basically read them ( I thought I did awhile back ).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on June 29, 2015, 10:12:41 PM
PS could I have all the patents location so I can basically read them ( I thought I did awhile back ).

Don't worry, you are not the only one that has been working in this generator without reading the patents. I can see that you dont have even a copy of the pdf files in your computer.

Never is late to look for the original patents instead of others interpretations of the original
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on June 29, 2015, 11:49:30 PM
I don't understand...

We went from the " Figuera " being the next best thing since sliced bread back to wrapping a coil around a nail...


Never stated "wrapping a coil around a nail" I understand your frustration because your hard work and ideas have gone nowhere.
I simply disclosed how to move a field with little to no moving parts.

Maybe it helps people here like Hannons translations of the patent. Jerking around with LED's goes nowhere ..... A simple fact.

Figurea studies the interaction of magnetic fields in a dynamo. Why aren't you?

Good luck.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on June 30, 2015, 02:41:42 AM
Hi Hanon:

I can try to show a Figuera device provided one cheating trick is allowed to me. I donot have sufficient coils as they are in another project.

I will try to show three primary coils and two secondary coils as depicted in a straight pole formation. I will need to use high resistance lamps as resistors to control the input. I cannot guarantee COP>1 output or something like that but I will show how the Figuera coil was built. Let me see if the 12 volts and 16 amps transformer is available. If it is availble then we can certainly show cop>1 performance. I will use AC.

The coil requires a lot of iron The iron and coils that I have is used for another different device under testing which I'm not interested in disclosing as I want to file a patent for it. Unfortunately we have not come out of the economic problems yet and I cannot further invest in this project. We have tried to make small coils and then ended up making the mistake of cutting the coils many times and so we do not have good continuous coils for being used in the secondary.

Unfortunately people do not seem to understand that this is a Generator. It is not a table top device. If I understand correctly Each primary was at least 3 feet length. Each secondary was at least 1 feet in length. If you put 6 such primaries and 5 such secondaries as a single pole it is the most efficient configuration but the length becomes at least 23 feet. If the primaries are 4 feet and the secondaries 1.5 feet then it becomes 32 feet in length. In my Opinion the devices were at least 3 feet in diameter to avoid saturation issues. It is not really appreciated that this is a very expensive device to build. It is very simple to build once you understand it.

Every electromagnetic motionless Generator small one will weight in the 1 to 2 tons category. The prototypes that I have done are about 200 Kgm in weight easily. So far I have purchased 350 kgm of Iron and iron powder for this project and spent a lot of money. It is only when I saw that the flux present in the Primary coils are not being used I also used to wind the secondaries on them to make the output increase in a small device. But we face the problem of Votlages not merging if the phase and frequency between the 5 secondary coils do not merge. Only when they merge without aiding we have a good device. So some tweaking is always needed in the device named after me but in Figuera this problem is absent.

Figuera used Pulsed DC of a different wave form than normally seen and using pulsed DC requires a lot of iron. Approximately 4 times the mass of iron and 4 times the length of coils used while using AC. So please understand how simple but how difficult to implement this project is for common people. It can be used as a community project to generate power but how many individuals can afford it is not clear to me as it is a one time investment but very expensive by our standards.

I will try to show a small video of the device in the next one or two weeks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 30, 2015, 02:49:09 AM
Yeah...
step on a few toes today...did I

What I remember reading was " The enigma of Clemente Figuera "...
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258
It has the patents on there...



Did I say you " wrapped a coil around a nail...
Did you bother to read the " Last " line...
btw...jerking around with Led s.......................... " when the Led s Light "...you know something is working... just sayin.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on June 30, 2015, 01:24:53 PM
Forget that patent its crap .... IS CRAP WHAT YOU WANT TO BUILD ????

I have a self running 5kw mega bucks mind blowing kick arse motor ... who want s to race it in E formula 1 ??????

Or r u going to jus t play with a dumb stupid dynamo ??????

ATOM1
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 30, 2015, 01:45:26 PM
ATOM1 went nuclear and exploded! This person really got some crack into the brain and is posting on all treads! How do we report this destructive conduct?



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on June 30, 2015, 02:05:04 PM
I would ignore it...

Bajac,
Solid cores or cylinders filled with smaller solid cores...
or no difference...?

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on June 30, 2015, 02:08:49 PM
I CHALLANGE YOU !

Let us compete ! I am angry I put up here my unified field oscillator for the OU prize they sent it to there government and changed the rules to the prize ,,,,, ??? why

And you want to insult me ??? why ??? because I am real ??? I dnt play games !!!

ATOM1
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on June 30, 2015, 06:45:51 PM
I CHALLANGE YOU !

Let us compete ! I am angry I put up here my unified field oscillator for the OU prize they sent it to there government and changed the rules to the prize ,,,,, ??? why

And you want to insult me ??? why ??? because I am real ??? I dnt play games !!!

ATOM1


Randy,
I do not know if understand your question but I am building the cores from laminated sheets. I have a roll of silicon steel sheets that were part of the 45 KVA transformer. I am cutting the pieces and putting them together to form the cores. See the attached sketch.


Atom, just show your work!



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on June 30, 2015, 07:05:42 PM
I PRESENTED MY UNIFIDE FIELD OSCILATOR FOR THE OU PRIZE ! THAN THEY SENT ME AN EMAIL AND SAID THEY HAD TO GIVE IT TO THERE GOVERNMENT .... Now they block all my schematics of it ... Its funded by the uk government meaning I am the only man on the planet with a working free energy technology with government funding .... It can power a city ........

Dnt knock me down email me for the plan and re post it ,,,,,,,,prtoneutrons@aol.co.uk

ATOM 1       
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 01, 2015, 02:47:53 AM
Bajac,
The pdf shows sheets...from the pictures ( that were too big... ) I assumed you were going to use solid round iron cores. Looking thru our msgs you stated you were using solid iron cores... why change to laminated silicon sheets...?
Since electric ( silicon ) steel comes in sheets I suspect you are using cad to draw your design on. Patrick is in the camp, of the design at the end of chapter 3... I'm still on the fence about that...
 If Figueras wasn't a Professor I would have been leery from the start about this whole apparatus...In a previous post Kehyo answered my questions and stated His work looked promising... I went back thru our msgs and I thought I asked you the same questions but maybe I didn't... what were your results before you disassembled your apparatus... ( forgive me if I am repeating myself )

Atom1
show us your work
 
Nobody's going to bother you here unless you make a mistake about when you read the patern of the Clemente or decide to wrap a iron nail around a coil... or God forbid you used an Led " a " jerking ... a simple fact.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ATOM1 on July 01, 2015, 11:31:50 AM
I presented my work to the admin here some time ago as to the OU prize! They replied they had to send it to there government than changed the rules of the prize .... I am not happy !

Its the world first unified field oscillator a replica of the NASA secret ufo ... ok ! and a real one ! in fact the only one ever built by a human ...... What is your technology like ?????

I am not to play with wires or to talk to people that only wish to disturb my peace of mind and I am not alone here ! I have freedom to express my interest in everything ! Including my planet ect ect !

ATOM1

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 01, 2015, 01:44:28 PM
Clearly Atom has assumed the difference between want and need, being an individual I dont need to power a town or city nor want . I build according to what i need that is enough to keep me plenty busy. We already have a centralized utility system. I see no purpose to repeat the same mistakes which eventually have the same results. Greed and foolishness is unavoidable. You Sir choose the wrong path Im sure you wont be alone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2015, 06:19:25 PM

Quoting another pragraph from the patent from 1914 (Buforn) with some cryptic sentences:



"The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interpose between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire."




Why did he make reference to two cases: 1- when there is contact between the induced and inducers cores and,  2- when they are close together and in contact by their poles ? Which is the difference between contacting through the cores and contacting through the poles?


Why did he mention that "in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire" ? At first sight it seems to be a redundant feature, does it?


Please comment your thoughts about these sentences. I am not able to understand their real meaning. I do not understand why Buforn emphatize those details.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on July 01, 2015, 07:13:49 PM
hanon,


I think he is just saying that the core of the induced can either be against or inset into the inducer core, and that in both cases the coils do not overlap each other (no coil on coil geometry). Here's a quick drawing of core segments/ends showing the core and coil relationships.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 01, 2015, 08:51:17 PM
Tak,


Exactly this is how I see it. I have used your original drawing to create the whole configuration with two inducers, as described in the 1908 patent. I hope you don´t mind for using your picture. If so tell me and I will delete it.


Note that also this configuration is the one used in the 1902 patent. I also attach an image from 1902 patent (Patent no. 30378): two straight solenoids (named "a" and "b") and the induced in the middle (named "c", not drawn in the patent, so not clear how to place it)


That why I always say to dig into the original sources.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on July 01, 2015, 11:25:53 PM
Note that also this configuration is the one used in the 1902 patent. I also attach an image from 1902 patent (Patent no. 30378): two straight solenoids (named "a" and "b") and the induced in the middle (named "c", not drawn in the patent, so not clear how to place it)

hanon,

I think you're mixing up the drawings, the 1902 Figuera patent did not use an induced core. Here's the timeline I use to chart the evolution of the Figuera design. Any corrections appreciated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 02, 2015, 12:56:50 AM
Tak,


You have done your homework!! (Randy take note about studying in deep all the patents)


My guesses:


The 1908 speaks about an "inducer circuit" with soft iron core and an "induced circuit". It does not mention anything about the core of the induced. But in one sentence it said that there is no need to have any separation between both circuits. Therefore I tend to think that the induced circuit had also a soft iron core. But it is true that it is not really specified explicitly.


The 1910 patent refers to an electromagnet as induced coil (page 13). There I think that this patent requires also soft iron core. As this patent is almost an exact copy of the 1908 patent then this is a clue that the 1908 patent had also core in the induced circuit


About the patent 30378 (year 1902) there is no mention to any core in the induced. But Figuera stated that the distance betweeen both inducers has to be minimal.  This could account for the possible lack of induced core.


The patent from 1913 in the second drawing shows already a feedback coil inside the core of the "y" coil.The first drawing does not include the feedback coil, but the text (page 20) and the 2nd drawing includes this feedback coil.


Good luck tak. You have done a deep and rigorous study of all the patents. Nice!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on July 02, 2015, 02:06:57 AM
hanon,

Thanks for your kind words, but in all honesty it's your Figuera info on this page (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258) that I used for investigating!

I based my timeline chart on the translated texts and the patent drawings, and once you start laying them out they make sense. In some cases there can be virtually no doubt, in others it makes sense in relation to what is written and the re-use of confirmed drawings.

The drawing progression goes from conventional generator design with only enough space for a coreless induced coil, then to side by side inducers with no induced core shown, to side by side inducers with induced core, then finally to linear with induced core. Once you see the pattern you can almost foolproof determine the patent profile by it's drawing alone!

And now I'll climb out on the limb and say that any talk about needing massive amounts of iron and miles of wire is suspect. Nothing I read in all of these patents even hints at anything so subtle going on that it requires a "go big or go home" unit to show the effect. No harm intended for anyone that is approaching it this way, there's no manual after all!

This isn't a current project for me, just observing and commenting.

tak
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 02, 2015, 02:22:37 AM
Noted...

I have read the patents... I haven't studied the patents in great detail because I am not there yet ( meaning...I had to get the electronics done first )... as I explained to Ramaswami I started electronics school about the same time as He did... I marvel at the 555, the arduino and the raspberry Pi 2... and anything that comes down the pike electronically or magnetically...but most of all I marvel at the mathematics behind it... Michael Faraday taught himself... Tesla quit the university... I studied some of Tesla's patents more than I have studied Clemente's admittedly... I have an arduino and the Raspberry Pi 2 sitting and waiting to be used... I ordered two more of them in case I break them or whatever...I have poured over 1000 s of schematics looking at semiconductors...looking and grasping concepts that I can use down the line...I am not frustrated as Hernandez stated...my tests are backed up from when I had my surgery in May...on the contrary I am excited about the possibilities...

I assumed the apparatus that Bajac built worked...but more importantly I want to hear the results ( what did work - and why something didn't work ) frame by frame I watched Woopy and Kehyo... looked at what they did and what they use/d... I poured over the pictures that Bajac produced... examined and studied each frame each square inch of His work space...what He built...the equipment He uses ( the names of the equipment.... Not because I'm " dedicated "........but because I am " INTERESTED " I'm interested in finding how Clemente reached his conclusions...He must of sat there and watched motors spin ( or anything that spun ) for hrs... days... months...years or whatever until the machine and the mathematics melded......................................kinda like watching Led s light  :)

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 02, 2015, 09:26:09 AM
I'm sorry I have to post this reply..I neither feel offended nor intend to offend any one but some talk and comments are clearly not acceptable.

I will always trust the man who would walk the talk and put the money where his mouth is..Simple. This is what a simple minded person with common sense would do..

Regarding the drawing..on 30378..Patent

Please see the Claims for that patent below:

"Founded on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro
Blasberg, in the name and on behalf of the society "Figuera-Blasberg"
respectfully requests to be granted final patent of invention for this generator
whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that,
in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of
four excitatory electromagnets in each, and the induced circuit is marked by a
thick line of reddish ink,
being this way the general arrangement of the
appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in
another form or grouping"

I clearly remember seeing the Red Line of the induced coils in this patent when I saw it first. Red line has suddenly disappeared..

A check on the web archive shows that 9 changes were made to this page..Please see..http://web.archive.org/web/20130501000000*/http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

Regarding the comment that large iron core and wire is not needed for making the "effect" there is no dispute for the effect can be made for testing by a small device on your table if you want. The generator itself is described in the patent text as follows.

"DESCRIPTION OF GENERATOR OF VARIABLE EXCITACION “FIGUERA”

The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit, also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly placed. As neither of the two circuits spin, there is no need to make them round, nor leave any space between one and the other."

So the small Y magnets are fixed and motionless and composed of several reels or coils.

What is the length of one reel. 305 Meters or 1000 feet. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel

Electromagnets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet

If small Y electromagnets are composed of several reels of coils what about the large Inductor electromagnets?

If you want to see the effect on a table, a small table top device is enough. If you want to replicate the device for industrial purposes, then the description that Figuera used in his specification must be followed..Probaly learned friends here know more than him. After all poor man died a hundred years ago and education levels have increased..So he did not know simulation and did not know electronics..If simulation alone can work, then India and China which build Nuclear Submarines and Satellites and ICBMs and Nuclear Bombs can easily build jet engines..But neither country is able to build Jet Engines or aircraft for it requires real hardcore hands on experience and technical know how. That is what Figuera had.

It is easy to do photoediting of drawings but people tend to forget to edit the text describing the drawings..

Some people may study patents for commenting only... Ramaswami does that for a living..Not only that he has taught patents to hundreds of people and 25 of his students are Registered Patent Agents..Some people would not put their money where their mouth is...Ramaswami would put his money where his mouth is and would not just talk but walk the talk...If he has weaknesses he would happilly admit..If he make mistakes he would sincerely apologize..

I'm really so sorry that this is a simple device that can change the world and so many misleading statements are made again and again to prevent people from getting to know this device. This Figuera device works. It can be constructed easily.. I will show a working device after two weeks. If starting without even knowing the difference between voltage and amperage I can modify it without moving parts,and post it open source online, any one can also do this machine off patent now any where in the world. The machine can also be self sustained..But I had been warned that drawing power from the environment that way may result in lightening and I had been told to avoid it. So I have avoided that part alone. This machine produces more output than input.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on July 02, 2015, 10:20:43 AM
...I will show a working device after two weeks...
If you could do a step by step build log with images and or video as you construct the device, that would be awesome. Whatever you can show is greatly appreciated. I'm an electronics newb but find the Figuera concept fascinating. Small table top example is fine.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 02, 2015, 12:47:58 PM
 Sadly, the “reddish line” was not drawn in the 30378 patent since I recovered it from the historical archives of the Spanish Patent Office. It is a pity but that fuc..ing line was not in the patent drawing. It is something that disturbed me from the first moment. Why was that line missing from the patent drawing?. Therefore there are more configurations to test: it is not specified explicitly in the text how the induced is oriented. Ramaswami: you should have think about the red line which is drawn in the other patent (patent 30376). In that patent the induced circuit is drawn. You can check it in the pdf file
 
Just for curiosity: when I checked the patent archives I could read that during the 1902 patent filing two copies of each patent memory were deposited in the patent office. Today there is just one copy of each patent. The other copy is not there. Historical timeline:  Filing date : 4 Patents filed the 20th of September 1902 ; Reference to the patent sell to the bankers: around the 25th of September. Patent rejection: In October or November (I do not remember) there is an official request for some formal corrections into the 4 patents. As this correction was not done the patent were cancelled for lack of corrections in due date. I guess that as the patent were sold to the bankers (surely with the intention of burying them forever), nobody took care of doing the requested corrections in the patents and therefore the patent were cancelled by the patent office. I suppose that maybe some of the new owners could have ask for the second copy of the patents, and therefore that copy is not the patent archives anymore.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 02, 2015, 01:43:34 PM
From Hannon
"Quoting another pragraph from the patent from 1914 (Buforn) with some cryptic sentences:



"The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interpose between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire."




Why did he make reference to two cases: 1- when there is contact between the induced and inducers cores and,  2- when they are close together and in contact by their poles ? Which is the difference between contacting through the cores and contacting through the poles?


Why did he mention that "in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire" ? At first sight it seems to be a redundant feature, does it?


Please comment your thoughts about these sentences. I am not able to understand their real meaning. I do not understand why Buforn emphatize those details.

 My response
   Because the method of induction is normal and not where the secrete is. It is only helpful to have a very good and strong electromagnet to have a very strong output. That in itself will only produce a big transformer of some form.It will not result in building a closed system where the useful effects of a magnetic field in motion are not destroyed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 02, 2015, 04:10:16 PM
Hanon,Doug1:

Both of you have the patent text of the last Buforn patent. That is the only patent that discloses the best method of operating the device. We have seen that the straight pole is the best mode and not the 7 cores connected in series..Both of you will not send me the translated text. I do not read spanish. I know how to read patent text..What can I do?

This patent was drafted 100 years back..Still it is not enabling people to replicate it. See how cleverly it was drafted.

This does not give what the poles are and I tested and identified it as opposite poles.

This does not give the method of winding the coils..This also I tested and found out. This has confused all of you and all have claimed that identical poles must be placed in view CW and CCW windings until I pointed out.

There is only one secret...

This patent shows three coils..

An input coil..

An output coil

A feed back coil in phase with the primary.

The secret is that the winding pattern of Primary coils is not disclosed. If it is a multifilar coil as the number of coils increase the inductive impedance increases so much it will not allow the current to flow through but the multiple rotating currents will create many magnetic waves one aidng the other and will create a very strong magnetic field inspite of the low input.  As lot of iron is used and the electromagnet in whatever geometrical form you wind it tends to focus the magnetic force in the center. Therefore once you determine what is the amount that the primary will consume, the feedback coil must provide only that or slightly above that for giving the feedback.

The super duper complex commutator is a diversionary tactics employed to hide the simple secret. I very quickly found that the commutator and the resistor array are redundant. You use the multifilar primary and the proper feedback backed up by a voltage limiting MOV (metal oxide varistor) and a fuse to blow the fuse away to prevent the runaway current, then you have an electromagnet that is continuously oscillated. Such an electromagnet will continuously produce the output current.

Counter emf will be present but is negated by the use of winding pattern and placing the coil within the cores or within the poles. Think about it..If the coil is placed inside the core one side of the coil is one pole of magnet and the other side of the coil is opposite pole. You have to connect the end of the feedback coil to the beginning of input coil and begiinng of feedback coil to the end of the input coil. Then wind an outside coil between two earth points and give it current once and the feeding current is removed and the iron is continuously oscillated.. Nothing more..You can take energy from any point on earth.

I'm warned that this method is known to many people but this method is dangerous because it taps energy directly from air and this can create a rush of energy to the system and this can result in lightening strikes on the system and lightening prefers living beings than inert material and so this method should not be employed. I'm also told told that many people have been killed attempting to do this. So the preferred method is to use the electronics method of using a battery and an inverter and then charging them.

Just think about it..

what is a permanent magnet.. You give dc current once to iron it becomes permanent magnet and remains a permanent magnet for supposedly 400 years. In practice I have seen it slowly reduce in magnetic intensity. Probably we gave less currrent.

What is an electromagnet..iron oscillated by AC or pulsed DC..Nothing more..If you can keep this oscillation continuous then you have continuous output. There is nothing else. No secrets. It is a very simple thing. How to keep the electromagnet always oscillated. Then you have a continuous production of electricity. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TruthHunter on July 02, 2015, 06:45:14 PM
The comment has been made that the Figuera device is likely massive. However, he traveled with it for exhibition so this seems
to put an upper limit on the size. Also, it seems that news articles might have commented on the size if it were significantly larger than
standard dynamos.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on July 02, 2015, 09:23:38 PM

So the small Y magnets are fixed and motionless and composed of several reels or coils.

What is the length of one reel. 305 Meters or 1000 feet. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel)

Electromagnets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet)

If small Y electromagnets are composed of several reels of coils what about the large Inductor electromagnets?

With respect, I don't think the generic word 'reel' has any more significance than 'coil' does in relation to the overall 'size' of the intended device. I think it's just another descriptor variation to convey an image.

If you want to see the effect on a table, a small table top device is enough.

Yes! That's all most people are interested in doing, creating a small proof of concept replication, and a small device is easier to improve upon as changes are easier to make and the results are easier to see, plus it's safer!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 03, 2015, 01:43:16 AM
Tak 22:

Thanks for your post..

It cost me $20000 in my personal funds and very signficiant time to learn this and do this. I'm not interested in spending my money, my time, my expertise gained with considerable effort who would comment or think. Do it yourself if that is what is interesting to you. Thank you for your understanding and wish you Success


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 03, 2015, 02:57:29 PM
Tak 22:


Thanks for your post..


It cost me $20000 in my personal funds and very signficiant time to learn this and do this.


Are we talking about U.S. dollars? What is "... do this" that cost so much?


The comment has been made that the Figuera device is likely massive. However, he traveled with it for exhibition so this seems
to put an upper limit on the size. Also, it seems that news articles might have commented on the size if it were significantly larger than
standard dynamos.


You brought in an intersting topic. I estimate the prototype of the 1908 Figueras apparatus to weight between 300 and 600 pounds (or even 1,000 lbs). It is now my believe that the larger the coils and cores, the easier it is to replicate the Figera's effects. That is why I am presently building larger cores of about a foot. I think the failure of the devices built by Kenyo, Woopi, and I is not only due to the wrong shapes of the iron cores but also to the small sizes.


Noted...
I assumed the apparatus that Bajac built worked...but more importantly I want to hear the results ( what did work - and why something didn't work ) frame by frame I watched Woopy and Kehyo... looked at what they did and what they use/d... I poured over the pictures that Bajac produced... examined and studied each frame each square inch of His work space...what He built...the equipment He uses ( the names of the equipment.... Not because I'm " dedicated "........but because I am " INTERESTED " I'm interested in finding how Clemente reached his conclusions...He must of sat there and watched motors spin ( or anything that spun ) for hrs... days... months...years or whatever until the machine and the mathematics melded......................................kinda like watching Led s light


I cannot say I Have an overunity generator, yet. Even though my tests indicate a power gain, they are too marginal for such a claim. I will only claim overunity whenever I have a self-running generators that can power heavy loads, as claimed by Mr. Figuera. I do not believe in overunity generators that can only turn on LED devices.


Nervertheless, I am very happy with the results. For example, the primary current of my device is independent of the secondary current. And in this case, I am not talking about marginal values, but rather, order of magnitude differences. This is an extremely important result that is considered an impossible event for the standard transformers and the mainstream science. IT IS THE KEY FOR OVERUNITY GENERATORS!


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 03, 2015, 04:32:20 PM
BajacC

What is US$20000. About 1.2 million Indian Rupees now and about spent over 27 months. I do not every thing myself and employ people to do things as I did not know any thing. For example I did not know what is voltage and what is amperage..Then Patrick wanted me to build a device and gave specs for that and we built it and every component of that electromagnetic device was built to his specs and he was satisfied. When we tested there was no electromagnetism. I used a variac and the variac fumed out. We then tried to make the device an electromagnet by connecting 200 x6 watts lamps in parallel and 200 x5 watts lamps in parallel. Zero electromagnetism..Patrick refused to believe me and I realized that the weakness is not knowing how to build magnets and electromagnets and I had to study and learn to build electromagnets and life and drop objects and at all and build permanent magnets and magnetize and demangnetise them. He then wanted us to build Figuera device and in between he retired and refused to answer mails. So we tried to build Figuera device ourselves and we had to learn. All coils were hand wound were heavy and this went on for many months and in by July 2013 we have learnt to make electromagnets well and in fact electromagnets that were very powerful and that would oscillate violently. We went to back to Figuera and no current came in identical poles and so had to reverse poles and then mofidied the central coil  as depicted in our pictures. We were getting results in a single core and not in all coils connected together. So we built a large single core coil and I realized that the flux availbale in the primary is being wasted and why it should be wasted and so I used it also  and we ended up with 630 no volts. We were stunned. We didnot expect so much voltage will come and then we connected to the earth to get the 620 and 20 amps figure.

Money is spent mainly on labour. This is a manpower intensive process. I did not know that we could wind using machines and even if is bought I would have asked my people to do this all as I had to focus on my practice. Labour does not come cheaply.

Your estimate of the 300 to 600 pounds weight is on nearly accurate side. We have found that the straight pole method of Buforn shown in the last patent to be the most efficient method. With all that we have had success off and on and some times the voltages fail to merge. So I looked at the principle and currently I have modified the device substantially and possibly we would get good results. let us see when I get it.
Trusted, honest and competent labour is not cheap. If you think that you can yourself modify the devices all on your own without helpers you can reduce your cost but about your time.

The reduced size Unit has about 2500 meters of 4 sq mm wires and about 200 kgm of soft iron. calculate the cost of it yourself.

I have bought lot of equipment that have gone waste. 3 people worked full time on this project apart from me.

Calculate the cost of 600 pound device you have in your mind along with the coils, cost of winding, cost of iron, time needed for testing, correcting etc etc. You will know how much this prloject will cost you then.  You would also know that you would have to put a lot of iron to prevent it from saturating and then many other things. We did not know at that time a R&D project of replicating a device is so costly. Had I known it I would not have ventured here. Calculate how much wire you would need, how much of current will have to flow through it and whether such current will saturate the iorn core. Then you put in more iron and make it bigger etc etc.

I moified and even last week and got 500 volts no load voltage in the secondary. I expect to get higher output results than input.

So this cost for a doing R &D project is not cheap. In material cost alone you are likely to spend $2000/-You would need about 2500 meters of wire. Check it and you would know.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 04, 2015, 12:41:13 AM
  What happens when the cart gets ahead of the horse? for 200 Alex.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 04, 2015, 08:23:17 AM
I'm sorry..I must apologize I made a mistake in my earlier post. We tried to connect 6 x 200 watts lamps connected in parallel in that attempt.

I must also apologize to tak22 for responding in a harsh way. See it is very expensive and very difficult to do things in this field. Theory is against the expected results or the objective of the experiments. We dare to go against the theory and experiment.  Expertise in some things do not come overnight. Especially in R&D Projects. In Electrical motors 300 to 500 Kg sizes are normal. Secondly many comments are made without even reading patent. Without intending to even make an effort to replicate making teasing comments is not fair. In any case I need not have responded harshly. Please accept my apologies.

Figuera Patent is very cleverly drafted. Buforn seems to be a very very intelligent Patent Attorney.  Figuera says that if we vary the strength of the current it wil result in magnetic flux. That variation is automatically present if you use AC. We need not use pulsed DC. If you use two primaries in series with the output coil placed in center the same effect happens when we apply AC.

I can confirm Bajacs statement that Lenz Law is not present in the center coil output.


How Lenz law is defeated in Figuera design..This is a reasoned analysis by a very Learned person on my use AC..

This is likely how the Lenz effect was mitigated. Let us take the coils P1 and P2 wound in the same direction. They will have the unlike poles facing each other at the centre. An alternating voltage is fed into the coils and from the wiring, live and neutral contacts are at the opposite ends of the the transformer (the secondary is in the centre of the two electromagnets created by the primary). During the +ve half of the AC cycle, the electromagnets are formed with unlike poles at the centre, say a N pole on the left of Central Secondary and S pole on the right of Central Secondary. So, Central Secondary is induced by the primary. The frequency is say 50Hz.  At the zero point of the AC cycle, just at the instant the voltage is rapidly switched, lenz effect kicks in generating a voltage (and magnetic flux) opposite that of the first half of P1 but just about the time the negative half of the Primary voltage is creating  magnetic flux and inducing Central Secondary but in the opposite direction to that of the first half of the cycle. This -ve cycle magnetic flux is reinforced by the back emf magnetic flux due to the first half cycle and the effect on the coil increases. If a load is placed on the secondary with this arrangement, similar reasoning can be used to assume that the lenz effect due to each Amp of current taken from the secondary will cancel out, ensuring that the load on the secondary does not influence the input. This sounds incredible." 

I can confirm that I have tested and the primary input remains the same. Whether the central secondary is loaded or not. Whatever be the load of the secondary the primary input is the same.

However I must most respectfully disagree with Bajac on transformers.

Transformer is an electrical device and it is designed to aid in the transmission of electricity. To reduce losses in tranmission it steps up the voltage from the generation point to the distribution point and steps down the voltage at the distribution point. For this it uses flux linking concept and for this purposefully it uses alternatively thinner secondaries of longer length and thicker secondaries of shorter length. It suffers from Backemf due to Lenz law which is normally present in all efforts. If you try to climb a mountain it is tough. This is similar to Lenz law opposition.

Lenz law is not present in certain situations. Electrically it is not present when the coils are wound between opposite poles. A simple example that can be given is that if we throw a stone from the top of the mountain the falling stone has no opposing force because it is attracted by gravity. Between mutually attracting poles or unlike poles or opposite poles Lenz law is absent. Figuera used this principle. This situation stops when the falling stone hits the flat surface. But when it reaches the bottom if the bottom were to turn up and and the top of the mountain were to become the bottom, stone will now have to go back towards to the point where it started due to gravity again. This is achieved by using AC. Figuera did the same thing by making the poles alternatively stronger and weaker. The Figuera design was obviously done to avoid Lenz law.

However Lenz law or counter emf or backemf can be very successfully used to make self sustaining generators. It was done by Daniel McFarland Cook in 1871. Therefore I must beg to disagree with the statement of Bajac that it is only when Lenz law is absent OU results can be obtained. My experiments show that it is possible to obtain such COP>1 results even with the presence of Lenz law effects. But they are so miniscule that it can be treated as manufacturing defect of meters.  Therefore in my earlier design I combined both to achieve cop>8 results but that design suffers from the normally known problems of combining voltages between multiple coils. So I have improved on it now with a simpler design.

I would request that let us share our experiences, knowledge and avoid indulging in oneupmanship statements or teasing others. It is actually frustrating. I had been told not even to come here and post and do my work but focus on research which I do part time as the need to make a living by focusing on my practice is more important to me. Be advised that the patent would take considerable skill to understand it and it is not what it appears to be on the surface.

Most people here have not still understood Figuera Patent. I myself did not until a few days ago. So I do not blame any one. Every drawing including the latest ones, made about the Figuera transformer todate misses two important elements of the design. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 04, 2015, 02:26:20 PM
Bajac,
I think the failure of the devices built by Kenyo, Wopi, and I is not only due to the wrong shapes of the iron cores but also to the small sizes.

Patrick stated that you increase the size of the wire on the secondary... ( maybe that was an assumption )
neither woopy or kehyo had showed that in the videos...

Even though my tests indicate a power gain

It has been my intention all along was/is to achieve a gain and then ( as Doug1 has stated ) to build to one's needs...........
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 04, 2015, 03:48:07 PM
" so what you're stating is: the larger magnet wire on the secondary has no bearing on output"
  That is wrongly stated but not wrongly intended.  The size of the conductor of the secondary is independent to the effect of flux cutting compared to the size of the primary. It is the quantity of flux which is being cut by the size and length of conductor which is separate from what caused the flux. They are two separate things treated separately. In essence they are even controlled separately.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 04, 2015, 04:41:01 PM
 Why do you think lenz law is such a bad thing? If you use it to your advantage it would be good. Maybe it would serve you to read it again and don't skip over the links thinking you know what the hyperlinks mean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz%27s_law
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 04, 2015, 04:45:26 PM
my intent...
was to find if Bajac, woopy and Kehyo did that... I ass u med they did but I don't want to take it for granted... Woopy and Kehyo never showed " that " in their videos.

Clemente drew the shapes in the Dibujo de la patente de 1908 / Drawing 1908 patent.
( the first picture )... in drafting school we drew from all sides ( Clemente didn't do that in that picture ).

My goal is to find out if pulses of energy multiply in coils or by bifilar coils... ( as I am sure everybody and his brother is too )
Why do you think lenz law is such a bad thing? If you use it to your advantage it would be good.
noted...
Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 04, 2015, 06:07:03 PM
@ NRamaswani
Hello
Does this schematic depicts correctly your description ?
Thanks

Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 04, 2015, 07:15:37 PM
You can create a simple motor effect with a magnet, piece of iron and a battery. Take a strong magnet and place the iron on one of the poles.
For this you can use a 16 penny nail. Connect the iron(nail) to the (-) side of a AA battery. Take a small wire from the (+) side of the battery and touch the bottom end of the magnet.
 You will see that the magnet rotates.

In this case two magnetic fields are created in one object. That object is the magnet. The current from the battery slightly distorts the magnetic field from the battery.
Prevent the magnet from rotating and quickly introduce and remove the current from the battery the magnetic field distorts and springs back.
In this experiment you end up moving a magnetic field with a current.

This effect can be amplified with electromagnets. Build a coil with iron, tire irons work well. Spin a coil on it, start light say 12 vdc. Connect wires to the iron core and pulse the iron core with 12 vdc.
Secure the iron core from wanting to rotate, when this is done again you are creating a Locked Rotor effect as seen in a stalled electric motor.

Find a way to get the distorted magnetic field to do work, shouldn't be that hard. Give credit where credit is do.

- Fernandez


Fernandez,


From the moment I saw your post I knew that I had seen something similiar any place. I have been searching for old links and sites. Please see the link  (http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm)I post. It seems that Hans Coler used something similar to your proposal in his free energy device.


http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm (http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm)


I post also here the pictures from the link. Apart from the Coler sketch I have noted a very similar sketch in the Dingel HHO car or Sweet generator to the scheme I think that Figuera used.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 04, 2015, 07:31:29 PM

I can confirm Bajacs statement that Lenz Law is not present in the center coil output.

How Lenz law is defeated in Figuera design..This is a reasoned analysis by a very Learned person on my use AC..

However I must most respectfully disagree with Bajac on transformers.

Transformer is an electrical device and it is designed to aid in the transmission of electricity. To reduce losses in tranmission it steps up the voltage from the generation point to the distribution point and steps down the voltage at the distribution point. For this it uses flux linking concept and for this purposefully it uses alternatively thinner secondaries of longer length and thicker secondaries of shorter length. It suffers from Backemf due to Lenz law which is normally present in all efforts. If you try to climb a mountain it is tough. This is similar to Lenz law opposition.

Lenz law is not present in certain situations.

However Lenz law or counter emf or backemf can be very successfully used to make self sustaining generators. It was done by Daniel McFarland Cook in 1871. Therefore I must beg to disagree with the statement of Bajac that it is only when Lenz law is absent OU results can be obtained. My experiments show that it is possible to obtain such COP>1 results even with the presence of Lenz law effects. But they are so miniscule that it can be treated as manufacturing defect of meters.  Therefore in my earlier design I combined both to achieve cop>8 results but that design suffers from the normally known problems of combining voltages between multiple coils. So I have improved on it now with a simpler design.

I would request that let us share our experiences, knowledge and avoid indulging in oneupmanship statements or teasing others. It is actually frustrating. I had been told not even to come here and post and do my work but focus on research which I do part time as the need to make a living by focusing on my practice is more important to me. Be advised that the patent would take considerable skill to understand it and it is not what it appears to be on the surface.

Most people here have not still understood Figuera Patent. I myself did not until a few days ago. So I do not blame any one. Every drawing including the latest ones, made about the Figuera transformer todate misses two important elements of the design.

Guys, we need to be careful when quoting other people or when making statements about the Lenz's law.
The effects of the Lenz's law are always present!!! These effects can only be mitigated. If you are just starting in the electrical field and I understand it can be difficult to really grasp the concept. The Lenz's effect is so misunderstood that people with many years of experience in the electrical field have not yet gotten the concept.

For example, the explanation for overunity given in the latest book that describes one of the John Bendini's device is plain wrong. The book shows a device consisting of permanent magnets and electromagnets that are powered from an electrical source. The rotor can turn as long as the electromagnets are energized in a certain sequence. Basically, it is a motor.  The effects of the Lenz's law are minimum for this type of system, and it is true for any motor or interaction of magnetic fields created by external electrical power sources. IF THERE ARE NO MAGNETICALLY INDUCED VOLTAGES OR CURRENTS, THEN, WE CANNOT REFER TO THE EFFECTS OF THE LENZ LAW AT ALL! We cannot refer to flux linkage but to the interaction of two magnetic fields created by the permanent magnets and the electromagnets connected to an external power source. That is why the explanation for overunity in said book is painfully wrong. I said "painfully" because such documents (like the said book) are the main source of disinformation causing a great blow to the FE movement. They are only motivated by personal gains and MONEY! Please, note that I am not saying that the John's device does not work, but the explanation is wrong.

The two Figuera's generators from 1902, the rotating and motionless ones, mitigated the effects of the  Lenz's law by using induced coils (or secondary coils) having very low self-inductance. The principle of obtaining overunity through low self-inductance coils was first used by the device shown in the U.S. patent 119825 awarded to Daniel McFarland Cook in 1871. Now, the Figuera's 1908 generator is a different animal all together.  This invention is the result of many years of experimentation - more than 20. Figuera invented a method for dealing with the effects of the Lenz's law based on using two primary coils (inducing coils), for which their magnetic fields are not in phase. This is an ingenious method! 

First, Figuera thought of moving the magnetic field of the induced "y" coils away from the magnetic field of the inducing "N" and "S" coils. He knew that a lot less energy would be required to detour the induced magnetic field away from the path of the inducing magnetic fields whenever the two magnetic fields attract.

Second, because the two primary magnetic fields attract (opposite N and S poles), Figuera minimized the interaction between the two primary N and S magnetic fields by adding magnetic gaps and by locating the primary coils on the opposite sides of the secondary coil ( "Y" induced coil.)

And third, Figuera also knew that the phase angle of the two primary magnetic fields was important. I strongly belief that the primary magnetic field that first starts, becomes the inducing magnetic field, while the one that follows it a few milliseconds later becomes the detoured primary magnetic field, which does not induce power into the secondary Y coil. For example, if the magnetic fields of the N coils start first, then, the magnetic fields of the S coils will start to rise from zero a few milliseconds later. In this way, the magnetic fields of the S coils pull (or detour) the magnetic fields of the Y coils away from the magnetic fields of the N coils.  The inducing magnetic fields of the S coils do not contribute with voltage in the Y coils, while the magnetic fields of the N coils are the ones responsible for providing power to the load connected to the "Y" coils.

Also note that the mainstream science uses the effects of the Lenz's law as the main reason why overunity can never be achieved. It is the electrical equivalent of the third mechanical law of Newton for action and reaction forces.  The mainstream science is of course correct for the type of magnetic structures accepted in the today's electrical standards. Where the mainstream science is faulty is when it generalizes the results to other structures such as the generators built by Mr. Cook and Mr. Figuera.

It is also wrong to relate the flux linking with the transformers only. Flux linking also occurs in rotating generatos. In order for a magnetic field to induce a voltage in a coil, a flux linkage must exist! It does not matter if  the inducing magnetic field comes from a rotor or the primary of the transformers. I think you meant to say the "transformer action", which is the terminology used for the magnetic interaction between fixed coils. In that respect, the Figuera's 1908 device is a transformer device. The other type of induction  is the one that occurs when rotating a magnetic field of constant magnitude. This type of induction is better known as "generator action" or "induction by motion." In both cases, the motionless and the rotating coils, the induced voltage is a result of the main flux linking the induced coil.

Do you think that the Lenz law is what's showing on the secondary ( on woopy's videos )... or is whats on the secondary something else?

I think the explanation above answers your question. Think about it. The Lenz's law basically states that "the magnetic field generated by the induced current (reaction) must always oppose the magnetic field of the inducing current (action)." The "induced current" has a specific meaning within this context, the magnetic field of the induced current is a REACTION to the ACTION of the magnetic field associated with the inducing current - primary current.

I feel that we are moving in circles. I have posted the above statement several times in this forum.
Thanks, Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 04, 2015, 07:48:40 PM
Clemente drew shapes but didn't specify as to what the shapes were.
 
 Yes he does ,read them again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 04, 2015, 08:04:35 PM
<blockquote> If an induced current flows, its direction is always such that it will oppose the change which produced it.
 </blockquote> Lenz's law is shown with the negative sign in Faraday's law of induction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction):
 (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/4/e/7/4e730c96c5e07417e399a8975c36c7d4.png) which indicates that the induced voltage (ℰ) and the change in magnetic flux (∂Φ) have opposite signs.[2] Lenz's Law is a qualitative law that refers to the direction of induced current in relation to the effect which produces it without quantitatively relating their magnitudes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 04, 2015, 08:34:15 PM



Induction by motion.


Yes. But instead of moving the inducers cores you may just move the magnetic lines of force and keep the cores static.


Quote from patent 30378 (1902):





"In Gramme ring and in the current dynamos,
current is produced by induction exerted on the wire of the induced circuits as
its coils cut the lines of force created by the excitatory electromagnets, this is,
as the induced circuit moves, quickly, inside the magnetic atmosphere which
exists between the pole faces of the excitatory electromagnets and the soft iron
core of the induced. In order to produce this movement, mechanical force need
to be employed in large quantity, because it is necessary to overcome the
magnetic attraction between the core and the excitatory electromagnets,
attraction which opposes the motion, so the current dynamos are true machines
for transforming mechanical work into electricity.


The undersigned, believe that it is exactly the same whether the induced coils cut
the lines of force, or that these lines of force cross the induced wire, because
not changing, as consecuence of the rotation, the arrangement of the magnetic fields, there is no
necessity to move the core, for induction to occur."






Again I just quote the patent text. I wold love to see others also quoting the patent text to support their interpretations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on July 05, 2015, 03:54:06 AM


Induction by motion.


Yes. But instead of moving the inducers cores you may just move the magnetic lines of force and keep the cores static.
............


This would be a good discussion.


- Fernandez

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fernandez on July 05, 2015, 04:07:25 AM
Quote
(a) is the field between two magnets, (b) the field due to a current in a straight wire and (c) the resulting field if they are put together. This last field is known as the "catapult" field because it tends to catapult the wire out of the field in the direction shown by the arrow.

If we remove the wire in (b) and pass a current through the core do we get the same motor effect? This is just an idea for those still looking for a basic starting point.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 05, 2015, 01:56:34 PM
Patent 30378 date 1902
In the arrangement of the excitatory magnets and the induced, our generator
has some analogy with dynamos, but completely differs from them in that, not
requiring the use of motive power, is not a transforming apparatus. As much as
we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the
construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of
these coils which differs completely. It has the advantage that the soft iron core
can be constructed with complete indifference of the induced circuit, (allowing
the core) to be a (real group) of electromagnets
, like the exciters, and covered
with a proper wire in order that these electromagnets may develop the biggest
attractive force possible
, without worrying at all about the conditions that the
induced wire must have for the voltage and amperage that is desired. In the
winding of this induced wire, within the magnetic fields, are followed the
requirements and practices known today in the construction of dynamos, and
we refrain from going into further detail, believing it unnecessary.

From Wiki
 
Magnetic field created by a current The magnetic field created by an electromagnet is proportional to both the number of turns in the winding, N, and the current in the wire, I, hence this product, NI, in ampere (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampere_%28unit%29)-turns, is given the name magnetomotive force (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetomotive_force). For an electromagnet with a single magnetic circuit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_circuit), of which length Lcore of the magnetic field path is in the core material and length Lgap is in air gaps, Ampere's Law reduces to:[17][2][18]
 (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/5/2/3524ef20c18d4bbe439ad1feadb8b218.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/5/4/5548901915dadc712c247aa37f05b6d1.png) where(https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/1/5/f15729d33637997f09c0d5998bc7d3c9.png) is the magnetic permeability (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_permeability) of the core material at the particular B field used.(https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/1/f/51f8ba92f7b0d59310b3ef229cab6a7b.png) is the permeability of free space (or air); note that (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/3/b/c3b4d844c60c334d335b700b47a24e69.png) in this definition is amperes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amperes).  This is a nonlinear equation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_equation), because the permeability (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_permeability) of the core, μ, varies with the magnetic field B. For an exact solution, the value of μ at the B value used must be obtained from the core material hysteresis curve (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis_loop).[2] If B is unknown, the equation must be solved by numerical methods (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_analysis). However, if the magnetomotive force is well above saturation, so the core material is in saturation, the magnetic field will be approximately the saturation value Bsat for the material, and won't vary much with changes in NI. For a closed magnetic circuit (no air gap) most core materials saturate at a magnetomotive force of roughly 800 ampere-turns per meter of flux path.
For most core materials, (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/8/8/a88ee2d4b4837cbabd66add6fa7ab100.png).[18] So in equation (1) above, the second term dominates. Therefore, in magnetic circuits with an air gap, the strength of the magnetic field B depends strongly on the length of the air gap, and the length of the flux path in the core doesn't matter much.
 Force exerted by magnetic field The force exerted by an electromagnet on a section of core material is:
 (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/0/d/4/0d4a229eb6eaca489af15547277399f7.png) The 1.6 T limit on the field[14][16] mentioned above sets a limit on the maximum force per unit core area, or pressure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_pressure), an iron-core electromagnet can exert; roughly:
 (https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/7/8/8783ad6acdbc25dfd4e34da8688cf7a8.png) In more intuitive units it's useful to remember that at 1T the magnetic pressure is approximately 4 atmospheres, or kg/cm2.
Given a core geometry, the B field needed for a given force can be calculated from (2); if it comes out to much more than 1.6 T, a larger core must be used.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 05, 2015, 02:34:59 PM
From Tompson and Sulvanius
 In the next of Silliamans Journal (Aprill 1831)
Proffesor Henrey "gave an account of a large electromagnet made for Yale College"
 The core of the magnet weighed 59 1/2 lbs, it was forged under Henry's own direction
and wound by Dr Ten Eyck. The magnet wound with 26 strands of copper bell wire of total
length 726 ft and exited by 2 cells which exposed nearly 4 7/9 square feet of surface,
readily supported on it's armature, which weighed 23 lbs ,a load of 2063 lbs.

  If this is the work done in the 1800's you need to step up your game.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 06, 2015, 06:58:42 AM
Doug:

Great work. I hope that with this theoretical background other learned freiends will see the reality. Not knowing any one of this, When I learnt to built electromagnets I wanted to build a powerful electromagnet and so wound a trifilar 300 meter wire (3x100 meters) and wound it on a 4 inch dia and 18 inch long solenoid. The coil drew about 18 amps from the mains and the iron oscillated so vigorously and jerked and the vertical solenoid fell down. The trifilar coil is the 3 core cable that is used for AC wiring and must weigh about 15 to 20 kgm I guess. Iron must weigh at least 50 kgm for that solenoid. I have not measured. When the coil fell down the circuit tripper at office rated at 32 amps tripped. I then realized that this is too powerful and then came to read about saturation. To avoid saturation add more mass of iron was the advice some place. So I want on to add and built a quadfilar coil to reduce the amperage drawn and to make a silent and soft eletromagnet that remained stable and not hot, it required me finally to do it on a 24 inch dia and 18 inch tall plastic tube filled with iron rods as an electromagnet. That was humming and stable. I did not have all the information you have provided and had gone by common sense and observation. I then learnt that if we put secondary wires under the primary the solenoid can be brought down for the resistance of the secondary make the solenoid stable but then it becomes a transformer. If we shunt the secondary the same violent reaction will come. Actually we were fortunate that we were not standing near that coil when it fell down..That was two years back..

@Alvaro_CS.. Your drawing is not correct. The middle coil is half the length and half the diameter of the two primaries. You also show the two primaries as a single coil they are two separate quadfilar coils that we used. I'm not good at drawing on computers. If you can wait for a 10 days I can post a photograph.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 06, 2015, 02:22:58 PM
 NRamaswami

   Think back to my prior comments regarding magnetic amplifiers. It is a method to use an extra winding to control the current.Like a regulator or a variac . You did not need to rebuild your first coils by adding more iron you just needed to get control over the source (mains). With a little practice you can use it as an additive source of current to increase flux if you need to in bi stable forward mode. They just amount to slightly different ways to wind an extra coil over the primary sometimes the secondary as well. I have a doc I scrounged from Texas Instruments which covers the use of gaps in a core and shunts outside the windings of a core to cure stray magnetic leakage that produces unwanted EMR on neighboring conductors or components even in the high frequency range. Gaps are a complicated thing.
   As far as your first cores ,the ones you rebuilt. The less power you use to operate the better wouldnt you think?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 06, 2015, 03:24:00 PM
Doug1:

I agree with you but not able understand how the Magnetic amplifiers must be done. . Yes..I'm trying to lower the input to as much as 100 to 200 watts hopefully without affecting the output. Let us wait and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 06, 2015, 04:09:45 PM
Induction by motion.
Yes. But instead of moving the inducers cores you may just move the magnetic lines of force and keep the cores static.
This would be a good discussion.
- Fernandez

Isn't that the function of the Figuera ... " motion... Less " induction ( not being sarcastic or flippant here ). My point is this... electrical ( silicon ) steel in laminations reduces the eddy currents...

http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/electromagnetic-induction.html
" Eddy current and hysteresis losses can not be eliminated completely, but they can be greatly reduced. Instead of having a solid iron core as the magnetic core material of the transformer or coil, the magnetic path is “laminated”.

hence... the figuera overcomes this by starting, then splitting and then stopping ( static ) as I understand it...


Lastly I think we should observe statements from Hanon, Bajac and others...
By: giving the location of the quote we use, or the location of the information that we use... or Bajac's stating... that He has stated something 3 or 4 times about the same thing...
We...minimize the confusion, mis quotes or redundancy... Not to mention the bickering, sarcasm... and who knows what else.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 06, 2015, 04:25:53 PM
NRamaswami
  I will attempt to attach a pdf for you to bone up on mag amps. This one is pretty good even if it is old.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 06, 2015, 04:48:08 PM
NRamaswami
  I will attempt to attach a pdf for you to bone up on mag amps. This one is pretty good even if it is old.

Doug1,
That's an informative pdf...

Cheers

PS responding to your comment
" If this is the work done in the 1800's you need to step up your game "
1. As I understand it... Clemente had the device built in three locations... if you were one of the builders wouldn't you be a little be curious at what you were building ( I would have built ( the part ) a copy of it in my garage - and my game would have started ahead of time )...
2. Main stream " science " has kept these devices or information from the books
3. Haven't you stepped up " your " game too... :-) ( just an observation...not a condemnation )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 06, 2015, 06:28:37 PM
 True ,you would have all sorts of time to contemplate as well.
  Here is another useful file. I know no one believes me. You will eventually reach conclusions by the process of elimination. If you can not explain to yourself what is going on in a device in a way that you can understand it then chances are slim to none you will be able to replicate it. There is very little chance of replacing parts with modern counterparts when you have no idea what the component requirements are. Which might explain all the smoke and melt of modern tech.
   
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 06, 2015, 06:57:13 PM
Thank you so much Doug..I will study them some time later this week. But unfortunately without the benefit of a standard education I'm not able to understand much of it and so I have done the experiments as a kind of an explorar and learnt from my experiments and observations. I have already come to the conclusion that what is stated about magnetics in books is utterly misleading. For example take this standard formula

Magnetic Field strength = Amperes x no of turns/length of the coil or ampere turns per unit length

Stated alternatively magnetic field strength is directly proportional to ampere turns per unit length.

This one is just part of the reality of misleading laws or principles. There is no mention of the diameter of the coil. There is no mention of the mass of the core material. When you bulk these things up, you get a different result. that is not even stated any where. I have not found it in any standard book. I then decided that books need not be trusted and are deliberately written to make people fools all the time. One of my learned friends laughed at me and said you do not know any thing I will give you a lecture for two hours on electricity and magnetism as a primer. I said ok before that I want to make a permanent magnet. Here is a piece of iron. Do you agree that it is a ferromagnetic material and that can be made a magnet.. He said yes.. I then asked him to convert it to a powerful permanent magnet so that it can lift it own weight and support it. He was stunned. This is not in our practical lessons and we do not do it and how to make magnets is secret. You see where it gets you. First the theory is misdirecting. Second the there is no R&D and third no practical experience. It is all so obfuscating that no one would want to study the subject.

Now there is no need to study books. I have already disclosed most of what I have learnt. All you need to do is this. Create a step up transformer but by using thicker wires than the primary. Higher voltage to be obtained in thicker more expensive and less reistance wires. That is all there to it. You get higher voltage and higher amperage. What about Counter EMF? You surround the Primary on both sides with this kind of wire and the secondary sends two back emf to the primary one like this -----> and the other like this <----- and both of them almost cancel each other out and primary does not suffer. But this result starts appearing above 300 volts only. I do not know if I'm accurate as I have used only 4 sq mm wires and not 4 sq mm primary and 10 or 15 sq mm secondary which I could not aford. Possibly then we will get higher cop>1 figures at a lower voltage itself.

if you look at it all equipment is rated to fail above 270 volts at 50 hz and at 60 Hz I think they are all rated or manufactured to fail even earlier.  If your voltage exceeds 270 circuit breakers will cut in. Only some old lamps can withstand above 300 volts.

There is nothing to be surprised here.

it is all business only.. You keep buying again and again and again for an one time investment of the rich person and keep paying him again and again and again..Normal business practice employed by every business. Not just big business. If you own a big business you would also do the same thing. Unfortunately this has resulted in some thing which is making a lot of people struggle for life.

I have some work to do and will come back and post after a few days.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 07, 2015, 07:44:38 AM
.

 All you need to do is this. Create a step up transformer but by using thicker wires than the primary. Higher voltage to be obtained in thicker more expensive and less reistance wires. That is all there to it. You get higher voltage and higher amperage. What about Counter EMF? You surround the Primary on both sides with this kind of wire and the secondary sends two back emf to the primary one like this -----> and the other like this <----- and both of them almost cancel each other out and primary does not suffer.


Very good explanation. But if the two counter EMF are as you have depicted, then, how are the poles of the two primaries oriented?

Another question: With this configuration is it necessary a central secundary or is it optional?

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 07, 2015, 08:47:51 AM
Oh Hanon..

That is what I have been telling you. I have used only the same size wire 4 sq mm to test this concept and I get COP>1 only above 300 volts in this configuration. But when we add two such coils and the center coils together what happens is COP>8. Possibly because the backemf is already reduced in the two primaries and when you place a middle secondary all the voltages and amperages developed combine.

But it is quite possible that if you do not even use the central secondary you can get cop>1 results easily if you were to use thick wires. You can test it by taking a 18 inch long and 4 inch dia solenoid and wind 12 layers of secondary coil inside and cover it with secondary. Power it and you get about 3000 watts out and 3300 watts in. Now surround the Primary with more wires and you cross COP>1 and you reach 115 to 120%. But I felt that this is all due to manufacturing defeact of the meters which must be given 10% to 20% and ignored it.

Remember the wire ratio of the Primary to secondary in this model is almost 1:3. So if you can use about 600 metres of primary and surround it with about 900 metres of secondary inside and 300 meters outside with wires thicker than primary I see no reason as to why you would not get COP>1 position. There is the problem of magnetic field becoming weaker and to avoid that use plastic iron plastic between primary layers. Unlike Figuera the Primary wire and secondary wire must touch each other here and only in the central coil there is no contact between primary and secondary. If you cover the outer secondary with more iron you would find that output further increases in secondary.

I have done a lot of experiments. For many I have ignored them as meter errors but the COP>8 cannot be meter error. It goes much beyound that but we have used the central coil in between and two COP>1 primaries together with the central secondary. That might have been the reason for the sudden boost.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on July 07, 2015, 08:55:55 AM
Quote
One of my learned friends laughed at me and said you do not know any thing I will give you a lecture for two hours on electricity and magnetism as a primer. I said ok before that I want to make a permanent magnet. Here is a piece of iron. Do you agree that it is a ferromagnetic material and that can be made a magnet.. He said yes.. I then asked him to convert it to a powerful permanent magnet so that it can lift it own weight and support it. He was stunned. This is not in our practical lessons and we do not do it and how to make magnets is secret. You see where it gets you. First the theory is misdirecting. Second the there is no R&D and third no practical experience. It is all so obfuscating that no one would want to study the subject.

You have got to be kidding me.

http://www.allianceorg.com/pdfs/Magnet_Tutorial_v85_1.pdf

There is so much literature available on magnetization processes, theory and R&D and _practical experience_ that you could spend _years_ catching up with the field. Of course... you will need some basic Physics background if you want to understand most of it. Secret? Hardly.  Do you have a computer that you can use to search Google for some keywords? Google "magnetization fixtures" and look at the Images.

Anyone with some wire and a DC current source of sufficient strength can magnetize a small piece of iron so that it can support its own weight. Most of us probably have magnetized screwdrivers. But iron or steel isn't the best material to use if you want to make a strong magnet.  Hint: Don't use AC !


http://www.fellermagnets.com/technical_support/&FrontComContent_list01-001_technical_supportContId=11&comContentId=11&comp_stats=comp-FrontComContent_list01-001_technical_support.html


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on July 07, 2015, 09:00:18 AM
Oh Hanon..

That is what I have been telling you. I have used only the same size wire 4 sq mm to test this concept and I get COP>1 only above 300 volts in this configuration. But when we add two such coils and the center coils together what happens is COP>8. Possibly because the backemf is already reduced in the two primaries and when you place a middle secondary all the voltages and amperages developed combine.

But it is quite possible that if you do not even use the central secondary you can get cop>1 results easily if you were to use thick wires. You can test it by taking a 18 inch long and 4 inch dia solenoid and wind 12 layers of secondary coil inside and cover it with secondary. Power it and you get about 3000 watts out and 3300 watts in. Now surround the Primary with more wires and you cross COP>1 and you reach 115 to 120%. But I felt that this is all due to manufacturing defeact of the meters which must be given 10% to 20% and ignored it.

Remember the wire ratio of the Primary to secondary in this model is almost 1:3. So if you can use about 600 metres of primary and surround it with about 900 metres of secondary inside and 300 meters outside with wires thicker than primary I see no reason as to why you would not get COP>1 position. There is the problem of magnetic field becoming weaker and to avoid that use plastic iron plastic between primary layers. Unlike Figuera the Primary wire and secondary wire must touch each other here and only in the central coil there is no contact between primary and secondary. If you cover the outer secondary with more iron you would find that output further increases in secondary.

I have done a lot of experiments. For many I have ignored them as meter errors but the COP>8 cannot be meter error. It goes much beyound that but we have used the central coil in between and two COP>1 primaries together with the central secondary. That might have been the reason for the sudden boost.

I challenge you to provide evidence of this "COP>8".

There is so much wrong with your recent statements that I don't even have time to go into all of them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TinselKoala on July 07, 2015, 09:10:56 AM
Quote
if you look at it all equipment is rated to fail above 270 volts at 50 hz and at 60 Hz I think they are all rated or manufactured to fail even earlier.  If your voltage exceeds 270 circuit breakers will cut in. Only some old lamps can withstand above 300 volts.

That's just silly. "All equipment"..... LOL. You can't be serious. Go ahead and google "480 volt equipment" and you'll see all kinds of consumer and industrial items that are designed for this voltage. Eat dinner in a large restaurant and your food is likely being cooked in a 480 volt convection oven.  Your statements can be demolished one by one, simply by Googling the appropriate search terms.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 07, 2015, 10:08:49 AM
Ha Ha..Our Good Friend TK is finally here to knock me out...I'm honored and obliged today.

Why don't you list list of equipment that would fail below 270 volt and equipment that is rated above it. I'm not going to do it for you for every one knows certain facts..What is the voltage of the majorirty of the equipment used..Why don;t you say high voltage transformer is an equipment designed to work at thousands of volts. What about the microwave oven transformer. Does it work without the step up transformer placed inside..

Now what are you going to do if I show a COP>1 device based on exactly the suggestion that I gave above. Build a solenoid. place secondary coils around it for many layers and surround it with primary, put iron between layers of primary and let primary and secondary wires be in contact and then again surround the primary with the secondary..If I show a COP>1 design will you show a video of your doing a Sirasasana.. standing on the head rather than legs.. It is a Yogasana good for your health only..Are you ready? If I cannot do that I will do that. Ok..

Do you know how to do that Yogasana first?

Regarding your hint not to use AC to make permanent magnets..it is what you call hilarious. Permanent magnets if surrounded with a coil and supplied with AC will lose their magnetism completely or most of it is gone and only residual magnetism will remain. It is the method of demagnetising. Why are you giving super hints..

Regarding the COP>8 device will be shown here after it is tested by an independent High Voltage Laborartory of repute and then can be shown here as video with reputable witnesses present. Until then it will not be shown here and it is not even in my office but in another place in dismantled condition. When we go to Lab we will need to wind it before their eyes and only then it will be taken up for testing.

Any one can check readilly..Wind a solenoid (minimum 4 inch dia) and 12 inch tall with secondary coils up to 6 layers after that for every layer of secondary layer put plastic iron plastic ( actually it is preferable to put plastic iron plastic between each layer of secondary) and after 12 layers of secondary is over wind a multifilar primary coil (10-12 filars minimum) Primary and secondary wires must touch each other. Put plastic iron of 2 inch thick and plastic between each layers of primary wind for about 4 layers. Then start winding again the secondary coils as before with plastic iron and plastic between each layer. So you end up with a big bulky magnetic coil. There should not be iron present between primary and secondary and the wires of primary and secondary must touch each other. Don't cheat here.

If the voltage is more than 600 volts in the secondary it is a must to put plastic sheets in between secondary layers as a safety measure. Better put plastic iron plastic. Iron can be soft iron rods or soft iron sheets. If you are going to use iron sheets use at least 3 mm thick iron sheets. Very thin iron sheets tend to get rusted and are very sharp and cause injuries to us when we handle. So I prefer to use iron rods to avoid that.

Plastic iron and plastic must be placed between layers of the same wire and must be present between layers of secondary and layers of primary. Coil will weigh heavy. Connect both the secondaries in series and all the coils are wound in the same direction. Check if the output voltage from Secondary is more than 400 volts. Then you check what is the input to the primary coil as input wattage and check what is the output wattage from secondary coil.

Both wires are of the same gauge. Secondary wires must be twice the length of the primary Any one can do it. COP>1 will be there. If you want to get more output surround the secondary again with a plastic sheet and then more iron. Test it yourself I say..I will also show some device next week built like this.
 
Iron rods conduct electricity. So don't get near them. No water any where in the room. If you do the experiment correctly Primary will not consume more than 220 watts at the maximum.

My suggestion hereinabove should not be construed as encouraging you to do the test. If you do this experiment you must cover the floow with plastic and thick wood and wear rubber shoes and rubber gloves and keep yourself at quiet a distance from the coil. Keep the coil in the horiontal rather than vertical position. Primary must be 10 or 12 filar or more primary which plastic very thick iron rods and plastic placed between the primary layers. I'm not responsible for any damage or injury or death that may happen due to your electing to test it due to carelessness and negigence on your part and if you do this experiment you are doing so on your own volition and you indemnify me that I'm not liable for any damage, injury or loss caused to you. Do not do this experiment unless you have the help of people skilled in handling high voltage. The secondary would produce both high voltage and high amperage and so it is a dangerous device.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 07, 2015, 01:28:36 PM
NRamaswami That effect of using layers of iron then insulation then coil is described in one of Tesla's ring distribution patents which was mentioned many months ago maybe even last year. It maybe the case that an electromagnetic field can be thought of like radio waves where the number of receivers to a transmission do not diminish the input power to the transmitter directly. I would like to point out one of the references figurea makes in one of his patents where he compares his coils to a rholmkoff coil then makes a distinction between his coils and those in that he is not used a group of them in his generator. If he used a single core covered with several layers of coil and each layer was treated as an independent circuit he could make his combinations of series parallel in part or in any combination for either or both coils N or S and allow Y to be common output coil. The voltage once increased to matched the load would have to be again reduced to match the voltage best suited for the inducers to reach the maximum and minimum magnetic saturation. For that you have to look at the method provided in only one of the forms of the patent which shows the resistance array. Power is fluctuating between coil sets using resistance to direct it to the right set of coils in the right time frame. When the field is in a state of collapse back emf spikes high and short in the case of a rhomkoff coil to make the spark but I think here the resistance array prevents it from discharging in that way and slows it down so it can follow the path into the opposite coil. The back emf becomes a controlled source of power to operate the next cycle suppressing the power from the source if the two voltages at that point in time are matched. I will dig out all the quotes and references later after work to prove my point for sake of constructive argument.       
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 07, 2015, 02:10:04 PM
Doug1:

My apologies. I cannot indulge in constructive arguments for I can only state my observations. There appear to be methods by which the primary input has not effect on the secondary whether the secondary is loaded or not. I'm aware of at least one method tested and verified. That will look stupid to say that but it works.

The second method is the one where Figuera made the input from N magnet to go from inner to outer and the other input in S Magnet to from outer to inner but at the same time maintained the North South Polarity to make them opposite poles. I do not understand what happens but in one electromagnet the process is one of implosion where the magnetic field is forced to go to the center and the other one is explosion where it is ejected out as explosion but the coil geometry forces the magnetic field to focus on the center. And I must admit that I did not use Pulsed Dc in my experiments whereas Figuera seems to have used pulsed DC or unidirectional current of a wave form similar to a sine wave form.

I have never understood why he used the resistor array. To me it appeared to be redundant and is not needed. I also did not think that the commutator was needed. Since he indicates that the When N Magnets are strong S Magnets are weak and S magnets are strong N magnets are weak I thought what is this..If we use AC N magnet is going to be strong once and S magnet is going to be strong next 50 times a second and then it becomes some thing without any moving parts and so why did he use that cumbersome method. So I thought he was diverting the attention of the reader and used a tactics to divert the mind of the competitor.

When the Primary is surrounded on both sides by secondary it does suffer back emf but it keeps coming to it in opposite directions and so the effect due to back emf diminishes. The effiency has been measured by us from 98% to 116% but fluctated with the input voltage from the mains. If the input voltage went up the efficiency went up and if it went down the efficiency was down. Here current fluctations are very heavy.

I apologise. I'm not trained in theory and I cannot understand much of the material especially if it involves electronic circuitry and devices I made are simple coils.

Regarding the position of the plastic insulation to separate layers I understand that it is a standard practice when high voltage is expected to prevent sparking between wires in adjacent layers. I used to put in iron sheets but the wires got hot and so put plastic iron and plastic and the iron sheets are very sharp and are very difficult to handle and cause scratches on the hand however carefully we handle them and so we started using iron rods and incidentally there is gap between the iron rods however closely we wind them. Does that have a bearing on the result..I do not know. I can only confirm what I have seen.

Possibly had I used thicker wires that can carry high amperages the output wattage might have been COP>1 at lower voltages than 350+ but I did not have the funds to buy them and these are very expensive coils and I was building large cores. 

My only feeling after doing the AC thing to power the N and S Magnets were this..Why waste the magnetic flux that is available in the two primaries. So I wound under the primary and then oh..magnetic flux is still wasted from the primary at the top and so let us cover it as well and covered it as well. It is a simple common sense approach. Not a scientifically calculated one and I do not much of calculations either.

There is in fact a problem that I face with the device that shows COP>8. It is not fixed and it can easily be increased. But the problem is that when we connect to a load all five coils may or may not be in phase and voltagesmay not merge. This is a problem faced in the electricity generation when the power generated has to be given to the grid. I considered the use of phase correction Run capacitors but I was told that they are for a fixed load only and it cannot be given to a variable load. Some times even without the load the voltages do not merge if the wires used are old wires and had been cut many times and are many joints in the secondary coils. When voltages of all the coils do merge (and most of the time they merge when we use new coils and do not cut them unnecessarily) the output power is COP>8 and can be much more except for the rule that voltages above 660 are pretty dangerous to use when high current is involved (I may well be wrong but I had to take decision at the side of safety of the people working for me and myself) and we had to be very careful and we did not have people to who are trained in High Voltage Electricity.

Only recently that I was appointed as the Patent Counsel for a Large Educational Institution and then I had the opportunity to obtain a patent for them and then I could ask them a lot of questions and get some guidance and go to the High Voltage lab. Probably only by the end of the month they would test.

Yes you may well be correct why the resistor array is there in the Figeura patent..But unfortunately I do not have the competence to understand it.  Secondly I do not understand circuitry very much. Possibly because I have people to do these circuit things here too many I did not focus on learning it. For magnetism there was none and so I experimented and learnt a bit of myself. I'm not able to understand how the magnetic amplifier control concept works to this date and how the variable magnetic amplifier control concept works.

This topic is based on Figuera Patents. Only three people were involved in the experiments conducted. An Electrician who is no more. Myself and my car driver. My driver had a blood clot problem and I had a mild heart problem last year and the Government here gives Rs.20 lakhs as grant for research projects if we build a prototype but that funding has been stopped for two years now due to funding problems with the Central Government. May be they will start accepting the applications again from October. So we put all this in public domain.

As Bajac stated the Figuera central coil is free from Lenz effect and the primary input remains the same irrespective of the fact whether the secondary is loaded or not. Why it happens is some thing beyond me and I'm not competent to discuss it really. I do not have that much of knowledge. My apologies.

I can easily have the device reconstructed and demonstrated but then our good Friend TK will say do not trust meters and trust the oscilloscope only and I do not trust any body only. Ignoring this what I say alone is correct attitude, the voltages are not going to merge if the frequency and phase is not the same. I do have some from some competent people and they use some simulation software and each one is experienced and each one comes out with a different wave form for the Figuera device and the only common thing is that it shows two waves at 180' opposition always which I understand shows that the waves come from a coil placed between opposite poles. Quite Frankly why we posted the material is that it can be taken forward by others who certainly have more knowledge than me. This is a very expensive project and all I have seen is that most people are only inclined to talk or argue but do not take action. Without experimentation and observation with an open mind, this process cannot be understood.

The only advantage that I have is this..I'm not a trained person and I do not require any certificates from any one and am not dependent on this for a living nor do I have to write an examination and accept some thing that is written as truth, by heart it and go write the exam and fix my mind on the concepts I studied. That is the advantage I have here. Most of the people in this forum appear to be quite senior people and most appear to be retired people. I'm not sure really.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 07, 2015, 02:45:53 PM
Here in the states... 3 phase transmission lines come from the substations and street transformers use single phase distribution to our row of houses... a set of three or four houses use a single transformer ( from a single phase distribution line ) and this transformer provides 2 120 lines and a neutral... the 2 120 s provide the 240 for stoves and a/c or and other equipment... a single 120 provides creature appliances... Businesses use 120, 208, 240, 480 and etc because they are using 3 phase equipment designed for their particular work and they get a premium on the price of electricity... 3 phase equipment is naturally more expensive but cheaper to use...

Most ppl could careless where electricity, magnetism or fossil fuel comes from or how to use it... My wife for example doesn't even put gas in the car... she uses a key, gas and brake pedal and the a/c..............................................and the driver's wheel :-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 07, 2015, 07:53:11 PM
Ramaswami,


You prototype is related to the 1902 patent (patent no. 30378) which uses just ONE signal (pulsed DC or alternating). In your case you have used AC as exciting current


 But the 1908 patent is different: it uses TWO signals generated in the commutator. The 1908 commutator generates TWO signals in opposition. Ac is just one signal. The commutator is the great difference between both patents. You should make an effort to understand the real function of the commutator . If not, you should, at least, stop saying that it is not needed. I encourage you to study the commutator in deep. Please look for technical advice . the commutator does not produce AC current. For simplifying: the commutator produce two AC-type signals at the same time, one in each side of the resistor array. The commutator is a key component of the 1908 patent, therefore Figuera explained it clearly and in detail and not just to cheat replicators. The 1908 needs two excitatory signals.


In summary: the principles explained in the 1902 patent and the 1908 patent are different. You can not mix both patents.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 07, 2015, 08:42:55 PM
Hanon:

Then Probably I'm wrong but ended up with a different AC devices that produces good results. Let us leave that aside.

We built a commutator that is exactly as specified in the 1908 patent using a student. It creates sparks and so we needed to make it touch 3 contacts If it touches 2 cntacts at any time it ends up touching 3 contacts part of the time or just one contact part of the time when sparking comes. I have a person experienced in DC motors and he says DC motor armature has a commutator that is diffferent but it has a long life.

From what you and Doug 1 tell me I had not understood the patent properly but ended up building a device that is totally different..

Now can you and Dough1 confirm the following thoughts in my mind..

1. A battery powered the initial input or a bank of batteries.

2. The current drawn was wasted or reduced in the resistor array which then send it to the N magnets and S magnets. This is where my confusion starts.

For example the connection shows as follows. If N1 is strong S1 is weak but at the same time N2 is weak and S2 is strong. I think this is what that circuit shows. But I'm not clear about it. I'm very weak in understanding circuits.  But what I felt is that this is not needed and so I went with AC as I focussed on the principle of operation and not on the exact replication of the device.

While I can probably get an ordinary commuattor getting a special commutator with a long life customized tor several years of operation is not easy. I tried the patent exactly as shown and the commutor broke again and again. I have also determined that the straight pole method is the best one and it is the last patent shown by BuForn.

My apologies if my comments that Figuera tried to misdirect the competitors has hurt any one. This is normally employed in patent drafting. This can be done by a Patent Attorney only after he gets a lot of experience and so I went with my own thoughts.

The one strong point about me that I take action. I simply do not speak or argue. My understanding is that the resistors are only coils of 1 sq mm wires wound on air core tubes. Nothing more. But the input for the N magnets is at the top or bottom and the S magnets at the reverse end. This project has moving parts. I do not have the money to invest here this time. It remained a secret for more than 107 years. Let me take some more time and then try to solve the mystery.

Regarding the COP>8 device or higher COP device it will have to be replicated by others first and then mistakes rectified and then we will give my prototype to the Hight Voltage laboratory. it is not easy to build coils of this type and it takes man hours and it costs money to me.

Let me see how I can redo it. I do not like the 21 module device. I would rather prefer the 11 module device because it is smaller and easier to construct and it has 5 secondaries. But not immediately. No funds.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 07, 2015, 11:02:40 PM
Dear All:

I'm receiving some private criticism that I have become some what aggressive. I apologize if that impression is conveyed and I'm actually very frustrated. One member here said that the COP>8 device if true can change the world. I do not know if it would.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 08, 2015, 07:14:24 AM
Ramaswami,
Answering your queations: I do not know if Figuera used a battery or and array of batteries to power his device. The only data we know is that in one Buforn patent he stated that used 100 volts and 1 ampere as input to the machine. In the 1908 patent is true that sending current to the resistors is wasteful, But it seems required to do it in order to get the commutator output signals required. Figuera did not figure out another way in his days to get those two opposite signals. And last, in the 1908 patent while N1 to N2 are strong, S1 to S7 are weak. Later, when N1 to N7 are weak, S1 to S7 are strong. This is also clerly explained in the patent text. You have severe misunderstandings of that patent. I would encourage you to ask for technical advice for new eyes into the patent. You are already biased and see electromagnets sequences not included in the patent, as well as your view of the commutator which is either right
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 08, 2015, 11:29:52 AM
Hanon,
What is your interpretation of the 1902 patent 30378...

The reason I ask... the shape of the figure at the bottom of the page is the shape that Patrick has put on the website in the Figuera section...no explanation, no other diagram exists to explain it... and the diagram above the shape isn't included or described...

Anybody...? chime in.

All the Best

PS there is a red inked line on the bottom of 30376
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 08, 2015, 11:58:09 AM
Hanon:

I must apologize that at the moment I have no funds to replicate the Figuera device. My technical expertise as is known is limited. I have spent a lot of money already and actually I'm struggling to complete the two different designs I have built. I will do this 1908 Figuera design when I have funds. I have big difficulty understanding circuits as I openly admit. I was also under the impression that N1 to N7 progressively gets stronger and S7 to S1 progressively gets weaker or vice versa. But the circuits are confusing. And as you yourself say if the input was 100 volts and 1 amp the resistor array would waste current and that is what made me feel that the resistor array and commutator are diversionary tactics which is normal in patent drafting to misdirect competitors. I have no bias and I apologize for that impression conveyed. This device requires about 200 kgms of Iron for using AC and would need 800 kgms to 1000 kgms if we pulsed DC to avoid saturation. Possibly that the reason why the 21 cores are shown. But it is both difficult to get soft iron and very expensive even here to get soft iron.

Let me complete what I have here and then let me replicate this device if funds permit. I thank you very much for at least agreeing in part that the AC device uses the principles of the 30378 device. Frankly I do not think so and the device design is based on misinterpretation of the 1908 patent but uses the design of the 1908 patent. So I have kind of taken things from here and put it there and it kind of worked and I have to check how to ensure that all voltages from five different secondaries merge when on variable load and not on a fixed load. To me it seems that the best way is to use phase correction capacitors and then convert to DC and charge a bank of batteries a fixed load and then invert from DC to AC. All this requires significant expenses at my end. Let me first complete it and then come back. For a 12000 watts unit this requires a lot of batteries and custom built inverter etc etc and it is not clear if all this would when combined work as anticipated.  And it is another question assuming that they all do whether they can keep running the device in a self sustaining way. At the moment We stand at where we stood in 2013. Build the device, replicate it and understand the principle, and then give it to earth.  R&D is not easy and especially if one were to use his own funds and borrow and return to friends to do R&D..This is all I can demonstrate to the High voltage lab also and they have other facilities to test and see fixed load variable load and conversion to DC and charging of batteries and then inverting. IIT Madras estimates that the losses involved in conversion of AC to DC and then again DC to AC and then losses at the consuming AC unit to be 50% of the originally generated AC output. So after all these losses whether the Unit can self run is another question. Ultimately they may declare that it is not a cop>8 design but after all these losses are taken to account it may well be around COP>2 only. Any way some contribution from a person without technical background and dedication and commitment to spend own money and demonstrate a working device and put it up in public domain for all people throughout the world to use.

Today Figuers Patent would be refused if you apply for it. Both EPO and USPTO and other patent offices refuse to grant patent to any device that claims more output than input. Only some exceptions can be shown to this general attitude. This is one more reason why I put the device in to the public domain.

Let me focus on work rather than posting here..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 08, 2015, 01:29:48 PM
no,if you prove the external energy source field being used like sun radiation for example
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 10, 2015, 11:30:26 PM
Sorry I was not able to get back right away. Tending an injured horse that needed round the clock monitoring. Trading off with family members so we could also work and get a couple hours of sleep. Any way the resisters are set up so the current has a better or poorer path.There is always a path. when in combination with two paths the total always equals the full current that one coil can use before ohms law limits it. It's just directing where the quantity goes very rapid.  Im really tired and have to grab an hour of sleep before I hurl. I dont need sympathy I need sleep.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TruthHunter on July 12, 2015, 06:34:20 PM
I was intrigued enough with Kelley's report of NRamaswami's generator to join the forum.  :) 

I have read the available information from time to time over the years, and always backing off because of lack of good info.  No useful theory, incomplete info, or
trivial results(Bedini motor) convinced me I would be wasting my time.  Perfect case in point is Figuera's device. Many excellent minds, 158 posts
and no  working device that resembles the patent...Except NRamaswami's device.

 WERE YOU PAYING ATTENTION AS TO HOW THAT CAME ABOUT?   


Anyway here I am. I am thinking I can scrape together a smaller scale replication.

I have broused through this forum a little more and find much of what I proposed needs modifying. Kelley's document is far from complete. I may collect all of RN's  suggestoins in a document... While a smaller device may be possible, it will require
careful thought. I think I can use the magnet wire, but will not be able to wind it tightly. If the device is dependent on capacitive effects, the dielectric of the insulation may be important. The thin enamel may give too high a capacitance.


At one point, I had an enormous pile of scrap security bars. It would have been enough to make the full core. I gave them to a step son-in-law.  :P
 I do have some...
At any rate I have a nearly full 10 lb spool of 14 ga magnet wire(~2 mm^2 area) which is about 800 ft./240 Meters.   I am considering buying regular 14/2 house wire and
strip the insulation to get sufficient additional.(Wrong! just leave it!) I plan to space the bare wire with paper(I know tedious) and Urethane each layer  as it will take a long time to order more wire where I live. (I think I may be able to layer tape or plastic between layers and space the windings enabling me to still use the magnet wire.) (After do some calc, I find I need at least 180 M additional wire. That's far too big a project to strip and insulate)  Unless I can come up with a test device that utilizes much closer to 240 M, I will have to wait.  >:(  Can 14 gauge be used in such a way as to produce sufficient field strength???

Basically, there are twenty windings. 12 at average diameter of 8.2 cm which gives approx 280 M(2 multifilar primaries)
                                                            8 at average diameter of 6.3 cm  making                   140 M( 8 layers of center winding) (wildly innacurate)

I am thinking of using pvc  pipe only as a form to bring the windings closer to the core(Cast the core, tape, and wind directly on it). I'll pack iron bars and wire( to fill spaces), immobilised with red primer(I believe  that "roaring" is a "bug, not a feature")  I calculate 11-12 Kg of Iron??  (~1500 cc) Seems low...did I miss something?(Now I see, I need to leave space for air circulation...I might still immobilise and reduce the roaring losses)

Half the wire area should handle half the current. For a similar B density, I believe I  would need 7 cm tube and 5 cm(locally available is  3" and 2"...will have to recalc) for the center instead of 4"/10 cm and 2.5"/6.3 cm.   90 turns should take up about 15 cm so the whole device will be about 50 cm long?? ( Now I'm thinking keep the core  diameter and make shorter coils.)

If I can get the square root of RN's current and 3 kw, it would be a roaring success. Actually, was thinking (I/2)2/I2

Any obvious errors?

However, what can I do with only 240 M?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 12, 2015, 09:57:58 PM
TruthHunter:

The concept is so simple and you do not need to follow me every step to replicate.

If you have a 12 volt 16 amps transformer about three to five layers of that on P1 and p2 can act as primary.

The secondary must have 7 layers under S1, seven layers in S2, 2 layers in S3, 2 layers in S4 and 7 layers in S5.

connect like this. S1-S3-S5-S2-S4 and that will simplify the connections and use either single wire if possible. Wire should be insulated wire and we have stressed that or you need to put space between enamalled magnet wire and mild plastic sheet between layers..Do not understand where you got that idea of removing insulation..Just plain wrong.

If you do not have adequate wires use only S1-S5-S2 in that case use 9 layers on S1 and 9 layers on S2 and 7 layers on S5. As far as possible use thicker wires in secondary than in primary.

The problem with this approach is that Iron can get heated unless you have big mass of iron. We use both big mass and multifilar coils to increase the magnetic waves and reduce the primary input. Multiple magnetic waves going one after another is like sending high frequency current. Small small chunks but lot of them that creates a lot of waves that support each other. I made two small cores for a table top design I promised but I have a big problem. Lost a major case and have to prepare the appeal and so I will not be answering or posting here for some time. I have to make a living. And losing a case is a bad thing. Please use the opposite poles of the primary magnets and place the middle coil to be lenz free. I believe with just a single transformer and by using a 6 inch dia plastic tubes as Primaries and 2 inch dia tube as central secondary by winding on all three you should be able to see COP>1 easily.

Actually that is a very efficient design but unfortunately it has five secondaries and four of them suffer from Lenz law effect. The two secondaries one below the primary and one above reduce the backemf but Lenz law effect is there.  While you can see the central coil functioning properly I do not know if the voltages of all five coils would join..(for me some times they do and some times they don't and I don't understand why they would not join. If you want to create a COP>1 design I would recommend that you look at Buforn last patent and use the central cores alone and replicate that. The straight pole as we have seen is the most efficient one. Many such small poles would be needed. Secondary wire must be thicker, longer, have more turns than the primary wire. Please do not forget that and do not assume wrong things like removing insulation with great effort.

You must use insulated wire and do not remove the insulation. Read the patent and the pdf again please before you waste your time and money.

Wish you all success.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 13, 2015, 01:08:56 AM
Hello All,
As I look at all the patents collectively... I get the feeling that in Spain or maybe just Figuera and Bujorn were patenting their ideas plus their drawings and of course their apparatuses. I would also imagine that Spain and its offices of patents or however they did things back then... the people involved held Professor Figuera in high esteem... Also I am sure there was pressure on Figuera and His economical partner Bujorn to produce a apparatus that coincided with their paper work... I also understand that Professor Figuera was known in other European Countries and doing work for them as such...so His reputation in His own backyard must have carried a lot weight... meaning when He died they afford Bujorn as much liberty as Figuera's reputation could carry..................

The main point from my point of view is the patent 30378...it clearly shows a dead on look into the main " figuera transformer " the transformers in the patent 44267 show how to effectively deal with the lenz law... the power house in patent 30378 is where the extra power is coming from...12 transformers powering just one " Figuera Transformer " and if you draw ( make it ) like the drawing on Kelly"s web site you have enough energy for the whole block... the red wire is on the patent 30376 and to include it where ever it produces the most electricity ( current )..........BUT... if you draw it exactly like the 30376 and 44267 combined you would have 4 y middle transformers instead of just one...

I think the confusion is looking at the 30378 from a draftsman's perspective instead... if you draw the lines down to the last shape it fits inside the dead on look shape above it...

Lastly... I don't see or read anything bifilar of the Tesla nature coinciding with Figuera... it would state that or it would show that... I just don't see mingling both of them... sorry Rams... that's just how I see it.... I think Figuera stumbled ( maybe not the right word ) on to a unigue way of running a motor to run a dynamo and then the super dynamo to kick in and whatever you want to run.......IMHO

All the Best
PS its correct on the Kelly website... its just not drawn in perspective like the Last set of interpretations

Update... I meant 12 transformers
Its either 1 transformer of 4 or 1 transformer of 12........... either way.... its seems to me a lot of extra power IMHO
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 13, 2015, 02:02:32 AM
Randy:

I agree that there is no mention of what type of coiling arrangement Figuera used. He has said simply Properly to describe how the coils are wound. That was very confusing. And Hanon has insisted to me that the input was 100 volts and 1 amps and output was 20000 watts. So I tried to reduce the input and what are the methods possible for doing that and accidentally stumbled across that multifilar method.

How did you get to the Number 24 when the patent says that it shows only 8 electromagnets..Please see..

be granted final patent of invention for this generator
whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that,
in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of
four excitatory electromagnets in each,
and the induced circuit is marked by a
thick line of reddish ink, being this way the general arrangement of the
appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in
another form or grouping


I'm afraid that your understanding of the patents may not be accurate. But how do I know either? It is a guess really in so far as these devices are concerned. It is not clear why the resistor array is there and what it is doing if the amp is just 1 amp and the voltage is 100 volts for the primary. Why send two signals in opposite directions. That is not clear to me. Circuit is also confusing to me to this very day.

The 376 patent is the one where the coils rotated within fixed magnetic cores and that was the machine which made Figuera very famous. It was the machine that ran on its own and converted static electricity from air in to useable electricity as reported in papers. I have studied it and it is not rectangle in shape.  I have even planned to have it built and then avoided it for funding constraints. If some mechanical engineer with facilities were to try it can be built. May not cost much really. The same idea was stated by Tesla in 1889 in his Dynamo Electric Machine Homopolar generator patent. But Tesla being Tesla, avoided the part of self sustaining and indicated it in only one line of the patent text. Both the 376 and the Tesla patent are employing the same principles but in different designs.

There appears to have been two groups of academics one emphasising using Lenz law obeying equipments alone so that the repeated demand and orders will keep coming and one providing a complete one step solution for a long time and no repeat order and make power anywhere in the world. Figuera appear to belong to the later group and I find that there is not even a mention of the exception to the Lenz law rules. I find that every thing is based on Lenz law which is the electrical equivalent of for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Naturally commercial sense won. So we do not not know about this part of the science. Not knowing any thing I want to study that part first.

Nothing to be sorry here.. We all share and split our hair here. In view of my experiments I can say with confidence only one thing. That Properly word in the patent is the key to understand and replicate his patent and who knows it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 13, 2015, 04:32:09 AM
I updated the last post...
Here's a picture of a Dynamo around that time period...

Alliance Dynamo

Not that Figuera's turned but I think this picture comes to mind when I see the picture that Figuera produced...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 14, 2015, 12:58:23 PM
Rams,
If you look at the Alliance dead on it would seem to be just one... but when drawn on its side the perspective changes a lot.

Also...there's 8 rows ( for lack of a better word ) and if each row had eight  N Y S configurations on it times 5 on the Alliance ( 7 times on the Figuera )... One pulse of 100 volts at 1 amp IMHO would achieve a lot of emf s when it finally reached its final destination.

Hence... the 100 volts 1 amp = 12 volts 8.33333333333333333333333333333333 amps  :-) is well with in the possibilities of the BDX53 along with a few Led s to amaze the onlookers....

Lastly... I think the Clemente & Bujorn team knew the problems Tesla had with Macaroni using His patents and hid or confused their patents abit...


All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 14, 2015, 01:35:08 PM
In 1857 Englishman Fredrick Hale Holmes modified the Nollet dynamo design and used it in the South Foreland lighthouse near Dover, England. The machine weighed two tons and had 120 coils arranged in five rings of twenty-four. The rotor had thirty-six compound permanent magnets arranged on six discs. The output for the light was DC. Ten years later he built another for the Souter Point lighthouse that had 96 coils and eight discs that produced alternating current.

Nollet Dynamo1857
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 14, 2015, 09:50:33 PM
Between 1857 and 1900 there was huge step in advancing dynamos. Do not compare those times !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 14, 2015, 10:01:03 PM
I'm not comparing apples to oranges...I'm merely stating that Figuera's view from the front is ambiguous and could mean anything...
endless possibilities.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 15, 2015, 08:16:44 AM
Randy

I have to agree with you that Figuera possibly might have hidden some aspects of his patent to avoid litigation. That is a real possibility as litigation is always expensive.

For example in the patent he says current would be higher on one side and lower on the opposite side. I came to the conclusion that the rotary device and the resistor array are not needed and AC woud do the same and did it in a simplified way. But what I now see is this. If as stated they gave only 100 volts and 1 amp where was it given? at the Primary coil level or at the rotary device level is not clear. When it went through the resistors one side would have higher current no doubt but the other side would have higher voltate due to higher resistance and lower current. This just struck me. Does increasing the voltage on one of the two primaries with reduced current would have any impact on the output? I do not think any one has discussed this theoretical possibility. Can any simulation be done for this?  One primary has higher current and lower voltage and another has higher voltage and lower amperage. Hanon was also saying that there are two signals in this device created every time. So there may be some thing more to it than that is stated even in the description. Only a perfect replication with properly measured values would enable us to decide that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 15, 2015, 11:50:49 AM
Rams,
Even the 100 volts and 1 amp statement is misleading... who stated it, when, where... etc.

As I have stated before... I think your apparatus is more Tesla than Figuera... and I also think Figuera stumbled ( if that's the right word ) onto the casimr effect ( which I think states... that if something is flashed at 300 volts 10 amps you can start it up with less before it dissipates )
Hence... if you saw your apparatus achieve greater than what was introduced... keep working on your apparatus ( in the same way ).

Lastly... I'm imagining the Figuera as 7 NyS in a circle ( or an array ) as you look at the dynamos of that era...

Just thinking...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 15, 2015, 10:44:43 PM
Randy:

Hanon has gone through all the patents and he has stated that Buforn states in one of the patents that the input was 100 volts and 1 amp.

I have a question to all generally? Don Smith states that Double the voltage quadruple the wattage. I saw it when the voltage which was 300 volts and 10 amps ( tested on load of 17x200 watts lamps in parallel) (input 3300 watts at 220 volts and 15 amps and output 300 volts and 10 amps) COP=0.91 approximately. One of the forum members checked the meters we used and he is satisfied that we used quality meters.

Lamps were rated to stand only 270 volts and at 300 volts they were exceedingly bright. We then made some more windings of secondary and reached it about 400 volts in no load condition but I was not willing to test it on load.

Actually I have to rebuild the Ramaswami device again. It shows COP>8 when connected to earth. At 620 volts the amp goes up to 20 amps. The one problem I have is voltage combining in all secondaries. I will check it again will all brand new wires. Because in any case it has to be taken the High Voltage laboratory some time in the near future. We will also check it on load with a new board that divides them in to 220 volts. Let me repeat that I myself have some reservations about the device. For one thing it has the disadvantage of Voltages combining some times and refusing to combine among the five secondaries some times. Four of the five secondaries are Lenz law abiding but we have made it reduced lenz law effect. If the COP is not equal to 8 then we need to connect to earth again and take the power from the earth points. We simply do not know why it produces such massive output. Such a reading cannot be attributed to meter error.

Let me again repeat that we have seen that effect only when both the wires are given to two different earth points. High Voltage battery refuses to accept this. They say that for measuing COP they would put it on load proper only. Whether it will provide the result needs to be seen. And whether the it is able to provide the power of 12000 watts when connected to earth and the power is taken from the earth points needs to be investigated as well. So we will do these tests and report.

I think it is possible that when we connected the two points of secondary two wet earth points some thing happened and the output voltage and amperage both increased. Some of the learned friends communicating with me are willing to accept the Voltage but not the amperage but the High Voltage laboratory is willing to accept the amperage but not the voltage. Let me redo the experiment proper and after it is measured by us and measured by the High Voltage laboratory we will present the pictures videos very detailed step by step construction notes. But with all that the glitch is this? Why voltages combine some time and refuse to combine other times..for the same device..If voltages combine it is COP>8 when connected to earth. If Voltages do not combine it is definitely COP<1.  Are we hitting what is called resonance some times and not some other times. I frankly do not know and I donot know any thing about resonance. I have tried to study the books to understand in my spare time but am not able to understand much of it most of the time.

One of the forum members advised me that Magnetics is a least understood subject and there are coils that produce induction when they are not supposed to. Coil types that behave strangely they are not supposed to but the problem is entire electrical engineering is based only on Lenz law. We will rebuild the device again and post it here after 15 days.

Please do not reply to this message. I will not be able to focus on this forum at least for the next 10 to 15 days. I apologise that I cannot resond due to work pressure.

I promise that after the High Voltage lab has tested it we will come back and post all pictures construction notes and layer by layer number of turns, wire size and how many turns in total etc etc and we will put up Videos. I will show the winding pattern by photo and pictures and we will ask people capable of drawing pictures and ask them to draw and explain.

Let me repeat that the COP>8 was when we used the same gauge of wire as a step up transformer kind of device and we had four reduced Lenz law coils and one Lenz law free coil ( I have a doubt whether it is totally Lenz law free when it is connected to four reduced Lenz law effect coils as well) but we have not tested it on load. If testing directly on load does not work, then we have to give it to earth and take from the earth points to the load and test. If that works then connecting a high voltage secondary coil to two different earth points some how has enabled us to tap telluric currents to a small degree and that may well explain the results and the device itself on its may well be cop<1.

I simply report facts. As I tell you again and again I do not know theory. I report what I observe. I also agree frankly I do not understand most of the things.

As far as Figuera is concerned I'm back to where I was for I'm unable to understand much of it. Why a rotating special communtator that sends two signals is needed. Why Voltage was made to increase in one of the primaries and in the other primary amperage was made to increase at that time. Why the winding patterns are so strange. I do not have the answers for these things. Some time I will arrange the actual Figuera replication to be done here and then will share with you what is the result. I have about 350 kgm of iron rods and iron powder and significant wire and we can buy more wire. Let us see. But Please forigve me for the next 10 to 15 days for I need to take care of the time sensitive filings to be done. Thanks for the understanding.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on July 16, 2015, 03:06:25 AM
Can anyone direct me to a photo of the drawing of PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267[/color][/font]
I think I have had a revelation that  explains many things but I need to see the original damaged patent before missing wires were added.
Thanks
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 16, 2015, 04:19:34 AM
Can anyone direct me to a photo of the drawing of PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267[/color][/font]
I think I have had a revelation that  explains many things but I need to see the original damaged patent before missing wires were added.
Thanks
Garry

Garry,

When I posted the paper in 2012, there was only a sketch of the invention that was worn out. After that, better sketches have been recovered by persons like Hanon. For instance, you can refer to this link for a sketch showing a diagram of the 1908 invention in very good condition,

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf)

If you compare the latest versions of the sketches and what I proposed back on 2012, you will notice that it was right on the money!

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on July 16, 2015, 05:28:40 AM
Bajac,
Thanks for the reply, but once again I have not made myself plain. I need a picture of the patent as it was in the vault. I want to see what was missing so that I know what was added to help restore the schematic.
I need to see what I would have seen if I had been the person in the vault after the water and time had done their damage and before someone fixed it.
Thanks
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 16, 2015, 11:48:43 PM
That may be a reason, if somebody incorrectly restored damaged picture.Would like also to see original documents .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 17, 2015, 01:11:01 AM
No image have been restored. The image from 1908 patent was just scanned with better quality I got later. Initially it was just low quality image with some shadows. . Your stament about this patent affected by water or humidity along this years is erroneous. The patent saffected by this effect were some patent from 1902, exactly patents 30376, 30377, 30378. Curiously patent 30375 was in perfect status. Maybe it was located in the place in the archives. In some post along this thread I posted the direct images from the scanner. The translation in the alpoma.net site just include the scanned drawings but the text is transcribed from the original handwritting (yes, the 1902 patents were handwritting). In the translations I copied the original spanish text and also my translation into english. I included the original spaninsh text and images in case anyone would like to go to the original spanish text for more details. For the 1908 patent it was already typewritting text, that is also posted along this thread somewhere I think. If you want the initial low-quality scannig you can look for the document in post #1

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 17, 2015, 01:43:22 AM
Bajac,
How is your work progressing...
Whats your opinion on the diagram on patent 30378 as versus the diagram on 44267 any connection or two separate things?

IMHO the diagram in patent 30378 would give more bang for the buck...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 17, 2015, 06:46:13 PM
Bajac,
How is your work progressing...
Whats your opinion on the diagram on patent 30378 as versus the diagram on 44267 any connection or two separate things?

IMHO the diagram in patent 30378 would give more bang for the buck...

All the Best


I will show some photos within about two weeks. I will receive iron cores (12" x 1.5 x x 1.5") by next week.


I am attaching the document that I used to write the paper. I do not know if it is what you guys are looking for. I have to say that when I wrote the paper, I only had that sketch. I read the text of the patent after I had submitted the document found in post #1.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TruthHunter on July 17, 2015, 08:51:15 PM
 RN:

 Thank you for a detailed reply. It was mostly clear upon careful reading.   I hesitate to interact as it induces
 you to spend precious time.

The concept is so simple and you do not need to follow me every step to replicate.

Agreed. This is why Figuera was able to make a working device more than 100 years ago.

If you have a 12 volt 16 amps transformer about three to five layers of that on P1 and p2 can act as primary.

Don't have one one of these transformers, I'd be still guessing. Small motors that I have disassembled seem to use 16 or 18 gauge(1 to 1.3 mm)

"3 to 5 layers" Multifilar presumably?...trifilar and pentafilar?

The secondary must have 7 layers under S1, seven layers in S2, 2 layers in S3, 2 layers in S4 and 7 layers in S5.

 S1 now becomes as 7 layer winding instead of a single layer? How should I size the coil? S1 has 1800 ampere turns(20 X 90 turns. If one is using smaller
wire, more turns could maintain the same NI. Half the cross section = half the current or twice the turns and a different inductance.  Increase the turns in
 S1 but divide into more layers wound like S5?

This results in less mass, but not necessarily less wire length.
 The core  could be considerably smaller, depending on the configuration.(Later,  I see you propose a larger, presumably shorter core - 6")

 As I understand, the core cross section needs to remain large.

connect like this. S1-S3-S5-S2-S4 and that will simplify the connections and use either single wire if possible. Wire should be insulated wire and we have stressed that or you need to put space between enamalled magnet wire and mild plastic sheet between layers..Do not understand where you got that idea of removing insulation..Just plain wrong.

The readily available 14/2 wire has 3 conductors, two insulated and an uninsulated ground wire within the outer jacket. I would use the ground wire too, but space it it between turns and layers. Do all the windings need to be spaced? Or just the primary?

I missed the discussion about the insulation when I wrote that about stripping the wire. I didn't see it in the pdf either... Spreading out the windings is contrary to accepted practice. B is proportional to 1/L, so maximizing B
isn't the answer. 

Dielectric of the insulation isn't the issue? Not immobilising either the core or the windings may be significant.


If you do not have adequate wires use only S1-S5-S2 in that case use 9 layers on S1 and 9 layers on S2 and 7 layers on S5.

This amounts to 35 layers total(P1,P2 5 layers each. 25 layers in Secondary...)  Less in wire mass, but not in length? Same turns per layer, just shorter
coil length?

  I made two small cores for a table top design I promised but I have a big problem. Lost a major case and have to prepare the appeal and so I will not be answering or posting here for some time. I have to make a living. And losing a case is a bad thing.

Very sorry to hear that. Especially as it seems to be an additional setback.

Most people interested in this field don't place a high priority on spiritual dimensions of life.
  I have observed that certain spiritual entities exact a high price. Also forces and counterforces contend. I am praying for you.

Please use the opposite poles of the primary magnets and place the middle coil to be lenz free. I believe with just a single transformer and by using a 6 inch dia plastic tubes as Primaries and 2 inch dia tube as central secondary by winding on all three you should be able to see COP>1 easily.

As I understand, the principles for success are:

1. Soft iron core divided to reduce eddies
2. Insulated or spaced windings
3?. 5000 ampere turns in primary (7 amps X 720 turns) or should that be NI/(unit of core area)?  (~63 NI per Cm^2) of core? ~21,600 NI in secondary!
Should we think in terms of B field per Cm^3, ie. volume unit?
4. Multifilar primary - 3 to 5 layers
5. Secondary surrounding  the primary, especially between the primary and core.
6. Part of secondary between the 2 cores as much as possible without eliminating connecting core between primary magnets? Some core needed
for maintaining inductance.
7. Sufficient mass of iron to avoid saturation
8. Wire diameter of secondary greater than primary
9. Secondary more than twice as many turns as primary. Trying to lower the number of turns and getting a lower output voltage doesn't work.

Did I miss anything?

Would 9. be circumvented if we kept the same number of turns but used 2-3 parallel windings?

60 Hz should require less iron than 50 Hz.  I remember reading that military used to use 400 Hz to reduce the size of transformers. Now mini-inverters
are used for all small devices, partly because it allows miniaturization. I don't believe we can use ferrite, but there might be other core configuration that
allow higher frequencies.

 Increasing the frequency might allow smaller size unless it negates other operating
principles.

 However, a simple,  purely electric generator now becomes an electronic device.

I hate to invest what amounts to a significant sum even  for a smaller device without some optimism for success.
 . 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TruthHunter on July 17, 2015, 09:25:43 PM
As a point of curiosity for the Ramaswami coil,, would endplates on the end of the core increase coupling?


|0000000                 0000000|
|0000000  000000   0000000|
|====== 000000  ======|
|==================|
|====== 000000  ======|
|0000000  000000   0000000|
|0000000                 0000000|

I am only mildly interested in the Figuera/Buforn patents. There is too much  missing info. Figuring out what
is happening in related WORKING devices such as the Hubbard coil etc seems more fruitful to reach a theoretical understanding
of what is happening. With the right understanding, Figuera would be obvious... including the evasions.

Looking again at the 1908 patent drawing, I see 7 Ramaswami coils side by side with primaries series/parallel and the secondary in series. No wonder
"Reels and Reels" of wire were required.   If
Ramaswami's coil has higher gain, do you still want to pursue the older one?

I see two worthwhile goals. 1. Theoretical understanding  leading to: 2.  Optimised nonPM OU coil generator(least Kg/Kw, noise, heat, material, most
reliability, least  sensitivity to environmental variations, and least electro-magnetic pollution.)

In the 19th century, the telegraph drove research. Real world problems raised scientific questions that produced progress.
Today, Electronics is surprisingly conservative. Its amazing how much happens in design that is unexplained. Circuits are worked out
with a lot of experimentation, then copied or improved incrementally. 

As Yogi Berra said "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is."

I suggest creating a new thread for the Ramaswami coils and leave this thread for speculation.
 

Begin the thread with a synopsis
of description, results and pics. Let it be for discussion and replication.

BWDIK

(but, what do I know?)   :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 18, 2015, 01:48:57 AM
Figuring out what
is happening in related WORKING devices such as the Hubbard coil etc seems more fruitful to reach a theoretical understanding
of what is happening. With the right understanding, Figuera would be obvious... including the evasions.

The Figuera will eventually be figured out...( if it hasn't already been ) but the question remains if the person who does figure it out shares...
I for one have everything to gain if the Ramaswami approach works...and I don't think Rams minds if the Figuera is figured out... the only person that I think minded was marathonman ( I wish He would come back - if He hasn't started a new name )... We can even talk about the Hubbard coil... its all information we could/can use...

Lastly... the magnet is still attached to my refrigerator and probably will be for the life of the refrigerator or until I expire ( then I don't care :-)

All the Best

PS Bajac... you didn't answer all my questions lol
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 18, 2015, 02:34:33 AM
The Figuera will eventually be figured out...( if it hasn't already been ) but the question remains if the person who does figure it out shares...
I for one have everything to gain if the Ramaswami approach works...and I don't think Rams minds if the Figuera is figured out... the only person that I think minded was marathonman ( I wish He would come back - if He hasn't started a new name )... We can even talk about the Hubbard coil... its all information we could/can use...

Lastly... the magnet is still attached to my refrigerator and probably will be for the life of the refrigerator or until I expire ( then I don't care :-)

All the Best

PS Bajac... you didn't answer all my questions lol


Randy,


I think for people who has no experience with electrical/electronics devices, the device shown in the patent #30378 should be their first choice. This 1902 generator works like an overunity transformer without any moving parts, switching elements, etc. Furthermore, the historical records indicate that Figuera built more than one working prototype of the 1902 device when his work showed up in all newspapers around the world. I have not records that Figuera ever built the 1908 device patent #44267. Though, I am convinced that Figuera built a working prototype for the 1908 because by that time it was required for any patent application.


It is my opinion that the 1908 should have the higher energy density of all Figuera's generators. If you think about it, Figuera first invented a rotary generator in 1902 and in the same year he also applied for the motionless generator, which can be considered superior to the rotary one. The two 1902 inventions minimize the Lenz's effect in a "passive mode." That is, the low self-inductance of the induced coils do not produce strong counter magnetic field (Lenz's law) that tend to cancel the inducing magnetic field. Because of the closed core construction of today's transformers, the counter magnetic field of the secondary opposes the primary almost in a 1:1 ratio. It is why the primary current of the standard transformers increases to compensate for the flux cancellation and maintain the Volts/turn ratio established by the primary voltage.


On the other hand, the 1908 device minimizes the Lenz's effect in an "active mode." This time, the induced coils have a much higher self-inductance because they are wound around an iron core and therefore, much higher induced magnetic fields to counteract the primaries. However, Figuera utilizes two out of phase primary voltages to deviate the induced magnetic field away from the primary field in an efficient manner, which minimize the Lenz's effects. I am working on the 1908 device but would like to see others working on the 1902 invention.


I also wanted to say that there are persons who are eager to criticize the construction work from dedicated researchers. I would just close my ears and don't bother. The work you are doing is hard work and it is important. In my case it is a slow and costly process. The three iron cores that I ordered cost $100 US dollars. But that is in addition to the cost of two patents that were awarded to me this year. I have more than 5 patents and I have not been able to build a prototype because I have been performing research on the FE technologies such as Figuera's. If you have been in a patent process, you should know how expensive it is.


Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 18, 2015, 03:23:00 AM
Bajac,
I was a little taken back when Patrick took down the information from His website. I know the cost of buying materials and the cost of iron. I believe Rams when He stated how much money He put into His work. I can only imagine the cost and time you have put into patents. I would encourage you to continue with which you have invested your time, money and energy in trying to replicate the " Figuera "...just remember ... Clemente only got to achieve and then He disappeared into the ether permanently...

I have my challenges ( as everybody else does ) and have been putting things off ( and now I have to do them ) so I have limited time with which to experiment with...

Lastly... I will be waiting patiently for news from the " Author " of this thread...........

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 18, 2015, 08:36:05 AM
@Truthhunter:

Thanks for your post and good wishes.

I do not have much of technical knowledge of electricity and magnetism. I understand that if higher frequencies are used lower size is possible but I have no direct knowledge so I cannot answer that. However I have seen that increasing the input voltage to 250 volts raises the output (again I do not know why).

As far as the device is concerned, it is fairly simple.

1. Wind 9 layers of single wire on S1, 7 layers on S5 and 9 layers on S2 and connect them in the order S1-S5-S2.  In terms of number of turns it would come to about 765 turns for S1, 765 turns for S2 and 420 turns for S5. Approximately for me and the wires used by me.

2. S5 coils must cut the magnetic flux between P1 and P2 iron core. The should be slightly above the hollow of the P1 and P2 and should not enter them but not more than that should be wound. 

3. The Central secondary must be half the size and half the diameter of the Primary cores. 

4. Regarding saturation the secondary on the primary coils some how provides some kind of impedance and so the primary coils would not be saturated.

5. The central coil appears to have higher magnetic strength from the sound made but I have not measured with a gauss meter.

6. I cannot say about winding the secondary in parallel for I have not tested it. I do not think it would work for the secondary develops amperage based on the voltage. Higher the voltage of the secondary higher the amperage. So a single coil but higher number of turns is better but as always experiment must tell the facts.

7. You can use S1, S2,S3,S4,S5 coils all as indicated but the outer coils requires longer wire because of increased diameter and I have suggested increasing the number of the smaller secondaries to reduce the cost and reduce the complexity of the voltages not combining. For me combining the voltages is the issue. Why they combine some times and why they would not some time?

8. Number of turns decides the voltages. Higher the voltage higher the amperage developed.

9. I have tried the Figuera method of putting the secondary alone in between primaries. It works but requires a lot of turns and coils. And lot of iron.  Advantage is it is totally Lenz law free. Disadvantage is that it ignores the magnetic flux available in the two primaries. I used AC to power the primaries of course. You need a lot of iron cores and the middle core must be fairly large to generate significant voltage and amperage in a single unit. Making many small units does not work. If you develop 180 volts in a small unit using small wires the amperage developed is different. If you make the same 180 volts in a large device with large wires the amperage developed is way too different. No comparison. But the iron mass goes bigger with higher amperages to avoid saturation.

I'm unable to answer the technical questions. This is what worked for me. I will try to rebuild that device and post pictures and give number of turns.

I understand increasing the input voltage and frequency can have a major role on output. But I have zero knowledge on that here. How can I comment on them without knowing any thing. I can only tell you what I have done and what I have observed. I do not have that much of knowledge.

We ended up doing the central cores alone first and then we realized oh we are missing the available power in primary and so wind coils on primary above and below the primary to reduce the Lenz law effect. This is how the S1 to S5 coils came about.

But the confusing thing for me is still this.. Why voltages in all five secondaries combine some time and why they would not combine some time. Not clear to me but I'm sure that it is an easy thing for people skilled in the art. If voltages combine then it is a COP>8 device for sure when connected to Earth. I'm unable to do much here at this time due my pre-occupations. I apologize.

It is a very expensive process. That is the problem. To avoid saturation you need to make the device bigger and how to reduce the size is not clear to me.

I have attempted to check the 1902 patent. Certain things are not clear there. If you put the wire between two irons, wire tends to get heated and so a small insulator needs to be put between the opposing electromagnets and wire to avoid heating. (may be this is the gap Hanon was talking about) Or very thick insulation with window like gaps to let the magnetic waves flow and hit the coils. Do the coils need to have their own separate magnetic core.. Not clear. What should be the direction of winding and how the coils should be placed. Not clear. So it is not as if 1902 device is a cake walk either.

This is a simple design no doubt but very very expensive and all would need to be done manually for prototypes.

The 1910 report shows that the only practical device tested before the Spanish patent office is the 1908 device. But it is not clear to me why we have resistors and a rotary device when simple AC input could have done the same thing. Where is the need for all this complexity? That is some thing I'm not able to understand. Those reports are not available for the 1902 patents filed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 18, 2015, 10:02:52 AM
@Truthhunter:


The 1910 report shows that the only practical device tested before the Spanish patent office is the 1908 device. But it is not clear to me why we have resistors and a rotary device when simple AC input could have done the same thing. Where is the need for all this complexity? That is some thing I'm not able to understand. Those reports are not available for the 1902 patents filed.

Hello Rams
I think that the goal for Figuera was to have a generator not dependent of any grid. Remember that in Spain in 1902-1910 the generation of AC was not so extended as today, it barely was in its early days, and therefore not available in most locations (and non existent in small villages)
So this device could be feed with batteries for starting, and then self-feeding after start.
IMHO that´s the reason of not using AC, there was no AC to plug in !! ;D
cheers
Alvaro
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 18, 2015, 12:05:19 PM
Alvaro:

You are correct. There is another advantage. A part of the output can be directed to the feeding coil through a phase correction capacitor or even without it as the initial current is unidirectional. I have been saying from the beginning that the primaries in the 1908 device went to Earth to avoid run away current but it is not accepted to this date. But I do not understand yet why Prof. Figuera needed the rotary device producing two signals going in opposite directions at the same time and then the resistor array. This is a device which if replicated can enable us to produce electricity from any point on earth in any amount desired without relying on Grid.

But it is very expensive to build. There is no gain without pain. Similarly valuable things do not come out without significant investment in time, effort and money and man power. I think the whole purpose was to somehow do what AC is able to do today. But the system had the advantage of a unidirectional current which AC does not have. But the half wave or full wave pulsating dc device or pulsed DC would have required massive amount of iron and wire. I have asked some of my clients to help in replication of the old device but their electrical engineers laughed it away. That is a problem today. No one will give credibility to this type of devices. Because of the promise and the dire situation in India I attempted to do it. Neither unsuccessful for a beginner nor successful totally to this date.

I do have a deep suspicion that giving the high voltage to two different earth points made all the difference in my case. It is considered a shunted coil by the High Voltage lab which refuses to accept the voltage. but we will know that when we test again may be next month because of this appeal problem. Sorry about the delay.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 18, 2015, 01:11:20 PM
Rams:
In my opinion the rotary device (run with a small  DC motor) allowed a kind of swinging of the magnetic strength in the primary electromagnets to both sides of the induced coil.
Doing this with a variable DC (via resistors) the electromagnets magnetic fields never collapse (no backEMF, or CEMF) and the core never saturates (less eddy currents, less heat )

In another note, some of the participants in this thread (as myself) don´t have the economic means to replicate your setup, so do not worry about any delay, we are lucky enough to be able to know that there are people like you that generously want to share their experiments and discoveries
Cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 18, 2015, 07:30:06 PM
Alvaro_CS:

I do not know if your statements about magnetic field collapsing as a necessary condition for Lenz law is accurate. For example if you use FW Diode bridge rectifier there is no collapsing of the waves and it remains full positive sign wave only. But at that time the saturation is attained very fast and eddy currents are actually higher and to avoid saturation we need four times more wire and more iron. That said I have not done the rotary device in combination with the resistors and tested the multiple primaries arrangement either. Therefore I'm not able to agree or disagree. The one thing that I have noticed is that this is a force of nature. It is present in nature. When a conductor is subjected to rotating magnetic field  or time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor. This is the original Law of Electromagnetic induction. Later on when Lenz law was made it has been inferred as conversion of mechanical energy in to electrical energy as the machines were build in the wrong way. For example in the dynamo the central core rotates and the coils are placed outside to cut the magnetic flux. You can build a small solenoid and check whether placing the primary coil inside and secondary outside is more benefifical or secondary inside and primary outside is more beneficial. The magnetic field tends to focus on the center. Therefore the output coils should have been placed or arranged in the center to collect the magnetic waves but we have the situation in the reverse in the generators because it is easy to do so. If the magnetic core is placed outside and is made to rotate or we have had magnetic cores placed inside and outside and both rotated in the same direction at the same time we would not have had any Lenz law effect. This kind of arrangement is what is present in the Figuera coils without the rotation of the magnet but with the presence of the rotating magnetic field.

I agree with this part of your post..

"In my opinion the rotary device (run with a small  DC motor) allowed a kind of swinging of the magnetic strength in the primary electromagnets to both sides of the induced coil."

I'm extremely doubtful if this is correct.

"Doing this with a variable DC (via resistors) the electromagnets magnetic fields never collapse (no backEMF, or CEMF) and the core never saturates (less eddy currents, less heat )"

Variable DC is available through FW diode bridge. The iron immediately saturates. To avoid that you need four times the iron needed in AC and you need four times the wire needed in AC to maintain the electromagnet to operate continuously. Eddy currents are more with saturation. So I'm very doubtful on this part. It is possible that the resistor array was there to reduce the current and therefore caused the effects you indicated but I need to test before I can agree.

Let us assume the same variable DC. Contrary to Lenz law we have another Law Ohms Law by which V=IR.  Therefore if we create a step up transformer using thick wires and gets an increased voltage, resistance being lower for a higher voltage higher amperage should result. In the primary since the resistance is higher for a lower voltage lower amperage should result. Now which one of these laws or principles is correct?

These laws or designs of equipment are good only so long as the conditions specified for them are strictly followed. If we look at it carefully and then try to modify them and ignore the books and theories and do some simple experiments and make observations we get different results.

The purpose of sharing is very very simple. We did not bring any thing to the world and we are not going to take away any thing when we go. The only thing that we can give to the world is what we have learnt so knowledge can spread. Assuming for a moment that we are successful in this effort, then we find a situation or a solution where any one can make electricity at any place on earth in whatever quantities needed. Investment for that and effort for that would be needed of course. But that is a knowledge that can generate lot of employment to a lot of people and can lead to growth and prosperity and better living conditions for a lot of people at low cost. There is not going to be any patent for this kind of inventions now. So why not share what we have observed. We do not need to attempt to have to reinvent the same knowledge after 100 years..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 18, 2015, 09:56:29 PM
Assuming for a moment that we are successful in this effort, then we find a situation or a solution where any one can make electricity at any place on earth in whatever quantities needed. Investment for that and effort for that would be needed of course. But that is a knowledge that can generate lot of employment to a lot of people and can lead to growth and prosperity and better living conditions for a lot of people at low cost. There is not going to be any patent for this kind of inventions now. So why not share what we have observed. We do not need to attempt to have to reinvent the same knowledge after 100 years..

Rams,
I am sure that these apparatuses have been figured out and are probably being used already... the same robber barons exist today as in the past...plus we ( America ) aren't a democratic republic anymore...the USA doesn't have allies anymore either...we have special interests...Even in the interview Prof. Figuera gave credit to God...today they don't believe in God or money is their god... I share because of the people who shared with me...plus I have a keen interest in learning things...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 19, 2015, 08:55:56 AM

Variable DC is available through FW diode bridge. The iron immediately saturates.

What I mean as "variable DC" is a  voltage that goes up and down NOT changing its polarity. Never going bellow the 0 V.  (DC is not AC) no pulsed DC either.

If the DC current supply is from a battery, this effect is not available through FW diode bridge.

regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 19, 2015, 11:52:31 AM
Alvaro
  The word your looking for is "Undulate".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 19, 2015, 12:46:14 PM
"The operation of the machine is as follows: it has been said that the brush
“O” rotates around the cylinder “G” and always in contact with two of their
contacts. When the brush is in touch with contact “1″ the current, which
comes from the external generator and passes through the brush and
contact “1″, will magnetize electromagnets N to the maximum but will not
magnetize the electromagnets S because the whole resistance prevents it."
 
  Brush O carries the current to the distributor. The distributor is connected to the resister array. Only the ends of the array are connected to the N or S inducers. Follow the rabbit. There is only one direction through the distributor/commutator. The segments or contacts are so arranged to provide 4 cycles per rev. The resistor array does not provide resistance to the over all flow of current from the source it gives it the required direction with respect to time. Brush O is always in contact with two of their contacts. If it is built well enough,if contact is maintained with at least one if not two contacts then there is no break. If there is no break there is no spark. If there is a spark. there is a fault in the construction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 19, 2015, 12:52:32 PM
Doug 1

Thanks for your correction. Yes Undulate was the meaning (or may be "fluctuating"  ?)Anyway, the idea is that the polarity never changes at the input (as it is DC), regardless how high or low the voltage (and current) goes along the rotary cycle.

I think Hanon has described extensively this subject in early posts.

regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 19, 2015, 01:15:51 PM
An old image, by Kekhoo, (I think)  which sumarize the aim of the 1908 commutator

It is not the same as AC!!!!. If somebody do not understand it please stop saying that it is the same as AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 19, 2015, 05:22:48 PM
The image is not very good representation and will confuse some people.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 20, 2015, 12:34:09 AM


I have to say that when I wrote the paper, I only had that sketch. I read the text of the patent after I had submitted the document found in post #1.


Thanks,
Bajac


Are you saying that you only used the sketch to write your paper?


Are you saying that you did not even read the text in the patent to write your paper?




This confirm my idea that your design has nothing in common with Figuera´s original ideas. You were looking for any kind of justification to used air-gaps to divert the Lenz effect, and then you saw the sketch from Figuera and you saw in it what you wanted to see.  You know this proverb that says that when someone has a hammer in his hands, all the thing he see are nails everywhere.


This is really a big damage to the efforts to replicate Figuera´s patent, the aim of this thread. Now everyone read your paper and sadly the are involved in a different design to the one included in the patent.


Everyone: Please read the original patent text. The rest are personal interpretations. Above we have the demostration...


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 20, 2015, 01:48:19 AM

Are you saying that you only used the sketch to write your paper?

Are you saying that you did not even read the text in the patent to write your paper?

This confirm my idea that your design has nothing in common with Figuera´s original ideas. You were looking for any kind of justification to used air-gaps to divert the Lenz effect, and then you saw the sketch from Figuera and you saw in it what you wanted to see.  You know this proverb that says that when someone has a hammer in his hands, all the thing he see are nails everywhere.

This is really a big damage to the efforts to replicate Figuera´s patent, the aim of this thread. Now everyone read your paper and sadly the are involved in a different design to the one included in the patent.

Everyone: Please read the original patent text. The rest are personal interpretations. Above we have the demostration...

Regards

It is true! I got the sketch from Boguslaw when he posted it on the energeticforum website. Couple of weeks after I published the paper, I got the text of the patent in Spanish and I did read it. I was satisfied because the patent only confirmed what I published. I had been able to understand the Figuera's device on the spot without the text because I was thinking of something very similar based on my research on the operation of standard transformers.

If you thinking that I was wrong on the paper, you are more than welcome to point me to the mistakes and will be very willing to accept them and make the corrections. What I do not accept are irresponsible general statements without providing any proofs of the accusations. I will give you an example of how a responsible and constructive criticism is made. For instance, when you said that Figuera's device generated two opposite signals is against Figuera's teachings. The patent says that when ones (coils) are full, the other ones are empty" meaning that when the magnitudes of the current flowing through a set of coils is maximum, the current on the other set is minimum or zero. This is clearly two signals being 90 degrees out of phase, THEY ARE NOT OPPOSITE!!! It is similar to the functions sine and cosine, whenever one is maximum (in either direction), the other one is zero or very close to zero.

On the other hand, I do not understand your explosive reaction. It is not on a professional level but on the emotional edge. If you are right in your attack, time will prove me wrong. There is no need to get excited or emotional about it. The purpose of this effort is not to prove that someone is correct and the other ones are not. The Goal is simply to replicate the Figuera's invention. You will do it your way, and I will do it my way. There is nothing wrong with it. We are fighting for the same Figuera's cause and not against each other! Only, jealousy, greed, and pride can really hurt our cause!

Bajac



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: TruthHunter on July 20, 2015, 02:21:06 AM
Actually, the voltage is not stepped. Remember that briefly two contacts are connecting. The resistance
has two parallel paths while both are connected, so the resulting wave will be a saw tooth.

Don't forget that the resistors were wound. They are mostly non-inductive, but like the Smith coil
may have effects.

 There is a picture purporting to be the Hubbard coil that shows it with an 8 cylinder auto distributor.   
http://www.free-energy-info.com/Utkin.htm

Apparently, he used a similar switching mechanism.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 20, 2015, 02:25:11 AM
Of course I will prove you are interpreting freely the 1908 patent.


Please quote any paragraph from the patent where Figuera states the need for air-gaps.


If you do not provide that quote (which BTW does not exist) I will take as proved that your design, while being genuine, does not have anything in common with Figuera´s ideas.


As you won´t be able to quote the patent, I will prove my point and I will quote a paragraph from that patent stating quite the contrary to your theory of ai gaps. I have read the patent tens of times. I will wait for your quote to post mine later.


I won´t go into personal criticisms. I am just here to speak about technical facts.   


BTW, Sine and Cosine are not maximun and minimum at the same time, as Figuera required. Revise your Maths. But please before look for that quote I mentioned above. Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 20, 2015, 03:13:14 AM
Of course I will prove you are interpreting freely the 1908 patent.

Please quote any paragraph from the patent where Figuera states the need for air-gaps.

If you do not provide that quote (which BTW does not exist) I will take as proved that your design, while being genuine, does not have anything in common with Figuera´s ideas.

As you won´t be able to quote the patent, I will prove my point and I will quote a paragraph from that patent stating quite the contrary to your theory of ai gaps. I have read the patent tens of times. I will wait for your quote to post mine later.


I won´t go into personal criticisms. I am just here to speak about technical facts.   


BTW, Sine and Cosine are not maximun and minimum at the same time, as Figuera required. Revise your Maths. But please before look for that quote I mentioned above. Thanks


BTW, I think now we are going into the right direction for a constructive discussion. Why do you think Figuera showed a separation between the S and Y cores and the N and Y cores? See attached sketch. The sketches are also part of the specification for a patent.

I have to agree with NR about Figuera's patents, They are very lousy! We are having all these problems because Figuera did not prepared a proper patent application and because the Spanish patent office accepted such application. In USA the Figuera's patent would have been rejected because it does not provide enough details for one with skill in the art to replicate the device.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 20, 2015, 03:18:51 AM
I enjoy boating... my friend has a fishing boat and we go out fishing every Monday morning...my  first boat was a sailboat I had to get rid of it because it was getting too expensive to keep. I enjoy sailing more than fishing but I get to go out on a boat every Monday...

My point is... some people look at the weather so much that they are scared to leave port...

All the best

PS as I have stated before... I asked Patrick what I should build and He stated the " Figuera "... I have learned how to build electronic devices and if Patrick and Bajac are wrong about this aspect of the Figuera ... at least they went sailing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 20, 2015, 07:44:49 AM
Randy: Good Point really. If we do not commit mistakes we will not know what does not work and only that can take us to what works and why it works and what does not work and why it does not work knowledge.

I don't remember ever having said that the patents are lousy. I sincerely apologize if I have ever conveyed that impression. Normally patents are written to provide both information and disinformation and to show the worst possible mode of working. Today we have three requirements all over the world as standard for Patent grant. a. The specification must fully and particularly disclose the invention so that it is clear to a lay man and would b. enable a person skilled in the art to replicate the invention and c. disclose the best mode of carrying out the invention. However for trade secret reasons as far as possible this is avoided. One of the key areas or modes of diverting the attention of the competitor is in drawings.

For example generally very generally speaking, Hubbard coil is described as 8 coils connected in series and wound around a central core and another outer coil also surrounded the 8 coils. If I'm wrong please correct me.

These 8 coils are normally deemed to be vertical coils. However if you look at the Dynamo design provided by Randy earlier and their pictures it is easily possible that these coils could have been horizontal coils and the iron core connected the core in the center and an outer core. And a single coil coul mean any number of coil in that same direction as the picture of the dynamo would show us about 4 or 5 cores on each one of the 8 arms.

So these drawings are the tools to confuse and misdirect competitors. There is nothing wrong in it and it requires expertise and exceptional understanding of the art and patent drafting skills to do all these things. I recently got a patent for a client with the examiner rejecting it for obviousness by citing 9 documents. But the Assistant Controller and the Examiner could not understand and I who drafted it six years back along with the inventors also could not adequately explain it to them. So we asked the inventor to come and he explained and he also showed videos of other devices and how his device is different and explained the principle. It is actually fully and particularly and clearly described in the specification. And shown in a lot of drawings. One of the Patent officers was an expert in that particular domain. Even he was not able to understand the writing. Neither was I who wrote the specification based on the instructions of the clients.

When that is the case how do you all expect to figure out this complex patent just going through it? Or Reading it many times.

I have been experimenting  with this device and there is no air gap between the N, Y and S magnets. There are very significant air gaps between the iron rods and this was explained to me by a person skilled in the art as a tool that avoids saturation of the core.  So soft iron rods and not a big core was deliberately employed by Prof. Figuera.

However I would most humbly submit that all of you are looking at the wrong thing. As I wrongly understood and demonstrated it is possible to use AC or pulsed DC today to get the same Lenz law free effects. What is most important is the coiling arrangment of the N and S magnets. How the current was sent there. The most important part of the patent is this. When N magnets are full the S magnets are empty or nearly empty. And when S Magnets are full N magnets are empty or nearly empty and thus a constant variation of the magnetic flux was achieved.

To my very limited knowledge this is the area where we need to focus on. If we can do this whether by mechanical means or electronics does not matter. Whether the current is sent in series or in parallel does not matter. The key is this. produce Lenz law free current in the middle coil and then combine many such coils to generate a higher output.

In all my humility the Ramaswami device came out of my ignorance as to why Prof Figuera wasted the magnetic flux available in the primaries by putting wires under the primary and above the primary. It is quite possible he tested this and found that higher output can be easily obtained as I have seen but it is also possible that such higher output being Lenz law abiding prompted the primary to draw to more current. I have to yet to provide loads to the coil of the Ramaswami device and it remains a concern to me and It also remains to be seen whether we need to connect to earth and then take the output from the earth points to defeat the lenz law effects. As of this moment it is not clear to me.

However I have seen that the Lenz law free output from the secondary can be made. The primary does not care whether the secondary is loaded or not. I have not used the parallel current method of Prof Figuera. I have used AC power only. Placed the Primaries NS-NS-NS with the middle coil being a small coil and connected the N and S magnets as serially connected. My Logic was when the wave goes like this ----> N would be strong and when it comes like this <----- S would be strong. I put up a cheating coil below the primaries. It is a coil that is neither loaded nor shunted but the ends were kept open and insulated. So primary will see only this open coil and then magnetise the N and S magnets and the secondary would function from the Y magnets. Amazingly the primary input remains the same irrespective of the secondary in the center being loaded or not.

It was my understanding that a battery was the power source as Prof. Figuera lived in an island. There are apparantly very well informed people about this device but they keep quiet. I have received a hint that the total turns Figuera used in the N and S magnets in the primary is just 48 turns. Since the current was taken from a battery I would expect that this could be possible as high current would move in the wire. My understanding to this date of the resistor array is to limit the current spent like this from the battery but I could be dead wrong. I do not understand the need for the DC commutator and the need to touch two contacts. I had tried to build that device but it has to touch two contacts always it touches three contacts and not two and if only two need to to be touched it touches only one and not two. And sparks still come however minor they are the brush suffers wear and tear. However I understand that in DC Motors commutators work for a long time but we have not bought from a professional firm and built it ourselves.

Take Action. Constructive Argument is mere talk. Do the experiments post the results and let us share the common wisdom rather than one criticising the other and trying to score points. This is in my humble opinion and my request is to be avoided.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 20, 2015, 09:05:13 AM
QUOTE FROM 1908 PATENT



"The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several
electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit,
also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly
placed. As neither of the two circuits spin, there is no need to make them
round, nor leave any space between one and the other."


-----------------------


These are the "air- gaps" that Figuera required in his original patent....  Just to show it for people interested in replicateing the original patent. the drawing is an sketch to visualize the different parts. It has no legal validity. It is just for clarification purposes. So you are not patenting what you draw, but what you write down in the text, especifically in the Claims.


Also I have said many times that maybe Figuera used straight solenoids to build his machive with a perfect linear aligment (=====)(=====)(=====)  as Ramaswami has built it. I quote below patent from 1914  by Buforn:


In the 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955 and filed by Buforn, a partner of Figuera) you can read:
"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way:
you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole
and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force."





Bajac: Sorry, but your design does not follow this design. Period. Buforn´s design require to use straight solenoids and stack them up in order to be able to use both poles. That means than when they are not piled they just use one pole. Good luck with your design, but do not tell people that your design fits into Figuera´s teaching


You did not even read the patent to write your paper. This like trying to understand one patent from Tesla just by watching the drawings and not reading the text. Impossible.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 20, 2015, 09:41:15 AM
Ramaswami,


I am really happy reading that you state that primary do not detect whether the secondary is loaded or not. The placement of your coils really resembles the idea trasmitted by Figuera: Two electromagnets in front of each other, and the induced in the center.


For your consideration I attach here the design used by Daniel Dingel in his water powered car. Note the yoke used to reduce magnetic losses along the device. Maybe you can also used this system to reduce looses and get the same magnetism in primaries with much lower input current.


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 20, 2015, 12:54:32 PM
It's encouraging that you guys are still working on Figuera generators. If I only could have your passion skills and resources  :-[  Definitely I would start from the beginning... the rotary dynamo.
How can I learn how obfuscate the patent to be non-understandable by the competitors ?  :P  Is there any way to do it properly ? If you want serious investors you have to show them the patent, but then why they would need you if they have more skilled own engineers ? Ramaswami, what would you do ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 20, 2015, 01:55:42 PM
QUOTE FROM 1908 PATENT



"The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several
electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit,
also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly
placed. As neither of the two circuits spin, there is no need to make them
round, nor leave any space between one and the other."


-----------------------


These are the "air- gaps" that Figuera required in his original patent....  Just to show it for people interested in replicateing the original patent. the drawing is an sketch to visualize the different parts. It has no legal validity. It is just for clarification purposes. So you are not patenting what you draw, but what you write down in the text, especifically in the Claims.


Also I have said many times that maybe Figuera used straight solenoids to build his machive with a perfect linear aligment (=====)(=====)(=====)  as Ramaswami has built it. I quote below patent from 1914  by Buforn:


In the 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955 and filed by Buforn, a partner of Figuera) you can read:
"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way:
you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole
and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force."





Bajac: Sorry, but your design does not follow this design. Period. Buforn´s design require to use straight solenoids and stack them up in order to be able to use both poles. That means than when they are not piled they just use one pole. Good luck with your design, but do not tell people that your design fits into Figuera´s teaching


You did not even read the patent to write your paper. This like trying to understand one patent from Tesla just by watching the drawings and not reading the text. Impossible.


Regards

Well, I have to say that I am glad not to read the patent text when I was preparing the paper submitted on post #1. Otherwise, I would have been driven in a different direction. I have to thank Whoopi (?) for running an experiment when I was posting at the energeticforum. Whoopi (?) had a video on YouTube showing what happens whenever the iron cores are brought directly into contact. The oscilloscope showed a "ghost image" that I had anticipated it as the result of a cross-talking between the two primaries. If you already have a Figuera set up, you can easily test this condition. Have a voltmeter connected to the secondary and an oscilloscope connected in one of the primaries. Whenever you get the ghost image, the voltage induced in the secondary decreases. This is because the cross-talking forces the inducing magnetic fields to cut the secondary wires twice, which induces two voltages that add to zero. It turns out that the Whoopi (?) experiment is one of the most important performed on the Figuera's device. Thank you Whoopi (?).


There is no need to waste more time on this issue. If you already have the device, you can verify my statement with no efforts. In my experiments, I was able to bring the iron cores in contact together but I did not have a ghost image. The reason being that the laminated sheets I was using are from standard transformers and they have an insulating coating or paint. Even though I was bringing them in contact together, the continuity test showed infinite resistance due to the coating, resulting in a very small air gap. I will try to put together my set up but this time I will file the iron cores to scrape the coating away. I want to replicate the Whoopi (?) experiment to settle this issue.

If what is in the text refers to the spaces between the iron cores, then, there is a clear conflict with the drawing. These types of conflicts are often the elements used by the competition when attacking a patent to get an annulment. The competitors can always claim that the patent owner did not know the concept at the time of the application.


NR,

I was referring to your post implying that there was something wrong with the Figuera's patents. The statement that these patents are lousy comes from me. It is why I wrote in two independent sentences. I apologize for not making it clear.

I want to say that the concept described in a patent shall not be ambiguous. Any ambiguity can be a justification for cancelling the patent. A task of the patent examiners is to catch on this issues. I think what you are referring to is to the functionality of the elements for implementing the concept. For example, you do not want to claim a "screw" but a fastener because the idea can be implemented using rivets, etc. Even patents submitted for trade secret must show the enablement requirement. In not doing so, a patent lawyer would run the risk to do a de-service to the client because the patent can be cancelled for not complying with the enablement requirement.

Bajac



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on July 20, 2015, 05:51:22 PM
Hello everyone,

I'm new to this thread and after skimming the entire topic I have a few ideas I would like to present for your consideration, devoid of any talk about lens or other extraneous theories.

Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the later Buforn patents I would like to focus on those.

Firstly, the commutator and resistor as it's shown in the patents is simply a variable dc voltage divider. It splits the voltage between the north & south coils. It starts with full volts to the N coil and near 0 volts to the S coil. As it rotates the voltage is stepped down in the N coil at the same rate it is stepped up in the S coil until the N is near 0 and the S is at full volts. Then it reverses the stepping process. This repeats continuously. There is no other explanation. There also is no reason this can not be accomplished with a solid state circuit. Every step, up or down, is made before the previous step is disconnected. The advantage of this is a controlled stepping of the magnetic field of the coils. It never significantly collapses between steps, so this would rule out a PWM driver unless a smoothing cap is used.

I do think Mr. Ramaswami's device deserves further experimentation and development. Although I am impressed with Mr. Ramaswami's build I do not see it as a direct application of the patent, simply because it uses AC current. I believe the intent of the original invention is to provide power from DC input.

One of the members here posted a link to an old book on dynamo design that is very informative.  It has formulas and methods for building whatever type of dynamo you need from scratch. Working from a desired output of X volts at X amps at X rpm, the book describes how to calculate the amount of iron required for each coil as well as the number of amp turns for each coil, the length and gauge of wire, and the exciting voltage. The underlying theories for the calculations are also presented. This should all be directly applicable to the Figuera-Bufron devices. From what I have read in this forum topic I think Mr. Ramaswami is the only one using a sufficient amount of iron and wire to get any significant results. It takes a LOT of iron and wire for even a small generator.

Well, enough of my opinions for now. I would build this device if I could find a complete schematic with parts list that would allow me to assemble a solid state driver for it.

Thanks for listening.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 20, 2015, 06:43:58 PM
Hello everyone,

I'm new to this thread and after skimming the entire topic I have a few ideas I would like to present for your consideration, devoid of any talk about lens or other extraneous theories.

Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the later Buforn patents I would like to focus on those.

Firstly, the commutator and resistor as it's shown in the patents is simply a variable dc voltage divider. It splits the voltage between the north & south coils. It starts with full volts to the N coil and near 0 volts to the S coil. As it rotates the voltage is stepped down in the N coil at the same rate it is stepped up in the S coil until the N is near 0 and the S is at full volts. Then it reverses the stepping process. This repeats continuously. There is no other explanation. There also is no reason this can not be accomplished with a solid state circuit. Every step, up or down, is made before the previous step is disconnected. The advantage of this is a controlled stepping of the magnetic field of the coils. It never significantly collapses between steps, so this would rule out a PWM driver unless a smoothing cap is used.

I do think Mr. Ramaswami's device deserves further experimentation and development. Although I am impressed with Mr. Ramaswami's build I do not see it as a direct application of the patent, simply because it uses AC current. I believe the intent of the original invention is to provide power from DC input.

One of the members here posted a link to an old book on dynamo design that is very informative.  It has formulas and methods for building whatever type of dynamo you need from scratch. Working from a desired output of X volts at X amps at X rpm, the book describes how to calculate the amount of iron required for each coil as well as the number of amp turns for each coil, the length and gauge of wire, and the exciting voltage. The underlying theories for the calculations are also presented. This should all be directly applicable to the Figuera-Bufron devices. From what I have read in this forum topic I think Mr. Ramaswami is the only one using a sufficient amount of iron and wire to get any significant results. It takes a LOT of iron and wire for even a small generator.

Well, enough of my opinions for now. I would build this device if I could find a complete schematic with parts list that would allow me to assemble a solid state driver for it.

Thanks for listening.


Thank you MadMack for your comment. It is always refreshing to see a new person with a different view.


Could you, please, provide the link to the information about the design of dynamos? Every week I search the internet for this type of info.


Regards,
Bajac


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on July 20, 2015, 07:48:00 PM

Thank you MadMack for your comment. It is always refreshing to see a new person with a different view.


Could you, please, provide the link to the information about the design of dynamos? Every week I search the internet for this type of info.


Regards,
Bajac

My pleasure sir.

ELEMENTARY DYNAMO DESIGN W. BENISON HIRD, B.A., M.I.E.E.
https://ia802608.us.archive.org/24/items/elementarydynamo00hirdrich/elementarydynamo00hirdrich.pdf


This link also has quite a few books.
http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/browse?type=lcsubc&key=Hydroelectric%20generators%20--%20Design%20and%20construction&c=x
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 21, 2015, 05:44:21 AM
@Forest...Ah.. You are asking me to disclose our trade secret.. Not possible. However let me give one simple explanation. Obfuscating some thing and disclosing it at the same time is very easy. See in the Ramaswami device we have described P1 and P2 as serially connected and the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS..

Please advise if this is clear or not. I will then tell you how to obfuscate. Say it now and then I will tell you.

Figuera went a step further and indicated that it is properly connected and the connection may be serial or parallel if I remember correctly.

Now I have a big advantage over the rest of Learned friends of the forum. What is that? I know well that I do not know any thing and so I have to test and learn. What I have learnt is that if some thing works in serial it need not work in parallel.

@Bajac; There is no ambuiguity in the patent. It is clear and it is written for Person skilled in the Art. Who is a Person Skilled in the Art? He does not exist. He is a fictitious person. But he knows every thing and reads every thing and can immediately understand every thing. So if different documents teach different concepts and those concepts have been combined for the first time in an invention, the patent application for that can be rejected because the Person skilled in the art can combine all the prior art literature and say it is so obvious to me. This is the Section 103 objection in USPTO and 50% of the patents refused are fefused under this section. Most of the time, once an examiner takes a 103 objection they would not relent and would refuse.

I beg to disagree with you in my humility. I would request you to read the patent again

This is quoted from the Alpoma net website..http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

I think the translation is done by Hanon but I do not know.
-----------Quote Begin--------------------
DESCRIPTION OF GENERATOR OF VARIABLE EXCITACION “FIGUERA”

The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit, also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly placed.
-----------------Quote End-------------------------

There is a big difference between soft iron cores and laminated transformer cores. Soft iron is highly magnetisable and shows very considerable magnetism and high eddy currents immediately. When you reach a high voltage and high COP (not necessarily 1 even at COP=0.9 positions but at high voltage in the secondary coils the eddy currents disappear. We have tested with tester to see very strong eddy currents and when high voltage is applied the eddy currents are gone. This is in simple uninsulated soft iron rods.

Soft iron core as single block is very heavy. So it is normally manufactured as Rods or round shape or screw type. When you place them to make a core a gap between the rods is inevitable. When the core is heated the air from the environment will blow in to cool the rods and that creates a lot of ionised air. However for making Transformers for the same reason soft iron is not useful. Even with lower magnetic, insulated transformer cores we see transformers burning out under storm conditions and any transformer made up of soft iron core will experience very high current as the already charged air moves through the rods which will increase the current in the system. This is why we have ampere turns limit set for the transformers and they are built never to reach saturation. In spite of this if the ionisation of air is high, transformers are likely to blow out or circuit trippers will trip the system.

When I started I looked at soft iron cores and bought it. I checked for transformer core prices and they are well five times to six times the soft iron cost. I could not afford it.

If you used laminated transformer cores you did not follow the Figuera Patent. I received an advice that Figuera used large cores and lower turns to avoid saturation. If you have built it as per the patent this would have been immediately known to you.

Now how to obfuscate a patent in writing? Well as far as I know maintaining the same polarity and connecting in serial, there are  512 combinations of connections. In the Figuera Patent I estimate that there are 4096 combinations are possible. Is there any ambiguity in the patent. No. He has indicated it can be connected in serial or parallel. I'm sure you have conducted a tests of several other devices and you do know the time, manpower and resources needed to check one result. So how do you check the results of all. What works in serial connection does not work in parallel connection. I know this as we have tested. And what we learnt is simple. We do not know any thing about magnetism. How it would behave under certain conditions and how it would behave under certain other conditions. Unless we have properly documented all. If the inventor can come and connect and series and show the system to work, the patent does not suffer from any ambuiguity. It simply means that the person claiming to be skilled in the art is not adequately skilled. Enablement test requires that a person skilled in the art must be able to replicate the device without undue experimentation. These are new requirements that have come forth later and not in the periof of Figuera. We need not go in to History of Patent Law development. Only recently after the PCT Treaty all countries are following the same principles for grant of patent and even then it differs from country to country. India is very strict in granting patents and many patents granted in USPTO are rejected here. Any experiment done without using soft iron does not meet the conditions of the patent. Secondly I have a big doubt that in the earlier experiement that the polarities were shown as NS-SN-NS because every body was saying that the poles must be reversed for this to work and I had to point out that poles must follow the natural pattern for the device is shown as one single straight rod or many straight bars placed parallel to each other. So I have to apologize that your conclusions are not accurate. I have both transformer cores and soft iron cores and rods and we know under identical conditions what kind of magnetism is produced by both of them. Figuera Patent for its operations require high magnetisation short of saturation. But because it uses DC as most members of the forum say, it is liable to be immediately saturated and the air gaps in the soft iron core are intended to prevent that. If some one does not know it, he is not a person skilled in the art for he has not done the experiments.

@Madmock:  Sir..I thank you for your kind words. I do not know much. My mentor Patrick Kelly initially wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device and when we built it to some specfication he received, there was no magnetism no electromagnet was formed. He was shocked but after a few days suddenly said he had a heart problem and he is going to retire and did not answer our mails. Prior to that he has taught us how to build permanent magnets using DC Power from batteries.  So we went on to learn how to build electromagnets on our own and when we asked for assistance we were laughed at and so we did all learning by studying and doing the tests and observing results and since pulsed DC as we then understood using the diode bridge rectifier required 4 times the iron and wire and we could not afford it we used AC. I justified AC on the ground that the primaries are alternately made stronger and weaker automatically by AC and so why do all the complex procedures.
My knowledge is very very limited and we learn by doing the experiments and observing and I believe that Magnetism has not been studied either properly or alternatively studies have been classified possibly. To this date I do not understand the magnet rotating in the center of the Dynamos. The outer field is a weak field. The rotating magnet must be placed outside and the collectors should be placed inside or magnets should rotate both outside and inside at the same time for maximum efficiency. This is some thing that we can see immediately in a solenoid based primary and secondary. May be it is more cumbersome to arrange it and so Figuera made use of motionless electromagnets that created rotating magnetic fields instead of rotating magnets. That is what we understand to this date. Thank you so much on the links and the old books and reading books from my experience does not teach us any thing and we will need to experiemnt and learn how things work under certain conditions and why they work and why things do not work under other conditions and what are the principles involved. That is a lof of work really. We can only acquire some theoretical knowledge but would need to experiment to learn these old technologies.

At the time the Patent for Figuera was filed the only requirement was that the working device must be brought to the patent office and demonstrated to the Examiner and if the device is large Examiner would have to visit the facility and verify that it works as claimed in the patent. Full and particular disclosure and enablment requirements came much later but today the demonstration of working device in the patent office is not insisted upon. Only if the device claimed violates the theories then the working model would be insisted upon. Any device that is claimed to work on its own or work in violation of law of conservation of energy is refused patent in most countries. USPTO however has granted COP>1 patents but EPO refuses to grant such patents. I do not know about other countries. 

Figuera Patent was very well written for the rules in force at the time it was written. It was valid for that time. The only exception in patents to disclose every thing in a perfect was supposed to be Tesla but he was working for Large corporations that controlled all and so he could disclose all without the fear of competition.

@Forest you have not your answer as to how to describe fully and particularly and how to also obfuscate. Can you just list out the 512 modes of the Ramaswami device. Can you tell me which one would work and which would not? If you cannot do that you are not a person skilled in the Art if Ramaswami comes and demonstrates connecting serially would make the device work.  Figuera has 4096 modes in my estimation. Many may work and only some may work. That is the problem.

I hope I have answered all questions. I sincerely apologize to Bajac in advance if any of my statements cause any hurt but I have no intention of hurting you or any other member of the forum.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 21, 2015, 01:06:47 PM
 Hi all,
 
I have being modelling in Excel the commutator described in the 1908 patent. Quoting the patent:  “ Let be “R” a resistor that is drawn in an elementary manner to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system.  “
 
I have done the simulation of the original commutator, as described in the patent, and also the simulation of an modified commutator consisting of two independent resistors. Using two independent resistor one for N-Coils and other for the S-coils (but both connected to the rotary brush device) it is easier to get two symmetrical signals for each array of inducers. With just one resistor the available values of resistances and impedance of the coils are more restricted to get a good output signal because the resistance of one array and the other array are mutually dependent. Using two resistors we get an extra degree of freedom and we may use more resistance values to get a better shape in the output signals. For those who use the Excel spreadsheet the input values to the simulation are the cells in green. 
 
I include here the simulation of both systems but, according to the patent quote, it won´t be difficult that Figuera just drawn it in such a way to make easier its understanding; but maybe he envisioned an optimized commutator to get a better signals to each inducer coil array (N and S).
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 21, 2015, 01:44:00 PM
@Forest...Ah.. You are asking me to disclose our trade secret.. Not possible. However let me give one simple explanation. Obfuscating some thing and disclosing it at the same time is very easy. See in the Ramaswami device we have described P1 and P2 as serially connected and the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS..

Please advise if this is clear or not. I will then tell you how to obfuscate. Say it now and then I will tell you.

Figuera went a step further and indicated that it is properly connected and the connection may be serial or parallel if I remember correctly.

Now I have a big advantage over the rest of Learned friends of the forum. What is that? I know well that I do not know any thing and so I have to test and learn. What I have learnt is that if some thing works in serial it need not work in parallel.

@Bajac; There is no ambuiguity in the patent. It is clear and it is written for Person skilled in the Art. Who is a Person Skilled in the Art? He does not exist. He is a fictitious person. But he knows every thing and reads every thing and can immediately understand every thing. So if different documents teach different concepts and those concepts have been combined for the first time in an invention, the patent application for that can be rejected because the Person skilled in the art can combine all the prior art literature and say it is so obvious to me. This is the Section 103 objection in USPTO and 50% of the patents refused are fefused under this section. Most of the time, once an examiner takes a 103 objection they would not relent and would refuse.

I beg to disagree with you in my humility. I would request you to read the patent again

This is quoted from the Alpoma net website..http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

I hope I have answered all questions. I sincerely apologize to Bajac in advance if any of my statements cause any hurt but I have no intention of hurting you or any other member of the forum.


NR,

I do not want to give the impression that I am a touchy type of person. I think your comments look honest and I do not see any harm being made because your comments always refer to technical issues. It is your right to disagree with my views!

Sincerely, I have problems understanding your lengthy posting, and normally, I do not agree with about 75% of your statements. However, it does not mean the your statements are wrong. It is just an act of having different perspectives for capturing an image or a concept.

I wanted to ask you why you are saying that citations against section 103 are objections. My understanding is that the Office citations under sections 102 (novelty) and 103 (obviousness) are always rejections. If you are cited against 102 or 103, you will not get a patent unless you can overcome the examiners rejections. You will normally get a patent when the examiner objects on your application. Objections are minor errors or mistakes that are usually easy to correct. For example, misspelling a word, etc.

In one of my patents, I fought the examiner for more than a year trying to overcome a citation under section 103, which is the most common rejections provided by the patent office. During that period, I had like six office action letters rejecting the claims. At the end, I was able to convince the examiner and his supervisor about the merits of my claims. Examiners will try to reduce the scope of the intellectual property that you are claiming in a patent. However, if you feel you have the right, you should fight for it.

In another patent, after responding to an office action rejection, the office held the award of the patent for about a year for public consideration. After the public scrutiny, the patent was awarded.

I paid about $8,000 US dollars to a patent lawyer for my first patent. When the lawyer sent the first draft of the patent application, I modified about 80% of the content. Then, the first office action letter containing a rejection was received, I fired the lawyer and continued the prosecution on my own. I had a lot of arguments with the lawyer because I accused him of not giving me the size of intellectual property that I was entitled to. In my email, I told the lawyer that he was providing "picture claims" with a very small scope of intellectual property. I considered that it was very easy for the competition to design around my idea and use it without paying royalties. The answer from the lawyer was that he writes the claims so they can be accepted by the examiner. In other words, even though I was paying thousands of dollars, the lawyer was not working on my interest. If you look at what the lawyer submitted as a draft and the final awarded patent, you will notice a difference of about 95%. The final patent was much stronger and difficult to copy.

It got to a point that I suspected of patent lawyers being paid by big companies to provide independent inventors with very weak patents. It would in the interest of a company with manufacturing and marketing resources to exploit the novel concept or idea not being claimed by an independent inventor without paying royalties.

It is my 'personal' impression that lawyers have a particular trait, lawyers can write a lot and be understood little.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on July 21, 2015, 02:18:28 PM
@hanon
That is one more proof that we have two signals being:
- exactly inverted
- do not go into negative voltage (ondulated DC)

My simulation results show very similar behavior (free program SIMertix). As I operated only one contact at a time (no idle timing in-between) the signal is not nice sine. This might be because of lack of tuning values of R to load inductances. Anyway basics are not to be disputed any more.

I prepare to test the 1902 patent in order to check for results:
- opposing poles / non opposing
- w and w/o air gap

I feel those results will give a lot of learning effect for all.
Unfortunately I am very restricted in time and therefore no short timeline available. I will prepare isolated current measurements in order to come closer to flux behavior. I will come back if I have the setup in place.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 21, 2015, 02:31:49 PM
Hanon,
What type resistors would you use for the two resistor array... I had bought enough for one resistor array of eight 100 watt 3 ohm resistors and three 100 watt 1.5 ohm resistors before my absence and before the info was taken down from the Kelly website...

And... are you using the rotary device, 555 circuit or the arduino...
If anybody states that they are starting to use the raspberry Pi2.................................................................................

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: JohnMiller on July 21, 2015, 03:00:05 PM
Recently an Arduino program was posted in this forum. I hooked it to the scope and it does well. I can encourage all non programmers to use Arduino. If we have the program it can be downloaded quite easily omitting any specialized know how.

This program resembles the signal shape by PWM sequences. We need fly back diodes in prallel to coils. They will support continuous flow of current.
I will use two of theses drivers with opto isolator (110V / 10A with input AC or DC). They can be hooked to µP directly.
http://www.ebay.de/itm/201087634645?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

I chose it because of simplicity and the chance to vary the frequency. This enables to research: (1) different signal shapes, (2) behavior at increased frequency (10KHz) and (3) resonance if adequate.

I know that there are a lot of objections related to this approach but it shall be tried. There are a lot of discussions on what is true or viable - direct approach. But sometimes it is most convenient to choose the indirect approach: test what is readily available and exclude what is not working . Surviving setups will be the winner and give the chance for more refinements and even more learning.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 21, 2015, 03:52:46 PM
Bajac:

Thank you very much for the post. Yes in USPTO it is Non Final Rejection and Final Rejection..Congratulations if you have got through 103 rejections. very good work.  We have a problem. If we draft a patent that can be accepted by the Examiner client may feel dissatisfied that his IP is not fully protected. If he is not getting the patent client will again be unhappy. No large company cares about small Patent lawyers and small inventors. As a trait Lawyers are very very loyal to their clients and their cause. I hope you will understand this small post. Most Patent Lawyers try to obtain a patent for as a client explained to me as long as he has a patent he can get finances to launch his product in the market. So he does not care whether IP is protected and to what extent. Secondly 98% of the patents are not commercialized. Most are filed to block competitors from obtaining patents. If you have a Large company has an enemy, that company and its Lawyers have hundreds of thousands of methods to handle you. Have no doubts about that. Always the initial claims and final granted claims are different. Another problem for a person like me is that we handle multiple technologies and we are not domain experts. Inventors are the domain experts. If what your lawyer wrote and what you wrote after that are different there was a big communication gap.  I wish you good luck with your patents.

I only write facts that we have observed. So nothing here for me to post things that I do not know and if I do not know I state it upfront. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 21, 2015, 08:49:52 PM

This is quoted from the Alpoma net website..http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

I think the translation is done by Hanon but I do not know.


All the translations from spanish into english are by me. In the translations I copied the original spanish text and also my translation into english. I included the original spaninsh text and images in case anyone would like to go to the original spanish source text for more details, or try a better translation. It is important to keep original Figuera´s words in the document in order to have the highest fidelity in future translations.

This is the story: in January 2011 the owner of alpoma dot net website published in an spanish magazine and in his blog an historical report about Clemente Figuera. He asked for his patents to the Historical Archives department in the patent office and he just got the patent no. 44267 (patent from 1908) and patent 30375 (from 1902). The other 3 patents from 1902 were not available to be scanned because they were in bad shape as consecuence of humidity, this was the answer by the patent office.

As I got involved in this story, in october 2012 when this thread was born, I travelled twice to Madrid to visit the Historical Archives, and I could get a copy of the other 3 missing patents. Basically the clerks just told me to have a look. The old manuscripts were folded in the middle and they were in really bad shape. They told me just to look from the outside but without unfolding the manuscripts. Luckly I didn´t obey, and as the clerks were far from my table, I opened all of them and I could make photographs. Thanks to this, now we have patents no. 30376, 30377 and 30378 with us. I remember that day clearly in my mind.

Later I transcribed them into text and I translated into english. I also translated some letters, interviews to Mr. Figuera, the original spanish website and some other documents just available in spanish until then. You can find all this info into the next link. The original investigation and publication of the character of Clemente Figuera and all his story and historical background was done by alpoma dot net website owner.

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

Later this guy also researched about Constantino Buforn, an economical partner of Figuera, and he found that Buforn filed 5 more patents after the death of Figuera in 1908. Buforn patent were filed between 1910 and 1914, one per year (I do not know why so many identical patents). You can find those patents also in that link (only in spanish...they are 120 pages long and they are identical to the 1908 patent so I decided not to translate them except for a short extract with the parts different to the 1908 patent). Also there, you can find a document certifying the test of practical implementation of the patent from Buforn from 1910. It is clear that the generator was presented to the patent examiner and it worked (it passed the test), but it is not explicitly written the power input and output from the machine. It is a very short report. It is worth to read it.

I am sure that this generator worked in the birth of the 20th century. Now we just need to find the key to make it work again....in the birth of the 21st century ...

Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 22, 2015, 12:09:21 AM
No,no,no....you have to find original device or at least pictures of it. Translation of Buforn patents would help a lot also because I'm sure he did whatever he could to preserve all knowledge from Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 22, 2015, 01:35:23 AM
All the translations from spanish into english are by me. In the translations I copied the original spanish text and also my translation into english. I included the original spaninsh text and images in case anyone would like to go to the original spanish source text for more details, or try a better translation. It is important to keep original Figuera´s words in the document in order to have the highest fidelity in future translations.

This is the story: in January 2011 the owner of alpoma dot net website published in an spanish magazine and in his blog an historical report about Clemente Figuera. He asked for his patents to the Historical Archives department in the patent office and he just got the patent no. 44267 (patent from 1908) and patent 30375 (from 1902). The other 3 patents from 1902 were not available to be scanned because they were in bad shape as consecuence of humidity, this was the answer by the patent office.

As I got involved in this story, in october 2012 when this thread was born, I travelled twice to Madrid to visit the Historical Archives, and I could get a copy of the other 3 missing patents. Basically the clerks just told me to have a look. The old manuscripts were folded in the middle and they were in really bad shape. They told me just to look from the outside but without unfolding the manuscripts. Luckly I didn´t obey, and as the clerks were far from my table, I opened all of them and I could make photographs. Thanks to this, now we have patents no. 30376, 30377 and 30378 with us. I remember that day clearly in my mind.

Later I transcribed them into text and I translated into english. I also translated some letters, interviews to Mr. Figuera, the original spanish website and some other documents just available in spanish until then. You can find all this info into the next link. The original investigation and publication of the character of Clemente Figuera and all his story and historical background was done by alpoma dot net website owner.

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)

Later this guy also researched about Constantino Buforn, an economical partner of Figuera, and he found that Buforn filed 5 more patents after the death of Figuera in 1908. Buforn patent were filed between 1910 and 1914, one per year (I do not know why so many identical patents). You can find those patents also in that link (only in spanish...they are 120 pages long and they are identical to the 1908 patent so I decided not to translate them except for a short extract with the parts different to the 1908 patent). Also there, you can find a document certifying the test of practical implementation of the patent from Buforn from 1910. It is clear that the generator was presented to the patent examiner and it worked (it passed the test), but it is not explicitly written the power input and output from the machine. It is a very short report. It is worth to read it.

I am sure that this generator worked in the birth of the 20th century. Now we just need to find the key to make it work again....in the birth of the 21st century ...

Regards

EXCELLENT WORK! We all thank you for your significant contribution.

I wanted to provide an important clue from the 1910 Buforn's patent. See the attached snapshot from a paragraph found at the bottom of page 13.

You will have to excuse me because I am not a very good translator but I found it important to give it a try. I added the information in brackets [] for clarification, it does not belong to the document. Basically, this paragraph reads as follows:

“The mode to collect this current is so easy that its explanation can be excused since we only have to interpose in between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we will call inductors [inducing coils N and S], another electromagnet that we call induced [“Y” coil], in proximity to them [N and S cores], but without any communication with the same [N and S cores] while collecting in the induced [“Y” coils] the result of the phenomenon experienced by them [“Y” coils].”

The bold text clearly indicates that the "Y" iron core is not in direct contact with the N and S iron cores. This paragraph is badly written since there must be magnetic linkage (communication) between the induced Y coils and the inducing coils N & S.

Whenever I am performing a research for prior art, I only look at the drawings or sketches. 90% of the time I do not have a need to read the text in the patents, and I never read the claims. A patent owner cannot claim what is not being disclosed. The claims are irrelevant for the purpose of prior art search. If a patent shows your concept in the specifications, you do not have a patent even when it is not being claimed. If I see elements in the drawings that are close or look like my concept, then, I would start reading the patent to take a closer look.

Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 22, 2015, 02:57:34 AM
Interesting video I came across just now... hope it inspires.

Free Energy Alternating Dynamo and Exciter Motor - Diagrams - DIY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kCxHgM5zNI

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 22, 2015, 06:04:20 AM
Bajac:

With due respect, what you are thinking does not appear to me to be correct. The patent talks about the coils of N and S electromagnets not touching the coils of Y electromagnet. In a transformer the coils are wound one over the other. I think that concept is called Flux sharing or flux linking. In a generator the coils generate power by flux cutting ( If my understanding is correct) as in a dynamo where there is no contact between the rotating magnet and the output coils. Here a rotating magnetic field is being created by the N and S Coils and Lenz law free output is taken from Y coils. Therefore the coils of N, S and Y magnet are not in communication with each other or there is not direct touch or contact between the wires of the N, S and Y magnets.

There is another coil wound either under the Y coil or above the Y coil (I'm not really sure about it) and this coil is the one that provides the feedback power to the rotary device. This is indirectly indicated or disclosed here but in the last patent it is fully disclosed. 

So once the machine starts the feedback is given to the rotary device and the battery is removed and because of this the system continues to work. Prof Figuera claims that it would work indefinitely but that is wrong because of several factors which are obvious but one of them being the wear and tear of the brush, battery life of the battery that operates the small DC motor, the limited life span of the small DC motor etc. There are many other factors that will prevent that and make routine maintenance necessary but the device would work.

So many complications are not needed and it is this indefinitely word that made me feel that the invention is different and the worst mode of performing the invention alone has been disclosed. 

I do not know spanish but this has been posted by Doug1, Hanon and others repeatedly in this thread.

Many people in this thread appear to be spain. They want to restore the glory due to Figuera that has been unjustly suppressed. Agreed. But I see most of you going after the minor details that are not even needed but ignoring the major ones even with my very limited knowledge. Any way Good Luck to you all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 22, 2015, 01:40:07 PM
I have to say that I would have not expected a person with learning experience on building magnetic circuits to imply that drawings can show magnetic gaps when the intent of the design is not to have them. The order of magnitude in performance for a close-path magnetic circuit and one with gaps is thousands, or the order of the relative permeability. The de-rating in performance is analog to designing for a race car but showing it with a 3-ton load in the trunk. I am sure that if Figuera's intention was to have close magnetic circuits, he would have never ever depicted the circuit in the sketches with gaps.

Furthermore, a person with learning experience in building magnetic circuits should also know that a magnetic flux that enters a coil on one side and exit the coil on the other side, induces zero volts in the coil. For example, in order for the magnetic flux generated by the N electromagnet to reach the S electromagnets, said magnetic flux must enter and exit the Y coils. This will be the result of making a close magnetic path between the N and S cores. I remember commenting on the Thane Heins bitt transformer that it was a de-rated Figuera's generator because it shows the Figuera's configuration with close magnetic path.

To me, this issue is common sense, and therefore, it is becoming annoying to continue this discussion. I will not comment on this issue again until I see the results of an experiment.

I also wanted to say that I received the iron cores, last night. I will take them to a machine shop to shape them. I estimate this process to take between 3 to 4 weeks.

I will keep you posted.

Bajac

PS: Randy, the link does not work. Could you verify the webpage and re-post it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 22, 2015, 08:03:12 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kCxHgM5zNI

How to Build Nikola Tesla Free Energy Alternating Dynamo and Exciter Motor - Diagrams - DIY

by FlyFisher

I thought it would be a refreshing break ... it is inspiring when you think about the possibilities if it worked...

All the Best

PS if the link doesn't work... look the title up on youtube.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on July 22, 2015, 08:28:49 PM
Pertaining to the Figuera device, here is a passage from a book printed in 1910 on the construction of a Tesla high frequency coil.
The passage is about the primary transformer, running on 110 volt AC mains current.
_____

The efficient working of a transformer depends largely upon the design of the core ….  A straight core is always best to use; for on the fall of the current from its maximum value to zero, the magnetic flux falls from its maximum value, not to zero, but to a value which depends on the residual magnetism. The residual magnetism in an open circuit is much less than in a closed magnetic circuit, so that when the current suddenly becomes zero, the magnetic flux drops lower in an open circuit than in a closed one. As the electromotive force in the secondary is proportional to the fall in the magnetic field, it is greater with a straight core than with a closed circuit of iron.
_____

This explains to me why the later patents show straight cores.

Mack
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 23, 2015, 12:35:59 AM
Mack,


I assume you are referring to this book:


http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf (http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf)


What is the page where the passage can be found?


It is an interesting reading. But I wonder if we are comparing apples to apples. For instance, is the lower magnetic residual due to a lower magnetic field of the straight coil?


Randy,


The link works now. Thank you.


Bajac









Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 23, 2015, 12:36:28 AM
About the subject of the inducers and induced touching or not , I found something weird that I posted in this post with quotes to two Buforn patents:


http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg437938/ (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg437938/)


Buforn in his 1910 stated "no touching" between inducer and induced. Then in his 1911 patent stated the contrary : "touching" between inducer and induced. Why this change? I do not know


Finally in his 1914 he claimed both configuration and in this patent he included the detail that Ramaswami refers about "without communication between the inducer wire and the induced wire", which also is weird because it is supposed to be so without need for a formal statement


For any reason Buforn changed this detail: maybe a trick to mislead, maybe a complementary feature that he noted to work fine also  so time after his first patent....who knows...


What it is included in all patents is that the induced coil must "be placed properly" (quoting literally) . I guess that all placement and configuration should be tested in order to find the right one. Some OU generator as Hubbard, Hendershot, Don Smith and others is supposed to use big distances between coils and very open magnetic paths. I do not say that there shouldn´t be space between inducer and induced, but in case that an space is required it is possible that the objective is not a small gap to divert the induced magnetic field but a certain spatial placement


Sorry but I do not share the interpretation that Figuera draw the coil from a top point of view, with air-gaps, with transformer-type cores to divert the induced field away from the powering inducer and with 90º unphased signals. All these is quite a forced interpretation of the 1908 sketch to match a personal design. genuine design but not the one from Figuera. I have demostrated that the patents show that the drawing shows three straight cores (solenoids), in case of gaps required they do not have the aim of diverting the induced field, and that the two signals are opposite (180º unphased --> sin(alpha) & sin(alpha+180º). The 1902 also used two inducers without the objective of diverting the magnetic induced field.


I quote below a paragraph from Buforn´s 1914 where he included both possibilities:


Quote
"

The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
"


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 23, 2015, 12:44:16 AM
Randy,


About your question about the values of the resistors. I suggest you to play with the Excel simulation. The steps are these:
1- Fix the value of your DC source
2- Fix the value of the resistance (impedance) of your inducer coils: the values resulting from your device
3- Search for some value of the resitor values that get a proper signals shape


The simulation is very easy to use. I have done in Excel (Office) in order that everyone may use it without requiring any special software


In the last months I havent done new test. All that I have posted lately are quotes form the patent and possibilities of configurations


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 23, 2015, 01:30:23 AM
Quote


The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.

Oh My God! We need an official translator for the patents! :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

In no place within the paragraph, the author refer to wires or conductors. A key element in the paragraph is that the author defines what an "induced" is as "...otro electro-iman que denominaremos inducido,.. " that is "another electromagnet that we call induced." Then, there should be no question about the "induced" term. Induced does not refer to the wire but the electromagnet - the combination of the iron core and the coil. If you do not believe me, just use a Spanish-English dictionary and perform the translation word by word and let me know if you find the word cable, alambre, conductor, hilo, etc., which are the Spanish equivalent for wires.

We need a person who can be impartial to validate the translated text or start from scratch. I can understand the mistake if the translator states that the work was done using candles or had a few drinks.

We need translators that are not biased! A translator is not supposed to allow his/her emotions to taint his/her work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 23, 2015, 02:47:22 AM
I have to admit that I also made a mistake in the translation when I referred to the "Y coils" instead of "Y electromagnets." Please, note that the prefix in the paragraph defined N and S as electromagnets, also. Then, a more accurate translation shall be:


Quote
“The mode to collect this current is so easy that its explanation can be excused since we only have to interpose in between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we will call inductors [inducing electromagnets N and S], another electromagnet that we call induced [“Y” electromagnet], in proximity to them [N and S electromagnets], but without any communication with the same [N and S electromagnets] while collecting in the induced [“Y” electromagnets] the result of the phenomenon experienced by them [“Y” electromagnets].”


Based on the patent sketches and because in electrical whenever we refer to interaction between two electromagnets is meant to be the interaction of their magnetic field flowing through their iron cores, it is generally understood that the relative placement of two electromagnets refers to the separation between their iron cores.

I am reattaching both, the paragraph and the part sketch so you can have visually available references.

I know, you do not have to remind me, but I promise, this is my last comment on this issue.


Hasta la vista, baby!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2015, 02:53:34 AM
Hanon,
I thank you for the work you have done and will do.

Moving away from the heated debate...
Do you think the " Figuera "  has something in common with tesla's apparatuses, the hubbard device or the ramaswami. Or do you think the Figuera is a stand alone unique device. If you have already stated as such ( forgive the redundancy ) please give me the post # and the date and I'll go looking for it... I have the 555 circuit up and ready to test things but alas the methodology has changed ( my friend and I soldered three parts of iron to make a iron c core and the info on the website was erased )... I don't have the luxury of a work space or a lab like some experimenter's do... my office is official junk space and the garage is cluttered...

The link that I provided is unique in the respect that... I have studied the design of Tesla's apparatus for receiving radiant energy and have seen the G and the M in the diagram but until somebody else explained it... it made a lot of logical sense. Maybe ppl have seen it but it was the first time I saw it...

All the Best

PS
Bajac,
what did you think of the link video...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 23, 2015, 03:40:35 AM
Randy,


The video seems to be very interesting but I will need more time to analyze it.


I will take time off from this forum for about six months to a year. It is the time I need to cool off.


The true is that I have too much research work and no time to post. Very very interesting research work.


Eventually, I am planning on posting a video of the testing of the Figuera's device.


If you have any questions, please, feel free to send me a personal message. Or even better, we can keep contact via email. I will not be reading this forum.


Hanon, keep up the good work! I know you did such a bad translation of the paragraph on purpose, just to annoy me. That is why I replied the way I did. No hard feelings.


Farewell guys!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 23, 2015, 04:27:41 AM
Since you all are in the process of enjoying a well deserved short break...

These are from a series of 16mm colour films made for schools. They were all made in Eric Laithwaite's "Heavy Electrical Laboratory" in the Electrical Engineering Department at Imperial College London.

NOTE: The "Rotatable Copper Cylinder" he uses to "test" the magnetic field direction. A rather simple to build and use device but rather effective I would say.

Professor Eric Laithwaite (1921-1997) of Imperial College London shows how a consideration of shape and size has had a profound effect on the design of electro-magnetic machines.

Professor Eric Laithwaite: Shaping Things to Come - 1972. Section on the evolution of motors/dynamos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5mA4l6xmGs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5mA4l6xmGs)

Professor Eric Laithwaite: Magnetic River 1975
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI_HFnNTfyU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI_HFnNTfyU)

Professor Eric Laithwaite: Motors Big and Small - 1971
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWiYsRi2Dss (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWiYsRi2Dss)

Professor Eric Laithwaite: The Circle of Magnetism - 1968
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tJfqMYHaQw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tJfqMYHaQw)

Eric Laithwaite - Information Blog
http://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/blog/videoarchive/2009/12/09/eric-laithwaite/ (http://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/blog/videoarchive/2009/12/09/eric-laithwaite/)
[His "Christmas Lectures," although geared towards younger set, I found quite interesting and entertaining (I don't think I' will ever actually grow up! - nor do I want to!)
http://www.rigb.org/blog/2013/december/eric-laithwaite (http://www.rigb.org/blog/2013/december/eric-laithwaite)

Another source of older electrical presentations [see "The Nature of Things"]:
http://www.richannel.org/collections (http://www.richannel.org/collections)

An example: (the famous) Sir Lawrence Bragg: Nature hates a change. 
1962 Sir William Lawrence Bragg returned for a second series of ‘The Nature of Things’ - See more at:
http://www.richannel.org/collections/2014/nature-of-things#/the-reactionaries (http://www.richannel.org/collections/2014/nature-of-things#/the-reactionaries)

The establishment (Royal Institute - RI) set out to ruin Laithwaite simply because he dared prove Newtons Third Law (action - reaction) did not apply to somehting as simple as a spinning Top. Head the lesson here if you plan to publish or present anything out of the main stream for "pier" review.
Prof. Eric Laithwaite - Inertial Propulsion Film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQp4grGdqY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQp4grGdqY)

Eric was a great inspiration, knew his magnetic's better than any and was an excellent mentor.

Quick Question: Just in passing - Hannon, do you know anything about NEO?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 23, 2015, 07:36:30 AM
Furthermore, a person with learning experience in building magnetic circuits should also know that a magnetic flux that enters a coil on one side and exit the coil on the other side, induces zero volts in the coil. For example, in order for the magnetic flux generated by the N electromagnet to reach the S electromagnets, said magnetic flux must enter and exit the Y coils. This will be the result of making a close magnetic path between the N and S cores.

Bajac;

What you are saying above is correct as long as the Electromagnets are placed like NS-SN-NS and Zero volts would be the result from the Y coils. Why? Because you are violating the Nature.

This is the case where the Magnets are placed NS-SN-NS In that case of violation of nature, the voltage in the middle coil is Zero. You can check earlier posts and Both Hanon and another member confirming that the zero voltage is the result where iron core is continuous but the polarity of the Y coil is reversed.

Where the Natures path of NS-NS-NS is followed we have reached up to 90 volts in small magnetic cores and we reached 65 volts in Y coils with 220 watts alone being given to the primaries. This was the case of a small Y coil of about 350 turns in 12 inch long core of a small Y magnet. Where the primaries are larger and the secondaries are larger in comparision to what we did and connected in series and you follow the natures path by giving a low input high output is possible. Hanon has earlier posted that BuForn has indicated in the last patent that for giving just 100 watts to the primaries he was able to obtain 20000 watts as output.

I therefore have to confirm that zero volts come only when we place the iron core continuous but violate the nature by placing the middle core as  NS-SN-NS but Let me state categorically that we get signficant voltage in the middle core by following the NS-NS-NS polarity of nature. I have not tested with a space between the primaries and secondaries as I felt that the secondary would turn due to repulsion and that we may be injured in the process. If you are saying you keep the secondary fixed with fixing means and then check between zero voltage and a few volts is orders of magnitude greater only but why violate the easy and simple path of nature?

This is some thing any one can check. Why bother about earlier scientists and their teachigs when we can take action and learn what is the fact. This is what we did.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 23, 2015, 11:14:59 AM
@ Bajac
With all respect, in ref. to your post 2436, I disagree with your interpretation.

In the "RAE" (the Spanish official dictionary") there are two definitions for the word "devanado"

The second one is "bobina" which means: coil, (no electromagnet, which is: electroiman)

I truly hope the best for your success
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 23, 2015, 11:32:31 AM

In no place within the paragraph, the author refer to wires or conductors.
 .....

We need a person who can be impartial to validate the translated text or start from scratch. I can understand the mistake if the translator states that the work was done using candles or had a few drinks.

We need translators that are not biased! A translator is not supposed to allow his/her emotions to taint his/her work.

I do not know why I take the time to post in detail and to write in english. I do my best to be understood by anyone who want to understand me. Please read or re-read my post. It is clearly explained there. I said that something weird is in 1910 and 1911 patent that I do not know the answer, but I quoted the 1914 where Buforn included both possibilities.

As far as your accusation against me that my translations do not include the word for wire / conductor /cable / winding. I just quote again from the patent. In spanish those words are:  hilo / alambre / cable / devanado, and of course that the word "devanado" (in english "winding") is included in the original patent text.

Again you are discrediting yourself. Do not blame me of bad-translation if your have not read the 1914 patent. 

Sorry for not sharing your forced view of the "top view transformer-type cores with splitted primary and air-gaps to divert the induced field" that you promote. Figuera did not used any of those words in his 1908 patent text. It is my belief that if your interpretation were wrong you are doing a lot of damage to this project because now your paper is in post #1 and everyone read it and follow your view. I try to be more precise, using always ideas directly extracted from the patent text. If you are angry with me (I mainly quote the patents an share the key points) you do not need to accuse of creating disinfo with my "mis-guiding" translations as you have called to these translations. I included the original spanish text in the files in order that anyone may feel free to re-do the translations as their will. I encourage you to do it. At least you will find the time to read carefully the text and grasp all the details, Which I am not sure if you have done so far.

I just attach an image from page 13-14 extracted from the patent No. 57955 filed by Buforn in 1914. Note the spanish word "devanado" (in english, "winding"), the word that you said that I invented in my translatation. I just marked in yellow this word to emphatize it.  Translation of the whole sentence: " but in no case it has to be any communication between the induced winding and the inducer winding".

I will stop replying to this topic about the type of core shape and the placement of the induced coil. I have already shown all the references to this topic included in the patents. In my oppinion the tests must cover all different possibilities because we do not know what is refered as "properly placed" as Figuera and Buforn include literally in their patents.

Bye

Ps: Randy, I will answer your post the next time I will have a chance and time to get connected. I prefer to answer first to this accusations against me and my translations.         


DEVANADO = WINDING  . And it is written in the original patent text. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 23, 2015, 05:15:01 PM
Oh I see

What is Bajac saying..

I think he is saying if you provide a small air gap and then provide the electromagnet in the NS-NS-NS configuration then you still provide magnetism to the iron core of the secondary but the iron core has the air gap so the primary will not know the presence of the secondary and primary will not be loaded whether the secondary is loaded or not. If we put 1 mm plastic sheet full of 1 mm holes the said efffect will happen between the primary and secondary for we are using minimum of 6 mm iron rods and the small gap prevents the primary from looking at the secondary load and so will not increase. This will ensure Lenz law free output and this is what is Figuera Patent teaches is his comment.

I would Agree that this will happen. No repulsion. Only attractive forces are present.  But there is a loss however small of magnetic flow in the air gap. But this is not the only method. The patent teaches two methods.

Bajac and Hanon are disputing each other only whether coils alone are present or iron core is present. with the air gap present like that whether it is a coil or electromagnet both may work but I would think that an electromagnet would work better than coil alone.

So Lenz free output can still be obtained when the Rods are connected.  I have checked and discussed the one with the Rods connected for the magnetism flows through the iron thousands of times more than in the air and the air gap however small will reduce that.

Bajac confused by saying that if you interconnect with the iron then the output in the secondary is zero. That is wrong if the coils are placed in the NS-NS-NS configuration.

As far as I have experimented I have come across at least four methods by which Lenz law can be totally avoided or substantially reduced. The air gap method with the magnets placed NS-NS-NS is only one method.  If the coils are placed NS-SN-NS the magnets will try to move away due to repulsion and I need to check whether the 1mm gap with 1 mm holes in many places will make the middle magnet to work. Howard Johnson says that the Magnetic flux due to this repulsion is three times greater than the attraction but it makes the system dangerously unstable. Repulsion is useful only for motive forces and the irony is that we have been using repulsive motors at higher speeds to make them work like geneators with little efficiency.

So there is nothing new here. For a person with hands on experience, the law of nature is immediately clear.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 23, 2015, 05:18:37 PM
SolarLab,
Its quite refreshing to watch the mild mannered English professor and His views amongst the boxing arena we have here in the " Figuera Titleist Heavyweight Championship of the World " fight...

which reminds me...I better get back to my experimentations...

All the best

Ps. I agree with MadMack... the results of our work should determine who is right/correct ( no offense to anyone )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on July 23, 2015, 09:31:58 PM
Mack,


I assume you are referring to this book:


http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf (http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf)


What is the page where the passage can be found?


It is an interesting reading. But I wonder if we are comparing apples to apples. For instance, is the lower magnetic residual due to a lower magnetic field of the straight coil?

Bajac

Bajac,

If you are reading this, yes that is the book. The passage is in chapter 2, pages 3 & 4. Since it was printed in 1910 I feel it is representative of what was proper at the time the patents were written.

I meant only to point out a valid reason why straight cores may have been depicted in the patent and used in the actual device.

IMO all this arguing about different designs should be settled through experimental building and testing. After all, anything else is just speculation.

Mack

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 23, 2015, 11:34:06 PM
@Madmack..Sir I agree with you.. Went through the quote in the book and it is correct. Magnetism goes through iron 50000 times more than in air and even the 1mm gap I considered testing was considered too much of loss by my mentors. As the book says and as you correctly pointed out the gap would make the magnetic field to collapse and that would cause Lenz effects.  I apologize for the mistake.

@Bajac..See this is the problem. After having done experiments for two years with continuous iron core, I find that your gap theory may not be able to avoid the Lenz law effects but in fact to the contrary make the magnetic field oscillation to synchornize with the electrical field oscillation and as Madmack has pointed out will cause the collapse of the magnetic field.. That is what causes back emf in the first place. I apologize for the mistake by me and I can say categorically that continous iron core is the best method and especially a smaller iron core with coils wound on a smaller iron core being placed between opposite poles of two large primary cores alone have been found by us to be best mode. In fact the coils have to be wound just to cover the iron and prevent the opposite poles from jumping at each other and If coils are wound well over the iron core their performance has degraded substantially. This is experimental data I have already posted.  For the same reason your comments on Thane heins being a degraded Figuera transformer may not be correct. I have not studied the Thane Heins transformer by experimenting with it and so I apologize that I cannot confirm much on that.

Since we learnt electromagnetism not by what is taught by books but by going against what is stated in books (what prevents a step up transformer to have larger wires but longer turns - uneconomical of course but what would be the result..COP<1 only as per transformer design but you put a secondary to go along with the primary and around the primary then you have COP>1. It is that easy. Repeatedly verified by us. Transformer mode or induction coil mode of one primary and one secondary is always COP<1. That we also verified.

I would suggest that real electromagnetism  principles are available in the old books and the first motionless generator was built in 1871 by Daniel McFarland Cook but it hides trade secrets but which are obvious to me now. The books after the second world war have not disclosed fully all magnetic concepts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on July 24, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Once again, I have to come back but this time is for a good cause, I have to apologize to Hanon.

Someone sent me a message and pointed me to the mistake I had made. I took the 1914 Quote you posted on reply #2434 as your translation for the one I posted on reply #2427 for the 1910 patent. I normally do not react like I did, but considering you are the key person in this forum, and most important researcher and translator of the Figuera’s history, I got very angry wrongly thinking that you have done such stupidity – risk your credibility for the sake of annoying me. Of course, knowing your work and thinking that you have done a bad translation on purpose, I could not believe my eyes. Happily however, it was I who was reading the forum with candles. It might be due to the tremendous amount of work I have with my private research projects and projects at my job.

I am sorry and I sincerely apologize for my behavior! And continue keeping this forum alive.

That being said, I will not post on the forum but before I do that I want to refer to Mack and SolarLab.

@Mack, SolarLab,
I am kind of impressed with your postings. I am under the impression that you have a formal education in physics and electricity. If that is the case and you would like some challenging research work, I would be glad to share with you some of my ongoing research work. It requires knowledge of electric machines and electromagnetic theory. I would like to form a small team so we can generate ideas about their interpretations and solutions. If the answer is yes to the proposal above, please, send me a personal message because I will not be coming into this forum.

I cannot leave without a word to NR. It would be very helpful if you show your work in the form of pictures and videos. Less talking more showing. In addition please, read my posts again about the gaps. I have never said that the voltage induced in the Y coils is zero, but that the magnetic flux moving across between N and S coils induces zero volts in the Y coils. The portion of the flux that does not do the cross-talking will induce a voltage in the Y-coil. However, it will be a much smaller voltage and power similar to the Thane Heins Bitt transformer. If you bridge the gaps of the Figuera’s 1908 generator you will end up with the Bitt transformer. The Bitt should have a much lower power density than the Figuera’s 1908 generator.

It is interesting to note how they keep changing the size and materials of the closed path core in the Bitt transformer. The latter is an effort to get some results by changing the reluctance of the different magnetic paths connecting the three coils. Figuera solved this inefficiency issue by increasing the reluctance of the magnetic path connecting the three coils by adding the gaps. The Bitt effort is another attempt to re-invent the wheel, a wheel that was already shown to the world by Mr. Figuera in 1908. See the attached pictures and notice the location of the three coils and the closed magnetic path. If you want to build the Bitt transformer is OK, but I think you would be better off doing it in the Bitt transformer thread.

From the bottom of my heart, I wish you good luck in your experiments! So long Guys.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 24, 2015, 03:06:49 AM
Bajac:

I have no problem showing videos, pictures, construction notes etc. I offered to assist any replicator who wants to replicate. Less than a handful of people contacted me. Less talking more working is what my mentors tell me. Before I post any videos or pictures my mentors around the world want me to meet certain standards. My mentors in India would allow me to post videos, pictures and constructon notes only after validation by Labs ( two different labs in India). Until that time I cannot and will not post videos and pictures and full construction notes. You need to recongize that formal education in Electricity and Magnetism is misleading. I'm pleased with the post and wish you Good Luck in your research projects.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on July 24, 2015, 03:44:51 AM
Cuanto más se habla del tema mas se desvía del mismo.
7 electroimanes colectores mas 14 electroimanes inductores, bobinas iguales
14 electroimanes colectores mas 7 electroimanes inductores, bobinas iguales

The more you talk about it but deviates from this.
7 electromagnets collectors more electromagnets 14 inducers, coils equal
Electromagnets 14 plus 7 inductors collectors electromagnets, coils equal

El consumo de electricidad en las 3 ondas representadas ¿es el mismo?
El consumo de los 3 multiplicadores representados ¿es el mismo?

Electricity consumption in the 3 waves represented is it the same?
3 consumption multipliers represented is it the same?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 24, 2015, 04:29:51 AM
An old image, by Kekhoo, (I think)  which sumarize the aim of the 1908 commutator

It is not the same as AC!!!!. If somebody do not understand it please stop saying that it is the same as AC

Link to image:
http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/150672/image// (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/150672/image//)


Actually this picture is just as inaccurate as the others. If you look at how the device is wired you would see that there are segments. These copper segments are separated by a space. So when the brush is between the copper segments there is no current and voltage. The picture you posted shows an increase from zero to max but it doesn't take into consideration what happens when the brush is between the segments.

In essence you actually has a series of rapid impulses that pass through a resistance. To add to this Buforn call it a "coiled resistance". So you can think of it as a sharp impulse dis-charger that doesn't under any circumstance create a smooth progression.

On page 13 of the first Buforn end of the first paragraph he states the following in regards to operating his dis-charger:

Quote
"We consistently change the intensity of the currents that pass through the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets N. and S."

Maybe this is just a phrase of the times? but how does a current, that's responsible for creating a magnetic field, pass through the magnetic field. This almost implies that the magnetic field is already there prior to the current. If that is the case what is creating this magnetic field.

He also states in his patent that the entire effect is created in the primary/primary action of the device. He states that to "use these currents is almost trivial to explain"(paraphrasing) this mean that a secondary winding is insignificant to the creation of the effect. This also means that you only have to concentrate on a primary configuration as this is where the effect materializes.

There are two very important rules, per say, to the device that he states. When I get a minute and find them I will post the translation.

Nice thread

Discharger....REVISED
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 24, 2015, 07:17:35 AM
Maybe this is just a phrase of the times? but how does a current, that's responsible for creating a magnetic field, pass through the magnetic field. This almost implies that the magnetic field is already there prior to the current. If that is the case what is creating this magnetic field.

Is is probable, that since the current that is being used is DC or what Doug1 referred to as Undulated DC, the core would have become a permanent magnet. Since the Primary is place where the DC current is supplied Primary makes the more powerful but oscillating DC electromagnets. It is very probable that in such a case the Y core would also become a permanent magnet core. This also implies that the device cannot exceed certain temperatures to operate. The heat inside the iron must be less for this to remain intact and the device unlike what is depicted must be put inside coolant tanks that must dissipate heat immediately.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MadMack on July 24, 2015, 04:45:15 PM
Greetings Core,

Please review the patent text. The brush is in contact with two segments at all times. The circuit is never interrupted at the commutator.

Actually the picture you posted the link to, the “original” is closest, but still not correct. If you look at the commutator jumpers that are shown in the patents you will see this; the end connections each span two adjacent segments. Thus the time spent at the peaks (max and 0) of the wave is twice the time at every other step of the wave. :)

Mack
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 24, 2015, 06:00:22 PM
Core,


It is exactly as Madmack states. The brush is always in connection with two contacts, therefore the signal is continuous without big sparks. It is a system "make before break" . The patent describes this feature clearly:


Quote from the patent:


Quote

 ...  the brush “O” rotates around the cylinder “G” and always in contact with two of their contacts.




Randy,
About the excitation circuit that I made: I built the electronic circuit with the 555 and two CD4017 . I do not have an oscilloscope so I build one DIY scope this some resistors to attatch to my PC sound card. To operate this electronic circuit you need an scope. In my case with this DIY scope was quite difficult to do many tests because you have to tune it for each test. Therefore it was quite difficult to do the test and be sure that I was injecting the proper signals to the electromagnets. Also I build an schematic which were uploaded by one user to this thread. This schematics required just one center tap transformer and one or two diade bridges and a capacitor. Instead of using a center tap transformer that I do not have I tried to build it with to normal transformers attached. I do not know what I did wrong that this system was heating a lot and I was not sure if it worked properly. I will look for this schematics in case you want to use it. The next time I will get connected I will post it. It is supposed to work fine because it was tested by this user into a simulation program


Finally I devised a very simple system to generate both signals in opposition. It was just as simple as building a composed magnetic field: adding a DC magnetic field + AC  in one inducer, and the same DC field - The same AC in the second inducer. To add or substract the AC field is just to connect it in the same sense or in the contrary . When I designed this system I had already stopped doing test, so I have not test it yet.


Regards


Edit: I have found the schematic done by user maddann. Here the link to his post: [size=78%]http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/ (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/)[/size][size=78%]    [/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 25, 2015, 01:16:36 AM
Hanon,
Thank you for your reply... I have some personal business to tend to before I start testing again... I have seen that particular diagram before - and it will take a couple of days to wrap my head around the diagram and the simulation circuit. I have the 555 circuit too and as I have stated before - that I just got my circuit to handle 12 volts at 8 amps before having surgery done.

All the best

PS Looking at the diagram in the am...
1. My 555 circuit can deliver up to 8 amps ( BDX53 ) at 12 volts
2. I have a wall wart from my sprinkler system that uses AC ( input 120 AC VAC 60 Hz. 25 watt - output 25.5 VAC 650 mA )
the questions that quickly arise are...
A. My wall wart has three wires ( two black wires and a green ( ground - I assume ) is this green wire going to be not connected ?
B. Am I bring the AC output to 12 Volts AC ?
C. Why are you bringing AC into picture? why not just bring two 555 circuits... ( just thinking out loud )... and start the other in the other side...
D. The two arrows on the left are they correctly going both towards the right or towards each other?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 25, 2015, 05:13:56 PM
Hannon

Finally I devised a very simple system to generate both signals in opposition. It was just as simple as building a composed magnetic field: adding a DC magnetic field + AC  in one inducer, and the same DC field - The same AC in the second inducer. To add or substract the AC field is just to connect it in the same sense or in the contrary . When I designed this system I had already stopped doing test, so I have not test it yet.

 That is pretty much how a magnetic amplifier works.It can add to or subtract from, to control the current to run other devices.. Sometimes they use saturation but there is always a trade off of problems depending on the method. I was shocked to see an entire new rehash going on. Same communication problems ,potato potado.
  One difference in a mag amp is they use dc to control ac or rectified feed back to add to bi stable or not depends on what you want it to do. Im not saying the figurea device is a mag amp just that there are some similarities. NS Im not sure what meant by the magnet is permanent ,fluctuating dc is far from steady like a permanent magnet. Maybe you were thinking about it in terms of not flipping poles. In that case the Y circuit would see a flux change from the outsides in strength alternating left to right and back again. The motion of the field as seen by the Y is independent of what caused it to change. They are two different things. It would not require cooling in the way your thinking certainly not anymore then a motor or transformer heats up. If you start looking at volt/turns per cm and the amount of flux your core can handle plus the size of conductor required for the expected heat in the windings you will get a better sense of scale. 
  You all have fun ,I have to go change the clutch on my truck. Nothing but bloody knuckles and creative cursing today.  I like to do my own work because it always ends up that way. I end up fixing what I payed to have fixed so I may as well skip the boob and just do it myself the first time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 25, 2015, 09:32:32 PM
Doug1

Thanks for the post and hope you would make your truck run all by yourself.

My question was very simple. I create powerful and large magnetic fields that are effective for several feet.

But when we subject permanent magnets to these fields they violently oscillate and do not like going near the electromagnet. However in the case of DC Electromagnet this may not happen for they are also permanent magnets except that they are more powerful or larger in size.

I know how to make a powerful permanent magnet using soft iron or alloys of soft iron. They may or may not be as powerful as a neodymium magnet but while neodymium is smaller in size these magnets can be made to any size and shape we want.

Let us assume that there is a 1 mm gap and we create a powerful magnetic field in the Primaries. The current is undulated DC as you told Alvaro.

Will a permanent magnet placed at 1 mm away from the DC electromagnet be demagnetized by the oscillaating core? Or will it remain a permanent magnet? Will the permanent magnet oscillate along with the undulated DC electromagnet and in such a case if coils are wound over the (assumed) oscillating permanent magnet generate electricity?  Was this why Figuera went to great lengths to put up all this complicated arrangement of commutator, resistor, circuits and multiple cores etc..

My understanding of the situation was that when a permanent magnet oscillates it must produce voltage. It did not for I was using AC. Whether I use AC or FW diode bridge created pulsating DC or full positive sign wave unidirectional current, the magnet will be demagnetized and core will also be demagnetized although it will retain a very small residual magnetizm.

Now could this be the reason how Figuera was able to get a large output because he made a permanent magnet to oscillate and create rotating magnetic fields instead of rotating the permanent magnet as in a dynamo? Will not this induced current convert the permanent magnet to become an Electromagnet and lose its magnetism or increase its magnetism..

I assume that there is a gap as stated by Bajac and I assume that the core is a straight core except for this 1 mm distance and 1 mm gap.

I normally do not assume things just do things and observe and learn. Here I do not understand what is undulated DC, what is its behavior and whether it will demagnetize a permanent magnet exposed to its wave at a very close distance without touching it,  with it make it oscillate and will it create a time varying magnetic field due to the oscillation created in the permanent magnet. If the poles do not change and if they remain NS-NS-NS only will this enable the middle permanent magnet to generate output.

But with all that If Undulated DC will not demagnetize I believe that the airgap is not needed and it will be wasteful and permanent magnet can be placed NS-NS-NS..

Regarding your comment also I'm very doubtful. Figuera is supposed to have created 550 volts. That is almost 37 amps in coils wound around the permanent magnets ( assumed) in the central. A lot of heat is bound to happen.

Can you please explain this possibility?

From the beginning I'm unable to understand why all this complexity is needed. As a Lawyer I learn principles and apply that principles to different facts of different situations. This is how I'm trained. So looking at the principle, if you need to create a regular circular rotary strong and weak magnetic fields in N and S magnets the simplest way is to use a coil connected in serail and wound around the cores. Agreed it was to avoid Lenz law but I have learnt to avoid Lenz law totally in AC electromagnets. I have not disclosed it and would like to file a patent for it.

As far as I know this is all totally new. Please advise your insight on the undulated DC current either enhancing the permanent magnet or demagnetizing the permanent magnet. Does the air gap required in order not to be demagnetized?

I have looked at all the various double wave signals. They all have one thing in common. That is simple. 180' opposition always. That simply means that the NS-NS-NS pattern was the one used and natures path was followed.

Please oblige. I request other learned friends to share the insight as well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 26, 2015, 06:12:02 AM
Core,


It is exactly as Madmack states. The brush is always in connection with two contacts, therefore the signal is continuous without big sparks. It is a system "make before break" . The patent describes this feature clearly:


I respectfully disagree, for starters I know how hard it can be to translate a language. Translation is easier when your face to face with someone because you can use there body language and face expression to better understand the context of there words. Below I translated page 11 of the Buforn patent starting from the last paragraph into page 12. This is from his first patent.

I have made every effort to find the right English word that matches the Spanish meaning.

Quote

Using to your advantage a magnetic field composed of a series of electro-magnets
N and S, a resistance and isolated contacts on a circumference in which the contacts
are linked with half of the ends of the resistance and the other contacts
united directly with the resistance.

Added to this a swivel brush always in communication with more then one contact.
Now one of the ends of the resistance is united with the electro-magnet N and the other
is with the S, as a result when the brush is communicating with the first contact
the current all goes to electro N at the time the S are empty, due to the fact that the
current that has to go to them has to advance all the resistance, 
when the brush is in communication with the second, the current no longer all goes to the
N due to having to pass through parts of the resistance and some current starts to pass
to S due to the fact that it has to pass less resistance then before and like that
the circuit closes successively.

Resulting in the current slowing or increasing as it traverses more or less resistance
and therefor varying constantly and that function we make continuous and orderly,
and here what we achieved is the proposed order.


Now, I understand it says "Added to this a swivel brush always in communication with more then one contact." however we see from the diagrams that half of the contacts are jumped together. As an example Contact 1, located between 12 and 1 o'clock is tied to Contact 8. When the brush is touching Contact 1 it is also in communication with Contact 8. When on Contact 2 it also communicates with Contact . Here we can see that the brush is always in communication with two contact points.

If we say that the brush covers Contact 1 and Contact 2 then the brush is in communication with four points, that would be Contacts 1 and Contact 8 and Contact 2 and Contact 7.

Also Buforn states:
Quote
"...as a result when the brush is communicating with the first contact"
that means one contact. He did not say "....as a result when the brush is communicating with the first set of contacts" or ".......as a result when the brush is communicating with the first and second contact" or ".......as a result when the brush is communicating with the first and sixteenth contact" he specifically states one contact.

Then to complete the above sentence he continues and says
Quote
".........the current all goes to electro N at the time the S are empty, due to the fact that the
current that has to go to them has to advance all the resistance"
Note the use of the word "ALL" in the patent he uses the Spanish word "toda" that means "ALL" if the brush is contacting two contacts simultaneously then the S electromagnet goes through ALL the resistance as the brush will always skip one because it covers two contact points.

Finally, towards the end of the paragraph he says:
Quote
"........the fact that it has to pass less resistance then before and like that the circuit closes successively.

Again if the brush covers two contacts, effectively putting four points in communication, then the circuit is "always" closed and never opens. But again he states "the circuit closes successively" That line would make no sense if the circuit was always closed.


Doesn't matter to me what direction people take, just wanted to provide another translation that sheds a different opinion on the operation of there dis-charger.


-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 26, 2015, 06:40:21 AM
BTW... In the dis_charger you will only have mad sparks when the brush is in communication with with the points that tie directly to the coil bypassing the resistance. When it hits the resistance amperage is reduced effectively reducing the sparking. Since we dont know the values of resistance and this resistance could be a solenoid with taps its hard to tell what type, if any, sparks he had.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 26, 2015, 06:43:13 AM
Dear All:

I have another doubt on the air gap theory..

I think these are the general principles found valid.

Electricity is induced in a conductor When the conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic fields. Alternatively When a magnetisable material is subjected to time varying electric field, it is converted to an electromagnet. When a conductor is wound over such electromagnet as a coil,  electricity is induced in the conductor. The length of the coil, thickness of coil and the number of turns and freqeucny and voltage of the time varying electric field determines the induced current.  The first time varying electric field or the electromagnets through which the first current is sent is called the Primary or Inductor. The second conductor that gets induced electricity is called Secondary or induced.  The induced tends to oppose the inductor (Lenz Law) and so more inducing current needs to be supplied to overcome this opposition and still continue the production of current. These are the general principles whether inductor is rotating or remains motionless and uses rotating magnetic fields. The one possible exception to Lenz law is if the induced is placed between two opposite poles of two primaries and aligned to be attracted by them. For in this case only the attractive forces are present and Lenz law normally assumes that the charges that causes induction are identical charges but if the charges are different as in the case of opposite poles, Lenz law will not apply. The magnetic field propagates in 1000 times to 50000 times more in highly magnetisable material than in air. A small air gap can significantly reduce the effect of the initial magnetization and can require much higher input at the primary. The air gap effectively creates a significant breaking mechnism for the magnetic field propagation and diverts it away from the core to a significant extent or reduces it.

Now the principles taught by the book referred by Mack refers to a straight core being far better than a closed magnetic core like EI core, Toroid, Square or any other form where the magnetic field is closed. We found this to be true after significant experimentation.

Now I'm not able to really understand the statements of Bajac on this point. If the number of times the magnetic field is increased or frequency is increased the induced emf or voltage in the secondary would be increased. The air gap effectively will eliminate this relationship if the straight core is absent.

I also looked at the explanation given by Bajac to BITT transformer and the straight core. There is no connection. The BITT is a closed magnetic core in all forms it is indicated and even in 1910 it was known that a straight bar is better than a closed magnetic core. So the comparision itself is wrong. A better and more straight forward comparision would have been the 1908 bar of Figuera with gaps and 1914 BuForn patent with the straight bar. We have already found that the 1914 straight bar is the most effective way of obtaining maximum output using minimum amount of core. We have also seen that AC requires less iron, less wires and provides a better effect than a FW diode bridge driven unidirectional full positive sine wave pulsating DC type of current. The air gap will break not only the magnetic field but also the effect due to frequency will be significantly reduced.

One very knowledgeable person indicated an air gap of 0.2 mm in transformers can be considered. That is almost as thin as a paper I think. How do we avoid the attracting iron core from tearing it off. More than this distance the magnetism will be adversely affected. I do not know how such a thing can be done. if use copper film with holes, we will only create more hystersis losses. A plastic material would stand only up to certain temperatures. A very thin, heat resistant, non magnetic film that will be able to withstand the attractive forces would be needed. Honestly I do not think it was available in 1908. A straight NS-NS-NS core on the other hand works fine. It does not look like our transformers do but it is certainly the best mode. If a coolant mechanism can be devised for that Lenz law free output can be easily produced from such straight bars. While I'm saying this from my first hand experimental experience Mack has shown the 1910 book and cited it to avoid creating any controversy. Another friend has given me a 1842 book. I have to complete the reading of these two books. These books do not ask us to assume a closed system as current books do.

I request guidance from other Learned friends on this point as well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 26, 2015, 11:54:03 AM
Rams,
I would use Electrical insulation paper... comes in many thicknesses and spray it with high heat or non flammable paint. I would use a thickness of .1 mm with many coating of non flammable paint...

Or ceramic shims...
the space shuttle used ceramic tiles... but I would imagine they are expensive...

Lastly... I would also imagine the bigger iron pieces you have the easier the job gets...

All the Best

PS if you were to use PVC it is a non flammable plastic and you could cut your own sizes
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 26, 2015, 03:11:58 PM
NRamaswami
  I dont know when or why you got on the idea of using permanent magnets. Old school dynamos the ones that actually became useful did not. It did not take long for them to figure out that a stronger controlled magnetic field could be made using current over a static permanent magnet. To answer your question though ,exposing a permanent magnet to an alternating field is not why a magnet used that way would lose it's magnetism. The heat will cause it or not being kept in a state where the field is locked with a keeper but it takes a long time for the second one to happen. Over powering a perm magnet dose not actually happen.It makes a bubble inside the stronger field .if it is struck while inside another field it will reverse polarity. It wont completely demagnetize until it is heated to the curie temp for material.

  I think Core might be confusing himself over the commutator/distributor. It is a circle with bars that lay across to make it easier to have a revolving contact that can be operated by a motor. Effectively reducing the motor speed required by having two halves.Each half is a full wave of function to the inducers as the contact reaches around the other half it repeats the cycle. That way he only needed an 1800 rpm motor if directly attached to the motor shaft. Or an even slower motor if it was geared by some method. The contact was placed on a shaft that extended up through the center of the comm. To it was attached and arm and a wheel on the end for it to ride around the outside of the contraption. the contact itself was the arm that lay across the top surface. If it was bent slightly in a curve to make contact with two bars or he used brushes is not explained. I guess that is a mater of personal preference. The term make before break is correct. The advantage is that you can easily scale this contraption to handle a large amount of voltage and amperage and operate it at any rate up to the maximum of what it can made to handle. The truck motor starters I eluded to way back have bars for the rotor not round wire wound many times like a ac motor. Those starters are rated for 5kw. The guy who did a video ,I think his name was woopy he sounds like a TV announcer from a Spanish channel  made a gizmo that was tiny and did it wrong by spinning the brush around a motor using only one brush. There is a certain period of time when the brush is only in contact with one contact point or segment as the brush is made that way. My opinion is he did it wrong. "Always in contact with two"has no exception in it. I had to take apart a motor and turn it by hand to find why it did not work. It seems a bit over done anyway just to test the idea of the contacts.
   As for mag amp theory and practice it is well worth learning just to pick up other ideas to solve later problems. On a small scale they're actually fun to play with. They were replaced with vacuum tubes which were fine for smaller applications and then came IC's which are fine for even smaller applications. I will be of no help with IC's or the like. I do not feel they are an improvement except to make a few people a little richer at the expense of everyone ells. In itself that is not to bad unless it causes people to lose creativity or knowledge.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 26, 2015, 03:30:59 PM
Doug:

I actually got the idea from you and Alvaro. You have referred to the current being undulated DC. Does not iron subjected to DC become a permanent magnet. Let us say a DC electromagnet only but the one in the center will become a permanent magnet right and it is placed in a focused area.

We have already built the commutator and we have made it to touch three points. If you make it touch two at a time, half of the time it touches only one and half of the time it touches two and so it is better to make it touch three so it will always touch two. The brushes had to be rounded and made to run slower. If we have a number of contacts a one cycle per second slow revolution itself can result in 50 Hz I think. It is not difficult to do and I showed a video of it when you questioned me why should you replicate the old device?

Looking at the principle itself that the N and S magnets must be alternately made strong and weak can be done with 50 Hz or 60 Hz currents very easily as what is 1/50th of a second. Secondly if you keep several magnets in the way the 1908 showed it will continously circulate one way and then reverse and alternately making them stronger and weaker. So I'm still not able to understand the complexity that is needed if we have access to AC to start the device.

The feedback mechanism discussed in the last patent is still not clear to me. If you know about it please enlighten me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 26, 2015, 05:16:53 PM
F.Y.I.

Space-Time and Asymmetrical Potential Interaction

NOTE: Law of the "Conservation of Energy" assumes a symmetrical closed system; that is, space and time are symmetrical - everything happens at exactly the same time and is confined within the same space, or very closely so; but what happens if these criteria skew and the space or time or both become asymmetrical and do not exactly align or become non phase coherent, or do not occupy the exact same space.

"The Application of Potential Energy for Creation of Power" by Alexander V. Frolov

http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/apply.pdf (http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/apply.pdf)

Spacial superposition and/or change of polarity (pulsed mode operation); so to speak!

Food for thought:  For example; consider an electron, with it's associated energy (kinetic and potential), is accelerating or decelerating; at any instant in space and time the electron's energy will be in a state of changing it's form. The faster it goes, the more the state-of-change. Or, consider the electron's influence moves beyond it's immediate environment and this influence then becomes asymmetrical. 
Many examples might be cited however the above referenced paper by Frolov should suffice.

Hint; one approach to Figuera might be to "skew" the "resistor control slip-ring (?)." See figures 1 and 2 in Frolov's paper. Having not followed this thread beyond the occasional glance, my apologies if this approach has already been investigated, experimentally analyzed and documented.
 
Just as a side note; either Volta or Ampere (I don't recall off hand) viewed "electricity" as simply "Potential Difference" => current => magnetics, and conversely, magnetics => current =>  "Potential Difference"; and I believe it was Volta who quoted something like "forget the magnetics, it will most likely just lead to great confusion!"

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 26, 2015, 05:25:45 PM
"I actually got the idea from you and Alvaro. You have referred to the current being undulated DC. Does not iron subjected to DC become a permanent magnet. Let us say a DC electromagnet only but the one in the center will become a permanent magnet right and it is placed in a focused area."

  It would if there was only one inducer. Draw out the motion of the flux. While I personally do not prefer this method it is easy enough to explain. From a single set NyS the direction of the poles being the same all facing one direction on N and S. The Y in the middle will see the south of one one inducer and the north of the other. Causing the Y to see flux running in opposite directions from the respective inducers. The Y has in effect been given the same as would a normal generator,what would appear to the Y a rotating field. The residual left in the declining inducer prevents the field in the inclining inducer from combining if you keep in mind that a declining electro magnet is giving back current and the field as a result is naturally reversed by itself as it recedes. AKA back emf. Cant juice the goose with out it. Otherwise it just becomes one big messed up magnet. The hour glass shape of the core which you sort of were able to see from a time ago in one of the drawings. It has more iron on the extremities of the core like a flared out end. Do you remember? There is a counter intuitive proportionality to control windings core size in the place of the control winding in a mag amp that causes it's own effect. That is to say if a mag amp used three legs and they were all the same size it would not work. So what is important is why they do work and how can it be exploited for the project at hand. Its kind of a strange why people use EL cores with a fat center leg when thats specifically built for a purpose that does not function the opposite way in the case of a meg type arrangement.    You kind of answered your own question about why you have not been able or not will be able to use ac the way you want to to power the inducers. If you were to build a internal combustion engine the same way it would tear itself apart.

  The flux is running through the center of the coils and around the outside back to the other end of the magnet.Split into two with Y in the middle when N or S is fully powered it has to include Y and exclude the opposite inducer in order to cause Y to have induced ac. The one being excluded at any given time is sending current back into the resister array in the same direction as the source is supplying the inclining inducer. Back emf is violent ,has a high spike and needs to be made tame and slowed down to act more like the source. Don't know what type of electronics can do all this, don't care burning plastic smells and is hard to make yourself. Always get stuck trying to fit a square peg into a round hole making more complex combinations to counter short falls of components. Just not worth the space in my head to bother with. I leave that to others who are less sensitive to the stench of smoking ic's.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 26, 2015, 08:53:29 PM
  I think Core might be confusing himself over the commutator/distributor. It is a circle with bars that lay across to make it easier to have a revolving contact that can be operated by a motor......

Actually Doug1 its made clear in the patent that the distributor, and its refereed to as a distributor in the patent, is made from a cylinder of thin laminated copper one after the other. The brush is in contact with these laminates.

There is no mention, as you say, of bars that lay across it, also it uses a swivel brush to make contact.

....... Has anyone noticed the difference in the patent drawings between the first Buforn patent and the last? What is going on with the last one. On the "y" core there are lines that run length wise. In that drawing the magnetic field generated by the N and S are in parallel with the lines drawn on "y". If these lines represent the coil then there is no magnetic induction as the lines of force don't cut the coil.

I just started reading the last patent. Good luck all, right now I dont think anyone has succeed but that doesnt mean anyone will.

-Core 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 27, 2015, 12:35:47 AM
Thin is harder to work with and produces a limitation in how much current it can handle. Thicker will not object to less power but thinner will object to too much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 27, 2015, 12:56:08 AM
....... Has anyone noticed the difference in the patent drawings between the first Buforn patent and the last? What is going on with the last one. On the "y" core there are lines that run length wise. In that drawing the magnetic field generated by the N and S are in parallel with the lines drawn on "y". If these lines represent the coil then there is no magnetic induction as the lines of force don't cut the coil.

I just started reading the last patent. Good luck all, right now I dont think anyone has succeed but that doesnt mean anyone will.

-Core

Core,
I wished the people who drew Tesla's drawings ( if He didn't draw them Himself ) drew Figuera's drawings...

All the Best

PS maybe the drawings and the verb age was complete... but is now lost...who knows...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 27, 2015, 08:42:05 AM

....... Has anyone noticed the difference in the patent drawings between the first Buforn patent and the last? What is going on with the last one. On the "y" core there are lines that run length wise. In that drawing the magnetic field generated by the N and S are in parallel with the lines drawn on "y". If these lines represent the coil then there is no magnetic induction as the lines of force don't cut the coil.
 


Hi Core,


I tend to think that the lines drawn along the Y coil are just a detailed sketch to show the iron core (as a longitudinal bar) + the Y coil used as feedback to power the machine itself + Y coil used for external uses


Note also that Figuera just called reactangles N ans S. He never said to be north - south polarity, just used N and S as a way to call each series of electromagnets. I do not know if you have seen my video about my pole orientation interpretation. If not, you can find it in my youtube chanel (user : hanon1492). Please search it to see what I mean. If you can not fin it please advice me. Right now I do not want to put the link again because I see a high degree of mess between both Figuera´s patents and I do not want to increase that mess. It has many in common with this other : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s)


I think that patents from 1902 and 1908 are different and, concept must not be mixed up:


1902: one signal , intermittent or alternating, polarity north-south according to the patent text.


1908: two signals in opposition (then the conmutator is required). For me the polarity is not clearly stated in the patent claims. I have the oppinion that Figuera moved the field to emulate the induction by motion (flux cutting the wires) as I stated in my video


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 27, 2015, 10:59:24 AM
Hanon,
I know you are using the 555 circuit... but take a look at this video of an H bridge - to control a current going backwards and forwards...
I am sure the 555 can used to create an H bridge... ( maybe this has been mentioned before )

Just thinking

PS I am referring to the repulsion mode video...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 27, 2015, 02:12:01 PM
Hannon

 I thought I remembered one of the patents read a second winding could be placed over the Y to run the motor and the inducers to make it self exited indefinitely. He seems to have had a number of versions or added to the patents to make them different as he went along. Could be a lot of reasons for that which are nether here or there but in any case when I tried the thin lineaments they were too sparky from particulates that came off the brush I used from the starter motors.The particles eventually made the brush ride on the dust and that caused scorching of the copper strap. the bars can handle more downward pressure. They are not really bars they are 3mm by 5 mm thick after sanding down true and flat Im sure it is less then 5 mm.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 27, 2015, 02:15:25 PM
Dear All:

I need one help. I have asked for the English translation of the last patent of Figuera from at least three people. They had not given it to me.
So we kind of used some programs to translate it. We do not speak spanish and so it is at best a guestimate.

The attempted English Translation and the spanish original from the alpoma.net website are posted. I request Spanish speakers to go through and correct the mistakes and post in the forum the corrected ones. Since we do not speak spanish nor I had ever been to spain, I apologize if any mistakes are made. Please correct any mistakes and post it in the forum the correct version.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 27, 2015, 02:31:54 PM
All,
Rams,
Thanks for the translation.

Hanon and All others...
the new perspective puts a light on the subject really well...

All the Best

PS time to test it
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 27, 2015, 06:17:58 PM
Regarding the 1914 patent image. Notice the gap is inside the inducer coil. There is a reference for that in mag amp theory that claims the flux will not leak out of the gap if it covered by a coil. On occasion a flat copper shunt can be wound over to further insure no leakage and to prevent magnetic radiation from leaking in or out that might upset other components particularly communications equipment. It would ensure detection to be improbably. Nothing is important until after the fact is known.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 28, 2015, 12:47:43 AM
Hannon

 I thought I remembered one of the patents read a second winding could be placed over the Y to run the motor and the inducers to make it self exited indefinitely. .......

Yes that is written in the 1914 patent towards the end. He states that an additional winding can be added to the induced winding and from here industrial currents can be utilized.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 28, 2015, 01:15:38 AM
The more I read the patents I get the impression that they are patenting a technique and not a device. This technique is a method of alternating a magnetic field that doesn't have to overcome the attractive forces that are found in a dynamo. The device they show in the patent drawing only serves to explain how to move a magnetic field in an orderly fashion. That is just my opinion from reading the Buforn patents.

There are three things that must happen in order for current to flow, Buforn says:
1. A magnetic field
2. Movement
3. Closed circuit

The patents are centered around creating this movement. I believe it can be done just not in the way outlined in the patent.

-Core

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 28, 2015, 09:16:00 AM
core




Like I said Buforn tried to preserve knowledge for future. Once upon a time I also started to translate Buforn patents but I don't know Spanish at all so it was very hard task, and that time nobody was interested in helping me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 28, 2015, 12:14:27 PM
@ all
I´m in the way to translate the 1914 patent as accurately as I can.
The translations made with web programs are very inappropriate,  because Buforn was not known to be an engineer nor a technician, therefore his old fashioned lexicon and language style, is quite prone to misinterpretation.

will post it here when finished.
cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 28, 2015, 07:28:27 PM
@ all
I´m in the way to translate the 1914 patent as accurately as I can.
The translations made with web programs are very inappropriate,  because Buforn was not known to be an engineer nor a technician, therefore his old fashioned lexicon and language style, is quite prone to misinterpretation.

will post it here when finished.
cheers
Alvaro


Because you guys, took this effort I'm oblige to post my hard work . Please remember that my English is very limited and I know in Spanish only the famous Asta la vista baby  :P  but if you have enough time even with google translator and a dictionary you can make something....


Alvaro, please compare this to your translation - it may be very helpful. Buforn seems to believe in the same theory as I do, that no single generator on Earth is producing electricity - they just condense it from external field - Earth field. That way physic laws are not broken and energy can really be free for everybody.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 28, 2015, 07:38:19 PM
" Important factor at this point is the sun, which we shall discuss, though
succinctly, particularly.It is the sun, the center of our planetary system and
from him we receive so big benefits as the light and the heat; the sun is
therefore an electrical generator unsurpassed, since it condenses in immerse
quantity the above-mentioned elements of light and heat, being thus a base of the
electric power production."


Buforn
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 29, 2015, 02:31:41 AM
@ all
I´m in the way to translate the 1914 patent as accurately as I can.
The translations made with web programs are very inappropriate,  because Buforn was not known to be an engineer nor a technician, therefore his old fashioned lexicon and language style, is quite prone to misinterpretation.

will post it here when finished.
cheers
Alvaro


Hi Alvaro,


Very good idea !! 


While I think that Buforn´s patent does not include any new concept over Figuera´s 1908 patent (basically it is a copy of the same foundations plus some improvements) , I think it will help a lot to clarify doubts about the iron core orientations. People will be able to read it and see that the "transformer-core type with air-gaps to divert the Lenz effect" theory is out of the scope in these patents. And that Buforn did not mention any of that either, because he described straight bar cores in all the inducers and induced coils.


I attach here a file with the text of the patent no. 57955 (year 1914) in case you may find it useful for your translation. I have not included both drawings because this file it is just to help you in the translation.


All: You may start using Google Translator for a rogh translation of the patent while waiting for the final document. Also you may use the machine-based translation provided by Ramaswami some post earlier, which is fine to grasp the main foundations of this patent. The patent has two drawings that you may consult in alpoma.net website


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on July 29, 2015, 03:48:20 AM

Hi Core,

Note also that Figuera just called reactangles N ans S. He never said to be north - south polarity, just used N and S as a way to call each series of electromagnets. I do not know if you have seen my video about my pole orientation interpretation. If not, you can find it in my youtube chanel (user : hanon1492). Please search it to see what I mean. If you can not fin it please advice me. Right now I do not want to put the link again because I see a high degree of mess between both Figuera´s patents and I do not want to increase that mess. It has many in common with this other : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s)
Regards

The whole N & S thing is perplexing and since no one has hit a home run your theory is just as valid as anyone's else. Interesting is the Buforn patent, he also states N & S  when talking about the electromagnets. However I will say that if the patent and the associated drawings represented a working device non of us would be on this site.

What I find interesting is that Buforn uses the words North & South when talking about the different hemispheres of the dis-charger. But only uses N & S when the talk turns to the electromagnets. Maybe its just a coincidence but permanent magnets are always referenced by the letters N & S and hardly ever fully written out North & South when shown on a diagram or magnetic bar.

Of course I know they talk about the core material and shape in the patents but what if this core material just sleeves a permanent magnet. So when the N electromagnet is at 100% the magnetic field is composed of the electromagnet and the permanent magnet. At that time the S electromagnet is empty (to use patent text) but the permanent magnet is till creating a force not nearly as large as the N side.

Question is: Does the S side, that is fueled only by the permanent magnet when the N side is 100% automatically try to increase its magnetic flux to balance the N side? On a decrease in current from the N side the magnetic field would collapse slightly cutting the wires and the S side would grow, also cutting the wires when the current was past 50% of the resistance.

What effect would this produce if any, not sure

One thing thats pleasant about the Figuera device is that there is no mystical spark gap or bizarre Tesla coil high voltage effect.

-Core
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 29, 2015, 09:04:33 AM

One thing thats pleasant about the Figuera device is that there is no mystical spark gap or bizarre Tesla coil high voltage effect.


Core,
Maybe that's what the Figuera needs...  :-)

Also... Maybe there's a third induced coil underneath... for one more aspect of power ( just thinking ). Or maybe a 4th or 5th and the N and S is just reference ... who knows... maybe the Figuera is just an idea ( like someone stated ) and you just daisy chain for the power that you need?

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 29, 2015, 05:54:55 PM
hola hanon

thanks for your kind words.
I already translated up to page 16 of the (Photocopied) original document.

As to have a practical system of reference, I have numbered each paragraph in the original as in the translation, in case of disagreement with the translation.

I am including a brief glossary of terms which are prone to mislead, due to the use by Buforn of a pronounced tendency to use the same word for different meanings, and vice versa.
I`m doing a great effort to translate as literal as possible to match with the meaning.

In a note apart, I warn you about this program translation, as I have found in it huge mistakes !!

Will post it here asap
Regards
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 29, 2015, 07:11:33 PM

Great news Alvaro!!!


You are working really hard. 16 pages in just one day!! Take your time, you will end exhausted. I did not start translating this patent because it was a huge work and you are doing it in few days!!


Do not forget to attach the two drawings using a whole page per image in order that every detail can be view perfectly. Those drawing are the best proof to reject any weird theory about transformer-core type geometry. You document will be of great value to those still designing Bajac´s proposal as it was Figuera´s ideas, which is false.


Regards


---------

Of course I know they talk about the core material and shape in the patents but what if this core material just sleeves a permanent magnet. So when the N electromagnet is at 100% the magnetic field is composed of the electromagnet and the permanent magnet. At that time the S electromagnet is empty (to use patent text) but the permanent magnet is till creating a force not nearly as large as the N side.

-Core


It is quite possible. Even Buforn mentioned in his patent that standard dynamos require an external magnetic field, that it is the Earth magnetic field. (¿?) A weird statement from Buforn. This is the theory exposed in his last patent.


Nowadays you can hide a part of the whole patented device without disclosing it if you claim to have described the whole system . You must patent the whole working device if you claim that what you are patenting is a whole working invention. But I guess that the Patent Law in Figuera´s and Buforn´s years in Spain was not as developed as nowadays. In fact, Buforn patented 5 times the exact same generator and copied to Figuera´s 1908 device. Now you may just file one time the same inventions.  The rest of patents would be rejected. 


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 29, 2015, 08:18:07 PM
hanon
I agree in most of your statements,
The patenting procedure and requirements in the Spain of 1914 are for us "an unknown territory", but at the reading of this Buforn patent one realizes what a low standard of scientific accuracy was accepted.

Alvaro

P.S. I started the work  last weekend as per Rams request. And it has been indeed a LOT of hours on it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 30, 2015, 12:56:28 PM
Alvaro:

Thank you very much for the translation effort. It had been tough on us even with programs. As I told you many were guestimates by us.

However I'm not able to understand the criticism of the spanish patent office standards in 1914. They insisted on a working prototype. As Hanon says each one is a slight modification or improvement over the earlier 1908 one and patents of addition are allowed. In India even today with the restriction that their term is limited to the term of the original patent. Not more. So I do not see any thing wrong with multiple patents which are improved devices of the same. As far the scientific discussion by BuForn is concerned I believe that it is very high quality Scientific discussion. He is going to the root cause and explaining what is the root cause of every thing or what is shown as the Al Origin in the patent drawings. We may not be able to understand today what was the thought process 100 years back. But we cannot say it is not scientific. To that extent I have to beg to disagree with you. 

But all of you are ignoring one element. BuForn demonstrated before the Spanish Patent Office a device that ran on its own. Powered itself and then powered other things. Devices like this have been built but the makers are either so greedy that they would ask for the moon as the price and it would go without being known to any one. The Ed Gray motor is one such thing. For professional reasons I'm unable to disclose any thing but let me see that devices like that are built by not one but by many people and they are not even filed for patents. The inventors are so secretive they refuse to give any details but want a patent and want a fee that no one would pay. I know of one such device but because of professional ethics I cannot say any thing. It is not built by me any way.  So replicating the device of Figuera is a very important task. Just as our Senior friend Mr. Mack has quoted a 1910 book another friend has asked me to study another book written about Electricity and Magnetism but published in 1842. So we can understand the original thoughts. Let me come back here if I have any thing useful to post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 31, 2015, 07:40:53 AM
But all of you are ignoring one element. BuForn demonstrated before the Spanish Patent Office a device that ran on its own. Powered itself and then powered other things.

Rams,
I must have missed that part... show me where it states that.

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 31, 2015, 09:05:46 AM
Randy:

You must study carefully.

That document is here http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

link http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf

Downloaded and attached for your benefit. As I know you well, you are so dedicated but you are very superficial and you are not giving attention to details. Please study carefully.

I will not be able to post for some time now. Heavy work on hand.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 31, 2015, 09:56:53 AM
Randy:

You must study carefully.

That document is here http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

link http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf

Downloaded and attached for your benefit. As I know you well, you are so dedicated but you are very superficial and you are not giving attention to details. Please study carefully.


Rams,

My friend... don't mix lawyer speak with engineer speak... ( my apparatus generated electricity... just not copious amounts of it )
I quote here...
 " Certify: That I have examined the material consisting of original memory corresponding
to said background patent, issued on June 6, 1910, for "A GENERATOR OF
ELECTRICITY" UNIVERSAL "which consists essentially of a series of inducer
electromagnets combined with a series of electromagnets or induced coils, a switch
and comprising a brush or rotary switch, which makes contact successively on the
series of fixed contacts and get a continuous variation of the current flowing through
the coils of the inducer electromagnets, developing in this manner a current in induced
coils. "

There is a saying " I am from Missouri show me "...

Like Doug1 ( or maybe Doug2 ) stated it... it has to run by itself and then power something else...

... if it is " show me " where specifically ( I am dedicated to details )...

professor Figuera invented " His " apparatus... everybody else has to " walk " as the saying goes...

Lastly... My friend... I'm not here to argue with anybody... but please... as Hanon has stated refer to specifically what, where and exactly in the patent you speak from...
...there is/are many different people/s ( working and conversing ) about the " Figuera " and each has a different dialect and custom and manners from us all..........
Let us work together ( and hopefully we can agree to disagree - with respect )

All the Best


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 31, 2015, 12:13:28 PM
Randy ..My apologies if you are even slightly hurt by my writings. The patent says it clearly that it produced more output than input and using that output continued to run. Yes it not shown in the report but it is stated in the patent.

I apologize again. I have to complete one thing before August 7 which is deadline for it and will post later. I have never intended to hurt you or any other member here at any time. Please accept my apologies. Please excuse me from the forum for some time due to work commitments.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on July 31, 2015, 01:29:13 PM
Rams,
Let us endeavor to find the Figuera's true potential. Good luck in your work.

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on July 31, 2015, 06:57:49 PM
@all
I have finished to translate the 1914 patent of BUFORN as it is in that pdf from the aploma web page,  a photocopy of the original, to which I added a numeric reference to its paragraphs and same to my translation. (in two format, pdf and word)

I also added some notes at the beginning to clarify the meaning of some words  used in the patent.
I hope it will be useful for any of you trying to replicate  this device. just remember that this is not a Figuera patent, but a Buforn one, made years after the Figuera death.

cheers
Alvaro

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on August 01, 2015, 02:11:11 AM
Alvaro_CS and All Others,
For your translation work...it gets us closer to the intent ( for lack of a better word ) of Professor Clemente Figuera's life long work...
As someone else has stated... I too think about the Figuera almost daily.

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 01, 2015, 05:00:32 PM
Hummm
51 downloads in less that 24 hours !

It seems that RandyFL is not the only one thinking about it.

At least I´m happy that my work could be useful for someone  :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 01, 2015, 06:53:12 PM
Not bad Alvero, a little bit word'y in the beginning. You have some type o's to fix but over all not bad. That is my version of a compliment. It would probably be better suited as a historical read over a manual. There are a lot of details left out regarding specific coil techniques of the inducer magnets. The resister array is spot on but there are problems with getting a person to mentally visualize it from a written description.  You did not mention anything about the current in the inducer of decline at any given time. The semi collapsing field will send current back into the array as it declines while at the same time reversing the polarity of the declining inducer.An electromagnet is also a storage device. For a short period of time this places the two inducers in an opposing field orientation nn ss after which the array is starting to move current into the opposite coil. A fair amount of the power is just shuttled back and forth through the array and boosted a little bit from a small amount off the output as it goes through the distributor.
   The advantage of paying attention to the turns ratio of the coils is the means to make a variable and powerful magnet no mater what the voltage you have to work with. You don't have to rely on using wire resistance to reduce the power consumption,the array will do it. So you can take full advantage using shorter coils in parallel to reach the volt turns ratio compared to the core dimensions covered. The Henry electromagnet should come to mind. A platter magnet might be a little better but they take soooo long to make.Lot of wasted material.
   Im going to ask you qualifying question. Does it need a rectifier?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 01, 2015, 09:24:29 PM
wowow Doug1, hold on a minute  !

I stated in my translator notes, that I was being as LITERAL as I could.
These are the patent words by Buforn, not mine !!!
IMHO its the  more tedious, repetitive, and obscure text I´ve never read in a patent. (I even found typos and spelling mistakes)

It is so even in Spanish, but someone here was using a worse program translation, and asked for a better option.
The simplicity of text in the Figuera patents, leaves many unknowns, but no booooring  :'(

By the way,. . what´s a semi collapsing field ?? . . . will it send semi current back as it semi decays ?? and will it semi reverse the polarity  ?? ;D ;D ;D (sorry, could not resist, no offense intended)

About my typo´s, please be kind to point them at me (in a PM) to be corrected asap. Thanks

cheers
Alvaro
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on August 02, 2015, 12:22:36 AM
..It seems that RandyFL is not the only one thinking about it...
Thanks for the translation.

I am trying to make sense of how it is wired together. The patent drawings don't appear to be clear on what wires are passing over others and which ones are connected together. Are all intersecting lines assumed to be connected together?

Attached is my attempt at which wires are connected together and which ones are not by pure guessing. Color coded only for clarity. The green dots are wires connected together and the yellow arch is where two wires pass each other but are not connected.

I have included a clean image so that you or someone can hopefully draw the connections correctly for me.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on August 02, 2015, 07:33:04 AM
Well here is my interpretation of the Figuera device.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on August 02, 2015, 10:05:26 AM
Core,
I am assuming... this is a straight view ( looking directly at it ) of your interpretation? could we get a side view?
If you can't with the pc... could you draw it by hand and post it
All the best

All,
Is it me or just my imagination... but I'm counting 8 transformers ( if that's the right word ) on post reply 2498 and 7 on Bajac's post of 2437 and 5 on post 2411 ( which is daisy chained and stacked on top )...

Clarification please...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on August 02, 2015, 02:07:42 PM
es igual
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on August 02, 2015, 10:18:04 PM
Core,
I am assuming... this is a straight view ( looking directly at it ) of your interpretation? could we get a side view?
If you can't with the pc... could you draw it by hand and post it
All the best

Draw by hand? that's barbaric  :D

Here is a better drawing and the attached PDF is a complete drawing that outlines operation. The PDF is one large drawing and is not intended for 8.5 x 11 Paper

Good Luck!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on August 03, 2015, 01:51:59 AM
Core,
So... from a side angle. Great job. Whats the bias coil for...? Now could you add one more thing to it. Draw a shaft ( rotor ) being held in place in the middle that spins and gives another avenue of the endless possibilities. Also you could have Y lower than the N and S to lay another coil on top of it............

Lastly... this bias coil... is that part of the U shaped iron... because it could be another Y if you separated it from the N and S and be a avenue for some more energy... plus you have that circle in the middle ( which puts this out of the ball park - home run ) great job.

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on August 03, 2015, 01:59:21 AM
Randy,

If you download the PDF file that is above the picture I go into detail on the operation of the unit. The details are located on the right side of the blue print. This PDF is a large drawing done on CAD and will not print out well on 8.5 x 11. It is made for large 34" x 48" paper.

- Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on August 03, 2015, 02:06:28 AM
This is how the above unit operates. In the PDF I give credit to the patents used. One of them is a device from Thomas Edison. In short these are concepts taken from other peoples hard work.



- CORE MATERIAL & SHAPE:
Iron is the only material used here. The shape of the core is extremely insignificant and does have to mach what is shown in the drawing. A Magnetic circuit will close regardless of the shape of the core material. To emphasize this you could create a core in the shape of Mickey Mouse with the smallest of air gaps and the magnetic circuit, providing the air gap closes via Magnetostriction, will still conduct magnetic current. For drawing purposes the core is shown square, functionality is the same regardless of shape when we are talking about Magnetic Currents. This drawing shows laminated iron sheets, in a square fashion, being used.


- SEQUENCE OF OPERATION

-Bias Circuit:
This circuit provides for a constant magnetization of the core material. The objective here is to constantly provide a low power driving force that keep the core material magnetized in a specific direction. Possible substitution here could be a permanent magnet core.
However the magnetizing force provided by this coil should be below the force required for the Magnetostriction effect. Initial voltage should be 24 volts D.C. @ .25 amps.

-PRIMARY COILS:
These coil provide the energy required to create the Magnetostriction effect in the larger iron core. It is estimated that this driving force should be no less then 120 volts @ 1 amp or 220 volts @ .5 amps. The coils should be oriented in a fashion that supplements the pole orientation shown on the drawing. These coils can be operated in the fashion shown by the Discharger circuit. If pulsed simultaneously a D.C. Output is created. If pulsed alternately an A.C. Output is created.

Resonance is of importance here. However this resonance is not electrical resonance but the resonance of the core material. The mass of the core material will dictate the required pulse frequency.

- SECONDARY COIL:
This phrase is used loosely here and used for identification then actual practice. This coil should be robust as it will absorb/transport a large amount of current. Its sequence is as follows:

1. At the moment the iron core of the secondary comes in contact with the primary core material (via the Magnetostriction effect) a large current will flow throw this core.

2. This coil, at that moment, is shorted out via a mosfet. When shorted a large current will flow through the coil increasing the expansion of its core material thus increasing magnetic contact with the primary core.

3. At the moment the Primary coil(s) are de-energized the iron primary core retracts effectively opening the core to the designed air gap. The magnetic current, that was circulating rapidly through the magnetic core is abruptly halted due to the resistance encountered in the air gap of the core.

4. At this moment the magnetic energy is thrown from the iron. It is at this moment that the Secondary coil short is removed and the coil is allowed to feed a load or a storage capacitor. The moment the primary coil is closed again producing the Magnetostriction effect the secondary coil is shorted again.

5. This procedure is repeated in a smooth fashion at the resonant frequency of the primary core material.



Taken from the PDF.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on August 03, 2015, 03:04:42 AM
I want to emphasize a point here that coil and core geometry mean very little. Unlike a traditional transformer that requires calculating the primary and secondary coil for the correct output that is not required here. The primary, and its called that for lack of a better name, has one purpose only and that is to magnetize the iron core to allow the Magnetostriction effect to take place.

There is no direct interaction, as in a transformer, between primary and secondary coils. The secondary coil, and its called that for lack of a better term, simply absorbs the energy that is released from the iron when the air gap is re-established and the magnetic current comes to a crashing halt. For a greater understanding please research the patents I cited in the PDF.

Bottom line: We are using iron to focus and collect the energy stream. This energy stream is the magnetic current in a magnetized material (iron). We use a natural effect to halt the movement of this energy. Then we use a closed earth grounded coil to collect what would normally dissipate into the atmosphere. This isn't new or original, it was experimented even by Thomas Edison (see his patent) and others. Ed Leedskainin wrote about it in his book.

-Core   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on August 03, 2015, 01:44:53 PM
Core,
Great job on your interpretation and your drawings. Now... have you got the replication in video of where it powers up and disconnects from the power and runs by itself and powers something else...

Also...is the transformer ( for lack of a better word ) stand alone or is it 5, 7 or 8 array...

All the Best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on August 04, 2015, 12:43:48 AM
Core,
I think you have nailed it. Some time ago I spent a large amount of money and 6 weeks full time work trying to replicate this generator. I learned that there was no combination of coils and cores that would work without an unknown ( to me ) factor. Thank you!


ALVARO_CS,
Thank you for the translation work. I did a google translation of part of this patent almost a year ago, but I knew it was lacking and your's cleared up several points for me.


Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 08, 2015, 04:40:15 PM
Alvaro,


Yo have done a great work translating the patent from 1914 by Buforn !!! I am sure that your work will be of great value to those wanting to replicate the original Figuera´s generator. This patent put into light some more details than the patent from 1908 because it defines the induced core orientation and it gives to arrangements for the induced coil with respect to the electromagnets. In this patent it is clear that the three cores must be aligned in a straight way :


(====)(====)(====)


but not forming a kind of transformer with the induced coil touching the 4 poles as Bajac stated in his personal proposal. That proposal from Bajac is wise, genuine and very interesting but it is not what Figuera porposed first in his 1902 patent, later in his 1908 and finally by Buforn after Figuera´s death (Buforn was a Figuera´s partner)   


Core,
It is good to see new ideas in the forum. I didn´t know the effect of magnetostriction (the deformation of the magnetic material as consequence of the magnetic polarity created). I have read some info in the wikipedia and this effect it is very little: around one micrometer (10^-6 m) of elongation per meter of length in the original material. It is too little to affect the space between inducers and induced coil. But it is just my guess after a quick review of the theory, but not sure if it could be the key. I have read that this effect is the acuse of the humming sound in transformer. In the other hand, Figuera never told about switch off and on both the inducer and the induced alternatively and shunting the induced coil while the inducer was powered. These are new ideas in your design but not in the patents. In case we were looking for and strange effect in the space between two magnet I tend to think that maybe it is more related to the works of Nikolaev with the discovery of the longitudinal magnetic field. I posted this in the next link. P please read it carefully and give your opinion:


http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg449854/#msg449854 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg449854/#msg449854)


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ALVARO_CS on August 08, 2015, 09:47:25 PM
Thanks hanon

remember how he defines two positioning ways (as seen in the two drawings):

several groups consisting each in two inducers with an induced in the middle,
A-placed one besides the other,
and B-  placed one after the other

Something intriguing, in B description, is about placing the top of the induced cores in the sinus of the inducer (inside ?)

Also intriguing is to place a second induced (smaller) inside the core of the induced
(would it be hollow ?)

Too many questions :o

hasta pronto
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on August 09, 2015, 02:57:39 PM
I'm thinking the inducer coil should be far away from its iron core and that all cores should be placed very close together. With a larger air gap between the inducer coil and its core, its collapsing field goes into the central core since that's the easiest route for it to take due to core's idea of magnetostriction between the closely spaced cores.

...Also intriguing is to place a second induced (smaller) inside the core of the induced
(would it be hollow ?
...
I read it to be hollow as well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on August 10, 2015, 06:05:14 AM
With the exception of Garry, the underlining principle went right over your head!


MagnaProp, you need a CLOSED magnetic circuit, that is an open magnetic circuit you are presenting, you will loose the energy from the ends of the core. That's is a simple fact, nothing special will happen.

Hannon, the magnetostriction effect is a freebee tool to achieve a result. It is not the source of free energy, with out it you would have to expend energy to Open and Close the magnetic circuit. The magnetostriction effect is a LOW COST solution.

ALL the magic happens in the iron core, energy is accelerated with a closed magnetic circuit and then exploded outward when opened. This is also a simple fact that has been written about by Ed L, see his book. 


Bottom line:
A closed magnetic circuit, very little lines of force project outward from the iron.
An open magnetic circuit, lines of force project outward from the iron.

These lines of force MOVE out, from the iron and then MOVE into the iron, HERE is the change in the FLOW of force we need

Quote from Figuera:
Quote
“There is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit”

That's it, no more complected then what is written above, those are also facts that you will find in any book.


If you manually open a magnetic circuit, work is required.
If you close a magnetic circuit, work is required.

The magnetostriction effect will do the work for you at a very low cost. You only need to provide an initial magnetic field to expand the iron. It will automatically retract when the magnetic field is removed, consequently OPENING the magnetic circuit.

To get a natural force to do WORK for you is an engineers wet dream.

The deal with the shorted coil was taken from one of the patents I cited, may not be necessary.

Important point number 1:
- The shape of the core is insignificant with this concept.

Important point number 2:
- All the action happens with the initial primary coil. Secondary/pickup coil is insignificant.

Fact:
Both points above are stated in the patent's and hold true for this design.

This technique may explain many other FE devices such as the TK device. Nobody has experimented using these simple principles. Everbody wants it to be MORE complicated.

I just want to clear up my point on this concept as it was being presented wrong by others.


Time to build.

Good Luck gentlemen.  :D

-Core


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 10, 2015, 06:08:26 PM
With the exception of Garry, the underlining principle went right over your head!


Core, I hope you the best with your proposal. I hope really that someone had sucess in this project but I see too many things in your proposal which are not described in the 1902 patent, as the switching sequence on/off alternatively in the inducers and induced coil in your design , and the need for shunting the induced coil or the bias coil. Noone of this is into the patent. Good luck and keep us updated in case of any special result.


In other sense, I tend to think that the key maybe it is some construction features of the system as the one pointed by MagnaProp or any other. Watching closely to the 1902 drawing it is true that it seems to represent that the inducer wires are embedded into a kind of resin/insulation very thick and they are separated from each other a lot. For some reason Figuera showed this detail into the patent drawing ...who knows ... Also the patent states that the distance between both inducers poles must be small...another featured stated in the patent which is quite curious to be addressed explicitly


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: neworld on August 11, 2015, 03:24:49 PM
Is there a energy researcher - Russian speaker, who is willing to work with me? Does anyone know a Russian speaker would be willing to translate videos into Hebrew or English?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on August 29, 2015, 03:20:34 PM
Hi Core and All,

Andrey Melnichenko's discoveries might relate to this technique as well? [He's not the rich Russian guy!]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8c82ABs02M (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8c82ABs02M)

Unfortunately a lot of his work is hard to find these days.
Anyway; FYI, regards...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 02, 2015, 12:53:34 AM
Hi all,


Patrick Kelly has updated in his ebook the info referred to the Figuera Generator. Now the info presents with a higher degree of fidelity the original concepts included in Figuera´s patents


Apart from the 1908 patent, in the book now it is also included new info from the two patents filed in 1902: the motionless generator (patent no. 30378) and the generator with the rotary coil (patent no. 30376)


Link in HTML:  http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt3.html)


Link in PDF:  http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf)


Below I post the sketch from the 1908 patent, and also the sketches from the 1902 patents: the motionless generator and the rotary coil generator.


Regards
 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 04, 2015, 09:43:45 AM
Hi all,


Patrick Kelly has updated in his ebook...
Great! Thanks for the info.

es igual
Thanks. Much simpler than what I was trying to do.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on September 05, 2015, 06:17:42 PM
Hi Hanon,

This is just a what if scenario, but what if those wire wound resistors were actually inductive? The "make before break" and the patent below would compress the flux through the windings momentarily increasing output to the drive coils.

US 4431960: Current amplifying apparatus

https://patents.google.com/patent/US4431960A/en
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 06, 2015, 01:26:14 AM
Hi,
Someone sent me a personal message asking for the data of the electromagnets I had built. Please, note that I had not checked this website since my last post. I will provide the data again in this post, and then may not return to this forum for months. I apologize but I do not have the time to post, so my reply should take some time.

I have built two electromagnets for the Cook’s device. Each electromagnet consists of

CORE
iron steel: 1018,
relative permeability: 2,540
length: 24 inches
Diameter: 2 inches

INNER COIL
length: 22 inches
diameter: 2 inches
turns: 900 single layer of #24 AWG
measured inductance: 10 mH (without outer coil)
This inductance is very different from the calculated values, which are usually larger than 3 H.

OUTER COIL
length: 21 inches
diameter: 2.5 inches
turns: 380 single layer of #16 AWG
measured inductances: 1.09 mH (and 2 mH with inner core-coil assembly)

I will start the tests for this device. A major challenge is to determine how to excite the device. For the excitation, I will also use two electromagnets (shown in picture) located about the mid section.

I have also built a section of the Figuera’s 1908 device. It was a lot of work because I have to cut Silicon steel sheets with scissors. Then, it was the hammering and drilling. See the pictures. The data for the electromagnets are:

‘N’ and ‘S’ electromagnets:
length: 10 inches
width: 1.5 inch
interface surface: 1” x 1.5”
turns: 1,050 multi-layers of #18 AWG

‘Y’ electromagnet:
length: 10 inches
width: 1.5 inch
interface surface: 1” x 1.5”
turns: 709 multi-layers of #16 AWG
Whe 60 Vac was input to one of the side coils, the output in the ‘Y’ coils was 30 Vac. I am working on the driver to generate the two out of phase pulsating DC voltages. It should be ready for tests within a week.

The old coil winder that I bought had really paid off. It has been a time saver, once you have the set up, it is so easy to wind the coils. It was money well spent.

I should be very busy for the next six months. I will not be able to post. However, I am planning on recording the tests data and publish them later.

I should get back to you by next year with the results of the tests on these new prototypes.

Thank you,
Bajac

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on September 06, 2015, 02:01:34 AM
More pictures are being attached.


More pictures and data details were also provided on the previous page in my post #2519.

I will come back to the forum in a few months.

Thank you,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 11, 2015, 12:55:41 AM
Dedicated to those still supporting his own views about Figuera using transformer-type cores with air gaps (their free interpretation)


Quote from Buforn´s patent 57955 (year 1914)

Quote
"The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
....
If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.

With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force.

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the
large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 11, 2015, 05:01:54 AM
Thanks for pointing out the secondary induced. I'm still trying to picture it in 3D.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 11, 2015, 05:38:09 PM
On the 18th of november of 2014 a user posted the sketch that I attach below.


Note how he alternated the polarity along each electromagnet serie in order to get close magnetic circuits with all the electromagnets. He added two external iron bars (in black) to get those close magnetic circuits. Closing the magnetic circuit will get more powerful electromagnets and enhance all magnetic effects


Just re-posted in case of being of interest


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 12, 2015, 07:00:30 AM
I'm giving up this research and this is my last post. I have actually asked the admin to delete all my posts and remove my account but that was not obliged.

Figuera Device is probably the second device to use a well known principle and the first being (If I'm correct, Daniel McFarland Cooks Device). The principle is simple. If you make a large permanent magnet core, there is a static magnetic field around it. If you can oscillate that static magnetic field so it becomes an oscillating magnetic field you can generate electricity from the oscillating or time varying magnetic field by putting  conductor in the area of influence of the now time varying magnetic field. In order to achieve it you need to ensure two things. High voltage AC must be applied and milliamps must be provided so that the permanent magnet is not destroyed. However this has the possibility of reducing the magnetic strength of the permanent magnet significantly.

Figuera therefore used DC Electromagnets and increased the Voltage by providing a lot of resistance and oscillated the DC using the DC commutator. He avoided backemf by ensuring that both N and S magnets had current always. The rotary device is an electromechanical device. It is quite difficult to avoid sparks unless it is professionally built but can be obtained. Since the current flowing was oscillated DC or as Doug1 indicated undulated DC the magnetism was not lost. If a shunted or shoted coil is placed over the core the shorted coil will act like a capacitor and will develop enormous amperage and so the magnetic field strength of the N and S permanent Magnets is never reduced. So far I have not seen any one mentioning the fact that the core is a permanent magnet core in the primaries.

If it very difficult to use high voltage pulsed DC or DC using mains. The amount of current drawn is very high. We can use step down transformers to make DC and create a powerful DC Electromagnet.

The second thing is that the resistors can be placed in between N1 and N2 and N2 and N3 and N3 and N4 and so on..This will result in the current being progressively reduced and voltage being progressively increased. In the opposite S magnets Since current is given from S7 to S1 reverse is the case. If in N magnets current is high, in S magnets the voltage is high.

Another important point is that Figuera used the amplification method. When you apply the current in parallel the output in the secondary is four times of what is expected if the voltage is halved by giving the current in serial.  Figuera avoided this by giving the current in parallel. The current moved from the edges to the center of the magnets and then went back to the edges of N and S. It is similar to clapping the hands. The secondary in the middle is half the diameter of the primary and half the length of the primary. (one primary) Therefore when the clapping hands moved towards the center the magnetic field strength in the center is very high. Voltage is high in one primary and magnetic field strength is high in another primary and this has resulted in the output in the secondary being high. The output is based on the diameter of the wire used in the secondary and the voltage developed. Voltage of the secondary is based on the number of turns and the current of the secondary is based on the diameter of the secondary wire. It necessarily follows that the number of turns in the primary must be high, sufficient to handle the current but also sufficient to create a magnetic field strength even if the current is low.

One way of doing this device without hassles is to give DC current through step down transformers to make the electromagnet a staturated permanent magnet core. This can be for about 2/3rd of the primary core. The rest of the primary core can have few layers of a coil that is neither shorted nor connected to any load but is kept open with the open ends insulated. On this we can have a multifilar coil of very thin wires and maintain the polarity of the cores. The permanent magnet will remain a permanent magnet. The multifilar coil will provide only milliamps and 220 volts AC. The input AC cannot demagnetise the permanent magnet which is in a saturated condition but it can easily distort the magnetic field. The output in the secondary is based on the number of turns and thickness of wires of the secondary. This is one way we can avoid the DC commutator.

I have observed COP>1 results two times. I have tried to replicate the Ramaswami device and reduced the output voltage to 351 volts and connected to the same earth points to which I connected two years back. Input was about 600 watts. Outut was dismal. 351 volts and 0.4 amps. I could not believe myself. Why the same earth points which produced an unbelievable amount of amperage two years back now would not work. Then a member of the forum who has occassionally posted here indicated that the earth rod would have rusted and the rust would have created an insulation and that might be the reason. I checked with a mentor who is a Prof in inorganic Chemistry only to be scolded that how I did not understand this simple thing of chemical reaction taking place and why I did not create fresh earth points after two years. The only rust proof metals that will never rust is 316L grade steel or Titanium. But the earth point for them should be prepared in such a way that they will not chemically interact with the surrounding material for the earth points to work as anticipated and desired. In addition the combination of salt water and the media surrounding the rust proof earth points must also be checked if we want to use the Earth. This is the specific reason why people are not able to use earth points consistently. Once we give a lot of current and water the earth point will interact with the surrounding carbon powder and salt and water very fast and will be rusted so much that the surface area available for conducting electricity is reduced. This is one of the reasons why people find it difficult to replicate the Barbosa and Leal devices. It works first time and second time onwards the efficiency goes down. If the above methodology is not checked and the earth points are electrical conductors working only like inert materials the problem will occur. I checked the centre coil alone and the output was 33 volts and 6 amps and it was able to light 10x200 watts lamps. Naturally not full brightness but the point was that if at 33 volts we get 6 amps and 10x200 watts lamps can glow, at 351 volts the output should be quite high.But when connected to the same earth points the output was just 0.4 amps. 

Figuera concept has now been implemented in a number of devices where permanent magnet is used on the transformer cores to increase the output. These devices are bound to fail after some time or if high AC fields are used for the permanent magnet will be significantly reduced and will be divested of the permanent magnetism. In addition the core will be heated if high current passes through and that will also demagnetise the permanent magnet. Figuera eliminated all these things at one stroke by making the entire primary cores DC Electromagnets and made them non-saturated permanent magnets. This is why the BuForn patent claims that what happens in the secondary is insigificant and every thing is done in the two primaries.

Now where is the extra energy coming from? There is no extra energy. This is quite difficult to understand. There is no violation of law of conservation of energy.

This device works like the solar cell. Solar cells produce electricity due to solar radition. We do not supply the solar radiation. It comes in nature. Similarly the magnets absorb charges from the atmosphere and keep conducting it from one pole to other. Every permanent magnet does not.

As I understand there are two particles which move from the atmosphere inside the permanent magnets. One of them is small and moves very fast and likes high resistance and is responsible for causing voltage. This is focussed on one pole of the magnets. The other particle is larger in size and moves slowly and requires thick wires and is responsbile for amperage and is saturated at the opposite poles. Both of them if I understand correctly are positive and negative charges. This is why like poles of magnets repel each other and unlike poles attract each other. It is the nature of magnets to attract the charges from the atmosphere and they keep travelling through the magnets and move out again in to the atmosphere and the process is repeated as long as the magnet remains a magnet. These two particles enter the magnet at diffent poles and once they are saturated inside the magnet they keep moving out to the atmosphere at the other end and the process is continuously repeated. This is why magnets are different from other non magnetic materials. It should be possible to check a permanent magnets aura and the movement of charges must be visible with proper instruments. This is why DC current which requires thick wires could not move to lot of distances and AC current which uses very high voltage could be transmitted to long distances. The voltage causing particle dislikes the thick wires and is reduced in the thick wires. If high voltage were to be transmitted through thick wires of less resistance we would require high current or very high amperage to be moved through the wire and the slower amperage particles cannot travel long distance. I may not be correctly describing but this is what happens.

You can test this by keeping two permanent magnets with their opposite poles on your both sides of your palm and you will know that the magnetic field penetrates your hand and muscles and the opposite poles will stick to each other and the hand will become warm after some time. If you want to do it cover your hand with a plastic sleeve and test as the magnets can easily pinch your skin and cause significant damage. So be careful. This method can relieve arthirities and will cause the blood to be charged and can kill bacterias, viruses and pathogens in the body. It can cure any disease in the human body. But the principle is that it charges the blood flowing in the body. This principle is used in the Magnetic pulsar of Bob Beck.

I understand that the idea that in generators where DC Electromagnets are rotated and output is less has led to the wrong notion that it is conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy. If we put wood or plastic core and rotate it, will it result in the production of electricity. Of course not. A magnet on its own has a static field. The rotating magnetic core causes the rotating magnetic field or time varying magnetic field and the conductor subjected to this field produces electricity. The magnet need not be rotated for this. It is enough if we oscillate the static field to an oscillating field. The energy needed for oscillating the field of a large magnet is low but the output can be very high as it is based on the strength of the magnetic field, the diameter of secondary wire and the turns of the secondary wire.

Some how this is a very unlucky field. Figuera passed away within a few days of filng this patent. Other people who test this suffer. I myself has suffered very significantly and finally decided to stop all this.

Many questions have been raised why I have not posted any photos or videos. Unfortunately we had people checking if what I say is correct or not. Even those replicators suffered. In my case it is both personal and financial and professional and whatever I do I suffer. it is for this reason I stop this.

Whether COP>1 is possible? Yes. It is doable What is needed for it. Identify a ferromagnetic material that will have high magnetism as a permanent magnet and will not be demagnetized by the application of high voltage and milliamps AC input. About 40% of the rods that I used remain permanent magnets. other rods are not. We will need to check the composition of the rods and what is the difference in the molecular structure of the rods that remain permanent magnets and those that are not.

However when you do the COP>1 set up you have a kind of magnetic vortex forming in the central core. This is actually frightening. I'm no hero and at the kind of current I employed this kind of dangerous phenomena occurs. This should be avoided. For this reason the core should be significantly large and it is better to magnetise the core not to saturation but some lower point so that the magnetic vortex kind of things are avoided. I'm not interested in this field any more. It is a fairly unlucky field. I would sincerely advice any one to avoid this.

TK is a very intelligent man. He appears to use power Electronics. He pointedly asked me a question as to what is the shape of the waves and whether the full wave positive sign waves are above 5. it simply means whether the magnetic field is not allowed to collapse. Only when the magnetic field collapses backemf will come or Lenz law will operate. TK indicated he would need to check it with an osciloscope. Prof Figuera avoided all that by using DC to magnetise the core first and then oscillating the DC so the permanent magnet is never demagnetised. Figuera also avoided that even if there is high amperage the permanent magnet would remain a permanent magnet for the DC current is always there. I do not think Prof Figuera had access to an oscilloscope. But in his claims he also pointed out that the heat is avoided in the device and so the maintenance is low. Therefore the core size is high and magnetism was not allowed to reach the saturation point by him. The invention remains state of the art even today after  107 years of its filing. It appears to employ the magnetic amplifier principle but the two primaries are both acting together to create that effect.

I have not checked if the device can be made to operate on its own. I'm told that if the COP>1 comes the device can operate on its own. High Voltage is needed for this to be achieved. But the secondary core must be larger to avoid the excessive magnetic saturation and the heat.
I frankly do not think that this device can be used for electromobiles. you need large cores to avoid heat. The weight of iron and coils that I used is greater than the weight of small electric cars. But my knowledge is very limited and I may well be wrong.

Let me focus on my practice. Sorry no pictures no videos and no responses. Some people in this forum have seen the photos and videos. This is a very unlucky field. Some one indicated that those doing this kind of thing would come under spiritual attacks. it seems to be the case. Let me completely avoid this unlucky field and let me focus on my practice. I will send the rods that became permanent magnets even after applying high voltage and high amperage AC and retain a remanent magnetism to some one who can verify what is their internal structure and what is the modification caused to them and what is their chemical composition and any other thing necessary. On my part I'm least interested in this.

I would again request the admin to delete all my posts and my account. Enough is enough. I decided to write this for no one appears to disclose that the primary cores become semi saturated permanent magnets and remain permanent magnets always and the rotary device is used to create undulated DC to distort the magnetic field of permanent magnets in the primary cores and that the secondary in the middle must be half the dia of the primary and half the length of the primary and so it experiences a sudden increase in the magnetic field strength and then it is reduced and increased again and again. There is nothing more to this device. Prof. Figuera himself indicates that the rotary device can be dispenses with a switch. Possibly an electromechnical switch but I'm not able to understand it. I have been successful only whe high voltage is applied and whenever low voltage is applied the output did not come. So high voltage and milliamps and high number of turns using the multifilar coils or helical coils of small wires and thick wires to send low voltage and high amperage DC to keep the rods powerful permanent magnets is what is needed here. The device certainly works and not a hoax. I believe I have shared all I know now in the forum and so let me leave and focus on my practice.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 12, 2015, 08:15:24 AM
On the 18th of november of 2014 a user posted the sketch that I attach below....
Thanks. I had not seen that image. I thought about the bar along the other side of the coils so it's good to see that may not be a crazy idea. I need to go through this whole thread again soon. The experiments I saw by woopy are very encouraging. He shows basically no change in his meter with the secondary present or not. It's taking me a while to understand this device but I think we are getting there.


...Figuera Device is probably the second device to use a well known principle...
Appreciate all the info. I agree with a lot of it. I'm still unclear on exactly how he defeats Lenz. I recall a tesla patent that mentions a lag in lenz showing up as a core is being saturated. I'm thinking this lag is what prevents lenz from hurting this device. The power to the primaries is switched so fast that by the time lenz shows up, it's to late for it to hurt the system. Lenz wants to push back but that coils electricity is already receding, so if anything it may help it recede by pushing back in the direction it's now going anyways. I think standard generators move to slow so that the lenz generated is in phase with the moving magnet allowing it to push back against it. At any rate, I can understand the need to take a brake from projects for a while. Hope you are able to come back after some rest as I find all info helpful.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 12, 2015, 06:51:53 PM
Hi,
Please keep on involved in the forum. You have been the only really involved in the project, technically and economically. At least keep you visiting the forum some days and helping in spreading this project.

Regards


I'm giving up this research and this is my last post. I have actually asked the admin to delete all my posts and remove my account but that was not obliged.

Figuera Device is probably the second device to use a well known principle and the first being (If I'm correct, Daniel McFarland Cooks Device). The principle is simple. If you make a large permanent magnet core, there is a static magnetic field around it. If you can oscillate that static magnetic field so it becomes an oscillating magnetic field you can generate electricity from the oscillating or time varying magnetic field by putting  conductor in the area of influence of the now time varying magnetic field. In order to achieve it you need to ensure two things. High voltage AC must be applied and milliamps must be provided so that the permanent magnet is not destroyed. However this has the possibility of reducing the magnetic strength of the permanent magnet significantly.

Figuera therefore used DC Electromagnets and increased the Voltage by providing a lot of resistance and oscillated the DC using the DC commutator. He avoided backemf by ensuring that both N and S magnets had current always. The rotary device is an electromechanical device. It is quite difficult to avoid sparks unless it is professionally built but can be obtained. Since the current flowing was oscillated DC or as Doug1 indicated undulated DC the magnetism was not lost. If a shunted or shoted coil is placed over the core the shorted coil will act like a capacitor and will develop enormous amperage and so the magnetic field strength of the N and S permanent Magnets is never reduced. So far I have not seen any one mentioning the fact that the core is a permanent magnet core in the primaries.

If it very difficult to use high voltage pulsed DC or DC using mains. The amount of current drawn is very high. We can use step down transformers to make DC and create a powerful DC Electromagnet.

The second thing is that the resistors can be placed in between N1 and N2 and N2 and N3 and N3 and N4 and so on..This will result in the current being progressively reduced and voltage being progressively increased. In the opposite S magnets Since current is given from S7 to S1 reverse is the case. If in N magnets current is high, in S magnets the voltage is high.

Another important point is that Figuera used the amplification method. When you apply the current in parallel the output in the secondary is four times of what is expected if the voltage is halved by giving the current in serial.  Figuera avoided this by giving the current in parallel. The current moved from the edges to the center of the magnets and then went back to the edges of N and S. It is similar to clapping the hands. The secondary in the middle is half the diameter of the primary and half the length of the primary. (one primary) Therefore when the clapping hands moved towards the center the magnetic field strength in the center is very high. Voltage is high in one primary and magnetic field strength is high in another primary and this has resulted in the output in the secondary being high. The output is based on the diameter of the wire used in the secondary and the voltage developed. Voltage of the secondary is based on the number of turns and the current of the secondary is based on the diameter of the secondary wire. It necessarily follows that the number of turns in the primary must be high, sufficient to handle the current but also sufficient to create a magnetic field strength even if the current is low.

One way of doing this device without hassles is to give DC current through step down transformers to make the electromagnet a staturated permanent magnet core. This can be for about 2/3rd of the primary core. The rest of the primary core can have few layers of a coil that is neither shorted nor connected to any load but is kept open with the open ends insulated. On this we can have a multifilar coil of very thin wires and maintain the polarity of the cores. The permanent magnet will remain a permanent magnet. The multifilar coil will provide only milliamps and 220 volts AC. The input AC cannot demagnetise the permanent magnet which is in a saturated condition but it can easily distort the magnetic field. The output in the secondary is based on the number of turns and thickness of wires of the secondary. This is one way we can avoid the DC commutator.

I have observed COP>1 results two times. I have tried to replicate the Ramaswami device and reduced the output voltage to 351 volts and connected to the same earth points to which I connected two years back. Input was about 600 watts. Outut was dismal. 351 volts and 0.4 amps. I could not believe myself. Why the same earth points which produced an unbelievable amount of amperage two years back now would not work. Then a member of the forum who has occassionally posted here indicated that the earth rod would have rusted and the rust would have created an insulation and that might be the reason. I checked with a mentor who is a Prof in inorganic Chemistry only to be scolded that how I did not understand this simple thing of chemical reaction taking place and why I did not create fresh earth points after two years. The only rust proof metals that will never rust is 316L grade steel or Titanium. But the earth point for them should be prepared in such a way that they will not chemically interact with the surrounding material for the earth points to work as anticipated and desired. In addition the combination of salt water and the media surrounding the rust proof earth points must also be checked if we want to use the Earth. This is the specific reason why people are not able to use earth points consistently. Once we give a lot of current and water the earth point will interact with the surrounding carbon powder and salt and water very fast and will be rusted so much that the surface area available for conducting electricity is reduced. This is one of the reasons why people find it difficult to replicate the Barbosa and Leal devices. It works first time and second time onwards the efficiency goes down. If the above methodology is not checked and the earth points are electrical conductors working only like inert materials the problem will occur. I checked the centre coil alone and the output was 33 volts and 6 amps and it was able to light 10x200 watts lamps. Naturally not full brightness but the point was that if at 33 volts we get 6 amps and 10x200 watts lamps can glow, at 351 volts the output should be quite high.But when connected to the same earth points the output was just 0.4 amps. 

Figuera concept has now been implemented in a number of devices where permanent magnet is used on the transformer cores to increase the output. These devices are bound to fail after some time or if high AC fields are used for the permanent magnet will be significantly reduced and will be divested of the permanent magnetism. In addition the core will be heated if high current passes through and that will also demagnetise the permanent magnet. Figuera eliminated all these things at one stroke by making the entire primary cores DC Electromagnets and made them non-saturated permanent magnets. This is why the BuForn patent claims that what happens in the secondary is insigificant and every thing is done in the two primaries.

Now where is the extra energy coming from? There is no extra energy. This is quite difficult to understand. There is no violation of law of conservation of energy.

This device works like the solar cell. Solar cells produce electricity due to solar radition. We do not supply the solar radiation. It comes in nature. Similarly the magnets absorb charges from the atmosphere and keep conducting it from one pole to other. Every permanent magnet does not.

As I understand there are two particles which move from the atmosphere inside the permanent magnets. One of them is small and moves very fast and likes high resistance and is responsible for causing voltage. This is focussed on one pole of the magnets. The other particle is larger in size and moves slowly and requires thick wires and is responsbile for amperage and is saturated at the opposite poles. Both of them if I understand correctly are positive and negative charges. This is why like poles of magnets repel each other and unlike poles attract each other. It is the nature of magnets to attract the charges from the atmosphere and they keep travelling through the magnets and move out again in to the atmosphere and the process is repeated as long as the magnet remains a magnet. These two particles enter the magnet at diffent poles and once they are saturated inside the magnet they keep moving out to the atmosphere at the other end and the process is continuously repeated. This is why magnets are different from other non magnetic materials. It should be possible to check a permanent magnets aura and the movement of charges must be visible with proper instruments. This is why DC current which requires thick wires could not move to lot of distances and AC current which uses very high voltage could be transmitted to long distances. The voltage causing particle dislikes the thick wires and is reduced in the thick wires. If high voltage were to be transmitted through thick wires of less resistance we would require high current or very high amperage to be moved through the wire and the slower amperage particles cannot travel long distance. I may not be correctly describing but this is what happens.

You can test this by keeping two permanent magnets with their opposite poles on your both sides of your palm and you will know that the magnetic field penetrates your hand and muscles and the opposite poles will stick to each other and the hand will become warm after some time. If you want to do it cover your hand with a plastic sleeve and test as the magnets can easily pinch your skin and cause significant damage. So be careful. This method can relieve arthirities and will cause the blood to be charged and can kill bacterias, viruses and pathogens in the body. It can cure any disease in the human body. But the principle is that it charges the blood flowing in the body. This principle is used in the Magnetic pulsar of Bob Beck.

I understand that the idea that in generators where DC Electromagnets are rotated and output is less has led to the wrong notion that it is conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy. If we put wood or plastic core and rotate it, will it result in the production of electricity. Of course not. A magnet on its own has a static field. The rotating magnetic core causes the rotating magnetic field or time varying magnetic field and the conductor subjected to this field produces electricity. The magnet need not be rotated for this. It is enough if we oscillate the static field to an oscillating field. The energy needed for oscillating the field of a large magnet is low but the output can be very high as it is based on the strength of the magnetic field, the diameter of secondary wire and the turns of the secondary wire.

Some how this is a very unlucky field. Figuera passed away within a few days of filng this patent. Other people who test this suffer. I myself has suffered very significantly and finally decided to stop all this.

Many questions have been raised why I have not posted any photos or videos. Unfortunately we had people checking if what I say is correct or not. Even those replicators suffered. In my case it is both personal and financial and professional and whatever I do I suffer. it is for this reason I stop this.

Whether COP>1 is possible? Yes. It is doable What is needed for it. Identify a ferromagnetic material that will have high magnetism as a permanent magnet and will not be demagnetized by the application of high voltage and milliamps AC input. About 40% of the rods that I used remain permanent magnets. other rods are not. We will need to check the composition of the rods and what is the difference in the molecular structure of the rods that remain permanent magnets and those that are not.

However when you do the COP>1 set up you have a kind of magnetic vortex forming in the central core. This is actually frightening. I'm no hero and at the kind of current I employed this kind of dangerous phenomena occurs. This should be avoided. For this reason the core should be significantly large and it is better to magnetise the core not to saturation but some lower point so that the magnetic vortex kind of things are avoided. I'm not interested in this field any more. It is a fairly unlucky field. I would sincerely advice any one to avoid this.

TK is a very intelligent man. He appears to use power Electronics. He pointedly asked me a question as to what is the shape of the waves and whether the full wave positive sign waves are above 5. it simply means whether the magnetic field is not allowed to collapse. Only when the magnetic field collapses backemf will come or Lenz law will operate. TK indicated he would need to check it with an osciloscope. Prof Figuera avoided all that by using DC to magnetise the core first and then oscillating the DC so the permanent magnet is never demagnetised. Figuera also avoided that even if there is high amperage the permanent magnet would remain a permanent magnet for the DC current is always there. I do not think Prof Figuera had access to an oscilloscope. But in his claims he also pointed out that the heat is avoided in the device and so the maintenance is low. Therefore the core size is high and magnetism was not allowed to reach the saturation point by him. The invention remains state of the art even today after  107 years of its filing. It appears to employ the magnetic amplifier principle but the two primaries are both acting together to create that effect.

I have not checked if the device can be made to operate on its own. I'm told that if the COP>1 comes the device can operate on its own. High Voltage is needed for this to be achieved. But the secondary core must be larger to avoid the excessive magnetic saturation and the heat.
I frankly do not think that this device can be used for electromobiles. you need large cores to avoid heat. The weight of iron and coils that I used is greater than the weight of small electric cars. But my knowledge is very limited and I may well be wrong.

Let me focus on my practice. Sorry no pictures no videos and no responses. Some people in this forum have seen the photos and videos. This is a very unlucky field. Some one indicated that those doing this kind of thing would come under spiritual attacks. it seems to be the case. Let me completely avoid this unlucky field and let me focus on my practice. I will send the rods that became permanent magnets even after applying high voltage and high amperage AC and retain a remanent magnetism to some one who can verify what is their internal structure and what is the modification caused to them and what is their chemical composition and any other thing necessary. On my part I'm least interested in this.

I would again request the admin to delete all my posts and my account. Enough is enough. I decided to write this for no one appears to disclose that the primary cores become semi saturated permanent magnets and remain permanent magnets always and the rotary device is used to create undulated DC to distort the magnetic field of permanent magnets in the primary cores and that the secondary in the middle must be half the dia of the primary and half the length of the primary and so it experiences a sudden increase in the magnetic field strength and then it is reduced and increased again and again. There is nothing more to this device. Prof. Figuera himself indicates that the rotary device can be dispenses with a switch. Possibly an electromechnical switch but I'm not able to understand it. I have been successful only whe high voltage is applied and whenever low voltage is applied the output did not come. So high voltage and milliamps and high number of turns using the multifilar coils or helical coils of small wires and thick wires to send low voltage and high amperage DC to keep the rods powerful permanent magnets is what is needed here. The device certainly works and not a hoax. I believe I have shared all I know now in the forum and so let me leave and focus on my practice.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 13, 2015, 07:38:33 PM

........... If a shunted or shoted coil is placed over the core the shorted coil will act like a capacitor and will develop enormous amperage and so the magnetic field strength of the N and S permanent Magnets is never reduced. So far I have not seen any one mentioning the fact that the core is a permanent magnet core in the primaries.


Ridiculous ........ you basically stole my idea and now claim it as your own brilliant insight.  ::) ::) ::) I already presented a "shorted coil" and my BIAS coil maintains the magnetic direction......I made that clear in my drawings and posts.

Are you sure your name is not Tito L?? I read a whole lot of ......."I got it"...... but not one ounce of proof.


Your beloved:

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 13, 2015, 07:56:57 PM
Hi,
Someone sent me a personal message asking for the data of the electromagnets I had built. Please, note that I had not checked this website since my last post. I will provide the data again in this post, and then may not return to this forum for months. I apologize but I do not have the time to post, so my reply should take some time.

I have built two electromagnets for the Cook’s device. Each electromagnet consists of

CORE
iron steel: 1018,
relative permeability: 2,540
length: 24 inches
Diameter: 2 inches

INNER COIL
length: 22 inches
diameter: 2 inches
turns: 900 single layer of #24 AWG
measured inductance: 10 mH (without outer coil)
This inductance is very different from the calculated values, which are usually larger than 3 H.

OUTER COIL
length: 21 inches
diameter: 2.5 inches
turns: 380 single layer of #16 AWG
measured inductances: 1.09 mH (and 2 mH with inner core-coil assembly)

I will start the tests for this device. A major challenge is to determine how to excite the device. For the excitation, I will also use two electromagnets (shown in picture) located about the mid section.

I have also built a section of the Figuera’s 1908 device. It was a lot of work because I have to cut Silicon steel sheets with scissors. Then, it was the hammering and drilling. See the pictures. The data for the electromagnets are:

‘N’ and ‘S’ electromagnets:
length: 10 inches
width: 1.5 inch
interface surface: 1” x 1.5”
turns: 1,050 multi-layers of #18 AWG

‘Y’ electromagnet:
length: 10 inches
width: 1.5 inch
interface surface: 1” x 1.5”
turns: 709 multi-layers of #16 AWG
Whe 60 Vac was input to one of the side coils, the output in the ‘Y’ coils was 30 Vac. I am working on the driver to generate the two out of phase pulsating DC voltages. It should be ready for tests within a week.

The old coil winder that I bought had really paid off. It has been a time saver, once you have the set up, it is so easy to wind the coils. It was money well spent.

I should be very busy for the next six months. I will not be able to post. However, I am planning on recording the tests data and publish them later.

I should get back to you by next year with the results of the tests on these new prototypes.

Thank you,
Bajac


Bajac

Impressive build!!!!!!!!

I dont have that kind of machinery, mine is being hand built. I look forward to your build.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 14, 2015, 06:27:57 AM
Dear Mr. Core;

I have not followed this forum for a long time and I have not studied your ideas. I'm sorry. You can go to some of my earliest posts where I have showed a copper vessel that was magnetised more than iron and I indicated that in the experiments to do that we used shunted coils. That was in 2013. 

2. The inspiration for the shorted coil idea came to me from an old man who was filing patents before your father was probably born. His name is Daniel McFarland Cook and please check his patent filed in 1871 for saturating the core using shorted coils.

3. I'm a Patent Attorney and I live in Chennai, Tamil Nadu India. You can go to google and just type N Ramaswami Patent Attorney and you get all details about me. I'm not aware of the other gentleman whom you have referred in your post.

4. I'm a Lawyer and until February 2013 had no idea of these devices. One of my students indicated that there is no research grant for magnetism in India after 1940s. I was surprised. I asked one of my clients who owns wind mills and his duty is to sign a contract with the bank to purchase the wind mills and award the contract and supply installation and maintenance to the wind turbine companies and there is no knowlege of the technology involved. We have lost millions of jobs and people are suffering and so I decided to test this equipment.

4. The idea of magnetic amplifier and a book on magnetic amplifier was given to me by forum member Doug1 a few months back. I could not understand much of it. I do not know if you have posted before that or after that.

5. In the current series of tests I did the results were conflicting from what we did in 2013. I take guidance from many mentors in India and other countries and the overseas mentors have stipulated that I cannot put pictures videos and construction notes until the device is built by 1o diferent people in 10 different countries and results are checked and validated and are more or less same. My Indian mentors are even more stringent that the device must be run for 24 hours continuously and the results should be analysed and all weaknesses should be found and sorted out. Only after that they would agree to release the information. Of course multiple people here would also verify the results.

6. In the current series the results did not match the results we obtained in 2013. It is only then I was told that I should put up a new earth points but the idea is not satisfactory to me. Once we set the earth it must work continuously for years. So Earth point set up needs to be investigated.

7. One mentor in India directed me to check each one of the rods indepdently. We have found that most of the rods are pure soft iron rods and do not have any residual magnetism. However some rods retain residual magnetism. Some are strong and some are weak. In these rods the magnetic field will never collapse becuause inspite of applying high voltage and high amperage AC these rods remain magnetised. They are not supposed to. So why these rods remain magnetised needs to be investigated.

8. The idea of employing DC to keep the rods substanitally permanent magnets came only after the what I stated in para No. 7. I have discussed with my mentors and one of them was of the opinion that DC and pulsed DC combination can be used. We have not checked it. But I found Figuera used the DC commutator to oscillate the DC to make it undulated DC and then used the resistor array to increase the voltage and reduce the current. I have seen that only when high voltage is applied high output comes.

9. Whatever credit you want to claim, please keep it yourself. But please look at the tile of the topic. It is Reinventing Figuers device. Some technology was available and it was lost and we are all trying to bring it back to life so a lot of employment opportunities can be created to poor people. My understanding was it was an open sourced project done with this idea only.

10. I'm a greatful man. My mentors for whatever reason have barred me from putting up any photos, videos and the like. It is only after I meet the continuous 24 hour operation the mentors in India would allow me to post pictures. It is only after the device is built and tested in 10 different places or 20 different places the mentors in other countries would agree to post pictures and videos and how to construct notes. I'm a greateful man and so I obey them.

11. Please stud the patent of Mr. Cook. You would know that in 1871 he has indicated that shorted coils can be used to increase the magnetism to saturation. I took the idea from him and I apologize that I was not aware of your post. I'm distressed that some how unknowlingly I have caused you to feel hurt but I did not even know it.

12. I do not know the Gentleman by name Tito. If you have some scores to settle with him it is certainly not me. I'm in a mood and inclination to get out of this field as soon as poossible. Nothing more.

13. If in spite of all this. after checking with all concerned, you still feel that you are the first person to propose some thing, please take the credit. I do not stand in your way. Most of what we do has already been done earlier.

14. There is a book called Healing is Voltage selling on Amazon. The Author was accused of taking a wave form from Russian Authors and not giving them credit. He then traced the wave form to a 1845 device that sits in a museum in US and listed that how many times the same wave form is used. Benjamin Franklin is credited with inventing lightening rods. If you go to the wikipedia page it says in a few lines 5000 year old temples in Sri Lanka also carry Lightening rods. So who really inveted them. Credit must be given to Mr Franklin for reinventing a lost technology. This is what we are all here trying to do. It is in this spirit that I work.

I hope that this clears the mist.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 19, 2015, 06:06:32 PM
Since I posted my theory sometime ago I have been diligently working on a prototype. Its EZ to say how something works and these forums are filled with the "This is how it works" crowd. My theory doesn't exactly fall in line with Figuera's patent however if everything was spelled out in the patent you wouldn't be reading this and I wouldn't of just spent 40 hours building a resonator.

My build is open source, anything I do will get posted here, win or lose, The passion is in creating something from nothing...... thats it. I am not looking to build a FE device, however I am looking to build a better Dynamo.

**** Build pictures located in next Post ****

Some Notes:
I didn't have the machinery to build the core design I originally laid out. I was able to redesign the core shape to provide identical functionality as I laid out. SEE PICTURE 2 of the redesigned core shape made in CAD.

The resonator, shown below in pictures is considered to be 100% complete. It was a pain in the A$$, I wanted something that would be EZ to adjust the magnetic gap but still had to be extremely durable and solid. This was a requirement due to the very small gap I am using. I did not want the magnetic forces to move the work pieces. As I stated I am using the magnetostriction effect to Make and Break a magnetic circuit as outlined in the patents I referenced.

Ultimately I am very happy with the final build of the resonator. I hit every goal I laid out to achieve. The pictures don't do it justice, its extremely durable, strong, and super EZ to work with.


......... Now here is a kicker... The first picture is a quote from the Thomas Edison patent. Stop and think about this for a minute. What if Ol' Thomas is actually the father of FE. What if history, or the controlling powers that be, allowed people to fantasize about Tesla. What if Tesla was used as there distraction. What if the answer can be found in Thomas Edison's patent..... wouldn't it be in plain sight?... right under our noses? YOU DECIDE.


From Edison:

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 19, 2015, 06:08:52 PM
The "CORE Dynamo Resonator"

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 19, 2015, 06:10:21 PM
More pics
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 19, 2015, 06:12:18 PM
FYI...... Everything in the above pictures shaped, cut, molded, spun, hammered by hand.


- Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 20, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Core
"......... Now here is a kicker... The first picture is a quote from the Thomas Edison patent. Stop and think about this for a minute. What if Ol' Thomas is actually the father of FE. What if history, or the controlling powers that be, allowed people to fantasize about Tesla. What if Tesla was used as there distraction. What if the answer can be found in Thomas Edison's patent..... wouldn't it be in plain sight?... right under our noses? YOU DECIDE."

 Interesting theory. Certainly within the realm of possibility. I would remind you that after the worlds fair in the early 1900's it was decided by all the major bankers and leaders that the world would be a society based on industry not agriculture. Soon after the war of the currents started. Tesla may have partnered with those who sought to exploit the electrification of the nations in order to secure his funding and his place in history. Plus he was really pissed at Edison over one of the projects Edison said he pay Tesla XX amount of money if he could find a way to do something which I do not remember what that was exactly. Then Edison told him he was not serious and that Tesla did not understand American sarcasm after Tesla did the work.
  Nice looking build by the way.
Another thing to consider they all learned from the same information sources when they were younger.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 20, 2015, 06:21:54 PM
Interesting theory. Certainly within the realm of possibility. I would remind you that after the worlds fair in the early 1900's it was decided by all the major bankers and leaders that the world would be a society based on industry not agriculture. Soon after the war of the currents started. Tesla may have partnered with those who sought to exploit the electrification of the nations in order to secure his funding and his place in history. Plus he was really pissed at Edison over one of the projects Edison said he pay Tesla XX amount of money if he could find a way to do something which I do not remember what that was exactly. Then Edison told him he was not serious and that Tesla did not understand American sarcasm after Tesla did the work.
  Nice looking build by the way.
Another thing to consider they all learned from the same information sources when they were younger.

Doug,

Whats interesting is that many people worked for Edison, including Tesla. Edison patented many devices, some of these devices most likely Edison had no creative input. Tesla redesigned his dynamo, I am sure, because Tesla worked for Edison, that Edison patented the redesigned dynamo device under his name and not Tesla.
So its possible that the device I am referencing had no creative input from Edison but was designed by a very creative employee of his. Edison most likely saw it function, as designed, and had the business sense to patent it.

Who knows...... regardless it has given me an avenue of experimentation.


Build update:
Started working on the electronics. I have about another 30 hours of work before I can start tuning the device.

-Core 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 21, 2015, 01:01:45 AM
Hello everyone,

I have not followed this forum to much as i have been very busy with life so i have been reading prior post to catch up.

thanks for the pic Hannon very informative.

i was thinking the other day on how to switch Figueras device electronically with out using resistors and this is what i came up with.......Tell me what you think?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 21, 2015, 10:11:18 AM
Marathonman,


I hope you are fine. I am glad to see you here again, This is a good sign.


You proposal is fine, at least under my limited knowledge. With a small DC signal you may control the big AC signal fed into one serie of electromagnets throgh a magnetic amplifier.


So far it is fine. The problem is that you need  two unphased signals, one for each serie of electromagnets (N and S). The problem is again how to get both unphased signals and tune them in the proper way . I already thought about Mag Amp for this subject but I could not solve properldy how to get the second signal. After many hours I gave up and I thought that maybe it was better the mechanical system even if it has many losses in the resistors. This is like a no-end road because I had not enough skills to build th mechanical conmmutator so I got stucked in this point


Core,


Your device looks great. I hope you the best, even if it is not pure Figuera´s design. You proposal of switching sequence and shorted coils were not part of any Figuera´s patent. You quote from Thomas Edison patent No.  US 434586 is curious, although I think that that does not means a selfpowering device. It is like many generators where some internal field electrmagnets are powered by part of the electrical output after the start-up. But these are not self-powering generators, because they rely on an external source to move the rotor


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 21, 2015, 03:48:12 PM
Marathonman
  You dont need the bridge rectifier use center tap coils as magnetic diodes. Ref Tesla pat title Dc currents from AC and work the principal into your design. If your dc input is equal to the winding output if run as a secondary then the battery will match half the ac cycle and cancel out half the cycle enabling it to be split. If the battery runs low the cancelled half will feed forward charge into the battery to keep it charged. The sequence of turning on the inverter will be tricky because when you force voltage into the output side it will fry if you have no isolation between the dc input to mag amp and AC output of the inverter. If you short out the dc input of the mag amp and add a capacitor + a dump load like light bulb to tell you when the dc is present you might be able to work it out. It seems a bit Rube Goulburg"ish to me but maybe it will work. There is also a residual charge left in the inverter even when turned off I have no idea what effect it will have when the unit is turned off and on repeatedly. You might want to add a switch between the AC output of the inverter and everything ells.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 21, 2015, 04:08:11 PM
Roughly like this.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 21, 2015, 04:31:47 PM
Tesla's magnetic rectifier Pat 413353 You have to use a bit of your own mind to rework it into other types of arrangements of core and coils after you really understand how it works.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 21, 2015, 08:25:00 PM
Hey guys, this is Jon, glad to see this thread still alive. I'll try to read through the thread later, but I'm guessing that no one came up with a viable generator design yet?

If I may, I wanted to remind everyone that multiple primary coils multiplies the output. I made some youtube videos about this, and got a lot of views, but I don't think many people understand that this is probably very important... kind of like an unknown rule of electromagnetism. After a busy summer, and refinancing and other things, I'm going to start working on this project again, but for now, I'll just weigh in.

The commutator and switching isn't as important as the electromagnets, and the "soft" iron core isn't that important either. The commutator was powered by DC, or a battery, which is the only way he could make it self-looped. The output was pulsed DC, which at that time could power every motor and lightbulb around (which was the only electrical devices they had anyway).

I'm using an image from this guy: http://www.eeweb.com/blog/clarence_alucho/a-flash-from-the-past-figueras-generator because my new computer doesn't have any of the stuff from my old one.

In the image:
1. Both primaries are wired N + N up, not N + S.
2. The commutator, fed by DC, produces two DC peaks that are 90 degrees out of phase. This means that as the commutator sweeps through the middle, both coils are at half of the full voltage. So if we have 12V input, it would be like this: Coil 1 is 12V then drops while coil 2 increases from 0V. In the middle, both coils are at 6V, and at the other side of the commutator, coil 1 is 0V and coil 2 is 12V.
3. The secondary sees the flux of both coils. So, if the secondary had a winding ratio of 2:1 with the primaries, we would see this voltage output: 12V out when coil 1 is 12V, when the commutator sweeps the middle, 24V out, then when coil 2 is 12V, the output is again 12V. So it's 12V out with a 24V pulse, DC.
The output Figuera generated was a pulsed DC with a DC bias. The winding ratios can be changed, but the principle he used was similar to his other patents, a DC generator. This type of generator doesn't exist today, but if the wire diameters are large (lower resistance), we're talking about a lot of current out... which is probably why it's described as "industrial". In a way, it's like magnetically saturating a large coil, then tricking it into producing DC. This principle could also be used to make a rotating generator quite easily.

But as I showed in my videos, AC can be used, too. The main principle is multiple inductors. I don't know why Faraday, or Edison, or even Tesla never realized this. It's like, if you sweep one magnet over a coil, it produces voltage. But if you sweep two magnets, same polarity, it produces twice the voltage. Twice the voltage means twice the power out for the same amount of sweeping. Even AC motors could benefit from this principle. If they were made with two stator coils side-byside instead of one (meaning a pole-face) the rotor would spin twice as fast. Even a typical AC generator could be redisgned to produce more power out, and possibly even power it's prime mover.

I don't want to stand on a soapbox here, but I just think this is that important.

Here's a link to the Platinum Invests', or whatever, generator video: https://youtu.be/2M89QnJaPY8

Please watch it. I know the magnet and coil configuration looks complex, but it's simply made to produce three-phase. The principle here is that they use multiple magnets that sweep over a coil at once. In the one at 6:10, even four magnets at a time. Increasing the number of magnets, or inductors, multiplies the power out.

Thanks for your time guys. I'll check in later
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 22, 2015, 06:14:03 PM
Hi Jon,
Nice to see you again. Could you provide the link to the videos you are referencing? Thanks in advance

About the link that you added it seems to be a divulgative blog. It is fine as an sketch, but IMHO the key in this generator is the placement and orientation of the coils. We really have doubts about aligning them or placing them perpendiculary , or parallel as this guy drew them in his blog.

If you check the last pages in the thread you will find a translation by Alvaro_CS of the last Buforn patent, where it seems to place the coils aligned

Also maybe you may check my post #2419 on the 21st of july, page 162 witb a simulation of the commutator and resistors
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 22, 2015, 09:37:11 PM
You know what ? The amount of possible combinations is not that large. A team of experienced scientists with all support and tools and lab and money can crack it in few months. Yet nobody was interested in Figuera for more then 100 years. Very strange indeeed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 22, 2015, 11:26:12 PM
Because his patents were lost into the patent office archives until 2011.  Alpoma researched his story and published a historical report into a spanish magazine in january of 2011. These are by far the simplest generators and the patents are supposed to disclose almost all everything. I hope we are missing just some details
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 23, 2015, 03:52:43 AM
Thanks Hannon and yes i am fine.
actually this control system will be used for my stationary Dynamo i have designed because the resistors i was using got to hot with 100 volts 1-2 amps so i had to come up with something else. i just thought i could use it for Figueras design.
i took a 1900 rotating Dynamo and made it stationary using electromagnets....just waiting for the funds to purchase the Iron Core.
I have racked my brain with Figueras device when not on other projects hoping myself or some one else would crack this 100 year old puzzle.

HAPPY FIGUERING
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 24, 2015, 09:49:40 PM
I think i have solved the Figueras 100 year old dilemma. last night at work i had an Epiphany. see i am working on a stationary Dynamo for my self just to say i did this but last night i realized that i had Inadvertently solved the Figueras Patent. i will draw out my findings and present them to everyone when i am finished. you will just soil your self ....it was right in front of our eyes the whole time.

HANNON..... here is the control system for Figueras using mag amps for control..... NO RESISTORS to waste electricity.
all you have to do is connect them opposite of each other and you will have mag amp control.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: truesearch on September 24, 2015, 10:04:07 PM
@marathonman:


Alright, don't keep us waiting!  ;D


truesearch
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 24, 2015, 10:11:33 PM
FINALLY !  ;)  Hard to believe it took you guys so much time ...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 24, 2015, 11:01:56 PM
Now just remember figueras took a rotating Dynamo and made it stationary so this means he had to put a Electromagnet at every station then he straightened  it out length wise then cut the core in pieces. but you must not forget that the original Dynamo had a north every other coil and the south every other coil so to get the reversing flux through the core as it turned.... so this has been forgotten in the process and also EVERYONE was wiring the whole thing wrong.
the pic below....all the RED dots are fired together and all the Blue Squares are fired together to get the original rotating Dynamo sequence of the reversal of the flux. "THIS IS A MUST AND CAN NOT BE ANY OTHER WAY" or it will not work
NOW look at the output coils "SEE HOW THEY ARE WOUND" one section is wired with the end of the coil on top and the next set is wired on the bottom then it is repeated in pairs AS IN TWO.
 Dynamos and Figueras devise will always end in South....you can not just add one you have to add two to get the north south coils.

as for the timing.... this will be up to you but for myself i will go for the mag amp control with no resistors.

Just remember Figueras Devise never reached ZERO VOLTS... he switched it at mid point


YOU ARE WELCOME EVERYBODY!

FIGUERAS ROCKS!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 25, 2015, 12:24:56 AM
...
YOU ARE WELCOME EVERYBODY!
...
Looks good. Thanks  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 25, 2015, 11:20:34 AM
Dear All:

I must warn every one about one unknown thing about the Figuera or Ramaswami devices. They do work. They are capable of creating higher output than input. But there is a problem

In Natural Bar magnets the waves flow out of the north pole and move towards the south pole and then they move inside the magnet from the south pole to the north pole. In a permanent magnet this process continues all the time.

In the Figuera and Ramaswami devices three combinations are possible.

a. input Voltage division.
b. input Voltage maintenance
C. Voltage multiplication in secondary by giving the primary in parallel. The output in C is 4 times the output in a. The input in C be brought down than the input in C if we use many coils in the multifilar coils say about 12filar coils due to increasing inductive impedance and we can effectively bring down the input wattage to about 110 watts. The output is far higher than that for the magnetic field strength is not diminished.

I tried to post many photos of the earlier experiments (the 2013 experiments were deleted but some of them remain and some members of the forum have received all the photos already). But there are limits on posting here.

Please see the strucutre of one of the modules where voltage division occurs. You can see that 10x200 lamps are able to light up. The no load voltage was 66 volts and after ten lamps were lit it was 33 volts and 6 amps. The input wattage was 600 watts approximately. If you look at the two primary coils carefully you would find that there are secondaries there and these secondaries are not connected and not closed or shorted but kept open with insulated ends. So we had COP=0.32 or 0.33 here. What is the deal nothing would be the first thought.

But if you keep adding the modules the primary input keeps going down in AC due to increasng inductive impedance. The magnetic field intensity is not altered and we can add more wires to maintain the magnetic field intensity of the primaries.  The secondary output keeps increasing due to the fact that the secondary voltage keeps increasng. This however happens in AC only when high voltage is applied. Alternatively we can use 440 volt Ac input and use a single module to increase the output of the secondary.

In pulsed DC high voltage cannot be applied. Pulsed DC does not feel the inductive impedance of the AC but only looks at the total resistance of the coils. It does not care whether the coils are multifilar coils are simple helical coils. High ohmic resistance must be provided before the coils if we are to use pulsed DC or DC or undulated DC. The coils shown by Figuera are high ohmic coils. In addition resistors can be placed between N1 and N2 and N2 and N3 and so on so that the current on N1 is maximum and current on N7 is minium. The Input is given at N1 and S7. So current on S7 is maximum and minimum at S1. To compensate for this we need to use increasing number of wires and turns in the lower current coils. This produces a situation where one of the coils has high current and the other one has high voltage. When the coils move towards the center the back emf due to N coil goes to the easiest path of receding current of S coil and the backemf of the S coil goes to the recedeing current of N coil. Hence there is no Lenz effect in the device.

In the Figuera and Ramaswami Devices there is one problem. We have conducted more than 100 experiments in the last 27 months. Every time we do these experiments we will feel very tired. Whether it is a young and energetic teenager or well built drivers assisting me or myself we will all feel tired. very tired.

In the Figuera device there is a problem. normally in a bar magnet the waves move out of the north pole and then move towards the south pole and from the south pole to north pole they move inside the magnet. This continues non stop.

But in these devices We do some thing against nature. The two primaries are larger and the way the coils are wound and the core is shaped
(central one is about half the diameter and half the length or 2/3d diameter and 2/3rd length of one primary) So what we are doing is we are compressing the magnetic field in the center and the center coil which is the output coil has far higher magnetic field strength than the outer coils. This is especially very high when the option C for sending current in parallel is used. When this option is used we compress the magnetic field in the center and then decompress it. Result is waves do not flow like in the normal way in the bar magnet.

I have measured about 4.1 Tesla range magnetic field strength in the central magnet and the magnet simply attracts any current carrying wire even at a distance of 6 inches to 8 inches from it towards it.

I strongly suspect that the central magnet emits some harmful radiations because of this unnatural movement of the magnetic fields. I'm not a scientist but I can confirm that all of us would feel exhausted after doing these experiments.

well when I connected the secondaries under the primary we had 351 volts and when it was connected to earth we did not get the output expected. It was then advised to me that I should put up two new earth points and then check again. One of my mentors who is a distinguished Scientist in Germany was satisfied and he assured me that you put two new earth points and you will be surprised. It would be about 351 volts and about 12 to 14 amps and would be in excess of input and this is known to me. However when we do it again the central magnet becomes very powerful and makes a very loud noise. indicating total saturation. Last time we did this the person who arranged and tested died within 3 months of the test. he was expecting a short life span any way but why take a risk.

The experiments in 2013 were not witnessed by a person who was present in my office at the time the experiment was done. He did not directly measure any thing. But he clearly indicated that some thing happens to the material inside due to this high saturation. I have used soft iron rods. They are magnetized when current is given and demagnetized when current is removed. However 10% of the rods have become magnetic rods. We have to check if there is any carbon content in these rods.

Now let me clearly tell you that we have all suffered. I'm just a shade of what I was 3 years back healthwise. My joints have repeatedly swelled and I have difficulty even walking for 20 to 25 minutes at a stretch. We do not know that this unnatural concentration of magnetism in the center and compressing and decompressing it has produced any harmful rays. We simply do not know but what we know is every one who participated has health issues.

May be I'm very timid and very frightened. But I can tell you that we all have had health problems.

The photos are attached. They were privately shared with some other friends already. The device works as claimed. But the problem is that the  center coil is far more saturated than the outer coils and has magnetic vortex pulling every thing towards it.

The photos of 2013 experiments were deleted by us.  They are not available. Some were deleted on purpose and some were in a digital camera that has gone. We do not know how to recoever it. We have also placed a lot of neodymium magnets near that camera and so I do not think any thing would be there really.

This is a suppressed technology and we wanted to make sure that it reaches as many people as possible in as many different places as possible. So I have used this forum to post the information so a lot of people will know. But unless the issue of suspected harmful radiation is solved doing this device is not advisable.

In addition to all this it is very expensive to build this device. There should be a lot of iron to reduce the saturation and very thick wires should be used in the secondary (about 15 sq mm wires ideally) but the voltage per secondary coil should be kept to a very low level of about 15 to 30 volts per secondary in the center so that the combined secondary has about 220 to 240 volts and high current.

The last photo dated 22-08-2015 shows an attempted replication of low voltage Figuera device with two modules. Pulsed DC was used and the input was given at the two points. Because we have not put the resistance after the transformer there was very little input of current and the attemped device did not work.

Every one associated with the experiments have suffered health problems. So when you do this please be careful. I suspect that the central magnet which reaches high saturation gives out some inimical waves but how do I find it out? All I can tell you is that we have all suffered.

This is not cheap. Each experiment cost me in labour costs alone $100 here. It requires helpers to do these coils and wind the coils. There are many other photos but they are not needed as the small central coil of a voltage dividing primary of one of the modules is able to light up 10x200 watts lamps.

May be I'm very timid and frightened. But I wish every one attempting to do this device all the Best of luck and all success. But please be careful about the radiations and remember that we are doing some thing that is against nature in this device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 25, 2015, 04:08:48 PM
Doug1 i will read the Tesla patent.....and thank you as i forgot Tesla has done about everything. my system will work but less parts the better.

 NRamaswami  i an not trying to be disrespectful this time but this is a thread for Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE not some NRamaswami bull shit.....so if you have to ramble on like some very lonely lunatic with nothing to do PLEASE GET YOUR OWN THREAD. matter of fact I BEG OF YOU to get your own thread and while your at it please contact Patrick and have him remove all Reference to this thread about your back yard devise........ THANK YOU!

NOW ! Back to business with "FIGUERAS DEVICE" the windings are CW-CCW-CW-CCW-CW-CCW...ect as i forgot to mention that but i'm sure from the drawings that you got that.
as for my observation that the output core could be a 2"x 2"x 2" cube solid iron or laminate and the north and south electromagnets are 2" x 2" x 4". i will be using 18 awg for my electromagnets and 10 awg square wire for my output cores as i found a low quantity supplier for that.
again i can not Emphasis  enough as to the wiring of the input cores. please study my previous post picture and realize how true and important the proper wiring is to the operation of the figueras devise. his patent was only a guide line and was drawn to throw off big bankers.
i will post later a picture of a early 1900 rotating dynamo and you can observe the proper wiring your self....."THIS IS THE ONLY WAY" it can be wired.

FIGUERAS ROCK'S !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 25, 2015, 06:55:02 PM
Marathonman,


Please be respectful with everyone. NRamaswami has been sharing with us all his findings using the basic Figuera configuration :


ELECTROMAGNET--COIL--ELECTROMAGNET


He is following the foundation settled by Figuera in his 1902, the patent no. 30378, and we should be glad for receiving such good news. He finally has got measurement while powering many lamps. These are really great news!!  As you I stopped doing test but now I am thinking about restaring again.


Marathonman, your configuration with powering alternative each sequential electromagnet in the series is similar -as far as the electromagnets side- to the configuration shown in post #2523, on page 169,   where the polarity is alterned N-S-N -...in each serie with the advantage that with this configuration you may close the magnetic circuit between each group and therefore resuce the input consumption. The difference of you proposal with this configuration is the orientation of your induced intermediate coil which is transversal to the electromagnet axis. This is the difference in essence. Take into consideration that in any dynamo there is motion and thus the wires can be transversed because with the motion you get the wires cut by the magnetic lines. I will like to grasp deeper your proposal with the transverse induce coil.


This a great day: we have some great experimental results and also some new proposals  :) :)


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on September 26, 2015, 02:04:36 AM
This thread is infected with people who build nothing and have nothing. My personal favorite are the one's who boldly state "THIS IS MY LAST POST......... I SWEAR IT".... and then naturally return to continue posting  ???

Since its so EZ to claim success then I claim, on this day, that I, Member CORE have a working device. We now have a Figuera device and a Core Device.

Really?.... Are we to believe that a person who can't figure out how to resize a picture to 800 x 600 can figure out Figuera????

Sad day...... NRamaswami pay close attention here THIS IS HOW ITS DONE.

This is my last post, ......you lose


That's right I am taking my ball and leaving

- Core

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 26, 2015, 02:38:02 AM
...I strongly suspect that the central magnet emits some harmful radiations...
Sounds like a valid concern until we know for sure what this device produces and if these effects manifest themselves only when higher power levels are used. As someone interested in this device, would it help to only "turn on" this device when it's inside a Faraday cage? Does a Faraday cage stop gama rays, Xrays and such?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: scratchrobot on September 26, 2015, 11:55:39 AM
This thread is infected with people who build nothing and have nothing. My personal favorite are the one's who boldly state "THIS IS MY LAST POST......... I SWEAR IT".... and then naturally return to continue posting  ???

Since its so EZ to claim success then I claim, on this day, that I, Member CORE have a working device. We now have a Figuera device and a Core Device.

Really?.... Are we to believe that a person who can't figure out how to resize a picture to 800 x 600 can figure out Figuera? ???

Sad day...... NRamaswami pay close attention here THIS IS HOW ITS DONE.

This is my last post, ......you lose


That's right I am taking my ball and leaving

- Core
[/glow]



You are just frustrated because you didn't got the same result that NRamaswami got.  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 26, 2015, 06:55:40 PM
Like i said i have solved Figueras 108 year old secrete !
in picture #1 is an early 1900 rotating Dynamo...as you can see their is a north magnet at every other coil and a south every other coil opposite of north. so every time the rotation advances one coil the flux through the coils are reversed . there are basically two halves of the Dynamo in parallel for better amperage.
NOW cut in half......with only one half of the Dynamo in which is a complete circuit..... remove the Magnets and add Electromagnets at every coil North on bottom and south on top. now straighten it up in a line because it is no longer rotating. what you have looks similar to Figueras but wait there's more..... the reason Figueras cut the cores was because in order to eliminate Lenz's law effect something has to be done. as long as you have a north and a south in a coil you will  have the Lenz's effect present .....so how did Figueras side step this effect.........by separating the poles. you can not have the Lenz's law present with only one pole.....sorry it isn't going to happen .
Gentleman i give you Acoms razor: The simplest solution tends to be the correct one. see Figueras never changed the winding's nor the position or the firing of the cores. you still have to mimic the rotating Dynamo's magnets approaching and leaving the coils..... if you don't you will get nothing.
again #3 picture is Figueras design in a nut shell handed on a silver platter......108 years in the making.
he took a rotating Dynamo and made it stationary...kept the same wind pattern and the same firing order.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 26, 2015, 08:51:03 PM
Thanks again for the info!
...by separating the poles. you can not have the Lenz's law present with only one pole.....sorry it isn't going to happen...
I would like to know more details on why this cancels or prevents Lenz. I do not question what you say but only wish to understand it better.

Does the orientation of the coil have anything to do with canceling Lenz? In your drawing Figuera cuts the coils 90 degrees to how the rotating version cuts the coils. So basically he changes the flux in the coil without actually cutting across sections of it. All sections of the coil get the same amount of change at the same time. Is this relevant to the lenz issue? I have drawn the bloch wall in blue and the red arrow is the direction it moves.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 26, 2015, 09:39:18 PM
NO!  it has everything to do with the splitting of the cores and switching at mid way. all the red cores are fired together then all the blue are fired together.....each pair acting as a battery in series just in reverse.just the same as it was a rotating Dynamo.
the north magnet will be attracted to the Iron core as will the south magnet causing a Potential difference by time-varying magnetic fields... ie if you have 50 volts negative north potential and 50 volts positive south potential then you have 100 volts peak to peak potential.all the cores are not fired at the same time. you have to follow the same rules as the rotating Dynamo but it is stationary.
Acoms razor: The simplest solution tends to be the correct one. Figueras took a rotating Dynamo and made it stationary....he changed NOTHING !  except the splitting of the cores.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 26, 2015, 09:40:27 PM
ops!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 26, 2015, 09:51:05 PM
Please try to avoid big images and long text which goes long after the screen border. It's hard to read it.


Yeah, it looks correct. Could you give us the original source of generator picture ? I've never seen such one.
In that case the rotating 1902 device would be very strange indeed !!!


Ah, what a pain tha we cannot look at the picture of original rotating Figuera device from 1902. Finding the source dynamo generator would explain everything. If this is the one Figuera modified then the correct aproach is to follow his modifications. From eliminating rotating magnetic core through the second patent to the last one.


Very good thought marathonman. The last step is to add commutator to immitate rotation ! We are in completly new paradigm now. Keep going.....



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 26, 2015, 09:51:34 PM
NO!...the north magnet will be attracted to the Iron core as will the south magnet causing a Potential difference by time-varying magnetic fields...
Ok thanks. Guess the concept is beyond me. Keep up the good work though.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 26, 2015, 09:52:46 PM
Like I said some time ago - the key is the first patent  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 26, 2015, 09:56:28 PM
You forgot the most elementary thought you said in first post  ::)  return and re-read it. I would press on finding the origilan dynamo Figuera modified - this is the most important. And for the God's sake - forget about resistors !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 27, 2015, 03:47:12 AM
First Pic Figureas 1908 Patent.... all annotates were added later "NOT BY FIGUERAS" all lines showing connections are incorrect.
Second Pic My Discovery.... all red cores fired together all blue squares fired together North south arrangement Cw-CCW-CW-CCW ect...just like the ORIGINAL ROTATING DYNAMO.
Figueas changed nothing because the original sequence of events of the rotating dynamo are still intact all he did was straighten out the dynamo and separate the cores the firing order are still the same.
Acoms razor: The simplest solution tends to be the correct one.....think like a rotating dynamo....well em...only stationary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 27, 2015, 12:21:29 PM

Ah, what a pain tha we cannot look at the picture of original rotating Figuera device from 1902. Finding the source dynamo generator would explain everything.



Yes we can. Here is the link to the Figuera´s rotary device, patent 30376 from 1902: [size=78%]http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/figuera_30376.pdf)[/size]


I guess everyone should read the patents deeper, or just read it. This patent is out and translated into english from more than 2 years.


Marathonman, I can not get yet how to beat Lenz Law by powering alternatively both series. Take into account that the original dynamo uses motion to get flux cutting induction along the wires. I do not understand how to simulate movement with your proposal


About the induced coil orientation it has been always a big clue: some infor seems to indacate that the coil is aligned with the electromagnet while other sources seems to indicate to be perpendicular. For example in this link and the image I attach below taken from this link:


http://www.electricidadbasica.net/energias-renovables.htm (http://www.electricidadbasica.net/energias-renovables.htm)


Who knows...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 27, 2015, 02:28:04 PM
Marathonman, I can not get yet how to beat Lenz Law by powering alternatively both series. Take into account that the original dynamo uses motion to get flux cutting induction along the wires. I do not understand how to simulate movement with your proposal.

Are you serious ....do i have to draw it out with Crayola Crayon guys........ok here it goes, on page 171 i posted a early 1900 rotating Dynamo picture #1 as the magnets advance one coil the flux in the coil/core reverses direction.
 WITH EACH ADVANCEMENT THE FLUX IN THE COIL/CORE REVERSES DIRECTION ! see picture #1 then see picture #2
PLEASE STUDY PICS and you will see what i mean.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 27, 2015, 02:50:40 PM
I forgot the third pic sorry... flux reversal just like it was rotating.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 27, 2015, 03:46:42 PM
Great! Slowdown a bit please  :D  What is in your opinion the original dynamo modification Figuera done ,before creating solid state version ? Could it be that original dynamo was already Lenz-free and the only thing to do was to eliminate rotor core movement which eliminated magnetic flux drag  ?  Then he cut dynamo into chunks , added additional elecromagnets and commutators to switch currents and create  switching polarity  magnetic fluxes exactly the same as in rotating dynamo.
I wonder if he cut the original dynamo core in chunks right in the first - rotating device patent , but then the arrangement of induced coils was maybe different or he just glued cores again together into ring. That why I asked of original dynamo, because in patent there is ony a schematic representation of idea - it could be that dynamo you found marathonman, which makes the 1902 patent even more interesting (core levitating ? induced copper coils on light "cylinder" in fact rotating almost without friction !???)




Please tell me where I made mistake...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 27, 2015, 04:54:55 PM
 I am sure glad someone FINALLY understands me.
Sounds good Mr Forest.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 27, 2015, 08:27:11 PM

I see  how magnetic flux is passing through the pair of identical but oppositely wound induced coils generating two equal and opposite counter-forces which negate Lenz effect , am I right ?[/size]

I have only two problems with this design. First Figuera rotating device with induced coils rotating alone and stationary cores
become very difficult to build if the original dynamo was that one you posted.
The induced coils must be on the hollow frame with spokes and the round core must be reall levitating inside this frame ! (imagine empty space inside the car tire)
It could be there is another arrangement of coils with the same properties but with other orientation of induced coils !
The other not resolved problem is how the commutator is made with not breaking the circuit.
Hopefully we ended that silly resistors topic , guys ? Do you see what I mean ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 28, 2015, 03:59:43 PM
Hello every one.
 I do not know if their was Mag Amps in Figueras days but it could of been easily implemented using the drum he so chose.
i to will not use resistors as this waste power through heat "BADLY" so i chose to use mag amps. by using two mag amps connected in reverse ie.... one high side/Low side to Low side/high side. in this fashion it will act "EXACTLY" as Figueras drum commutator did except no waste heat or parts to wear out. it can be controlled by Patrick's design/ or mine as i prefer,  to mimic the drum's action.
i know i have posted the mag amps in simplified form but the real one i am using in pictured below.
easily implemented using a small three phase transformer. and yes i can use a Toroid is so desired.
the pic below will have multiple dc taps to mimic the drum action increasing or decreasing saturation in the core causing the output to increase or decrease.

Forest/Everybody please study the actions of the rotating Dynamo more closely and you will see that #1 i am right #2 it will be easily to implement. all the rotating Dynamo does is reverse the flux through the core/coil every step of rotation. each advancement of the rotor shifts the flux in the opposite direction. then by daisy chaining them together "each pair acting as a battery" will raise the voltage to what ever is your desired voltage is. you can then parallel them to get higher amperage if needed.

Acoms razor: The simplest solution tends to be the correct one.  it was right in front of our faces all this time. so simple a child could operate it. we as human's tend to over complicate thing when the simplest solution was staring us square in the face.
FIGUERAS was a simplified Genius !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 28, 2015, 05:10:29 PM
IT can't get ANY simpler than this. pic #1 Red is high. pic #2 Blue is high.
the arrow in between cores/coils are just to show the direction of current.... in reality their is "NO" interaction between coils....no LENZ EFFECT.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 28, 2015, 05:28:55 PM
Whoever that is doing tests should test every possible configuration and placement. Maybe this proposal is right , but we should not forget that NRamaswani has posted some experimental value showing OU results, and his cores were aligned. His post is to take into deep consideration. He seems to have been testing in deep and try many configurations. I see just one flaw. He should redo the measurement with an oscilloscope to assure that the output is or not greater that the input, or do any kind of calorimetry to measure find the number of watts out.


Also we have to take into consideration some of the Buforn´s patents. His patents show that the cores orientations. If his patents are not right we should then consider that he is lying to hide the true configuration and his patents were not valid in that case. I attach here a zoom of one figure from one Buforn´s patent


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 28, 2015, 06:49:08 PM
SEE PIC and you will understand.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on September 28, 2015, 11:07:33 PM
QUOTE FROM BUFORN PATENT 57955 (year 1914)


"The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles"





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 28, 2015, 11:33:03 PM
...both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers..."
Good point. Might help to encase the coils in permeable metal also as Ed mentions?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 29, 2015, 01:44:24 AM
Hey guys, call me a purist, but I think I'll stick with the patent and the way Figuera described it. In fact, I don't think the patent image is wrong or misleading at all... except for the way the induced coil is wired with those two little wires coming out. lol

@ marathonman, I know your coil setup imitates a rotating generator, particulary the Gramme ring, which we all know is the father of the "barrel winding" motor or generator... but I really don't think you'll have much success. I know hanon and I have both experimented with transverse or perpendicular windings with little output. You probably will get some output because of the North and South coil orientation, but not a free energy machine. Barrel windings literally cut the magnetic field lines, that's how the current is excited, so without moving the coil or magnet you're just relying on induction, which isn't very much in this case.

As for the Figuera generator, I'm going to say we simply don't understand what he made. It is a stationary, rotating generator. Or if the induced coil were mounted on bearings, it would be a motor... or at least a vibrator.

I'm eating my words now, because I said the poles would need to be the same polarity, but no, he was right, they are North and South, all 7 rows.

This guy, woopyjump, is the only person I know that actually made it according to the patent. https://youtu.be/HlOGEnKpO-w

in this video https://youtu.be/3QguCN8TP7o he shows a setup powered by only two transistors. Note: this would be identical to powering it with half-wave rectified AC, like with diodes. At the 4:30 mark, he shows how current INCREASES when he removes the induced circuit. He also states that current is "almost double" when the two inducer magnets are NOT connected.

These strange things plus the ghost voltage that he talks about all point to the same thing. Figuera made an induction motor. lol  :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 29, 2015, 02:31:14 AM
I don't see how lenz has much of a chance to hurt this system. I think that getting out what you put in a transformer is the wrong way to go about using one or even trying to get out more than what you put in. If the secondary is small enough then you get less out of the secondary without hurting what you put into the primary. A smaller secondary can't possibly build up enough lenz to fight back equally. That doesn't begin to factor in other things like delayed lenz to have what little lenz there is help the system instead of hurt it.

Hey guys, call me a purist, but I think I'll stick with the patent and the way Figuera described it...
I changed my mind on what I said in the Ed post but didn't want to leave the post blank so just kept the info there. I agree that staying as close to the patent as possible is the best way to start. Woopyjump had some of the best examples. He hasn't posted in a while. Anyone know what he is up to?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 29, 2015, 03:41:41 AM
Actually MagnaProp, I enjoyed the excerpt. Ed was right, too, as that's how lifting magnets are made now.

I don't know what you guys are talking about with the Lenz... Lenz current is the reason why a transformer can be plugged in with nothing on the secondary. It's what we call the impedance, or inductive reactance. It's also what lets an induction motor pull such low current.

We all know that motors have very low ohms, right? Most compressor motors I see have about 2 Ohms, which at 240V would draw 120 amps. But because of the Lenz law they only draw about 8-12 amps depending on load.

Figuera's generator uses Lenz to aid it, just like an AC motor. That's why it has to be a North and a South. See, because of his commutator, when one is increasing in strength, it produces a back voltage, or Lenz current, in the other. this effectively nullifies a part of the incoming current, so instead of a high current it would only need something small to run.

That's why woopyjump's video is a perfect demo. The north and south have to be inductively coupled to lower the current draw. And I don't know the guy, but I wonder if he made a larger setup. I think large inductors would show a much larger effect, like extreme power out with little current in.

hanon... "or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles"

doesn't this mean that the inductors are aligned and their poles are in contact? Parallel inductors, right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 29, 2015, 04:20:46 AM
So can someone please tell me where it say's that the inducers are C cores....... yah right!  that's what i thought.....NILL.
that's why everyone using c cores got squat output and will continue to get squat output.
that's why i chucked the C core design cause it don't work.

antijon sorry its not a Gramme ring.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 29, 2015, 05:39:19 AM
antijon{quote{@ marathonman, I know your coil setup imitates a rotating generator, particulary the Gramme ring, which we all know is the father of the "barrel winding" motor or generator... but I really don't think you'll have much success. I know hanon and I have both experimented with transverse or perpendicular windings with little output. You probably will get some output because of the North and South coil orientation, but not a free energy machine. Barrel windings literally cut the magnetic field lines, that's how the current is excited, so without moving the coil or magnet you're just relying on induction, which isn't very much in this case.

Quote from Figueras Patent....Thus, varying the intensity of the current, varies the magnetic field which crosses through the induction circuit.

Quote from Figueras patent...Therefore it does not matter if these induced currents were generated by rotating
the induction coils, or by varying the magnetic flux which passes through them.

Quote from Figueras Patent...The principle on which this theory is based, has the unavoidable need for the movement of either the induction
circuit or the magnetic circuit, and so, these machines are considered to be a transformer of mechanical work into
electricity.

Quote from Figueras Patent...In order to attain the production of large industrial electrical currents, using the principle that electrical current can
be provided by just changing the flow of magnetic flux through an induction circuit.


Quote fron Figueras Patent...DESCRIPTION OF GENERATOR OF VARIABLE EXCITATION “FIGUERA”
The machine is comprised of a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores
enhancing induction in the induction circuit.

NOW ! what was that you said about induction antion. next time read it twice.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on September 29, 2015, 09:47:02 AM
Hello All,

Welcome back MarathonMan...
I have been busy with Life projects ( wall oven, cooktop, range hood and wall bed ) and last but not least surgical procedures... My morning studies have taken me in a different direction. The automobile alternator is the most important apparatus in a ICE and is the backbone of the Tesla electric Automobile  ( only bigger of course ). My point in this is... Tesla has/had a patent on motors and generators...the difference between a dynamo and a alternator besides the spelling is the dynamo is dc and the alternator is ac ( sorry for being redundant here - I'm sure you know all of this ) anyway... Nikola Tesla already figured out the synchronicity of a motor and a alternator to be used to for work  ... hence you power up the electric motor ( with whatever means you want ) which turns the alternator which produces the electricity to run the motor = synchronicity = Ockham's razor. The rocket scientists have already used bemf s to detect where in the cycle of 3 phased bldc motors to their ( ours too ) advantage...
the difference between Doug1 and my outlook on greedy corporations is if you want to beat them invest in them... its called a dividend. We probably agree on the One World Order which is for another thread elsewhere.

Lastly...I agree with your work ( its simple and very logical ) so build it.

welcome back
All the best
RandFL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 29, 2015, 01:11:27 PM
Right about now is when it goes sideways.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 29, 2015, 02:01:50 PM
Quote from Figueras patent....It can be seen that electromagnet sets N and S operate in a complementary manner, because while the first set is being progressively powered up, the other set is being progressively powered down. This sequence is repeated continuously causing an orderly a constant variation of the magnetic fields passing through the induction circuit.
complementary manner......meaning N and S work together as in north south coil....

what Figueras is talking about is a set N and S NOT set of N and S.....meaning he is referring  an N and S as a set not necessarily the one next to it.

in such a way that the excitatory current will be magnetising successively with more or less strength, the first electromagnets, while, simultaneously decreasing or increasing the magnetisation in the second set, determining these variations in intensity of the magnetic field, the production of the current in the induced.
confirming again that the sets N and S are taken up then down in intensity.
again of my previous post where all the RED N and S sets are taken high then low,  the BLUE sets taken low then high varying the intensity of the currant  through INDUCTION !

RandyFL.....the core are ordered and will be here in three to four weeks. {4} 99.9 % Pure iron cores @ 2" x 4" x 2" depth.  2 Cores @ 2" x 2" cube.
10 awg square Magnet wire for output cores and 18 awg Magnet wire for electromagnets. timing circuit i have already designed from previous Figueras and the three phase transformer cores for mag amp i already have and are winding NOW......BOO YA !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on September 29, 2015, 02:56:04 PM
MarathonMan
much success kiddo
where did you acquire the iron? and at what price...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 29, 2015, 03:07:13 PM
Ordered from over sea's supplier ....50$ cheaper per piece shipping included. as for the price.....em well i spent whole pay check on cores....Ouch ! whoops.... their goes an easy Grand.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on September 29, 2015, 03:39:58 PM
Ouch...
I got mine from Ed Fagan Inc. at around 300.00 US ( which is not the best but it is adequate from tests I did )...
I also have the circuit that Patrick put on the website which is also adequate for this   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 29, 2015, 03:49:22 PM
Well, marathonman, you certainly do get excited.

For those of you that are interested in what I have to say, there are evidences of why I believe this functions as an induction motor. For instance, the rotor of an induction motor is one coil winding. The strong current induced in the rotor is what generates the back voltage in the stator windings. In motor operation, this back voltage diminishes incoming current.

If we could tap the rotor windings, while the motor is running, we could add a load. However, a small load, like one lightbulb, would have an incredibly high resistance. This would lessen the rotor current which would lessen the back voltage in the stators, causing input current to increase. But, if we were to add a large load to the rotor, say 100 lightbuls in parallel (very low resistance), this would maintain the high current in the rotor, and maintain the stator back voltage.

Because of the power transfer theorem, we associate a drop in load resistance with a decrease in efficiency. In a normal generator, as load increases (or as resistance decreases to zero) efficiency is lost. However, it's the exact opposite with the induction motor's rotor. As the load decreases ( resistance increases), the efficiency decreases. A motor rotor is the only example of a device that increases efficiency as it is loaded.

This is why I believe the Figuera generator imitates an induction motor. As woopyjump showed in his videos, output load increases efficiency.

But this also introduces more complications. For back voltage to increase efficiency, it must have a path. This means that the driving circuit must allow the current to pass back to the source. If Figuera used a DC generator, or battery, to power his commutator, this is fine. But, if we use blocking diodes or transistors, we block most of the back voltage and won't see a drop in input current.

I'm going to try to work with this in mind.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 29, 2015, 05:52:02 PM
I'm really astonished by the prices of iron rods you are talking about. I bought 300 kgm of iron rods which needed to be cut to sizes here. About 260 of them remain non magnetized and about 40 kgm have become mild magnetic rods. Most of the rods that I got were high purity soft iron rods. If any one of you wants I can buy it from here and organize it to be cut and then send it to you. The small amounts of cores that you make to test may not work. No disrespect intended. Iron is the least magnetizable material and neodymium is the most magnetizable as my limited knowledge goes. Since you are using the least magnetizable material you need to have high core sizes or otherwise you will be hit by saturation issues immediately.

I can see that majority here have not had hands on experience and are good in theory. I do not have theoretical knowledge but I have a lot of hands on experience.

Magnets or Electromagnets do not behave in the way we expect them to behave. We need to follow them up and learn from them how they behave. Theories are not accurate. For example Magnetic field strength of a solenoid = Current x No of turns per unit length. Now if we use the same length solenoid one smaller diameter and one 10 times larger diameter what will happen. Will the large core get saturated at the current of the same solenoid. These formulas are not very accurate because they would put the magnetic field strength to be same which is not correct in practice.

Marathonman..You have quoted Figuera patent extensively but has forgotten one small thing. he has put all N magnets on side and all S Magnets on other side. If you put an N magnet and S magnet adjacent to each other what will happen the opposite poles will attrack each other and they jump towards each other. Your idea is correct and you have understood. But the poles have to be all N poles on one side and S poles on another side and the central coil is wound in only one direction. I'm saying this because I do not want you to get hurt. I have hurt myself using small neodymium magnets and these are comparitively large size iron cores. You need to be very careful when testing them.

Lot of iron is needed to do this project. The soft iron is in the center and the primary cores are carbon steel ones. The Primary cores have to be made a permanent magnet core before the current from the commutator and resistors is given to the primaries.

Resistors are needed and are a must to increase the voltage of the input DC current so that the DC amperage is reduced.

If you look at the patent drawing of Figuera 1908 patent you would find two things. Current is given from N1 and S7. Simply from N1 to N7 current decreases and voltage increases. From S7 to S1 current decreases and voltage increases. So if in one N magnet current is high S magnet has voltage high and vice versa.

Backemf follows the least resistant path as far as I have learnt. Back emf of N1 goes to S1 because the receeding current of S1 is the least resistanct part for the N1 back emf  and back emf of S1 goes to N1 for the same reason. Normal transformer back emf of N1 will affect N1 adversely and this is absent in this set up. This is how Lenz is defeated here. This is why Figuera transformer is called asymmetrical transformer.

The only thing that I do not understand is where is the need for the commutator. Once the current is started in the seccondary it can power the primary continuously. It is still not clear to me as to why we need the commutator. Possibly I need to test with DC votage.

When Using AC the straight bar method that I have shown in the photo along with multifilar coils works best when the poles are a straigh bar.
if you keep increasing the number of wires in the multifilar coils the input amperage keeps going down but the magnetic field strength of the primary is increased.

I have iron to make a maximum of three secondaries and four primaries as you have seen. It is a very expensive experiment and we may have to make 8 to 10 modules to make the output of the secondary exceed the input from the primary.  Some Learned friend earlier indicated that if you keep increasing the secondary cores the secondary output will increase and primary would decrease. That is correct as I have seen from actual observations. But it is very difficult to believe in at first and very costly to implement.

To all experiments please be careful. These are heavy devices and no risk should be taken and the entire earth should be insulated and the walls should also be insulated. The rods carry current. Be careful and all the best.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 29, 2015, 10:27:52 PM
RandyFL; i to am using a circuit like Patrick suggested but i chose the TO-247 MJH11020's instead of the separate Transistors. this is what i will use for the control of my Mag amps, since it only takes milli amps to saturate a core with DC. less wasteful than Resistors.

antijon; Yes i know ! but i believe in what i say....and something in my heart tell's me that i am right. i studied the rotating Dynamo for months and the interaction's of the Magnets with the Coils. the reason the coils are wired as they are and why Figueras separated the cores.  i ran the simulation's in my mind over and over. at night when i was half asleep i dreamed in color seeing the magnet flux move through the coils as the magnets Approach and withdrawal. then at work all of a sudden i stood up and a massive bolt of what ever hit me and it was clear as day.
The stationary Dynamo.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on September 29, 2015, 11:19:44 PM
marathonman, You should keep a civil tongue in your head. Nramaswami has given a huge contribution to this work and shared it freely. So far you have shown drawings. For what it is worth several of your drawings do not work at all. I wasted some time trying them even though there was no reason to believe they would work. I have been at this for over thirty years and have read hundreds of reports from people who have solved the free energy problem, in the end they were mistaken. So when you show an actual machine working I'll buy the champagne. Until then I won't hold my breath.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on September 30, 2015, 03:16:08 AM
Two Mondays ago I almost got killed by a dump truck ( totaled the rear quarter panel of my 2002 Toyota fishing car ) I was provoke by the dump truck and then I returned the provocation...when my car did a 180 I was suddenly " scared " ...

when it was all over my wife took me out to eat...when I was half finished my dinner I realized how angry my wife was at me for being that stupid... bottom line - my wife wanted to belt me for not thinking of her spending the rest of her life without me...

My point is ... don't let other ppl ruin your day/night .... " avoid " them.

All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 30, 2015, 05:28:40 AM
 NRamaswami, back EMF is the same as normal current, it will follow every path. Whether you have resistors or wire it will still behave as normal current does.

Your experiments remind me of the Cook patent. Extremely large inductors with a lot of wire.... but I think you understand back EMF differently, as your are talking about the magnetic fields. Which you are correct, a North pole facing a South pole will have a beneficial effect and lower input current... that is if they are out of phase. I need to test this again.

You're right that we don't understand magnetism. The Cook patent is really just two large transformers but still remains unreplicated.

Marathonman, it's not that I don't believe you, but the Crayons may help me understand. lol, just kidding. We all have different ideas because we're all different people. We're thinkers and tinkerers. In fact, we may never truly replicate Figuera's generator, but we're all working and sharing knowledge along the way. It was your perpendicular coil idea that lead me to my idea... and who knows, I may not replicate Figuera, but I may make something else, and spread that knowledge around.  NRamaswami said his device made him feel ill. Someone else may read that and later use that knowledge to make something that makes people feel better. Point is, sharing is caring... and don't be a hater (I'm just saying that because apparently your parents didn't teach you).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 30, 2015, 07:55:49 AM
Let me tell you my thoughts. Everything is connected. I spent many years solving unsolvable software problems - everything can be solved either permanently or (most common) - using workaround method. Finally, some very troublesome problems became obviously simple if the "hidden layer" is uncovered - an ugly and kept in secret bug in hardware for example ...
In  case of Figuera the secret is real device or its pictures. I bet there is at least one picture or better drawing somewhere, the efforts and money spent by Buforn for years confirm that.
When real device finally materialize you will find that many of us have been close to it and the solution is in combination of all  good ideas. In my opinion Marathonman is now the closest to the working device, but there are still some questions.
My first question is : why engineers abandon the dynamo with ring core presented by Marathonman ?


@Marathonman, you didn't answered my question : where did you find that dynamo picture, in what old book ?


@antijon
I think it's quite obvious that the Cook patent was used extensively in many later devices and patents, but the period of 1870 -1900 is not easily searchable in online patents databases ;-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 30, 2015, 08:52:52 AM
@Antijon:

I do not know theory. I understand that pulsed full positive sign wave is considerd as pulsed DC by some or AC by others. Similarly there appear to be two schools of thought. That Lenz law is a natural force and nothing can avoid it and backemf will be present always. To the contrary is the school that teaches that Backemf can manifest only if the magnetic field collapses. In Figueras device because the current was undulated DC with a different wave form than pulsed DC the iron always remained a magnet and the magnetic field never collapsed. Becauase the magnetic field never collapsed to zero there is no back emf. I have circuits using pulsed DC but they end at +5 and it is said that there is no back emf in them.

Wikipedia teaches a totally different concept that Lenz law supposes that the charges are identical in nature for it to manifest and so when electricity is induced between the North and South Poles two electromagnets, the reaction should be considered to be an interaction between protion and electron or positive and negative charges and there will not be any opposition due to Lenz law by only additive flux between opposite poles. I have observed that this is correct to a certain extent.

In my experiments I have seen that this additive flux manifests only so long as the secondary wire is inside the core diameter of the primaries. If the secondary wire is made to go over the primary core and match the primary wire the Lenz effect is visible. Output decreases.

Why? I do not know. These are my observations. I'm not trained in Electrical Engineering nor in theory and I can only tell you my observations. Simply because I'm an action taker please do not consider me to be competent enough to talk theories. I only state my observations and why some thing happens can be understood by me after doing experiements and observing results and then studying about them and asking questions from other learned members. I was not able to understand why Figuera ignored the flux availale in the primary and so extended the secondary to the primary cores. This increases the voltage and Lenz law comes in to play but because the if the Y coil secondary is inside the cores of the primary N and S there is no Lenz effect but the voltage and amperage increases. But I cannot say this with certainity for the voltage was very high and we have not given it to any load.

I also wanted to check what would happen if we use thin wires in primary and step up the voltage with thick wires. I understand that the ampere turns need to be incresed only so slightly for the output to dramatically increase after a certain point. I have tested up to 351 volts but above that there is surge of voltage and amperage.

Regarding the 2013 experimental results My Inorganic Chemistry professor brushed it aside. He pointed out that high voltage was sent between two earth points which constituted two large chemical batteries consisting of Iron, charcoal, Sodium Chloride and water and the high voltage created an electrochemical reaction and so in his view the high amperage came. He wanted me to convert it to self power itself and then to run it for one week continuously and had predicted that then it would stop once the iron rusted out. But it needed only one test for a few minutes and two years of non use to this to happen. We have ascertained how to use this Earth point continuously so the system can be used for many years once set but we neeed to test it to believe that our assumption is correct.

I have stopped the experiments. The current set of experiments were conducted with donations from some forum members. Economy is badly down here and most of clients are affected and so I will not be able to do any thing for the foreseeable future. There is also intense opposition in my family and office as this downturn started only after we started the experiments. So every one dislikes it.

I wanted to do the Cook Coil experiment. I have the iron and I need to have some more wire to match his description. But I think he used Permanent magnets in the core but I think during his time since they felt that DC converting iron to magnet is a normal one, he has stated only about iron core. Electromagnets stated by him must be understood to be DC Electromagnets ando so permanent magnets. I think his pictures are mutilated and he talks about circuit D which I believe is a coil in between the two opposite poles of the two large transformers with an output coil. In that sense it is similar to Figuera device. But with Magnets I have learnt one thing. They teach you to be humble. What you consider to be correct and bound to happen does not happen.

If I can say with confidence that I have mastered some thing it is this.. I have found that the input current to the primary can be significantly reduced to about 100 watts and enormous magnetism will be present in the core at this low level. A figuera coil in the center at that stage is COP>1. Mr. Mack (Madmack) has understood it and expressed it earlier. In this forum I have had the opportunity to interact with a lot of good and experienced and senior people and I'm pleased about it. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on September 30, 2015, 09:16:35 AM
...I don't know what you guys are talking about with the Lenz... Lenz current is the reason why a transformer can be plugged in with nothing on the secondary...
But its also why we have to put more into the system than we get out I thought? If there was no lenz then we could plug the device into a much smaller voltage to begin with I think. The magnetic flux in the central coil may be strange also. In the drawing, if N is strong and S is weak then the secondary should be N poles on the outside and S on the inside? If S is strong and N is weak then the secondary will have strong S on the outside and N on the inside? This is assuming the secondary is in phase with the primaries. I can see how if the secondary in this case was delayed, that it would help the strong primary get stronger and the weak secondary get weaker and so on since the poles of the secondary would be reversed from what I have in the drawing. I also no longer think the secondary block wall moves up and down. I think it just stays in place and switches poles ???

...Figuera's generator uses Lenz to aid it, just like an AC motor. That's why it has to be a North and a South. See, because of his commutator, when one is increasing in strength, it produces a back voltage, or Lenz current, in the other. this effectively nullifies a part of the incoming current, so instead of a high current it would only need something small to run...
I will have to look at the firing sequence closer. I don't see how one primary increasing causes an effect in the other primary other than the secondaries poles which both primaries have to contend with. Can you draw a picture of how this back voltage lenz current happens. Crayons are fine but sock puppets are preferred.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on September 30, 2015, 10:04:14 AM
I think were onto something here... MarathonMan has brought a new piece of the equation. In my humble opinion I think Tesla and Fiquera reached the same conclusion but their approach was different...if we can reach parity who knows where it will take us. Bottom line - I think it also gets us out of the stagnant rut we've been in.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 30, 2015, 03:33:58 PM
@Marathonman, you didn't answered my question : where did you find that dynamo picture, in what old book ?

I found it in a Book on Dynamo someone had posted earlier in this thread ....ie "link"...but i have gone back to find it and a bunch if post have been deleted. as in hundreds of posts. i have been searching on line for weeks to no avail.

it is plain and simple... Figueras took a rotation Dynamo of his time, studied it,figured out how to stop magnetic drag so he made it stationary all the while realizing it had to be wired the same and fired the same. he then split up the ring to isolate each coil/core to negate the Lenz effect { as we can't have the Lenz effect with only one pole} each coil pair acting as a battery.  he switched the polarity at midway point  so his battery {coil pairs} would never reach zero. then he stacked his batteries one after the other raising the voltage to what ever he desired.
Acoms razor: The simplest solution tends to be the correct one.
felas it can't get any more simple then that. while i was away from this forum i was studying figueras night and day.....even while at work. over six months i have racked my brain over this and i have come to my present day design/firing order.  red go high blue low then blue high red low just like a rotating Dynamo.....{EXACTLY}

Magnaprop: Crayons are fine but sock puppets are preferred. Oh my god that was so funny.... i must of laughed for 15 min

Forest: My first question is : why engineers abandon the dynamo with ring core presented by Marathonman ?

 answer: Higher output
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on September 30, 2015, 05:48:01 PM
@forest
lol, it wouldn't surprise me if someone in Spain had a Figuera generator in their basement.

@NRamaswami
Don't confuse back EMF, or counter EMF, with inductive "kickback". Kickback is what happens when you power a coil then quickly stop the voltage, or try to pull the connection off. This is also an effect of Lenz law. AC devices like transformers never produce kickback. Back EMF can be easily demonstrated by powering a coil with a battery, then swiping a magnet over the top. If the coil is North at the top, and you swipe a South magnet towards it current will drop. Swiping a North magnet towards it will cause an increase in current.

Lenz law is present in every coil with a magnetic field.

@MagnaProp
I can draw a picture when I get home from work this evening, but everything I said is only relevant to parallel inductors. If the coils are on the same inductor it will not behave the same.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 30, 2015, 10:36:34 PM
Hello every one,
I found the Rotating Dynamo Picture and will post the link to it. it is actually a Rotating Ring Unipolar Alternator.
below is the pic and here is the link
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015038749308;view=1up;seq=180

please look at the coil wiring cw ccw cw ccw.... i told ya!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 01, 2015, 04:52:36 AM
@MagnaProp
This is my simple drawing, please excuse my lack-ability. This is a parallel winding configuration. Two outside coils are inducers, central secondary is induced.

I forgot the page, but hanon had a good image of the wave produced by the commutator. In this setup, Lenz current would lower input current when the coils are driven by out-of-phase current. Also, every time one coil dimishes while the other increases, the secondary output will change polarity.

And, if you can imagine the secondary rotating in the frame, and the coils powered by DC, this is an AC generator. Figuera's commutator provides electrical rotation, so the secondary is stationary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on October 01, 2015, 08:29:17 AM
@MagnaProp
This is my simple drawing...
Thanks for the image and the info. Its helped me to understand it better.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 01, 2015, 10:34:03 PM
Antijon, Your design is the same as bajac design. I think he tested it largely without any result. Anyway this configuration has nothing to see with Figuera´s 1902 design and Buforn images


Figuera 1902 patent no. 30378 ---> two electromagnets one in front of each other and the induced coil in the center[/size]

Figuera 1902 patent no. 30378 ----> two electromagnets one in front of each other and the induced coil in the center[/size]

Figuera 1908 patent no. 44267 ---> No drawn. We do not know it for sure

Buforn 1910 patent      ---> No drawn. We do not know it for sure. An exact copy of the Figuera´s 1908 design

Buforn 1911-1914 patents (4 patents) ---> two electromagnets one in front of each other and the induced coil in the center[/size]


Guess which is the more problable configuration for the 1908 patent...let me think.... ::)


IMHO we can compose all the information in all the patent to know the general arrangement of the device. Antijon, your proposal is basically a three phase transformer. I do not see any similarity with any patent description. I think it would be better if you follow the arrangement explained in the 1914 Buforn´s patent which is the more detailed one


Image attached from patent 30378:     a , b are the electromagnets ; c is the place for the induced
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 02, 2015, 12:03:16 AM
Hanon, I appreciate your advice but I don't think it's safe to rely on previous patents for clues. And his first patents were... I have no idea because he lacks so much info. On the contrary, I see a lot of similarities to the Buforn patents, from design to what they describe as the operation.

lol I see that it does resemble a three phase transformer... However it also resembles a generator. I'll share my test results whether it does something or flops.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 02, 2015, 03:29:16 PM
marathonman, You should keep a civil tongue in your head. Nramaswami has given a huge contribution to this work and shared it freely. So far you have shown drawings. For what it is worth several of your drawings do not work at all. I wasted some time trying them even though there was no reason to believe they would work. I have been at this for over thirty years and have read hundreds of reports from people who have solved the free energy problem, in the end they were mistaken. So when you show an actual machine working I'll buy the champagne. Until then I won't hold my breath.
Garry
First off i disagree about the contribution of a certain person of whom you speak so highly of.....working an a device that have nothing to do with Figueras device and high jacking this thread for his own personal agenda thus diverting people from our real goal.
secondly i was posting drawing of other people idea's "NOT MINE" to get an idea of what they were talking about to get a better visualization. i sense quit posting other people ideas as it only distracted me from my own idea's of Figueras devise. that's why i took a brake from this forum to rid my mind of all the other non working ideas and concentrate on the real working aspects of how to take a rotating Dynamo and make it stationary. as i have posted earlier i visualized for six long months over Figueras devise and as far as i am concerned i have the closest working model to date. "simple and elegant"
and hell yes i am in the process of building it and will freely post my findings.


FIGUERAS SIMPLY ROCKS !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 04, 2015, 06:51:13 PM
Hello everyone,

 I have been using a slightly different type of pulsing system then what was used by PJK with better luck. i have been using a Hex Schmitt trigger or the 741 Op amp instead of the 555 timer. the 74HC14 has a very sharp wave form compared to the 555. below are a few circuits that i have used, the first one being the best in my opinion.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 04, 2015, 08:23:09 PM
Here are two other types of ring Dynamo's of Figueras time.
 please look at the way each coil is wound....... CW, CCW, CW, CCW..ect.... imagine that !
also look as the magnets rotate and advance one coil, the flux is reversed trough each "coil pair" each time......imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 04, 2015, 11:06:20 PM
Is it the same a field which changes in time (as in transformers) that field due to movement of the magnetic field (as in generators)?


According to the research William J. Hooper no. He found differences between both kind of induction.


Quote
It is established that there are three types of electric fields. The first due to a distribution of charge known as an electrostatic field. The other two are associated with the two types of electromagnetic induction. The first type of induction is known as flux cutting and is due to relative spatial motion with respect to magnetic flux. The electric field resulting from this type of induction is the motional electric field. This type of electric field has unique properties that separate it from the other two. Experimentally, it is confirmed that this electric field is immune to shielding due to the fact that magnetic (not electric) boundary conditions apply to it. Motional electric fields can also exist where the total magnetic field that induces it consists of non-zero components that sum to zero. The other type of induction is due to linking time changing magnetic flux.



[size=78%]
[/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 04, 2015, 11:26:13 PM
Interesting...would that mean every power generators in power stations having MW of output power generate unshielded electric field in copious amounts ????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 05, 2015, 12:41:17 PM
Flux linking can never yield more then the total amount of watts used to produce the primary field. 2 apples + no apples is still 2 apples or less if someone takes a bite out of one.
  A none rotational generator has fewer possible variations to induce by way of a magnetic field using a current into a separate circuit. The time it takes for the field to build up to a usable strength against the opposition of self inductance of a coil is too slow.Using extreme amounts of power to over come these things is too wasteful and will prevent it from being able to use a small portion of the output to excite the inducers. It will require a fast acting magnet using the least amount of power or what ever will provide the same as seen from the reference of the induced circuit.
  Rotating generators do not reverse the field by changing the direction of current in the rotating magnet. If they did they would be self powered transformers. It takes a considerable amount of force from a prime mover to rotate the magnet when powering a load in a rotating generator. Far less when just running with no load, that difference is the amount of resistance set up against rotating the magnet from the self inductance that resists change coupled with the resistance to change in the load circuit. The clock wise counter clock wise stuff is to use a coil with a larger amount of area using both ends of the magnet. With one pole being north which the lines of force leave from and south pole being where they return to the two coils have to be reverse wound so current is forced in the same direction through both coils even though the field has both directions seen on the ends,one comes out the other in. Check it yourself with the right hand rule.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 05, 2015, 03:56:08 PM
There are actually two types of induction used in rotary generators. I've been doing a study on this but it gets me confused.

The first type uses flux cutting. If you google ac generator you'll see the first image, however, this is not how a typical generator works. Flux cutting can be demonstrated as a single conductor moving through a magnetic field. I think this is a spatial phenomenon because atomically, I'd say that the magnetic field has more difficulty penetrating the interior of the wire than it does penetrating the outer edges. This causes the electrons to twirl around the outside edge of the conductor as it passes through the magnetic field, similar to how Ed described magnetic current... Anyway, when the conductors in the image are straight up and down, furthest away from the magents, it's said to be the "neutral zone" where no current flows. This is only true with flux-cutting generators.

The typical generator uses flux linking. In the 2nd image, a single large magnet rotates through pole faces. As the armature rotates, the amount of flux linked to the stator changes from 0% to 100% back to 0%. In this, I can only imagine that current travels the same as in a transformer, away and back again.

The difference between the two generators is that the flux linking can be used as a transformer, extremely inefficiently as Doug said, but the flux cutting cannot.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 05, 2015, 06:15:18 PM
To whom are you directing this at Doug1 because no one ever said  the currant was ever reversed at least from me it wasn't. i am ware of this and also that the right hand rule is observed in my proposal ie...CW, CCW ect.... just as you were stating.
in figueras situation Flux cutting seams to be the obvious  with only three cores butted up against each other. flux linking would be beside each other .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 05, 2015, 07:27:43 PM
 At no one in particular Marathonman
  There is a pattern where by confusion sets in and everything goes side ways. I was not arguing your point I was excepting it with the addition of reason.

  Three coils on one core is linking same as a trafo they are not side by side but inline. There being few exceptions.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 05, 2015, 10:57:38 PM
Just Checking !.... reasoning is good, confusion is bad.
and thanks for the vote of confidence.
i have been on a 35% food grade H2O2 regimen and i think rather clearly now a days. that's when i had my brain storm when i was at work, two hrs after my H2O2 dose.
i was so excited i paced for three and a half hrs with goose bumps..... life is good!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 05, 2015, 11:38:52 PM
self explanatory.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 06, 2015, 01:22:15 AM
@marathonman
you can safely drink H2O2?  :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on October 06, 2015, 04:13:29 AM

Consumption of any concentration of hydrogen peroxide above 10% can cause neurological damage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 06, 2015, 05:05:37 AM
it's diluted in Distilled water. Der!
antijon as far as i know in low quantities as Randy has stated and "ONLY" food grade. Hydrogen peroxide is ONLY water {H2O} with an extra oxygen atom added.....taste like shit to
anyways back to Figueras .
i ordered the wrong wire, i was suppose to order 23 awg. the 18 awg was for another project...ARG !
the 23 awg puts me at 94 to 95 ohm for 8 cores which is about perfect where i wan't to be amp wise.  around 93 volts @ 1.03 amps.
23 awg can handle 4.7 amps chassis wiring max so i am good there.
I have you in my sites FIGUERAS!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on October 06, 2015, 10:54:57 AM
Randy:

Pse go through this link that explains H2O2. It is about 3 ml of 20% concentration Hydrogen Peroxide mixed in 1000 ml of mineral water. This enables the lungs to take in more oxygen from the air for some time and we feel more energetic.

See http://freedom-school.com/health/one-minutecurepasswordfreefinalpdf102708.pdf 

Aloe Vera is the natural food that contains Hydrogen peroxide and is usually sold on the beach here as herbal drink. One Christian Priest in Palestine was supposed to have used Aloe Vera, Ginger and Turmeric extract to cure many dieseas including cancer. Aloe Vera taken alone cures many dieases is taught in Tamil Medicine and is a fact. One problem is that it will eliminate toxins and will result in loose motions for a few days. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 06, 2015, 01:07:42 PM
loose motions

rolf who would have thought there was a politically correct way to say that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 06, 2015, 05:27:33 PM
 I think it's "ROFL".... roll on floor laughing. ha ha ha ha!
"This enables the lungs to take in more oxygen from the air for some time and we feel more energetic."
BZZZZZZt ! "Wrong answer"
by drinking this it is absorbed into the blood stream through the digestive track. while in the blood stream it raises the oxygen level of the blood in which aides the immune system to fight off the bad guys. i do have clearer lungs ie {less phlegm} since i have been taking it.
There are clinics around the world that offer intravenous iv therapy that does what the first sentence says. it causes a reaction between the lung sack lining and the tar/nicotine Mucus is bubbled off and you will cough up hair balls/tar balls just like a cat......but your lungs will be clean..ie take in more oxygen.
PS. H202 can replace bleach as a safe alternative and won't destroy your clothes either. {cleaner/Disinfectant}

fellas,  hay fellas......FELLAS ! remember that Figueras dude.....yah! you know that guys devise we are supposably trying to solve. can we please get back to him. ha ha ha ha!

Figueras, Figueras, he's the man, if he can't make free energy then nobody can.
i think i'm about to throw up!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 08, 2015, 01:10:30 PM
Marathonman

 You aiming to power individual legs out of a distribution panel ? Or planning to incorporate it into appliances individually?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 08, 2015, 10:15:22 PM
Doug1: I really haven't gotten that far in my thinking, I have extinguished so much energy solving this puzzle that i am burnt around the edges.
i think i will take a break while my stuff is being delivered and concentrate on self healing.
i already know how to wire for 90% out of phase or for Inverter usage so this will not be a problem.
did test yesterday  to confirm my 1908 configurations and i was 100% correct on configuration and timing. it's balls to the wall when my stuff comes in.
PS. I think i solved the 1914 patent also but i will not lay that on this forum until i know the 1908 patent is built and in the bag.

Figueras lives on through us and it is our duty as human beings to continue  his work in the name of humanity and suppress the powerful elite from world control .
 I WILL NOT GO FORWARD WITH OUT A FIGHT NOR WILL I WALK AWAY FROM HUMANITY !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 10, 2015, 10:35:29 PM
Maybe you should work on it mathematically first.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 12, 2015, 08:56:54 PM
To what part are you refering to ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 14, 2015, 05:12:33 PM
New board design for Figueras device with inverting schmitt trigger.
this will be used for my mag amp control.
this board is designed with Dip Trace lite {500} pin but the pots don't have a 3D model that's why they are not there. Dip Trace also has a FREE version but that is limited to 300 pins.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 17, 2015, 06:16:20 AM
Here are the only ways of Induction that i can think of in Figueras Device. #3 acting directly on the wire is to me {my idea} the most capable of producing the largest amounts of induction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 17, 2015, 09:01:55 AM
here is something else to think about also, Flux opposition {LENZ}.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on October 17, 2015, 12:47:24 PM
Marathon man I think the drawing #3 should say "flux at 90 degrees"

 not 90%.

I didn't think any current was produced moving along the side of a coil.
Am I wrong?

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 17, 2015, 04:24:37 PM
I know that it should say 90 degrees, so tell that to my key board that doesn't have a degree sign.
next time i'll put degrees just so you won't get confused.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 18, 2015, 05:53:10 PM
Here is something else to to think about.
{Sorry for the mistake about EMF with one pole what was i thinking}
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 19, 2015, 04:05:59 PM
@Norman, you're not wrong. If this were a typical AC transformer, having flux at 90 degrees to a coil would produce no output. However, Marathonman's setup is slightly different than that image. If it does simulate a moving field, it may act similar to a flux-cutting generator.

@Marathonman, I want to remind you, but I'm sure you know. Without Lenz opposition the efficiency of power transferred is going to be lower, so you may want to plan with Ohm's law in mind, V/R=I.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 19, 2015, 04:51:00 PM
I agree with V/R=I and i have planned accordingly but i totally disagree with your Lenz statement  as Lenz is the #1 reason Transformers and Generators are inefficient.
have you heard of Gennady Markov,  i have studied his work and his transformers are 100's % more efficient than a regular transformer because he side steps Lenz.
Ohm's Law and Lenz have Nothing to do with one another.
and yes you are correct as to the Flux cutting Generator but in this case if there is any Lenz at all it will be at 90 Degrees to the inducers flux.

below is a pic of Gennady Morkov Transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 19, 2015, 10:03:47 PM
Note that Gennady Markov transformers have North-North orientation in the primaries. I do not see your 90° angle in this transformer.

If you read my post on the 11th of may you will note that something weird , not explained by current science, happens where the magnetic field is null. Floyd Sweet,  Gennady Markov, William J. Hooper, Gennady Nikolaev, ...etc
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 19, 2015, 11:29:07 PM
Hanon; I just brought up Genady just to prove a point to antijon that Lenz is what is killing Transformers not aiding.
 i am quite aware of the different winding method but in this case of Figueras i don't think any of those method's are used in his devices.
he took a rotating Dynamo and made it stationary.... no bells, no whistles, no fairy dust just logic plain and simple. he even states that it is unbelievably simple and couldn't believe someone didn't think of it.
yes i know B fields cancel E fields add i read it but don't agree with it in Figueras devise.
it desn't matter if you see 90 degree in it or not because the transformer is split to negate lenz any ways.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 20, 2015, 02:11:27 AM
ah haha...

Marathonman, thanks, never heard of Markov, however, I'm very knowledgeable with his
work. His device is a dual-primary transformer, which I've already mentioned here... as I have
independently researched. Eventually I'll start a new thread about it. But that has little to do
with efficiency. And it also has little to do with balancing magnetic fields, which he states. It's
simply that multiple primaries multiplies the EMF.

Lenz law in a transformer... if you guys don't know, I'll be happy to explain it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 20, 2015, 04:17:14 PM
Doug1 had ask me why did they abandon the ring dynamo.... well all the ring dynamo's of Figueras time were limited to 15KW output. isn't that just a slight coincident that figueras device put out 15KW.  these Dynamos were of Figueras TIME.
another coincident is ALL of them had the inducers flux at 90 degrees to the coil length, NOT one but ALL of them. so why do you think i have my coils arranged the way i do....BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY IT'S IS SUPPOSE TO BE.
Figueras made it stationary to eliminate drag, separated the cores to eliminate Lenz effect and WIRED it the same way....."WHY" because it worked the first time. "FLUX CUTTING ALL DAY LONG"
yall can argue all you want, add all kinds of stupid crap n fairy dust to over complicate it but in the end all you will have is a NON WORKING DEVICE.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 20, 2015, 04:35:25 PM
Finally found the missing 3-D parts for my board design. looks much better with all the parts on it.
found them on the MFG web site and had to do a lot of adjustments but it was worth it.
also added power LED to the board.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on October 21, 2015, 01:07:46 PM
Marathonman you are right on the money ;)

The only way Figuera could do it work at that times is following the principle "KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID"

Toroidal generators were well known through 19th century and much more eficient than current ones

He only evolued them to static.

Listen carefully to the beggining of this video when he speak about the toroid: "19th invention and internal cancelation of back EMF"

Its it , I made test and it works

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu4pzvkSkzo
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on October 21, 2015, 01:24:44 PM
More 19th century toroidal generators

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 21, 2015, 01:40:51 PM
Marathonman
  Sorry it will be a a while before I can retrieve the paper I wanted to post with the math so you can determine for yourself what quality and quantity of power you have to account for in your method. Much as I complain about technology being so easily broken I failed to move some files to safer place. I would actually rather use books made of paper but they are too costly to acquire and maintain.
  The reason they moved both magnetic poles to the inside of the ring was for economic and safety reasons. The same principles are still used in automotive alternators which have evolved to operate under the conditions encountered in a vehicle engine compartment as the principles of the old model you have in the pic. There are as many differences as similarities in actual design but I am referring to principles of induction.
   Even Faraday's disk does not follow Faraday's own math since there is no cutting of the field by the normal rules of induction used in all the other types of generators. In spite of that it did not stop people from making disk dynamos some of which were massive multi ton units. They are hardly practical to operate for 99.999 percent of the population. If you address how the unit in question was able to run itself with out a prime mover or any additional input from the source the possible finish designs are limited only by the imagination of the builder. The only important thing is how he closed the loop. How you conserve the magnetic field while it is in motion while taking from it the effect of induction into an independent circuit to do useful work. I could tell you how to make a perfect loaf of bread but if I did not know altitude has an effect and you were at a different altitude then me then you would not be able to make that perfect loaf of bread.You would claim the recipe does not work. I have nothing against trying to get lucky if you only wish to make your own for your own personal use never to be replicated ever. After all why would I care how much time or money it cost you when it was for your own satisfaction. I wouldn't. There is an old saying measure three times cut once.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 21, 2015, 04:27:23 PM
pedroxime this is truly a joyous day. i knew i was right all along i was just waiting for yall to catch up. HA HA HA ! and thanks for verifying it before i could get a chance to.
Doug1  i will very much appreciate the formula. as soon as you find it post it.

Figueras is SMILING from ear to ear. young Padawan you have done well.

THANK YOU MASTER !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on October 21, 2015, 08:17:34 PM
...
Listen carefully to the beggining of this video when he speak about the toroid: "19th invention and internal cancelation of back EMF"
...
Saw the video but didn't notice the part where he explains how Lenz is not there.

You put two coils in series on a toroid and it magically has no Lenz problems?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 21, 2015, 09:54:33 PM
Saw the video but didn't notice the part where he explains how Lenz is not there.

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

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

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

when i posted my device the way i had it wired it would of been CW, CCW, CW, CCW ect.... but after looking at the way Figueras had it wired from my post 2632 i have realized that all the output cores are wired CW.  this device can be wired in different ways so this is just for the post 2632 not my previous post.it is still correct.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 22, 2015, 12:03:41 AM
And if any one is interested in DipTrace pcb design software  just look at what you can do with the silk screen.
it will be in white but it still looks way cool.
Pic is back of board.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 22, 2015, 09:27:48 AM
Marathonman,
 
If you draw an imaginary  line from the center of the pole of one electromagnets to the center of the pole of the other electromagnet you will have determined the axis along which induction is done symmetrically. Let´s say that there is a radial symmetry from this axis . Induction does not know about left, right, up, down from this axis: the same action is done equally in all directions.
 
In your design if you place the induced coil just in the center then the induction creation to the left side is compensated by the induction to the right side, therefore no net result will be obtained.
 
The only way that your design had any chance to work is if you place the induced coil de-centered (out from the center) . For example, placing all induced coils to the left of the induction axis, or placing them slight “in front” respect to the axis (let´s say outside the plane of the paper in your sketch) 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 22, 2015, 04:09:05 PM
Quote from Figueras Patent; Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns,  while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic  field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet.

Well Mr Hanon we have a dilemma, or rather "YOU" do.   see mr Figueras a "Physics Professor" knew that the maximum force from an electromagnet will be when it was centered and even stated this FACT in his PATENT.  so it seems that you know more than a Physics Professor. not only that you contradicted yourself from your first paragraph to your last paragraph.
SO like i said "YOU" have a dilemma not me.

and while your at it tell all the Inventors of ring Dynamo's that their making them wrong and that the won't work. you know the one with the electromagnet at 90 degrees to the coil.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 22, 2015, 04:35:32 PM
hanon, now that you mention it, it appears only the outer most coils will be producing current. However, if the complete set was separated into groups that problem could be avoided. Such as 4 groups, each containing 2 output coils with their exciters.

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

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

The ring dynamo did have less back-torque. This doesn't mean that it avoided Lenz law, it means that it had very poor induction. At high outputs, efficiency drops to nill. To counter this exciter current would need to be increased, but because of the low induction, saturation would soon follow. Basically, you'd need a ring dynamo the size of Manhattan just to power the city of Manhattan.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 23, 2015, 04:49:49 PM
I'm not trying to be mean but what the heck have you two been smoking.  reread your own post sober then post again.
Lenz is a prediction.... OMG !  i must of laughed for 10 minutes .
not only that we now have an expert on Ring Dynamos who's info is off by a mile. speaking of a mile, we are now building a Figueras devise the size of Manhattan.
and here i thought i was building it to power my house......{SILLY ME}
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 23, 2015, 04:50:38 PM
Well, I was rereading the patents to try to get more information.

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

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

In reference to the engineer report found here: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf
Quote
which consists essentially of a series of inducer electromagnets combined with a series of electromagnets or induced coils, a switch and comprising a brush or rotary switch, which makes contact successively on  the series of fixed contacts and get a continuous variation of the current flowing through the coils of the inducer electromagnets, developing in this manner a current in induced coils.

Also, quote from "Key Parts of Buforn Patent No. 57955" found here: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/Bf_1.pdf
Quote
The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it, because we will just have to interposed between a pair of electromagnets N and S, which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be in to hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire.

And finally, a quote from Figueras 1908 patent, found here: http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/patente_1908.pdf
Quote
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns
to the generator where taken; naturally
in every revolution of the brush will be
a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if
wanted

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

S=Inducer=N  =Induced= S=Inducer=N

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

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

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

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

If Figueras generator simulated a variable inductance, it may be when the one coil is decreasing and the other is increasing. When the currents are equal and opposite, the magnetic fields would oppose each other, and this may create a sense of reduced induction in the induced coil. If that's true then we can mimic his concept without using his commutator and switch.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 23, 2015, 05:04:22 PM
Aw what the heck, you guys don't believe in my work so why not throw more Gasoline on the fire.
Here is Buforn's 1914 Patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 23, 2015, 05:20:25 PM
@marathonman, I don't know what your problem is. I don't agree with your idea, I think it's unworkable. I said this the first time you mentioned it. Is this some kind of popularity contest for you?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 23, 2015, 07:58:00 PM
Well antijon i really don't know what your problem is either except being completely closed minded. whether you think my device will work or not is not my concern. i too think your Ideas were ridiculous but i said nothing in this forum about it.
i am taking the Dynamos of Figueras time and working with those parameters... no more no less.
you keep trying to over complicate thing by adding this and adding that. fairy dust here fairy dust there, in the long run you will have accomplished    nothing but a non working device.
as in your popularity contest, i could care less about anyone who like me or don't. i am here for one reason and one reason only to solve Figueras Device. so quite being a baby and lets figure this thing out.

start by working with the tools that Figueras had at that time ie... late 1800 early 1900 dynamos and go from there. study the winding technics  and material used.....ect ..ect. this is what i did and that is what i came up with and when my material come in i will build it and "IF" it doesn't work i will rearrange it until it does. his first devise had no or little Lenz but it did have Magnetic drag. so he took it and made it stationary to eliminate the Magnetic drag this is well known from his Patents. so that means he took a rotating Dynamo made it stationary to eliminate drag then separated the cores to eliminate Lenz effect all while using Electromagnets, then varying the currant to mimic the effect of the magnets approaching and departing the output cores. there for by keeping the electromagnets center lined the output core are always in the sweat spot of magnetic peak.
 this Device is suppose to be simple so please lets try to keep it simple.
PS. Figueras used 100 volt 1 amp not 12 volt.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 23, 2015, 10:30:27 PM
PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION
Considering carefully what happens in a dynamo in motion, we see that the coil turns of the induction circuit
approach and move away from the magnetic center of the magnets or electromagnets, and those turns, while
spinning, pass through sections of the magnetic field of different magnetic strengths, because, while the
maximum magnetic strength is in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action weakens as the
induction coil moves away from the center of the electromagnet, only to increase again when it is approaching the
center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.
Because we all know that the effects seen when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic
center are the same as when the circuit is motionless and the magnetic field increased and decreased in intensity,
since any variation of the magnetic flow traversing a circuit produces an induced electrical current. Then,
consideration was given to the possibility of building a machine which would work, based, not on the principle of
movement as current dynamos do, but based on the principle of increasing and decreasing the strength of the
magnetic field, or the strength of the electrical current which produces it.

this statement taken Directly from the Patent tells me i am right on track and no one will tell me other wise.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 24, 2015, 04:06:45 PM
Quote from Tesla 1895

"That is the trouble with many inventors; they lack patience. They lack the willingness to work a thing out slowly and clearly and sharply in their mind, so that they can actually 'feel it work.' They want to try their first idea right off; and the result is they use up lots of money and lots of good material, only to find eventually that they are working in the wrong direction. We all make mistakes, and it is better to make them before we begin."

  The sense of urgency is false if it results in continued failure. Is that not how we got here in the first place?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 24, 2015, 10:48:54 PM
 marathonman,

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

Shadow 119g
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on October 24, 2015, 11:20:47 PM
Hi Marathonman,

In patent 30378 Figuera shows an alternate version which is a little abstracted by the mechanical elements.

Quote
"...two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink, being this way the general arrangement of the appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in another form or grouping."

A 2001 Canadian patent CA2357550 by Bud T. Johnson is the closest to this setup.

CA2357550 - Electrical generator - solid state configuration

https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1

I have to agree that idea sounds simple by Figuera's description it is pretty much lock an AC generator coil at the 90 degree mark and just alternate the flux cutting through the center with electromagnets.

Quote
"...Leaving still both the induced circuit and the core, it is essential that lines of forces to be born and die, or being removed, which is achieved by making the excitatory current intermittent or alternating in sign."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 25, 2015, 12:24:47 AM
I thank you for the confidence.
apparently some people are having a hard time visualizing what is going on in figueras device, maybe this pic will clear it up.
north and south coils working together.

shadow119g your last sentence said it all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on October 25, 2015, 01:02:54 PM
Is anyone working or a simple test of these coil ideas or does anyone have an ideas about how to make a simple test to demonstrate the principle?

I'd like to see that but don't have it fully together enough to make something to get a simple test.


Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 25, 2015, 01:29:15 PM
Marathonman
  If your right,you should be able to build a single section unit and run it backwards supplying ac power to the output coil and seeing what comes out of the input coils/inducers. A measurable output that will indicate what the input will need to be in order to achieve the opposite which would be running it the right way round to have the correct output from the output coil.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 25, 2015, 01:49:40 PM
Hi Marathonman,

In patent 30378 Figuera shows an alternate version which is a little abstracted by the mechanical elements.

A 2001 Canadian patent CA2357550 by Bud T. Johnson is the closest to this setup.

CA2357550 - Electrical generator - solid state configuration

https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1

I have to agree that idea sounds simple by Figuera's description it is pretty much lock an AC generator coil at the 90 degree mark and just alternate the flux cutting through the center with electromagnets.

Hi DreamThinkBuild,

Could you please give me the complete patent of Bud T. Johnson quoted above? I have done googling with no result yet.. Thanks a lot for your help..

Best regards,

Poorpluto
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on October 25, 2015, 02:12:19 PM
Hi Poorpluto,

No problem, attached is the patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 25, 2015, 02:23:34 PM
Ploto

 When your looking at the page that pops up a lot of the text is in another color because they are hyper links. Googleing his name brings up a lot of stuff.
 https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=ininventor:%22Bud+T.J.+Johnson%22&gws_rd=ssl (https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=ininventor:%22Bud+T.J.+Johnson%22&gws_rd=ssl)

 Clicking on the hyper links in the sitations brings you to other similar patents and if the name for assignee is a hyper link it will expand into more names if there are more then one person who is a partner in the patent. If you click around you'll find Bearden and a few others on what looks like a meg in another patent which is sighted. Canada lays out their patents differently then the us. I left the hyper link for all the stuff Johnson had a hand in or was linked to in other stuff. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 25, 2015, 02:32:51 PM
Sometimes where is says applicant if there is company name along with the inventor you can click on it and Google will come back with a list which may include the art work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 25, 2015, 02:49:07 PM
This one is interesting for a number reasons.
https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357063A1?cl=en&dq=inassignee:%22Bud+T.+J.+Johnson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwATgKahUKEwiBkJys393IAhVD8j4KHSbuBFQ (https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357063A1?cl=en&dq=inassignee:%22Bud+T.+J.+Johnson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwATgKahUKEwiBkJys393IAhVD8j4KHSbuBFQ)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: poorpluto on October 25, 2015, 04:50:41 PM
@DreamThinkBuild Thank you very much for your kind help & quick response, I do appreciate it
and @Doug1, I'll give it a check..

Keep Figuering!

Poorpluto
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 25, 2015, 06:46:37 PM
Marathonman
  If your right,you should be able to build a single section unit and run it backwards supplying ac power to the output coil and seeing what comes out of the input coils/inducers. A measurable output that will indicate what the input will need to be in order to achieve the opposite which would be running it the right way round to have the correct output from the output coil.
Not sure about that but i am working on one section just to prove my point. have a few transformers laying around and a few i acquired so i am building a mock up. lacking the proper wire but it is just to prove my point.
i will post my findings as soon as i can.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 25, 2015, 08:12:19 PM
Hi Marathonman,

In patent 30378 Figuera shows an alternate version which is a little abstracted by the mechanical elements.

A 2001 Canadian patent CA2357550 by Bud T. Johnson is the closest to this setup.

CA2357550 - Electrical generator - solid state configuration

https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1 (https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1)

I have to agree that idea sounds simple by Figuera's description it is pretty much lock an AC generator coil at the 90 degree mark and just alternate the flux cutting through the center with electromagnets.


Hi,


Thanks for sharing this patent. I have found it very interesting.


The winding pattern is related to the one in this old post:


http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg420569/#msg420569 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg420569/#msg420569)


The image that you linked is not from patent 30378, but from patent 30376, but the idea is perfectly expressed. The image included in that old post is the 30378 drawing plus a drawing of the proposed winding, because, sadly, the 30378 original patent do not include the induced circuit. It mentions it but it is not drawn. 


A quote from patent no. 30378 that I think that it supports the flux cutting that Figuera, IMHO, used in his devices by moving the magnetic fields:


Quote
" In Gramme ring and in current dynamos, current is produced
by induction created on the wire of the induced circuits while
its coils cut the lines of force "
.....
" The inventors believe that is exactly the same that the induced
circuit coils cut the lines of force, than that these lines of force
 cross the induced wire. "


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 25, 2015, 11:27:18 PM
In my humble opinion this Patent should not of been issued as it infringes on Figueras Patent in which is in public domain as those Patent are expired but i have no expertise in that field.
Figueras device is  more efficient than this device as he used two cores instead of one,  eliminating Hysteresis in the inducers completely and by using pure Iron output core the Hysteresis their is almost non existent.
but all in all this is a good device and it does supports my theory.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 26, 2015, 12:35:52 PM
You have to file in each country you want to secure your rights in, which is pointless if you do not have the finances to higher attorneys in all those places in the event of having take legal action. Patents do not come with free legal support they just give you leg to stand on as proof of ownership. Thats only worth about 50 cents if you take into consideration the governments can decide to over ride your rights for number of reasons. You wont know that or what those reasons are until it happens. Kind of like playing poker with someone who is making up the rules as they go along so they will always win and you will always lose. It always comes down to money. Just another reason the system has to be forced into total collapse.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 26, 2015, 01:33:03 PM
Marathonman
 I found you a good and simple tool to use which will most likely help you in the end.
 http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/emfchb.html#c3 (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/emfchb.html#c3)
 You may have to play around with it for while to figure out how your model is going to function. It will surely determine if or if not your confusing the motion of the field"s" with the position of magnets.

  This tool can be used by itself to make right all the silly notions which will never work if the desired result is a self runner.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 26, 2015, 03:29:29 PM
The only tool i found on that site is a solenoid magnetic field calc tool and that's it. i have already been using a solenoid tool from another site. besides i can't get it to work. if you are referring to another tool on that site i am lost.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 26, 2015, 03:43:56 PM
Doug1, induction really is amazing. That tool is what sparked my curiosity when I was a kid. It's crazy to think that the induced current will still flow even if the coil is already powered.  ;D

Norman, I have tried my ideas. Mainly the three coils, will poles all vertical, or parallel with each other. I think it's the same general design as the one Bajac was working on. But I don't have the skill to make a commutator, so I used AC with a capacitor to make 2 phase. I figured that would be faux pas, so I didn't mention the results. I'm only dealing with 12V input, but the max output I got was 91V, which exceeded the supposed output for the turns ratio, which should have been 60V.

I think one of the problems with this particular setup is that the "exciter" induction can bypass the coil. When loaded the output was only .5W. The image might be an improvement to this design, by adding an airgap to prevent the exciters from bypassing the coil. Really, with a larger coil, higher inductance, and properly wound exciters, this design may work. Bajac may have better success.

About this perpendicular coil patent, I have doubts that it works. It looks like he has the electromagnets wired in parallel, and all the fields in the same direction. This could be powered by AC instead of a DC switching circuit, but I guess he included that for the high current pulse and lack of reactance. Saying that this resembles a generator doesn't mean anything guys, because when the armature is at 90 degress in a generator, no current is produced.

The patent is also not like a dynamo, Gramme ring, or any other generator. It has a north on one side, and a south on one side, and if the coil were moving up and down, would produce equal and opposite currents which cancel... or simply no current at all. But I can see why it should work being static.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 26, 2015, 04:17:18 PM
antijon: I would just like to point out that NO WHERE in the Patent does it state that they are North and South just Sets of N and S. this is being so over looked it's not funny.
"would produce equal and opposite currents which cancel... or simply no current at all."   this is exactly why Sets of N cannot be all North and Sets of S cannot be all South. the set S is of opposite polarity to Set N and in order to produce large currants each output coil has to be of opposite polarity. this is a fact that can not be Denied nor over looked.
and also you keep saying that my proposal won't work because it is at 90 degrees well it worked fine when it was in a ring Dynamo so why would it not work here.
that's like saying a peanut is not a peanut because it's not in it's shell..... sorry it's still a peanut no matter how you look at it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 26, 2015, 05:19:39 PM
Watching closely the canadian patent I think it can not work with the induced coil as it is drawn in the patent figure. Note that one part of the induced loop is transversed by a magnetic field in the direction between poles N----|-----S while the second part of the induced loop is also transversed by a magnetic field  in the same direction N----|-----S  , being "|" the symbol for the induce wire. In one case the induction is producing a current upwards, while the second case the current is downward, which is non-sense. In this case both effect will cancel each other and the net result would be zero.


It must have a different winding that the one drawn in the patent. This is why I think that figures in patent are many times used to misguide, being the text (claims) the really important part of the patent . The patent just claims that the induced coil is placed between electromagnets: one half between two poles (let´s say N----|----S) and other half between other two poles  (let´s say S----|----N) as I attach in the figure below drawn over Figuera´s sketch. I tend to think that it were the case in Figuera patent the two induced coils should be placed in the thick part which surrounds the electromagnets cores up and down. I see two possibilities (see below)


The canadian patent is badly redacted because the claims are so ambiguous that you would not get any protection even if the device had really worked.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 26, 2015, 05:46:39 PM
A ring Dynamo is moving.  ::) It's a whole different thing. It works because the coil sees a flux and changing inductance over time. Dude, I'm not here to argue, I'm just here for the science.

@hanon, I agree completely, but there is a way that the patent can work as stated. I can't draw it out right now, but if you can imagine the flux moving across the wires individually, it's feasible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 26, 2015, 08:16:01 PM
Hanon, this is the action I was referring to. The square and small circles represent the coil. The lines represent the external field. I'm just saying it may be feasible. I think the field induced by the coil would also have some effect though.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 26, 2015, 08:21:06 PM
Quote from Hanon: Watching closely the Canadian patent I think it can not work with the induced coil as it is drawn in the patent figure. Note that one part of the induced loop is traversed by a magnetic field in the direction between poles N----|-----S while the second part of the induced loop is also traversed by a magnetic field  in the same direction N----|-----S  , being "|" the symbol for the induce wire. In one case the induction is producing a current upwards, while the second case the current is downward, which is non-sense. In this case both effect will cancel each other and the net result would be zero.
you are right in your assumption  but what if while one side was taken high N|S the other side was taken low N|S this would reverse polarity on one half of the coil. each electromagnet N|S acting in unison, like a push pull kind of thing ?????
i have even thought of the Figueras Device in this manor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 27, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Doug1; i decided to post it any ways.

This is what i am referring to Hanon,

when the North Magnet/Electromagnet is approaching the core pic #1 currant is flowing down left side of coil.
when South Magnet/Electromagnet is Approaching the core pic #2 currant is flowing up left side of coil.{opposite with same side}
now take South Approaching Magnet/Electromagnet around the other end of the North Approaching Magnet/Electromagnet now the Currant/B Fields/Polarity are the same, complimenting one another.
when you do the same with the #3 and #4 Receding Magnets/Electromagnets you will get the same thing at opposite polarity with currant?B Fields/Polarity the same, complimenting one another.
so that leads me to Pic #5 at bottom  one set Approaching and one set Receding, complimenting each other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 27, 2015, 12:19:45 PM
One non matal ruler two magnets and one coil of wire connected to a mutli meter will go a long way.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 27, 2015, 12:47:13 PM
Doug1 what is matal ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 27, 2015, 03:23:09 PM
Well, did some general tests on perpendicular coil last night. Working on the basis that says a changing B field perpendicular to a coil produces current, I found bumkiss. When the coil is perfectly centered and flat against the electromagnet, and the B field is uniform, zero current flows.

The Canadian patent is non-working unless he uses a foreign coil wrapping technique different from a typical solenoid. Apparently, he also confused the difference between a moving and non-moving magnetic field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on October 27, 2015, 04:26:52 PM
Marathonman your drawing made it clear but I need the wording to finish my understand completely. So here it is.

Today is truely a great day for alternate energy.
 Refer to fig. 5 in this message.

 http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg464191/#msg464191 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg464191/#msg464191)
 
 As we know when current flows there will be a push back/Lenz counter to motion force
 and that force in this drawing will be counter balanced by the N to S magnetic attraction.
 
 I suggest
 1. a flat coil because you do not want to go inside the coil and you do not want to
 get super close where you have an attraction sticky spot
 2. mount two magnets per fig 5 on a scissors ends so that they can
 simultaneously can approach and leave equally.
 3. and if that force is not equal two repelling magnets of a proper matched force
    on the other ends could match up/balance the Lenz and magnet attraction force.
 4. to test this drive it with a weight on a string/connecting rod and run 2 tests
     a. no current flowing and b.  with the coil shorted.
   The times should be the same if this idea works.
 
 This setup is not a NO LENZ generator but a magnetically balanced generator.
 
 
 This means we can generate either 1 watt or 100 watts for only the mechanical work
 to move the mechanism.
 This is a new day for sure.
 
Thanks Marathonman for your dilligence to get my mind to understand the principle.

I think there is a problem when the magnet leaves because Lenz will resist leaving
like the  attracting magnets resist separation but that can be handled with repel balancing also.


Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on October 27, 2015, 05:15:18 PM
Doug1 what is matal ?

He wanted to type metal I think,    so he must have meant a non metal ruler.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 27, 2015, 09:16:53 PM
In Figuera 1908 patent one pole is getting stronger while the other pole  is getting weaker. Therefore is like one pole approaching and the other receding simultaneusly

This is an interesting video:
https://youtu.be/SMHmLgXWR1U (https://youtu.be/SMHmLgXWR1U)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 27, 2015, 10:08:55 PM
I like the way how you progress...keep doing this great work... :-*  KISS
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 27, 2015, 10:14:42 PM
Ya know what happens when two magnets are put together facing the same way?You get one magnet. Even when there is a space between them it still acts like one magnet.
  If you think you can generate a voltage with current by sloshing a coil back and forth in the middle of magnet in the dead zone then have fun with that. When you get done wasting time turn them so like poles face each other so it always keeps the poles separated from one another so the Y coil and the 2 magnetic fields can actually do something. The strong one will push the week one out of the Y coil as the power is cycled between the two sets N and S which are wired to have the same magnetic poles facing each other with the Y in the middle. Ruler magnets coil. Move the coil to simulate the fluctuation of field strength after all he states it makes no difference if the magnetic field moves in and out of the coil Y by rotation or current which caused it is increased and decreased. Prove it to yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 27, 2015, 10:53:51 PM
This is exactly done in this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s)



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 27, 2015, 11:37:27 PM
A link for those interested in knowing about Hertz Electrodynamics:


http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/ (http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/)


I see in this theory that there are two different ways to get induction:


1 - with a changing magnetic field in time:  dB/dt
2 - with a moving magnetic field in space:   v x B



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 28, 2015, 02:14:37 AM
@Norman, good effort bro, but as Doug said, will not produce current. If your device is a N on one side, and a S on the other, one swinging out while the other is swinging in, they will produce equal and opposite currents. 1 + -1= 0

Doug, you may be right. Maybe it's time to rebuild my first setup and check the results... That would be the simplest way to interpret Figueras generator, after all.

Hanon, cool link. Do you understand the math?  :) I'm math illiterate. Good point.
The image is from: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1455120
and he has a pretty clear answer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 28, 2015, 11:48:27 AM
Antijon
 It's worse then that. there is no rotation to reverse the field nor any difference in the number of lines of force between them when they are facing ns in the middle. Only the slight shifting of the outside poles on the outer most n and s far from the Y. Think about the number of times you'll get a pulse. If you end with a freq of 100 cycles per sec it's because you thought there was 2 instead of 4. 2 separate magnets north in 1 north out 1 other n in 1 other north out 1 = 4 not two not three but 4 for stones lol.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 28, 2015, 02:30:15 PM
So in light of this new information have had to reconsider my proposal. that leads me to believe that it is NYN, SYS, NYN  ect.... ect
because like you said opposite poles will lead to one magnet so they have to be NYN, SYS.
as one magnet is coming in the other is going out supporting each other in a push pull type of scenario.
so tell me if this is it below.
Thanks for the link Hanon.
But

 I am not one to argue but Maxwell's 20 original equations were Altered by Heaviside to erase the free energy equation as was Lorentz. they were paid by JP Morgan,  Heaviside paid once and Lorentz twice.
Einstein was and has been proven wrong from about ten different people. he is a complete Idiot and was paid also to keep status quo .
 this site reflects all kinds of mistakes that was probably taught to you in school in witch has been wrong for over 100 years.
I to am math deficient but i read very much more than the average person and have learned a lot. enough to know equations were altered.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 29, 2015, 09:16:03 AM
So in light of this new information have had to reconsider my proposal. that leads me to believe that it is NYN, SYS, NYN  ect.... ect
because like you said opposite poles will lead to one magnet so they have to be NYN, SYS.
as one magnet is coming in the other is going out supporting each other in a push pull type of scenario.
so tell me if this is it below.
If that were the case then your setup will produce null voltage because the induction created in the left side of the induced coil would be counterbalanced by the induction done in the right side of the coil ( (+1) +  (-1) = 0 ). You are fighting against axial symmetry along the axis joining both inducer poles.
 
In case of using perpendicular cores I think you would need two output coils (one CW and other CCW) to add up the effect and produce voltage (+1 +1)  . Other option is to used aligned cores, as drawn in some Buforn´s patents. The good thing it is that you may test both alternatives just moving/turning the coils.
 
This video will be of use to see how induction could be done by flux cutting: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 29, 2015, 05:16:23 PM
coils acting as one.
I am not powering them both at the same time one coming up the other going down.
i have already seen your video Hanon.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 29, 2015, 08:40:31 PM
You know one thing that really puzzles me or rather bothers me is out of the entire internet, thousands and thousands of free energy web sites NOT one talks or tried to figure out Clemente Figueras device .... NOT ONE !. this really bothers me and makes me wounder about this guy. i know their is a lot of suppression, even on this site but still in the back of my mind i have been bothered by it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on October 29, 2015, 09:33:14 PM
You know one thing that really puzzles me or rather bothers me is out of the entire internet, thousands and thousands of free energy web sites NOT one talks or tried to figure out Clemente Figueras device .... NOT ONE !. this really bothers me and makes me wounder about this guy. i know their is a lot of suppression, even on this site but still in the back of my mind i have been bothered by it.


That's because you cannot argue with that simplicity. If you crack it , build it then everybody can do it also.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on October 29, 2015, 09:49:32 PM
MarathonMan,
It bothers me that you have been bothered...I've for one have been waiting in the wings hoping you had/have solved the Fiqueras ...

In the conspiracy Camp that Doug1, you and I have dabbled in... you have to be very good in mathematics and especially mathematics pertaining to physics to understand the simplicity that Figueras had found... the education that Faraday taught himself was very Noble but the understanding that Tesla and Figueras knew was beyond most common people...

my point in this is keep going...

All the best
RandyFL

ps I am still in the wings but I have looked into more of Tesla's work for now
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 29, 2015, 10:33:36 PM
I am reading everything i can on Magnetism ....very old as in 1800's until now. it's just every thing published is junk as in raped by JP Morgan and friends. all the crap that was in school books is totally useless to everyone and should be used to start your fire place insted of being on school/Library shelves.
i won't stop doing what i like to do... reading, electronics and building crap with my hands. and besides like someone said their is only a few ways you can rig this device and I will find it.

 The good thing it is that you may test both alternatives just moving/turning the coils. This is exactly what i plan on doing Hanon
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 30, 2015, 01:07:01 AM
If you really want to know the great suppressed electrodynamics theory you should go deep into Ampere and Weber electrodynamics, sadly almost forgotten now. They discovered a longitudinal force, not represented in current transversal equations. A good point to start: http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html (http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html)


I think that in recent years nobody has suppressed Figuera. For sure in 1902 there was a huge suppression , a dark chapter that we do not know. But later, he remained forgotten, lost in the patent archives until 2011
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 30, 2015, 11:46:03 AM
Suppression if you want to call it that happens later. The constitution includes commerce clauses which will prohibit such a device because it will upset the economy and the tax base to such a high degree. Im the gonna guess every country that does business internationally or with the world bank system will also have difficulties with allowing such concepts to be wide spread. Then of course you have so many people in the communities who are invested in the systems in place that will lose huge sums of money as a result. I wouldnt worry about MIB's I would be more concerned with the guy next door who who might lose his life savings. He's not governed by any rules like a gov employee he might just beat his losses out of you with a hammer. Then as you can imagine it would get blamed on the mystical MIB's. If I were a gambling type I would put my money on the later being the hard part not the device being hard to figure out. Just food for thought.
  C.Y.A.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 30, 2015, 03:18:09 PM
Are there any "practical" working free energy devices out there?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on October 30, 2015, 03:25:47 PM
Are there any "practical" working free energy devices out there?

That is what we are all looking and working for so I think the answer is probably not.
But there are some things that "seem" to have promise.
But I've almost given up after 15 years of stalking this horse.

I do have an overunity permanent magnet device but it does not have enough power
to self reciprocate and it will not scale up to big power well due to size and weight.
So overunity does exist because I have seen it myself.


Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 30, 2015, 09:00:28 PM
Norman, thank you for your response.

Of course I didn't want to hear that, but, i find it extremely difficult to believe
that the Figuera devices and many others were merely a way to empress the
people of their era.

Thanks again,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 30, 2015, 10:08:17 PM
Our entire Universe is a perpetual motion machine and just the thought of scientist saying their is no such thing is unbelievably hilarious.
our present day system is designed to rob every person of even basic needs and keep then in perpetual debt.
it is up to people like us, the average person to break out of the grid lock these rich MF morons have us in.
our Governments and corporate World Kill many people a year just to keep status quo... ie massive inflow of money.

these devises where not figments of our imagination, nor are they merely used to empress,  they are for real and highly suppressed.
the likes of JP Morgan, Rockefeller, Rothschild  and their cohorts know no bounds when it comes to GREED and CONTROL.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on October 31, 2015, 12:35:12 AM
The robber Barons robbed...yes admittedly! But there is a thing called return on investment...and its the opportunity to get ahead if you can create the scenario ...but if you enslave yourself in the webs of Madison 5th ave. gotta have a new iphone ipad new car... new everything
who's fault is that?

I think Tesla's motor and alternator patent is a keeper but you gotta build it, test it and run it.................

Its Tesla's patent 555190 ( a motor and a generator )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 31, 2015, 01:16:08 PM
Randy
  I think you meant this one see link. The numerical identifiers sometimes expand to include extra O's as the number of patents to date recorded use up all the numbers.Like social sec numbers get longer eventually or phone numbers.

 http://www.teslauniverse.com/sites/default/files/patent_pdfs/00555190.pdf (http://www.teslauniverse.com/sites/default/files/patent_pdfs/00555190.pdf)

 They added many more possibles since 555190 by placing two zeros in front of it. Just think there somewhere there is a number 00000001. I think the mouse trap is still the one idea with the most number of patents. Yet a shoe still works best.
 As for the patent you sited it does state it produces the power to run itself. The picture which is what most people will glance over shows two views.The first image being an ordinary arrangement with a prime mover. If you are just glancing over the images it would be quickly dismissed and ignored. Not reading you would miss out on the statement that the first one is to show the ordinary and second the modification to achieve the patent. Two separate fields 90 degrees out of phase both of which are independent. Two things which are the same but totally separate in time crossing over the same space working cooperatively to produce an effect on the space between them. If Tesla only knew what would pass for an advanced society in the future he would have broke out Marathonman's crayons. Who really knows how many are out there including ideas that people never patented. Makes ya wonder if your researching the wrong thing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on October 31, 2015, 01:33:47 PM
.........

I think Tesla's motor and alternator patent is a keeper but you gotta build it, test it and run it.................

Its Tesla's patent 555190 ( a motor and a generator )

When I see a patent this old and do not see motors on the shelf ready to buy
then I have to question the validity of the patent....But it sure looks like Figuera
stuff with the 90degree coil.....

Randy did you make this motor?


https://www.google.com/patents/US555190?dq=patent:555190&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAmoVChMIuq_botnsyAIVwvAmCh3TXQsf

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on October 31, 2015, 02:09:15 PM
I have read completely through that patent 3 times now and I don't see anywhere that Tesla said it would run itself.  Where does anyone get that idea from the patent?  What Tesla is describing is an early version of an induction motor.  This patent is a way to run an induction motor from a single phase source instead of a 2 or 3 phase source.  His secondary coils as he calls them produce an opposing field shifted in phase to cause the rotation of the armature.  That is all this patent is about.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 31, 2015, 02:55:54 PM
 citfa
 Third time was not the charm, take a break try again later when your head is clear you missed every novel feature of this invention.I can only guess your trying to multi task your thoughts which is like being a jack of all trades and an expert of none.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on October 31, 2015, 04:13:07 PM
I have read completely through that patent 3 times now and I don't see anywhere that Tesla said it would run itself.  Where does anyone get that idea from the patent?  What Tesla is describing is an early version of an induction motor.  This patent is a way to run an induction motor from a single phase source instead of a 2 or 3 phase source.  His secondary coils as he calls them produce an opposing field shifted in phase to cause the rotation of the armature.  That is all this patent is about.

I read through and did not find it either.
So are we talking about 555,190 Feb 25, 1896?
if so what page and line number did I miss?

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 31, 2015, 04:23:46 PM
No, I also have to disagree. I see nothing in the patent that claims it could power itself or generate for an outside load.

He used "transformer" action to provide a second phase. This is the closed circuit he was referring to.

I'm not sure where I read it, but he mentioned before of using a transformer with a motor; the primary of the transformer in series with one winding, and the secondary of the transformer powering the winding at 90 degrees. This patent must be his finished product- the transformer is included in the motor. This works because the secondary of the transformer produces a current before the reactance of the primary of the transformer allows line current to pass.

Since the advent of the permanent split phase capacitor motor, this type of single phase powered motor is outdated. Heavier and more expensive, but probably more reliable, as capacitors fail quite often.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on October 31, 2015, 04:33:35 PM
citfa
 Third time was not the charm, take a break try again later when your head is clear you missed every novel feature of this invention.I can only guess your trying to multi task your thoughts which is like being a jack of all trades and an expert of none.

Doug,

I will admit I am not a brain surgeon or a NASA scientist but one thing I do know a lot about is electric motors.  I have worked in electronics for over 50 years and on motors and generators and motor controllers for over 30 years.  There is nothing in this patent we are discussing that suggests this motor can run itself.

Now I am NOT saying that Tesla may not have built overunity machines but I am saying this is NOT one of them

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 31, 2015, 04:35:36 PM
Here it is: http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1888-05-16.htm

He states,
Quote
Two more motors of this kind have suggested themselves to me.  1. A motor with one of its circuits in series with a transformer and the other in the secondary of the transformer.

This paper was published the same year that particular patent was filed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 31, 2015, 04:46:11 PM
I have leave to attend a benefit lunch for a cancer patient but will return later to see if you have recognized the novel features of the patent. I hate getting dressed up and being around loads of people so hopefully I wont just end up crabby.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on October 31, 2015, 04:57:54 PM
Wow...
nothing gets past you guys...

1. I suggest you go back and look at 3 phase generating and transmission by your local purveyor of electricity...
a. who invented that?
b. why?

2. I would also suggest you going outside or in your garage and open up the hood of your car and see ... I don't know.... maybe a Fxxxxxx "alternator "..........................
a. Gee who invented that thing? I guess ...................its " useless " eh
b. I wonder what its for............duh?

3. An alternator is a.......................................motor turned inside out.........
a. who would want to build an alternator when you could possible find it at the local auto supplies purveyor
b. go look up " ufopolitics " if you wanna build motors

you might not find the forest because too many trees are in the way

ya might wanna actually consider studying the patent..............................................................................


All the best
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on October 31, 2015, 05:15:18 PM
Wow...
nothing gets past you guys...

1. I suggest you go back and look at 3 phase generating and transmission by your local purveyor of electricity...
a. who invented that?
b. why?

2. I would also suggest you going outside or in your garage and open up the hood of your car and see ... I don't know.... maybe a Fxxxxxx "alternator "..........................
a. Gee who invented that thing? I guess ...................its " useless " eh
b. I wonder what its for............duh?

3. An alternator is a.......................................motor turned inside out.........
a. who would want to build an alternator when you could possible find it at the local auto supplies purveyor
b. go look up " ufopolitics " if you wanna build motors

you might not find the forest because too many trees are in the way

ya might wanna actually consider studying the patent..............................................................................


All the best

Randy,

What are you talking about?  I didn't see where anyone said any of Tesla's patents were useless.  There is no doubt he is probably the greatest inventor this world has ever seen.  His AC systems made it possible to send power anywhere needed.  His AC motors revolutionized industrial machines.

My only problem with this patent is the claim by Doug that Tesla said it could power itself.  I can not find in that patent where Tesla makes that claim and so far Doug has not shown where he got that idea.

By the way, mentioning Dufo's silly attempts to make a better motor in the same post as talking about Tesla is a tremendous insult to Tesla.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on October 31, 2015, 06:32:34 PM
Hi Marathonman and everybody
 
This is what probably happened: one of those 1800s dynamos with electromagnets arrived to Figuera island and he had the idea of pulse the electromagnets in static mode and it worked
http://www.lafavre.us/brush/dynamo.htm


The patent... Seriously questionable, the same time when Tesla was not allowed to give free energy to the world the same bankster buy the Figuera pat , too easy to replicate To make it public


The reason why those 1800s dynamos were so eficients is cause they had weak steam motors and in some cases the need human or animal energy. They were forced To do it the smart way
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on October 31, 2015, 08:12:05 PM
I can see the forest and the trees.  8)

But I'm not following. Motor, alternator, generator... ?

I wouldn't buy anything that Ufopolitics has to say.

BTW, has anyone ever studied the synchronous condenser?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 31, 2015, 08:42:26 PM
Sorry it's not Figueras !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on October 31, 2015, 09:37:32 PM
I don't advise buying or doing anything...

I personally am working on the alternator part...and I have my fingers crossed that someone in here finds the key to Figueras.........

btw Here's more of Tesla's patents... make what you want of it...
http://www.nuenergy.org/uploads/tesla/US390721.pdf


MarathonMan,
the unique thing about turning the workhorse car alternator into a sensorless BLDC motor is you can make it go slower or faster depending on the work load...

Doug1,
I think this is the patent ...

( Patent # 401,520    April, 16 1889
Method of Operating Electro Magnetic Motors )

... that we have been referring to...
it states when the motor and alternator attain " sync " they run independent ( whatever that means ) lol
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 31, 2015, 10:07:17 PM
You are right Antijon
 
He used "transformer" action to provide a second phase. This is the closed circuit he was referring to.

 I admit I made a mistake. It happens lack of sleep I guess.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 01, 2015, 11:49:34 AM
For those that are having trouble with Lenz's Law this might help.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 01, 2015, 01:02:20 PM
For those that are having trouble with Lenz's Law this might help.


Oh, marathonman


This picture give me more headache and doen't explain it at all !
Why the induced current must be in opposite direction to the primary current ? Here should be explained the principle of Faraday induction and the simple rule to find direction of induced current.
Second , why is Lenz law talking about curents without explaining the simple and real principle hidden under the rules ?
And the last one is : how and why the induced current interact with primary current at all ?
This is not explained....in fact all Faraday induction laws are badly explained, I think we should first be teached how to understand them not how to solve equations...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 01, 2015, 03:29:28 PM
It's Taught not Teached, and you must be pulling my leg about this. after 3000 + posts you have been around for a while and i know you know things. granted somethings are a little hazy to me but i read so much that eventually i will pick it all up.
just think of ZPE or what ever you want to call it { Nicola Tesla called it a Gaseous media that permeates everything} as super fast cosmic radiation that doesn't like to be messed with and is lazy as a no good woman that squawks and complains every time she is in an ordered state and will do everything she can to be stationary when near a polarized field. doesn't like to cough up that electricity easily.

Wow ! i just described my ex girl friend.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 03, 2015, 04:05:04 PM
I just came across this, for those of you interested in motor/generator ideas.
The Robert Alexander transformer/motor/generator. haha
http://rexresearch.com/alxandr/alexandr.htm

Marathonman's photo made me realize that it's different than a normal converter, so I had to take a look. The input and output are wound in a way that they have a transformer action, but the input also causes it to motor. He uses DC, but claims that AC can also be used.

I haven't figured out if this is overunity, but if an AC model were built, it could be wound like a normal induction motor, just with two sets of windings on each stator pole. In a normal transformer, drawing more output increases the input current. But in the case of a motor, that would have the effect of increasing the magnetization energy. I can only speculate, but I imagine that would decrease the slip causing it to "generate" more power.

See, I have tried making a "Rotoverter" before. In that case, single phase is used to power a 3 phase motor, and the extra winding is used to supply current. It didn't work at all, even though free energy sites were like "It's amazing." blah blah. When current was drawn, it increased the slip, causing input current to increase. This is the same thing in a typical DC to AC converter. Current out increases the drag. But in this transformer/generator, that wouldn't happen.

Just a thought. Sorry, not related to Figueras
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 03, 2015, 08:07:28 PM
By the way welcome to the forum pedroxime. i love the second pic you posted. everything made back then was so rugged and built to last unlike the Crap Corporate America puts out now a days.

Once Figueras Device is perfected it can be used to power cars or Homes. this will instantly put Tesla Motors in the OUTDATED section.
converting a regular car to electric motor leaves all kinds of room to stack Four or more Figueras devices in the engine compartment wired in parallel for higher amperage.
wouldn't that be great to drive around the country never having to worry about GAS.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 03, 2015, 10:08:41 PM
Antijon,

Note that if you look carefully to the original figure in Alexander patent there are two north poles confronted. Do not be misguided by the confusing notation in the sketch.

Also extracted from the link you posted:" The basic design of this device is a transformer ( flux linkage or acceleration device), used as a generator rotor ( a flux cutting, velocity device )."  ::)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 03, 2015, 10:48:05 PM
Thanks Hanon. You're right regarding the original image. I don't know if he made a mistake, or simply wanted to identify that as a South Pole. It's even possible that he assumes the reader will recognize that a North Pole and South Pole are required for a motor to operate.

The figure. 2 in the patent shows proper magnet operation for a DC motor.

BTW, what do you think of the patent? Interesting concept, right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 04, 2015, 01:17:03 PM
Antijon
 Since there are no stator coils represented in the picture of the motor generator it's pretty safe to assume they are permanent magnets. The housing of the motor closes the field between the magnets from behind them leaving it a north south configuration with the rotor between the poles. If it was going to be push push motor instead of push pull motor you would have to change a number of things.
  Speaking of push push, what happens to the collapsing magnetic field in a electromagnet? The field is supposed to give back current isnt it? Induction is any change in the field or movement of the conductor within a field. Long time ago I found my PMH after years of it being lost after it was charged up. It was still charged. It gave back all that was stored in it for all those years. I dont know of any battery that could have done that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 04, 2015, 01:35:17 PM
 It´s interesting that in Richard Willis patent WO2009065219A1 (Magnacoaster – Vorktex) he also used two lateral magnets with their north poles confronted. And a coil in between both magnets...I wonder if he was also using induction by flux cutting ???
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 04, 2015, 02:57:03 PM
Doug, the PMH is an interesting device. I'm sure modern science would say the cause is simply residual magnetism, which is true, but not really. It's obvious that a PMH holds a running magnetic field that must be unchanging over time. After all, if it was changing it would generate a current in the coils. Magnetic fields are mysterious themselves. If we observe Lenz law, we see that a North field, acting on a coil, can produce current in both directions, depending on if it's growing or receding. This is an interesting phenomenon, considering the polarity of a magnetic field. It almost looks like "magnetic particles" change direction in space.

Thanks for the info hanon, I'll look that up after work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 04, 2015, 09:07:17 PM
It looks like Richard Willis is using the same technique as Mr Figueras did. using the second north pole collapse to assist the first one.
it has to be that either the particles change direction {probably not} or as you are Gaining/going in,  the front side of the spin is cutting the wire and when it is receding the back side of the spin is in cutting the wires causing reverse direction.

Found an interesting transformer from Germany.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 04, 2015, 10:56:28 PM
I found a link to that patent here: http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf

Sounds right to me. Didn't Figueras mention in a patent that his device was similar in principle to an induction coil? So perhaps his idea was to set-up an induced field in a coil, and then force the field to change? That would explain his 90 degree waveforms. 1st pulse to induce, and 2nd pulse to alter the induced field.  :-\

I see in the Willis patent that he makes a point in mentioning that the lower magnet must be farther away. This means a couple of things, but one thing it brings to mind is that, in the Figueras, or with electromagnets, it may be necessary to have an air gap or space between the inducers and induced. This should allow the electromagnets to work on the induced field without affecting each other. But this may also be possible with spacing between the coils, on the same inductor shaft. Just thoughts.  ;D

Does anyone know if this has been replicated?

Marathonman, I agree. I don't really think that there's a particle, it's just giving me a brain freeze. haha I mean, North increasing and South decreasing produce the same direction current... that could be explained by spin...  :o

About the transformer, I googled lenzless transformer and found variations of that design. Yar, but it's not lenzless. People are building it in circles, but it's not producing a revolving magnetic field, it's producing a magnetic field inline with the center coil. A definite pole face at the top and bottom of the loop. The reason why is that the side coils equally oppose the field of the center coil (inducing coil), and they equally oppose each other.

I did wire a transformer one time that looped two primaries together to kill the reactance, but I didn't record any output in my notes. All I can remember is that it produced a constant DC current in the primaries, even though it was powered by AC. The result was a whole lot of current draw. haha
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 05, 2015, 04:35:05 PM
Figueras used the the 1st to induce { increasing} while the 2nd {decreasing} as the Lenz effect supports the first increasing fields {same Direction}  therefore nullifying the lenz in the first. so basically Figueras is using it's BEMF or Lenz's effect  to aide his device in producing energy.so the only way the poles can aide each other and not interact with each other is NYN, SYS or NYN, NYN. in patent 1914 it states that it can be put one after each other so i am going with NYN, SYS, NYN, SYS ect......

actually Figueras is using 180 degree wave forms, as set S is zero the other set N is high and vise,verse. see pic below to see what i mean. by using this style of switching the coils will NEVER reach zero....ie switched after High to Low/Low to High point acting as a battery then series to raise the voltage.

as for the magnet placement Richard Willis is using a ringing effect in his device  as Figueras is not and it even states so in his Patent that there fore need no spaces or gaps between them. Figueras is trying to get the Highest flux possible {induction} from his device so a gap here is detrimental. just remember the square of the distance when dealing with induction.
 
Nicola Tesla and many others basically proved that their is a median that is so small that we can not measure it and that it permeates everything, basically it is the space between spaces. a mater of fact Dmitri Mendeleev, who came up with the periodic table of elements said there are elements lighter that helium that he cant measure but he knows it's there.

It's all about spin direction, our whole Universe is all about spin direction,  right hand spin/left hand spin, attraction/repulsion, convergence/divergence, space/ counter space   ect... Ken wheeler is a good start and is a  F-in very smart person. makes Einstein look like a grade school drop out.

as for the lenzless transformer, well it will have to wait another day as all my time is {consumed} with Figueras device.

Sorry pic is incorrect .....see next post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 05, 2015, 08:20:12 PM
Sorry for the mistake, the cross over Reverse direction points are here.
the transition from High to low and low to High.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 05, 2015, 11:52:50 PM
Doug1 you are Very right. after observing the above graph i agree with you completely 100 %. each wave form represents Two cycle changes {Flux Reversals} so with two wave forms {One Complete Cycle} you will have Four flux reversals.
so it would seem to me that that constitutes double the frequency  ie not 60 but 120 Hz. ???????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 06, 2015, 12:17:30 PM
Nice graph marathonman.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 06, 2015, 10:21:49 PM
I just wanted to comment about the lenzless transformer. I think everyone means a transformer where the output doesn't affect the input. I mentioned this before, but Mykhaylo Balush seems to have designed a transformer to do that. Because a transformer is a flux linkage device, the primary and secondary will always affect each other. But in his device, he uses 2 secondaries, wired in series to cancel each other out. So if they were matching, there would be 0 volts. However, they don't need to be matching to have the same inductance. One secondary can have more windings, and a higher voltage, but still have the same inductance as the other. This means that there will be an output. The two inductances will cancel each other out, and the primary will see no load.

His first video here https://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE
Go through his videos and he shows how the secondary has no effect on the primary current.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on November 07, 2015, 04:56:34 PM
I can see the forest and the trees.  8)


Hello Antijon, you can keep your irony for yourself. I have been watching this "one weekend project patent" thread for years and years and people going nowhere, perhaps is time to rethink from the start.
Only see Marathonman going somewhere.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 07, 2015, 06:52:19 PM
Haaa... irony huh.

Who are you?  :o Okay, go ahead. Label me as a bad guy. Ohhh, maybe I work for the MIB. Maybe I just don't want anyone to have free energy. Maybe I just don't want someone else to succeed. ???

Don't be a quack. Unlike you free energy groupies I actually experiment and research. I know, there are some here that are vastly smarter than I am, and have accomplished a lot, but frankly, I've done things that you and marathonman couldn't even understand yet.

But whatever. you guys want me out of your little marathonman parade? fine. haha, I work just as well on my own
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on November 07, 2015, 08:08:41 PM

....
But whatever. you guys want me out of your little marathonman parade? fine. haha, I work just as well on my own

Hej Antijon,

Not so fast, please,  I do not think anybody wants you out of here, just carry on as before.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on November 07, 2015, 08:28:12 PM
...His first video here https://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE
Go through his videos and he shows how the secondary has no effect on the primary current.
I wouldn't mind seeing a discussion on how this device works. Especially since we know it works and he is still alive to talk to. Even if not exactly the same as Figuera I have already noticed similarities between Figuera and other devices being built which can help lead us to the answer for Figuera. I don't speak russian so his other videos are of little help to me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 08, 2015, 08:58:18 AM
Hello mad little puppy's please stop barking at each other. their is enough Figueras food to go around.
we are not here to throw stones but to solve a 107 year old mystery.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 08, 2015, 09:32:17 AM
even though some of us are a little sensitive un like myself being 52 5'11" 220lbs ex military and not fat we still have to try to get alone.
this pic is for all you DOGS......WOOF!

i just thought we all needed a little cheer....please don't kick me out for this?????
Figueras, Figueras, he's the man, if he can't make free energy then nobody can.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 08, 2015, 03:07:46 PM
 marathonman
  Did you earn your red wings or what?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 08, 2015, 03:39:51 PM
Rainy day review magnetism values to electricity (https://books.google.com/books?id=C3luAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=magnetism+values+to+electricity&source=bl&ots=iAVLMd8I-q&sig=Je-ZHPDOMxeHwMqCW0BWL9PxtXY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEgQ6AEwCGoVChMIgobQjfeAyQIVSW0-Ch0YZgX_#v=onepage&q=magnetism%20values%20to%20electricity&f=true)
 Get your mind right Marathonman lol.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 08, 2015, 10:44:59 PM
Marathonman, muy buena imagen de energía libre, aunque creo que suelen salir muy caras, Je JeJe.
 Y en cuanto a Clemente Figuera… Idea.
google traduc:::: Marathon Man, very good image free energy, although I think often be very expensive, Je JeJe. As for Clemente Figuera ... Idea.

Drawing legend: calculate resonance capacitors to wait minutes to measure power, the image only shows the electromagnets inductors
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 09, 2015, 06:37:21 PM
Yes Doug1 i have them....all of them LOL.
I would like to Apoligize for posting that pic. i was a little drunk when i posted it. people were starting to get out of hand so i thought i would try to redirect their thoughts.
SORRY!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 09, 2015, 08:58:47 PM
Back on Track------
operation of Figueras Device in a nut shell.
Hanon:  if you haven't realized  we are talking about the same thing as in your video.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 10, 2015, 12:00:10 AM
But if you want to use one induced coil at right angles respect to the inducers (which is a possibility that can work) then you have to use TWO induced coils, one at each side of the central axis, or just use one coil but uncentered.  At least see 40 sec. from this video with this other set-up: https://youtu.be/ZPbWoaPUE5s?t=11m57s (https://youtu.be/ZPbWoaPUE5s?t=11m57s)

With you just one centered induced coil induction in each side (left side and right side) will cancel out....because...it has axial symmetry.

Anyway it is a possibility to test, but I prefer to follow the recommendations included in Buforn´s  last patent in 1914.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 10, 2015, 12:46:46 PM
 Hannon they are not powered up at the same time equally.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 10, 2015, 04:57:27 PM
DUH !....... that sure was a hard one.

Hanon; in your Video you take your clear piece of plastic and shift it side to side. what do you think is going on to get that shift from side to side ? YES! you got it,  one side is being progressively powered up while the other side is progressively powered down and vise verse.
the pic below is the exactly the same as your video. as one side peaks then is progressively powered down it reverses direction  and supports the other side being progressively powered up........SIDE to SIDE SHIFT.
it doesn't matter if its North or South it will do the same thing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 11, 2015, 12:13:41 AM
Doug1; I finally found the circuit i have been looking for in my mag amp control circuit. i had it on my computer when i got bombed from the Internet...... lost everything.  well this is the exact circuit i will be using for controlling Figueras Device.
i just hope it reacts quick enough.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 11, 2015, 03:49:05 PM
Well, sorry for losing my cool. Stress lately makes me want to be one of those deaf-mutes... but I'd prefer to keep playing the catcher in the rye. Anyway, happy Veteran's Day marathonman. If you're from the US.  ;D

But I'm going to ask you to clarify, is your intention to align the induced coil perpendicular to the inducers, like a ring dynamo? I know it has been, but you post photos of lenz law showing the poles facing. These are two different things. Maybe you can just let us know.

But if that's what you're intending, I've tried many different ways, even yesterday, but I cannot get any current out when the coils are arranged perpendicularly. No response at all.

Magnaprop, I just realized his two secondaries are arranged parallel to each other, physically I mean. This makes a difference in the operation, but I should be able to test his design later. Smart guy, right? I like his other videos about inertia.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 12, 2015, 02:47:16 PM
I think Marathonman will in the end realize that constructing the Y coil at 90 degrees to the induced will prove too difficult and not necessary.
  The cores will take care of the angle of the magnetic field without having to do that. If the wire wound around a core impresses the field wrapped around the wire to the core sending the lines of force out of the ends of core and into another then direction of the lines of force into the second core will impress the reverse effect into the secondary wire as induction in the second coil.
  Turning the second coil 90 degrees introduces a lot more complications.Firstly the field being impressed into the second coil will be stronger nearest to the pole face and weaker with square of the distance from the pole face leaving the side of the coil furthest from the pole face which active in a weak field compared to the side close to the pole face. Thereby reducing the amount of induction in the second coil not increasing it. The position above and below will see nothing so induction will only effect two quarter quadrants of each full turn of the coil. That alone cuts the inductive potential in half right off the git go. Second if the field envelops two sides of the coil at the same time going over the coils from top and bottom it will just cancel itself out  because the field is pushing on both halves of each turn in the same direction the way most basic models show the wire being in the neutral position where no lines are being cut at all as a wire loop is turned inside a magnet field.
  It's not the end of the world. Remember there are 999 light bulbs that don't work some where in a dark room. If not for them you would still be burning candles or in the dark yourself.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on November 13, 2015, 10:47:54 PM
...
Magnaprop, I just realized his two secondaries are arranged parallel to each other, physically I mean. This makes a difference in the operation, but I should be able to test his design later. Smart guy, right? I like his other videos about inertia.
Let us know how your experiment goes. Very interested in what he is doing and how it might relate to Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: EMJunkie on November 14, 2015, 03:39:13 AM
@Marathonman,

Regarding the Images you have shown about the 1904 Patent: "The Dynamo", I have been able to obtain a copy.

The URL you can download it from is here: The Dynamo 1904 Edition (http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/The%20Dynamo%201904%20Edition.pdf) - This file is 187Mb in size, please right click and click Save As or you will be here all day waiting for the pages to show.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 20, 2015, 04:57:37 PM
Thank you Chris Sykes, i admire your work and appreciate your in put. I am curious as to why you wanted me to download this as i have an earlier one that i have been studying that is the information that was available to Figueras. i have downloaded it and have been reading it but i must admit it is the same info that is in the earlier version.
is their any specific section that you think i need to study.?????... if there is please let me know
i have also been studying all other patents and have come to the conclusion that all are right about the coil orientation. i have also possibly uncovered another clue to his device and it have to do with Hanon's delay effect.
in most of the patents the cores that were drawn were very long in proportion to the coils and with this set up a delay effect would take place.
also i would like to bring up that the secondary cut away in the first pic. notice that the primary is cut away also. could this be that the primary core was hollow to allow for an adjustment of some kind as in to get the exact delay effect Hanon was referring.  if you look at the other patents you will see that all of them have a long secondary core except two that have no core drawn.
first pic is my point
other pics are of long cores.

the last line on the right is suppose to be 'induced' not enduced and Sorry for the stupid large pic !

Ps. my materials i ordered have still not come in and i am really P O ed. so i haven't been able to do any test.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 21, 2015, 11:32:55 AM
just something to think about.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 22, 2015, 03:52:17 PM
more good info to think about
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 22, 2015, 04:03:40 PM
How can i take a pic down after posting it????
the huge pic was a Paint fail and i would like to fix it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on November 22, 2015, 04:48:13 PM
How can i take a pic down after posting it? ???
the huge pic was a Paint fail and i would like to fix it.

You click on the Modify icon on the very right hand side corner of your post which includes the huge attachment.
Then you are in the Edit mode again and check the delete file or something like that (cannot recall exactly) at the uploded window area you picture filename is. 
A correct picture file size to upload is max  860-900 pixel horizontally, this would not cause any widening of the thread size horizontally.

Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 22, 2015, 05:25:44 PM
gyulasun; Thank you worked just fine.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2015, 06:03:51 PM
Here is a link to a calculator http://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.repel. (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.repel.asp?calcType=block)
 There is a link in the frame to a pull force calculator as well. Compare the force of two permanent magnets which are the same. Pick out an arbitrary magnet but use the same magnet in both calculators and see the difference measured in terms of force for pulling compared to pushing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 22, 2015, 08:49:21 PM
OK Mr cryptic what is your point?
both were the same.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 23, 2015, 02:46:06 PM
Convert everything to force per time to get a comfortable working scale of size for all the parts. If your inducers can only exert a couple pounds of force it will take a lot of them to add up to the amount of force being used as the end product. 72 pounds of force at 50hrtz = ?watts and so on.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 23, 2015, 07:32:11 PM
 I had to read what you said a few time to grasp what the heck you were talking about but yes that makes sense. it takes so much force per time to get a certain voltage and amperage then add each coil to get end result.
so do you have a calc tool for that since my math kind of sucks.
i have a 120 IQ but because of my up bringing i have a  post tramatic brain. ie. war zone house hold,  so it is wired slightly wrong. i understand things that most people have a hard time grasping { machanical skills are off the charts} but other things are not so good.
it's 60 hz in my part of the woods.

for all that may be interested here is a NJ supplier of PURE IRON at a reasonable price http://www.surepure.com/products.php?a=17,31&o=20
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 24, 2015, 02:41:36 AM
It's 60hz here as well but it wasnt important to convey the idea just an example. I havent found a calculator for it that is straight forward just end up using lots of other converters and writing it down.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 24, 2015, 01:07:47 PM
Marathonman
 I understand you want for smaller more powerful cores but you have to consider heat dissipation. If an expensive material allows for a smaller size will it result in over heating under operating conditions like the ambient temperatures it may be subjected to?
 Almost everything can be converted to something ells ,hp to ft pounds ,watts to hp, heat to watts. Watts to watt seconds was as small a time I could find, just have to break that down into 60 cycles per second yourself which seriously reduces the force as a constant to about 10 to 15 lbs per set being shifted the distance occupied by the Y coil. Even the number of magnetic lines per sq cm of material and the amount of current density can be converted although not as easy.
  It may sound a bit nutty but a paper clip on a plastic straw provides a quick probe to determine the point of intersecting fields. Has just enough flex to not be rigid and able to trace out the field as it is moved along the coils. It will even vibrate when you find the center point so you can make adjustments in the alignment with out spending a paycheck on expensive equipment.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 24, 2015, 04:16:23 PM
I am aware of the heat dissipation and know that i can use slightly smaller core as opposed to laminate but it has to handle the amount of your projected flux count and not over heat. i will have a small sensor attached to the core to monitor the heat.
I canceled my over seas order because they took to long. i will be ordering a test piece from the above NJ company. i will start with a 1 1/2" round bar of 99.8% pure iron but in the mean time i am assembling some very low tech stuff just to prove my point.
i have a oscilloscope that i will be using to line up the cores to get the phasing right as i am assuming that the phase of the secondary is used to aide the primaries as shown in the cutaway in most of the patents. i am so stupid to have not caught that earlier on in my investigation of his device.
see Figueras was hiding the fact that there was a gap between the primaries and secondary (being properly place) to get the proper phasing but Buforn  not being so cryptic shown the gap in his cutaway drawings. (purposely or not it is their)
if the primary was right against the secondary it would be hit with out of phase signal (BEMF)  but by adjusting the core back it can be timed to be in sink with the phase of the secondary (180 out) to aide the primary reducing the power draw of the primary.
I tried to find the video that HANON posted of the hall sensor dealing with the phasing but i couldn't find it.
you could be a little more helpful Doug but in the long run i will get it right.

PS. PARIS ATTACKS = GOVERNMENT FUNDED TERRORISM !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 24, 2015, 04:31:59 PM
Marathonman, you're right about the patent image, but I think it doesn't affect the design very much.

According to Buforn patent 57955:
Quote
we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles

@ Magnaprop, I haven't had good success with my recreation of the transformer, but I realized it's operation is completely different than I thought. If you watch Mr. Balush's video, you see the two secondaries' cores side by side, then the primary wrapped around it. This must be an integral part of the design.

Hypothetically, with a transformer, if the current drops on the primary this indicates an increase in reactance, due to an increase of inductance. This is only possible if the secondary produces a field in the same direction as the primary. A normal transformer is the exact opposite, the secondary opposes the field of the primary and reduces it's reactance.

I'm still figuring this out, but if you have any clues let me know. It may not be related to Figueras but still good knowledge.

Found this video which appears relevant: https://youtu.be/tXno_7xXSZs
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 24, 2015, 06:15:34 PM
Marathonman, you're right about the patent image, but I think it doesn't affect the design very much.

In YOUR mind maybe NOT mine.

In my mind it changes everything, it simplifies the construction and reduces the cost by over 50 %. three Electromagnets on bobbins, one straight Iron Core and some proper tuning changes everything.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on November 25, 2015, 01:52:26 PM
Hi Marathonman
Ray found a sweet not back EMF point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3TFALmHtMw
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 25, 2015, 07:09:54 PM
Good research but such little voltage that i myself would not bother with it at this moment in time. in time with further development maybe, until that time i will stick with Figueras device.
 i have a lot of time and effort involved in Figueras device only because i believe in my heart that it will forever change my life.
our entire Universe is "electric" that does not like to be disturbed, when it is disturbed to do work it's ugly second half "Magnetism' rears it's ugly head to oppose the movement of electricity. ( the name humans gave this force is LENZ's Effect)
along came a man by the name of Clemente Figueras who studied present inferior generating apparatus and devised a way to side step the lenz effect. so he built this devise and it did work because he sold it to some dumb Bankers for a lot of money. the bankers did not know he had already refined his device to being stationary as his moving device he just sold had drag. the stationary device Figueras wanted to give to the world for them to use freely.
so he built a stationary device to eliminate the drag but once again (LENZ'S EFFECT) raised it's ugly head. Figueras then devised a way to use the Lenz effect to his advantage by separating the coils on a core, so by doing this he could time the Lenz effect (phase)  from the secondaries to aide the incoming (phase)  of the primaries and lower the amp draw. thus the secondaries in essence are invisible to the primaries as their is no phase collision seen by the primaries as in present day devices.
he then switched the primaries at the half way point so the secondary will never see zero volts thus acting as batteries then series them for more voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on November 26, 2015, 01:20:23 PM
Thanks Marathonman
Im currently in other projects and never went too deep in to Figuera´s
Good luck  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 28, 2015, 12:56:45 AM
Here is some more information on Lenz's Law and Figueras Device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 28, 2015, 04:57:54 AM
Sorry for not proof reading the above post first. the replacement pic is corrected. very tired
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on November 28, 2015, 10:48:08 AM
Suppression if you want to call it that happens later. The constitution includes commerce clauses which will prohibit such a device because it will upset the economy and the tax base to such a high degree. Im the gonna guess every country that does business internationally or with the world bank system will also have difficulties with allowing such concepts to be wide spread. Then of course you have so many people in the communities who are invested in the systems in place that will lose huge sums of money as a result. I wouldnt worry about MIB's I would be more concerned with the guy next door who who might lose his life savings. He's not governed by any rules like a gov employee he might just beat his losses out of you with a hammer. Then as you can imagine it would get blamed on the mystical MIB's. If I were a gambling type I would put my money on the later being the hard part not the device being hard to figure out. Just food for thought.
  C.Y.A.

Life is simple. But the greediness in humans earth darkens is proper power of reasoning. Are the Governments in the world the Creator of earth and it Natural resources which we met here? Yes if everybody posses free energy devices what badness will it cause the world? Nothing at all because all what we humans need at crude and both advance stage have been created here into our world by God himselves. But the Satan-cotroled mided ones of our planets will always says the resource are not enough so it as to bé controlled. Greed is the root of all EVILS on Earth back in history and present day. The rich are getting richer while the poor are made to get poorer, does that makes sense? Look at the Sun, it produces power for we Dust (humans) free all around the world and the some animals will say we are not equall when still we breath in and out the same Ahir. Wait if we humans alive today suddenly procreate to the extent that all Lands get occupied in a jiffy, what will it take the one blessed our furfather Adam to expand the Land again and again. Or say make the Earth bigger without us knowing? What?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on November 28, 2015, 05:01:29 PM
Somehow some way, I think, the first 3 major thing to make any Overunity Transformer work is to make sure:

1. You make your Primary Winding to generate Etremly High Flux and the only way I know to do that is to apply Tesla style of Winding. So you must use at least 10 to 30 strands or above of any gauge you wish to use. And note that between 100 and 200 turns produce the Strongest Flux though you can go higher in relation to your input voltage and core size.
 Furthermore, you should separate each layers of your primary winding and secondary windings too with appropiate insulator which means an insulator as thich as the magnet wire you intent to use. But generally, plastic cellotape is better than paper. If the tape is not as thick as the gauge of your wire, simply re-tape the area over and over to achiece the desired thickness. Another advantage of using plastic tape is that it holds your windings firmly and that firmness aids high capacitance too and capacitive is one of the keys.

2. You cancel Lenz Law in your Set-up. This is a Major Key because onze you achieve this, then overunity is 70% bound to occur. So simply mould a the type of core Thanes Heins invented or if you wanna go the way of Mr. N. Ramaswani, then you wind one Primary Clockwise and the other primary anticlockwise to negate Lenze effect to pave way for the flow of Flux in the correct WAY.

Other things I'm considering is instead of using AC to power the System and therby such heavy Wattage, can't the Primary bé Pulsed with an High Voltage low amp input and still get AC at the secondary much like in inverter?

I think if this is possible then Optical Switch will bé employed to Switch the Primary and the Primary must bé wound with Thin Copper gauge or Heave Kilogram of say AWG#26 or #30 or #31 to allow for high resistance needed for High Voltage usage at vero low miliamp.

So in a nut shell the Primary will then bé using say 540VDC at 0.05A or even 1000VDC or higher depending on the Resistance of the Primary coil finished winding and still produce extremly powerful Flux to the well prepared Secondary(wind to form Capacitor) to produce upward of 1000W.

Another benefit in Pulsing the primary will bé the production and capturing of Radiant Energy which will help cool the system and further allows for complete Looping using Diodes and Capacitors that matches the voltage of the incomming Back EMF.

Most times, the Back EMF is always in Ten fold withouth you loosing ang forward amperage. So when you pulse your Primary with say 500V 5mAh, you will get as back EMF at least 500VX5mAhx10!!!

So all you need do is to make a Lenzless High Voltage stepdown transformer and connect it to your E.M.F Capaturing Capacitors and from the transformer to Rectifying diodes and from there to filter capacitors and from there to your Super Capacitor Bank and Or Battery provided the output Voltage from the H.V Lenzeless stepdown transformer fits your Bank charging Voltage.

All the way from Nigeria, Dare Diamond say hello to the Whole house.

NOTE: No human invention is perfect so also my sayings above. So they can bé modyfied for corrections where anyone think I am wrong.



 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on November 29, 2015, 04:17:26 AM
To generate High Otput Wattage in the Ramaswani great invention without inputing high wattage as high as 60W, High Voltage Pulsing DC is needed because Voltage is the Major Driver not the Current.

In High Voltage pulsed Motors, one of the ways to surpress lenze includes usage of High Voltage!!

 

To curb saturation of the core using DC, then buy powderd Iron from Chineese Manufactures if you can't get it in your countries local Iron manufacturing companies, 2-Part or 3-part Resin or.  Any other Epoxy and mix them together to Mould your core.

See people, moulded core can withstand Higher Voltage at Higher frequency or oscillation.

Use thin gauge for your Primaries.

When using Mosfet to Switch on and off the Primaries, connect in Parallel High Voltage AC Capacitors to Suck any B.E.M.F or Spike so as not to get your Mosfets fried!!

The extreme capacitance build-up in the primaries conditioned them excellently to absorb the Ambient Energy which multiplies the Output of the Secondaries Enormously. So YOU MUST use nothing less that 10 strands or even more as high as 30 to make your Primaries and connects there leads in SERIES.

Wind your primary in capacitor style by separating each layers with Plastic Tape( I have already stated the benefits in this)

Also, when winding your Primaries, make sure the strands falls side by side to increase the capacitance.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 29, 2015, 04:04:01 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 30, 2015, 02:33:57 AM
Hey guys, I'm following a hunch here.

If you look at the image, we have a phasor of a resistor in series with an inductor. Now a perfect inductor has inductance, and zero resistance. So ideally, devices based on inductors, such as a transformer, cause the current to lag the voltage by 90 degrees, due to high reactance.

However, because there is a resistance in series, the resistance offsets the reactance, causing the lag to be less than 90 degrees. So looking at the phasor again, if the resistance were higher than the reactance, we could eventually reach zero current lag.

So I'm starting to think the reason Figuera made his commutator was twofold.
1. So the exciter current could be powered by DC.
2. The variable resistor, and series of inducer coils, reduced or eliminated the reactance.

Getting into this, in his other motionless patent he mentions,
Quote
until the present, none has tried to change, at industrial scale, from zero, the magnetic power of the excitatory magnets or electromagnets of a running machine.
This strange quote seems that he implies alternating the exciter current of a generator to produce the same results. When considering the generators of the day, with their large exciter coils, what would the results be?

So, is it possible to create a generator, or simply a transformer, powered by AC? I'm curious to know if the turns ratio still applies if you had a larger resistance than reactance (zero current lag)? ???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 30, 2015, 10:02:48 AM
I think this is an easy way to get the two signals: using a magnet  (or DC inductor) + AC signals to modulate the strength of the final magnetic field. While one field is increasing in strength (adding the magnet field  plus de AC magnetic field) the other field is decreasing in strength (the AC field substracting from the magnet field). Later, when the AC is reversed, the situation is the contrary in each inducer. You will get two opposite signals.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 30, 2015, 01:42:40 PM
"I think this is an easy way to get the two signals: using a magnet  (or DC inductor) + AC signals to modulate the strength of the final magnetic field. While one field is increasing in strength (adding the magnet field  plus de AC magnetic field) the other field is decreasing in strength (the AC field substracting from the magnet field). Later, when the AC is reversed, the situation is the contrary in each inducer. You will get two opposite signals."

 That is pretty much how a magnetic amplifier works. A generator shifts the primary field to induce a secondary (the stator) without direct contact. Only the field is in contact with both in a generator. The signal would still have to be generated and the second source of power would have be generated to make the amplification. If the two forms of field use less power then they put out on the induced then your good to go. Figurea only used a small portion of the output to excite the moving field and turn the motor in the controller which is so much less then the output it could run itself indefinitely. There is ether a way for the stored power in the form of the magnetic field to remain constant as it is shifted from one inducer to the other minus a little bit for losses or the output is so large it can power the load plus all the required power to operate the effect causing the effect. Your still missing a couple of things which you will chip away at if you stay on track.
  I will save you one of them. Thinking in terms of a normal generator that rotates. A  single field from a electromagnet crosses through an air gap into a ring completing the magnetic circuit making it a closed path. Is there a constant force of attraction and how much force is there in ft lbs at all times as the magnet rotates? Or as I would view it what is the minimum and maximum amount of constant force required excluding the rotation since the rotation will be handled differently?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 30, 2015, 03:34:47 PM
In magnetic amplifiers the high power signal must be alternating. It can not be DC. You need to play with its impedance, so it has to be alternating. As the powerless signal, which govern the output pattern, is an aprox. 50 Hz signal for the Figuera´s device then the power signal must have a much higher frequency than the small signal and later be smoothed with a capacitor. Therefore the high power signal must be HF or kind so (400-500 Hz or more). This is my IMHO , as far as I understand the theory of those devices, because I have never seen any. As you can see I give answers, not cryptics clues as you tend to do in your posts


I am not currently doing tests, I stopped it. I won´t go into discussion. I just post to help others. Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on November 30, 2015, 04:56:38 PM
Hanon, that's a pretty good idea. The DC bias acts like the neutral zone, and the AC causes the rotation. But I'm going to say, as Doug mentioned the mag. amp., if the two AC coils were wired in parallel instead of series, the AC current would naturally go to one coil or the other instead of both. But this is all stuff that would need to be tested with experimentation.

Doug, you have some good questions, but that's what makes Figuera so interesting. As they say, energy is stored in the field. When the magnet is pushed to the coil, the torque is converted to the energy, or EMF, of the output coil. As the same thing happens when the magnet is pulled away from the coil. So it would seem that the magnetic energy remains mainly unchanged, and the torque is directly converted to the EMF. But in a different aspect, you could say that as the magnet is approaching one and leaving the other, they are both inducing EMF, which means twice the power.

But in the Figueras generador, and apparently his motionless patent before that, a changing magnetic field is used to do the same thing. And it was apparently a very small current. So what's the difference between his device and every other non moving device? Input reactance is the only thing I can see.

His device lacks reactance, and when the fields are changing, both fields are producing EMF, and that means with two exciter coils you get twice the power output, similar to a generator.

And this is why I'm now starting to look at resonant transformers. If a capacitor can quell the reactance, we can have current in phase with the voltage. Of course, a transformer is a transformer, so it would also require a second primary, or exciter coil, to increase the EMF.

Well anyway, you can replicate the device, or you can understand the device and replicate the method.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 30, 2015, 06:33:19 PM
Quote "until the present, none has tried to change, at industrial scale, from zero, the magnetic power of the excitatory magnets or electromagnets of a running machine".
Quote "This strange quote seems that he implies alternating the exciter current of a generator to produce the same results. When considering the generators of the day, with their large exciter coils, what would the results be?"

All Figueras is saying is that up until that time no one has varied the currant in the excitatory / Electromagnet to get the desired output. i also can't believe you said this "This strange quote seems that he implies alternating the exciter current of a generator"  Duh! that's what Most all of his patents have been saying..... he varied the currant in his electromagnets in an alternating fashion .... ie one high one low.

I personally think that hanon"s idea is not valid but who am i to get in the way of one man's research. i would tend to think that all human's have an enate history to over complicate EVERYTHING so i think i will stay on the track i am presently on. Figueras was a very simple man that built a simplex device that did not use Magnets in his design.
good luck to the both of you.
i have some design specs i will be posting later that can be used by everyone and tweeked to their liking.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 30, 2015, 07:00:23 PM
Hannon
 Zero cryptology then. The signal strength being amplified can be cascaded into any number of amplifiers to reach any output you feel inclined to reach. It is only similar ,there are differences.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 30, 2015, 07:26:11 PM
So how R we doing fellas..... getting along R we..... YES we R getting along R'nt we. everyone nod your head up and down.....thank you.
on that last post i said F-IT and will post all my goodies. just remember it can be tweeked so nothing is set in stone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 01, 2015, 07:58:15 PM
Wow, don't know how I missed the posts by darediamond before, but welcome to the forums, from one newb to another. I saw you posted a chapter by Patrick Kelly, but it would be wise to not put too much thought in his book. I'm just saying, he's another guy that pretty much spreads bad info, at least in my opinion.

Marathonman, I'd like to know why you think hanon's idea is not valid. It should produce the proper magnetic fields. The DC bias prevents reactance. The polarity of the coils prevents AC from developing in the DC winding, similar to a mag amp. And above all, there's only two controls, DC voltage, and AC voltage. So what's so complicated about it.

And this:
Quote
i would tend to think that all human's have an enate history to over complicate EVERYTHING so i think i will stay on the track i am presently on. Figueras was a very simple man that built a simplex device that did not use Magnets in his design.
good luck to the both of you.

Dude you are the king of over-complication. From the control board to the mag amp voltage control, all I see is complicated. But you're missing some of the foundation of the whole thing, like the reactance. I know we talk a lot about the "what-ifs" of the generator, but we're really going over the "whys" so we can understand the principles. Because if you don't get it right, you just might end up with a fancy transformer or inverter.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 01, 2015, 08:49:45 PM
antijon, some how this new guy's post were added after we posted. i don't know how but he did....weird huh !   guy rambles like ranswami did also. Arg!

anyways about Honon, he has his poles at the secondary the wrong way. if you have a North at one end and a south at the other end it will act as one magnet. like he said he doesn't test any more.

my control board is very simple as is my mag amp set up. i will not use Figueras commutator set up because i don't like it because it will wear out. if you think you can do better well more power to ya. all i am doing is sharing my research and can give a F-in rats ass if some simple minded person thinks it is over complicated. boo hoo ! use some thing else antijon, very simple.  I DO NOT CRITICIZE YOUR WORK OR Hanon's LIKE YOU JUST DID TO MINE.  all i said is i don't think it will work. if it does well good for him and you also if you use it.
i am using the mag amp style because it will be almost indestructible and no parts to wear out except for the very small control board which can be replaced in a few minutes and is cheap to build and implement . what is so complicated about that?   far more simple than Figueras Commutator set up.

i agree with you about Patrick's stuff, he post to much misinformation.
here is a little info about our wonderful magnetic poles.  pic below
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 02, 2015, 05:01:42 PM
I didn't criticize your idea but I will criticize that chip on your shoulder.

The point I was trying to make about your arrangement was that, when it comes down to it, it's just a transformer driver. Try to listen here, instead of just looking for another reason to curse at someone. You're producing AC and driving coils. That's all an inverter does.

But please, build it and test it out. I have enough experience to already know the outcome.... just like your transverse coil idea.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 02, 2015, 05:17:56 PM
That"s not what i read. to disagree is one thing to Rant and rave is another.

You're producing AC and driving coils.  EXPLAIN !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 02, 2015, 08:02:50 PM
Reactance. Due to self induction every coil powered by a changing current will exhibit reactance, whether it's pulsing Dc, or Ac.

In a generator, there is zero reactance. Because velocity increases emf, we can say that as a generator is turned faster, it produces more power. However, with a transformer, it's the opposite. As frequency increases, reactance increases and power transfer drops. This is due to current lag in the primary and the secondary load doesn't change this.

So you can feed a coil any voltage to make a transformer, but to make a generator it has to have voltage and current in phase. In your design, yes you can produce the proper dc pulses, but without correcting the reactance, as you increase frequency your power will drop.

The reason Figueras commutator is important is because it keeps the current in phase. I didn't realize it at the time, but I think I successfully replicated the Figuera generator with a sliding resistor. As the slider was moved faster, the output increased. This is also why I agreed with hanon's idea, the DC field prevents reactance. I'm just saying, there's a thin line between a generator and a transformer, but killing reactance is certainly a key.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 03, 2015, 01:13:40 AM
Muy bueno Antijon, ahora simplifica, incorpora… con condensador (atrasa), reactancia (adelanta),
Very good Antijon, now simplifies incorporates ... capacitor (delayed), reactance (forward)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 03, 2015, 05:38:23 AM
Yah!  good luck with that dogma education you have. you listen NOW !
MAGNETIC "AMPLIFIER" !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 04, 2015, 04:46:14 AM
Good name.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 04, 2015, 03:57:45 PM
Would any one know what the maximum flux a 99.8 pure iron bar can handle ? the sizes are 1.5 inch and 2.25 inch diameter.
i can't find ant thing on the internet worth beans and i would rather not guess in this area.
any help would be very much appreciated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 04, 2015, 05:41:14 PM
ignacio, thanks for the advice, but please explain.

marathonman, what do you mean by magnetic amplifier?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on December 04, 2015, 11:38:21 PM
here you go


(http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/BH_iron.png)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 05, 2015, 03:57:33 AM
here you go


(http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/BH_iron.png)

I need to know what amount of flux i need for a certain amount of volt and amps.  a BH curve does me nothing besides it is not a BH of pure Iron.....this i know.

antijon; the Figueras device is as Doug1 described. it is an amplifier in regards to the incoming signal as both halves are working together. as one is gaining the other is receding, but as it is receding it aids the Gaining electromagnet in the same direction lowering the amp draw on the gaining electromagnet and helping amplify the signal without direct interaction as would be if it was a south face electromagnet. see if it was an south face electromagnet it would interact with the north electromagnet and act as one magnetic bar with a north and south poles. there fore you could say it is a push pull amplifier
one half of the Secondary coil is negative and the other half is positive. that's why it is so important to get the spacing correct. that and the fact that the BEMF confronting the primary has a role also.
if you have a coil hit with a flux of 50 volts and so so many amps that is all you get but if half the coil is hit with 50 volts positive and the other half 50 volts negative then the net volts are 100.
thus you have it's named  "Variable Inductance Cascade Amplifier".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 05, 2015, 07:04:47 PM
I agree. And I think your phasing device is a good idea too. But you may not have to worry about saturation. Only experimenting will tell, but hypothetically, when one coil is increasing it will always face an opposing field until it reaches the maximum current, and the other reaches the minimum. So, the opposing field will always act as an impedance. Not to mention the load which will also act as an impedance.

I think what you mean is how much power you can get out of that core size, right? Maybe try this transformer calculator: http://www.giangrandi.ch/electronics/trafo/trafo.shtml
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 05, 2015, 07:14:09 PM
YES SIR, we are now on the same page !
yes that's what i mean and thanks for the link. their is no pure Iron in the bunch but it will do.
this is a good day in Figueras land.
well maybe not according to the calc tool it says i have to have a gigantic core and that cant be right ?????? ARG!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 06, 2015, 04:27:50 AM
Well, hypothetically, you could always increase the frequency to make up for small size. If it's true that increasing the commutator speed also increases EMF, then you could just run it at high frequency, rectify the output, and power a typical inverter for 60HZ.

But bare in mind that the calculator is for transformers. It's all about efficiency and maintaining low magnetization current, and preventing saturation. Some of these things may not apply.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 06, 2015, 02:31:52 PM
This is very true antijon, the calc tool was designed for a transformer not Figueras device so indeed certain parameters will not apply.
even the calc tool it's self is off as the core of Figueras device can be taken closer to saturation than a regular transformer core and retain zero magnetism.
he was smart in choosing pure iron for his cores as it's properties are amazing. i have read else where that iron can handle a higher frequency then what we have been led to believe. i can not remember where but it said that pure iron can be brought up to the multiple kilohertz range without ill effects.
 i myself will stick to the 60 hz range because i previously designed the whole system for 400 plus hz and found that the price was to high for all the parts to build it. the inverter alone is 2500 to 3000 plus step down transformer, cap bank, high power diode bridge ect..... i found a company that specializes in s high amperage transformers ie... 48 volt/300 amp and the price is not for the faint at heart.
so that lead me to stick to 60 hz and tie it to a 480 240/120 v transformer and be happy about it.  found that on ebay for 350.

that's why my design spec's was the way it is because once the distance is set between the primaries and secondary then the center supports are cut to that exact thickness and no other measurement is needed because it's all ready set for the rest of the cores. also the reason the core doesn't go to the to the end of the primary is it is Not needed. why spend extra money when one doesn't have to because you are using only one pole in this set up. now it will be different for the 1914 patent because both ends are utilized.  also in my design spec's were the fact that very high opposing forces are present in Figueras device so caution must be taken to completely secure this device. that is why i chose two center supports and large end caps secured on a very sturdy base. if a part was to come loose when someone was standing near they could quite possibly loose their life.

another thing is the magnetization will not drop that much in a straight core of iron so the BEMF from the secondary can be aligned to the primary (Phasing) as not to collide with each other. just like in Hanon's video where he brought the hall sensor back to align the signal. if the BEMF from the secondary was aligned as to hit the primary when it is coming down when the primary was coming up then the signal would more than likely aide the primary not hinder or at the least be reduced to the point the primary might not see it.
just a thought
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 07, 2015, 04:44:36 PM
before everyone gets their panties in a uproar about my design spect's i think you need to reread this statement from the Figueras Patent.
it simply states that the Primary can have it's own core or it can be in contact with it's poles....meaning in contact with it's North poles.... or South if your device uses them.
I have a pic to see what i mean.....if you interpret it differently well more power to ya cause i don't want to hear flack about it.
if you build it either way it will STILL WORK JUST THE SAME,   just one way will save on core material and the other won't
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 07, 2015, 08:17:29 PM
I have also been studying the wave form and pole reversals with an Geek friend of mine with Magnets and Electromagnets and we have the same thoughts about the switching and pole reversals. as each Primary is switched from High to low then at the mid way down it is switched High again never seeing Zero the polarity switches EVERY TIME. that is each half of the Secondary switches polarity 60 times a second or if your in a 50 hz Country it's 50 times a second.
take a North magnet and shove it into a coil with a amp meter attached and see what will take place. the coil/amp meter will read currant moving in one direction. then pull the same magnet out of the coil and what do you get. the currant is in the opposite direction. why did it reverse currant you ask ? BECAUSE IT REVERSED POLARITY !  you don't even have to pull the magnet out all the way when you shove it back in and it will do the same thing, currant reversal/pole reversal.
Now do the same thing to an Electromagnet and tell me what is going to happen. the currant is going to act the same as the magnet did causing pole reversal/ currant reversal all day long. certain people seemed to think that this very undeniable fact can be ignored, forgotten or just plain glossed over......WRONG ANSWER !
so another words one end will see N,S.N,S,N,S while the other end will see S,N,S,N,S,N ect.....ect.....ect....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 08, 2015, 05:35:58 PM
uh, marathonman, you probably expected me to say something, but in every AC system (generator, transformer, whatever) the current* changes direction every 1/4 wave.

I don't know exactly what you're trying to say here, but no, the poles don't reverse at every peak, only at the central section. The induced field changes direction, but the induced field is never a literal field, it's only a resistance to the change of the field you are applying to the coil.

*Currant = fruit
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on December 08, 2015, 06:11:47 PM
I am new to this forum and have read the posts dated prior to October 2014. You people have really put forth some good stuff. So far, I have not seen a simple, low power circuit that provides 90 degree out of phase excitations for the Figuera 1908 patent. Therefore, I present the following for your consideration. I hope you find it useful.

Attached is a drawing of a circuit whose inputs connect to the count pulse outputs of the CD4017 circuit provided by Patrick Kelly. Each output pulse simultaneously drives the bases of two NPN 2N222 transistors. Each base draws 2.4 ma. The counter outputs are rated for 10 ma, so they are not overloaded. There are sixteen transistors in all. The transistors sequentially ground connecting points in two different strings of series resistors in the adjustment circuits of two LM317T adjustable voltage regulators to provide two quasi-sinusoidal outputs that are ninety degrees out of phase.

Each output is capable of supplying 1.7 Amps. The LM317Ts can handle up to 37 volts DC. If greater current is required, the outputs can be used to provide input signals to emitter followers or other high power devices such as DC drives - assuming the acceleration circuits can be adjusted to permit the rapid response required for this circuit.

The resistors are selected to simulate the equivalent of a 90 degree segment of a sine wave. The values progress from small to large in both strings. The sequence of grounding in one string progresses from small to large, and the grounding sequence in the other string progresses from large to small, thus producing outputs that are 90 degrees out of phase.

If you check the application notes of the LM317T, you will find that they suggest a different circuit for digital output selection. I chose not to use it because the required watt ratings of the small resistors were larger then those of the circuit I used. This is shown in the attached spreadsheet.

I have not yet built the complete circuit. I have built half of the circuit powered by 12 VDC to verify that the LM317T can respond fast enough. It does. However, I do not yet have a completely satisfactory working circuit. The attached oscilloscope picture of one of the waveforms shows that there is a problem in one of the counter circuits that causes some of the segments not to appear. I have not yet fixed this, but suspect that a couple of diodes are malfunctioning as I have seen similar problems while getting this device working.

I would appreciate any suggestions for improvements to this circuit.
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 08, 2015, 09:56:10 PM
  And Figueras device is "every AC System" RIGHT. i have my own opinion and you have yours. i am done explaining, researching, expressing,  the bottom line is the Figueras Device is solved in general and all one needs to do is build it. all the little particulars can be argued for months but i will not indulge in that.
95% of my idea's were mine but i did have some guidance from someone that has had a working device for over a year now and i thank him VERY MUCH for dropping hints here and there.
in my design i widened the outer caps so to bolt down, used 1/2 inch thick center supports and added a clear Acrylic top for support and protection. i also added temperature controlled fans to the ends for thermal control. i also designed the self powering system and circuits but other than that all i need to do is wait for the rest of the money to build it. as i build i will post on youtube for other to see.
I can say it was a good journey over the last year and a half and i enjoyed it thoroughly.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 09, 2015, 12:26:49 AM
lol
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 09, 2015, 02:49:30 PM
I am new to this forum and have read the posts dated prior to October 2014. You people have really put forth some good stuff. So far, I have not seen a simple, low power circuit that provides 90 degree out of phase excitations for the Figuera 1908 patent. Therefore, I present the following for your consideration. I hope you find it useful.

Attached is a drawing of a circuit whose inputs connect to the count pulse outputs of the CD4017 circuit provided by Patrick Kelly. Each output pulse simultaneously drives the bases of two NPN 2N222 transistors. Each base draws 2.4 ma. The counter outputs are rated for 10 ma, so they are not overloaded. There are sixteen transistors in all. The transistors sequentially ground connecting points in two different strings of series resistors in the adjustment circuits of two LM317T adjustable voltage regulators to provide two quasi-sinusoidal outputs that are ninety degrees out of phase.

Each output is capable of supplying 1.7 Amps. The LM317Ts can handle up to 37 volts DC. If greater current is required, the outputs can be used to provide input signals to emitter followers or other high power devices such as DC drives - assuming the acceleration circuits can be adjusted to permit the rapid response required for this circuit.

The resistors are selected to simulate the equivalent of a 90 degree segment of a sine wave. The values progress from small to large in both strings. The sequence of grounding in one string progresses from small to large, and the grounding sequence in the other string progresses from large to small, thus producing outputs that are 90 degrees out of phase.

If you check the application notes of the LM317T, you will find that they suggest a different circuit for digital output selection. I chose not to use it because the required watt ratings of the small resistors were larger then those of the circuit I used. This is shown in the attached spreadsheet.

I have not yet built the complete circuit. I have built half of the circuit powered by 12 VDC to verify that the LM317T can respond fast enough. It does. However, I do not yet have a completely satisfactory working circuit. The attached oscilloscope picture of one of the waveforms shows that there is a problem in one of the counter circuits that causes some of the segments not to appear. I have not yet fixed this, but suspect that a couple of diodes are malfunctioning as I have seen similar problems while getting this device working.

I would appreciate any suggestions for improvements to this circuit.
Sam6
Well  Sam6 it seams that you have not put out any effort because if you did you would of read ALL the post. see if you would of read ALL the post you would be up to date on everything and realize people Have posted low power circuits over a year ago and months ago. my circuit is 5 volt, is that low enough for you.
Besides their are to many ways to electronically drive the Figueras device, what you should be doing is concentrating on it's operation (what makes it tick) in which you know nothing because you did not read the post.  how in the world do you expect to solve ANY problem without ALL the information available . that's like butting in on a conversation offering a solution that you know nothing about.
Welcome to the forum by the way.
all information posted in the last month will give one enough knowledge to build a working Figueras device...... some just can't see it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 09, 2015, 03:33:35 PM
Here is everything one needs to get a working Figueras Device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 09, 2015, 07:57:14 PM
Here is an assembled top view of Figueras device using round bar iron with short core and long core. bolts on end cap and set screws on center core supports.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 09, 2015, 11:30:16 PM

Sam, Darediamond:


Welcome to the forum.


Sam: Take your time to read all the posts, there too much info. I remember that in october 2014 I posted a very interesting video


Darediamond: your statement about requiring a thick insulation in the inducers is surprising. I have also read that in Cater´s  book (design of the Hubbard generator) and in the patent by Daniel McFarland Cook. Could you explain a little deeper your proposal or your findings?




Marathonman:  Could you elaborate the quote copied below? Is it really a working device?  When did you started to show the working device design? Your design has evolved in the two last months from transverse coils to in-line induced coils. Is there really someone that has a generator working?

i did have some guidance from someone that has had a working device for over a year now and i thank him VERY MUCH for dropping hints here and there.


Lastly I do not post many times. I saw your Mag Amplifier design and I think it wont work as you think: you can not feed power AC and modulate it at 50-60 Hz. You can not feed a 50-60 Hz power signal and modulated it with a 50-60 Hz signal. You need to use a much higher frequency AC signal in the power signal in order to be able to modulate it at 50-60 Hz with your board circuit, and later smoth that HF modulated signal with a cap. Just my thought. I already covered the subject of magnetic amplifier in january 2014. Later I just saw that the AC input must be HF. See this post: [size=78%]http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg383123/#msg383123 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg383123/#msg383123)[/size]



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 10, 2015, 12:15:52 AM
Your design has evolved in the two last months from transverse coils to in-line induced coils. Is there really someone that has a generator working?

"Yes"  there is and that why my design changed. and NO i will not divulge his name....only he can do that.
if you build it with the currant specs it will work.
My mag amp operates at 400hz Hanon some thing i missed to inform. ops !
and your correct about the smoothing caps...... very small one though. you said you couldn't incorporate it into Figueras Device so you gave up. well i did and i posted it.
Figueras, simplified Genius.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 10, 2015, 12:31:07 AM
I guess that it is important to avoid magnetic leakage in the geometrical configuration of the coils. I tend to think that piling the 7 or 8 single groups is to get a shorter  path for the magnetic lines from one induced coil to the one close to it. For that reason I think that maybe Figuera used a series of  rectangular coils, not cylindrical, more like plates piled one after another to create a short path from one coil to the one next to it. What do you think of this?  A simple design for two group system will be with two electromagnet and two induced coils :


-----
|    |
N   S
|    |
|    |
N   S
|    |
-----

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: EMJunkie on December 10, 2015, 02:13:05 AM
Thank you Chris Sykes, i admire your work and appreciate your in put. I am curious as to why you wanted me to download this as i have an earlier one that i have been studying that is the information that was available to Figueras. i have downloaded it and have been reading it but i must admit it is the same info that is in the earlier version.
is their any specific section that you think i need to study.?????... if there is please let me know
i have also been studying all other patents and have come to the conclusion that all are right about the coil orientation. i have also possibly uncovered another clue to his device and it have to do with Hanon's delay effect.
in most of the patents the cores that were drawn were very long in proportion to the coils and with this set up a delay effect would take place.
also i would like to bring up that the secondary cut away in the first pic. notice that the primary is cut away also. could this be that the primary core was hollow to allow for an adjustment of some kind as in to get the exact delay effect Hanon was referring.  if you look at the other patents you will see that all of them have a long secondary core except two that have no core drawn.
first pic is my point
other pics are of long cores.

the last line on the right is suppose to be 'induced' not enduced and Sorry for the stupid large pic !

Ps. my materials i ordered have still not come in and i am really P O ed. so i haven't been able to do any test.

@Marathonman - No, no reason, just was there if you needed it.

Keep up the good work!

Take the words of Clemente FIGUERA seriously, he knew what he was looking for:

Quote

PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION
Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns, while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.

Ref: PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267 (Spain)


Science tells us Electrical Energy is "Generated" in an Electrical "Generator" - Energy is never ever "Generated"!!! Charge is separated and this is seen as a "Generation" of Electrical Energy.

Good Luck!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

P.S: Sorry for the late reply.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 10, 2015, 04:27:44 AM
 Thanks EMJunkie i appreciate kind words.

Yes Figueras knew that he had to mimic those exact motions in his stationary device that is why he chose to raise and lower the currant in his electromagnets.... utter Genius.

Hanon; it can't be that way because if it was with the two different poles next to each other the flux leakage would be so bad that hardly any power would be created. the flux would jump across to the other pole and not through the core. they are as you have stated before ( NN) not one but all of them. the entire device has to be all N or all S not both. no where in his patent does it say anything about polarity, people just (assumed ) it was before investigating. by being the same polarity on the opposite end and taken down it helps amplify the incoming signal without interacting with the other electromagnet. if the other electromagnet was a south pole the entire core and electromagnets would act as one. even if it was next to it it would lets say magnetic short circuit if you will. this is not what we want.
the rest of what you say is right but i can't justify the cost of square pure iron that is why i choose bar iron. easy to assemble to.
of course laminated can be used as i was so informed but i really want the most bang for my buck if you know what i mean.

NNNNNNNN
NNNNNNNN

be good everyone and happy Figuering !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 10, 2015, 06:28:10 AM
Hey Sam, thanks for sharing. Great waveform too. I see you get the basics of the modulation, and why it's required. I don't know electronics, but I don't really see any need for improvement. If you decide to test it, maybe with a transformer with know turns ratios, I'd be interested in the results.  ;D

Hanon, as far as the original coil design, I think we talked about it in the past, but is "reels" of induced coils the proper translation? In his previous motionless patent, he mentioned that it resembles an induction coil in principle, so we know that he was familiar with induction coils.

From wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_coil
Quote
the secondary coil is wound in many thin flat pancake-shaped sections (called "pies"), connected in series. The primary coil is first wound on the iron core, and insulated from the secondary with a thick paper or rubber coating. Then each secondary subcoil is connected to the coil next to it, and slid onto the iron core,

I know the article is about induction coils, but Figuera may have used the term "reels" to refer to previously rolled coils that were slid onto the iron rod.

Also heard Paul Babcock say, if you want to use iron for cores go to an ammo shop and buy soft iron birdshot for shotguns. He said he used acrylic to coat the shot then formed it in molds.
This is what I'm talking about: http://www.ballisticproducts.com/Steel-Shot-8-bag_10/productinfo/SH08/
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 10, 2015, 11:35:34 PM
Marathonman,


I find difficult to believe that someone has a working device, and he just contacted you in order to help you and he do not want to help the rest of users. Sorry but you are not the kindest person to deal with if someone do not share your ideas. That person supposedly told you his findings while you were trying another design.  I can guess that you surely did not accept those finding at first. I refer to your mood just by watching your behaviour with some users as NRamaswami, Darediamond, Sam, Antijon or even me when some of us just posted discrepancies with you transverse coil design (now abandoned by you) or just by advising you of some weak points to take into consideration as I tried to do. I will love to believe you and I would love to know that somebody had discovered the key. That was my aim by sharing all this in this thread. But I can not get it how you could have access to such info.


Antijon,


The translation is fine. Figuera used some old words that are not currently in use in spanish electromagnetism jargon. For example he used sometimes the word "carrete" (reel) a word that today is not in use and everybody tend to use the word "bobina" (coil) instead. Anyway I copied the original spanish text in order anyone could improve the translation if required. You may try to re-translate any parragraph with Google translator. I really think that the key is not hidden in some special word. I tend to think that the real key are the polarity and the geometrical dimensions and placement of the coils.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 11, 2015, 03:48:50 AM
Marathonman,


I find difficult to believe that someone has a working device, and he just contacted you in order to help you and he do not want to help the rest of users. Sorry but you are not the kindest person to deal with if someone do not share your ideas. That person supposedly told you his findings while you were trying another design.  I can guess that you surely did not accept those finding at first. I refer to your mood just by watching your behaviour with some users as NRamaswami, Darediamond, Sam, Antijon or even me when some of us just posted discrepancies with you transverse coil design (now abandoned by you) or just by advising you of some weak points to take into consideration as I tried to do. I will love to believe you and I would love to know that somebody had discovered the key. That was my aim by sharing all this in this thread. But I can not get it how you could have access to such info.

Well i can't really deny anything you said except about the person in question.  i was the one that pmed  him because of some of the clues he dropped to us that no one ever thought twice about except ME apparently.  so i pmed more and found out he has had a device for over a year now and he shared much, much more to me. that is why my design took a radical turn.  i do not know why he won't share, i haven't a clue in the world.  i really don't care or want to care why. it really wouldn't bother me if this server crashed tomorrow but one thing i did do is shared everything he relayed to me to everyone on this forum.
the information posted over the last month will allow someone to build a Figueras device.  open your mind and really look especially at my last few post and you will know, if not well i can't help that only God can.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on December 11, 2015, 06:03:39 AM
 ;) Thanks Marathon
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 11, 2015, 07:13:25 AM
You're right, Hanon. The key to his invention is his method. No reactance on the inducers producing real power, and the 90 degree pulses which create a large B field that changes incredibly fast. I'm still planning to test your design, BTW.

All in all, this process has made me think about how we understand concepts today. In this device, or any coil powered by AC that has no reactance, we consider that real power, not reactive power as in a transformer. In terms of a generator, this real power is what they use to gauge the exciter power by in ampere-turns. Because, of course, if the power were reactive then no power would really be used.

But in the same sense, modern terms confuse things. As we know, a coil's inductive reactance can be corrected, either by a resistance in series, or by capacitive reactance in series. We say that this corrects the power factor by bringing the current and voltage in phase, to produce real power. However, we have also mystified this by calling it a resonant circuit. Now we imagine radio towers and Tesla. But in reality, any inductive device can be matched with a capacitor to nullify reactance. Even a 60HZ transformer. Of course I don't know what the output would look like, or what the turns ratio would do. But I can guarantee it would be creating a B field based on the ampere-turns that changes polarity 60 times a second.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 11, 2015, 05:14:00 PM
Here is a little info one might want to read.

This is taken off of hanon's link he posted and help translate; http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

 " In the two patents can be seen how ingeniously and by mechanical methods, the engineer tried to generate electrical energy inside a coil by varying the flow of two opposite and opposing magnetic fields, trying to get into the machine the same characteristic behavior of a conventional generator, but without moving parts".

this sounds like 180 Degrees and two NN Electromagnets to me, or SS if you so desire. think ?

this is Quote from patent;
"In short, the resistance makes the function of a splitter of current because those current not going to excite some electromagnets excites others and so on; it can be said that electrodes N and S works simultaneously and in opposite way because while the first ones are filling up with current, the seconds are emptying and while repeating this effect continuously and orderly a constant variation of the magnetic fields within which is placed the induced circuit can be maintained.

again this kinda sounds like 180 Degrees to me. think ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 11, 2015, 06:42:02 PM
Marathonman, the coils are located at 180 degrees but the excitation current is such that the two currents overlap before going to zero volts. This is 90 degrees electrically. Hanon provided a good image of the waveform in this post: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg456798/#msg456798
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 12, 2015, 02:31:56 AM
Top pic Sine/cosine @ 90 Degrees.

Bottom pic Hanon's  Sine/Sine @ 180 Degrees.

Come again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 12, 2015, 04:02:26 AM
haha, yeah that's 2 phase AC, full wave. And what would it look like if you rectified that wave to a DC current? See Hanon's image.

Look we can argue about the semantics, but 180 degree is different in both phase and polarity than Figuera's wave. In AC circuits, 180 degrees refers to polarity or phase. The image appears the same as Figuera's, but it's 180 degrees in polarity. One is fully positive, the other fully negative. The currents would be equal and opposite, and in Figuera's inducers, would cancel each other. Not the same as one fully positive, the other zero, where the net B field will be in one direction.

The bottom image shows an AC current rectified. The DC pulses are 180 degrees apart in phase. If Figuera used this waveform to power his inducers, the combined magnetic fields would produce an AC wave, and the behavior would resemble a transformer. But lucky for us, Figuera described his commutator as producing currents that increase and decrease at the same time. 180 degree phase doesn't do that, only 90 degree phase does.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 12, 2015, 06:31:18 AM
Top pic Sine/cosine @ 90 Degrees.

Bottom pic Hanon's  Sine/Sine @ 180 Degrees.

Come again.

where in this post do you see arguing?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 12, 2015, 06:51:44 AM
seams simple to me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on December 12, 2015, 01:05:11 PM
seams simple to me.


I spent quite a bit of time studying the original patent which had the rotating brushes feeding the DC to the coils.  I am convinced your drawing of the 180 degree shift of current is correct.  It also agrees with the statement that one signal is increasing as the other is decreasing.  Since he was only using a DC source the signals could never cross below the zero line which also agrees with your drawing.  Thanks for posting that.  It should help a lot of people understand how to power the coils.

Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 12, 2015, 09:27:32 PM
seams simple to me.
Fine. Whatever makes it easier for you to understand.  ;) But know that I'm done pandering to your egocentricity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 13, 2015, 10:20:03 PM
you sound like a spoiled 10 year old, ha,ha,ha.
you need to get off your high almighty horse and realize Figueras devise IS NOT a regular transformer that you so deemed yourself some kind of authority on the subject.
NO ONE in this forum is an authority on free energy especially the Figueras Device.
IF you don't like what i post, DON"T FUCKING READ IT.
but know this you will never ever get a working device in the direction you are going. the info i posted in the last month was past to me to get a working device weather you like it or not.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 13, 2015, 10:24:42 PM
citfta; thank you for the kind words and yes that is why i posted it so everyone can realize what is going on with the coils. just remember that the coils are not taken all the way down to zero.
all the info i posted in the last month will get everyone a working device.

Good luck and happy Building,
Donald
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on December 13, 2015, 11:47:33 PM
collecting near zero is a waste of time.
The top 1/3rd is where the most can be collected.
The more coils you add , the more 1/3rd's you have, also the more kick-back spikes.
Equal's more output.
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 14, 2015, 10:17:14 AM
Based on the configuration that Marathonman is describing maybe it could be better to order the electromagnets poles and induced coils in such a way to maximize the magnetic strength of the electromagnets and reduce the open magnetic path of the magnetic lines jumping from one core to the next one: I mean using rectangular induced cores and pilling up all of them close to each other. With same polarity confronted I tend to think that magnetic lines just will be expelled from the induced core when they crash in the center. I think it will not be leakage between adjacent induced coils because the reluctance of air is much much higher than that of the iron core and magnetic lines will jump from one core to another when they are forced by the confronting field.


What dou you think? It is another variation to test which may enhance the system performance. Just my thought.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 14, 2015, 07:24:49 PM
 In the vid there are a few interesting things if you keep in mind the date of figurea and image of part G and the resisters. I think it was mentioned a part was ordered from somewhere not the islands.In the course of time things advance, designs change. Why use a resister contraption when a core will work better?If you cant find the G spot ,what good are you? Spoons never included.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pEmpvcNmXg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pEmpvcNmXg)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 14, 2015, 08:59:09 PM
you sound like a spoiled 10 year old, ha,ha,ha.
you need to get off your high almighty horse and realize Figueras devise IS NOT a regular transformer that you so deemed yourself some kind of authority on the subject.
NO ONE in this forum is an authority on free energy especially the Figueras Device.
IF you don't like what i post, DON"T FUCKING READ IT.
but know this you will never ever get a working device in the direction you are going. the info i posted in the last month was past to me to get a working device weather you like it or not.

Don't direct your comments and profanity at me you stupid, arrogant, bumbling ignoramus.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 14, 2015, 10:58:01 PM
Thank you Antijon and merry Christmas to you.

Thanks Doug very good video. i will watch more of him. a mag amp or core as you say can do many, many thing people on this forum are not aware of like  Amplify, Regulate, Relays, Saturable Reactors, Currant Limiter, Servo's, Timers, Converter/Inverter's, Oscillators, Phase shift, Multivibrators,  and many others.
my control board will operate at 5 volt,  12 volt for magamp @ millivolt range to control my 1 amp variation so this allows me to use Flat ribbon cable which is cheap.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 15, 2015, 12:19:10 PM
I found it this past week end Doug1.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 15, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
Time ago, an user, madddann, developed a simple circuit to create the two opposite signals just by using two transformers with intermediate tap and a diode bridge. It is very simple:


http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/#msg394315 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/#msg394315)




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 16, 2015, 04:29:07 AM
you posted something different from what he posted, just so you know.
Here is a square core design as you were referring to Hanon.
second pic Buforn 1914 patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 16, 2015, 05:32:12 AM
Based on the configuration that Marathonman is describing maybe it could be better to order the electromagnets poles and induced coils in such a way to maximize the magnetic strength of the electromagnets and reduce the open magnetic path of the magnetic lines jumping from one core to the next one: I mean using rectangular induced cores and pilling up all of them close to each other. With same polarity confronted I tend to think that magnetic lines just will be expelled from the induced core when they crash in the center. I think it will not be leakage between adjacent induced coils because the reluctance of air is much much higher than that of the iron core and magnetic lines will jump from one core to another when they are forced by the confronting field.


What dou you think? It is another variation to test which may enhance the system performance. Just my thought.

hi hanon just reading the 190 pages of this not half way yet. just wanted to say great work you did on the history of this and the man.

good to see you stuck with this, i have some ideas but as i don't have all the info yet i will not comment and save you repeating yourself but can i ask:

- Was this reproduced
- was it reproduced in the analogue or only attempted with digital conversion?

in the very first pages there has been much talk about the stepper system to produce a Sine.

Regards.

oh one other question are there any existing photographs of the 'original' device?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 16, 2015, 06:30:11 AM
Hanon here is my contribution so far :

feel free to ignore this if it has been covered previously:

see attached.

so it seems to me to try to attempt a 'digital' conversion of this system you would need to:

- generate the correct sine wave.
- Then experiment with break / no break connection also the timing on the brush etc.
- run that Sine pulse to a V wound inductor with the relevant winding but with taps at each stage. (this is the pre inductor/resistor)
- this is not to be underestimated as the taps position on the inductor and the fact that the inductor is wholly connected  and even the Degree at which each inductor meets at the V coudl be important. 
- then those taps go to the electromagnet.
- try a complete isolated Emag or a 'common core' type. 

PS 'R' could also men 'Resonator' but it may likely mean resistor.

when i first saw the picture I first thought it said resonator as it made more sense as an inductive resonator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 16, 2015, 02:24:44 PM
digitalindustry;

Referring to the comment about the resistor unit. Figueras refers it as a splitter of currant and not an inductor.  spreading out resistive wire in this fashion would have no inductive value at all and would seem that he was trying to get as much wire as he could in a small space while maintaining heat dissipative value.

it has already been shown and says so in the device patent that it can have a common core or separate cores if so desired. the core is not shown in this pic you posted but Buforn shown in all his patents.  i have posted on this subject and made this aware to the forum.

a make before you break set up would give someone the impression that he was trying to avoid inductive collapse in his set up and would be detrimental to this device and destroy the magnetic fields he was trying to build up and maintain in the core. as was passed to me once the field is brought up to a certain level it is easy to maintain it with little amperage.  even though it would create power in the collapse the Amplifying properties of the two primary cores would be destroyed and this is not what we want.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 16, 2015, 03:31:46 PM
digitalindustry;

Referring to the comment about the resistor unit. Figueras refers it as a splitter of currant and not an inductor.  spreading out resistive wire in this fashion would have no inductive value at all and would seem that he was trying to get as much wire as he could in a small space while maintaining heat dissipative value.

it has already been shown and says so in the device patent that it can have a common core or separate cores if so desired. the core is not shown in this pic you posted but Buforn shown in all his patents.  i have posted on this subject and made this aware to the forum.

a make before you break set up would give someone the impression that he was trying to avoid inductive collapse in his set up and would be detrimental to this device and destroy the magnetic fields he was trying to build up and maintain in the core. as was passed to me once the field is brought up to a certain level it is easy to maintain it with little amperage.  even though it would create power in the collapse the Amplifying properties of the two primary cores would be destroyed and this is not what we want.

1. if you don't think that set of coils would have inductance maybe you should familiarize yourself with an induction meter or learn about induction?
also not only would they have induction but it would have variable inductive capacitance.

2. ok i'll ref to the patent it seems to make sense for them to be separate, but ok thank you.

3. that's not what i asked, i asked if it specifically stated 'make before break', because assumption being the mother of all fuck-ups of course.
who says it's 'not what we want' who is 'we' ?
do 'we' have a functioning device? can you link me to the video?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 16, 2015, 03:33:10 PM
deleted - error
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 16, 2015, 08:23:36 PM
maybe you should familiarize yourself with an induction meter or learn about induction.

I have  an Induction meter and am reading more as we speak. i am curious as to what you are attempting to hypothesize in relation to the Figueras device.

Yes there are working Devices but unfortunately they don't wan't to post completely. of the one's i know of they are very cryptic.

ok, take out the word "we" then read it.

all i can say is good luck.

Happy Figuering to all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 16, 2015, 08:39:35 PM
here is something Hanon in relation to Sine and Sine 180 for those who are pursuing that. notice the phase relationship to one another.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on December 16, 2015, 09:53:34 PM
Hanon:

I must apologize for asking this question.. Did you test the set up you propose or is it just a proposal as I suspect without experimental observation and results..Please advise. I believe you would only get zero volts in that arrangement.

One Learned Member asked me for some clarifications. I do not do the research any more. No funds. I focus on my practice only. Had not been to this forum until your email.

Let me repost the reply I gave to Mr. Diamond below so it can benefit all.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Sir:

I do not know Electronics stuff. Patrick Kelly tried his best to teach me but I could not do it and the transistors we used could not handle high currents.

The diagrams at page 190 are dead wrong. They would produce zero voltage. I used plain simple 50 Hz Ac.

I have attempted to use Pulsed DC using diode bridge rectifier but the problem is when you do that there is no resistance in the coils and the primary draws massive amperage from the mains and the mains trip. I used 4 sq mm wire and in a coil I was warned that 4 sq mm wire should not be used to carry more than 12 amps. The 24 to 29 amps stated by different manufactuers are for straight line transmission of electricity and not in a coil.

The device is simple and does not require the commutator. Unless you use the exact system that Figuera used.

I'm advised that the theory is that if pulsed DC is set to remain full positive sign wave rectified current with the wave does not go to the negative side and remaining above 5 always the magnetic field will not collapse. if the magnetic field does not collapse there is no back emf and if there is no backemf no lenz law effect.

However the same thing can be easily achieved in AC as well. The only thing you start the current in Primary one at the corner of NP1 and carry it to NP2, NP3 and NP4 etc..The voltage will now divide.

To avoid Lenz law in the opposite side SP1, SP2, SP3, SP4 primaries you give the current in from SP4 corner maintain the same NS-NS-NS polarity. What happens is current is strongest at NP1 and SP4 and progressively it becomes weaker and weaker. So the magnetic core remains as NS-NS-NS (the middle NS denotes the secondary) and outer ones the primaries. If you look at Figiuera drawing you will see that the current is  being given at one corner (top corner and from the opposite bottom corner for the other primary). This creates a variation of the magntic flux for the field strength is continuously decreasing in one side and increasing in the opposite respective core. This is how current is varied.

Now the goal is to reduce the input current and take out a higher output.

This is easily achieved in AC if you multifilar coils ( the increasing inductive impedance will nto even allow the current to pass through primary wires and ultimately you will only be able to draw about 0.5 amps or less at the 220 volts mains input if you do this properly. You would need about 10 to 14 filar coils for this. Smaller the primary wire higher the resistance or impedance to AC and so the amperage drawn will be less. However as the number of turns of wire is increased the magnetic field strength is very substantial even at low amperage input.

Magnetic field strength = Amperage x No of turns per unit length.

This magnetic field strength reduces in the N side and increases in the S side. So if one N primary is strong the corresponding S primary is weak and so you have a variation of the current. This variation in the flux causes the induction in the center.

I have seen that we must use thicker wires capable of carrying high current in the secondary and thin wires that have high resistance or impedance and that will create a significant block to the AC input drawn.

The current is given to the whole system as a normal Solenoid. The difference is the solenoids are dissected and the current is given at two different ends.

If you use pulsed DC then you must use low voltage as otherwise the current drawn is very high. Because there is no impendance to pusled DC in the coils.

If you use AC you must use high voltage as the wires provide increasing impedance to AC. That eliminates all the reuirements for the complicated equipment.

The output increase is attributed to Earth batteries or Earth supplying higher ions as two points of earth are having voltage diffference. The earth points are filled with Iron and Carbon and salt and water. Therefore what we have inside the Earth is essentially an earth battery albeit a large one. we connect to such Earth batteries. We artificially cretate a high potential difference and this results in the ion flowing through wire from the earth batteries. This will continue until the Electrode is corroded and the chemical reaction can no longer take place. However I'm advised that if we use High Grade stell 316L steel that will not be corrodded or Titanium for the electrodes the action can continue for a long time as long as the Earth batteries are kept wet. 

The only thing that we do is to create a large magnetic field using low input current. that is where the multifilar coils come.

Figuera to avoid the high current that would be drawn by the DC current supplied used the rotary device to interrupt the DC current to make it pulsed DC. He then used the high ohmic resistor array to reduce the current that will be drawn from the battery. Rest of the system is as stated above.

There is no need for Electronics or Mosfets this and that here. it is simple system. I do not have funds. I tried to get funds to continue the research but could not get any funds. So I have dropped the project.

Learned people are disadvantaged because they are learned people and they tend to apply their theories. Because I'm not a learned person in Magnetism or Electricity I did the experiments and noted the results and I have learnt what works, why it works and what would not work.

But to me most people appear to be making drawings and assuming that magnetism will behave this way or that way without doing actual experiments, making observations and then posting results. And I'm not used to indulge in abusive language practices and no point in wasting time here was the idea.  So I have left.

The drawing Hanon shows is against nature and will not work.  We must follow the Nature. A bar Magnet has a North pole at one end and a south pole at another end. I'm aware that the North Pole contains a small amount of south pole element and the South Pole contains a small amount of North Pole element. I must apologize to Hanon for this.

There are no funds here to experiment. We have tried to obtain Government grants. Again No funds in Government. We are going through a recesssion and for my survival I'm only focussing on my practice.

There is an advanced version of this device that is evident at first look but Figuera has not disclosed it. If and when time and money permits I will do it. I will also post this on the forum.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would in all humility request the Learned members to see that I'm a Lawyer. Not an Electrical or Electronics Engineer. I'm unable to answer many questions on MOSFET and that kind of stuff. I do not understand them and have not used them. I used simple coils. Nothing more.

The arrangement has to follow the natural law of a Magnet having two opposite poles at two ends. So the connection has to be NS-NS-NS. The core is a continuous core. Of course many cores are interconnected to form the device of Figuera. It is very simple to replicate.

However I would caution any replicator to cover the electromagnets with plastic insulation. we experience a high intensity magnetic field which is similar to a magnetic field around a high voltage line. This high intensity magnetic field is at 50 Hz and is inimical to health. I have hadmy foot swollen like an elephant and had to take rest and suffered enormously because I did not know that the Electromagnets must be shielded.

I have to survive and focus on my practice and raise against the difficulties. I cannot answer any questions. My apologies.

Drawings of Figeura and BuForn are clear and self explanatory. They used DC and resistor array to reduce the current and the commutator to created interrupted DC. Because I could not do it I used AC and instead of resistor array I used multifilar coils. There is nothing more to this device and any one can replicate this device. This device is capable of producing electricity at point on Earth from Earth batteries that are  subjected to artificially high potential differences by this method. Nothing more. Nothing less.

The high output that we experienced in July 2013 is due to the fact that the Earth points were freshly made and the iron was not corroded. If it is corroded then the output will be lesser than the input. Again experienced by us and disclosed by us.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 16, 2015, 11:21:47 PM
Hi,


I guess diagrams from page 190 may only work with the use of the commutator to move magnetic field lines back and forth. With AC both magnetic fields with confronted poles NN will have the same power in every instant and thus both field will "collide" always in the middle point and there won´t be any movement of the magnetic lines and induction will be null, as you tested. It may just work with the commutator.


Your development is related to the 1902 patent (except for the earth connetion that is not mentioned in any patent), while the diagrams in page 190 are proposals for the 1908 patent. You are wrong about the resistor function in the 1908 patent. I still insist that while you do not understand the commutation function you will not understand why Figuera used it and described in his 1908 patent with so much detail. Please ask for advice to understand it.


Suppose the system in the video (N-N polarity) but instead of moving the induced coil, you just move up and down the two magnetic fields colliding in the induced core. This is why Figuera created two opposite fields:


https://youtu.be/aCClYZp9Yls?t=2m55s (https://youtu.be/aCClYZp9Yls?t=2m55s)


Virtual motion of the fields. No movement of the coil. Thus, No cogging.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 16, 2015, 11:44:59 PM
  Suppose the system in the video (N-N polarity) but instead of moving the induced coil, you just move up and down the two magnetic fields colliding in the induced core. This is why Figuera created two opposite fields:
[/quote]

Exactly Hanon, as one is going high the other is going low Amplifying the signal .  push pull way of thinking. and by switching the signal at the 1/3 to 1/2 mark the core stays full of flux acting as Figueras put it "Batteries" in series.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 16, 2015, 11:56:46 PM
DigitalIndustry,


Instead of reading the whole thread I recommend you to read three times the 1908 patent. In deepth. You will find that R is the name for "resistor"  (literally mentioned in the patent). You will aso find that Figuera stated that there must be always at least two contact connect in the commutator (what we call make-before-break) or that the resistor has the function of splitting the current and create two opposite intensity ( one field increase while the other decrease, and later the reverse..). Just read the patent 3 times and judge for yourself if the polarity is clearly defined or not. It is a pity when I see people just paying attention to the drawing and not reading in deepth the patent text.


In the next link there is a very useful GIF animation:


[size=78%]http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-28.html#post265699 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-28.html#post265699)[/size]   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 17, 2015, 05:08:16 AM
Quote:   "We don't have the necessity of separating Flux (Flux Linking Law E=-dPhi/dt) we only need to modulate Flux (Flux Cutting Law E=B·v·l) and this can be done with very little power like Floyd said all those years back"
Floyd is doing what Figueras did in 1908, modulate the flux back and forth.  Figueras also said it takes very little effort.

(Flux Cutting Law E=B·v·l)

awesome !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 17, 2015, 10:50:57 AM
maybe you should familiarize yourself with an induction meter or learn about induction.

I have  an Induction meter and am reading more as we speak. i am curious as to what you are attempting to hypothesize in relation to the Figueras device.

Yes there are working Devices but unfortunately they don't wan't to post completely. of the one's i know of they are very cryptic.

ok, take out the word "we" then read it.

all i can say is good luck.

Happy Figuering to all.

i'm saying to account for the :

1. inductance
2. inductive capacitance
and
3. Resistance
 
 AND the variable nature of all.

of the so called 'Resistor' (even if it was market as so)
and to turn that to a 'digital' system

one would be best starting with perhaps

an inductive coil (air core)
a bi polar capacitor
a resistor.


and you would need to vary each of the above stated on each # to coil i.e to each coil

probably a NF cap range.
and just ohm range for resistor.
likewise the choke (coil) microH


and build the same relationship that this configuration has.

if you have built a device and all you are getting is essentially 'transformer' type results i'd start on this lead.
then explore the 'make or break' variable. 

regards.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 17, 2015, 11:05:15 AM
DigitalIndustry,


Instead of reading the whole thread I recommend you to read three times the 1908 patent. In deepth. You will find that R is the name for "resistor"  (literally mentioned in the patent). You will aso find that Figuera stated that there must be always at least two contact connect in the commutator (what we call make-before-break) or that the resistor has the function of splitting the current and create two opposite intensity ( one field increase while the other decrease, and later the reverse..). Just read the patent 3 times and judge for yourself if the polarity is clearly defined or not. It is a pity when I see people just paying attention to the drawing and not reading in deepth the patent text.


In the next link there is a very useful GIF animation:


[size=78%]http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-28.html#post265699 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-28.html#post265699)[/size]

Ah thank you Hanon

so that solves the make before break.

yes i understand it could be called 'resistor' however reality still being reality it is not just a 'resistor'
you know in the 1800's many names varied and i understand that one part of what that is doing is splitting current.

however all inductors (air core) hold a tiny amount of inductive capacitance.

just read here:

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/25683/why-does-an-inductor-behave-as-a-capacitor-at-high-frequencies

now you might feel the urge to say (but that is under high resonate freq) nope that is actually when they start to 'fully' act as a capacitor, the effect is always present.

so now we have an issue that reality is presenting a conflict with a word 'Resistor' in such cases i prefer to follow reality unless it is suggested that Figueria was not using that config.

next - the inductor is tapped thus providing, variable inductance and capacitance and resistance. 

i.e why it would be good to explore 'modern' components such as i explain in the post previous.

- a coil (choke air core)   
- a Cap Nf or Pf
- a R

for EACH coil and varied to EACH original config.

also you would need to take into account the DIRECTION of winding when each coil is tapped.

sometimes the simple things are right in front, but in this case that device is not a simple 'resistor' if you just replace it with a 'Resistor' you are not in tune with the reality of the device.

that's just the facts for you.

anyone that is purposely avoiding this reality is leading you up the garden path. i would say 50% to 60% of the people on this forum are probably paid (in a job in an office) to do that.

it's more than 'big business'


i'll make a picture basic rep  for people that are looking to try at this very innovative design and let them decide if it makes sense.

i leaned a lot from reading your historical refs, great work. very interesting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 17, 2015, 12:09:38 PM
An important point on Reality.

Attached it a list of the modern components that woudl be needed to accurately represent the Reality of the component in the original device:

- For configuration

you would need to vary each component for each number of taps along the original 'variator'

i would start by looking at the amount of turns in each section of the winding and try to guesstimate a Henry inductance

then match your Cap and Resistor up with that.

they will likely be low

i.e -
Ohms of resistance
NF or Pf of capacitance
mico H of inductance.

example : (just for show)

10 NF steps per 'tap' (stating at 10)
or
10 pf steps per 'Tap'   

anyone that didn't  mention this in 190 pages is either

A - Paid by a gov or corporation to mislead you or
B - was misled by A


but hey A is just trying to earn a living we can't be playa haters.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 17, 2015, 02:04:14 PM
 ;D  it will work with resistor too , just no or very little overunity  :P
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 17, 2015, 03:24:50 PM
digitalindustry; take some high ohmage wire for your resistor section, wire it like the pic shows and take your own LCR meter if you own one and measure the inductance. you will get a reading that is so low that amounts to nothing.
so that leads me to believe in the following.

#1 you haven't read not one single patent.
#2 typical human reaction to over complicate a simplex design.
#3 being guided by taught dogma from status quo instructors.
#4 being paid to do so because we are at the point of production.
#5 just a complete idiot that likes to disrupt people.
#6 knows enough to think he knows everything.

NOW digitalindustry pick ANY TWO !

anyone that didn't  mention this in 190 pages is either

A - Paid by a gov or corporation to mislead you or
B - was misled by A

apparently Clemente Figueras never got this memo and forgot to put it in his patent.

Have a nice Figueras Day !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 17, 2015, 04:01:45 PM
NRamaswami;
Quote;
"The arrangement has to follow the natural law of a Magnet having two opposite poles at two ends. So the connection has to be NS-NS-NS. The core is a continuous core. Of course many cores are interconnected to form the device of Figuera. It is very simple to replicate."

What planet are you on ? you couldn't be farther off if you tried. the only thing you got right in that book of a post was that it IS very simple to replicate.
i'm sorry to inform you but it SN-Y-NS. any other way you might as well be beating your head against a Mars rock.

"The arrangement has to follow the natural law of a Magnet"

is that why your feet swelled up, you were following the natural law's ?

Have a Nice Figueras Day !

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 17, 2015, 05:10:14 PM
digitalindustry; take some high ohmage wire for your resistor section, wire it like the pic shows and take your own LCR meter if you own one and measure the inductance. you will get a reading that is so low that amounts to nothing.
so that leads me to believe in the following.

#1 you haven't read not one single patent.
#2 typical human reaction to over complicate a simplex design.
#3 being guided by taught dogma from status quo instructors.
#4 being paid to do so because we are at the point of production.
#5 just a complete idiot that likes to disrupt people.
#6 knows enough to think he knows everything.

NOW digitalindustry pick ANY TWO !

anyone that didn't  mention this in 190 pages is either

A - Paid by a gov or corporation to mislead you or
B - was misled by A

apparently Clemente Figueras never got this memo and forgot to put it in his patent.

Have a nice Figueras Day !

hey i'm not trying to give you a hard time.

- coils of wire have inductance and all the other parameters i stated, it's a fact, you can 'wiki' it of you like.

- i expect Figuera had to purchase the much older model of Arduino and he probably had to code it in machine code, so its just not a fair comparison, when he wrote his Patent he probably left all that out.

: D

yes in case anyone has been recently hit on the head that last part was sarcasm, all i said previous to that is fact, thinking more about it i'd probably just make it straight up how he described, vectoring on the 'V' shape of the inductors.

i'm sure people have achieved it both ways, and a mix , by adding caps etc.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 17, 2015, 05:14:27 PM
;D  it will work with resistor too , just no or very little overunity  :P
yep i think you'd essentially have some sort of transformer bi-transformer.

may as well put a toroid in a toroid and play with that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 17, 2015, 10:13:48 PM
yep i think you'd essentially have some sort of transformer bi-transformer.

may as well put a toroid in a toroid and play with that.


yep, that's why he (Figuera) didn't stopped with arrangement of two AC currents shifted in phase in his second device
i wish i could have resources to replicate his devices  :(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 17, 2015, 11:58:39 PM
Forest;

How would you propose to build a sine/sine 180 circuit that switches at the 1/3 to 1/2 way down mark at 100 volts 1 amp and never reach zero.

Ac wasn't viable until 1893 at the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago and in place a year or two later and Ferranti went on to design the Deptford Power Station for the London Electric Supply Corporation in 1887  so that means that the Canary Islands off the shore of Spain got AC that quick.  well now that is some feat.
i would more than likely go with "he used DC" on this device.

Just saying, it's just a thought.
Happy Figuering.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on December 18, 2015, 01:08:05 PM
Probably this is my last post.

I gave this info to Darediamond and so I'm giving this openly now...

Shape of device I used: It is hour glass shaped with the secondary wires kept to prevent the primary irons from dashing against each other. The secondary is in the center. The winding can be described any way..CW or CCW.

You consider a solenoid of many layers wound either CW or CCW. Now the solenoid has a North Pole and a South Pole.  Then you cut that solenoid in to two parts. You want to keep the NS-NS-NS configuration for Lenz law is not present only when the secondary is between the primary iron cores and the inducation happens due to the forces of attraction.

If you give the input from the top of the two solenoids the output comes but the current moves in one direction always. It goes like this -----> and then it goes like this <------- In the two solenoids simultaneously.

Now Let us give the Current from the two edges In this case the winding is CW-CW-CCW but you are going to give the input from the end points of the two primaries. This is where the confusion comes. This is answered in one simple way..you give the current to rotate in the same direction from both the end points. Then you keep the NS-NS-NS configuations. When you do this..What happens is the waves moves like this..   P1----->  S <-------P2  and then P1<------S-------->P2

In this later case the attractive force in the center tremendously increases at one time and decreases at another time. Therefore the flux variation is very high and this results in very high output. What we need to do is to increase the magnetic field and then convert that magnetic field in to Electrical output. So the Electrical input is lower but output is higher. I will post it in the forum also.

Please carefully shield the electromagnets and use 4 sq mm wire for primary and about 10 sqmm wire for secondary because the secondary must have high voltage. For that current you need to have high turns of secondary. A straight pole as shown by Buforn in his last patent is the most efficient one. He discloses as much. I have seen a single secondary kept between two primaries reaching 235 volts and 14 amps for a low input. But be careful here for the force of magnetism in this type of winding is very high and it pulls even current carrying aluminium wires towards it. The magnetic field is tremendously amplified. It affects us badly and you must shield the electromagnets carefully. Let there be air flow but ensure that secondary is sufficiently covered by plastic sheets. You can feel that the force is so much that the middle secondary behaves as if it will break. So be careful.

If you use pulsed DC from a Battery then low voltage alone will be applied in the primary but pulsed DC draws lot of amperage. Multifilar coils are not needed at that time as pulsed DC does not suffer from impedance of coils. It will increase the magnetism too much.

Unfortunately what we do is to increase the magnetic field while providing a lower amount of input. This increased magnetic field is converted to high electrical field in the wires when higher number of turns are present in thicker wires in the secondary. Couple it to the Earth and you have artificial high potential difference between two earth points.

I'm not a competent person in Electricity and so I have not dared to do much here. It requires competent supervision and careful planning. But once this is done safely this can be replicated easily and the output can be used to run the machine.

I'm more comfortable with AC than with pulsed DC for pulsed DC is a beast when compared to AC and produces a very high magnetic field. However a magnetic field created from pulsed DC is said to be beneficial to health between 8 to 25 Hz while magnetic field from AC at 50 Hz to 60Hz is said to be inimical to health of humans. I do not know except that I have swollen feet that refuse to go away. I have stopped the experiments and avoided them completely.

There is nothing more to this. You create a very large magnetic field using small electrical input and then convert that magnetic field in to high elctrical field output. Use the Earth to increase the amount of Electrons or ions available to increase the amperage. If done correctly the Earth connection is not needed.

Probably this is what Floyd Sweet and Hubbard and others did.  Any one can easily check that a very powerful and very large electromagnetic field and electromagnet can be generated by application of about 100 watts of input. It is the conversion of this magnetic field in to Electrical field and extraction of it that is done in these devices.

I'm unable to understand how Hanon and Marathonman say that  the poles are SN-Y-NS. I'm unable to understand how Lenz law would be negated in this arrangement as stated in Figueras patent. But well I'm not a knowledgeable person and from my attempts to do it, I got only zero voltage and no output. Forum Member Dieter has also reported the same thing earlier.

However I must agree that Magnetism is not clearly described in texts and how it operates does not appear to be known to many. For example a permanent magnet once magnetised remains a powerful permanent magnet for a number of years. Electromagnet on the other hand becomes a powerful magnet only when electricity is applied but the magnetic field around an electromagnet is far higher than that of permanent magnets. I do not think that there are many competent people on this subject who have actually experimented and found. Since I did not know any thing I ended up doing practical experiments and learnt from my observations. I have nothing to more to contribute here and I do not think I will be able to do these experiments given the state of my funds and problems I face.

Regards,

Ramaswami
 





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 18, 2015, 03:19:35 PM
Quote;
 "while magnetic field from AC at 50 Hz to 60Hz is said to be inimical to health of humans. I do not know except that I have swollen feet that refuse to go away."

More then likely you had the device on the ground standing next to it for extended periods of time and cause massive cell damage/Cell Frequency disruption  in your feet because of your crazy device putting out a huge magnetic field. that is why everyone working with you got iLL.
things like this only happen when your are working against nature not in harmony with it.
next time use your brain not your feet, no pun intended.

precaution MUST be taken when working with ALL electrical devices.

as was passed to me, when one is gaining the other is receding but in doing so helps Amplify the gaining Electromagnet as both currants is in same direction. this can only happen with two opposing Electromagnets. if they were of opposite polarity it would act as one complete magnet and have little output.
Duel Amplification, B fields cancel E fields add.

Happy Holidays and Happy Figuering
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on December 18, 2015, 06:39:30 PM
Thanks Marathonman for the kind words..I have taken precautions against the electric field but not against the magnetic field. That is the mistake.

The informatiion given to you is correct but your understanding is wrong.

The information given to you probably was like this. P1 is wound CW- Y CW- P2 is Wound CCW.

You therefore think that the identical poles were facing each other. This is why you and Hanon insist that it is NS-Y-SN or SN-Y-NS.

That is not correct.

There are other people who have tried to replicate what I did in this forum and one of them can tell you if he so desires that at 12 to 14 filars of winding for a very low electrical input a very large magnetic field can be produced.

There is another competent experimenter in a First world country who replicated and advised that the voltage is divided in the primary and the Ramaswami device did not work. I also did the same thing and it did not work. I was so completely puzzled. What did we do in 2013. Why the output is coming but why it is lower than the input. The answer is in the email I just sent to this competent experimenter.

The mistake that we did in 2013 was to wind the layers of secondary under the primary as described in the Ramaswami device. The description was given from memory and so I could not understand how the voltage divided and how we got a lower value in secondary output..

In my description P1 and P2 had the currrent going from top to bottom or from Left to Rigth and then return. This causes the voltage to divide in the primaries.  Current Moves like this P1----->Secondary P2---------> The current moves in the same direction in the primaries. P1 and P2 are connected in series. This is what we did and the experimenter reported voltage division.

To the contrary try winding like this..

CW-CW-CCW  (This is similar to the SN-Y-NS that you think was done by the experimenter who advised you)

But this time give the current from the two ends of the primaries. The current should rotate in the same direction in the two primaries. In this case the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS for the polarity is determined not by how the coil is wound but by how the current rotates in the coils. If the direction of rotation of current is same then the polarity remains unaltered.

But this time current travels like this.. P1---------> Secondary <------------P2. In this case the current moves to maximise the voltage to double of what is originally given. Instead of voltage division that we saw this time the voltage adds up. Magnetic field strength is increased 4 times or more. Because the Magnetic Field strength curve will suddenly shoot up when the number of Ampere turns crossses a particular range. This happens in this type of winding.

This is the reason for the very high amperage suddenly seen in the wire by us in 2013. In the second case the Magnetic field strength is tremendously increased for the same input and then tremendously decreased. The variation of fulx is very high. Our mistake was to have wound the secondary also under the primary and this resulted in the high voltage and high amperage which made the current unusable. If we limit ourselves to the secondary winding alone the voltage remains at the range of 220 to 240 volts and the current is in the range of 12 to 14 amps. We only need to use higher number of wires in the multifilar coils to reduce the input amperage.

If we use pulsed DC we would need to reduce the input voltage for pulsed DC draws too much of current as the input voltage  is increased. The secondary in the center would still experience a high output voltage and amperage and the voltage is determined by the number of turns of the secondary. This is why Figuera used a battery in 1908 but used a resistor array to limit the current drawn.

It is normally understood wrongly that if the solenoid is wound CW the pole is of one type and if it is wound CCW the pole is of another type. This is  not so. The same CW winding can be used to produce a North pole or South Pole by giving the current from the inside to the outside or from the outside to the inside. Direction of rotation of current changes. This changes the poles. Polarity is determined by the direction of rotation of current in electromagnets.

If we do this the voltage division is now changed by voltage addition. You may test it at your convenience. Giving it to the Earth is not needed. We can give the secondary directly to load. Still voltage will add up and the output voltage is based on the number of turns of secondary. The current is about 12 to 14 amps and voltage is about 235 volts. But it differs slighttly up and down.  But please cover the electromagnet with many layers of plastic. The magnet Ends must also be covered with plastic. If possible allow the air to go but cover the device with Aluminium sheets with i feet air gap present between the Iron and Aluminium. Earth the Aluminium sheet configured like a tank for it will have high amperage and low voltage and it should be earthed. ( Just some wire from from the aluminium to an iron rod fixed in earth would do. Not the Normal Earth connection kind of Earth. If you do not allow air to go to the electromagnet and cover the whole thing with aluminium the magnet may not work. Aluminium will prevent the magnet from getting ions from the Air and the magnet may not work.

But this kind of shielding will ensure that no harm is caused as I'm suffering now even after many months of stopping the work.

One of the reasons that I advised others not to experiment is because we did not understand these points. Aluminium shielding will have higher amperage as long as the electromagnet is functioning and so should not be touched and must be earthed.

You may please check with the experimenter if what I say about direction of rotation of current altering the polarity is correct or not. Then you will recognize that this is how Lenz law was cancelled by Figuera.

We have moved the rods out. About 10% of the rods have become mild permanent magnets. Rest remain pure iron. One Metallurgical professor says that there is a possibility that this has caused the iron to change in to another isotope of iron. But this is rejected by another Professor who insists for an element to move from one isotope to another a lot of energy would be needed. We have not tested the iron internal structure to find these things out. So I may not do these tests again.

But the fundamental principle is you increase the magnetic field strength by providing a lower electrical field and then take out a higher electrical output from the concentrated magnetic field. This is the mystery of the free energy devices. There is nothing more.

 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 18, 2015, 06:54:23 PM
Hi,
We should keep being respectful. At the end all of us are behind the same objective

Ramaswami is working over the 1902 patent, with different poles and fed with pulsed DC or AC, as Figuera stated.

Marathonman is speaking about the 1908 patent, with same poles confronted and fed with the commutator.

It is that simple. There are two different patents, and I am not able to assure whether both are about the same working principle or not
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 18, 2015, 10:43:44 PM
NRamaswami;

well em, i was kind of being derogatory. sorry !
Is pot or Hallucinogen legal in your country???? it must be.

happy Figuering and Happy Holidays.

PS. Hanon you are ok in my book.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on December 18, 2015, 11:45:21 PM
Marathonman..No problem..I'm a teetotaler vegetarian and conservative and peaceful Hindu who respects all religions and all faiths and go to Churches, Mosques and Temples all to pray. There are families where one is hindu and one is christian and Tamil Muslims are very peaceful people and had converted to Islam on their own more than 1000 years back.

I do not smoke, do not drink alchohol and do not eat meat. So No Hallucinations.

I would humbly request you to replicate the experiments that I did. It will take another 12 to 15000 dollars for this to be done and we are in recession and from a staff strength of 19 people I'm down to just four. I cannot invest more in this and I have disclosed all.

Why do not you do the experiment as described by me for a start and verify yourself. There are people who have verified part of the device and found my description to match. But they are not willing to come forward for they are afraid.

I started with humble beginnings and came to Madras with just Rs.750 Rupees and a degree in Law and struggled enormously. I know the pain of loss of employment for many families for lack of power. So I asked what is the status of research only to find that my rich clients owning wind turbine mills have no idea on technology. No research and funding and so I spent my own money and produced some results and some friends then came forward to support me and this is how I have done these things. I have tried technical advice and they are wrong. So I used observation and then followed Figuera and applied commonsense and the result came.

I suggest that you take a large solenoid and put 14 filar coils of 4 sq mm wire that can transport 24 amps to 27 amps electricity at 220 volts and give the power to it just as a single primary..See what is the output at the end of the primary.. See what is the input consumed. See what is the magnetic field strength developed. That single experiment has been replicated by some one here and he confirmed that I'm 1000% accurate.

With due respect and in all my humility you please accept this single experiment as a challenge. A single electromagnet. 18 inch long and 4 to 6 inches dia and fill it iron rods and then wind over it a 14 filar 4 sq mm wire. Give 220 volt AC input. see what is the input amperage that goes in and see what is the output that comes out of the solenoid. See what is the magnetic field strength. you would instantly know what I'm saying.

Though I'm a patent attorney I have elected not to file any patents and put it in open source and so no one can get any patent and cannot harass people who want to build these devices and sell them. As for me, I'm physically very weak and instead of being greedy and thinking about millions of dollars let me put in my small part so humanity can benefit out of this knowlege given to me.

See I'm a Lawyer. No training in this domain and i'm able to do this. How and why? I also ended up spending a lot of money Why..Some invisible force has forced me to do this and made me disclose this..

This is a humble challenge. Please accept it. Do the experiment and verify the results yourself and if you have doubts ask me and I will happily guide you. I do not deceive people on principle.

No hallucination.

People are ridiculed..

People are opposed

People are then accepted is the rule for inventors. Here I'm not the Inventor. The inventor is Figuera and Buforn. I have added an earth connection. I could have applied for a patent and then I would have come under threats to sell the patent and it would have gone to dust. But I sacrificed this aspect of greed and has disclosed so it can be done in hundreds of places and verified.

 
If the device of solenoid as described does not produce high magnetic field for a low input electrical field you can come here and you can beat me like a child as you stated in your earlier posts. I'm just joking and not offended by that and Please do not take any offence. The device works. period. Test it and without that please do not think for a moment I'm making false claims. I do not do that.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 19, 2015, 06:50:04 AM
I would not humbly replicate your stupidity to save my life, i would rather Die. i sure hope you are a better Lawyer then you are an experimenter because you suck at it.
your advice is like catching the clap from a  Hooker that's giving away free cuchie. you knew it was bad before you hit it. thanks but NO THANKS !
Sorry but i am more intelligent then a box of rocks at a nut concert.
if you along with every other nut that comes on this website that run's their mouth would actually read the F-in Patents that Clemente Figueras gave to the world you will find that there is another side to the Lorenz force that man has not postulated.
Figueras knew this but was cryptic about his presentation to the bankers because he did not want them to get a hold of his crown jewel. the stationary Dynamo.....1908 Patent. this he gave to the world but they tried to hide it until two people gave a darn..... and you two know who you are. thank you ! you have changed the world whether you know it or not.
Figueras gave this to us to use but some of you are to darn ignorant to even fathom the Simplex design of it all so i beg of you to read the Patent....all of them 20 times like i and many others have and realize the end result is more simple than you think.

i had help in my journey to him i will forever be grateful. those hints were well received and i thank you.

this device given to us by Clemente Figueras of the Canary Islands is a Variable Inductance Cascade Amplifier. it Amplifies the incoming signal by using two opposing Magnetic poles being varied by the commutator in a push pull fashion. while one is gaining the other is receding  buy while it is receding and on the opposite side of the core it aides the gaining electromagnet as the currant is of the same direction. B fields cancel E fields add so you are getting a two for one deal as to say just as Floyd sweet so elegantly presented many years later and who knows he might of copied Figueras.
if it was of opposite polarity it would act as ONE MAGNET so stop asking or posting this stupidity.

he used all N electromagnets or S Electromagnets as if the one next to it was of opposite polarity it would siphon the flux straight away and leave the core virtually empty .....ie SQUAT OUTPUT.
so what did we learn from this post... well,
1. that i am aggravated beyond comprehension at all you BONE heads for not reading the F-in Patents.
2. we have a DC device using two opposite and opposing Electromagnets being varied in intensity (ie Currant) to Amplify the incoming signal inducing  currant into the Secondary then cascaded to get the desired voltage. once the level of flux is attained in the core it requires little amperage to maintain.

Thus ends Variable inductance cascade Amplifier 101, 102,  and advanced class 105
all D and F students will be redirected to PJK BOOK PDF 101.

Happy Holidays and Happy Figuering.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 19, 2015, 04:30:06 PM
Lenz's law /ˈlɛnts/ is a common way of understanding how electromagnetic circuits obey Newton's third law and the conservation of energy. Lenz's law is named after Heinrich Lenz, and it says: If an induced current flows, its direction is always such that it will oppose the change which produced it.

Formally stated, Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object.

  Was having a thought about this since it keeps getting thrown around. Wrongly applied to a different set of conditions even an internal combustion engine would be up for argument. Just exclude the fact that the detonation is confined to only allow the piston to travel without blowing the heads of the engine. Exclude the piston acting on a crankshaft in a circular motion to contain the travel of the piston so it does not fly out of the bottom of the cylinder. You could argue all day long for eternity just apply unconfined singular straight line effects to something which is not. Lenz law implies there is something being acted on which has a resistance to that action. Certainly you could imagine that a increase in load will require an increase in force to move that load.Resistance to that change could never go away except for it to never happen. Since it is going to happen instead of trying to say it is mitigated and does not exist why not think of it as being part of the back board used to constrain the force being used to move the object. Like the way the cylinder heads confine the combustion so the piston can only travel inside a confined space. Lenz law does not have to be broken just controlled.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on December 19, 2015, 05:35:01 PM


Formally stated, Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object.

  Was having a thought about this since it keeps getting thrown around. Wrongly applied to a different set of conditions even an internal combustion engine would be up for argument.

The cylinder is counter balanced with a crankshaft weight so it does not get yanked apart. Its like if you were on a skateboard and you pushed another person on a skate board with wheels in the same direction both of you would move backwards but
if you turned one skate board 90 degrees the wheels would prevent that equal
and opposite movement.

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 19, 2015, 06:18:51 PM
Yeah,that's not about Newton third law, or Lenz law - it's all about wrong usage. It is common knowledge for example that every object falling in Earth gravity would not jump again higher then to the place it was at first.However it does not mean we cannot do that !

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 19, 2015, 08:11:55 PM
Quote;" Lenz law does not have to be broken just controlled."
I definitely agree with that.
Their must be something wrong with me because i love it when people's brain rattle with excitement from usage.

PS. "earth's gravity" Wow! Gravity is a push not a pull.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 20, 2015, 01:08:10 PM
Yeah,that's not about Newton third law, or Lenz law - it's all about wrong usage. It is common knowledge for example that every object falling in Earth gravity would not jump again higher then to the place it was at first.However it does not mean we cannot do that !


i more think it's about spamming the page so people don't see these pictures ha ha

: D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 20, 2015, 04:53:59 PM
digitalindustry;

This is the exactly the same post as #2845 and #2858. i am not speaking for everyone but i think we got your concerns the first time.
i don't see the need to repost. just sayin.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 20, 2015, 09:37:34 PM
Some users with apparently good results tell that the coils have to be adjusted or moved in order to get the effect.


I do not understand why (if we are already moving the field), but, anyway I post here a link to an old post which shows how the distance may change the induced filed. I guess this is what marathonman is referring with his proposal of a variable inductance device:


http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg437608/#msg437608 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg437608/#msg437608)


Lastly I want to recall that it is very important to read in deepth the 1908 patent a few times. Many doubts will be clear if read it and digested it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 20, 2015, 10:22:33 PM


"SUPPOSE THAT ELECTROMAGNETS ARE


REPRESENTED BY RECTANGLES N and S ".


.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 20, 2015, 11:18:10 PM
YES SIR Mr Hanon this is "exactly" what i have been talking about as was passed to me. once the adjustments are made between the Primary and Secondaries the center support thickness of that exact distance can be cut and assembled. no other measurement is needed because the thickness is all ready set for all other Electromagnet bobbins whether it is round or square.
the distance will change as core, Bobbins size, Voltage, ect.. change.

i just named it Variable Inductance Cascade Amplifier because "The Figueras" sounds kinda dorky.

#1  it's currant is varied up and down which varies the Inductance.
#2  it is Cascaded to get your desired Voltage.
#3  it Amplifies the incoming signal.

thus you have the Variable Inductance Cascade Amplifier.

If he named the Rectangles and the Y core X, Y, Z would it be less confusing to every one. "NO WHERE" in his patents does it say North and South.
That was  fatal mistake in which through EVERYONE OFF for a long time and is still throwing you people off.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 21, 2015, 02:45:32 AM
digitalindustry;

This is the exactly the same post as #2845 and #2858. i am not speaking for everyone but i think we got your concerns the first time.
i don't see the need to repost. just sayin.

i just notice you guys filling the pages with repetitive and redundant data - so in that same sense my images might add a new vector to the fact that you are going over the principals of a transformer.

this image attached particularly highlights the the simplicity in which the original device was conceived.

it would be my advice to try building the 'Resistor' just as is displayed instead of trying to use modern  components or if you do you modern components then use a mix to compensate.

i think this is relevant and new info does anyone disagree? 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on December 21, 2015, 03:32:02 AM
i just notice you guys filling the pages with repetitive and redundant data - so in that same sense my images might add a new vector to the fact that you are going over the principals of a transformer.

this image attached particularly highlights the the simplicity in which the original device was conceived.

it would be my advice to try building the 'Resistor' just as is displayed instead of trying to use modern  components or if you do you modern components then use a mix to compensate.

i think this is relevant and new info does anyone disagree?

Why do you keep posting the same thing over and over?  Are you desperate for someone to comment on what you are posting?  OK,  You have several things wrong with what you posted.  The resistor bank that is shown is just a resistor bank.  The windings are so far apart any inductance will be so small it probably can't even be measured.  And the same thing as far as capacitance.  With the windings spread out like in the drawing there would be no measurable capacitance.  Then you have a small capacitor that is so small it wouldn't have any inductance.  Then you show a small inductor that is too small to have any capacitance.  And then you show a carbon film resistor that has no capacitance or inductance.  And lastly there is no such thing as inductive capacitance.  An inductor can have capacitance and a capacitor can have inductance.  But inductive capacitance  is just a buzz word that means nothing.

Now will you please stop posting the same thing over and over?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 21, 2015, 05:36:06 AM
citfta;

 I think the buzz word you are looking for is IDIOT, or it could mean NOTHING. which ever word you chose to peg on the Donkey's behind is ok with me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 21, 2015, 07:04:07 AM
digitalindustry, I see what you mean. Because he used old school parts, necessary for construction, they would most likely contain parasitic capacitance and inductance. But why do you think it's important? What would be the effect of inductance on the resistor?

lol, people are giving you a hard time, but you're not cursing yet, so you're ok in my book. Besides, it's not like you jumped in here with a, "I saw the light," savior complex. And you don't claim to have a little fairy whispering in your ear about the secret, holy grail of free energy... at least I hope you don't, we don't need another one.   ::)

And yep, you'll find a lot of redundant posts, and a few posts with Doug's philosophical insight, which I appreciate. The problem is there's not a lot of builders here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 21, 2015, 01:58:14 PM
digitalindustry, I see what you mean. Because he used old school parts, necessary for construction, they would most likely contain parasitic capacitance and inductance. But why do you think it's important? What would be the effect of inductance on the resistor?

lol, people are giving you a hard time, but you're not cursing yet, so you're ok in my book. Besides, it's not like you jumped in here with a, "I saw the light," savior complex. And you don't claim to have a little fairy whispering in your ear about the secret, holy grail of free energy... at least I hope you don't, we don't need another one.   ::)

And yep, you'll find a lot of redundant posts, and a few posts with Doug's philosophical insight, which I appreciate. The problem is there's not a lot of builders here.

thanks friend , no not at all - i was very interested in the patent sale and all that history.

i don't have 'little people whispering in my ear'  presently but i can't speak about later on ha ha .

yes i'm telling the builders to take this all into account, all of these devices are always about a 'rotating magnetic field'

every-time there is inertia there is 'energy'  because gravity is 'magnetic at frequency' 

i'm not making grand presuppositions i'm saying to people that take into account that the 'Resistor' in that case may be serving more than one purpose.

and to just think about the logic of a rotational mag field.   

i will be working on a concept but not this one soon with a 'flicking' or rotational mag field i will post it when done for analysis.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 21, 2015, 05:37:56 PM
Quote
i'm not making grand presuppositions i'm saying to people that take into account that the 'Resistor' in that case may be serving more than one purpose.

Are you also under the impression that the resistor reduces the reactance of the inducer coils?

Quote
i will be working on a concept but not this one soon with a 'flicking' or rotational mag field i will post it when done for analysis.

Looking forward to it. Care to share your setup now?

There's many ways to fulfill Faraday's BxV, which is what I've always been interested in. For instance, in Figuera's generator, B (flux density) increases when input current increases, just like a normal transformer. But due to the effect of two inducers acting with proper phasing, the coil now appears to be "moving" between two magnets. Like in the image below. BTW, have you ever seen those cheeky little shake-to-charge flashlights? They used a single magnet moving up and down in a coil... you know the output would be twice as high if they used this arrangement.

Speaking of flux density, I don't suppose you read my posts about parallel primaries, or parallel inductors?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 21, 2015, 06:28:57 PM
digitalindustry,antijon ;

Quote "all of these devices are always about a 'rotating magnetic field'

every-time there is inertia there is 'energy'  because gravity is 'magnetic at frequency" 

it's about time This is the most intelligent sentence you've posted yet.

  that so called fairy wispering in me ear has a 5 kw system working for over a year now.
as he mints to me i post to the forum but whether you heed the information is entirely up to you. that is why my design took such a radical turn in the last few months was from his operational hints. why he gave to me i don't know, can't answer that.

sure i am an ass hole, you are not telling me something i all ready know but i do enjoy helping other that are willing to help them selves and not blindly jump in a pit because of a shinny object.   i just think that the  areas your engaged in are secondary to the main real concern, the pulsing, operation and dimensions of the cores. without these main concerns you will never have a working device.
i know this device was using DC at the time in question because the Canary Island had no AC at the time of his builds and he used a DC motor for his commutator rotation. this is not to say that AC can be used as i so recently found out but the control system to manipulate it will be to very elaborate as compared to DC.

he used DC through a resistor network to split the currant between two opposing Electromagnets (same polarity) as not to interfere with each other but help amplify the incoming signal (push pull/push push) while rotating the commutator to raise and lower the currant in the electromagnets in opposite fashion.
that is as plain and simple as i can put it so if it is not understood the exchange of knowledge has ceased and one's intelligence level will remain stagnant.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 21, 2015, 07:33:26 PM
Quote
that so called fairy wispering[sic] in me ear has a 5 kw system working for over a year now.

Well, I didn't name you directly, but regardless, I don't believe hearsay, and nor should anyone else. Skepticism is a part of due process, and it keeps us safe from playing a role in someone's fantasy.

Quote
as he mints to me i post to the forum but whether you heed the information is entirely up to you.

Unnecessary, but thanks. If he has a working model but refuses to share, he can:
A. Keep quiet
B. Kiss my ass
C. Both of the above

I pick C.

Quote
that is why my design took such a radical turn in the last few months was from his operational hints. why he gave to me i don't know, can't answer that.

Lies, lies. When you first started posting your "ring dynamo" idea, we, the regular members of this thread, schooled you until you learned the basic principles. Remember that? We told you it wouldn't work, but you adamantly denied, and claimed that everyone else will have a "non working device". In the end everything we said started to sink in, and now you claim our ideas as your own. Anyone can look back and see that "your" new design is the same design we've been going over for a long time. If anyone should be credited with the design it should be Hanon. He stuck with it even though I and others were trying different configurations. In the end, Hanon proved to be correct.

Quote
but i do enjoy helping other that are willing to help them selves

Funny that you say that. If we look back to this post: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg467996/#msg467996 we see you "helping" a new member, who, by the way, has already constructed part of a driving circuit. He generously shares with us his knowledge, experience, schematics, and waveform, and you berate him in your arrogance. Congratulations, you helped another lost soul find his way to the fairy man's benevolence.

Quote
it's about time This is the most intelligent sentence you've posted yet.

You want to talk about intelligence? Really? Come on man, drop the gloves, let's do it. You're a hundred years too soon to talk about intelligence. And please, work on your spelling and grammar before you try to school someone. My college English professor would be hitting you with his umbrella.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 21, 2015, 08:38:36 PM
For everyone's entertainment, I've republished a video that I recorded Oct. 14 of 2014. I had deleted my youtube videos in hopes of updating the info, to make it more clear and concise, but it seems relevant to repost it now.

https://youtu.be/ScTHwo-Jaq4 Haha, I was probably drinking at the time. Anyway, I replaced the commutator and resistor with a sliding resistor. The effect is the same. The poles are same polarity, facing each other. If you can take anything from this video, see that it proved the validity of Hanon's original interpretation, which he published here: https://youtu.be/ZPbWoaPUE5s . Bare in mind the date, Oct. 6, 2014.

Now, for those of us in this forum, newcomers and all, you may be learning these things for the first time, but that doesn't give you the right to claim conception here. I'm not going to sit quietly and watch the rug get pulled out from under someone, while someone else tramps around saying, "my idea, my idea." Give credit where credit is due. Otherwise, shut your fairy-loving pie hole.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 21, 2015, 10:29:56 PM
? Sorry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 22, 2015, 12:12:23 AM
Come on guys! This is a serious thread. Marathon, please modify your last post. The only thing that you will get with such kind of posts is to avoid some MIB coming to this circus.


Now that the audience is quite high I post some doubts that I have:


1- I got stucked builing a commutator.  I am thinking of restarting my tests. But as I am not very expert in mechanizing objects nor I have a workshop I need to build the easiest commutator possible. Please tell me if the ideas in this post are fine to get the two opposite magnetic fields: [size=78%]http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg467058/#msg467058 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg467058/#msg467058)[/size]


2- As the 1908 patent already uses two variable signals I do not understand why we still need to adjust the distance of the coils as Marathonman is suggesting


3- If we just want to replicate a static dynamo, then why is marathonman suggesting no to use external yokes to close the magnetic circuit or just to arrange the coils so that the expelled lines of force may go back by a path of low reluctance




As the secret benefactor prefers to keep in the dark I suppose that he won´t answers to these doubts, so please marathonman if you are so kind..


Regards

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 22, 2015, 05:08:21 AM
Hanon;

antijon had almost got it.  Quote "Are you also under the impression that the resistor reduces the reactance of the inducer coils?"

Hanon had almost got it right.  Quote "or just to arrange the coils so that the expelled lines of force may go back by a path of low reluctance"

 the reluctance of the longest path through the two cores will add to the distance through the air as it returns to the opposite side of the single magnet completing the path for one of the inducer magnets. The distance adds to the reluctance decreasing the amount of difference in terms of current change.
so no external yoke hanon.

there is a small adjustment to fine tum the cores to one another depending on core size, electromagnet size and currant....ect
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 22, 2015, 11:51:23 AM
Are you also under the impression that the resistor reduces the reactance of the inducer coils?

Looking forward to it. Care to share your setup now?

There's many ways to fulfill Faraday's BxV, which is what I've always been interested in. For instance, in Figuera's generator, B (flux density) increases when input current increases, just like a normal transformer. But due to the effect of two inducers acting with proper phasing, the coil now appears to be "moving" between two magnets. Like in the image below. BTW, have you ever seen those cheeky little shake-to-charge flashlights? They used a single magnet moving up and down in a coil... you know the output would be twice as high if they used this arrangement.

Speaking of flux density, I don't suppose you read my posts about parallel primaries, or parallel inductors?

nope i didn't read your post i will find it after posting this -

i am always happy to share:

There are two basic designs:

First is a Pyramid

and this is my own idea/design

- take a pyramid of the general proportions attached. (any ratio of that proportion)
-make out of copper tubing
- from dead center top drop a copper wire/tube and here is were the 'capacitor' will sit.
- the 'Cap' should sit also 50% down from the top of the pyramid to the base.
- the 'capacitor' is built by 3 plates (willl experiment with copper or conductive metal)
- the center plate i will experiment with 'earthing' down to the base of the pyramid
- left and right of the center will be a dilaletric material i.e i was going to use thin piece of vinyl
- then left and right of that a 2x strip of bismuth so 1x left 1x right
- another set of dialectic (vinyl) left and right of the Bismuth
- then the two outer plates.

- the two outer plates will be attached at the bottom with a wire/tube down to two inductors.

- these two inductors will then patch off the wire to the fluctuation 'energy' i.e the two output wires.

- i will drill the whole 'capacitor' in such a way that from the right and left at a 90degree angle i can have two (2) Perm Mags approaching the  two outer plates. (and make it in a way that they are adjustable)

- the adjusters should not be made out of any conductive material i.e the Perm Mags have to be air gap adjustable and not 'conductivity' attached to the outer plates.  (also the integrity of the capacitor) i.e if you drill the cap through the center to run an 'adjustable rod' it should not be conductive 

and experiment from there.

Second one was given to me just recently by some non human friends of mine
it is a magnetic motor and when i saw it i thought it was so simple that i didn't believe it.  (not that they have reason to lie to me ha ha)

so i won't talk about it until i build it.

i have no problem to build and post them here - the people i have a relationship with more or less run and own the meatpuppets on these many sites thee real MIB are men in 'white' and they are currently running this planet.

we are coming to arrangements to make changes in the configuration of the planet to try to help people but there maybe some 'bumps' along the way.

so strap in.

: D

edit* fixed unclear parts

variation in experiment would be as follows:

- use one perm mag instead of two
- eventually use a ball/sphere of bismuth and perhaps center it and build the outer plates as spheres around it- (still insulated with the dialetric)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: digitalindustry on December 22, 2015, 12:13:12 PM
digitalindustry,antijon ;

Quote "all of these devices are always about a 'rotating magnetic field'

every-time there is inertia there is 'energy'  because gravity is 'magnetic at frequency" 

it's about time This is the most intelligent sentence you've posted yet.

  that so called fairy wispering in me ear has a 5 kw system working for over a year now.
as he mints to me i post to the forum but whether you heed the information is entirely up to you. that is why my design took such a radical turn in the last few months was from his operational hints. why he gave to me i don't know, can't answer that.

sure i am an ass hole, you are not telling me something i all ready know but i do enjoy helping other that are willing to help them selves and not blindly jump in a pit because of a shinny object.   i just think that the  areas your engaged in are secondary to the main real concern, the pulsing, operation and dimensions of the cores. without these main concerns you will never have a working device.
i know this device was using DC at the time in question because the Canary Island had no AC at the time of his builds and he used a DC motor for his commutator rotation. this is not to say that AC can be used as i so recently found out but the control system to manipulate it will be to very elaborate as compared to DC.

he used DC through a resistor network to split the currant between two opposing Electromagnets (same polarity) as not to interfere with each other but help amplify the incoming signal (push pull/push push) while rotating the commutator to raise and lower the currant in the electromagnets in opposite fashion.
that is as plain and simple as i can put it so if it is not understood the exchange of knowledge has ceased and one's intelligence level will remain stagnant.

i'm fine with all that as stated i recommend people build the 'resistor' to the original patent  (or a variation of that)

to tell you the truth after 100 + years (of human history) there are so many devices that could be built this would be a fun one to make.

you are not currently registering even close to 'arsehole' on my meter, i wouldn't even say you are annoying.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 22, 2015, 05:34:52 PM
QUOTE FROM FIGUERA PATENT 30378 (year 1902)



In Gramme ring and in the current dynamos,
current is produced by induction exerted on the wire of the induced circuits as
its coils cut the lines of force created by the excitatory electromagnets, this is,
as the induced circuit moves, quickly, inside the magnetic atmosphere which
exists between the pole faces of the excitatory electromagnets and the soft iron
core of the induced. In order to produce this movement, mechanical force need
to be employed in large quantity, because it is necessary to overcome the
magnetic attraction between the core and the excitatory electromagnets,
attraction which opposes the motion, so the current dynamos are true machines
for transforming mechanical work into electricity.


The undersigned, believe that it is exactly the same that the coils in the induced cut
the lines of force, or that these lines of force cross the induced wire, because
not changing, by rotation, the arrangement of the magnetic fields, there is no
necessity to move the core to create induction.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2015, 11:31:24 AM
http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg420569/#msg420569 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg420569/#msg420569)


Maybe also Figuera used a notation trick in his 1902 patent. In spanish the possesive pronoum "sus" is not different to denote the kind of owner, as happens in english. "sus" can be translated, with no difference, as any kind of 3rd person, singular or plural :  "its", "his", her" and "their".


ORIGINAL PATENT TEXT:
"Varios electroimanes están colocados uno enfrente al otro, y
separados sus caras polares de nombre contrario por una pequeña distancia."

ONE POSSIBLE TRANSLATION:
"Several electromagnets are placed one in front of another, and
separated their polar faces of contrary name by a small distance."

OTHER POSSIBLE TRANSLATION:
"Several electromagnets are placed one in front of another, and
separated its polar faces of contrary name by a small distance."

If the real meaning was "its polar faces" then Figuera was talking about the two poles of the same electromanet, not the poles of two different electromagnets.

Again, we find a polemic way to define the real polarity of the system. Was it the Columbus Eggs mentioned by Figuera?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2015, 11:36:28 AM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 23, 2015, 02:23:43 PM
Repost.....foul

I like that last post Hanon. was it a moment of silence for Figueras. ha, ha

Quote; "contrary name by a small distance."     meaning "opposing or against"  opposite poles with gap used to tune the primaries to the secondaries.

now this pic below will get a laugh.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on December 23, 2015, 03:39:39 PM
When I said Pulsed DC, I meant Direct Current being switched on off Either by a Mosfet or a mechanical commutator. And note this my hounourable Barrister Ramaswani, it's when you use thin gauge like 0.31mm (AWG#27 or #31) to make the Primaries and switch them on and off
at high frequency that you can actually easily make them to consume very low Amperage in the miliamp!
With stationary Generator, High Voltage is the key to attaining Overunity not necessarily high amperage.
AWG 26 maximum Voltage rating is 360V though if you go hingher in turns with it to make an Electromagnet, it can bear upto 1500VDC or more but it will consume so much Amperage when compared to AWG #27 or #30 at such high voltage request.

Generally, multifillar winding is one of the keys to. Attaining Pure Overunity either in stationary (M.E.G) generator or in Rotating Generators. And when you connect the Strands of wires in any multifilar coil in series, then you will not only increase the magnetic strength but also largely decrease the amperage it will bé consuming.

So I will rather use High Voltage (1000V above) instead of low voltage of 220V or 300V to power the Multifilar-wound Primaries.

Now what I only need to know is how to practicaly wind a Coil in Clockwise and Anti Clockwise directions rigth on the winding manchine.

Could you please explain this?
   
Thanks Marathonman for the kind words..I have taken precautions against the electric field but not against the magnetic field. That is the mistake.

The informatiion given to you is correct but your understanding is wrong.

The information given to you probably was like this. P1 is wound CW- Y CW- P2 is Wound CCW.

You therefore think that the identical poles were facing each other. This is why you and Hanon insist that it is NS-Y-SN or SN-Y-NS.

That is not correct.

There are other people who have tried to replicate what I did in this forum and one of them can tell you if he so desires that at 12 to 14 filars of winding for a very low electrical input a very large magnetic field can be produced.

There is another competent experimenter in a First world country who replicated and advised that the voltage is divided in the primary and the Ramaswami device did not work. I also did the same thing and it did not work. I was so completely puzzled. What did we do in 2013. Why the output is coming but why it is lower than the input. The answer is in the email I just sent to this competent experimenter.

The mistake that we did in 2013 was to wind the layers of secondary under the primary as described in the Ramaswami device. The description was given from memory and so I could not understand how the voltage divided and how we got a lower value in secondary output..

In my description P1 and P2 had the currrent going from top to bottom or from Left to Rigth and then return. This causes the voltage to divide in the primaries.  Current Moves like this P1----->Secondary P2---------> The current moves in the same direction in the primaries. P1 and P2 are connected in series. This is what we did and the experimenter reported voltage division.

To the contrary try winding like this..

CW-CW-CCW  (This is similar to the SN-Y-NS that you think was done by the experimenter who advised you)

But this time give the current from the two ends of the primaries. The current should rotate in the same direction in the two primaries. In this case the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS for the polarity is determined not by how the coil is wound but by how the current rotates in the coils. If the direction of rotation of current is same then the polarity remains unaltered.

But this time current travels like this.. P1---------> Secondary <------------P2. In this case the current moves to maximise the voltage to double of what is originally given. Instead of voltage division that we saw this time the voltage adds up. Magnetic field strength is increased 4 times or more. Because the Magnetic Field strength curve will suddenly shoot up when the number of Ampere turns crossses a particular range. This happens in this type of winding.

This is the reason for the very high amperage suddenly seen in the wire by us in 2013. In the second case the Magnetic field strength is tremendously increased for the same input and then tremendously decreased. The variation of fulx is very high. Our mistake was to have wound the secondary also under the primary and this resulted in the high voltage and high amperage which made the current unusable. If we limit ourselves to the secondary winding alone the voltage remains at the range of 220 to 240 volts and the current is in the range of 12 to 14 amps. We only need to use higher number of wires in the multifilar coils to reduce the input amperage.

If we use pulsed DC we would need to reduce the input voltage for pulsed DC draws too much of current as the input voltage  is increased. The secondary in the center would still experience a high output voltage and amperage and the voltage is determined by the number of turns of the secondary. This is why Figuera used a battery in 1908 but used a resistor array to limit the current drawn.

It is normally understood wrongly that if the solenoid is wound CW the pole is of one type and if it is wound CCW the pole is of another type. This is  not so. The same CW winding can be used to produce a North pole or South Pole by giving the current from the inside to the outside or from the outside to the inside. Direction of rotation of current changes. This changes the poles. Polarity is determined by the direction of rotation of current in electromagnets.

If we do this the voltage division is now changed by voltage addition. You may test it at your convenience. Giving it to the Earth is not needed. We can give the secondary directly to load. Still voltage will add up and the output voltage is based on the number of turns of secondary. The current is about 12 to 14 amps and voltage is about 235 volts. But it differs slighttly up and down.  But please cover the electromagnet with many layers of plastic. The magnet Ends must also be covered with plastic. If possible allow the air to go but cover the device with Aluminium sheets with i feet air gap present between the Iron and Aluminium. Earth the Aluminium sheet configured like a tank for it will have high amperage and low voltage and it should be earthed. ( Just some wire from from the aluminium to an iron rod fixed in earth would do. Not the Normal Earth connection kind of Earth. If you do not allow air to go to the electromagnet and cover the whole thing with aluminium the magnet may not work. Aluminium will prevent the magnet from getting ions from the Air and the magnet may not work.

But this kind of shielding will ensure that no harm is caused as I'm suffering now even after many months of stopping the work.

One of the reasons that I advised others not to experiment is because we did not understand these points. Aluminium shielding will have higher amperage as long as the electromagnet is functioning and so should not be touched and must be earthed.

You may please check with the experimenter if what I say about direction of rotation of current altering the polarity is correct or not. Then you will recognize that this is how Lenz law was cancelled by Figuera.

We have moved the rods out. About 10% of the rods have become mild permanent magnets. Rest remain pure iron. One Metallurgical professor says that there is a possibility that this has caused the iron to change in to another isotope of iron. But this is rejected by another Professor who insists for an element to move from one isotope to another a lot of energy would be needed. We have not tested the iron internal structure to find these things out. So I may not do these tests again.

But the fundamental principle is you increase the magnetic field strength by providing a lower electrical field and then take out a higher electrical output from the concentrated magnetic field. This is the mystery of the free energy devices. There is nothing more.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 23, 2015, 04:16:38 PM
 For all that is skeptical about my mag amp set up.  i think you might want to see this website experimenting with them. NO power robbing resistors on the power side, just on the control side.

Technically it may be described as a device that controls the AC reactance of a coil by controlling  the permeability of the core in which the coil is wound on.

http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm

Good stuff manard.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 23, 2015, 05:48:31 PM
digitalindustry, never looked into it until now, but apparently pyramids make good receivers. http://rexresearch.com/grandics/grandics.htm good luck, and be wary of high voltages.

Hanon, in 30378, he says:
Quote
The driving current, or is an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign alternately by any known method
This implies that he used a driving circuit, which is probably the commutator/variable resistor. Reading the patent, the induced circuit is very confusing, but he may have just wound pancake/spiral coils between the poles.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 23, 2015, 07:00:35 PM
Antijon,
You are right. Any kind of commutator should have been used in the 1902 patent 30378. He did not describe it in the patent text but reading the newspaper clips is said that the machine had a kind of governor or regulator. I guess he did not disclose it all in the patent or it was just a basic pulsing system. The greatest difference with the patent from 1908 is that in 1902 he just used one signal to excite all the electromagnets. Also the induced circuit is mentioned to be drawn in the drawing, but it is not there.

Marathonman,
The guy who made that mag amp webpage also has a very interesting video on youtube  https://youtu.be/DBX1-POuJMw (https://youtu.be/DBX1-POuJMw)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 24, 2015, 05:35:50 PM
Hanon, I think it's possible to use only one signal, depending on how it is generated. A physical analogy to a generator would be a magnet spinning over one coil, instead of two coils 180 degrees from each other. Because he includes an air gap, he probably resisted saturation in the core.

One thing I realize with Figuera is that he probably did a lot of experimentation before he developed these designs. If we look at his commutator/resistor, we see that there must be a reason for it necessary to the operation of the device. If he just wanted to convert DC to the AC output, he could have just used a two pole commutator, or switch. The effect would be the same as a push-pull shown here: http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/Amplifiers/amplifiers54.php
Of course we all know the resistance is necessary, I was just thinking. Speaking of, I haven't been able to test your driver yet, but I still think it's a good idea. A small DC bias should cancel the reactance of the AC circuit. I should be able to test it soon, will have more time after the holidays.
Also, I think I will purchase a driver board like this: http://www.velleman.eu/products/view/?country=be&lang=en&id=355404
And use it with transistors and a resistor set, to power a system. A board will be an easy way to control resistor voltage, and it has a variable speed to test increasing frequency versus EMF output. All in all I hope for a simple 12DC control to make it easier to loop.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on December 24, 2015, 07:40:20 PM
Felices fiestas y muy prospero año nuevo.
Merry Christmas and very Happy New Year.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on December 26, 2015, 06:59:20 AM
When Lenz is canceled or Negated in any Electro-magnetic device and or Machine, Endless Wattage can then bé easily drawn from the Air you and I do inhale and exhale.

Lenz law is the Major Road Block to Overunity.

So the winding style of the Primaries is the key to canceling lenz effect in both Figuera and Ramaswani Device.

To make the device perform even better, buy soft Iron Powder, Resin and accelerator and make a Mould to make your own Hourglasslike Core. This type of Core can withstand Extremly high FREQUENCY which is need to better generate at the Secondary High Output Wattage and the Needed Back E.M.F needed to loop the system via the primaries and not sencodary and thus keep the device cool as the collapsing magnetic field in the primaries draw from Ahir Cold Electricity or Radiant Energy or Ambient Energy.

Note: you must connect High Voltage AC Caaps to the leads of the Primaries to absorb Spikes and. To further collect back E.M.F, connect a Full Wave Diode Bridge which is made with Fast Switching High Voltage Diodes and direct that Power to an High Voltage High Micro Farad Capacitor Bank and from there to a Multifillar Wire Wound Lenzless Transformer like the Thanes Heins Trasfomer.

Note that apart from cancelling Lenz with the Clockwise and Counterclowise windings in the Primaries, you MUST use Multifillar Wire (which must also lies side by side and layers of windings separated with suitable Di-electric or insulator like Paper or Plastic tape or mylar) to make your Primaries.

Also, it is best to Insulate each layers of the Secondary coils too to turn it into Capacitor as well.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 26, 2015, 08:06:14 AM
I am curious as to whom or what patent your are basing your info on? i have every patent from Figueras and Buforn printed and sitting right next to me as i speak that i have read at least 40 to 50 times each and not one remotely resemble what you just described.

all i can say is good luck.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on December 26, 2015, 02:09:20 PM
I base it on what have been generally discovered and achieved over Lenz effect which Fuguera also discovered that made him to successfully build the Fueguera Motionless Generator.
Fuguera used Pulsing DC which is Switch on and off by the ready-made dc  motor-powered mechanical switch.

Whenever you pulse any type of electromagnet, you will always generate Radiant-Energy Mixed Back E.M.F as free Energy. But the amount of that energy your E.Mag can absorb depends on How Well you Wind your Coil to bé a C A P A C I T O R and THE RATE AT WHICH YOU SWITCH the electromagnet because the External Energy or Radiant or Ambient Energy is ever switching. So to capture that FREE ENERGY, you must Pulse your Coil which acts as harvester. This is the secret.


When you pulse any Electromagnet, it turns into a Socket which allows the Air base endless Wattage to Plug into it.

The Clockwise and Counterclockwise winding cancel Lenz or drag. And that would pave way for a Massive Radiant Energy Harvesting.

All Motionless Overunity generator requires Magnetic Core. But  not the case with Motion overunity electric power generators. The coils in the later are most times coreless and that makes them suitable for Extremly high frequency Pulsing.

Overunity is all about using say 10W to Generate 1000W or more. So there is need to find a way to make your coils use very little Amperage to generate High Amperage.
Remember Amps can not bé easily multiplied like Voltage!!!

And excessive Magnetic field can bé generated at High Voltage.
Base on that benefit we can then easily lower input amperage to miliamps and increase Input Voltage to Kilovolt generate the amount of needed Magnetic Strength.

So inview of the forgoing using thin gauge coated copper wire to make a Multifillar-Wound Electromagnet which will bé pulsed is the best. As it will bé able to bear High Voltage and consume very low Amperage.
When your swithing frequency is High, you Magnet consume very Low Amperage the more!!

Another benefit in switching or Pulsing your Primary is that the incoming Ambient Power will keep it cool!!

I recomended Moulded Core because of the Needed High Frequency which your Primary needs to absorb a Large amount of  Air-base Free Power or Electricity.

When you successfully build either Fuguera or Ramaswani Device, instead of Looping the Power Set out of  the Power coming from the secondary, with your Radiant Energy collection Circuit (which will consit of an HV Fast Switching Diodes, HV DC Capacitor Bank and an HV step-down transformer) integrated into the System, you will then simply loop it from the FREE excess energy being Absorbed and delivered as Back.E.M.F by the Primary still.
:::::::::
If anyone do not know how to use Mosfet to Switch the Primaries you can simply buy one low power high torque 12V/24V adjustable DC Motor, make a copper commutator or buy ready-made one, buy 2 pieces 8mm or 10mm bore flange or pillow bearing and buy Carbon Brush to make your Mechanical Switcth the Primaries. It is easy.

ttp://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?catId=0&initiative_id=AS_20151226043027&SearchText=10000V+2A+diode

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Miniature-generator-JS-3420-motor-24V-DC-motor-speed-control-high-speed-high-torque-motor/1915368050.html

http://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?catId=0&initiative_id=SB_20151226045217&SearchText=copper+commutator

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/5pcs-Carbon-Brush-Assembly-for-2kw-Honda-Chinese-Gasoline-Generator-5-5-6-5HP-Free-Shipping/32324764844.html?spm=2114.01020208.3.54.uQQOxR&ws_ab_test=searchweb201556_7,searchweb201644_3_79_78_77_82_80_62_81,searchweb201560_3

 
I am curious as to whom or what patent your are basing your info on? i have every patent from Figueras and Buforn printed and sitting right next to me as i speak that i have read at least 40 to 50 times each and not one remotely resemble what you just described.

all i can say is good luck.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 26, 2015, 08:36:41 PM
Quote; "I base it on what have been generally discovered and achieved over Lenz effect which Fuguera also discovered that made him to successfully build the Fueguera Motionless Generator.

Completely conjecture statements based on other people not your own experiments and what Figueras actually attained in his device in which you have no idea.

Quote; "When you pulse any Electromagnet, it turns into a Socket which allows the Air base endless Wattage to Plug into it."

Our entire Universe is electric and is where the power is coming from. Figueras device is not a static electro device. it has Nothing to do with air ever. it will work in space as it pulls directly from the field within it.

Quote; "Fuguera used Pulsing DC which is Switch on and off by the ready-made dc  motor-powered mechanical switch.

Figueras device is Not switched on and off at any time. it is a make before break type setup to avoid voltage spikes which would kill the intended purpose of building up a magnetic fields and maintaining that said fields in the core with harmonious and continuous swinging of that said fields.

but the multifiller info is good as i have attained amazing results from multifiller primary coils. so much so it jumped across the room when pulsed with 100 volts DC. luckily my door helped stop the torpedo. so take Doug's warning as to completely secure your coils or those things between the legs could get amputated.

my torpedo has 3.2 inch long primaries with aprox 654 turns quad filler @ 2 T each. the funny thing is i could not get proper ohms and B field until i took my two inch secondary coil and multiplied it by the golden ratio of 1.618 thus gives ruffly 3.2 inches for my primary. then everything fell into place, so weird.

good luck.

Happy Figuering
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on December 26, 2015, 09:22:23 PM
Figuera main achievement centred on negating Lenz effect and as such, his. Device can bé improved addind and subtracting some features.

 


Quote; "I base it on what have been generally discovered and achieved over Lenz effect which Fuguera also discovered that made him to successfully build the Fueguera Motionless Generator.

Completely conjecture statements based on other people not your own experiments and what Figueras actually attained in his device in which you have no idea.

Quote; "When you pulse any Electromagnet, it turns into a Socket which allows the Air base endless Wattage to Plug into it."

Our entire Universe is electric and is where the power is coming from. Figueras device is not a static electro device. it has Nothing to do with air ever. it will work in space as it pulls directly from the field within it.

Quote; "Fuguera used Pulsing DC which is Switch on and off by the ready-made dc  motor-powered mechanical switch.

Figueras device is Not switched on and off at any time. it is a make before break type setup to avoid voltage spikes which would kill the intended purpose of building up a magnetic fields and maintaining that said fields in the core with harmonious and continuous swinging of that said fields.

but the multifiller info is good as i have attained amazing results from multifiller primary coils. so much do it jumped across the room when pulsed with 100 volts DC. luckily my door helped stop the torpedo. so take Doug's warning as to completely secure your coils or those things between the legs could get amputated.

my torpedo has 3.2 inch long primaries with aprox 654 turns quad filler @ 2 T each. the funny thing is i could not get proper ohms and B field until i took my two inch secondary coil and multiplied it by the golden ratio of 1.618 thus gives ruffly 3.2 inches for my primary. then everything fell into place, so weird.

good luck.

Happy Figuering
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 27, 2015, 03:12:06 AM
As was passed to me Quote;
  "once the inducer magnet is charged up with a field near it's maximum say 80 to 90 percent, the force is maintained with very little current because of lenz law. lenz law does not account for a dynamic field much less two with and inductive field in between them."

this tells me that Figueras figured out how to use Lenz law to his advantage and probably counted on it.

Quote; "The backside of the inducer core has to close the magnetic path through the air. So looking at that path in both conditions once for when it is not traveling through the Y core and once for when it is. the reluctance of the longest path through the two cores will add to the distance through the air as it returns to the opposite side of the single magnet completing the path for one of the inducer magnets. The distance adds to the reluctance decreasing the amount of difference in terms of current change. It's very small only enough to push the field the length of the Y while still having 80 to 90 percent of the maximum flux in both inducer cores."

your Quote; "Device can be improved by adding and subtracting some features."

true though the device as crude as it said it was still powered his entire house so not much more is needed.

i have been working on a sort of ACR (automatic currant regulator) on my mag amps. when a sensor on the main line detect higher currant draw like when a washer, dryer or AC unit is turned on the sensor detects this and sends more currant to the bias winding on the mag amps thus raising the timing pulse currant window to allow more currant through my electromagnets. then when the currant demand is low the bias winding returns to it's previous off state.

i have also implemented a currant regulator on my 400hz sine wave inverter  i am building that will not allow more than 1 1/2 amp on the output inverter line as to not fry my Primaries 25 awg winding's in the case of a dead short on the output line of the secondaries.


Happy new year and may the Figueras force be with you all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 28, 2015, 03:24:54 PM
 You know i was just thinking,  that Mag Amps were developed in the United states in 1885 and being a Physics Professor at a university,  Figueras might of had access to such privileged information so he could of quite easily applied Mag Amp tech into his commutator.
this would be much more efficient in terms of power usage compared to a resistor set up that totally waste power through heat.
he could of used the commutator to mechanically regulate (make before break)  the power to his Primaries in opposite fashion.

The use of a Mag Amp for control purposes with electric circuits is primarily to regulate, within limits (maximum and minimum), variable resistance magnetically speaking.
the easiest way to draw a magnetic resistive system would have been the style he used in his patent and just to call it a resistor.
i will be working on a commutator design for who ever would want it when i get a chance.
 i personally will be using my mag amp set up as i think rotating parts of any kind are as to say (1908 ish) ha, ha, ha
now that there is funny.

it's just a thought !

PS. my Christmas gift to myself was excellent results in Mag Amp and Primary testing.

Happy New Year Forum.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 28, 2015, 10:03:18 PM
hanon


I've sent you PM.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 29, 2015, 12:03:47 AM
 idegen:
 did you know the Greek definition/name  of a donkey's swollen pus infected ass hole is ?   it's called  "idegen"

the American name is called "gofuckyourselfitis"

and the definition of "STUPIDITY" is your mother having YOU !


for the rest of the real Figuera people that have major time and effort involved, i have a "RUFF" and i say "RUFF" estimate of the rotating commutator. just so you can get a general idea what figueras was doing in the commutator area. i know a lot of people have struggled in how in the world did he build his commutator so i hope this will give some inspiration.

i hope this will help someone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on December 29, 2015, 04:52:01 AM
Could you please answer the question in the Picture Mr. Ramaswami?
Doug, Mack:

Without going in to much, what I have done is this..

a. Create a primary..

b. Take a permanent magnet and measure at what distance the permaent magnet does not oscillate in your hands by the EM wave from the primary core.

c. bring the magnet towards the core of the primary so permanent magnet will start oscillating increasingly violently.

d. Identify the distance at which the magnetic oscillation does not increase.

e. Divide this distance by two.

f. Build the middle coil for this distance.

g. Keep the middle coil at half or slightly more than the diameter of the primary core. 

h. Wind the coils on the middle coil to prevent the iron rods of opposite poles of primary from crashing in to one another and so build the middle core to be slightly above the primary core size alone.

Results:

a. For a single module the output of middle core alone is less than the input of the primary. But irrespective of the load on the middle coil primary input is constant. Primary does not care whether you load the middle coil or do not load the middle coil. Therefore the secondary is Lenz law Free.  For this to happen one thing must be done but I'm not disclosing it..You can find it in the Patent of Figuera but he feels it is not necessary to disclose it.

b. you continue to add modules. As primaries are added their resistance increases and so input decreases. As secondaries are added their voltage increases and so output increases.

C. Continue  steps a and b above.

Problem with Figuera device is that this requires a lot of iron, lot of coils, and not infrequently the brush of the rotary disc goes. It needs to be very sturdy for long term use. You need multiple modules which costs lot of money.

Within my budget I modified the device and the results were available.

I'm working with a group of like minded replicators and what we are doing and what are the results I cannot disclose without their consent.

It is not impossible to get the center core output on its own to be greater than the input. But certain conditions need to be fulfilled for that. They are so obvious that I'm not going in to them and I consider that disclosure unnecessary.

I'm a very ordinary man without much of knowledge. Until I started I did not know the difference between voltage and amperage. Until very recently I did not know the difference between and implications of connecting in serial and connecting in parallel. So actually when I started I did not know that this kind of device cannot be done. So I ended up listing the conditions needed to create the device and I ended up doing it.

These are the conditions.

1. Primary input should be low

2. Avoid back emf

3. Create Lenz law free output.

Figuera patent does all that and it is very well explained in the patent how to do all this. Unfortunately he is very cryptic. That is the problem. I do not intend to post on this as I have given all info needed to replicate already.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 29, 2015, 01:24:54 PM
darediamond;
 Can you please lower the resolution on your pic.
open with paint and re size.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 29, 2015, 02:04:32 PM
Marathonman,


Now that I see you commutator design I remember that a user in the spanish forum created a Figuera commutator. I attach here a link to his video. He had the problem that at high rpm the brush did not toched all the contacts due to the centrifugal force. He said then that he saw why Figuera set the brush in the center and the contact in the outside circle to avoid that problem.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRKePdQfp8w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRKePdQfp8w)


Darediamond: The CW or CCW winding of the wires in the coils does not matter at all. The only important thing is the direction of rotation of the current around the cores.


Marathonman:  The proper name is Clemente Figuera, not Clemente Figueras, as you always call him erroneusly. Also for you info, take into account that the letter "u" in Figuera  is mute. This is important if you want to call the master by his proper name. I suppose that you also like that everyone pronounce fine your name. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 29, 2015, 06:16:26 PM
Thanks Hanon good video.
so you think that even with strong spring it will still raise off of contacts. humm.... now that would be difficult to invert as in putting contacts on inside instead of outside.
i was just trying to help, i myself am going with mag amps you already know

oops, your right about the name "Thanks" and also about PM's. i will look into it.
i am not blocking anyone on purpose.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 29, 2015, 07:21:15 PM
Hi,
I have been simulating the electric circuit to emulate the commutator included in this link posted by user madddann:


http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/#msg394315 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg394315/#msg394315)


I have found a website which allows you to simulate circuits online  ( https://easyeda.com/ (https://easyeda.com/) ) and I have been able to simulate it in just 30 min. This circuit just creates two opposite signals with an intermediatte tap transformer, and, then adds a DC offset created with a diode bridge and a capacitor.


I have found that the rheostat is not need so you can reduce the heat losses of the original circuit. That rheostat was just creating a voltage drop that you can also manage with a different transformer in the DC offset. You just need to provide a transformer for the DC offset signal with a higher output voltage than the one with the intermediatte tap. For a 220 volts input I am using a transformer ratio 20:1 for the intermediatte tap one and a ratio 15:1 for the DC offset transformer. I am taking that each electromagnet series (N or S) have a resistance of 10 ohms, but with 5 ohms it will also works fine.

You may test it online in the refered website. Open a New Schematic , Menu "Source EasyEDA" , Paste the code in the attached "txt" file, Pulse Apply.
I hope it helps. Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on December 29, 2015, 09:03:34 PM
About my last post:


Even you may get rid off the central tap transformer and change it by two normal transformers, and still getting the same output signals


Note: The higher the oultput voltage of the DC offset transformer is , the greater is the minimun value of the intensity. Therefore you can even increase the output voltage of that transformer in order to get a minimun of 0.5 or 1A...


Marathonman: please do not play the game that that user is setting. It is was he wants. Just check his posts history. He is saying the same in all forums
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 29, 2015, 11:14:53 PM
You are very, very lucky i don't know where you live. as a US vet i would have no problem snapping your neck.
Please get off this discussion there is no room for BOYS/Girls.


Hanon; i think i fixed the PM thing.

i like that program, i have been using it for a while but i had no luck with my 400hz bubba sine wave circuit. i don't know why it just refused to run it
what is the adjustment at the N and S coils ?
set your DC transformer at a certain level then put a dimmer switch before the transformer to dial in your exact window you need.
just a thought.
oh i forgot what is the distortion at peak i see or is that just the program ?

darediamond; can you please resize your pic.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on December 29, 2015, 11:28:17 PM
I actually think it would be interesting to talk to a psychologist about people like idegen. What a strange, twisted nature to get happiness from pestering other people. It's sad and pathetic, really.

Funny, but his name reminds me of the word indigent.

Yeah, thanks hanon. I'm going to try to run some circuits there, too.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on December 31, 2015, 08:52:43 PM
Dear All:

I wish you all a Happy and Prosperous New year 2016.

Dear Darediamond:

Your idea about the iron powder is correct for high frequency. I understand that just as I had difficulties with the commutator others are also having difficulties.

Now What is Figueras device? As we all understand it used a battery, used a make before break type of commutator. This commutator creates spark. Whatever we did it created sparks very minor sparks. Sparks have high voltage and normally high frequency. I do have a suspicion that the commutator points are all spark plugs kind of things so when the commutator rotated sparks came and the outgoing wires were going from the other end of the spark plug.

We need high voltage to create sparks. However when you have a rotating charged body, you do not need high voltage to create sparks. The rotating carbon brush touching the copper point will create a spark and this spark will go to the nearest metallic point which in this case (if my assumpiton is right) is the copper point held in close proximity and to which the resistor array wires are connected. Now we have the following conditions.

High voltage+ High Frequency+ current ( Low amperage or high amperage needs to be tested). I'm not in a mood or position to test. High Frequency input will draw less current. Rotating charged body touching another charged metallic body creates sparks. Sparks have high voltage and high frequency and low amperage. The Violet Ray device which produces 50000 volts is an example.

The whole commutator can be easily replaced by a small Tesla coil proper. May be 30 watts or 60 watts coil.

Give this output to a copper plate to which the primary N and S are connected and connect the end of the primaries to two earth points.

I'm given various information by different people. One distinguished person says that Iron can be responsive up to 999 Mhz and the information in the books is not accurate. What type of iron he is referring to is not clear to me.

Others say soft iron can be magnetised up to 1000 Hz and may be even up to 2000 Hz.

But it is agreed that Ferrite Core can take up to 1 MHz and be magnetized. But Ferrite is extremely expensive in America.

What is Ferrite. Iron +Zinc +Carbon is Ferrite. You live in Nigeria. Therefore ask the local artisan to put create a furnace where carbon, iron powder and zinc are burnt for a 24 hours or so. At this heat the zinc would merge with the iron powder and carbon and you now have Ferrite. See if you can ask the local artisan or Foundary to make the core like the Hour glass shaped continuous core.

If you can do it use multifilar coils for primary to create high magnetic field strength in primary. Focus this magnetic field strength in the secondary and make it collapse on and off by giving the current from the two ends.

Regarding middle secondary length and diameter it is half the diameter of the primary or 2/3rd diameter of the primary. What is the length.

You please add the length of the primaries and divide by 3. That is the optimal length of the primary. If your primaries are both 18 inches the total primary length is 36 inches. Dividing it by 3 we get 12 inches which is the optimum length of the middle secondary.

Can we use a single secondary and two primaries alone to create a higher ouptut. yes We can but it requires another component to be added. I'm not inclined to disclose it. Sorry.

using a Tesla coil in the place of the commutator will solve the problem of providing high voltage and high frequency. If you carefully look at it what is happening is that the device is a reverse of the Tesla coil. One Tesla coil provides high voltage high frequency and low amperage input and the primary using the large number of turns of the wire generates high magnetic field and the secondary using the focussed magnetic field and thick wires creates high amperage. The voltage of the secondary as we all know is based on the number of turns. Output Amperage from secondary is based on the thickness of secondary wire.

If you use AC, you avoid all these problems.

Why primary does not care about whether secondary is loaded or not. The only function of primary is to generate high magnetic field which is compressed in the center core. if the secondary is not present that magnetic field will go to the atmosphere automatically. If the secondary field is present the secondary takes that compressed, concentrated and saturated magnetic field strength to generate electricity.

The midddle porition is also lenz law free when it is put between opposite poles. If we are able to produce about 150 to 200 volts in the secondary the output wattage can be very consideably increased by the addition of another component. I have elected not to disclose it.

You can check all of the above statements and you would find that a Tesla coil require a source of high voltage but a rotating charged body does not require high voltage to create sparks. Probably because in the Islands only batteries were available Prof Figuera used the commutator.

I wish you success. Avoid Electronics and go to simple mechanical things. They work very well.

Like Marathonman said long exposure to the magnetic field appears to have weakened my foot. I now have to take 8 to 10 hours of sleep and keep the legs high and take steaming of legs daily. This has magically reduced the swelling and I'm able to walk fast now. So please take all available precautions. I will not be posting here as I have to focus on my practice and there are no funds to any experiments. So I'm sorry about the delays. Please accept my apologies.

Regards,

Ramaswami





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 01, 2016, 11:38:40 AM
Hi, A very happy new year to all.  I'm new to the forum, but not new to electronics, hacking, using microcontrollers and suchlike.  Have already dabbled in HHO, the bedini SG and also it's computer-fan derivative. Am fascinated by the Figuera patent.  I'vre read through about 20 pages of this post, but it's just getting too heavy to read with all the ads and donkeys getting in the way  ;)
I'm getting ready to try some experiments with the heart of the patent : two primary electromagnets driven 180° out of phase and with a secondary 'pickup' placed in-between.  To drive with a clean, 180° shifted, AC signal - nothing simpler than a center-tapped transformer.  I want to see the presence/absence of the Lentz effect.  No electronics for the moment - just pure EM.  If that bit works, I'll also try looking at what resonance can do.  Then I'll worry about winding more coils and finding the simplest, cleanest and quietest way of driving them.
To the moderator/webmaster : are there any tools to extract a post into a file so it can be ridded of the 100s of ads and donkeys ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 02, 2016, 03:20:31 AM
Okay, well I have an inductance meter now, and i ran some tests i thought I would share.

First, regarding Ramaswami's setup. Using a Tesla bifilar coil as a primary (of a transformer) serves to increase the coil's capacitance. Referring to Tesla's patent, https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/patents/us-patent-512340-coil-electro-magnets , he describes the purpose of the coil, and also other means of reducing inductive reactance.

As we know, a transformer has high inductive reactance when the secondary is open. Adding a load reduces the primary's reactance and increases current draw. Shorting the secondary cancels the reactance, and the primary draws max current, only limited by it's DC resistance.

So, in this case, my question was, will the secondary coil's EMF change between normal transformer arrangement and an arrangement where the primary coil's reactance is negated?

If you have an inductance meter, you can use an online reactance calculator to determine the reactance at line frequency for a primary coil.
In my setup, I had a 1:1 ratio transformer, and the primary's inductance was 213mH with a reactance (impedance) of 81 Ohm at 60HZ.

To cancel the inductive reactance, I used a capacitive reactance calculator to find an impedance of 80 Ohm at 60HZ with a 33mfd. capacitor.

So, the two reactances cancel, for the most part, and the current is only limited by the DC resistance of the coil.

In testing, I proved this by checking for current and a magnetic field when the secondary was not loaded. So, results were, when loaded, the EMF is the same whether it's wired like a normal transformer, or with a capacitance to cancel reactance.

In my book, this proves to me that, yes, you can cancel the reactance of a primary coil, but that will not change the EMF, and thus the power out will be the same as if it were a normal transformer. I have also tested dual primary transformers, similar to Ramaswami's setup, and in my findings, with normal AC, and both coils in phase, the output EMF doesn't change. Here, also, the EMF and power out is related to power in, and should never be more than 100%.

For Darediamond and Ramaswami: Tesla also states in his patent that increasing the voltage will also reduce inductive reactance. In any way, reducing reactance is great for electromagnets, because any reactance limits magnetic strength. In transformers, however, it makes no difference.

Figuera's generator is different than a normal AC transformer, and I hope this helps clear up and de-mystify some of the things involved. Using bifilar coils may aid a Figuera setup (by reducing reactance), but it's his current divider that makes it more than a normal transformer and increases EMF.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 02, 2016, 07:03:05 AM
Antijon:

I do not understand much of the technical stuff you have written. All I can tell you simply is this. Please increase the number of filars from bifilar to 12 to 14filars. See what happens. In AC..See what is the current drawn and what is the magnetic field strength. What is the wire type that you used? Did you use thinner wires for primary and thicker wires for secondary and did you have sufficient number of secondary turns to increase the voltage.

A Multifilar coil is different from a bifilar coil. The impedance or resistance keeps increasing enormously with the increase in the number of filars and you have very little current draw in AC but a very powerful magnetic field is created.

We do not really need info on Tesla and what his patents suggest. Why? Much of his published literature is in line with theory and those that are against have been confiscated and remain state secrets to this day. To me Tesla is an experimenter who made his observations. We also need to make experiment and make observations. Nothing more. Nothing less. Since you have all the meters why don't you check if the 12filar coil arrangement reduces current draw but increases magnetic field strength..

Also did you use the Earth batteries as I suggested? New ones

If the current is given to move in series it will not produce COP>1 without the Earth batteries. If the current is given in parallel maintaining the same polarity it will increase the voltage experienced in the secondary in the middle 4 times and if the powerful magnetic field is compressed and magnetic saturation attained in the secondary core  you get the cop>1 results. If you connect to Earth batteries it is automatic.

Unfortunately it is against theory and so you conveniently limit yourself to the theoretical model and restrict yourself to bifilar as disclosed by Tesla. What prevents us from moving one step more and doing it friend? And you are coming immediately to conclusions..

Electromagnets do not behave in the way anticipated. We need to test and find out how they behave. The essential point of the Figuera device is the shape. and the fact that he used two primaries with secondary in the middle. as a module and used several modules and sent current in the opposite sides so the two primaries will have different magnetic field strength always.  I do not understand why he did it for I have not experimented with all 8 cores. Could not afford them.

You please check with a 12 or 14 filar coil and then give us your insight..What is the input and what is the magnetic field strength and what is the amount of current that would be needed in a single helical coil or bifilar coil to produce the same strength. As I have tested even a trifilar coil is capable of drawing a lot of current and only when we go above the 8 filars the current draw starts diminishing.

Do not limit yourself to bifilar. Do not use old data..Old patents..Progress in every other field has been achieved except electricity and magnetism and it is only for one thing to maintain the status quo of rich countries as rich countries and poor countries as poor countries. Not for long..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 02, 2016, 09:37:47 PM
  i have been testing 3.2 inch primaries with Quad Filler 640 turns plus and had great results and with only 100 v 1 amp.
but i must remind you that all currant can be controlled out side of the primaries so worrying about ohm's should not be an issue as that will be controlled by your resistor setup. i don't have to worry because with my mag amp setup,  the control coil resistor tap will take care of all that leaving the power side alone to do what it does best. using 12 volt at milliamps doesn't waist a whole lot of power on the control side.

i don't understand why someone would wan't to waste their money on so much wire when it was totally unnecessary.
i am really surprised the core didn't melt in front of you.

you did get the Dogma old data right. all the books of today are filled with Dogma status Quo crap that is designed to rob you of any over unity and waste your precious Electricity. do your own research just like the Great Pioneering Men before you did before the age of the gutless high forehead Scientist that hide behind a 600 line Dogma Quack Equation. this is why Tesla was so dangerous to the status Quo because he didn't play their gutless game.

Hell J P Morgan paid Heaviside, Lorentz and god knows who else to doctor up Maxwell's 20 plus original free energy equations and even had school books replaced to cover it up,  literally wiped all references pertaining to them.  even  Einstein was paid by him to lye.  because of this greedy man the world has suffered to no end.

the key to the universe is Electricity and Magnetism,  it is what makes the heaven's move. so when one master's the key's the rest is of no consequence.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 02, 2016, 09:59:01 PM
similar to Ramaswami's setup, and in my findings, with normal AC, and both coils in phase, the output EMF doesn't change. Here, also, the EMF and power out is related to power in, and should never be more than 100%.

  What?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 03, 2016, 02:23:43 AM
Doug, I was referring to a dual primary transformer. Ramaswami showed some photos before and he had two primaries on either side of his secondary, just like Figuera's.

You can add as many primaries as you want, but if they are powered by the same AC source, wired in parallel, the output voltage won't change.

So, if I have windings of 1:1 ratio, 12V source- turn on one primary, output is 12V. Turn on second primary, output is still 12V. Twice the current on the primary side, but EMF doesn't change. I learned this by experiment.


And Ramaswami, if you don't understand my technical jargon then I apologize. I don't have formal schooling in this but I try to learn on my own. And for whatever "theory" you are referring to, perhaps we should also forget about Faraday's law, or Ohm's law, or Ampere's law... it seems they also include theories.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 03, 2016, 09:16:11 AM
Antijon..Please .. No apologies are needed. I'm sorry if I had spoken harshly..Let me explain the problem..later..

Marathonman..You are correct that the magnetic field strength would have been very high and iron would have been heated enormously. You are quite correct on that. But you see the device used iron rods. Lots of them and we have hammered them to be in place. This kind of core has lot of air gaps. So air flows through the heated iron from the environment to cool it. So yes iron is heated enormously. We have first tried to use step down transformer and high current and lower number of turns and both the wire and the iron became so hot we moved to minimize the input but keep the magnetic field strength high. And we compressed and decompressed or increased and decreased  the magnetic field strength in the central core which is smaller in length and diameter and so the central core had magnetic saturation and was screaming. The heat was an issue. But we could not get funds to tackle the heat and other issues. The core size has to be high here as we produce more output to avoid the heating problem precisely.

Antijon.. The problem is this..

Let me make some theoretical statements and you will all say yes and so let me myself say yes..

1. We all inhale and exhale air  -- yes

2. Without this air we cannot survive -- yes

3. We do not see the air for air is not in the visible spectrum -- Yes..

4. Bacteria and virus are living organisms present in air but so tiny we cannot see them -- yes

5. Bacteria and virus can move through the invisible air and can infect us --yes.

6. We have cell phones and Internet and we can communicate like this.. Yes

7. A child inside the womb of the mother is a living human awaiting entry to Earth --Yes..

Now if you tell the child inside the womb of the mother all that is stated as yes in points 1 to 6, the child will not agree for it is limited by its surroundings. The vision and the knowledge is limited. It will say don't cheat me what I know is the reality. No fault with that. 

Similarly if we limit ourselves to what has been stated in old patents and do not go beyond them we will also say the same results. Where is the need to limit ourselves? What prevents us from doing beyond what is stated in old patents?.

As I understand from one Senior person, there is very little literature on Multifilar coils. I can tell you that if you use 12 filar to 14 coil on a primary the coil would draw at 220 volts and 50 Hz not more than 0.5 amps or it would not draw more than 110 watts. The magnetic field strength on the other hand would be very intense for we have 12 parallel rotating currents over the core and this creates a very strong magnetic field.

If I undrestand correctly in transformers you are not supposed to have air gaps and magnetic field strength should be as low as possible to prevent eddy currents.

I have seen a strange thing in the experiments.

I built a solenoid as a step up transformer. 12 layers of 4 sq mm wire. On that we wound the primary and the primary was quadfilar if I remember correctly. The input was 220 volts and 15 amps and output was 300 volts and 10 amps. The output was given to a load of 17x200 watts lamps and lamps were bright but the meters indicated that the output was only 3000 watts. Input was 3300 watts and so COP was 0.91 or so. I think you can easily simulate this to verify that what I'm saying is correct. Because the number of turns of wire are high and the amperage was high the magnetic field strength of the core of the solenoid was high and it could be felt up to 4 feet away and could be very strongly experienced at up to 1 feet away.

Can you agree with the above results?.

The strange thing is that as the voltage in the secondary is increased eddy currents disappear. When we test the rods with the tester there is no current when voltage in the secondary goes to 300 and above volts. Possibly because the rods get very hot a lot of air pass through the core and this carries away the ions that cause the eddy currents. I do not know but I can tell you that when the voltage of the secondary in such a single solenoid is increased the eddy currents are gone.

Now in this device itself if we make some modifications and use thick wires like ones capable of carrying 100 amps for the same input what will happen? I do not know..We can conclude from earlier experiments done by others that the results cannot be more than 100 % of the input. I would agree with that. I think you would also agree..

I think you all also would agree with the strong magnetic field that is felt at a distance from the core.

This is what you would not agree..

This simple solenoid can be easily modified to produce far more than the input.

Let me proceed to explain How.

You place in the center of the core two thick copper bars. Insulate them from the iron core. Let them not touch each other as well. Let the copper bars run to one feet extra on both sides.

You please place two thick copper cones and weld it to the copper bars so that the tip of the cone is at the extreme outer side and the magnetic waves that are coming out of the solenoid are captured by the cone and concentrated at the tip on both sides. Connect the high voltage secondary to the cone and take the power output from the tip of the cone which is a very thick copper bar..It can be cone shaped, pyramid shaped, or shaped differently but in essence the magnetic field strength must be concentrated in the cone.

The copper cone would work like a Homopolar generator and would have great amperage. The energy for the copper comes from the wasted magntic field. Voltage is given by the thick wires.This will not consume more from the primary if you use sufficient number of multifilar coils.

You would agree that the copper cone would produce very high amperage as long as it is not connected to the secondary wire and would argue or feel that once it is connected to the wire since output = Input we would have to draw more input. Not necessary.

If the thick wires capable of having high amperage are used then this system can be tested immediately.  We experimented with only one copper at one end and the heat was excessive and current was very high and so we did not connect the wire and the copper cone. But I can tell you that the copper cone has separate high amperage which does not require any additional input from the primary. It gets its power by concentrating the wasted magnetic field. We may have to provide two cones one over the other with holes so that the magnetic field can move out but only after energising the cone..Even if we make only a step down transformer and connect all of them in series the voltage and amperage would go up for a small input. You see it looks like the Ed Gray device..You also see it looks like the Homopolar generator of Tesla in 1889.

We have experimented but the problem was one of heat and core size. If we are going to make a lot of output the core size has to be increased to prevent heating and melting. Core cannot be a core like in transformers but must be a leaky core that should allow the cooling media to pass through. By increasing the Frequency of the input the input amperage can be brought down and we will need to use high voltage and spark plug to create that drop in the input or we need to use multifilar coils to create the drop in the input.

I would request you in all my humility to please go beyond what is stated in books and patents. Experiment, observe and learn and apply.


There is no need to limit ourselves to old data. In the example I'm giving you would say yes for the copper cone producing high amperage  without drawing any input from the primary and secondary can be separate. But you would not agree that if the secondary and cone are connected primary would not draw more.

You need to experiment for this with multifilar coils and realize that as the number of wires go up the input is limited in AC.Wire cannot draw current.

In pulsed DC to the best of my knowledge there is no impedance to the current whether you use a single helical coil or multifilar coil and so we need to reduce the input voltage and give higher amperage. Pulsed DC here is AC rectified by diode bridge rectifier.

I have not experimented with the rapid switching on and off method of DareDiamond and so I cannot say any thing about it.

In the Ramaswami device you have forgotten that high voltage is fed to two large Earth batteries and they supply higher output as long as the electrode is not corroded. Higher the voltage faster is the electrochemical reaction in the earth batteries.

I'm not inclined to do further experiments due to many reasons.  But I do hope that the above examples would enable you to become creative and not limit yourself to old data.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 03, 2016, 03:21:50 PM
At this point Im pretty sure no one here has ever built a normal generator or done extensive work on one. It would be very hard to build a odd ball generator if you didnt know what was going on in a normal generator. I had a hunch and went looking for a patent.The original patent for the meg. A number of people have their hand in the Meg patent. I wanted to see based on the patent if they also showed any signs of the same anomaly. Sure enough they also try to avoid or skirt around the laws of physics.
  There is at least one familiar page. The one showing the input pattern from the controller they used. Easy to over look even when your looking at it.
   You cant run this absolutely off an ac input. Ac goes full circle to the zero line and reverses. Count the number of times flux changes per the number of times the input changes the flux.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: telemad on January 03, 2016, 06:33:55 PM
Hello to every member of this thread and forum in whole!

Firstly, being for more than a year in the OU research field I have nothing to present yet. For now I'm just a reader who makes his own conclusions based on other OU researchers' experience.

I've already read a lot of great works of Hendershot, Hubbard, Smith, Mark and others. But Clemente Figuera just got 100% of my attention.
All 196 pages of this thread are in my head now.

And although I'm pretty sure that almost all of the OU devices share the same idea (magnetic interactions with ether etc.) Figuera's device is what I need to do first to prove at least to myself that all the teachings of standard physics are directed to move people away from the thought that the energy must be free and accessible everywhere to everyone in any quantities.

From my part I promise to share any valuable results I achieve to the community for free. As a great inventor Tesla did.
Thank you for all your thoughts and experiments, it is realy a big help for those who can read and analyze sometimes an enormously valuable information.

Happy New Year! And may your ideas come true in this piece of art - Figuera's infinite energy machine.
I'm sure, we will solve his puzzle.

From Russia with love  :)

P.S.
Sorry for some grammar mistakes, English is not my mother language.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 03, 2016, 08:21:22 PM
I want to link a post from nov-2012 in EF forum from a user about the 7 resistors and the 7 gropus of coils. Just to show that good ideas are around us more time than some may think. The two most important things that I learned was from nov-2012 in the EF thread. Those who know and do not teach are not with me.

Quote

I tried to see in the mind of Figuere if at all possible. First I think if I was building a device for free energy, would I put in massive resistors? This sounds contra productive to me. Besides, If I look closely to the remains of the patent drawing, it looks faintly as if the resistors are placed there in a later stage, this is of course guesswork.

Secondly: Why is Figuere drawing a stack of 7 sets of primary and secondary coils in his patent???? This haunted me for a few weeks, time and again, WY 7 SETS OF COILS???? till I thought of the following.
Every inventor is making deliberate mistakes in the description in his/her patent. This is to my mind not different with the patent of Figuere.

So lets trow away the resistors. Then make a rotary collector system that puts 7 primary coils in series all times. So on the first step of the rotation of the rotating collector device, all 7 primaries of the south are in series, the other are powerless. Then on the second collector position we have again 7 primerie coils in series, this time 6 of the south and 1 of the north, then next position it is 5South and 2North, next 3S and 4N, then 2S and 5N and so on. In this way we have always the same current in 7 series connected primeri coils. This way you get more or less the same waveform as with the resistors, but all the current is active, not used to heat resistors.


http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-6.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-6.html)

PS  Telemad, Welcome to this thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 04, 2016, 04:05:24 AM
I will not contradict anyone at this time but what i will say is you can't have a north and a south near each other at any time or it will be one big magnet. it will as one can say magnetically short circuit it self and leave the secondary core high and dry with zilch out put.

telemad;
 you are off to a good start by reading all post and all literature you have mentioned.  you already have an upper hand as opposed to bone heads that start posting with no clue what is going on. i commend you and would like to welcome you to the forum. we as people need to stick together as we all know our Governments suck and are corrupt to the bone.
when i was in the navy all the Russian woman would complain that their guys would drink to much vodka so my advice would be give her the meat then drink the vodka. ha, ha, ha ! 
хорошего дня khoroshego dnya
May Figuera shine on all of us.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: telemad on January 04, 2016, 07:47:02 AM
Hanon, Marathonman, thank you!

Marathonman, actually, it's a common fairy tail about Russians drinking too much vodka. Vodka is just a national drink. We don't have bears with balalaika singing and dancing down the streets neither :)

As for Figuera. I'm building a commutator as it's been described in patents. After this the first thing I'm going to do is to make the most powerful but safe voltage electromagnets as Marathonman (and Tesla US512340 http://www.google.ru/patents/US512340 (http://www.google.ru/patents/US512340)) suggested (manyfillar windings to increase magnetic field).

There are lots of ideas about coils setup in this thread to try. And I already have some of them written down for testing. But as someone here said, we should first repeat the work of the inventor using materials of his time and thinking as he did in his time. And (only) when we get positive results we should move forward switching to new materials, mosfets, etc.

For now I'm reading and experimenting when I have spare time.
When I have something to show I'll do it definitely.

Thanks to Hanon, Marathonman, Doug1, NRamaswami, Antijon, Forest, RandyFL and others who do their best to support this thread.
Your ideas are precious.

Respectfully,
Denis (telemad)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 04, 2016, 04:10:59 PM
Ramaswami, actually, you may have something. After more thinking, a multifilar primary may increase current on the secondary. About your setup with the copper, it's interesting, but why wouldn't you close the core to increase induction on the secondary coil?

Doug, it's a process. haha Personally, I haven't built a generator, but I can say that the more you learn the better your chances are. I advise everyone to start at the beginning. Learn the laws, and learn how to apply them. https://youtu.be/qWu82nJS42I This is a link to Brightstorm physics on youtube. If you don't know Faraday's Law or anything about induction, watch their videos. And I'm not saying that to you personally, Doug, always sounded like you knew this stuff. I think the concept of Figuera's device is simple. The EMF is based on the input current (B Field), the core area and number of turns, and the rate of change of B through the core. In an AC system, the rate of change is related to the voltage, higher voltage= faster change in B field. In Figuera's, the rate of change is equal to the voltage, but doubled when the two waves crossover (doesn't reach zero point like AC). I'm only speculating, but the EMF should be double, compared to a standard pulsing arrangement.

But that's not the only way to create EMF. A standard generator has a constant B field (exciter), but changes the area per rate of change. A transformer has a constant area, constant rate, but changes the B field. So if we change either the area, or the frequency of a transformer, we can generate more EMF= more than 1COP. We can't change the frequency, but we can change the area. But that's a different idea entirely.

Welcome Telemad. Look forward to seeing your ideas come to fruition.

Hanon, the thing that bothers me about that description is that all of the secondary coils are wired in series or parallel. If the coils were powered sequentially, some secondaries would be powered, and some not, meaning that some would be powered by the others, losing power to the outside load.

*also, if anyone wants a copy of magnetic circuit laws, such as AT, B field, etc. it's the attached pdf. Don't remember where I found it, but it comes in handy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 04, 2016, 04:52:19 PM

Hanon, the thing that bothers me about that description is that all of the secondary coils are wired in series or parallel. If the coils were powered sequentially, some secondaries would be powered, and some not, meaning that some would be powered by the others, losing power to the outside load.


Antijon, That posts refers to forget the patent drawing and just build only one stage: one whole electromagnet N composed by 7 small piled electromagnets with the same core fired in that sequence, then just one single induced coil in the middle , and another whole electromagnet S with its 7 small electromagnets piled one after another sharing the same core.

Just forget the patent sketch. Maybe the drawing is just for clarification, not the best implementation of the device. I guess Doug1 knows about this design. He also propose it in 2014.

Marathonman, I guess you have realized that that design may be powered with an electronic board without heat losses.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 04, 2016, 05:13:17 PM
As I said with resistor you can make it work but very little overunity can be obtained.The setup is actually very simple and good explained by Figuera and you have all keys except maybe one, the problem is each of you are fixed on one aspect of device.
The most important aspect is not Lenz law or resistor or commutator but something else.Try to guess what.
hanon,glad you found the other way without resistors, please answer why Figuera insisted on make before break.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 04, 2016, 06:30:14 PM
You have my attention.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 04, 2016, 10:55:36 PM
Forest,
That was to avoid sparks, have a quasi-smooth signal, and avoid collapsing the magnetic field to have always charged the electromagnets. Or not? What else is important? Let's see your view...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 04, 2016, 11:35:06 PM
 A modified 5kw variac turned auto transformer? Thats my guess.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 05, 2016, 12:02:56 AM
Here Marathonman the image of their inputs and outputs.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 06, 2016, 03:46:19 PM
I just thought i would look for a program to simulate the magnetic effects of the two opposing primary electromagnets.
OMG ! not only are their NO open source programs but was i floored at the price of the retail programs.
does anyone have any spare kids they want to get rid of for trade for program. ha, ha, ha.

PS. we are still waiting.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: telemad on January 06, 2016, 04:59:58 PM
Marathonman,

even if you have money for any of such program, I suppose you won't find it useful in case of searching for any OU effects that are banned in all kinds of information sources or simulators for many-many years by you know whom  ;)
These programs are for mainstream (scholar) physical effects only, IMHO.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on January 07, 2016, 10:56:14 AM
Hello All and Happy New Year...

I wanted to remind everyone that Thomas E. Bearden does have a patent on a motionless magnetic generator ...
US patent US 6362718 B1 ... and that Howard R. Johnson did have a patent on a magnet motor.

I return you to your previous watched program " Dancing with Figueras "

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 07, 2016, 02:04:07 PM
I have been doing some tests with permanent magnets and a magnetic steel bar to emulate the movement of the magnetic lines changing the magnets from one side to the other side of the steel bar (interchanging the strength of the magnetic field in each side).


I have noted that the plane where magnetic lines collide and are expelled is not moved much. I mean that the distance from one side at full power and the inverse situation are not very different.  (Note: I tried to guess the colliding point with a small magnet, felling the point of change in its magnetism moving it along the steel bar)


This is just a thought: if the magnetic fieds are transversing the steel with almost null resistance to its movement (low reluctance) then there is not difference on how far they go along the steel even changing their strenght. I guess that it would be better if the induced coil core would have a core composition which creates some resistance to the movement of the magnetic field along the core. I mean a core that decrease in magnetic intensity as the field go a longer distance along the core. For example an air-core induced coil will create a higher difference in the movement of the colliding fields be cause air has a greater reluctance (resistance) to the magnetic field. In air with one electromagnet at minimun the colliding point will be very close to that electromagnet, effect that I think i won´t be the same with steel (low reluctance). On the other hand higher reluctances, as air,  will create more dispersion of the magnetic lines. Maybe the optimum is to find a core composition with the proper reluctance to get enough movement of the magnetic lines and also enough compresión of the lines around the colliding point of both fields.


This is a quote of the 1908 patent. Nothing is said about the induced core composition:

Quote

The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several
electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit,
also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly
placed. As neither of the two circuits rotate, there is no need to make them
round, nor leave any space between one and the other.

 


Later Buforn seems to have used also electromagnets as induced coil. But it is interesting to note that he refered in some cases that "inside the induced core you can place a smaller coil..." (literal translation: ...in the sinus of the induced coil you can place another coil...). This small coil was the coil used to feedback the device.


What are your thoughts about this?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 07, 2016, 03:23:33 PM
Hanon, that's very interesting, but remember that when one is max, the other is zero. With a perm. magnet you could pull it away from the core to see if it changes the line.

But keep in mind that the EMF is related to the strength of the magnet and how fast it is changing polarity in the induced. So it is actually a copy of a generator. If you introduce a reluctance, it's only going to show itself as a loss of efficiency. Also, if you use two electromagnets with AC wave, but DC bias, the opposing DC fields should cancel, leaving only the energy of the AC wave to induce EMF. Makes me think that one side must drop to zero as Doug mentioned before.

Guys, the only reason modern mainstream science would not accept overunity is because of conservation of energy law. But once you understand electrical "power" and generators, you realize that it doesn't violate any law.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 07, 2016, 03:54:30 PM
Conservation of energy is a BS drummed up set of parameters set by status que people. Maxwell original equations proved excess energy is available and is a reality that was altered by the hands of J P Morgan and friends. that is why free energy devises work because of the completely flawed laws set forth by greedy corrupt individuals.

Hanon; a simple method to test the movement of fields as was passed to me is a straw and paper clip. the paper clip will move with the fields. i have tested this and believe it or not it does work. it would seam to me that magnets would not be good to test as you cannot block or change the field strength of the magnet. i personally would use small electromagnets to test.
yes i do agree that the small coil was used to power the device.

Randy; TB's device is not as efficient as Flynn's devises ie better switching. besides i would think the patent office would see it as different as one have magnets and one doesn't. good to hear from ya.

PS. i think TB is a total bone head but that is just my observation.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 07, 2016, 05:12:46 PM
C'mon.Conservation of energy is correct law. Bufor explained it throughfully, others mentioned it also. Never on this Earth any generator produced electricity by conversion of mechanical energy.They are pumps, they simply condense ... :P  "air electricity"

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 07, 2016, 05:49:07 PM
Forest: 3231 posts and I doubt if any of your posts is any useful. We are still waiting the answer to your previous post. Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 07, 2016, 05:53:57 PM
Forest: 3231 posts and I doubt if any of your posts is any useful. We are still waiting the answer to your previous post. Bye
No answer. Guess yourself, it's very easy.Besides I'm waiting for original scans of patents, but I guess you are not willing to share,right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 07, 2016, 07:27:06 PM
I do not care much of your missing reply. You are stating in the EF forum that polarity is north - south, therefore, we are not in the same "wave". All patents are now in public domain and translated into english for friends and everyone. All technical info about Figuera and Buforn is now on the internet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 08, 2016, 04:36:09 AM
Hanon; if he is waiting for the original scans then he has nothing to offer but hot air because if he had a working device why would he need the original scans. besides a north near a south all you get is a big fat magnet not overunity.
bla, bla, bla, bla that's all i hear on this forum except from a few intelligent people in which you know who you are as i do.
good god all the most important info has been posted, read it, know it, live it, build it.
conservation of energy is F-in DOGMA BS and the sooner you pull J P Morgan/Einstein out of one's ass the better your life will be. Einstein created nothing, he built nothing, he has nothing but a 220 volt hair do and idiots that follow him.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 08, 2016, 12:15:40 PM
 Hannon
  On your magnet test rig check to see how close the magnets can be to each other and still attract the bar or metal by using smaller bars or slide the magnets together on the long flat side until they start to repel. Better still use two or three bars set up like the pat and feel where and when things change. Two longer bars on the outside and a shorter one in the middle will give you room to move one magnet away while the other is closer.Test it in different positions and pull the ends apart and see which end the middle is stuck to compared to where the magnet is on the one it sticks to. Not much point in using more magnets on one side compared to the other too much to hold on to and they tend to flip over and smash together chipping off edges or corners when they are being adjusted. If you think I said the power input should go completely off on the declining magnet that is ether my poor communication or your poor interpretation. Try thinking in terms of proportions. The signal from G for example if it was tied to 12v would sweep back and forth from 3v to 12 volts and never go to zero no one magnet would ever go below 3v. It takes too long for the field to build up if it turns off. For sake of clarity lets call the 3v a base line input. it will produce a steady pressure repelling the two powered magnets powered from G .
  Now go back and rethink how you would compare that to what happens in a mag amp. Then look at a normal rotating gen. The field never drops down below a certain point or speed. The engine never provides a single volt to the output or to power the rotating field magnet. All the current comes from the gen to run the field and the output. Exclude the engine by separating the pert of the current used to mimic motion and the part setting up the field which will be forced over Y as the changing field causing induction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 08, 2016, 12:37:11 PM
This is for lazy people who dislike to see a whole video of 13 min. This is a summary of just 2 min.


Keep off this link if you think that "rectangle N" means North and "rectangle S" means South:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2qwR6yNe58 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2qwR6yNe58)


.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 08, 2016, 04:10:51 PM
Doug, I may have misunderstood, but the fact remains that Figuera himself said that one should be full while the other is empty of current.

It makes sense to drop one as close to zero as possible. This will increase the rate-of-change and increase induction. The reason why I say this is because if you have 12V on one electromagnet, and 3V on the other, the total field will be the sum of both. Because the fields oppose, the total field will be 12V-3V=9V.

But that's really a small concern. If Figuera raised the input voltage over the resistor, it would do the same thing. So I guess it doesn't really matter, increasing the input voltage still increases the EMF.


Hanon, you can use North and South. That's the real secret that "they" don't want you to know about. See the two magnets make aether energy! That's the secret that the aliens told Tesla when he talked to mars! What's EMF?? That's just what the dogmatic schools want you to think... wait, you guys are too scientific, you must be planted here by the governments to stop us from knowing the truth. #joking
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 08, 2016, 05:55:24 PM
Antijon,


I think you should always need a minimum intensity in the system in order to create a magnetic pressure and compress the magnetic lines of both electromagnets. If you reach zero then the magnetic lines in that moment will not collide and they will just pass along the induced coil without cutting the wires


This system is not based on the rate of change to increase induction (as in transformers) but it is based on the number of flux lines which cut the induced wires (as in generators). The field variations are just to move the magnetic lines back and forth, not to create a rate of change per se (dB/dt). In fact if you have a maximum of 12V and a minimum of 3V, as they are compressed in the induced core I think you will get and induction of 12 V + 3 V


I guess that Figuera said that when one electromagnet is full and the other is empty was to make easy to understand. We know that there is always some intensity going along the higher resistance path in the commutator described in 1908 patent. Around the 21st of july of 2015 I posted an Excel Simulation of his commutator. If you can not find it, tell me and I will look for the link to that post.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on January 09, 2016, 02:21:16 AM
@forest

I can feel that you have OU transformer like Figuera and I do believe that were not dealing
with steady state here but Impulse Technology. Right?

There is a fellow here, in our place that sell similar device that capable of self-charging. After using it,
just leave it for awhile and charge itself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 09, 2016, 04:17:05 AM
Sorry Hanon, don't have excel. I know what you mean, but I think it's kind of the same thing either way you look at it.

Here's some info, found this site http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-index.html that has some great animations of circuits.

Anyway, found this one particularly interesting. http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-dcrestoration.html

also known as a diode clamper. Found this site in googling http://www.circuitstoday.com/diode-clamping-circuits
Notice the positive and negative clamper produce the opposing DC waveforms from the same source. So I made the schematic below to see what it would look like. I guess it's something else that should be tested. Of course, may not work properly with the centertapped as a source, but it's easily done with two transformers. Or could simply use the two signals to power transistors on the coils. I'll play around with it and see.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 10, 2016, 02:26:15 PM
Hannon
 
 You can calculate the amount of energy the declining magnet returns to the system in addition to what you have done. If what is otherwise lost is reused to some extent the 12 volts used from the source is exponentially reduced in each cycle where a greater amount is used from the declining magnet until it completely or nearly so suppresses the source when they become qualitatively equal. If the lesser magnet is 3 it gave back 9 if it was perfect from when it was at 12. Reducing the opposite magnet input by 9 and in the next cycle less is from the source until in each consecutive cycle up to the point of the source being matched. it's not that perfect but that should give you some better mental image to chew on.

 In addition to that is the time domain.The time it takes for a field to develop taking the characteristics of the electromagnet into account. Better explained here http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/106296/how-fast-does-it-take-to-create-a-magnetic-field-in-a-solenoid
  If the magnetic filed were allowed to drop to zero it would just take too long to build back up to an effective level. 60 or 50 times a second would not be likely to happen. The longer the time permitted for it to build up could even be leveraged to reduce the current giving it more time in which it can build up the field.The way a rotating generator uses an escalating current fed back from the stator to the field until it reaches it's effective level to maintain the output.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 11, 2016, 12:16:19 AM
So it would seem to me that if someone let the switching of their Electromagnets go to low that their core would loose the amplifying capability of the design Figuera was so searching for because it would take way to long for the field to build back up.
so by switching them sooner it would allow the Fields/Pressure to be maintained between the electromagnets thus the secondary output core.
then that would mean that the declining electromagnet is only decreased enough to clear the secondary before it is raised again and that is where your paper clip trick comes into play as it would basically act as a pointer to where the fields collision line is at all times........SWEET !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 11, 2016, 01:05:11 AM
I think this is an interesting read about changing magnetic fields in time and in space (in motion):

http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/ (http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/)

http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/files/MaxLor.html (http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/files/MaxLor.html)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 11, 2016, 04:46:46 PM
Thank you Hanon for this link, even if you have posted it many times it is still good reading. also i agree with you about above post stating that if increasing electromagnet has a flux of 100 volts and it takes a decline of say 40 volts to push out the declining electromagnet from the secondary then the net flux are 160 volts in the process,  even though i think we are dealing with currant you still get the general idea.

 You should also take into account that as one electromagnet is being reduced or declining and or being shoved out or the secondary into it's core from the increasing electromagnet,  it supports the increasing electromagnet as the currant from both are in the same direction.

this would be impossible if it were a North South facing electromagnets as one reducing and one increasing electromagnet would have opposing currants. this is why people who chose North South facing Electromagnets have very little output as it is a battle of currants and what is left over from the increasing electromagnet is of little use.

Figuera described his device as "batteries in series" so in order to achieve this it would lead me to believe that once the field is built up that all one needs to do is switch his electromagnets to maintain the fields between the electromagnets thus acting as batteries as the stored field would act as such requiring very little currant/effort to maintain said field in a varying sweeping motion.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 12, 2016, 06:34:25 PM
Marathonman,


I feel that in some sense my labor here it is to convince people that it is not the same the induction in a transformer than the induction in a generator. Thus why I repeat some posts: to get people convinced.


Let´s see what William J. Hooper told. He noticed, and tested,  that there were three different electric fields with different properties. In fact the motional electric field is the only one which can not be shielded, as he tested. Therefore, it´s different from the other two electric fields.


Quote


The writer has classified operationally the three most prominent electric and the three most prominent magnetic fields which we find in nature. They are as follows:
Fundamental Electric & Magnetic Fields (m.k.s. units)
(1) The electrostatic or Coulomb field arising from the presence of charges
        Ec = Qr/4·pi·eo·r^3
(2) The motional electric field which acts on charges traveling with velocity V across a magnetic induction Bs. This field is produced by flux cutting and should not be confused with Et arising from flux linking   
        Em = v x Bs
(3) The electric field Et, in this formula arises from flux linking, or transformer electromagnetic induction discovered by Henry and Faraday. In this field B changes intrinsically with time. A is the magnetic vector potential.   
        Curl Et = dB/dt
         or   Et = dA/dt

[.......]
All electromagnetic phenomena applied in electrical technology have, as their fundamental basis, the mutual forces experienced by electric charges, and we have seen that these arise in three ways:
Ec ~ Two charges experience mutual forces in virtue of their positions. This is the electrostatic force of attraction or repulsion.
Em ~ They experience additional forces in virtue of their velocities. Thence arise the forces experienced by a conductor carrying a steady current in a constant magnetic field, the forces between current-carrying conductors, and the induction of en emf in a conductor moving relatively to the source of a magnetic field.
Et ~ They also experience additional forces by virtue of their accelerations, from which arise the induction of an emf by transformer actions, and electromagnetic radiation of energy.
http://rexresearch.com/hooper/horizon.htm (http://rexresearch.com/hooper/horizon.htm)

[/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 12, 2016, 07:05:25 PM
Yes i agree it is frustrating, i downloaded his work the last time you posted it, printed it out and have read multiple times as all good posts and literature.
use bull Zip PDF printer, highlight what ever you want right click then print. it allows me to save just about everything i read in PDF form. i have one hell of a collection of very good stuff. i then back it up to hard drive, USB and Blue ray as to never loose work again. on sites that won't let me do that i use snipping tool from windows 7.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 13, 2016, 12:08:49 PM
I think one of the main reasons the figuera device is so efficient has to do with Two opposing Electromagnets (B fields cancel E fields add) and the Hysteresis loop. i see it as this, when the core is taken close to saturation it remains their in the upper quadrant of the hysteresis cycle shown below in blue. it never see's the lower quadrant because the core is never demagnetized. it in fact almost reaches saturation and stays their so not only would their be very little loss but also will be extremely efficient as the Primaries are never reversed as the magnetization is always in the same direction.  i also think that is why figuera chose pure iron to get the most bang for his buck as to say.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 13, 2016, 05:34:37 PM
Hanon, sorry but I'm going to have to provide an argument to your hypothesis. I don't think Figuera's concept relied on flux-cutting, but flux-linking.

If you view the device as a DC source, powering two parallel resistors and coils, you can calculate current based on the position of the commutator. So simply a DC source to two variable resistors. Now, if you do this you can get an image of what the magnetic fields timing will be. So with a large total resistance, you can get two pulses, 180 degrees in timing, essentially an AC wave. With a smaller resistance, you will have two DC signals with ripples.

The smaller resistance is what you are referring to. Say that we have a DC pulse with a low of 5V and a peak of 12V. It can be assumed that each electromagnet will have a constant magnetic field equal to 5V, and a peak field equal to 12V. So it's fair to assume that there is a constant flux "breaking out" of the core that may shift from side to side.

But you also have to consider the effect of the electromagnets on each other. When two electromagnets are arranged to oppose each other, their magnetic fields cancel. Read here http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/inductor/series-inductors.html to see that the total magnetic field will be weaker than the sum of the individual fields, and it will have a direction of the stronger electromagnet. So what I mean is, if one coil is at 5V, and the other is at 12V, the fields won't break out of the core if the mutual induction is high. The field will have a direction from the polarity of the 12V, and it will have a strength equal to 7V.


Also, here is a video from Gotoluc showing that the created fields don't repel, but simply cancel out, or that the total repulsion is very low. https://youtu.be/wAYsAN5QPnA

Another example is a common transformer. When the secondary draws current it produces a magnetic field that opposes the field of the primary. If this caused the magnetic lines to travel out of the core, then the primary would cease to induce the secondary. This means that a transformer would not be able to work. But a transformer relies on the fact that the fields don't repel, they cancel. The field of the transformer secondary coil is always weaker than the primary, and therefore, the primary will always induce a current on the secondary. Of course there are losses to flux leaving the core, but this isn't due to the repelling fields as much as it is due to geometry of the core.

As we've said before, according to Lenz law, when one field is zero and increasing to North, the other is -North and increasing to zero, the induced EMF from each is in the same direction and adds. This also shows that one should bring the decreasing field as close to zero as possible.

Also, if that had been Figuera's intention, I think the inducers would be made to make it more efficient. He includes no flux paths outside of the induced coil. With such a large "air gap" the iron in the core would be meaningless and the efficiency would be low. I'm just saying that this is equivalent to armature reactance in a generator.

Anyway, I'm not saying you can't build it based on the principles that you describe, after all, there are many ways to induce EMF. I'm just saying that your hypothesis includes more problems that would need to be accounted for. And even if you tried to build it based on a flux cutting model, current will still be induced by the flux linking, no way around it unless you change the geometry and eliminate the coils altogether.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 13, 2016, 09:03:06 PM
antijon:
  I just watched your video and read your link completely. it seems that all your references are using opposing electromagnet with both being powered up at the same time in opposing or attracting mode. not one of them has an electromagnet increasing while the other is decreasing.
therefore you might want to reconsider your post,  just a thought.

if the electromagnet are taken all the way down you will lose all amplification from the declining electromagnet negating the purpose of the second primary. i think the whole purpose is to build up the field and maintain it with little effort.

Figuera's device would have to have some kind of coupling (weather soft or hard) for the amplification to take place. i think that since one is increasing and the other is decreasing that the currant is coupled between them and causes the amplification in the secondary.
this is of course just my opinion's so please don't get mad if i disagree as i have grown to question everything with not only the figuera device but with all known law's as we know many are flawed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 14, 2016, 03:46:28 PM
Marathonman, I appreciate your comment, and you're right, the post didn't deal with increasing and decreasing fields, but what would happen when both fields are kept up.

To build and maintain a field requires current. Current equals wattage in. But in this case, maintaining the fields would only lose power, because any remaining DC fields produce no output on the output coil.

Quote
Figuera's device would have to have some kind of coupling (weather soft or hard) for the amplification to take place. i think that since one is increasing and the other is decreasing that the currant is coupled between them and causes the amplification in the secondary.

You're exactly right, it's about the fields increasing and decreasing at the same time, the same amount of change. They're like the inverse of each other. We agree on Lenz law, Lenz law is a part of Faradays law, so let's use that to explain it.

Faradays law is a changing B field, times the area of the coil, over time, equals EMF in the coil.  BxA/sec= EMF

So say I have two coils on a core, I input DC to one, so the field goes from zero to max of 2 Tesla. So I have a field change of 2T. The area of the coil is 1mx1m= 1m2. The change happens in 3 sec. so 2Tx1m2=2Tm2 2Tm2/3sec=0.66 EMF or volts in the output coil. Of course, this is one loop, so if I have 5 windings, it's 0.66Vx5N=3.3V

Now with the Figuera, just say we have two input coils. One is at zero, and the other is max of 2T. The first one goes from zero to -2T, and the other one drops to zero. I'm saying negative 2T, because that's how the output coil sees it. So the total field change from 2T to -2T is -4T. So again with Faraday, -4Tx1m2/3Sec=-1.33 EMF x5N=-6.65V.

See what I mean? Based on simple induction, the two fields change more over time. This doubles the EMF, and more power out. Compared to a normal transformer that builds up, and goes to zero, then goes the other way, this simply builds up then goes the other way.

In Figuera's design, with resistors, you can take the fields down to zero, and it would increase the EMF. There is no time lag because there's little to no reactance, and there's little wasted power because ANY change on the input coils induces EMF. Well, based on Faraday's law just like Figuera said.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on January 14, 2016, 05:15:19 PM
@antijon
Quote
In Figuera's design, with resistors, you can take the fields down to zero,
and it would increase the EMF. There is no time lag because there's little to no
reactance, and there's little wasted power because ANY change on the input coils
induces EMF. Well, based on Faraday's law just like Figuera said.
As Faraday said - It does not matter how the change occurs only that it does. A changing magnetic field or a moving magnetic field which is in effect changing, both expand or contract from a region invoking change. In this case there is no right or wrong persay and the reality of the problem at hand is only limited by our creativity in solving it. There is also the issue of Exergy and absolute change within a system. Many seem overly preoccupied with forcing a transformation through dissipation however a transformation is not exclusive to dissipation the alter ego being accumulation. Explosion-Implosion, Equal yet opposite however in one transformation energy is dissipated and all is lost and in the other transformation energy accumulates and all is gained. It does not matter how the change occurs only that it does, "how" is open to interpretation.
AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 14, 2016, 10:44:14 PM
antijon;

 Very good post and good insight.someone has done their home work
 
The B Field are in constant Change from taking the electromagnets from high to low and back again in unison allowing constant pressure between them because what was passed to me that even though the electromagnet is declining it still has reverse pressure against the increasing electromagnet as it is trying to keep the magnetic field steady. what is not changing is the E Field because once the B Field in the core is built up it is easily maintained by switching the electromagnets back and forth in intensity allowing the E Field to attain a steady state output.
at least this is my understanding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 15, 2016, 02:35:42 PM
allcanadian;

quote "Many seem overly preoccupied with forcing a transformation through dissipation however a transformation is not exclusive to dissipation the alter ego being accumulation".

Please explain further.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 15, 2016, 04:36:15 PM
AC,
Quote
It does not matter how the change occurs only that it does, "how" is open to interpretation.

 ??? I can make a free energy generator and say it's powered by unicorn farts, but does that help you recreate it?

I was open to saying that, in this case flux-cutting or linking, whichever term we prefer, produces the EMF. But there is an inherent problem with the flux cutting model that changes the scope of the blueprint Figuera created.

Flux cutting would require a high magnetic field density that protrudes from the iron and cuts the output coil. This implies that both inducers should always be kept near their maximum, at a great expense of current, to produce the greatest density. This is beyond what Figuera described.

Flux cutting would also require these lines, emanating from the core, to sweep up and down the output coil. I hoped to show in the previous posts, that electromagnets don't behave as permanent magnets. When they are confronted, or on the same inductor, a great portion of their fields cancel out. And honestly, I've never seen a field sweep on an inductor. It's more likely that the density is increased or decreased at the point where they meet and emanate, the center of the inductor.

Either way, two different models produce two different machines.

Marathonman, that's how I see it. A simple solution that's easy to reproduce. Even though I haven't yet. haha But getting into Faraday's law, there's other ways to build a free energy device based on it. You just have to change the B field, area, or frequency from the input to output. That's why I said people that think it breaks conservation of energy don't even understand how a generator works.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 15, 2016, 09:11:41 PM
I had forgotten about area and frequency, thanks
it's more like the opposite fields are pushed out like Doug said not really sweeping as i said. as one field is weakening the other is strengthening so i guess it would push the weaker field out but still maintaining the pressure between them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 15, 2016, 11:13:44 PM

Flux cutting would require a high magnetic field density that protrudes from the iron and cuts the output coil.


Maybe for that reason Figuera placed the two electromagnets very close in the 1902 patent. To compress the flux lines. Also remember that thesum of the fields B1+B2 = constant, so ..the sum is always at maximun.

A very pertinent video: https://youtu.be/yvVbDQ-z66o (https://youtu.be/yvVbDQ-z66o)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 15, 2016, 11:16:25 PM
Forest,
You asked for the original scanned documents. Here I send you the only sentence that you have to understand in this patent. Go and translate it with google if you do not believe my translation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 16, 2016, 01:46:59 PM
Even in a rotating generator the filed is kept up fairly high all the time fairly steady.Only the position changes as it moves the entire magnet. Without movement and without having the continuous stator core for the magnetic field to return though to complete the magnetic path it would need some changes. Second magnet with stator placed between them and a unique controller. The number of lines of flux penetrating the Y still remains the same in both types of generator. You could use the lift test to determine the amount of flux from a standard field magnet from a working generator with the field powered at its maximum. If your looking for 50 or 60 htz output your cyclic rate will have to be reasonable steady so you wont be able to increase the speed to increase the output unless you want to get more complicated more parts.
  Work your way backwards from Y making the Y the size you need for the output you want. Then build the magnets to drive Y based on what Y is in size. The idea that external power is what is always feeding the field magnet is wrong. It does not even work that way in a rotating generator.

  The field which has a measure of force needs to be kept steady it is the resultant amount of flux which is being shifted.It is the number of lines of flux which is cutting the induced. Even if it is slightly reduced in one to enable the shift of the center point where the two fields collide.With two magnets the number of lines in each are not able to mix so the numbers are not the same as one single rotating magnet. Each one is half as many lines as a single rotating magnet. Slightly higher actually but each inducer is less then what would power a single rotating magnet for same output as a single rotating magnet. No engine which rotates a magnet ever directly supplies any power to the magnetic field.The residual field left over after it stops is all it has to ever start up with to cause an output which is given back to the rotating field to make it stronger until it becomes full enough to operate with enough output to power the field and the external load. That is why you have to flash a virgin,there is nothing there for the engine to rotate.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 16, 2016, 03:49:15 PM
So what you are saying is that once a few cycles have passed the the Figuera device will begin to feed it self suppressing the input. so the original power source is just used to build up the field, after that the device takes over and maintain's it self (Field).

so it sounds like the power source can stay attached being recharged in the process. this was what you were referring to when you said it was being shoved into it's core by the gaining electromagnet. this would cause a sort of kickback to the system recharging the original power source.

a while back i read an article about this guy doing studies on a motor. he said after the motor was run for a while and shut off that it took way less currant and time to restart and run the motor compared to a dry cold start. this is because of the residual magnetic field residing in space after it was shut off.  the said field remained for several minutes after the shut down and as long as the motor was restarted within three minutes the field would still be present.
this of course is what is happening with the figuera device or rather all electromagnetic devices.
but  because of the two dynamic fields between them the field is maintained because of the Lenz law not accounting for it let alone two inductive fields between them.   (Right)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 17, 2016, 01:20:55 AM
Correct. There is enough output to power the field plus the shift if you chose to recharge the source then so be it. It is also a buffer to input power to the filed quicker then the output can supply to the field when large loads are fluctuated or turned off and on rapidly to help prevent a lag in the output voltage. Once running a steady load the source can be removed. The difference from a rotating field is the field is moving physically with the rotating magnet leaving the induced winding and approaching another with enough output to power the moving field and the load. here the magnet is not moving just the field, again with enough power to supply both the load and field from the two magnets and a small portion to run the controller. It would serve every ones best interest to stop calling it a commutator.It does not function as one and only slightly looks it could be made from one.Which it can not. Even I am guilty of wrongly calling it a commutator. You would'nt call a volume control on a stereo a commutator. Just call it the controller.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 17, 2016, 02:56:10 PM
It crossed my mind this morning that there is generally some confusion brought about from various sources in text books as to which way the electron current moves in relation to magnetic current.In turn on paper it would also show up as to which side of an electro magnet is North or South in relation to which side of the magnet the lines of force leave or enter. The point of reference can lead to the reverse of what is actually the case and lower level institutes aka crappy colleges will just brush it aside with it does not make any difference as long as you follow through with what ever you start with.
  Here is my point of view. If I go out to eat and have to pay for a bowl of chicken soup and the waiter brings me a bowl of rock soup and says it does not make any difference because it all comes out the same way. Then we have a problem. I guess the waiter will have except my hand drawn currency on a napkin cause it does not make any difference since there is no real value to government issued currency.It all is of no value.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 17, 2016, 04:21:05 PM
hanon
I don't need it, but you spotted correctly - that's how every patent is hiding the essence ....The secret is  slightly uncovered in single sentence in Buforn patent. I know you can find it easily.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on January 17, 2016, 05:22:14 PM
Hi All,

I found these two patents of interest to this subject. The first is related to tape recording but he describes the conditions needed to create a "Traveling Field Transformer". The second is of a device which uses a similar "TFT" setup for power generation which uses a three phase input. Did Figuera create a linear version of a "TFT"?

US 3629518 - Rotating field transformer and tape recording system using same

https://www.google.com/patents/US3629518

US 20040007932 - Generators (Application)

https://www.google.com/patents/US20040007932
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 18, 2016, 02:37:27 PM
I've read through your patents posted and all i can come up with in the end is a fancy name for a rotating magnetic field that can be powered by multiple type sources.

I find it very annoying that people post on this forum being so cryptic. one would have to be rather fucked up in the head in the first place acting like a spoiled rotten brat that knows something that you don't, this is in my book a serious character flaw.
i mean seriously why the fuck post shit that no one can decipher except with a Capitan Jack Cracker Jack Box Decoder ring. does it make you moron's feel like a big man like your holding shit over another man's head well sorry to spoil your fucking head fest but grown men don't play stupid KID GAMES.
Humanity will be extinct shortly and we will finally be rid of pimple ass pukes like this. if you can't post where people can understand it DON'T FUCKING POST IT. do us forum members that want to build a working Figuera device a favor and GO SOMEWHERE ELSE to play your decoder ring games.
I personally am building Figuera device because i have felt i have not done enough to help humanity. the human race is heading in the wrong direction because of Corporate/Government Corruption and Greed and the only way us nobodies are going to get anywhere is by helping each other not just ourselves, lead by example not by the Corporate/Government example.
 by having our own power supplies we could break the bond of control the Corporations and Governments have on us by growing our own food, lighting our own houses and working with nature not against it.
i for one when i have completely built this device and is working will put together design specs and send it around the world for others to build and enjoy whether some like it or not.
i'm sorry for cursing but i am just frustrated and have had my limit of stupidity and secrecy on this forum.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 18, 2016, 04:21:25 PM
You guys have been busy. Nice video Hanon. In fact, I was thinking about buying one of those shake-to-charge flashlights and hacking it to have the magnet polarities arranged like this.

Overall, until we find an easier way to replicate the controller circuit, we'll have a hard time knowing exactly what it does.

I've been doing some studying to determine just what the current and voltage are doing in the coils when the resistance changes, but it's actually more complicated than it seems.

Long story short, the first image is about the easiest way to look at the controller circuit. As you can see, it's a common current divider. A key concept is that the supply voltage is always present, so that makes the whole idea I had about cancelling reactance kind of pointless, because there will never be any reactance.

Anyway, I tried a couple of things, mainly adding a battery to a center-tapped transformer to power another center-tapped transformer. Both transformers were matching 12V, 6V-0-6V. Adding 9V did increase the output voltage, but, as suspected, there was just too much current to make this reasonable. Just to power a 15W lightbulb there was a lot of heat. Overall, trying to run a DC current through a "controller" transformer causes the primary of said transformer to pull a matching current.

In a way, it's like a typical generator. You want to increase the exciter current? You need to apply more torque to turn it because it's going to bog down.

Getting into other designs, I've been looking at typical amplifier circuits. The second image shows a class a amplifier. In this arrangement, the transistors are biased and always maintain a DC current through the transformer.

Anyway, a funny thing about transformers on amplifiers, the voltage across the primary increases above supply voltage. You can read more about it here. http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/Amplifiers/amplifiers52.php The third image was taken from the site.

There's a lot to it, and I'm not saying it will work, but I wonder if anyone's tried using a typical audio amp connected to a modified transformer, like Figuera's coils.
And sorry for always making long posts. haha
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 18, 2016, 07:11:37 PM
Hi again,
Well, I've wound some coils.  Couldn't find any soft iron so I've used some steel bar that I had in stock.  I want to play with the simplest setup for now : two electromagnets and one pickup coil in the middle.
My two electromagnet coils are identical and are wound a few hundred turns of 0.4mm (approx) magnet wire salvaged from a MOT secondary.  DC resistance around 5 ohms.  My pickup is overkill : all of the primary windings of the same MOT (240v version).

The driver circuit I'm using is like this (dual darlingtons) :

The transistor on the left, driven by a 1v peak signal from my sig-gen, is split into two signals 180° apart.  The two signals are fed through decoupling capacitors to two identical darlington drivers.  My coils are represented by the inductors L1 and L2.

With component values shown, the current in the two coils looks like this (dual darlinton plot) :

Quite high current ( the coils get warm after a few minutes use), and a fairly strong magnet effect.  If I place the coils (with the pickup in the middle) with like poles facing each other I get some current in the pickup (but much less that I would have thought).  If I place the magnets with opposing poles facing, I get even less current.

I haven't yet included voltmeters and ammeters : that's the next step.  Note that by varing resistors R7/R5 by 1K or so you control the amplitude of the output signal; by varying R8/R6 (by a maximum of perhaps 10k either way) you can vary the DC quiescent current which allows you to let the coil current drop down to 0amps or not.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 18, 2016, 07:24:45 PM
The coils :
This is my pickup : size is 6cm dia. by 6cm long.  Former is printed on my 3D printer.

And the magnets : longer in length (around 7.5cm) and only 3 layers of wire (I was impatient).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 18, 2016, 08:48:44 PM
Marathon,

I agree with last post. Many people love speaking in high encrypted code. In my case as I am a simple person I just may say everything clear and straight.

Please look this link and do not forget to have a look into the signature:

http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=990#p7320 (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=990#p7320)

It is a pity that this forum does not accept to include a signature.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 18, 2016, 10:00:53 PM
Glenn_FR:
 Good start, looks good, wish i had a 3-D printer but life has not been so kind after i broke my foot. can only do limited test as of now until healed. just remember a sine/ sine 180 goes below zero and figuera did not. i had always positive sine/sine 180 circuit but lost it on the last attack on my computer.
 i have since built a PFSense Firewall and it doesn't happen any more thanks to Supermicro and PFSense. less than 20 watt always on firewall,  now the Government can kiss my 20 watt Backside. ha, ha. ha.
Glad to have u aboard.

hanon;
 some code i can decrypt and some i can't. he whom i won't mention i can get but others i can not. what are you referring to the signature. i have went to site and translated but was very weird in translation and sounded like me when i am hammered drunk on a case of beer. can you please explain.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 18, 2016, 10:23:53 PM
Glen, beautiful setup! Trying a decent amp was the next thing on my list. Just wanted to say, looks like your current is a little high during the "off" time. Have you tried increasing the value of R8/R6 and seeing if that helps?

Thanks for the link to the Wordpress site, Hanon
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 18, 2016, 11:02:43 PM
Marathon,
In that page in the signature of that post there is a link to a site with clear info. My aim is to collect there the most important info that I think it is important to grasp it in a quick view. Into this forum the info is very dispersed and mixed with many different theories and stuff that is almost imposible to find good info. Of course this will be my view and oppinion about N-N design. All those which want to contribute to that design are welcome to give those key features.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 18, 2016, 11:18:42 PM
Thank you for clarifying that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 19, 2016, 09:23:17 AM
Glenn_FR:
 Good start, looks good [...] just remember a sine/ sine 180 goes below zero and figuera did not[...]
If you look at my design and the plot trace (from a simulator) you'll see that the current NEVER inverses.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 19, 2016, 10:35:16 AM
hanon


You go it. :-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 19, 2016, 02:04:15 PM
Glenn; Sorry over looked wave form. actually everything looks fairly good.i don't see how much voltage you are using, Figueras used 100 volts.  your amperage is not that high so your steel core is probably the source of your heat problems. steel has to many pinning sights causing it to require way to much power to reverse it's domains so i would suggest hacking a transformer core as Doug had suggested or pure iron for a core. even though your primaries are not being reversed steel is NOT as good as Iron and also your core will retain Magnetism. as for your Secondary absolutely do not use steel unless you need to heat your house. ha ha ha.
pure Iron was chosen because Figuera realized that it can amplify the incoming signal up to 50,000 times it's original level so it is just a little info to think about.
I found some large E I cores and used the I part and it worked out just fine for experimental purposes. i think they are about 1" X 1" x 4" and wound with 4 or 5 layers of 22 awg. i also did not wind one continuous coil, i attached one end with the start of another layer and so on, made one hell of an electromagnet. just remember that it can be all wound on one core if long enough... ie primary and secondary but allow for adjustments, just so you know.
even though the layering of the wire i chose was stronger then continuous winding i still used a Solenoid calc tool to get me in the ball park. here is the link for the calc tool but remember to put 200 relative in the permeability section.
if you need any help just ask.

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/electromagnetism/solenoid
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 19, 2016, 02:26:27 PM
Glenn; [...]  i don't see how much voltage you are using, Figueras used 100 volts. I'm currently using 12v in the simulator and on the bench.  My bench supply isn't very powerfull, around 4A maximum for the moment - but it avoids overstressing the power transistors that aren't yet on proper heatsinks.
  your amperage is not that high so your steel core is probably the source of your heat problems. 
The wire on the magnets is around 0.4mm - that makes it about 26awg.  I can remove the cores to see if they heat as much.  Thanks for the calculator link - very useful.


So, where did the 100v come from?   I would think that in the early 1900s in the Canary islands there wouldn't have been any mains power - 100v seems to be a lot of batteries...  I've also seen, on the 'signature' link that was posted above, talk about 'diabolo shaped' pickups.  That shape - can also be imagined as dumbell-shaped - seems to me to be the inverse of what is required.  But is it a trick to maximise the current pickup in the area where the field is moving slower (each sine peak) ?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 19, 2016, 05:52:32 PM
Their was no AC at that time so i guess it was DC Gen ? besides he was a physics professor and probably could build any thing he wanted...ha ha ha
as for the 100 volt's, on one of the links that talks about Figuera's Device Patent it says 100 volt 1 amp. i don't have it handy right now but Hanon might have it. i will search for it and post it.

at first i was going to use 26 awg but them Doug brought up the fact that my mag amps will take care of the amount of power coming out so i will be using 22 awg on my primaries and 10 awg Square on my secondaries. the control circuit will take care of that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 19, 2016, 11:23:05 PM
If you look below my nickname in each post, in the left column, there is a World Globe sketch. That's my website. Go there and in the home page down there is a picture of one Buforn patent stating that 100 V and 1 A input gets 20000 watts output. In another part is stated that the output had 300 amperes.

In the spanish forum people is testing with pulsed current with supposedly good results, but nobody gives details. Remember that the 1902 patent used "intermitent or alternating current"

This posts are a possibility using two bucking coils:

http://www.energeticforum.com/270430-post822.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/270430-post822.html)

http://www.energeticforum.com/278000-post836.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/278000-post836.html)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 20, 2016, 12:52:24 AM
Glenn, the 100V 1A is a reference to Buforn's patent here: https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf Although I think he means that hypothetically to prove the point that the ampere-turns and EMF is all that is needed, forfeiting the mechanical torque required in a normal generator.

Actually Hanon, I really appreciate this patent copy, a lot of things make sense now. Like the newspaper clipping claiming atmospheric energy, Buforn clearly defines this as the magnetic energy around the wires, the source of induction. It's an interesting read.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: how2 on January 20, 2016, 01:54:53 AM
In the link below ,  you will find a mechanical-tesla-switch( a wheel-with-electrical-contacts ) on page-9,  it looks like it would function just like the rotating component in   Figuera's-Device,    and down near the bottom they explain how the principle would work to achieve overunity.
http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf

Or, I wonder if people back then thought it may have been OU,   because they could not interpret the output and input currents correctly enough,  in order to compare them,  or if they had the equipment to accurately do that .



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on January 20, 2016, 02:36:11 AM
In the link below ,  you will find a mechanical-tesla-switch( a wheel-with-electrical-contacts ) on page-9,  it looks like it would function just like the rotating component in   Figuera's-Device,    and down near the bottom they explain how the principle would work to achieve overunity.
http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf (http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf)

Or, I wonder if people back then thought it may have been OU,   because they could not interpret the output and input currents correctly enough,  in order to compare them,  or if they had the equipment to accurately do that .

The document you link to shows a mechanical switch built by Matt Jones.  I know Matt personally.  He considered it OU because it ran a load for weeks and the batteries did not discharge.   We were also able to get a solid state version to work but only with very small loads.  I was able using Matt's design to get a Tesla Switch to run for a full week lighting some LEDs the whole time.  At the end of the week my batteries were still fully charged.  In addition to the LEDs the batteries were also supplying the power for the electronic switching circuit.  It can be done but it is very tricky getting it to work and if you change the load then you have to start the tuning process all over again.

I have seen on this thread several times the opinion that a commutator is a bad way to go.  I think it must be that most are not familiar with how reliable they can be when designed and built properly.  I have seen large industrial DC motors that were run every day and they would go for years without needing any attention to the brushes or commutator.  Just something to think about.

Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 20, 2016, 08:59:12 AM
@Hanon, @Antijon
Thanks for the info, links and references.  So much reading, so little time...
Although my linear amplifier works fine I'm not happy with it's "class A" operation, even if it does help keep me warm at the moment  ;)
I shall be looking into a less wasteful method of driving my coils and then I can experiment further.  I'll post my schematics and findings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 20, 2016, 01:13:43 PM
Glenn, the 100V 1A is a reference to Buforn's patent here: https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf) Although I think he means that hypothetically to prove the point that the ampere-turns and EMF is all that is needed, forfeiting the mechanical torque required in a normal generator.

Actually Hanon, I really appreciate this patent copy, a lot of things make sense now. Like the newspaper clipping claiming atmospheric energy, Buforn clearly defines this as the magnetic energy around the wires, the source of induction. It's an interesting read.


Actually, I just used the translation done by Alvaro_CS but just modified the format to be like the other patents. Thanks to Alvaro_CS for his hard work translation thw whole patent


For me this patent jsut offer some interesting details. Much of this patent is just literature about the Sun, the Earth, induction,....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 20, 2016, 02:22:13 PM
@Hanon; I agree it is very good reading, Thank you.

I for one took it a little more than literal and have been using in my test and with great results so i think i will stick with 100 volts 1 amp as a reference point. i think it should be a guideline or Base point ie... no less than.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: how2 on January 20, 2016, 05:23:09 PM
  If it did contain a rotating 'Tesla switch',  or a 'Wimshurst machine' or any of the other similar devices to Wimhurst,  it should be pretty easy to disprove any overunity effect .
    -  Firstly,  you could just use a simple loop-circuit with a spark-gap,  connected to a battery( or a battery made of capacitors ),  and then see how long it will run for .
        (  but that would only test if the spark/mini-lightning is drawing electricity from the environment )
    -   (  Also,  two metal-plates placed close to each other ( nanometers ) can cause some very interesting effects,  which are even thought as a method to time-travel .   Could they also be generating energy,   especially in this case,   since they are moving past each other,  even though it's brushes( not plates ) that are close to plates  ) .
       And,  http://www.overunity.com/6323/what-about-the-wimhurst-generator/#.Vp-nwJorJH0


     It would be very interesting to see an animated diagram of what is happening in the  middle-row-of-secondary-cores( coils )   which are in between the   two-rows-of-primary-cores( coils ).   
        Obviously the   two-rows-of-primary-cores( coils )  induce a current in the   middle-row-of-secondary-cores( coils )  .
     I can imagine some very odd effects happening in the   middle-row-of-secondary-cores( coils )  if I have understood the polarities and what happens in the coils correctly .
     At some points I can see currents almost crashing against each other in the same wire,  or magnetic-fields crashing against each other .   Or,   maybe these effects could happen in the 'Resistor Coil' .
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 20, 2016, 10:08:20 PM
How2, what's up bro. Tesla switch... According to Tesla's ozone patent, the only purpose of the switch is to provide a high current pulse to the oscillator circuit. A simple make and break.

Figuera's is a make before break. Honestly, the other circuit powering a load with batteries in series, it would eventually stop, dissipating all its energy as heat in the batteries. Just my assumption. But it's funny that he commented some overcharge and some completely discharge... Yeah, that's kind of what happens when you overcharge a battery.

The wimhurst is interesting, but so are all other static generators. You should read up on a perfect current source, which is impossible, but still, as load resistance increases, voltage increases, and so does power out. All you need is a source of current with zero internal resistance.  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 20, 2016, 11:08:07 PM
I like how Buforn explained  the reason the cores are so close to each other and when you think about it, it makes a lot of sense.
each electromagnet puts out electric field radiating in different directions, (wave as he put it, or rather Figuera did and he copied)  so by being so close to each other they will pick up radiating fields from the electromagnets next to one another further enhancing it's induction and output.

quote."t is generally assumed that an electric current flows through a conductor
winning one molecule of the wire after the other; but bear in mind that this
current flowing through the conductor exerts actions on other independent
conductors, although physically nearby, as happens in induction. It seems
more settled with the truth, to think that the electricity propagates by waves,
and when these waves find a better conductor body than the atmosphere
where they have been produced, they take the easiest path, yet in the form of
waves, but deforming their spherical shape and stretching along the direction
of the conductor because they clearly not confine its trip to the mass and the
surface of the conductor, but getting outside of it, (if we can so express this
concept), they produce action on other conductors which are at a small
distance away."
Nice !

How2,
"At some points I can see currents almost crashing against each other in the same wire,  or magnetic-fields crashing against each other   Or,   maybe these effects could happen in the 'Resistor Coil"

as the field of the declining electromagnet is shoved out of the secondary it could quite possibly be shoved back into the system reducing the input drive currant to nothing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 21, 2016, 05:29:14 PM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 21, 2016, 06:06:27 PM
Edit: For those that saw my previous posts, my mistake. It helps to properly understand simulators. lol
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 21, 2016, 09:46:16 PM
Some very quick post..I donot come here now..need to survive.

1. Marathonman..Saw your Curve on Magnetic Field Strength and Ampere turns. I donot know where you got that 2 Tesla figure. Probably valid for a solid core. For iron ords with Gaps the high magnetic field strength ought to be in the region of 2.9 Tesla to 3.7 Tesla. If you have a copy of the Awesome Life Force or Ultimate Reality by Joesph Cater you would come across this as a hint. I found a website with detailed figures and we calculated using Excel. Best one comes at 3.7 but the heating problem comes and so between 2.9 to 3.3 Tesla is ideal.

2. Hanon I saw you Bucking coil Diagram How do you say that the poles there are NN Current rotates in both primaries in the same direction as the input is given from the ends. The polarity there is NS-NS-NS.  Current would roatate in One in clockwise direction (in your picture on the left hand side it is clockwise and on the right hand side it is Counter clock wise). Check polarity. It is NS-NS-NS. If you look at the left hand side on top current rotates at the CW direction from the top. At the right hand side which will now be in bottom Current again rotates in the CW direction. Polarity is NS only here. The secondaries are placed between opposite poles.

3. Secondaries with the identical poles facing each other can be made to work to produce output. like SN-NS-SN. But not in a straight pole. For that to work the Geometrical shape of the device is totally different. And not the one indicated by Figuera or Buforn. But it is a different Geometical shape. We have successfully experimented on that as well but ignored it for lack of funds. Secondly it is much more expensive to build it.

4. A commutator on DC motors is sturdy enough to work for long time and a mechanical commutator can be so arranged to create any desired frequency. This is a well known fact. However We have only one city where this kind of DC commutators can be ordered and many have closed down. We have build a commutator personally and tested it and I posted the video of it long back. And I came to the conclusion that it is not necessary. There are many solutions to the same problem.

5. As it is interestingly indicated at one place Buforn says 100 watts input can lead to 20000 watts output and he indicates that the output is 300 Amperes. A wire that can carry 300 amperes in coils must be capable of carrying 600 amperes in stright line. Why no thought is being given to this. If the primary carried only 1 amp and secondary carried 300 amps then it goes without saying that the primary is a thinner wire and secondary is a thicker wire. Just as indicated by Daniel McFarland Cook.   

6. I had been told that if a Tesla coil spark is given to a copper plate and the copper plate is sent to earth through a thick coil of wire the wire will not only have high voltage but will also have high amperage. As high as 1000 amps. But for that it must have very thick insulation. Was unable to test these things. Where is the money?

Unfortunately due to funding shortages I had to stop all these interesting experiments. I will do it some time in future when I;m able to do it. May be after 8 to 10 months. 

Please go here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_rod See who is the inventor..For your information In India we have had Tall Temples that are over thousand year old. None has been hit by lightening. You know why? They had this inbuilt as per the Hindu Sastras which are 5000+ years old. If any one has got the opportunity to study Austrian Scientist Viktor Schauberger he would explain how water can be conserved in a place and ground water level can be maintained. That system is build in the Hindu Temple Water Ponds.

I believe Tesla did this self sustaining DC generator in 1885 and for commercial reasons kept quiet.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 21, 2016, 11:02:25 PM
To tell you the truth i don't know why i am even Acknowledging your crazy post but hear it goes.

for one,  the max Gauss's of pure Iron is @ 2.15 to 2.2 Tesla's and if someone did their home work they would know this and wouldn't wind up sick with their feet the size of Elephant's feet from all the RF damage radiating from a poorly designed device you call a success. if you ever want to open up a hot dog stand your device would be great Microwave emitter to heat up the dogs. just please keep your feet and hands away.

two,  is i have both those books and are garbage if you ask me, a total waste of money. all he does is speculate and has proven zilch or even built zilch. basically another Tom Bearden or Peter Lindemann. all these people do is sell books and get rich off of other people's ignorance and i for one not knowing at the time fell into this trap.

as for the outrages currant 300 amps that was posted is total BS. all a person needs is 41.6 amps @ 480 volts = 20,000 watts.
if that is taken through a 480-240/120 split Phase transformer everything will be ok as far as i know. even that is way beyond what the average household needs. who the heck needs 300 amps.

and last you have to realize we are NOT working on your RF device, we are working on 1908 Figuera Patent. it as we all understand it is NN design.... or SS if your into that kind of stuff. ha ha ha
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 22, 2016, 02:52:28 AM
Marathonman:

1. It was taken from some University website and extrapolated to Excel by us. You can do some search and find the University values that tested iron up to 10-20 Teslas of various types of iron.

2. The Elephantine legs are gone. Turns out that apart from all this I was working for 20 hours a day and sitting before the computer in my chair has caused the body fluids to store in the legs. Not due to the device. No other person who experimented suffered this and only mine. They all kept moving and had no ill effects. I had to sleep for 10 to 12 hours a day, steam the legs and do a 30 minute walk in the beack a day without shoes on bare feet ( we can do it in our hot country in the beach) and well the elephantine legs are gone. Turns out that I need to do a lot of yoga exercises to tone up the entire body especially the legs as they have become weak.

3. I have no comments to make on NN or NS. I have made both of them to work and I'm aware that for SN-NS-SN kind of thing to work you need a different geometry and the straight line does not permit it. If you go back to the earlier pages there are people admitting that identical poles produce zero volts.

4. I have done experiments and no theories. Cater is reported to have built a device in 1971 and applied for patent and was prohibited under National Security laws and then he kind of became a rebel. His information to the most part is inaccurate and misleading but he provides hints as to how certain things can be done. If we expect these people to disclose fully what they have done and how they have done and try to replicate it we will end up with failures. If we understand the principles we can succeed.

5. I do not know any thing about Tom Beardon but he uses a permanent magnet in the middle of the MEG if I'm correct to increase the magnetic field strength and prevents the collapsing of the magnetic field strength to zero. I look at the principles and try to understand them and not try to copy to the dot. I have to agree that most information given is misleading and inaccurate if taken accurately.

6. I would agree with you on the need to use a lower amperage output but we need to see what is given in the patent. If the patent says 100 volts and 1 amp input and it is acceptable to you, then why the 300 amp output is not acceptable is not clear to me. Back in the 1900s DC was the most used one and high amp DC required thick wires and the wires that were available were only like that intended to carry DC to short distances at considerable lossses.

Any way I'm not able to continue to post here as frequently as I used to. And I'm sorry about it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: how2 on January 22, 2016, 08:21:17 PM
The  simulations which were posted on this page,  have been deleted.

But, if simulators could possibly produce overunity,  you could simulate 2 of the 3 main components,  the primary-coils-inducing-the-central-secondary-coils,   and the resistor-coil,   but not the rotating-switch-unit.
(  even if simulators are not good enough to produce overunity,  maybe there is a simulator which has a  'different-view' function which creates an animated diagram that shows what is going on in  the primary-coils-inducing-the-central-secondary-coils,   and the resistor-coil ,   to make it more understandable to those of us much less knowledgeable in electrical-circuits  )

   The recent posters have ruled out the possibility that the  rotating-switch-unit  could possibly have had any similar effect to a  rotating-tesla-switch  http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf  ,  they have the required knowledge in this area .

You could just build and test  2 of the 3 main components, separately,  and using less coils,  to try and detect any overunity.
_________________

  What rotates the  rotating-switch-unit,  I cannot see a motor mentioned in the device,  or even any permanent-magnets  to cause a homopolar-motor  effect .
_________________

Quote
You should read up on a perfect current source, which is impossible, but still, as load resistance increases, voltage increases, and so does power out. All you need is a source of current with zero internal resistance.

The closest thing could be  a  Persistent-Current ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_current ) powering an  Electric-Motor( made 'Entirely' out of superconducting material ),  so that all of the electrical-conducting material( wiring and motor etc )  used in this idea is entirely made out of superconducting-material,  so that there would be no energy lost through heat.
    And maybe, this idea could be run in a vacuum .
(  Normal electric-motors only lose energy through heat,  they waste no energy in generating the electromagnetic-fields to make the motor spin,  although,  the electrical-current changes the winding's into temporary-magnets,  so I assume that those winding's could be considered a load because they are not yet the temporary-magnets that the electrical-current turns them into,  but I am not sure  )
(  Some time ago I noticed that a  Persistent-Current energy-storage( or was it generating ) device had already been built, for some specific application,  but I can no longer find that )

Even More Off Topic
I once discovered that by placing a permanent-magnet right up next to an electric-motor,  that the motor  sped up very-very significantly,  I assume what happened is that the permanent-magnet increased the magnetic strength of the permanent-magnets already present in the motor,  I replicated it a couple of times,   and then later on,  I actually discovered that someone on the internet had discovered the same thing,   but only 1 other person,  but the replication by the other person is too hard to find .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on January 22, 2016, 09:39:12 PM
Adding a magnet to the outside of a PM motor has been known to several of us on the Energetic Forum for at least the last couple of years.  I just recently discovered that it also works with a universal type motor if that motor is run on DC.  What was also interesting is that a large ceramic magnet worked much better than a small neo magnet.  I don't have a way to prove this but I think the neo magnet may be over saturating the laminations of the motor.  Please don't tell Milehigh about this as he is convinced magnets can't do work so therefore what we have seen must not be possible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 22, 2016, 09:40:05 PM
Antijon, why did you delete your posts???

How2, why do you make posts off topic and even more off topic? You are welcome to create a new thread about the tesla switch in particular.

Click on the World Globe Sketch located under my nickname to go a website full of info.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 22, 2016, 10:28:01 PM
Quote
3. I have no comments to make on NN or NS. I have made both of them to work and I'm aware that for SN-NS-SN kind of thing to work you need a different geometry and the straight line does not permit it. If you go back to the earlier pages there are people admitting that identical poles produce zero volts.
Ramaswami, sorry man, but it does work, and quite well. Even in a simulator.

Guys, you should try this sometime if you're bored. The resistor is variable, so it can be adjusted on the fly. It's just crazy watching the currents. And I still have no clue exactly how to replicate it (solid-state), but that's the schematic in a nutshell.

How2, yeah, I removed those simulator shots because they were nothing out of the ordinary. No OU, just me misreading the scopes.

Quote
What rotates the  rotating-switch-unit,  I cannot see a motor mentioned in the device,  or even any permanent-magnets  to cause a homopolar-motor  effect .

A motor rotates his commutator. Buforn stated in his patent that the output AC is rectified by a switch. The resulting DC powers the commutator motor and also provides the DC for the exciter magnets.

Tesla's switch was like a spark gap, intended to produce high frequency oscillations. This is quite different, it's more like a controlled magnetic field.

Quote
could those winding's be considered a load because they are not yet the temporary-magnet that the electrical-current turns them into.

I see where you're going man, but windings draw current based on their resistance. They only reason they draw less than this is due to reactance, or a change in their inductance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 23, 2016, 06:29:57 PM
Ouch..

I made a mistake..I wrote SN-NS-SN  -- This is a bar magnet proper with two different poles at two ends. Here you are reversing middle secondary. Secondary is placed between opposite poles of primary.  Please do an experiment and let me know what is the voltage you are getting. Not in simulator and whether the voltage is able to light up the lamps.

This is what I should have written SN-SN-NS..This is what is against the law of Nature. This is what does not work. Identical poles of primary facing each other and secondary being placed in between.  My apologies for this. Many have tried this and have reported in the forum to be zero voltage as I have also found. Secondary placed between. The question was whether secondary placed between identical poles of two primary would produce output. That is what I was answering but made the primary poles opposite. My apologies. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 23, 2016, 10:36:46 PM
Hi all,
Not had much time to work on this stuff the last few evenings.  But I can answer the question about "SN-(coil)-NS" : using proper 180° phased NON-ZERO-CROSSING sinewaves : yes, there is output.  I can't yet say how much because my coils overheat before I can get to take proper measurements.  What I do know is that I'm seeing a full reversal AC output current : if I place two white LEDs mounted back to back ( anode to cathode) across the coil they both light up.

Have tried using proper PWM with the conventional comparator that compares a high frequency ramp signal and my input sinewave, but the HF part of the signal is causing induced currents in the pickup coil that disturb the 'real' signal - so I'm not convinced that it's a good path.

More news soon.  I will also try two identical pickups wired as in the diagrams posted the other day : "[SN]-(SN)(NS)-[NS]"
() = electromagnet; [] = pickup coil
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 24, 2016, 10:40:16 AM
Glen i think your (), [] are backwards.
you have to deal with your heating issue before anything else. i had one along time ago come to find out it was my cores were to small for the amount of flux i needed.
i think the HF is causing your cores to heat up, this will cause the issues you are having. steel can not handle anything like that also try 22 awg or larger cores.... you can order pure iron core in small quantities at the link i am giving you but be aware they are high priced or you can just hack large transformer. here is link.  http://www.surepure.com/Iron/a/17
good work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 24, 2016, 12:18:07 PM
I will also try two identical pickups wired as in the diagrams posted the other day : "[SN]-(SN)(NS)-[NS]"
() = electromagnet; [] = pickup coil

Yes, thankyou Marathonman, I meant : [] = electromagnet; () = pickup coil.   Too late at night  ;D

I'm printing a second set of pickup coil formers at this very moment.

P.S. I'm puzzled : I can't find any way to correct my original post.  Why can't I edit my own posts ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 24, 2016, 08:41:15 PM
Glenn, there should be a modify button up at the top right of your post, next to the quote button. It may disappear after some time.

But from your experiment I'm going to guess that only the peak of the wave, when the opposite polarity has dropped to near zero, is producing induction. That kinda proves my idea that the fields are cancelling for the most part. I mean, high current plus little output shows low impedance on the input, but also low induction.

I'm going to say, it's possible that Figuera's design had a very small inductor on the secondary coil, and larger inductors on the primaries. This is almost evident in every patent. In this case, the small inductor would quickly be saturated, and the remaining fields could collide and travel at 90 degrees to the surface of the secondary coil, kinda like two perm. magnets opposing. But, I don't mean like flux-cutting. If his secondaries were pancake coils, the inductive effects should be just like we thought.

Or it's possible that he just left an air gap between his primaries, and also used pancake coils.

Either way, I'm going to say, maybe just try using two independent, matching transformers. Should be able to produce inductive effects without negative effects of primaries acting on each other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on January 24, 2016, 09:47:33 PM
Glenn, there should be a modify button up at the top right of your post, next to the quote button. It may disappear after some time.
[...]
Either way, I'm going to say, maybe just try using two independent, matching transformers. Should be able to produce inductive effects without negative effects of primaries acting on each other.
Hi Antijon,
Yes, the 'modify' button disappears very quickly - and my mistakes are there for posterity  :)
I'm not sure I follow you about the transformers, though.  I had tried the idea of using a center-tapped transformer to create my 180° phased signal, and then I tried adding some DC bias to avoid returning to zero current and my (ancient) recollections of one BIG problem with transformers came back to me in a flash : they HATE DC currents because they cause saturation of the magnetic core.
Could you describe your idea more precisely, please ?

@Marathonman : thanks for the link for the iron supplier - but as I'm in France, Europe, it's not very practical.  I do have a pile of MOT laminations on the workshop floor, I'll see what they do in place of my steel cores.  It's not saturation causing the heating, though : I've used the coils without the cores (one advantage of my printed formers : the cores slide out easily) they heat just the same.  I wish to stay with about 12v primary supply for the moment.
Looks like I need to go bifilar to get more money for my volts.  I'm not sure how the wiring goes, though.  Do I wind equal lengths of wire side-by-side and then connect the end of one to the beginning of the other (like the Tesla flat coils) ?  I think it was you who talked about this the other day but I couldn't understand the way you described the connections.  Were talking about the electromagnet windings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 25, 2016, 04:24:35 AM
 Glenn_FR;
It seams you need to up the swg rating of your wire. wire has a maximum chassis rating that most people don't know about but you may have exceeded that. Mot's will work great (lucky you) and as for the wiring i wound multiple layers and connected the end of one to the start of the next beginning. it really is up to you but i have had great results from this style of wiring and that is with laminant. i can't wait for my real cores to be fired up...ie solid iron cores.
it only takes milliamp to control saturation Please read up on mag amp control  and you will think more clear.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on January 25, 2016, 08:47:35 AM
@antijohn
Quote
Either way, I'm going to say, maybe just try using two independent, matching
transformers. Should be able to produce inductive effects without negative
effects of primaries acting on each other.

You know... Albert Einstein may have been a world famous physicist however it was his experience as a simple patent clerk which made him a success as a physicist. He learned to see past the smoke and mirrors of perception, to see the kernel of truth in the patent which defined it and how this connected with all other patents. Now in the literature and patents of both Figuera and Buforn they state... the production of electricity without any transformation. So why is everyone here trying to build transformers when both inventors state catagorically that they are not transformers and there can be no transformation?.

It reminds me of the blonde who calls her boyfriend and tells him to come over because she is trying to make a tiger jigsaw puzzle however she cannot get it started and none of the pieces fit. Then when the boyfriend gets there he looks at the picture of the tiger on the box and say's -- it's okay honey let's just sit down and put all the frosted flakes back in the box.

If none of the pieces fit and we cannot see the big picture then the premise is probably flawed and we should rethink what were doing.

AC
 
 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 25, 2016, 11:33:57 AM
allcanadian;
Quote; "The principle where is based this theory, carries the unavoidable need for the movement of the induced circuit or the inductor circuit, and therefore these machines are taken as transformer of mechanical work into electricity."

so what he is referring to is that with the Figuera device their is no transformation of mechanical work into electricity because it is motionless so there is no loss associated with movement. it has absolutely nothing to do of what you said and on top of that the Figuera device is NOT a transformer it's a Magnetic amplifier so if anyone would actually read the patents this is what they would find out.

i really feel sorry for anyone that follows Albert Einstein because he has never designed anything, built anything or for that matter has spoke any rational thought in his life. he is an idiot that stole his equations from someone else, they are not even his. not only that this bumbling idiot clerk you call a success has been proven wrong about ten times plus.
 so please i would suggest that you keep your family stories to yourself and the next time come to the table with more than a straw full of peas.
but by all mean's keep up the good work but you might want to tweek your perception a little.
marathonman.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 25, 2016, 03:44:49 PM
Damn! That"s why I cant get this puzzle to work! I was on the phone with an Indian at tech support all week end for nothing.Well not totally nothing I did get 4 sham wows and a set of rubber spoons.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 25, 2016, 04:02:10 PM
Glenn, my reasoning is that, with two independent transformers, you can rule out the effects of the primaries working against each other.

If you look at the image, it shows a typical amp for driving a centertap. Notice how each transistor drives a half wave. But the difference is that one half drops to zero before the other starts. In Figuera's, this is quite different because the half waves cross, as their timing is only 90 degrees apart, instead of 180.

Now, if we look at the operation of a transformer in general, we know that they're designed to have a very high impedance. This is due to the very large inductance of the primary. The effect of Lenz's law in a transformer is that, when the magnetic field of the secondary opposes the magnetic field of the primary, it acts to directly cancel the inductance of the primary. Or you could think that it increases the reluctance of the core material.

Why I think this is important in Figuera's design, is that we see when two opposing fields are interacting, they must act against each other. If Figuera's used a solid core on which all three coils were placed, we can predict that when one field is increasing, and the other decreasing, the net induction performed on the output coil will be very low, as the two fields cancel. Just think that two magnetic fields cannot occupy the same space. A north field with a strength of 3, and a south field with a strength of 2, will produce a net north field with a strength of 1.

So I'm saying, it may be possible that Figuera used three separate inductors, or even a smaller core that the output coil was wrapped around. There's a need to produce independent fields, fields that don't directly cancel the net induction.

With two transformers, you can test your amp without the two primaries working against each other. Just pretend that you are driving a Figuera coil. If the two secondaries are wired in series, the total voltage should be the sum of the two secondaries. This will tell you if your amp is producing the proper phases. If it is, then you just need to work on the coil arrangement.

Frankly, I don't think anyone else has developed a complete driver circuit yet, so you're like the guinea pig when it comes to testing coil designs. But I just bought a 600W 2 channel audio amp to test, so hopefully I'll also have some results soon.

ahh, just wanted to say, two transformers are only for testing, it won't produce overunity. The difference is in the number of windings.

AC, what exactly are you proposing? The theory of Figuera's generator is simple. Induction. The easiest way to test inductive EMF generating devices is with a simple, cheap transformer. We already know a majority of the operating principles, so I don't think we need to go back to square one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 25, 2016, 11:34:08 PM
antijon;

 I have been studying your proposal and i think it would work only if it is always positive sine/cosine wave because their is a large gap if you look at what you are proposing. if you flip the negative parts of the regular sine/cosine wave to positive you may have something. but you end up with a signal that looks just like what i have proposed already sine/sine 180 always positive.
just saying.
thing's that make you go hummmm.
this might work on separate sine cosine signals ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on January 26, 2016, 07:17:27 AM
I can see why after over 200 pages, that no one has yet succeeded in a replication.
  People should not just read the patent,they should STUDY it, then
maybe it'll sink in.
  The only thing that makes this device work is a VARYING magnetic field.
Yes a transformer can produce such a field but the timing is all wrong.

The plus & minus ends of a xformer coil are 180 deg. out of phase so at any one
instant of time when the plus is positive creating a nice field,the negative pulse comes along in the next instance of time and cancels it. So that's why Figuera uses resistors. Both primary coils get pulsed in the same instant of time and not subject to the phase bull-shit!
  The coils get pulsed ONLY with a varying positive voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 26, 2016, 07:48:51 AM
Why No one has succeeded after 200 pages..

1. It is an enormously expensive device to construct in the way it is described. So a simple study will not do but practical hands on experimentation must be conducted and then the difficulties of doing this kind of experiement will be known. With his knowledge, reputation, skill and resources it took Figuera about 6 years to do this device.

Marathonman..It is very difficult to avoid heating up the core if you use a solid core. As you said, the saturation level of the solid core will come at around 2 Tesla depending on the material. If you have air gaps (which are considered to create an inefficient transformer) and a lot of them as I created the Higher Tesla ranges are possible but still in the secondary we had the problem of heating. I have not recommenced experimenting again but will do so probably from April.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 26, 2016, 10:02:30 AM
cliff33;

SOME PEOPLE in this forum still think it acts as a regular transformer, i'm glad you have it after ONLY 2 post. now i see why people with a working device don't hardly post because i am sick trying to convince people the simplicity of it all as was passed to me. it's really simple it's a variable inductance magnetic amplifier that amplify's the incoming signal with two variable currant primaries opposite  from one another.
this forum needed another sane person (to many bone heads)

WOW ! really hard fellas.

NRamaswami a 5 kilowatt device was constructed with discarded material that people in America discard all the time. unfortunately there are to many scrappers where i live so not possible.

Thanks Doug, i spit coffee all over the carpet on that one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 26, 2016, 10:28:31 AM
Marathon,


That why I decided to put up a dedicated website, in order to summarize into one site all the information that I think it has sense and it is valuable. This way newcomers at least have a place to read it without distracction. Here this forum is full of different theories. People appear, post something and later dissappear. The design posted by bajac in post #1 had made a great damage to the original Figuera design. That design is posted there and it is biassing people to think about a transformer. Figuera never told about a transformer type design, nor about air gaps. He just used electromagnets and coils. That why i think it is good to read the later Buforn patent especially the 1914 patent, because they offer some details which clarify the device arrangement.


I would like to see that 5 KW device at least in some pictures. Or even I just get satified if it is possible to know which method was used in the commutator (mechanical, electronic,...). For me the simpler, the better. No moving parts better that high precission calibration in a rotary commutator.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on January 26, 2016, 06:48:26 PM
@marathonman
Quote
SOME PEOPLE in this forum still think it acts as a regular transformer, i'm glad you have it after ONLY 2 post. now i see why people with a working device don't hardly post because i am sick trying to convince people the simplicity of it all as was passed to me. it's really simple it's a variable inductance magnetic amplifier that amplify's the incoming signal with two variable currant primaries opposite  from one another.[/size]this forum needed another sane person (to many bone heads)


I'm not sure how these boneheads could possibly question your obviously superior intellect. I mean where do they get off questioning you?, I imagine you have working units scattered about like confetti. One for the house, one for the car and others laying about just because you can. I get really sick of these boneheads questioning you and I think you should smite them... I mean fire and brimstone shit. Uhm... you do have working units don't you?, well of course you do what in the hell was I thinking and I apologize for even thinking such obvious insanity. I can only hope you show tolerance towards us ignorant unskilled peon's and in the future show us the path to righteousness.




AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 26, 2016, 08:07:12 PM
Well damn dud you people keep trying to treat Figuera's device as F-in transformer and IT"S NOT. every new person that comes along post some stupid SHIT that has absolutely nothing to do with the Figuera device. fuck it  you F-in hicks, i have a two section unit that has produced overunity but ill be GOD DAMN if i'm fucking going to post it. i wouldn't give you the fucking satisfaction ass hole. if you would pull your fucking stupid head out of your know it all ass you might get some where but NO YOUR STUCK ON STUPID thinking you know all about transformers. YOU DON"T KNOW SHIT MORON!

STICK THIS FORUM UP YOUR ASS !

Thanks Doug
Thanks Hanon
See ya around.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on January 26, 2016, 09:22:26 PM
Why No one has succeeded after 200 pages..

1. It is an enormously expensive device to construct in the way it is described. So a simple study will not do but practical hands on experimentation must be conducted and then the difficulties of doing this kind of experiement will be known. With his knowledge, reputation, skill and resources it took Figuera about 6 years to do this device.

Yes but Figuera lived in a remote area far from the few electrical companies at the time. He had no access to the electrical resources we have today.
That's why he had to use  cumbersome switching in his device, where today we should be able to do it electronically.
It's an extremely simple device and only expensive if you don't want to scrounge around for used parts.
  I use the laminations from old tv or MOT xformers which can be gotten from yard sales,second-hand shops etc. I use my chop saw to cut off the
center of the "E" (10 at a time) that leaves me with a "C" for winding the coils.
   But yes, if you figure in your time it could be very expensive. Figuera has already done most of the work for us, so instead of 6 years we should
be able to have one going in 6 months.
  Back in the 80's tv satellite systems were selling for $10,000. I built a good working system for about 3 or 4 hundred dollars.
Had to make my own 12 ft. dish with feed horn & LNA, & put together a satellite receiver kit.
 The point of all this is to be more innovative by using your head.
We shouldn't be trying to built a 5000 watt system right from the start. Concentrate on a small cheaper system to prove the concept theory first
and then we can work on a system to power our house.

cheers

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 27, 2016, 01:29:13 AM
Well..

what is inexpensive is dollar terms is very expensive in India Rupee terms. I have made a small unit demo earlier where output voltage was higher (normal step up transrmer function done very inefficiently. If We add two simple  components then cop>1 results come automatically.

I do not know electronics and whatever we tried burned out. We cannot afford it.

If you run the commutator at high speeds of 1000 RPM or just about 16 hz it throws out a lot of sparks.  If we use lower Voltage levels and lower amps using permanent magnets you easily go into Cop>1 but that is dismissed here as table top demos which will not work if they are scaled up. That is correct really.

So being a man lesser intellect and only hard worker not smart worker I am unable to get any voltage when secondary is placed between identical poles.  I get some output only when it is placed between opposite poles. In our earlier experiments output is either too high which cannot be used or too low it is cop<1. We have some idea but we need to try to get around high amp and about 200 volts. We will test it some time when we can afford it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 27, 2016, 11:47:04 AM
NRamaswami


Your main mistake is searching for the solution for large current in secondary. You should have been searching for low current in primary while maintaining the same output on secondary (or scaled down to resonable amps).
It is that simple and I know hanon got it right.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 27, 2016, 08:28:47 PM
Thanks for supporting my views, but this device is resisting to give me its juices. I am almost sure that my view is right, and this why I try to share it with most people in order that someone maybe more skillfull or with better means could make it real. I have finished the website. There you may find everything together.

NRamaswami, with sames poles facing each other and instead using the two signals just using pulsed DC as you do, I think you will need not one induced  coil but two induced coils. Each one will pickup the induction of one electromagnet. You can connect them to add their voltages, and  at the same time their two induced magnetic fields will cancel out. I posted an image few days ago, but I post it again. Pulsed DC is like using two signals of the same strength at each instant. It is not the same that using two signals of different strength each instant, these signal will indeed move the magnetic lines back and forth
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on January 27, 2016, 09:10:38 PM
NRamaswami:
 
f you run the commutator at high speeds of 1000 RPM or just about 16 hz it throws out a lot of sparks.  If we use lower Voltage levels and lower amps using permanent magnets you easily go into Cop>1 but that is dismissed here as table top demos which will not work if they are scaled up. That is correct really.


You'll never get this thing working at 16 hz. Thats why it's consuming so much current and lots of sparks.
If you're using 60hz, then speed up your commutator to 3600 rpm.
 I or some one else will come out with a drive circuit to eliminate that sparking commutator.
So just hang in there to see what happens.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on January 27, 2016, 10:25:57 PM
@cliff33
Quote
[size=0px]You'll never get this thing working at 16 hz. Thats why it's consuming so much current and lots of sparks.[/size][size=0px][size=0px]If you're using 60hz, then speed up your commutator to 3600 rpm.[/size][size=0px][size=0px] I or some one else will come out with a drive circuit to eliminate that sparking commutator.[/size][size=0px][size=0px]So just hang in there to see what happens.[/size]


I would agree and there are a few issues with electronic switching. First the mechanical commutator makes the next resistor connection then breaks the last resistor connection. This implies for some period of time before the break both resistor terminals are conducting or shorted through the brush. Also, during this time the positive connection of the source is also conducting through the brush to the respective resistor terminals.


As such to fully emulate our simple brush mechanism we may need two HV mosfets back to back not unlike a triac across each resistor terminal because we do not know if the current reverses. Then we also need one more HV mosfet to each resistor terminal. If we follow patent 44267 then we need 24 high voltage mosfets for switching and a controller. The next issue which is a big one is gate-source ground plane issues as the gate voltage normally maxes out at 25v and we have large transients to contend with.


The thing to remember is it all works out fine at low voltage until the voltage rise such as an inductive discharge transient from the electromagnet coils is involved above 1000v within an extremely short time frame at which point it all goes sideways in a big hurry. The body diode cannot handle these fast transient effects nor can the mosfet gate conducting through the ground plane. Fast Zener diodes could be an option as well as zero threshold mosfets configured as diodes however the voltage rise time is what generally pounds the last nail in this coffin. We simply do not have off the shelf electronics which can cope with fast transient effects.


To put it mildly if you could switch HV in the nanosecond range the transient voltage would creep over the plastic surface of your electronics as if it was not even there. The thing to remember is when we speak of conduction/resistance we are speaking in relative terms. As such insulators can conduct and low resistance conductors can offer a massive resistance outside the simplistic construct of ohmic resistance. In a word, actually a few, it's a rats nest of one problem after another I cannot reconcile.


However this is all water under the bridge because as marathonman said I'm just a fucking moron... what would I know.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 27, 2016, 11:10:06 PM
I think I already posted this picture long ago. This is the device I use for my tests. I think my weak point is the signal generation. Also I do not know if I should close the magnetic circuit around. I accept suggestions from those with more knowledge and expertise.

Marathon, you said time ago that the distance of the coils must be adjusted (tuned). Exactly what you referred by that? Should I test separating the electromagnets from the coil?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on January 28, 2016, 01:30:40 AM
Hi Hanon,
Are the coils both putting out the same field ,or opposites?
What field are the E-cores projecting?
The fields can get mixed up real fast.
This is where the answer is.
Excellent thread.
Thanks artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on January 28, 2016, 04:57:34 AM



I would agree and there are a few issues with electronic switching. First the mechanical commutator makes the next resistor connection then breaks the last resistor connection. This implies for some period of time before the break both resistor terminals are conducting or shorted through the brush. Also, during this time the positive connection of the source is also conducting through the brush to the respective resistor terminals.


AC:
  Thanks for the post. You make it all sound so complicated, but yes electronic circuits can look simple enough but when you try them out you can get many of
these transient problems as you just mentioned.
  Reading Figuera's notes, he describes well how a regular dynamo works by a changing magnetic field.
He is emulating the performance of these machines by using high power resistors to vary this field. He didn't have the resources which we have today.
 So he simulated a stepped sine wave with all these resistors.  You will notice that only a varying positive voltage is applied to the coils.

  So here is my intention on how to simulate his version.
I'll be using 2 2n3055's to replace all those resistors. These things can vary the current the same way the resistors do,only in a more continuous manner.
The collectors will go to the +12volts and emitters to the primary coils. 
The transistors will be biased so that, with no source voltage they'll each be drawing 10 amps.
 One of the power transistors will be driven by a smaller one which will be wired to invert the incoming pulse.
The source of these pulses will just be a 60hz oscillator putting out a sine wave.
  Here's how it works:
On the positive portion of the sine wave, the first 2n3055 will be turned on MORE creating a current of perhaps 20 amps while the 2nd 2n3055 because
of the inverter, the current will drop down close to zero.
On the negative portion of the sine wave, the first 2n3055 will go back down  to 10 amps while the 2nd one, because of the inverter will
increase it's current  to 20 amps.
There you have it.  60hz being such a low frequency, shouldn't have any of those transients.

Cheers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 28, 2016, 12:34:50 PM
Nice looking rig hannon

  Think about the magnetic path of the E cores. The shortest path is the one the field will follow. From the outer legs to the central leg is the shortest path in each core. As soon as a load is placed on the Y core/coil the path through the center will be even worse. Find a way to shield the central leg pole face from the outer legs so the field has to reach all the way past the Y coil before it can exit the Y. The distance of the path from the end of the coil in the inducer to the desired exit out of the Y has to be shorter then any other path it could take. The photo looks like the E core coils are different a little bit from one another. If they are that wont make it easier for you to control them.
  I realize there will be a problem with the shield if you shield both of the central legs in the two E's but thats probably why the original concept didnt use E cores. You can test your cores with a low voltage dc and use a paper clip to map out your magnetic fields or you can spend a few thousand on some equipment that will do the same thing. You can always find another use for those cores without wrecking them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on January 28, 2016, 05:20:47 PM
Other use for this cores : patent 457561. I'm sure  inventor would not protest :-) Can you post again schematic which can obtain 90 degree change in phase for sinewave ?
I think about using two TDA7293 amplifiers to get 150W 200V AC from a weak signal using transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 28, 2016, 08:37:13 PM
anybody tried this?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 28, 2016, 10:12:34 PM
Doug,
Should I close the magnetic circuit or it is just the opposite? Even Closing the circuit there is always a gap between the Y coil and the magnetic circuit so flux lines will not jump so easily. Maybe they just jump out of the core when they collide and are forced to come out. But this just my guess. Maybe I am wrong.

Another doubt is that if I should use more than one group to get any juice. I remember that someonne posted that the design shoud be with confronted poles with all poles grouped as

NNNN   but never this NSNS
NNNN                            NSNS

because in the second design the lines will go from N to the closest S without going along the central Y coil located between two N poles. How do you see this?

Please help me with your expertise. Thanks in advance

For those asking about the filed that I use: I use opposing fields, thus, this is with same polarity as I alway had said NN, and powered with the two signals as the 1908 patent. Please go to the website (clicking the World Globe sketch under my nickname) and there you will find all my ideas. I have great problems implementing the commutator. Without a proper scope I do not know if I am feeding right the electromagnets . Any recommendation to build the simplest commutator possible are welcome!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 29, 2016, 07:06:18 AM
I'm grateful for the kind words of encouragement from the members. Let me first reiterate that I'm not educated formally in Electricity, Magnetism or for that matter in Electronics.

The only advantage I appear to have over the rest here is that I'm a Patent Attorney and having worked closely with many inventors and having obtained patents and opposed both successfully and unsuccessfully Patents I do know a bit of Scientific mentality. Scientists do not trust other scientists and generally they try to mislead as far as possible other competitors. This is not without reason. If a competitor is seen to be working in some area then what companies do is to file patent applications and would get them published early and so the patent for the competitor will not be granted and invention can be deemed to be anticipated. Never mind that your patent applications are not going to be granted. The idea is to prevent the other from getting a patent monopoly. This is the case today when we need to disclose sufficiently to enable another person skilled in the art to replicate the experiment. This is why you find a lot of Patent applications being filed in US, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Israel and Western Europe.

Earlier the rules differed from country to country and you are permitted to retain trade secrets but needed to show an working device to the Patent Office. Then Patent office would not mind if you kept some trade secrets. These rules differed from country to country. 


I had been told that many have tried to exactly replicate the Daniel McFarland Cook device and all failed. Not at all surprising when the device is disclosed in part and hides some key components.

Nikola Tesla to one of his credits is the one person who broke away from this tradition and disclosed every thing fully and particularly. He used this like the Free emails services of today to get noticed and get recognized. With this historical background I find that most of the patents hide or try to provide misleading information.

On Lenz Law

An essential point of the Figuera -Buforn Patents is that we need to cancel Lenz law.

I beg to disagree with Hanon for Lenz law is not cancelled when you put the output coil between identical poles. The way the bucking coils are shown may provide some output but they can never be more than the input. To put it very correctly Bucking coils would only partially offset the Lenz law but never completely. They partially offset Lenz law because they appear to be taking the higher flux available between identical poles.

There is a thought process that if positive sign wave frequency is used for example if the magnetic collapsing of magnetic fields and reversal of wave form is avoided back emf will not come and if the voltage is kept at always +5 to the peak and  then to +5 as a sign wave Lenz law would be avoided. I do not know if the theory is correct but it does not appear to avoid Lenz law.


On Multifilar coils

A multifilar coil is built by using three core or four core commercial coils that are twisted. If you make parallel coils and duct tape them to cut costs you will find that the coils get twisted any way. The end of the coil No.1 is connected to beginning of coil No2 and end of coil No. 2 is connected to beginning of coil No. 3 and so on to make multifilar coils.

On Electronics

In our experiments we have tried Electronics First. Patrick has given me two circuits and one of them provided as output only milliamps and millivolts when measured. The output was in a frequency higher than 20 Khz for we were not able to feel the current. We accidentially let the carbon electrodes touch each other and the carbon electrodes started burning. It is only then we realized that the device is capable of providing current but for that we need to use very low resistance wires capable of carrying high current. It used low voltage and the output voltge was 56 Volts pulsed DC. The amperage drawn was very little from the circuit when we connected to thick wires and there was no magnetism. We have tried other Electronic circuits and they failed.

None of the inventors who have demonstrated devices Daniel McFarland Cook, Nikola Tesla, Clemente Figuera, Hubbard, Harry Perrigo, Hendershot had any Electronics available to them. Therefore I would not use Electronics. It is an avoidable waste of money, time and effort. I say after experimenting with Electronics but I concede that my competence in this area is characterized by zero knowledge. So I may well be wrong.

The only patent that considerably discloses things is that of Buforn. Normally we Attorneys tend to talk a lot, write a lot and Argue a lot and with that basic traits BuForn has considerably discussed and disclosed a lot of things.

On Commutator

In my opinion having done a lot of experiments and variations, The commutator is not necessary. It was a clever method by which Figuera has disoriented and diverted the attention of the potential infringers.

When we started we failed and then I realized that the weakness was in the lack of knowledge on how to make Magnets both permanent and Electromagnets and had to study to learn them and applied it to build them. How to magnetize and demagnetize and how to make powerful magnets and how to avoid lenz law are some of the things that we tried to learn.

On Size

It is not as if I went straight to large cores. Where is the money? You forget that money point when you criticise me for using large cores.

We used just four iron rods as the core of a solenoid. 6 inch long iron rods. Secondary wound first first and then primary and secondary together and then secondary wound over the primary. I reasoned that this way we will capture all the flux that would be due to the input. Output was lower than the input. then when we moved the small coil towards other iron rods that were lying nearby voltage increased and surprised and we surrouded the coil with a lot of iron and this resulted in trebling of the output wattage for the same input. These were ordinary helical coils. We learnt practically that Greater the iron Greater the output. That was an important lesson. So we went to larger cores as we could afford. 

On Figuera Patent

I think that Figuera disclosed a lot. There are certain things that I was not able to understand in his design. His essential points are

a. In dynamos when the magnet rotates the coils make the iron on which they are wound electromagnets and these Electromagnets are of opposite polarity to the rotating magnet and they prevent the magnet from rotation. We need to over this force and hence we need to supply more input to genereate lesser output.

b. If motion is avoided this problem is solved

c. To produce current we need to create only rotating magnetic fields by providing time varying electric fields.



His design discloses two most important things.

a. There are two parallel primaries.

n. Primary output of both primaries goes to two different Earth points.


Many would disagree here but he shows that the primary output goes to Al Origin. The source of all. This has been the most confusing thing to me. What is Al Origin Earth.

I'm most certain that if this method is employed using multifilar coils and modifying the design of the device as required a higher voltage and higher amperage output would be easily achievable. This will result in very high amperage output current and would need a very low input current of higher voltage if we use AC. This is how we come across the 100 volts and 1 amp input. 

I prefer AC to Pulsed DC. Primarily because of the risks involved in using Pulsed DC.

If pulsed DC is used the input should not be more than 30 or 40 volts. Otherwise the current drawn will be very heavy. Pulsed DC is AC rectified by Full Wave Diode Bridge. The coils do not present any impedance to such a current and the current drawn is so heavy at higher voltages. Multifilar coils which provide enormous impedance to AC do not provide any impedance to this form of current. This is quite risky to use this unless you work with low voltage input but still the magnetic saturation will be achieved immediately. The saturation in the secondary is one that needs to be seen to be believed. It is better to avoid this. By providing AC input we not only avoid this high current input we also prevent heating to a significant extent.

How Scientists Work and Mislead People and do not trust any one

Figuera provides the correct principles but has diverted the attention of the people by showing a commutator. Hanon would strongly disagree.

A few years back I was tasked with writing an important patent application. It was a Billion dollar patent application. We had been given a formulation and I have carefully vetted and selected two young scientists whose families are known to me to assist me in the process. The application was complete and it had to be filed in another country. The client directed me to send the scientists home and remotely viewed my office room and was satisfied that there was none other than me. He then directed me to change the composition of the formulation. He indicated to me that while he can trust me, he had no trust in other Scientists. I made the necessary changes and then filed the application and then I was instructed to destroy the copies I had in my computer for the actual formulation. The composition of the drug was totally different from what was originally written. Once I deleted it I also did not know what was the composition till the patent application was published. This patent had been granted.

This is the extent to which Scientists go to confuse the competitors. They do not even trust others in the same team and would keep the secrets themselves. No super duper Internet security will work for people like me can just read and memorize and walk out and rewrite what we memorized. So I would request Hanon to consider the possibility that the commutator is a clever design to deceive competitors. 

On How to Avoid Commutator


I have built the devices and I have seen that the commutator is not needed. This is a practical observation.

We can simply provide the power at both opposite ends of N and S Magnets to the input coils. A line wire divided in to two does this job easily and both of them are simultaneously powered at diagonally opposite ends. The polarity of the many cores remain NS-NS-NS

Just provide the resistors in between the series of N magnets like NP1-R-NP2-R-NP2 and S magnets like SP1-R-SP2-R-SP3 etc and the Provide the power simulataneously to the input points and the job is done.

Every thing that the commutator is supposed to do is performed without the trouble of mechanical work, sparks, burning Electronics and it is all so simple. Just reposition the Resistors.

No commutator needed. You would place one resistor between SP1--resistor --SP2--resistor--SP3 and so on.

The First input coil will always have the highest current and the opposte coil will be having the least current and the most amazing thing is that this primary ends goes to Earth. Two different earth points. If you build quadfilar coil based cores (or pentafilar or hexafilar as the case may be) and provide resistors in between the two primary S coils the first one will have higher current and will have more magnetism and the second one because of resistor or (even without it ) will have lower current and hence lower magnetism. Ultimately the last of the Coils in the series will not even have any current..may be some thing in millivolts region but nothing more than that and we can control it easily. Since the current is given from the opposite end, in the corresponding opposite coil we will have a stronger or weaker magnetic field.  Always we will have a Strong S Coil and a weak N coil and a Strong N coil will have a corresponding weak S coil. Commutator is not needed. No Electronics needed to achieve this. We have already tested this and what I'm saying is correct. You can use your simultators to verify this but this is common sense. 

Please try this and you may easily find out that COP>1 is easily doable. The polarity is NS-NS-NS.

Whether you reach COP>1 or less than 1 is based on the thickness of secondary coils and its turns and the amount of magnetic flux to which they are subjected to.



I have not dared to do a self sustaining device for I had been warned that this can crate a device that can suck the electricity in the atmosphere and can bring in lightening by Patrick. I discussed adding one component and my driver who has not even passed 10th grade said Are you crazy we both will be killed on the spot. We will be hit by lightening?.

However It is quite possible to do such a device by providing power from an input UPS and then charging that UPS continuously to do this but we have not tested this. I think with a spark plug this is doable and lightening chances are reduced but why take a risk where I'm not trained.

Theoretically this is doable but if we look at the Report of the Inspector of Patents to Buforn it does not disclose a self sustaining part.

You cannot defeat Lenz law by using output coils placed between identical poles. That will not work. Figuera very correctly teaches that Lenz law must be defeated to achieve cop>1. But please take this with a bit of salt as I'm not a competent or trained person. The only qualification I have is that I have done hands on experiments and seen the results.

While I report my experimental findings  let me repeat that I'm not academically qualified to speak on this topic. I share my experimental observations. When you do the experiments hands on, you see that many variables can be done.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on January 29, 2016, 11:54:07 AM
Continuing with my earlier Post I have pmed Hanon on how to use the identical poles.

Using Identical Poles to Generate Output

You can use NN poles and get results. But not as in the Bucking coil.

You should surround the Core with Square coil. Coil must be wound CCW-CW-CCW-CW and many such cores must be placed on the iron core. You see here all the coils are in replusion mode but they would work. Iron should be a square with 90' and coil must be wound on all four arms as CCW-CW-CCW-CW so that all poles are identical and insert this to the iron core surrounded by plastic and you have output in the output coils.

In between the NN coils what happens is that the flux is three times more than the flux between opposite poles. But the flux dissipiates in all directions. So to capture it you need many coils of the type square coil type. In the Square coil also you will have identical poles facing each other but it works. But why it works is not known to me. If it works we accept it. But it is very expensive to do it.

If you want me to draw this and send this to you I can do it. You will see that you will get immediate results. If you want to draw power from identical poles, use identical poles to get the power and if you want to draw power from opposite poles use opposite poles. This seems to be the law of nature.

Now there is a difference between using AC and Pulsed DC..

Pulsed DC is approximately Four times more powerful than AC. So it will draw in more current which will create more magnetism but more heat.

Identical poles have three times the flux between the opposite poles.

Therefore using pulsed DC and identical poles you can generate about 12 times more output than that you would get by using AC and opposite poles. This is the reason of higher output that earlier efforts were focussed on pulsed DC.

But it is very violent and can lead to runaway currents and burning of wires very easily. It can draw lot of current. It costs more money to build pulsed DC based units.

Controlling AC on the other hand is easier and safer. When you realize that output is not based on input but is based on

a. The amount of iron used and the magnetic field strength of iron core

b. Thickness of output wire

and c. number of turns of output wire

you look at stability, sustainability and safety of operations. All these are present in the NS-NS-NS type of thing and any output sufficient to meet our needs can be obtained. In July 2013 had we used much more thicker wires and used them to create lesser number of turns the problems of excessive voltage that made it unusable would have been immediately solved. The Earth batteries were there any way to provide whatever amperage we needed.

Even without the Earth batteries higher output is available by using the Figuera device. I hope that some other people will now test the Figuera device now since the problem of commutator is solved and how to reposition the resistors is explained.

Unfortunately well trained scientists minds are put inside a cage where they can only think that input contributes to output. That is not the case really. Secondly you all appear to avoid iron core and iron rods which are much more magnetisable than laminated transformer iron. Higher the magnetic field higher the eddy current and higher the waste seems to be the normal dictum. But contrary to that if you use higher magnetic field strength and very thick output wires and thinner input wires and iron rods with gaps the loss due to eddy currents is not an issue. Connecting a lot of step down transformers in series for this reason would not yield the desired result. The material of the core matters.

I think I have explained every thing needed for this device to be replicated by any one interested. If there is a need to post I will post.
 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on January 29, 2016, 08:55:29 PM
Hmm, people really getting into it.  ;D

Just wanted to post something else I realized while playing with a simulator.

Inductive kickback, as it's called, is really just returning the current you apply to create the magnetic field. Using a diode to catch the kickback and direct it to the battery recharges it. I'm not saying it returns 100%, but it returns quite a bit.

If you look at the left scope on the left, you see power leaving the battery as -4.46W, power being returned to the battery is the 4.45W... Of course that's the peak wattages, not the total over time. But you can see power returned is at least 50%. The other scope is the load resistor. If you compare the peaks between the two scopes, you see that when there is current on the battery, whether it's supplying current or taking it, it is producing power across the resistor. Meaning that 50% of the time, the resistor is being powered for free.

Now I'm not saying this is overunity, but technically it is. The input power over time is extremely small, because a good bit of the energy is being returned. The output is all output. So in this case, maybe what, 2W on the input and 7W on the output?

The turns ratios are important. This is because the 5V sees the output as a very high impedance. So with a normal transformer, if I had 5V and wanted 120V, I would use a 1:25 ratio. But, because the impedance would be small, when the switch opens it produces a very FAST current. This is like the normal arc on a switch. In this case, the ratio is 1:50. The higher impedance means that the current must move slower, and you get what we see here, a low voltage current that recharges the battery. I'd advise everyone to use a very high ratio. But, this is only half of the circuit, so if I can get it figured out, it might not be necessary.

This reminds me of his other patent that said it was like an induction coil. This is an induction coil. lol Except we can control the kickback, or slow it down, to reclaim energy. So can an induction coil be made to produce free energy? kinda seems that way to me.

For the record, switching the supply at 1 amp peaks produced around 120V, this is about what you see in the scope shots.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on January 30, 2016, 11:52:45 AM
Hanon

 Sorry for the long delay im a little bit ill and it will be a few more days before this fever goes down. So while i said your rig looks nice that was just me being nice toward your effort and the clean appearance of the windings. The path of the flux in your E cores is not going avoid the short pah and take the long one through the y core and coil. It will just jump back and forth between the legs of the E in each core. It's curious why you used such a large Y winding. The E core primaries are already made for those E cores to run at mains voltage as a transformer. Wouldnt you think one of those windings would be better suited for a Y coil. If you can get enough flux to move back and forth over the already provided primary you should be able to figure out what size inducer coils you would need to do that. If not for the fact the E core will not work that way. Where are the I 's? For gods sake stop calling part G a commutator. It's a regulated splitter. I'll try to come up with a way to give you a image you can make in your head from something you might have on hand to watch  after I rehydrate so my head is not pounding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 30, 2016, 11:41:00 PM
Doug,
Thanks for making the effort in those conditions. Rest and cure that fever. I guess that you are saying that closing the magnetic circuit is bad for the flux moving along the Y coil, and that I should use a shorter induced core. As far as I understand your post is about not having a contrary pole near the one emitting the field. Your post is suggesting a design as the one in this post: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg468602/#msg468602 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg468602/#msg468602). I will try to discard those E cores and use just straight bar cores. My previous idea about the design is the one included in the sketch below, but I will try now with straight cores. I also tried time ago with shorter Y cores as the pic attached, but also with those E cores. Maybe I also should try with more than one set at the same time, and just straight cores. My other problem is the commutator, aka regulating splitter of current, that I use with electronic firing and without a proper scope I am not really sure what I am really feeding.I call it commutator following the words of Figuera, but I have clear in my mind that it splits the total current to one or other set of coils sequentially. It is not an on/off commutator, but a incremental current splitter.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 01, 2016, 09:01:59 AM
Summaryzing the last recomendations I´ve received for building the device I post here a list of those features:


- Short induced core to make sure of the field crosses the whole length of the core


- No use of a closed magnetic circuit


- Use the primary winding of a MOT (microwave oven transformer) also as the winding for the induced coil  (thick wire in the secondary)


- Use of straight cores (instead of E cores) in order to avoid the inducer field from jumping to a near opposite pole


- Use of two or mor sets -instead of just one set- to enhance the output, and arrange the poles to have always the same pole toward the induced coil  (all north poles or all south poles)


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on February 02, 2016, 12:16:28 AM
I think the thin wire gives off more spikes, or vibrations.
Collection is the hard part ,because as it changes, so does the ways of doing it (collecting it that is).
Lenz, is just another form of the magnetic field.
Don't fight it, use it.
It's all in the switching, when to flip that field, It's field reversal where to collect.
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 02, 2016, 01:23:16 PM
- Short induced core to make sure of the field crosses the whole length of the core

   (yes but with enough flux to be productive without overheating. Core size is also a factor. For the best materials a max of 10k lines per centimeter square dont expect to get anywhere near that. The filed being generated will attract the adjacent core converting it's own field to match up with the direction of the more active field/ stronger of the two.

- No use of a closed magnetic circuit
 
  Maybe one day but that day is not this day and a closed path does not have to be completely closed one.

- Use the primary winding of a MOT (microwave oven transformer) also as the winding for the induced coil  (thick wire in the secondary)

  If that is source of reliable windings that are easy for you get in numbers and they are all are actually the same.Not a bunch of them from different mots for different size ovens. The two in your rig are not even the same size. If you end up needing 10 coils for the Y's combined up to reach a appreciable output they should be the same.

- Use of straight cores (instead of E cores) in order to avoid the inducer field from jumping to a near opposite pole

  I cant believe you asked that.

- Use of two or mor sets -instead of just one set- to enhance the output, and arrange the poles to have always the same pole toward the induced coil  (all north poles or all south poles)

   Well some what unbelievable question, Big cores are dangerous hard to make and hard to justify. You have the option to combine the output of lots of modest size cores.Even full scale power plants use a lot of smaller coil/core sets and combine them up. For you own use you can make them fairly small it's a balance of resources. If you want to be the next Con Ed utility I don't have anything nice to say to that. I would rather it be less to build then the cost of a couple months bills for the same service from the utilities. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 06, 2016, 12:31:58 AM
"If the current is given to move in series it will not produce COP>1 without the Earth batteries. If the current is given in parallel maintaining the same polarity it will increase the voltage experienced in the secondary in the middle 4 times and if the powerful magnetic field is compressed and magnetic saturation attained in the secondary core  you get the cop>1 results. If you connect to Earth batteries it is automatic."
With this statement, do you mean that the Multifilar Wires must not be connected in series?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 07, 2016, 03:27:38 PM
Hi all.
A quick update, I'm not dead or ill - I'm self-employed and sometimes I don't get much time for my own tinkering...
First a couple of pics :
(Coils_in_use)
The coils I'm currently using.  The outside primaries are still my (ex. MOT) ~26AWG windings.  Still the same solid steel cores.  They can cope with about 1.5A at 12v without getting too warm.  I don't have any means to measure the field strength.  Does anyone have links/info on how to DIY a scope probe for magnetic fields - and how to calibrate?
(Bench_mess)
The breadboard is one of about 20 different designs I've been playing with to SIMPLY drive the two coils with the correct phase between them.  Two major design problems are persistent : how to minimise losses (mainly heat) using standard bipolar transistors in linear mode; how to bias the system to have almost zero idle current and minimum distortion of the sinewave (at 50 or 60Hz).  Ignore the mess aroundabout : I leave everything as-is and come back and tinker when I get time and inspiration.

One thing I did try was this simple inverter circuit ('cos I have built it on a pcb for a customer).  It outputs perfect 50% on/off out of phase signals to drive power mosfets.  For the primaries it is VERY efficient even at 50Hz : mosfets stay cool - even without heatsinks - and the coils get barely warm.  I had to add some shotky diodes to get rid of back EMF (yes, I know that I could recuperate the spikes to charge caps or batteries - but that's not the issue here).  The output signal in the secondary coil is of little use, though : just two tiny spikes each cycle - no real power.  Here's the circuit if anyone wants it :
(Inverter_circuit)
I haven't yet found the graal : simple, low power wastage, simple, only driving the coils in one direction, and simple...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 07, 2016, 03:33:22 PM
(part 2) :D
Some questions :

- It's not easy to see in the photo, but my secondary coil has no core - it's air cored.  Has anyone info on this ?  Should it be cored ? 

Ciao,
Glenn
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 07, 2016, 09:58:56 PM
Does any one on this crazy forum actually read and study the Patents.
it seems not.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 07, 2016, 11:31:15 PM
Glenn,
I also recommend to study the patents to find most of the details.
Sorry I do not understand your inverter circuit. It seems just a one step driver instead of the 7 steps used by Figuera. I do not know if it could work fine or not. Anyway I think it does not include a base DC current for the minimun current always present in both inducers.
I would recommend to use a core in the induced coil
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 08, 2016, 09:15:43 AM
Glenn,
I also recommend to study the patents to find most of the details.
Sorry I do not understand your inverter circuit. It seems just a one step driver instead of the 7 steps used by Figuera. I do not know if it could work fine or not. Anyway I think it does not include a base DC current for the minimun current always present in both inducers.
I would recommend to use a core in the induced coil
Thanks for the info about the induced coil.  I have read the patents that I've been able to find (mainly thanks to you), and I think that I have understood what was done bu Figuera.  I'm working with just one set of coils for the moment to see how everything fits.  Figuera used a commutator and resistors to acheive his two inversly varying magnetic fields.  I'm experimenting to find the most efficient (and simplest) means of doing this with today's electronics.  Efficient meaning not having banks of resistors getting hot.  The fact that the coils should be driven 'in one direction only' and possibly with an idle current are design constraints that are not easy to meet with simple electronics.  To make it more complicated I've added my own design constraint to run everything from 12v.  Aiming for OU is one goal, aiming for something practical is another.

I tried the inverter circuit because I had it to hand.  I wanted too see how the system reacted to being switched hard on/off both sides alternately instead of the progressive variations.  That's what experimenting is all about, no?  I now have the answer - it's not the right path.
Thanks again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 08, 2016, 01:53:03 PM
Glenn,


IMO If you want to swing the magnetic lines you will always need a minimun current present in order to get a collision of both magnetic fields along the core of the induced coil. If you do not use that base DC current then you are just powering one inducer on and the other off (ON+OFF), then the second inducer on  and the first off (OFF+ON) but not both at the same time.  IMO it doesn´t have to reach zero volts (see image below)


I guess you may skip the resistor array if you use 7 batteries in a series and you power more or less batteries in series to one or other inducer set: 6-1 / 5-2 / 4-3 / 3-4 / 2-5 / 1-6. Adding their voltage you will get a higher or lower intentsity along each set of electromagnets.


Also, as I appeared long ago in the forum, you may also use 7 coils for each electromagnets and you could fire 1,2,3,...7 in order to get a higher or lower magnetic field in each electromagnet, being the second electromagnet fired in the opposite sequence: 7,6,5...1
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on February 08, 2016, 04:33:20 PM
Hey guys, Glenn, dude you're working hard. I hate to say it, but I think unless we use a different model for coils, we'll just end up with a transformer driver.

If you view the two images, the first is a set of coils driven by 2.5V AC, and the second is a set driven by 5V DC, in the pulse that we believe Figuera used.

The coils are 1:1:1 ratio to make EMF easier to understand. First photo, both primaries are driven in phase. The total EMF is the sum of the voltages, so, 5V AC. In this case, because the turns are 1:1, the output current will be equal to the current in each primary. So 5V at 1A output is equal to 2.5V at 1A on each input coil. 5W in and out.

Second image represents what we've discussed as the Figuera generator. Both coils driven by pulsed 5V DC, opposing. Output is 5V AC. Now notice the similarities in each image. Whether it's 2.5V AC or 5V DC the total change is equal to 5V. Here again, 1A in the output is equal to 1A in each input coil, but because they come from the same 5V source, it's 5V at 1A, or 5W in and out.

So what I mean is, yes it's possible to use DC, but in a normal transformer model it's still only 100% efficient. I think it's important that he uses series of primaries in all patent images. In Figuera's patent, I could see excess output greater than 100% if all of the cores were attached, side by side. This would be similar to a parallel path transformer, which I described before. But in Buforn's patent, where they are all arranged in a series makes it appear like a very long transformer. Unless all the output coils are wired in parallel.... anyway, I don't think anything out of the ordinary will show without multiple sets.

If anyone wants to say, " It's not a transformer," or, " You don't read the patent," then please substitute that with a decent theoretical model. It's easy to show voltage and power to explain your understanding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 09, 2016, 08:32:45 AM
Hi Antijon:

Patrick has taught me that the Figuera device is an Asymmetrical transformer. Whether single module can provide OU or not who knows? It may or may not.

Darediamond...I apologize for delay. I'm not able to understand your question and not able to answer. I have some litigation work and may not post for some time. Have to take rest. Thanks.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 09, 2016, 08:57:32 AM
Very complicated electronics is not needed. An ordinary step down transformer with diode bridge at out put of transformer and split primary connected to diagonal opposite ends of two primaries with the ends being connected to diode bridge will do the trick of both primaries having different current flowing in them always. I'm not able to understand the need for electronic circuitry here. It is a simple device. Multiple modules may be needed to do it. Electronics does not work in my experience and is a waste of money and time and effort and every component is so sensitive that it burns out easily.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 09, 2016, 01:03:50 PM
Antijon

"Second image represents what we've discussed as the Figuera generator. Both coils driven by pulsed 5V DC, opposing. Output is 5V AC. Now notice the similarities in each image. Whether it's 2.5V AC or 5V DC the total change is equal to 5V. Here again, 1A in the output is equal to 1A in each input coil, but because they come from the same 5V source, it's 5V at 1A, or 5W in and out."

 If 2,5 qnd 2,5 are 5 how is 5 and 5 =5? When the source is split into two completely separate magnets with the same 5 volts feeding both in opposition the difference would be the total when it is in motion shifting the fields over the Y. Thats without even accounting for the number of lines being compressed at the point where the two fields collide shortening the distance of movement needed to have induction result in the Y. The Y is a reference to a space with out movement of it's own having two fields move over the space one at a time. The force between the two fields pushing against each other is the analog form of using one high intensity field being rotated with a physical core the force between the two increases the lines of the fields which determines the amount of induction as each of the two fields are shifted to cover the Y as the other retreats without losing the overall force between the two fields. If ether of the two fields collapse to much the compression of the two is lost and the output will fall off. Transformers only use a single field to which it is converted up or down or used to isolate the mains from the load in case of a short on the load side. A generator increases it's field strength by using the output to feed back into the field to generate more output until it is generating more output then the combined load of the field and the working external circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2016, 03:59:40 PM
 Just some thoughts about the movement of the two magnetic fields. Both fields move and collide in the the exact point where they find their equilibrium point: this point  is where their magnetic forces are equal. Let´s say that the magnetic force is directly proportional to the current intensity (Intensity) and is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (d) from the electromagnets (many Physical Laws show a behavior of dissipation proportional to (1/d^2) ). Then simplifying, the magnetic Force could be represented by:    F = K · Intensity / (d^2)   , where K is a constant
 
The point where both fields (1 and 2) move and find the equilibrium point is where there is balance of their forces :  F1 = F2 . Also we know that the distance from one electromagnet (d1) plus the distance from the other electromagnet (d2) is the total distance between both electromagnets (L).  If we have in one electromagnet a Intensity1= 7 amperes and in the other a Intensity2 = 1 ampere then:
 
K · Intensity1 / d1^2  =  K · Intensity2 / d2^2        ->    d1 = sqrt(Intensity1/Intensity2)·d2
 
d1 + d2  = L                                                         ->    d2 =  L / (1 + sqrt (Intensity1/Intenst2))
 
Now my question: if the induced core is a low reluctance metal , Could it have a force decreasing  proportionally to 1/d^2 ?, or, May it have a magnetic force almost independent to the distance, as consequence of the low reluctance medium? In this second case the movement of the field lines will be very small because the equilibrium point will not be dependent of the distance to each electromagnet. May we need a kind of medium with a little higher reluctance to increase the lines movement?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on February 09, 2016, 04:28:36 PM
Very complicated electronics is not needed. An ordinary step down transformer with diode bridge at out put of transformer and split primary connected to diagonal opposite ends of two primaries with the ends being connected to diode bridge will do the trick of both primaries having different current flowing in them always.

And this is it in a nutshell. In every simulation or idea I've tried to recreate the waveforms, it always ends up as two waves 180 degrees in time. It's AC voltage. Like in the first image, I have 4 different sources pulsing at different times, but the effect is that the current travels up and down the resistor. The resistor is just a current divider used to produce two clean sine waves.

Doug, I actually made a typo there. The coils are at a ratio of 1:1:2. It's a step-up where the output coil has twice as much windings as each primary.
Quote
If 2,5 qnd 2,5 are 5 how is 5 and 5 =5?
Look at the peak to peak voltage. Peak to peak voltage of 2.5V AC is 5 volts. DC pulse of 5V is 5V peak to peak. It's the same thing. Look, the coils don't care whether it's AC or DC, it just sees a current moving in one direction or the other.
Quote
When the source is split into two completely separate magnets with the same 5 volts feeding both in opposition the difference would be the total when it is in motion shifting the fields over the Y. Thats without even accounting for the number of lines being compressed at the point where the two fields collide shortening the distance of movement needed to have induction result in the Y.
It doesn't work like that in reality. Magnetic lines don't just leap out of iron and produce "flux cutting" on coils. The reason why is because iron has such a higher permeability than air, it requires a lot of energy to to push the lines out. And this also creates a lot of heat in the iron... say induction heating? If you want to go with that model, good luck.

I'm pretty firm in the opinion now that he simply used the driver to create AC. The overunity comes from the arrangement of multiple coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 09, 2016, 06:16:15 PM
We will just have agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 09, 2016, 08:40:11 PM
Excuse me Doug i have Indian Tech support on the other line, i'll get back with you.
Damn i sure like those Sham Wow's but they were out of rubber spoons.
and here i thought it was the Hysteresis cycle that caused the heating and that pure iron has almost no hysteresis.
dummy me, how could i have ever thought of that.

Hanon pic below
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 09, 2016, 10:05:03 PM
And this is it in a nutshell. In every simulation or idea I've tried to recreate the waveforms, it always ends up as two waves 180 degrees in time. It's AC voltage. Like in the first image, I have 4 different sources pulsing at different times, but the effect is that the current travels up and down the resistor. The resistor is just a current divider used to produce two clean sine waves.


Antijon..In all my experiments where some good results came secondary had lower turns than even a single primary. This is FYI. No of turns matter but thickness of secondary wire can be modified to reduce number of turns. This is where it is not a transformer but generator. Output is AC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 09, 2016, 11:28:30 PM
Marathonman,
What do you think that is easier: to build a mechanical rotary commutator as the one that you posted, or to fire the resistors with an electronic circuit. I think that it is easier an electronic circuit, except that in my case that I do not have an scope and I do not really know if my circuit is fine and it is feeding the proper sequence. On the other hand, rotary machines at high rpm are difficult to calibrate, but you know what you are really feeding. Maybe my circuit is fine but the problem is in my coils. Or maybe I need more coils.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 10, 2016, 05:27:31 AM
Hanon,

 You all ready know my feeling on this matter as i will use mag amps but had to build the above to get some results but it wasn't that hard to build. all parts were bought from ebay except for the Nicrome 80 wire i bought off of TemCo. i really hate moving parts period. as for the resistance, that can be measured with an LCR meter or most AC/DC measuring units have ohm measurement included to get the proper currant you need.
as for my mag amps i have a 10 watt pot i will be using to adjust the milliampers in my 12 volt control coil while it is operating with a load and measuring the amperage at output of 1 amp, .9 amp, .8 amp ect. this will tell me the milliamps i need in my control resistors attached to my timing board. each resistor will allow more or less milliamp currant through the control coil to control amps on the output coil.(very little loss)
use minimum of two coil sets as i did not get much from one set. you will start to see it from two sets and up.
use the solenoid link i posted it came in handy and also Electronics assistant.
you can run duel resistor networks also as i am with my mag amps just make sure that you hook one exact copy backwards to get the proper currant sequence in your primaries.

and listen to Mr D. i would not be their if not for listening to the wisdom.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 10, 2016, 09:48:08 AM
Continuing with my earlier Post I have pmed Hanon on how to use the identical poles.

Using Identical Poles to Generate Output

You can use NN poles and get results. But not as in the Bucking coil.

You should surround the Core with Square coil. Coil must be wound CCW-CW-CCW-CW and many such cores must be placed on the iron core. You see here all the coils are in replusion mode but they would work. Iron should be a square with 90' and coil must be wound on all four arms as CCW-CW-CCW-CW so that all poles are identical and insert this to the iron core surrounded by plastic and you have output in the output coils.

In between the NN coils what happens is that the flux is three times more than the flux between opposite poles. But the flux dissipiates in all directions. So to capture it you need many coils of the type square coil type. In the Square coil also you will have identical poles facing each other but it works. But why it works is not known to me. If it works we accept it. But it is very expensive to do it.

If you want me to draw this and send this to you I can do it. You will see that you will get immediate results. If you want to draw power from identical poles, use identical poles to get the power and if you want to draw power from opposite poles use opposite poles. This seems to be the law of nature.

Now there is a difference between using AC and Pulsed DC..

Pulsed DC is approximately Four times more powerful than AC. So it will draw in more current which will create more magnetism but more heat.

Identical poles have three times the flux between the opposite poles.

Therefore using pulsed DC and identical poles you can generate about 12 times more output than that you would get by using AC and opposite poles. This is the reason of higher output that earlier efforts were focussed on pulsed DC.

But it is very violent and can lead to runaway currents and burning of wires very easily. It can draw lot of current. It costs more money to build pulsed DC based units.

Controlling AC on the other hand is easier and safer. When you realize that output is not based on input but is based on

a. The amount of iron used and the magnetic field strength of iron core

b. Thickness of output wire

and c. number of turns of output wire

you look at stability, sustainability and safety of operations. All these are present in the NS-NS-NS type of thing and any output sufficient to meet our needs can be obtained. In July 2013 had we used much more thicker wires and used them to create lesser number of turns the problems of excessive voltage that made it unusable would have been immediately solved. The Earth batteries were there any way to provide whatever amperage we needed.

Even without the Earth batteries higher output is available by using the Figuera device. I hope that some other people will now test the Figuera device now since the problem of commutator is solved and how to reposition the resistors is explained.

Unfortunately well trained scientists minds are put inside a cage where they can only think that input contributes to output. That is not the case really. Secondly you all appear to avoid iron core and iron rods which are much more magnetisable than laminated transformer iron. Higher the magnetic field higher the eddy current and higher the waste seems to be the normal dictum. But contrary to that if you use higher magnetic field strength and very thick output wires and thinner input wires and iron rods with gaps the loss due to eddy currents is not an issue. Connecting a lot of step down transformers in series for this reason would not yield the desired result. The material of the core matters.

I think I have explained every thing needed for this device to be replicated by any one interested. If there is a need to post I will post.
 when an electromagnetic field colasps, it results into  changing of polarity of voltage NOT Polarity Of Magnetic Poles  so using an High Voltage DC that is rapidly swithed on and off with either Mosfet or Mechanical Commutator to Power the Ramaswami transfore will work with added benefit of safe looping of the Nramaswami TrafoGen as the back EMF from the Split Multifilar Windings can easily be collected and be used to charge the either super cap banks and or install batteries bank being used to power the inverter being used to powèr the voltage multiplier that power the either Optical Switch or Mechanical Switch been used to Pulse the System.
NOTE: Substantial ount of Radiant Energy can only be colleteod at high frequency of an 'Harvester' and you must use an High Voltage Fast Switching Diode Bridge with the cap.
However, High Frequency  with Multifilar Capacitorlike Winding is the MAJOR KEY to ABSORBING EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY THE FREE ELECTRICITY IN THE AIR.
The higher the frequency, the lower the PRIMARY driving power in Watt becomes and the higher the available Radiant Energy becomes too.
Just make sure your harvester is at least a Bifilar Coil.

If you wanna still.use AC which is ofcourse cheaper to get directly from a DC Powered Inveter, I will recomend making an High Frequency Variable inverter Oscillator or Convert or HACK your present inverter by replacing the cbb capacitor used to get the 50 or 60hz AC outputs with one that will allow for higher pulse rate
 and use a Pontentieter of higj resistance to control the frequency remember that every Trafo have it limit to frequencies!!!

Nigeria says hello to everyone.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 10, 2016, 10:32:05 AM
 When an electromagnetic field colasps, it results into  changing of polarity of voltage NOT Polarity Of Magnetic Poles  so using an High Voltage DC that is rapidly swithed on and off with either Mosfet or Mechanical Commutator to Power the Ramaswami transfore will work with added benefit of safe looping of the Nramaswami TrafoGen as the back EMF from the Split Multifilar Windings can easily be collected and be used to charge the either super cap banks and or install batteries bank being used to power the inverter being used to powèr the voltage multiplier that power the either Optical Switch or Mechanical Switch been used to Pulse the System.
NOTE: Substantial ount of Radiant Energy can only be colleteod at high frequency of an 'Harvester' and you must use an High Voltage Fast Switching Diode Bridge with the cap.
However, High Frequency  with Multifilar Capacitorlike Winding is the MAJOR KEY to ABSORBING EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY THE FREE ELECTRICITY IN THE AIR.
The higher the frequency, the lower the PRIMARY driving power in Watt becomes and the higher the available Radiant Energy becomes too.
Just make sure your harvester is at least a Bifilar Coil.

If you wanna still.use AC which is ofcourse cheaper to get directly from a DC Powered Inveter, I will recomend making an High Frequency Variable inverter Oscillator or Convert or HACK your present inverter by replacing the cbb capacitor used to get the 50 or 60hz AC output with an high resitance Potentiometer!!!

Nigeria says hello to everyone.
 
Continuing with my earlier Post I have pmed Hanon on how to use the identical poles.

Using Identical Poles to Generate Output

You can use NN poles and get results. But not as in the Bucking coil.

You should surround the Core with Square coil. Coil must be wound CCW-CW-CCW-CW and many such cores must be placed on the iron core. You see here all the coils are in replusion mode but they would work. Iron should be a square with 90' and coil must be wound on all four arms as CCW-CW-CCW-CW so that all poles are identical and insert this to the iron core surrounded by plastic and you have output in the output coils.

In between the NN coils what happens is that the flux is three times more than the flux between opposite poles. But the flux dissipiates in all directions. So to capture it you need many coils of the type square coil type. In the Square coil also you will have identical poles facing each other but it works. But why it works is not known to me. If it works we accept it. But it is very expensive to do it.

If you want me to draw this and send this to you I can do it. You will see that you will get immediate results. If you want to draw power from identical poles, use identical poles to get the power and if you want to draw power from opposite poles use opposite poles. This seems to be the law of nature.

Now there is a difference between using AC and Pulsed DC..

Pulsed DC is approximately Four times more powerful than AC. So it will draw in more current which will create more magnetism but more heat.

Identical poles have three times the flux between the opposite poles.

Therefore using pulsed DC and identical poles you can generate about 12 times more output than that you would get by using AC and opposite poles. This is the reason of higher output that earlier efforts were focussed on pulsed DC.

But it is very violent and can lead to runaway currents and burning of wires very easily. It can draw lot of current. It costs more money to build pulsed DC based units.

Controlling AC on the other hand is easier and safer. When you realize that output is not based on input but is based on

a. The amount of iron used and the magnetic field strength of iron core

b. Thickness of output wire

and c. number of turns of output wire

you look at stability, sustainability and safety of operations. All these are present in the NS-NS-NS type of thing and any output sufficient to meet our needs can be obtained. In July 2013 had we used much more thicker wires and used them to create lesser number of turns the problems of excessive voltage that made it unusable would have been immediately solved. The Earth batteries were there any way to provide whatever amperage we needed.

Even without the Earth batteries higher output is available by using the Figuera device. I hope that some other people will now test the Figuera device now since the problem of commutator is solved and how to reposition the resistors is explained.

Unfortunately well trained scientists minds are put inside a cage where they can only think that input contributes to output. That is not the case really. Secondly you all appear to avoid iron core and iron rods which are much more magnetisable than laminated transformer iron. Higher the magnetic field higher the eddy current and higher the waste seems to be the normal dictum. But contrary to that if you use higher magnetic field strength and very thick output wires and thinner input wires and iron rods with gaps the loss due to eddy currents is not an issue. Connecting a lot of step down transformers in series for this reason would not yield the desired result. The material of the core matters.

I think I have explained every thing needed for this device to be replicated by any one interested. If there is a need to post I will post.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 10, 2016, 12:17:18 PM
Marathonman.. I'm surprised that you did not get the result in a single coil. If you are using Magnetic Amplifier principles results must come at such high rates. Possibly you are using small core and small coils very few turns. Magnetic Amplifier using permanent magnets is different and Magnetic amplifier using Electromagnets is pretty dangerous. Iron will get hot enormously and output will be quite high but such risks are better avoided. It is very easy to use shunted coils at the ends of the primaries but the coils can carry 100 amps and can saturate the entire core. Or did you try with small PM or few turns on coils. This is to be avoided really and is risky. 

Darediamond....How you do you use high voltage pulsed DC at high frequency..Would that mean a spark plug..Kind of Tesla coil primary. Can you explain this part please.

I have used only 50 Hz and 220 volts AC which I know is very mild but it is sufficient to get results. Yes I have used very low input. If I use pulsed DC it will consume 30 amps at 220 volts or 240 volts. Iron will be heated so much and will be saturated and output will be so high. Very few turns of very thick wires can then be used. It is all worrying so much to me and AC is moderate and kind. Also Iron cannot be used at very high frequencies but we will need ferrite cores.

Pulsed DC at high voltage is deadly. Any thing above 60 milliamps can cause death and pulsed DC is DC which is one way current and people doing such experiments should be extremely careful. I do not recommend such risks. Avoid high voltage if you are using pulsed DC and do not go beyond 30 Volts. This is what we are told here. 

Once you master taking energy out of the Atmosphere where is the need to take risks. It is enough if we take what is needed without compromising on safety.

What is Radiant Energy? My understanding is multifilar coils increase frequency of AC and increase inductive impedance and so primary consumes very low input but because there are multiple rotating currents in parallel the core is magnetised signficantly causing high output. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 10, 2016, 03:48:17 PM
Just some thoughts about the movement of the two magnetic fields. Both fields move and collide in the the exact point where they find their equilibrium point: this point  is where their magnetic forces are equal. Let´s say that the magnetic force is directly proportional to the current intensity (Intensity) and is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (d) from the electromagnets (many Physical Laws show a behavior of dissipation proportional to (1/d^2) ). Then simplifying, the magnetic Force could be represented by:    F = K · Intensity / (d^2)   , where K is a constant
 
The point where both fields (1 and 2) move and find the equilibrium point is where there is balance of their forces :  F1 = F2 . Also we know that the distance from one electromagnet (d1) plus the distance from the other electromagnet (d2) is the total distance between both electromagnets (L).  If we have in one electromagnet a Intensity1= 7 amperes and in the other a Intensity2 = 1 ampere then:
 
K · Intensity1 / d1^2  =  K · Intensity2 / d2^2        ->    d1 = sqrt(Intensity1/Intensity2)·d2
 
d1 + d2  = L                                                         ->    d2 =  L / (1 + sqrt (Intensity1/Intenst2))
 
Now my question: if the induced core is a low reluctance metal , Could it have a force decreasing  proportionally to 1/d^2 ?, or, May it have a magnetic force almost independent to the distance, as consequence of the low reluctance medium? In this second case the movement of the field lines will be very small because the equilibrium point will not be dependent of the distance to each electromagnet. May we need a kind of medium with a little higher reluctance to increase the lines movement?

 I have realized that this in another way which may manifest the necessity of an open magnetic path. Although you have a low reluctance path along the induced core, the magnetic lines have to return to its original electromagnet (toward the opposite pole). If you have an open magnetic path, this return path to the other pole is along the air, so air for sure will present high reluctance, and thus a dissipation proportional to 1/d^2 will appear. Therefore the reasoning is still valid if we have an open magnetic path independently of the core reluctance.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 10, 2016, 04:42:45 PM
As been said before the long air path adds to the reluctance = resistance to change = slowing of change of currant in the core. this is a necessity that Figuera purposely built into the system that acts as a currant self regulator sort of speaking.

we need to split this forum into two entities because it is obvious some of us are on a total different path then what is said in patents. if it is not followed then it is NOT Figuera's device plain and simple. their is no BEMF collection or what ever you want to call it, their is no 50 layer filler coil, their is no radiant energy collection just plain and simple orderly currant variations from high to low and back split between two primary electromagnets,  no more no less.

any thing other than this description is NOT A FIGUERA DEVICE.

and yes Nswami my demo device is small so i had to use two core. Duh! i think that would be obvious. my final cores are way larger.
after reading the last few pages on this forum all i can do is shake my head in amasement as to what did i do GOD to deserve this.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 10, 2016, 09:03:38 PM
I has come to the conclusion that this forum is like the real society. Some people try to help (altruist), some people are just here to absorb info but do not like to share (selfish), others are just misguiding with their posts (wicked). Is the Floyd VTA a transformer? No. Is the Willis magnacoaster a transformer? No. Is the Hubbard generator a transformer? No. Is Figuera generator a transformer? Patents do not mention anything similar. Please stop using Bajac's design with his air gaped coils to divert the lenz effect. All this is  not even mentioned in the patents.

Patents are just about this:    One electromagnet   One Coil   One electromagnet

As I have collected all my thoughts in my site there is not much left to repeat here.  You may find there all the info about Figuera, and also my own interpretation, which, by the way, follow very close the patents text (just the NN polarity is the only thing which may be disagreed, because is not explicitly written in the patents)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 10, 2016, 11:46:53 PM
 Is the Figuera Device a Transformer ? (NO)
does it act like a transformer? (NO)
is it wound like a transformer? (NO)
is it like or does it act like Rswami device? (HELL NO)
does it amplify ? (YES)
well then how does it amplify ? (by taking the incoming signal and amplifying it)
well how does it do that ? (MAGNETICALLY)
well how does it do that?  (by imitating a rotating generator)
but a generator uses two poles and this device uses only one, how is that going to work? (by two opposite opposing electromagnets varied in intensity in a uniform manner keeping constant pressure between them)
if it is not a transformer then what the hell is it ??????????   (A MAGNETIC/SIGNAL AMPLIFIER.)
why is it not a transformer? (because it transforms nothing)
so your saying all it does it Amplify? (YES)

what did you say it was again?  (A MAGNETIC AMPLIFIER)

WOW Imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on February 11, 2016, 01:53:22 AM
Is the Figuera Device a Transformer ? (NO)
does it act like a transformer? (NO)
is it wound like a transformer? (NO)
is it like or does it act like Rswami device? (HELL NO)
does it amplify ? (YES)
well then how does it amplify ? (by taking the incoming signal and amplifying it)
well how does it do that ? (MAGNETICALLY)
well how does it do that?  (by imitating a rotating generator)
but a generator uses two poles and this device uses only one, how is that going to work? (by two opposite opposing electromagnets varied in intensity in a uniform manner keeping constant pressure between them)
if it is not a transformer then what the hell is it ??? ??? ??? ?   (A MAGNETIC/SIGNAL AMPLIFIER.)
why is it not a transformer? (because it transforms nothing)
so your saying all it does it Amplify? (YES)

what did you say it was again?  (A MAGNETIC AMPLIFIER)

WOW Imagine that !

Hi marathonman,

I have no problem at all with any of the things you posted in this quote.  Except I would not call this device a "magnetic amplifier".   While it may technically amplify a magnetic field the term "magnetic amplifier is already an established term for a particular type of transformer that controls the current through the transformer by adjusting the saturation of the core of the transformer.   To call the Figeura device by the same name will only cause more confusion in the OU world where there are already many terms being misused and misunderstood.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 11, 2016, 04:27:19 AM
OK it's not term it's fact.......but.
lets try another thing since the confusion is running wild (Thank you by the way citfta for not disagreeing)
a car is called a car no mater how many hundreds of variants there are even though some are diesel and some are gasoline but to avoid confusion lets call the Figuera device an Signal Amplifier.

SIGNAL AMPLIFIER for the easily confused.

and you are very correct about misuse of terms......everyone might be guilty of that present company included.
good to here from you.
Hanon ad one more on the intelligent list.
yes the sham wow's can be put away, tech support not needed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 11, 2016, 10:14:56 AM
Hanon and all:

I apologize if any of my posts have caused any discomfort to any one.

oh by mistake many parts of the posts are deleted. My apologies.

Ramaswami device is an improvement over the Figuera device. Small single piece device. Not multiple ones.

The poles are open and a copper plate if placed will absorb the magnetic field coming out of the core and as the polarities are shifting North South always significant current is induced in the copper or Aluminium plate

The rule is that Electricity is induced in a conductor subjected to time varying magnetic field.

The current generated is directly proportional to

area of the conductor
thickness of the conductor
intensity of the magnetic field
area of the magnetic field and
mass of the magnetisable core

And

Inversely proportional to the resistance of the conductor.

This is how we get huge amperage in Homopolar Generators where only DC is used. So the Tesla Dynamo Electric machine patent rotates the copper disks. If we are use AC no need to rotate the disks and amperage without voltage will be developed.

If we wind the secondary wire on the core and connect to the two copper plates then significant amperage is developed in the secondary and secondary causes the core to saturate and this causes high voltage to be developed in the secondary again. You can test it if you want to check.

Primary does not need to provide high input. I have succeeded in providing very low inputs 33 watts to be precise and powering lamps for up to 2000 watts but the output was not 2000 watts. Output was able to power 2000 watts lamps.

You have to combine the Dynamo Electric machine and Figuera device or Ramaswami device. Any amount of power can be developed with a small input.

While this thread is focussed on making the Figuera device I see the purpose as providing an easy, simple to replicate, no moving parts no complexity device that can be made to work any where in the world. That also seems to be the over all purpose of the Forum.

Using the above principle it is possible to create 300 amps output easily. But core should be large enough to avoid saturation and heat.

I again apologize if I have caused discomfort to any one.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 11, 2016, 11:09:36 AM
 Hi,
 
Your complex design windings show that your device is not pure Figuera design. I am glad if you have had good results. But your design with concentric primaries and secundaries, multifilars windings resembles me more to the patent of Daniel McFarland Cook than two simple electromagnets with an intermediate coil patented by Figuera. I wouldn´t say that you are strictly following Figuera´s designs.
 

Hanon and all:

I apologize if any of my posts have caused any discomfort to any one.

oh by mistake many parts of the posts are deleted. My apologies.

Ramaswami device is an improvement over the Figuera device. Small single piece device. Not multiple ones.

The poles are open and a copper plate if placed will absorb the magnetic field coming out of the core and as the polarities are shifting North South always significant current is induced in the copper or Aluminium plate

The rule is that Electricity is induced in a conductor subjected to time varying magnetic field.

The current generated is directly proportional to

area of the conductor
thickness of the conductor
intensity of the magnetic field
area of the magnetic field and
mass of the magnetisable core

And

Inversely proportional to the resistance of the conductor.

This is how we get huge amperage in Homopolar Generators where only DC is used. So the Tesla Dynamo Electric machine patent rotates the copper disks. If we are use AC no need to rotate the disks and amperage without voltage will be developed.

If we wind the secondary wire on the core and connect to the two copper plates then significant amperage is developed in the secondary and secondary causes the core to saturate and this causes high voltage to be developed in the secondary again. You can test it if you want to check.

Primary does not need to provide high input. I have succeeded in providing very low inputs 33 watts to be precise and powering lamps for up to 2000 watts but the output was not 2000 watts. Output was able to power 2000 watts lamps.

You have to combine the Dynamo Electric machine and Figuera device or Ramaswami device. Any amount of power can be developed with a small input.

While this thread is focussed on making the Figuera device I see the purpose as providing an easy, simple to replicate, no moving parts no complexity device that can be made to work any where in the world. That also seems to be the over all purpose of the Forum.

Using the above principle it is possible to create 300 amps output easily. But core should be large enough to avoid saturation and heat.

I again apologize if I have caused discomfort to any one.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 11, 2016, 11:19:02 AM
Hello All

MarathonMan,
I haven't seen anything ( in this forum or others ) that equals the lonely alternator in " our " cars...or gen heads. You can use dc or ac to drive both... Synchronicity is what Tesla used either starting it up by earth battery or 12 volts.
IMHO the " Figuera " separates the driving force and collects it in what everybody is calling a/the transformer(s)
If ( we ) could make our work resemble an actual alternator or an older dynamo I think we could achieve ( stumble on ) what Professor Figueras had discovered.........

All the Best...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 11, 2016, 11:24:21 AM
Hanon:

Thanks for the kind words..Unfortunately Figuera has added to the mystery by saying coils are wound properly and has not even disclosed the pole arrangement. The similarity that we have a secondary in the middle and two electromagnet primaries on both sides. It is only to that extent it is similar. IT is more similar to Buforn Patent last design is what we felt but we can be inaccurate. Yes Cook Patent uses thin primaries and thick secondaries but he places the primaries on the core and secondaries over the primaries and we have reversed it. So to that extent it is similar to Cook patent also. I have to agree on that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 11, 2016, 07:19:03 PM
Randy;

 What is this fixation with a car alternator ? they have to much drag to be anything remotely considered OU.
as long as you have N and S and it rotates you, we, everyone is screwed.

Rswami; Quote;  Figuera has added to the mystery by saying coils are wound properly and has not even disclosed the pole arrangement.

easily deduced with proper reasoning and investigative research. if anyone that can read will find out that the spin direction of a NyS set up will not work because the spin direction/currant are opposing when one taken up and the other taken down. so that leaves NyN.
so you try this and low and behold it works because the spin direction is the same way when one is taken up and other taken down.
SIMPLE TEST AND REASONING.
imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 11, 2016, 10:20:52 PM
well... for starters. Alternators and gen heads work. I don't see anybody coming up with a " figueras " that works. secondly everything in profit world has a life expectancy of a fortnight... I don't have a fixation on generators except that they work.

Tesla's patents on generators may or may not be over unity but they work. MagAmp has been around for awhile... I think the germans were using in it WWII on their V1 and V2s

maybe our differences are the verbiage.......... collectors and amplifiers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 11, 2016, 11:38:07 PM
I am afraid that sucessful fellows are just quiet, and do not show up.  Even I dare to think that some of them maybe are just throwing smoke curtains to distract. Very few real altruist people in the world.

See you
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 12, 2016, 04:25:15 AM
Hanon; i agree and hang in there, altruist to the bone.

well... for starters. Alternators and gen heads work. I don't see anybody coming up with a " figueras " that works. secondly everything in profit world has a life expectancy of a fortnight... I don't have a fixation on generators except that they work.

Liar i bet you have one on your night stand. ha, ha, ha.

Meaning i don't have what it takes to think this through and i want to take the easy Corporate way out and screw my neighbor.

you seam like you are an alright guy but how chicken shit can you be. that is the most gutless statement i have ever heard.
contrary to you absence their are people out there that have a working device and with that guidance i have achieved over unity with a two section unit. yes this is a real deal and no bull shit. not everything that takes place in this forum is hillbilly bull shit.

Randy we are about the same age and i am not pulling your chain. PM me and i will fill you in with what i have.

If you can handle it.
PS. yes the Germans "perfected" an American design to no end. you have no idea unless you researched.

marathonman.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 12, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
Hanon,
That's an interesting drawing...please add the Y coil

R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 12, 2016, 12:10:09 PM
Well, you guys really know how to frighten away newbies...    Between personal attacks and cryptic comments it's a real welcome cocktail.
I innocently (read naively) thought that those who "know" were here to help or guide those who want to learn.  Even after wading through over 200 pages - and trying to sort what's good to keep and what's not worth lingering over - there's not much to go on.  The Figuera patents are very vague.  Some of you have come-up with some good interpretations and a few have, apparently made something work.  I say apparently because there's never anything tangible posted : no photos, no data.

Many thanks to Hanon who has taken time and much effort to document his interpretations.  I'm still uncertain about the 'crashing fields' theory, though.  In my mind - and based on experimental results - what I see working is much simpler :
When one coil is energised 100% and the other is near 0%, the energised coil presents, say, it's N pole to the pickup (induced, secondary, whatever) coil.  If that coil has a core, it will take on the opposite magnetic polarity and so you'll have a S facing our electromagnet's N.  When you inverse the situation, the powerful N pole is now facing the other end of the pickup core : so the pickup core will reverse it's S-N poles.  Induced AC current.  Simple.

As I've said in previous posts I'm looking to see if the system can be driven from a 12v battery to make a portable device.  Driving coils efficiently with uni-directional 'sine' pulses is not as straightforward as it looks.

If I'm allowed I'll continue posting my experiments and results.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 12, 2016, 04:30:33 PM
Glen;

 Everything to get a working device has been posted over the last few months but all it does is fall on deaf ears. this is why the people that have a working device will not post because NOBODY LISTENS.

i know i have listened to the little tidbits here and there that were posted and also Hanon that basically had the idea of opposing electromagnets in the first place. i save EVERYTHING and review EVERYTHING almost every night for the last year and a half. i eat Figuera, i sleep Figuera, i dream Figuera, i even talk about and think about it at work......why? because i believe in this device and knew it worked.
that is where i am today with a two core device with outstanding results and can't wait to build a whole unit. but unfortunately i lost my job and broke my foot so i can't afford shit until my income tax comes in and i get a another job.
as for pictures well i don't even own a camera and my phone is cheap as hell so i can't download anything from it even if i tried. i will though buy a cheap camera when i can and post my core setup and what all else i have just to calm the BS factor arising in peoples head.

like i said all the info posted since about October or November will get you a working device you just have to decide what is real and what is BS. i am very sorry for pissing everyone off, i apologize as i am not a very good teacher or conveyor of info as i have no patients with someone that won't listen.
May all your builds reach OU.
Donald
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on February 12, 2016, 06:17:21 PM
Hey Glenn,
Quote
When one coil is energised 100% and the other is near 0%, the energised coil presents, say, it's N pole to the pickup (induced, secondary, whatever) coil.  If that coil has a core, it will take on the opposite magnetic polarity and so you'll have a S facing our electromagnet's N.  When you inverse the situation, the powerful N pole is now facing the other end of the pickup core : so the pickup core will reverse it's S-N poles.  Induced AC current.  Simple.
I agree. It's a very simple concept. Unfortunately, I've tried to prove to others here that this is the same action as a simple transformer and generator, or any other generating device, but most here can't understand that, as they don't understand EMF or ampere turns, or Watts, or why a generator has a single B field of one strength but links two circuits of very different Wattages.

I Found out over a year ago that multiple primaries, positioned PARALLEL to each other physically, multiply the EMF on an output coil. This is essentially a solid state generator, because if we view a generator in operation, we see that it has a changing B field, but also a changing area, or inductive path. As an armature rotates toward it's exciter, the B field increases along with, or due to, the increasing area coupling the two coils.

An exact replica of a generator would be a single generating coil with many exciter coils arranged on it's pole face. If the exciter coils were turned on sequentially from one side to the other, or from a min to max number of coils, it would be literally a solid state generator. But in reality, all that's required is to have the exciters powered by AC, the total B field will be the sum of all, the total inductance will be the sum of all.

So in my opinion, which is unwelcome here, Figuera relied on many parallel primaries to increase the Ampere turns on his secondaries. I have yet to experiment with multiple secondaries, but what the hell, it probably works. But one single secondary definitely works, and this is what I'm basing my plans on.

This is all due to my independent experiments, ignored in this thread except by Randy who encouraged me a year ago. I don't have any data, but if you, or anyone, would like more info on this concept, please let me know. I can even make videos to demonstrate it with real devices... at least, to demonstrate the increase in EMF and plausibility of OU. Again, I have not made a documented OU transformer, but it's plausible.

Everyone else, yes I said transformer.  ;) Marathonman, congrats on the working model. Looking forward to some videos in action. ahh, funny thing happened yesterday, lightning struck and it started raining bacon... I guess pigs are flying.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 12, 2016, 07:25:56 PM
Im still trying to figure this statement out.

"It doesn't work like that in reality. Magnetic lines don't just leap out of iron and produce "flux cutting" on coils. The reason why is because iron has such a higher permeability than air, it requires a lot of energy to to push the lines out."
 
 So your saying the magnetic field around the earth does not exist because the field lines cant just jump out of the magnet core.We all burned up a long time ago and this is just a dream?Cool
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 12, 2016, 08:48:57 PM
Antijon;
look forward to your plausible video ? and my broke foot say's Hi !
Doug: I agree.
Something to think about Pic.
Expansion can not exceed Compression and Compression can not exceed Expansion otherwise induction will be lost.
exact opposite of the other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 12, 2016, 11:17:19 PM
Antijon, guys,

Antijon, your post is an important post not to be dismissed. Summary: Multiple primaries in parallel multiply the induction in the secondary.

One user in the spanish forum told that with just one single set the device does not work. That he needed more sets to get it working. Yes, you read it right: to get it working. He also told that it works with the commutator, or with pulsed DC, or AC. Marathonman needed two sets. One set was not enough. Now antijon seems to have tested that multiple primaries in parallel get an amplification effect. It seems that primaries of two sets may interact mutually and get the effect we are looking for.

Maybe these results explains the geometry of the Hubbard generator with multiple coils, or why Figuera used 7 single sets in his 1908, and 4 sets in his 1902 patent instead of just one set as the essential unit of the generator. Also have a look to this next patent where it is stated that the output is multiplied by the number of coils: http://freenrg.info/Patents/FR739458_COUTIER/FR739458_COUTIER_TRANS.html (http://freenrg.info/Patents/FR739458_COUTIER/FR739458_COUTIER_TRANS.html)

In summary, maybe the key is to built two or more sets. Not only one set as I have tried until now. If so, maybe we are looking for a kind of interacction between the primaries of two close sets. And maybe Figuera patented a series of sets instead of just claiming one single set (which further could be setup in series or parallel)

Antijon, sorry but I did not note before that you were claiming many primaries in parallel. If you told it or showed your results before it passed unnoticed for myself.  I may agree with you on the neccessity of multiple sets, but I still go forward of my interpretation of the polarity. It is good to find complementaries ideas in your post. For me the parallel primaries that you mention are from two close single sets. Thanks.

Hey Glenn,I agree. It's a very simple concept. Unfortunately, I've tried to prove to others here that this is the same action as a simple transformer and generator, or any other generating device, but most here can't understand that, as they don't understand EMF or ampere turns, or Watts, or why a generator has a single B field of one strength but links two circuits of very different Wattages.

I Found out over a year ago that multiple primaries, positioned PARALLEL to each other physically, multiply the EMF on an output coil.
This is essentially a solid state generator, because if we view a generator in operation, we see that it has a changing B field, but also a changing area, or inductive path. As an armature rotates toward it's exciter, the B field increases along with, or due to, the increasing area coupling the two coils.

An exact replica of a generator would be a single generating coil with many exciter coils arranged on it's pole face. If the exciter coils were turned on sequentially from one side to the other, or from a min to max number of coils, it would be literally a solid state generator. But in reality, all that's required is to have the exciters powered by AC, the total B field will be the sum of all, the total inductance will be the sum of all.

So in my opinion, which is unwelcome here, Figuera relied on many parallel primaries to increase the Ampere turns on his secondaries. I have yet to experiment with multiple secondaries, but what the hell, it probably works. But one single secondary definitely works, and this is what I'm basing my plans on.

This is all due to my independent experiments, ignored in this thread except by Randy who encouraged me a year ago. I don't have any data, but if you, or anyone, would like more info on this concept, please let me know. I can even make videos to demonstrate it with real devices... at least, to demonstrate the increase in EMF and plausibility of OU. Again, I have not made a documented OU transformer, but it's plausible.

Everyone else, yes I said transformer.  ;) Marathonman, congrats on the working model. Looking forward to some videos in action. ahh, funny thing happened yesterday, lightning struck and it started raining bacon... I guess pigs are flying.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 13, 2016, 03:18:33 AM
Lo siento Hannon

............................. this is why the people that have a working device will not post because NOBODY LISTENS.
This would explain why you still post.

....that is where i am today with a two core device with outstanding results and can't wait to build a whole unit.
.....as for pictures well i don't even own a camera and my phone is cheap as hell so i can't download anything from it even if i tried.
If you don't own a camera what exactly are you trying to download from your phone ??? .........because if your phone had a camera you would own a camera.


i will though buy a cheap camera when i can and post my core setup and what all else i have just to calm the BS factor arising in peoples head.
Because asking a friend or a family member to borrow there smart phone hasn't occurred to you ???  (light bulb moment)


like i said all the info posted since about October or November will get you a working device you just have to decide what is real and what is BS.
if you read the last few posts by the members here its pretty obvious they know where the BS comes from.


............. as i have no patients with someone that won't listen.
That is the mentality of Dictators.

Somewhere a village is missing its idiot.


-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 13, 2016, 03:37:38 AM
Ok Hannon,

1. How do you prevent your secondary coil (y) from interacting with your primary coil as in a regular transformer.

2. You have stated on your website that secondary core size is important, but the patents state otherwise. How do you figure this.

3. In your device, in theory, where do you take the energy from.

Just some general questions.


-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 13, 2016, 03:52:56 AM
Core ;
Please go molest your neighbors boy again because i am sick of puke fucks like you distracting this forum.(Paid Misinformant) please go back to your Michael Jackson forum. not impressed !

Yes Hanon i also agree with your post.

here is info to think about.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 13, 2016, 05:06:46 AM
Core ;
Please go molest your neighbors boy again because i am sick of puke fucks like you distracting this forum.(Paid Misinformant) please go back to your Michael Jackson forum. not impressed !

It wouldn't hurt to stop and think before you post. In order to misinform people you need to provide information that discredits a theory or introduces a new theory in an effort to derail the current direction.

I simply responded to your post with witty comments that had nothing to do with the theoretical direction that Hannon or others are moving in. Only a Village Idiot would think that my post, to you, was misinformation. Truthfully just like I laughed at other members comments to you, especially allCanadian, others are most likely laughing at what I wrote.

In my second post I simply asked Hannon basic questions. At no time did I denounce any idea as "Not Practical", "stupid", "you not listening"....etc, however I did ask probing questions.

Questions such as these stimulate the imagination and engage members (not idiots) to work together to develop a concept that can then move into the development stage. Obviously you never had a professional job before and have never worked with a development team. This is called the R&D stage. Actually this thread is still in the theoretical stage, hasn't gotten to the R (Research) stage and is years away from the D (Development) stage as I see it.


Comment for you:
The comments in your attachment state the following "this leads me to believe that North face Electromagnets are the ONLY option available in the Figuera device"
This sentence implies that you are still in the theoretical stage. If you had a device you wouldn't have to guess at the direction of the electromagnets, you would know it by just looking at your device.

Try placing two magnets, with North sides facing each other, in a tube. Wrap a coil around the outside of that tube and shake it like a "Shake Flashlight" In essence it's a prototype of what you are proposing, .............even though you already have the real deal.


BTW..... forum rules ask that you resize images to a max of 800x600. You seem to not understand this.


-Core
 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 13, 2016, 07:15:10 AM
Marathonman:

I'm so sorry about your injured Leg. I pray for and wish you a speedy recovery. Take rest. I had a facture in the leg when I was seven year old child and I had to remain bedridden for four months and I was not allowed to play for several months. So please be careful and take good rest and take care.

Antijon:

You are perfectly correct on primaries connected in parallel. The device which is a significant modification of Figuera was independently constructed and tested in an European country. The Replicator told me the results did not come. He did not have earth batteries. But he was not getting the voltage either. He has some Electrical business and is well trained in High Voltage. He measured the primary voltages and indicated that the primary voltages divided when connected in series. I have since conducted the experiments again and predictable results come when the primaries are in kept in parallel.

It appears that the EMF or more specifically the wattage produced could be as high as four times if the Primaries are connected in parallel than in series. However it again depends on how high the input voltage in the primary is and how high the frequency used is..

We have separately tested the Figuera device alone and I have to concur that it is not possible to get COP>1 results from a single secondary.  With Ramaswami Device it is possible as we have seen. However we need to improve it substantially.

Main drawback is I'm not an Electrician or Electrical Engineers and I have to wait for the qualified hands to come. We do one test in two weeks or some times no tests in a month. That also depends on budget constraints. So progress has been very slow. Had we continued we could have completed all this in 2013 itself.

Input 220 volts and 50 Hz AC.

The COP>1 results have come many times when the core is saturated. But it is totally useless. It is not possible to run such a device for a long time. I had been advised that the Magnetic field strength in the core should not exceed 1.2 Tesla

I have rerun the tests again in the last few days and I was able to get for an input of 33 watts (220 volts and 0.15 amps) an output of 47.3 volts and 1.05 amps and it was able to light up 10 x 200 watts lamps.  There was no earth connection this time as earlier results were not accepted by the University Professors who considered that the coil is deemed to be a shunted coil and amperage of 20 amps is the amps in the coils and voltage show cannot be accepted. So we had to struggle and do this test. But yes with a single secondary in Figuera it is not possible to get COP>1 as stated in the Patent. It is doable by doing some improvements. But then it is not pure Figuera device.  We have also found that Buforn Method of a long straight pole provides better results than the Figuera Method of divided cores. If the Buforn core is used with all Primaries  connected in parallel then it should produce better results.

Hanon: I beg to disagree. I have tried to implement your suggestion of identical poles facing each other and only a few volts come and no amperage. The volts are sufficient to light LEDs but there is no amperage. If we Keep the poles NS-NS-NS then the output comes and we are able to light lamps.

Unfortunately just as high saturation is useless very low magnetic field strength is also useless. We need some reasonable amount of magnetization that is safe and can be used for many years.

From Figueras Patent it is clear that he used a low input to feed the primaries. My suspicion is that he used the commutator to create a lot of sparks and then captured the sparks in a copper plate around the commutator and then used them. It appears to be from the last patent of Buforn that the Primary coils are both connected in parallel as well as in series. Buforn appears to have created alternating strong and weak N magnets opposed by corresponding weak and strong S Magnets.

Core: Where is the energy coming from? Simple. How do you live? If you study any medicinal text book they would teach you that it is the electrical charge in the body that runs our body. Where do we get this electricity from? From the air we inhale and water we drink and food we eat. The same air provides the excess energy in this device. I have to agree with you that identical poles do not produce output as seen from my experiments. If you look at the pole arrangements they always are NS-NS-NS but if you see the way current flows it moves in and moves out and creates in the secondary core a very high magnetic flux. This flux is more if the length of the Y coil is reduced and less if the length of Y coil is increased. Ideal length of Y core has been found to be 2/3rd length and ideal diameter of Y coil has been found to be 2/3 by us. The wires on the Y coil are not only getting the flux from the core but they are also getting the flux from the primary cores which they block. You can also see the diagrams that show the Y coil to be smaller than the S or N coils in the patent drawings.

Quite Frankly this effort is not at the theoretical stage. People are experimenting and sharing.  I think it would take almost about 6 meter long core produce the kind of electricity attributed to Figuera. 100 watts in and 20000 watts out. It appears to be doable.
If we are able to use very thick wires that can carry 200 amps and get 100 voltage there then output of 100 volts and 200 amps can be easily produced. I have succeeded in making 28.3  volts and 2 amp in each one of the three core cables in the center coil. It was cop<1 but if we connect multiple primaries in parallel and then connect the secondaries in series, voltage and amperage in secondary will have to go up. Instead of 3 x 4 sq mm wires had we used a 15 sq mm wire we would have got same voltage but better amperage I guess. I repeat I guess for this is some thing that I have not done.   

Another observation that I made is that the number of layers on the secondary should not exceed 3 or 5 but if the wire is very thick it should not be more than one. Never exceed 1 Tesla range in the secondary. I have not tested but I think if we use steel in the secondary which can be an electromagnet as well as a permanent magnet the problem may be solved. I have not used permanent magnets in any of my experiments.

Hubbard is supposed to have got 124 volts and 344 amps. While getting amperage is understood and easy getting that voltage is difficult and I do not know how he managed it with a small device.

I agree with Antijon that primaries have to be kept parallel. The cores have to be large to produce the output amperage.

I however suspect that the Primaries of Figuera were carrying high voltage. I suspect that he captured the spark on a copper plate and from that he took the input to the primaries.

If we increase the input voltage then the size of the device will come down. I'm told if we use both high voltage and high frequency then the input amperage will go down but output will be higher. This is something that I'm not able to do for I do not haev the technical expertise or place for this.


Finally I would request all not to hurt each other but to focus on sharing the knowledge please.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 13, 2016, 09:54:25 AM
Core:

I need to recheck the values. There is a particular type of coiling that we have done here that is responsible for the increased voltage in the secondary. Amperage measurements were made with the same clamp meter at both primary and secondary. Voltage is by Digital multimeter.

If we modify the coiling arrangements slightly it does not work. If we increase the number of windings to get higher voltage it does not work. It comes back to COP<1.

You can easily make a cop>1 device. I have not done this particular test and so this is a guess.

I have earlier done a test where the secondary was wound over the solenoid 4 sq mm wire. 12 layers. Primary was a quadfilar wire. Input was 220 volts and 15 amps. Output in the secondary was 300 volts and 10 amps and that was able to light 17 lamps of 200 watts connected in parallel very brightly. COP=0.91

I think any one can replicate this experiment and see that what I'm saying is correct. Solenoid was filled with soft iron rods tightly packed by hammering them in. Solenoid core dia meter 4 inches and length 18 inches.

Now if we read about solenoids they tell us that the waves focus on the solenoid central and so magnetism is highest in the solenoid central core. No doubt.

If you put a plastic sheet on the primary and then on it put a thick copper sheet what will happen now. Copper sheet will block the magnetic waves from going out and because it is a thick copper sheet it will have high amperage and almost very little voltage. To increase the secondary amperage which is now at 10 amps all we need to do is to connect the secondary to the copper sheet. Secondary amperage I think will have to immediately increase.  I have not done this test. I do not know what will be the amperage that will come and whether the core will saturate to the point where the iron can melt due to increased ampere turns. Therefore I have not taken these risks. But I can confidently tell you yes that amperage is bound to be there. Thicker the sheet greater the amperage. Please tell me where is that amperage coming from? It comes due to Electrostatic induction.

Same device can be used to generate both electrostatic and electromagnetic induction. Devices that can focus this energy can be built. Have been built in the form of Homopolar generators which have generated up to 2 million amps with little voltage.

I think Antijon is perfectly correct. Multiple primaries connected in parallel must increase the induced emf of the secondary.

On Figuera device I see that good amperage can be produced easily. Greater the size and mass of the core and thickness of wire and greater the number of turns greateris the amperage produced But he has variously been quoted as producing 300 Amps output in the secondary or 550 volts in the secondary or about 20000 watts in secondary. I'm not clear on these points.

The device that produced a cop=1.5 approximately is enclosed. It is a Ramaswami type of device and not Figuera type of device. We certainly measured carefully. But I'm not satisfied for the readings are low. I would prefer to build one more module and then see if the performance can be repeated.

One of the Principles of Viktor Schuaberger is used in the device and possibly it might well be the reason for the increased output.

In summary I believe that it is possible to do these devices and these are neither fake nor misleading ones. On Figuera Patents I'm most certain that they were hiding some simple things as trade secrets which they were allowed to at that time and My suspicion is that they used permanent magnet core in the secondary portions which can also become an electromagnet but will again remain a permanent magnet when current is removed. So it is in that material that secret is hiding. I do have about 10% of my rods which have become very mild permanent magnets but I have not used them in these experiment conducted earlier this month.

 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 13, 2016, 04:44:42 PM
Core; or Government faggot i should say. what is the matter were their on the figuera device and you Government Faggot are mad and will try anything to distract.
Quote "In my second post I simply asked Hannon basic questions. At no time did I denounce any idea as "Not Practical", "stupid", "you not listening"....etc, however I did ask probing questions."
how did you know i emailed Hanon last night as i never said anything about that. the only way in the world you could know is you ass holes are intercepting my emails.
last night after i posted from your ass wipe un called for attack.  i was attacked from the internet not once but twice. what's the matter Government Faggot couldn't get through. ha, ha, ha Faggot i don't have a store bought firewall i built it my self Government Faggot. ha, ha, ha
not only that a van was parked in front of my friends house down the street with a Government Faggot in it posing as a tech. well i went down to confront him after i called my friend and asked him what he doing in front of my friends house. typical Government Faggot response which was a lie. he didn't know my friend brought out his guns to clean them in the garage visible to him. Government Faggot peeled out from in front of the house so fast all i could do is bust out laughing. just like you, you Government Faggot.
you better hope you attack better in person that you do from the internet otherwise my 20 year old razor sharp K Bar will be protruding from your chest. bring it on
who's payroll are you on Fag boy the Government or a Corporation. trust me if i wanted to find you i can so i would suggest you back the fuck off of me and this Forum. but i'm sure your College Educated Mouth will come back to run some more.
You Government Faggots are all the same.

PS. that pic i posted was from November of last year Government Faggot just so you know.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 13, 2016, 05:36:15 PM
Hannon

  Wasn't there some mention of something that was ordered from Germany that was assumed to be german silver wire by some people in one of the news paper articles? Do you have a copy of it? Or do you remember the month and year of the article? Also what was the name of university clemente worked at and the date he was employed there?
 
   If it's true people are starting to hack others it's a sad day indeed. If that is the case do you really think man kind is grown up enough to be responsible enough to have more capacity to do real harm? That will be the spin put on the prospect of being able to produce your own power. that even within the ranks of the people who are in pursuit of such a tech they themselves are reduced to violent behavior. I seriously hope your wrong Marathonman.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 13, 2016, 07:22:38 PM
Marathon

 Zipping right along I see, sense and sensibility are hard to beat. Im almost done hunting for the part ordered from Germany just waiting for the dates from hannon.
 Seems his web page is having trouble in Spanish cant tell what is says. No mater I can work around it.Problems are only unresolved solutions. FYI it's not German silver resistance wire. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 13, 2016, 07:28:18 PM
Doug,
Yes he ordered something from Germany and France , if I recall fine. Not specified what. It just appeared in the newspapers from May or June 1902 which just said that Figuera ordered pieces in different places that he later assembled in his workshop. He worked as profesor in San Agustin Collegue in Las Palmas. I suppose that he was just a part time job, because he really was engineer working for the goverment. Collegues in that time in Spain was not the same as current universities. Collegues were more related to technical schools for educating new profesionals

Peace guys!!!  After so many unuseful staff in the last posts I just summarize what seems to be an important key: many parallels primaries seems to interact and seems to get an amplification effect. Therefore it seems we should build more than one set
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 13, 2016, 08:11:29 PM
good ideas
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 13, 2016, 11:24:46 PM
NRam, when I look at the picture you provided I have a hard time understanding how you are defeating the Transformer effect. I would imagine your increased secondary output would have a proportional effect on the primary. This would especially be true if traditional induction took place in your coil. A larger output would indicate a larger magnetic field on the secondary. This magnetic field would interact with the primary coil, if its circuit is closed.

In essence you are still held hostage by Lenz's Law. Also in the picture are you using a solid core or individual cores for the primary and secondary.

-Core 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 13, 2016, 11:33:26 PM
Im still trying to figure this statement out.

"It doesn't work like that in reality. Magnetic lines don't just leap out of iron and produce "flux cutting" on coils. The reason why is because iron has such a higher permeability than air, it requires a lot of energy to to push the lines out."
 
 So your saying the magnetic field around the earth does not exist because the field lines cant just jump out of the magnet core.We all burned up a long time ago and this is just a dream?Cool

Doug, who did you quote. I also don't agree with that statement. I just want to read the context of the entire post.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 13, 2016, 11:37:33 PM
..........I just summarize what seems to be an important key: many parallels primaries seems to interact and seems to get an amplification effect. Therefore it seems we should build more than one set


Do you mean "wired" in parallel or placement being parallel. If placement are they wired in parallel or series. I think the patent shows series.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 14, 2016, 12:20:02 AM
Quote "In my second post I simply asked Hannon basic questions. At no time did I denounce any idea as "Not Practical", "stupid", "you not listening"....etc, however I did ask probing questions."

how did you know i emailed Hanon last night as i never said anything about that. the only way in the world you could know is you ass holes are intercepting my emails.


Huh ??? Maybe I am thick headed but what the heck are you talking about.  :o Where did I say you emailed Hannon, or where did I say I know you emailed Hannon. Any civil person on this planet will see that wasn't the case.

I asked Hannon questions, how on earth did you translated that to mean "I am reading your emails" is beyond my comprehension. What in my quote above would make you think I was talking about you when I used Hannon's name  :o or gave the impression I was watching you.

If there are MIB people that go after OU builders I don't think they go after Village Idiot's........... so you are safe.


I don't think anyone here takes you serious. You are someone who a few short months ago thought they stumbled on the secret and ridiculed others that showed an opposite view. Your a side show at best, always have, always will be. It's been the story of your life and it's sad.

I don't mean to be cruel, however you had it coming. BTW ..... Based on your profile here you are a Newbie on this site. I may be the most senior member here.


On a different note. Still constructing a device myself. Long hours at work doesn't allow me to finish.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 14, 2016, 03:06:52 AM
Core
 From antijon reply 3066.

 
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 14, 2016, 09:36:13 AM
So, with a bullet-proof jacket and steel helmet against the flack, here goes...

My recent concerns have been to find an efficient and simple way to drive my pairs of coils with the 180° out of phase signals.  No power resistors to calculate, minimum heat losses.  After finding suitable DC amplifier candidates (either Darlington or Sziklai pairs), I looked for suitable sinewave oscillator circuits.  And THAT turned-out to be the delicate part.  I've lost count of the number of designs I've tried - all transistor or op-amps.  Most of them work but many have side-effects : temperature stability, poor rejection of power-supply variations (a big problem when aiming at battery operation) and - for all of them - the problem of zero-crossing.  Coupled with the need to also generate the inverse sinewave, each solution became overly complex when adding phase splitting, level-shifting, compensation, etc.

So, as I do much more digital than analog electronics development nowadays, I decided to go back to some of the simple synthesis techniques that exist.  I mentioned in an earlier post that standard PWM wasn't the solution - at least not at low frequencies - because it requires quite complicated filtering (filters that have to be designed specifically for the frequency being used).  But there is one technique that looks very Heath-Robinson (who know who he was ?).
The technique is nicely described here : http://www.electroschematics.com/2957/digital-sinewave-oscillator/ (http://www.electroschematics.com/2957/digital-sinewave-oscillator/)

If anyone would like a detailed description of how it works - ask me.

As there is no power involved at this stage (the signal needs to be amplified), the signal is easier to filter.  Filtering is necessary because the output waveform looks like this :
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 14, 2016, 09:37:25 AM
NRam, when I look at the picture you provided I have a hard time understanding how you are defeating the Transformer effect. I would imagine your increased secondary output would have a proportional effect on the primary. This would especially be true if traditional induction took place in your coil. A larger output would indicate a larger magnetic field on the secondary. This magnetic field would interact with the primary coil, if its circuit is closed.

In essence you are still held hostage by Lenz's Law. Also in the picture are you using a solid core or individual cores for the primary and secondary.

-Core

Sir:

My knowledge on what is a Transformer effect is low. In a Generator as Figuera explains magnets are rotated creating a rotating magnetic field. The coils are wound on iron cores and these coils get induced electricity and the iron cores become electromagnets of opposite polarity and they therefore block the magnet from rotation. Therefore this requires additional energy from the outside to rotate the magnets and so more energy in and less energy out. So this is considered a transformation of mechanical energy to Electrical Energy.

To the contrary if we use coils to rotate current on Two solenoid electromagnets a rotating magnetic field is created in the iron core. If another coil is placed in connection with and in between the opposite poles of the two electromagnets the magnetic waves travel through the secondary and thus they cause an induction and therefore the necessity of movement is avoided.

I have checked the two primary coils connected in series and connected in parallel. For a single secondary coil not much of a change is visible but when more than one is involved the increase in output is visible. We can also explain it that due to the increased voltage of the secondary the amperage also increases and this is the reason for it.

You have written as follows:

A larger output would indicate a larger magnetic field on the secondary.

This is true. To understand this you need to look at the picture again. The Primary coils are 6 inch dia plastic pipes. Iron rods hammered in weigh approximately 60 kgms in each primary. The secondary core is 4 inch dia plastic pipe. Iron rods hammered in weigh approximately 30 kgsm

So two primaries have 120 kgms of magneized iron core. The primaries are connected in parallel. The current moves from the center as you can see to the outside and then moves towards the center where secondary coil is placed. Because the central coil is placed NS-NS-NS and the central coil is smaller in a hour glass shape. the magentic field strength of 120 kgs of iron of primaries focus on 30 kgs of iron on the central coil and so central magnetic field strength is higher. 120 kgms of Magnetic field strength is compressed to megnetise 30 kgms of iron. Therefore the magnetic field strength in the central coil is higher. This further increases as the secondary coils gets energised. Then the magnetic field strength is reduced as the current in the primary again moves out towards the outer portion. The intensity of the magnetic field strengh here is reduced and increased. The intensity increases enormously if the weight of the iron in the center is reduced by reducing the length of the secondary and iron goes in to saturation. We have learnt that does not work and is not sustainable. Some increase and decrease is needed but not saturation. So this is similar to clapping of hands where the sound is made when the hands touch each other and is stopped when the hands move away. I request you to notice that the secondary is placed on two platic tubes and that will show you that the secondary core is smaller in diameter than the primary core.

Wikipedia says that Lenz law effect is absent when electricity is generated due to the interaction of opposite poles. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz%27s_law#Conservation_of_momentum

Now if you place a secondary wire between two primary wires where current in one primary is going down and current in another primary is going up and the secondary coil is wound in such a way that each adjacent turn of the secondary coil is separated by 2 to 4 times the diameter of the wire. Joesph Cater explains that adjacent turns closely wound turns would oppose each other and so widely spaced turns would not oppose each other. I donot know if these things are true or not for I do not have that kind of knowledge. What I do know is this.

When a secondary coil is wound like this and placed in between two primary layers and connected to the central secondary coil the voltage of the secondary coil increases. When the voltage increases amperage also increases. This happens without drawing additional power from the mains. The increase in the secondary placed between two primary layers appear to me to come from electrostatic induction rather than electromagnetic induction.

Same high cop>1 figures come when Iron goes in to satuartion and even if the secondary coil is wound on the core. But that is so high a voltage we cannot use it. Secondly high saturation of iron causes the rods to heat enormously and wires also get heated and this is not a sustainable proposition.

Another thing that I have noticed is that for the same number of turns if we increase the magnetic field strength the voltage of the output coil increases. So secondary voltage can be increased not only by increasing the number of turns but also by increasing the magnetic field strength. Of course it is increased and reduced 50 times a second.

We have reduced the primary input by using a 12 filar coil. 10 of them are 2.5 sq mm wires and 2 of them are 4 sq mm wires. We have also seen that for the same magnetic field strength if we use thicker insulation we get more amperage and more voltage. Why I do not know but this is what we have observed.

Getting Amperage High Amperage out of a solenoid is childs play. It is so easy. But getting voltage is very difficult. Especially when the amperage goes up very high. Hanon has indicated to me that in the Figuera 1908 device the input was 100 volts and 1 Amp and output was 300 amps and possibly 67 volts to account for the 20000 watts output described by BuForn. Only 50 sq mm wires can carry 300 Ampere current and so the output wires need to be very thick and for safety of operations the Tesla range of the core should be less than 1.2 Tesla for long continuous user. So probably the device was a very heavy device that had lot of iron. Hanon has also clarified that only in the 1902 device the output was 550 volts and 28 amps.

I have to confirm that if we use only one secondary the output is COP<1. We consider that the Buforn style Long Pole as the better of the two alternatives presented as for every Four coils instead of two we get three secondary coils.You have one coil as bonus coil. If you have 8 Primary cores instead of four secondary cores you get 7 secondary cores and so a bonus of 3 additional cores.  We have seen good magnetic field strength to come at 220 volts and 1 amp and winding many such secondaries should enable us to get higher output.

A torodial shape can make an equal number of primaries and secondaries.

This device differs from a Transformer in that when multiple secondaries are there you have magnetic field strength reducing in one secondary and increasing in another secondary and all secondaries are connected in series. The device can work as a very cheap device for the only thing needed is lot of coils and iron core which are not expensive.






Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 14, 2016, 09:39:47 AM
(next part)
Note that the signal does not cross zero : it's exactly the waveform that we need.  Because the signal needs amplifying, the filter can be very simple. For the moment (partly 'cos I'm impatient, partly 'cos I don't know what frequency my final system will be working at) I'll use a low-value capacitor in parallel with the output.
This is what a 1uF capacitor gives (same 'scope settings) :
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 14, 2016, 09:53:53 AM
(part 3)
A small level-shift has occurred (around 2v) and the signal is attenuated, but the shape is a darn close approximation and is completely unaffected by outside conditions !

What's best about this setup is that it can be driven by any sort of clock generator, especially digital pulses, and so the frequency stability depends only on the type of clock circuit that drives it.  It could even be a crystal driven circuit once the frequency is known.

This is the full circuit that I'll be building today.  Not quite full - I've left out the driver circuits for now.  The 'scope readings above were taken from just one-half of this circuit (one 4015) to test everything - I need to add the second (inverted) sine generator.

Below the circuit diagram is the 'scope output of the same signal (CH2 unchanged) and the VOLTAGE output to one of my primary coils, through my power driver circuit (coming soon).  I still need a reliable CURRENT probe to see what the real picture is...

I can supply a pcb layout if anyone is interested (but wait till I've built mine first  ;)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 14, 2016, 11:44:37 AM
I understand that this specific thread is for the Figuera device. It is my understanding that some spanish friends feel that the world has suppressed all and any information about a Great Spanish Scientist which Prof. Figuera rightfully was and has suppressed the information on the first device that was working on its own without needing any fuel. They simply want to redo the same devices that Prof Figuera built and to reclaim the lost glory.

As a Person coming from a Poor third world country and probably the poorest region of the world (900 million people in India are poor) and earn less than $180 per month. In the last few years I have seen many clients losing out and closing shops and we have seen hundreds of thousands of people losing jobs. Much of this has to do with power shortage.

Without elaborating I have had weird and incredible spiritual experiences beginning 2013. I was so frightened that I could not sleep. We had a serious power crisis at that time. I asked one of my rich clients who owns windmills what research he is doing and he said we do not know any thing. So I asked another student who was a Former ISRO scientist what research we are doing in Electricity and Magnetism and she said oh for that Research was over in 1940 and no funding is given for new research. I was astonished. Then I got to read Patrick kellys book as I could not sleep.

I contacted Patrick kelly on 3rd February 2013 and he trained me over Email. I have never ever spoken to him. Entire thing was through Emails. When I read his book I was astonished to find that he placed the order for Caters book and the money was refunded and books did not come. I was very surprised and so I ordered the books and the books promptly came and one of them was signed by Cater himself personally. When I tried to get in touch with Cater I was informed he is no more and passed away peacefully at an elderly age.

Patrick advised me to build the Hubbard Device and Figuera device. We elected the Hubbard to do first as it was smaller in size. We build the device to the specific instructions of Patrick and the device did not work. Patrick then retired. We then realized that our big mistake was not to know how to build magnets and we built them and today we are where we are. I financed the entire operation in 2013 and then we had such significant problems in the Economy and all my clients suffered and I had to downsize my office. Beginning 2014 four friends insisted that I continue the work and offered funding support. One of them gave it as interest free loans and three others as donations. I had partly returned the loan.

I had been requested to open a separate thread and post information about devices I construct from one of the friends who helped me financially. As a person coming from a poor country where lifes of people could be transformed I looked at improvements to the Figuera device to cut costs and build an easy to build device for dummies like me. I will stop posting in this thread but will open a separate thread and post information about future experiments and improvements that we do. I will keep it all open source as that would enable any one from any country to build and operate the devices to be built by me in my experiments.

I see that people here are building circuits and looking at scopes and making a lot of circuits that I do not understand any thing.

The thing is so simple.

if you send electricity through two parallel wires in the same direction where current is moving from top to bottom in one primary and bottom to top in the next parallel primary and secondary coil is wound in between these two parallel primaries then that is essentially the Figuera Device of 1908. In this case only one magnetic core is needed. Only one secondary layer where wires are wound separated.  Since secondary is always subjected to raising and falling current in opposite parallel primary coils Lenz law effect is some how cancelled. We may need to wind several such individual Electromagnetic coils to get the needed voltage and amperage in the secondary. This in essence is the Figuera concept. You do not need complex circuits. You need Iron, You need coils to carry electricity and secondary coil. Amperage of the secondary is easy to get and voltage will be difficult. This can be partly offset by using high voltage input. This is the principle involved.

I'm grateful to all who read and responded to my posts. I will open a separate thread when I complete a working device which will take some time due to financial constraints.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 14, 2016, 03:58:26 PM
[...]
I see that people here are building circuits and looking at scopes and making a lot of circuits that I do not understand any thing.

The thing is so simple.
[...]
This can be partly offset by using high voltage input. This is the principle involved.

NRamaswami, the circuits are an attempt to get away from using mains electricity.  I know that there is already a nice sine wave (well, not even nice, it's so polluted with CPL and other high frequency junk) - I pay far more than enough for it.   I want to try using the Figuera technique with a device that will work from 1 or two standard 12v batteries.  That's what the circuits are all about.  Thankyou, in any case, for sharing.

Glenn
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on February 14, 2016, 05:32:44 PM
Seeking for someone  to enlighten me... hmmm..... I guess everybody has done a good job..
go tell our boss we need an extra payment  coz we've done our job so well.. :)

A trully master piece indeed....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 15, 2016, 12:49:11 AM
So, with a bullet-proof jacket and steel helmet against the flack, here goes...

No need to worry, keep up the good work. Sounds like you have a strong electrical background, something I admire. What do you plan on driving? What kind of primary voltage will you be using.

-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 15, 2016, 01:03:15 AM
NRamaswami, the circuits are an attempt to get away from using mains electricity.  I know that there is already a nice sine wave (well, not even nice, it's so polluted with CPL and other high frequency junk) - I pay far more than enough for it.   I want to try using the Figuera technique with a device that will work from 1 or two standard 12v batteries.  That's what the circuits are all about.  Thankyou, in any case, for sharing.

Glenn

NRam, I am no electronic guru however I wanted a simple system that allows me to make quick adjustments when I am pulsing a coil. Glenn is correct, I prefer to work with 12VDC, to do this I use a 12VDC to 110VAC inverter. From here I convert the AC to DC @110 volts.

This way I can pulse the coils with 110 VDC max. Also what you don't see is under my converter board I am using a Basic Stamp board. This allows me to quickly write or modify the code to operate the transistors that feed the higher power Mosfet's.(board not shown)

I am not that good with discrete components but Glenn appears to have a strong background, so its easier for me to build a rig that allows for flexibility and quick changes. Yes, I am impatient and I dont want to start from scratch every time I start a new project.

Also the magnet on my board comes right off and I can change it out and still use the electronics to drive it. Figuera is not the only device I will be experimenting with. It just so happens to be the first electromagnetic one.

-Core 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 15, 2016, 02:09:28 AM
Sir:

My knowledge on what is a Transformer effect is low.
Generally I was referring to the Lenz's effect experienced when a transformation of any kind occurs.


To the contrary if we use coils to rotate current on Two solenoid electromagnets a rotating magnetic field is created in the iron core. If another coil is placed in connection with and in between the opposite poles of the two electromagnets the magnetic waves travel through the secondary and thus they cause an induction and therefore the necessity of movement is avoided.
True, but when the core are individual, meaning not physically connected, the induction is generally week. Induction is stronger when the Primary and Secondary cores are mated, much like a common transformer. Induction is increased the closer the Induced core is to the Inducer core and vise versa. In a generator the clearance is very small, increase this clearance and output is diminished. This has been my experience.


I have checked the two primary coils connected in series and connected in parallel. For a single secondary coil not much of a change is visible but when more than one is involved the increase in output is visible. We can also explain it that due to the increased voltage of the secondary the amperage also increases and this is the reason for it.
This is where I get lost. If you add more coils to your secondary you must be increasing consumption on the Primary coil.


So two primaries have 120 kgms of magneized iron core. The primaries are connected in parallel. The current moves from the center as you can see to the outside and then moves towards the center where secondary coil is placed. Because the central coil is placed NS-NS-NS and the central coil is smaller in a hour glass shape. the magentic field strength of 120 kgs of iron of primaries focus on 30 kgs of iron on the central coil and so central magnetic field strength is higher. 120 kgms of Magnetic field strength is compressed to megnetise 30 kgms of iron. Therefore the magnetic field strength in the central coil is higher.
I am trying to visualize the central coil being NS-NS-NS. Does that mean you have three separate cores?

When a secondary coil is wound like this and placed in between two primary layers and connected to the central secondary coil the voltage of the secondary coil increases. When the voltage increases amperage also increases. This happens without drawing additional power from the mains. The increase in the secondary placed between two primary layers appear to me to come from electrostatic induction rather than electromagnetic induction.

Any chance you could draw a hand sketch of the arrangement. Also what primary voltage are you using, 220 vac?


Hanon has indicated to me that in the Figuera 1908 device the input was 100 volts and 1 Amp and output was 300 amps and possibly 67 volts to account for the 20000 watts output described by BuForn.
Depends how you interpret that paragraph in the patent. It is actually from the Buforn patent if I recall. Buforn was just theorizing and was attempting to make a point. If my memory serves he doesn't state he uses 100 volts @ 1amp in his generator. I believe he stated that in reference to reducing losses in a traditional generator. Doing that a generator that is feed with 100 volts @ 1 amp could produce 300 volts @ x amps. I will go back and take a look.


-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 15, 2016, 11:14:58 AM
My replies to Core:

Sir..I do not have much time till Friday to respond. My apologies for the delay.

1. Core is a continuous core of iron rods hammered in. Figuera device is based on Geometrical shape of the central coil being smaller than the primary coils. Smaller in length and diameter. The primary coils move the magnetic field towards the central core and move it away much like the clapping of hands. The device that you show in your picture has nothing whatever to do with Figuera or Buforn devices. I request you to study the patents again and look at the drawings again and understand it.

2. Let me explain it like this.. You have two primary coils producing induction as indicated above with the secondary in the middle. primaries are connected in paralllel and secondary is separate. Now as per your theory Secondary can have up to COP= 0.95 which is common in transformers I guess. I think you would agree.

Now visualize this P1-S1-P2-S2-P3-S3-P4  For Four primaries connected in parallel you have three secondaries instead of two secondaries.

If you separately connect the P1-S1-P2 COP=0.95
If you separately connect the P3-S3-P4 COP=0.95

If you place the cores in a staight line as indicated by Buforn, S2 can be placed between P2 and P3 without drawing additional current. S2 will add to the voltage and amperage of the secondary as the seconaries are connected in series. Then it becomes COP= 0.95*3/2=1.425 But actually results are much better. For if we add the voltages and amperages it does not work like this. For example if we get 100 volts and 10 amps in one secondary by connecting all three we are going to get 300 volts and 30 amps but 300x30=9000 watts.

This result has to do with the geometrical shape, compression and decompression of magnetic fields and the way current is sent that enables the cancellation of  Lenz law effects.

Unless you do the experiment you will not understand it. Simulation would not work for simulation is based on theory. Simulation can never show any thing in violation of theory.

The square device that you show in your picture as a transformer device shows that device is not a Figuera device. That has nothing to do with Figuera concepts.

I'm not writing any improvements carried out by me to the Figuera concepts having due regard to the sensitivity of my friends.

I will give you more details after Friday. My apologies for delay.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 15, 2016, 01:39:59 PM
Glad to hear someone use the term compression of the fields. The total number of lines of force from the field result in the amount of flux which is able to be changing in the coil it is effecting. Cant very well run a wind generator in a vacuum. The density of the air turning a wind turbine does effect the force exerted on the blades the same way a jet flying at high altitude will have less wind resistance compared to flying at low altitude even air temperature has an effect. The density of the medium is used to advantage once you except it exists and begin to think in those terms. I'm not saying you can get an infinite volume to compress to an infinitely small space, it's not a black hole. You can certainly take advantage of instead of being taken advantage of by sensible design and simplicity.

 Almost forgot. Hannon I checked on the French purchase possibly he was ordering a custom built lead acid battery/s from the inventor of the lead acid battery or the successors of it or getting the technical data to produce the same. It was where the lead acid rechargeable battery was invented production would be expected to have started in France where it was invented first by Raymond Gaston Planté mid to late 1800's. Prior cells were the type that consumed the zinc and had to have the zinc replaced often enough to make it not desirable or commercially viable to develop a generator that used batteries to start.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on February 16, 2016, 05:08:42 AM
1. Core is a continuous core of iron rods hammered in. Figuera device is based on Geometrical shape of the central coil being smaller than the primary coils. Smaller in length and diameter. The primary coils move the magnetic field towards the central core and move it away much like the clapping of hands. The device that you show in your picture has nothing whatever to do with Figuera or Buforn devices. I request you to study the patents again and look at the drawings again and understand it.
I respectfully disagree with you, my work is based on Figuera's principle and not the patent drawing. If I recall correctly from an article he stated:

"There is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit"

It wouldn't be natural if there was only one way to achieve these results. His device is an electromagnetic device, like others after him, personally I am looking to discover the principle of the invention and not replicate his patent design. I see no value in that.

To clear up my point, in the refrigeration field, the so-called "refrigeration effect" can be achieved with many styles of compressors, they are reciprocating, scroll, screw, and centrifugal. Each one has a completely different design and physical operation, however they all achieve the same basic principle. If we all concentrate on one design only, the patent design, our chances of failure are greatly increased. The secret will manifest itself with more then one design, it would be disingenuous for us to say there is only one approach.

I have read the patents, I have read all the patents, I am one of the few here that can read Spanish. I believe I already translated some of the Burfon patent some time ago. Also being able to read Buforns patents gives me a bit of an insight on his and Figuera's thought process. There is a lot of extra material in the Buforn patent including his description of the "ideal Generator". This may or may not be an advantage.

On this topic there is a interesting phrase that Buforn uses in his patent and it appears more then once. He states "....the current passes the magnetic field and returns the same from the two extremes of the entrance and exit of the resistance...." Some issues here are as follows, Buforn has some serious run on sentences (bad grammar). He sometimes goes a whole paragraph without a comma or a period. This makes translation tricky as it will come out fragmented.

He repeats the above statement again a few paragraphs down, this time he omits the section regarding the resistance. I will quote him directly here. "We got and produced an orderly and continuous change of the intensity of the current that traverses a magnetic field" .......... I dont understand how a current can traverse a magnetic field, any opinions? A current in a wire creates a magnetic field. I get the impression that the N and S we see in the patent are actually permanent magnets and on them are wound electromagnets. The electromagnets and the permanent magnet may very well be opposing each other. This theory I can experiment with due to the versatility of my device.

One can easily get the impression that the magnetic field is present prior to energizing the electromagnets ........... I don't know.

One thing I got from the Buforn patent, and I take as fact, is that the effect manifest itself in the Primary only (I am using Primary in a loose term). He states, and I will paraphrase only, "It is a grand energy" he also states the he defeats Lenz law prior to even utilizing these currents, and to use this grand current, here he says doing so is simple. (a basic coil)

So in essence, in interpreting Buforn you can create a grand current in only your primary and not even have a secondary coil on your system. 


2. Let me explain it like this.. You have two primary coils producing induction as indicated above with the secondary in the middle. primaries are connected in paralllel and secondary is separate. Now as per your theory Secondary can have up to COP= 0.95 which is common in transformers I guess. I think you would agree.

Now visualize this P1-S1-P2-S2-P3-S3-P4  For Four primaries connected in parallel you have three secondaries instead of two secondaries.

If you separately connect the P1-S1-P2 COP=0.95
If you separately connect the P3-S3-P4 COP=0.95
I was interested in how you are powering your Primary coils. Are you using Mains @ 220 volts? I recall you stating you also pulsed your coils. What mechanism did you use to pulse the coils and at what voltage. Did you use a mechanical chopper?

The square device that you show in your picture as a transformer device shows that device is not a Figuera device. That has nothing to do with Figuera concepts.
I personally don't classify a Figuera's device based on what it looks like. Read my comment above regarding the refrigeration compressors. What classifies a device should be its principle of operation and not it's appearance. But is cool, judging by looks really is human nature and it just show's your human.

The square devise is not a transformer, there is no direct communication between the coils. It is based on a change of magnetic field. Well, that is the concept. Basically it is the same principle that Figuera uses.


-Core
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on February 16, 2016, 10:11:03 AM
Hmmm... It reminds me of a MEG presented by someone at energeticforum that has two opposing magnet..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 16, 2016, 10:36:51 AM
Sir..

Saw your post and have some time to respond..

I do not know any thing about Refrigeration or quite frankly speaking on any Electrical device. I'm a Lawyer and by some invisible force that kicks me that I have got in to this field.

I have tried to learn Electronics and this soldering thing got me such an allergy I have given it up. So if you say that the square device uses Figuera Principles it might well be and I do not know how your device works and so I have to agree with you particularly for I do not have any knowledge.

I used 220 volts AC from Mains. As far as I'm aware pulsed DC means simply one thing. If you give AC through a diode it produces half waves pulsed DC and if you give it through a diode bridge it will give full wave diode bridge..

BuForn is correct in saying that the Primaries do the job and the secondary coil just sits there if I understand the translation correctly. I do not  read spanish and I had a hard time requesting people to get it translated. Especially the last patent of BuForn.

I built a commutator, a custom built one as prescribed by Figuera design and it was not satisfactory. It created a lot of sparks when it ran fast and so the Electrical engineering student working with me made a step down gear to reduce the speed and we had to make it touch three points at one time to reduce the spark but it still had sparks at one contact place. So we gave up.

I have tried to use the FW diode bridge at 220 volts and it drew so much of current that the circuit braker tripped. So I do not use pulsed DC. I have tested it with 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer but the efficiency was low and so I gave it up. We have seen higher the voltage better is the performance. And when the coils are connected in parallel better is the performance.

My understanding is fairly limited on theory and so if what I write is nonsensical just simple plain ignore it as the blabbering of an ignorant person. I'm not a subject matter expert. 

I believe that when a coil is wire is looped around an iron core and current is passed electromagnet is created. The current is also present in the iron rods. This current is called Eddy current. This current is more if the magnetic field strength in the core is higher. So current can co-exist in iron rods along with magnetism. If you want to check this test the rods with a tester and you will see that the rods have current. Be careful and put on your rubber shoes and gloves and do not get in to any shock. Do not test this with DC for if you are suffer an accident DC will now allow you to withdraw your hand but AC will allow you to withdraw your hand and you can survive. I hope you are aware of these things. So yes current and magnetism exist together in iron rods.

The thing is this. You can make a given core a strong electromagnet or a weak electromagnet by controlling the current or by controlling the Ampere turns ( Number of turns per unit length). For the same current and same Ampere turns a smaller mass of Iron gets saturated but if you add more iron the magnetism is reduced. To reduce core saturation add more iron. That is the simple formula.

Ok So we have it here.

What is magnetism..We do not know much..

What is a permanent magnet.. When DC current is sent in the coils of wire the material becomes a permanent magnet. Depending on the combination of the material used the Permanent magnet may be a strong permanent magnet or weak permanent magnet. I'm also told that if we sent AC also through steel rods, steel will become permanent magnet always and to remove the magnetism it must be heated beyond the Curie Temperature ( what the heck is that? I do not know really) or we must provide current and bring down the voltage slowly using a Variac.

Soft iron rods are those that will become an electromagnet only when current is sent and will lose the magnetism the moment the current is cut off.

What is the difference between Permanent magnet and Electromagnet. Permanent magnets do not like electromagnets and oscillate violently if we keep them in our hands and move towards electromagnet. Some how this permanent magnet thing which is an inert lifeless thing knows that an electromagnet is present and oscillates in our hand. It does not like to be moved towards an electromagnet.  How the heck does it know that it is being moved towards an Electromagnet and why it does not like it.? I do not know..But this is how a permanent magnet behaves. So do magnets have life? We do not know. Permanent magnets also do not show any eddy current..Only Electromagnets show Eddy current. Permanent Magnet is cool to touch. Electromagnet is hot. How do I know? Without knowing any one of these things and the risks involved I used to stand on the wooden floor we have made and used to take the rods from inside the core by empty hand..God was so kind to me that I did not have any shocks for I was standing on the wood always. My driver tested it with tester and we were shocked oh my God Rod has current..Rod has heat and Rod has Magnetism..all in one place..This is the electromagnet.

So what exactly is magnetism? We do not know. Some very knowledgeable clients atttempted to teach me what the heck is Magnetism..I asked them hey you convert this rod to Permanent Magnet, Strong Magnet and Weak Magnet and Strong Electromagnet and weak electromagnet..The knowledgable clients did not know these practical things..So people do not know.

As I understand it, magnetism is like a gas. Same amount of core can have higher magnetism and can be saturated and can have lower magnetism.

You can compress gas and fill it up in a cylinder. The same gas can be given to a ballon and the balloon will become very big and the density of gas inside is so low that the balloon will starting floating in air. So we can think that the magnetism is like a gas.

Now this gas like Magnetism some how enters the iron rods when current is sent through the wires looped around it and a small amount of current is sufficient to create magnetism in a large amount of iron. This magnetism appears to come from air. Because apart from wire and current we do not have any thing else for this magnetism to come suddenly. It cannot come from another star. For we know Air is here and we also know that air has electrical charges. We call it static electricity..

Now because the magnetism is like a gas, it can be compressed and decompressed. If you provide a two primaries which current first like this
P1------>Y coil<---------P2 with the direction of rotation of current being same the situation is NS-NS-NS in all three cores. Ok..

Now if you make the Y coil secondary smaller than the primary coils the magnetism of both the primary coils each of 60 kgm enters the secondary of 30 kgm. So now we have magnetism compressed in the secondary coil.. Here the density of the magnetism becomes higher. Text books say that the strength of the magnetic field or saturation of the magnetic core or some thing like that but essentially it is a case where the density of the magnetism is higher. Let us say about 4 times higher than in the primary P1 and P2.

Now I gave you the example P1-S1-P2   Here we have primary current first moving like this ------>S1<------ and then they move like this
<------S1--------->

I think you would agree with me on this. When this happens the concentrated magnetism in S1 is weakened. So S1 is subjected to time varying magnetic field strength. Or the magnetism in S1 is made stronger and weaker. Electricity is induced when a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field is the rule of Electromagnetic Induction. We see that it is correct for secondary produces current. Connect the secondary to load lamps and lamps light up.

Again look at this The only thing that is done in P1 and P2 is for current move like this -----> and like this<------. That is all P1 and P2 does..

Now if you put P3 and P4 like this again and they do the same thing you have a similar situation and we will call the secondary placed there as S3..So S3 also produces a current.

But if you place all of them like a Train P1-S1-P2-S2-P3-S3-P4 . You see now the S2 gets magnetism increased and decreased. We need not provide any additional current for this in P1, P2,P3,P4..

This is some thing that you cannot agree and will not agree unless you do the experiment as indicated above. You will tell me where is this gas coming from in S2 unless we supply additional current..No need to supply additional current here.

Now forget your text books, forget your theories and listen to this dummy and do the test like this and connect the secondaries in series and connect the primaries in parallel and you will know. Please measure your readings without the S2 being present and with S2 being present as indicated. Any one any where can test these things. Primary does not require additional input to generate magnetism in S2 and hence additional output from S2.

This is how simply I can explain it. I apologize that I'm writing like this but this is the truth.

When Buforn says he has current and magnetism he refers like me ( He is also a Patent Attorney like me..Aha what a coincidence) to the Rods carrying Heat, as well as current as well as Magnetism..What a wonder of the world you see. It is so simple really. You need to create a large train like thing to get this magnetism thing to get in to iron. Most strangely if the wire has thick insulation more current is produced in the secondary and more current is drawn in the primary..No one talks about this except Daniel McFarland Cook in his 1871 Patent.

Is this a violation of Law of Conservation of Energy..No. The Law to be applied here is the Law of conservation of Energy for open systems. There is no violation of that law. Law of conservation for closed systems does not apply here. why? Neither Energy can get inside nor energy can get outside of a closed system. Here Magnetic poles are open.

Incidentally in your device Magnetism will leak enormously at the edges of the square. Magnetism likes to leak out of any system.

This is all I know..Please I beg you to understand that I do not know much..I cannot write about the improvements I have made to these concepts let us say improvements of dummy..but they are so commonsense.

I do not understand how Lenz law first comes if there is no secondary. I can tell you how to defeat Lenz law in a single core solenoid easily as I have already done it. That is a non issue really but Lenz law comes only if there is a secondary. Not otherwise.

I apologize if I have miscommunicated or hurt you in any way without intending to do so. Please I'm not trained in this subject and I do not know much about any thing. So I can only tell you what I have observed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 16, 2016, 05:51:50 PM
I believe to attain Overunity in any Electromagnetic power generator,  lens law Must FISRT OF ALL be subdued in it design.

One way to easily a achieve that according to Tesla is via Clockwise and Counterclowise coil winding style as well Series conneted Multifilar coil as Ramaswami MEG shows.

The exccess power in Ramaswami TrafoGen comes from the air as Radiant Eletricity.

So it means the syst can be looped. All is needed apart from killing lenz, winding Multifilar Primaries is An HIGH VOLTAGE HIGH FREEQUENCY AC DRIVEN PRIMARY.

And to get that High Frequency and Voltage Power Supply, you need to make Your own Pure Sine wave Variable Frequency and Variable or adjustable Voltage High Voltage Inverter.

The core in the inverter must be Moulded to pave way for High Frequency Osscilations from the MOSFETs.

If you drive your inverter tramsformer at High Freequeny, Your Primaries in the Rama.TrafoGen will generate Enormously Gigantic Flux for the Secondary at very low Power Consumption of the Primaries. When you achieve this, you will be able to attain COMPLETE 100% Overunity.

Even if you use low voltage like 300VAC, and you Primaries are wound with say AWG#20, at High Frequency like 200hz and above, your mulftifilar wound Primaries will consume very low wattage

The to and fro of the AC readily allows the the Radiant Powèr to boots the Otput of the Secondary.

You need modrately high resistance in your Primaries to keep amperage consumption low even at high frequency.

But in all, High frequency and Multifilar Anti-lenz winding is the Major Key.

Once you are able to keep to all these, you only need High Farad SuperCapacitor Bank instead of Batteries, Inverter and an Home-made Coreless Mini Axial Permanent Magnet Handcrank-able Generator to Kickstart the System and Generate Power for life.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 16, 2016, 06:46:47 PM
I believe to attain Overunity in any Electromagnetic power generator,  lens law Must FIRST OF ALL be subdued in it design.
I'm OK with that statement, and it's probably pertinent here for the Figuera device.
One way to easily a achieve that according to Tesla is via Clockwise and Counterclockwise coil winding style as well Series connected Multifilar coil as Ramaswami MEG shows.
I'm not sure that I understand the CW / CCW thing for electromagnet coils - or is it the same as bifilare ?
[...]
So it means the syst can be looped. All is needed apart from killing lenz, winding Multifilar Primaries is An HIGH VOLTAGE HIGH FREQUENCY AC DRIVEN PRIMARY.
[...]
But that isn't what Figuera did.  I'm not saying that it won't work (I'm even fairly OK with the statement) - but it ISN'T the Figuera device.

Apart from that, I've been winding some more coils, but my impatience is getting the better of me.  I've wound two new coils on round formers, in order to try a different "iron" (*) core.   I've wound them bifilare and pretty-much identical (2 x 2 equal lengths of wire), but I didn't measure my length of wire, nor the number of turns...  Shame on me.  I have one other same length of wire so when it's less cold outside I'll try and measure it around a drum.

I'm not convinced about the bifilare windings...  Certainly I have less heat generation than before, but I'm not sure that the magnetic field is any stronger.

Sigh.   Back to the drawing board...

(*)  I'm doing all this on a very shoe-string budget.  Apart from the coil formers that I can print (while I still have plastic filament), everything else is salvage...  And there are no metal engineering firms roundabouts, they've all closed-down, to give advice and/or samples of different iron stock.  So I have to try by experiment with what I find - hoping that if/when I do  find something that works well I can find a way of identifying it in order to "procure" more.

I wonder, did Prof. Figuera get his students to wind his coils for him?  It's a tedious business!

More soon.
Glenn
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 16, 2016, 09:05:21 PM
My view: Stop postulating new designs and just return to the patent design.

A user has posted this in another forum:

"Hola,
Pensaba que después de tanto tiempo ya quedaba claro que son necesarias más de un grupo de bobinas, todas interactúan unas con otras
Cuando le pongo carga a las bobinas recolectoras o las conecto en corto circuito, las bobinas recolectoras cercanas tienen un incremento de voltaje de un 20 a un 30 por ciento.
Esto demuestra que se puede reutilizar Lenz y que todas las bobinas interactúan unas con otras"

-------------------

I am interested in posting into overunityresearch forum. I think that to be a member there you need an invitation. If a user read this and he may give me an invitation I will be very grateful. If so, please PM with the instructions. Thanks

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 16, 2016, 11:54:33 PM
Hanon, I like Mr. Ramaswami is talking about solution here not just anyhow thought from the blues
Must humans act like a Robot?
The principle to attain overunity or fueless generator lies in killing LENZ which can be done I'm several ways and that is what Overunity.com is Primarily directly and indirectly about.
So Patent or no Patent we must Talk about Solutions. And any man-made Solution or law can be modified.
Get it?
 
My view: Stop postulating new designs and just return to the patent design.

A user has posted this in another forum:

"Hola,
Pensaba que después de tanto tiempo ya quedaba claro que son necesarias más de un grupo de bobinas, todas interactúan unas con otras
Cuando le pongo carga a las bobinas recolectoras o las conecto en corto circuito, las bobinas recolectoras cercanas tienen un incremento de voltaje de un 20 a un 30 por ciento.
Esto demuestra que se puede reutilizar Lenz y que todas las bobinas interactúan unas con otras"

-------------------

I am interested in posting into overunityresearch forum. I think that to be a member there you need an invitation. If a user read this and he may give me an invitation I will be very grateful. If so, please PM with the instructions. Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2016, 10:29:24 AM
Dear All:

Please..I have a Humble Request to all...

There are Five persons who are responsible for a reasonable level we are here today with this thread and with this particular device model..

1. Prof Figuera who invented the first device..
2. Patent Attorney and Inventor Mr. BuForn who improved upon Figueras device.
3. Hanon who got the patents of Figuera to the Light and reported them.
4. An utterly incompetent and Lazy person by name Ramaswami who was and who is a dummy..Since he was and is incapable of understandng complicated things he had to simplify them.
5. One 1492 Person. People of knowledge know who is this 1492 person.. This person compelled Ramaswami to continue the experiments and forced him to continue the experiments..
6.  Mr. Patrick Kelly who mentored Ramaswami  and answered nearly 1000 emails asking for doubts clarifications etc etc.and who today has elected not to respond to him..

And

Somebody or some thing that kept on forcing Ramaswami to do the experiments.

Today the Figuera device major part looks clear..

It is a large number of primary coils. Let us P1 to P10. In between the opposite poles of the two primary cores is placed the secondary coil. All Primaries are connected in parallel and all secondaries are connected in series. The primaries are made of thin wires and have higher turns but the secondaries are made up of thick wires and may not have a higher turn than the Primaries. It depends on the wire diameter of the secondary and the magentic field strength of the core and the voltage needed. So this is the device we have here..Simple only.. Dummies can construct it only..Very low cost only..But it will work any where in the world only..

It has been stated indirectly by others and directly by Ramaswami with specific Numbers that this device produces COP>1 output and that this was achieved in 1908 officially for the first time by Prof Figuera.

Hanon wants that this must be replicated in the same way as stated by Figuera for he wants to claim something for his country and to restore the Forgotten Professor Figuera to Eminence.

This thread would not be here without Hanon..

Randy has given a kind of kick on the butt ( he did not really. he asked I'm a man from Missouri..Show Me where is the device that is started and runs on its own.. Is the spelling correct?

Unfortunately I have kind of disagreement on the purpose of the commutator..As made by us the commutator makes lot of sparks..It is a rotating charged metallic body suddenly making and breaking contacts with other metallic contacts..So it makes sparks and quite a lot of long distance sparks..That essentially means it produces High Voltage and possibly High Frequency and low amperage currents.. So I think if a copper cylinder is placed around the commutator in close contact

and

if wires from the copper drum or cylinder kind of thing or surrounding plates go to the Electromagnets

the Primary Electromagnets will get a lot of High voltage and High Freuqnecy current and this will result in high output in secondary and the High Voltage is the reason why the Primary coil ends go to Earth points..

This is the simple reasoning that comes to my mind. There was no need for Primaries to have resistors except to present the least effective method of operation of device ( All scientists do this and they are supposed to disclose the Best mode and even Buforn does not provide the Best mode)..Actually it is not Ramaswami but Antijon who disclosed this best mode of operation fact that parallel winding of primaries would provide a higher output in the secondary coils connected in series with sufficient number of turns although it was done by Ramaswami and Narayanan much earlier and forgotten by Ramaswami and then recollected by him.. (I went through an enormously distressing period and so I was not suppressing information..I provided the document a few months after July 2013 when we first ran the successful experiment and made a COP>8 result but could not actually measure it due to the high voltage and our fear of low frequency and high voltage current which is dangerous really.. My Electrician Narayanan passed away I think two or three months after that and then I suffered a chest pain..It is only after that I made the Ramaswami Doc as advised by Mr. Patrick Kelly)

Hanon Kind of disagrees with me and he feels that the commutator provided no sparks and it is a high amperage current DC commutator which needed the resistors to boost the voltage. This theoretical disconnect would not come had I been able to make a DC commutator that did not create sparks. Unfortunately I was not able to make it.

As per theorey Hanon is correct. The model should work perfect. Hanon is learned in Magnetics as taught today and what he thinks is in accordance with what is taught.

But it is not working out for me. that is very unfortuante. I have tried with 12 volts and 16 amps and only when the voltage increases output in secondary is higher.

This is not stated in Magnetics theories. Also it is common sense that to reduce the core saturation we must create a large core. This is also not stated. Mutiple primaries impacting on a common secondary produces a Ginormous induced emf. You do not get this info any where. I'm unable to believe that what is provided in Magnetics texts is accurate. Again for some reason no funding for magnetics research. Persons who are theoretically trained to teach this subject is also few even in India. We have a Magnetic Labs only in US and it is strictly controlled by obligations imposed for Research funding and access is very limited.

While the thought of Hanon is correct by the theory of Magnetism, like Magnetic Field strength = Amperes x Number of turns per unit length..

What I see in practice is higher the voltage higher the output and it is not based on Amperage. Higher the Frequency lower the amperage is the rule. It is seen in Tesla coils where spark is able to light up lamps but does not produces any shock to us. It creates high frequency burnout skin effects though if exposed for sufficient time and if we actually hold hte electrodes on our skin but it does not cause any shock.

But let us ignore all these things.. As the person who brought the patents to Light Hanon is entitled to ask that we attempt to replicate the Patent.

It is unfortunately very very vague. Multiple Interpretations are possible. Not just one.

I have opened a new thread Self Running Electricity Generator.. Please discuss your thought processes on it.

Let us Honor Prof. Figuera and Hanon here. We owe it to him and should not be disrespectful. Without Hanon this kind of Information would not have come to us. Without the infor we would not have experimented., And only because my Electrician Narayanan Passed away and then I had a chest pain I decided to make the knowledge of whatever we did public domain..so it can benefit others.

There is another reason for Hanons insistence on replicating the patent.. Because it is in public domain no one can claim any ritht to use such a device..

We owe a Moral duty to honor Hanon..

And finally It is the 1492 person who financed me after I made the disclosure of Ramaswami device and decided to wind up and insisted that I continue..He has in fact asked me to file a patent but I have refused for filng a Patent would enable the Government  to direct me to keep quiet and destory every thing and not do any thing further in National Interest. If I do not file for a patent it remains a Fundamental right of freedom of speech and freedom scientific research which it is the duty of the Government to promote.

So please we have reached a major stage here.

The only thing you need to take the Overunity price is multiple primaries multiple secondaries and send current through the primaries in parallel and collect the output in the serially connected thicker secondary coil. Let us move on to the continuously running device..Fuelless Generator or what not.in a separate thread,. But leave this only for replication attempts of Figuera device..Please..Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 17, 2016, 11:37:19 AM
Okay all well said and heard Lawyer Ramaswami. Thanks to Hanon for his selflessness too. 100 Gunshots to Air to Him alone. I dolf my hat Sir!

::::::::::::::::::::::
Mr Ramaswami, what do you PRACTICALLY  mean by connecting the primaries in Parallel againn?

2, yesterday or so, you said there is a way to kill Lens in a Single Solenoid. How can that be practically done Sir?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 17, 2016, 12:30:24 PM
Dare Diamond:

I will answer your Lens Law question in the new thread. Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on February 17, 2016, 01:13:36 PM
Dare Diamond:

I will answer your Lens Law question in the new thread. Thanks
May I have  the link to the new thread Sir?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on February 17, 2016, 01:36:57 PM
Here's the link:  http://overunity.com/16425/self-sustaining-electricity-generator/
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 17, 2016, 10:56:48 PM
Hello All,
Any updated news about a paralleled device... Hanon had stated someone was getting results in a Spanish forum...

Referring to the repulsion method...posted Reply #3087...Is the 2 primaries and the secondary in a non magnetic tube with the secondary just close to the primaries ?
 

R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 18, 2016, 12:12:37 AM
Two user saying to have success, one in this forum, and one in the spanish forum, are stating the same: more than one single set is required, because sets seems to interact and increase the output.

Both users say that with one set they could not find OU. One user got it with 2 sets and same poles confronted, and the commutator. The other user think that a minimum of 4 sets are required. He also used same poles  confronted, but he is just using pulsed DC, as the 1902 patent.. Pay attention..!!

I need to build my second set !!

Randy, all the info that I think it is important about same poles confronted is collected in my website, in the Globe Sketch below my username

Good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 19, 2016, 01:12:40 PM
Hannon

 I think I will just stick with this thread if you dont object Hannon. Im not a real big fan of integrated circuits and ic's. They just have not proven more reliable or durable in the long run making them not cheaper against down time or initial expense. I never take for granted that when a person says they have a great deal on something which will make it all easier cheaper better,they might actually be telling a fib that is only to end up being to their benefit. It does not benefit the model of commerce to produce your own anything so it is unlikely that any real effort will come from commerce minded people who are only looking to get rich easy. Even if they are wrong in the possible execution of their get rich easy plan. If it was easy someone would already be doing it. If it was politically possible or socially sustainable someone would already be doing it. I cant think of or imagine a single reason to fix what is not broken to make it more complicated and less dependable for the benefit of a few companies who make electronics who I usually spend my time cursing for making such crap parts. There were no electronics at the end of the 1800's early 1900's and yet they built the world we live in and made it possible for the digital age. The digital age seems to built for corruption and criminal minded greedy people.
   I would like to know why you continue to call part G a commutator. When have you ever seen a commutator that looks like part G?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 19, 2016, 04:05:24 PM
Actually I dont have much new to post. All that I know is in the website for everyone who want to find a summary of all the concepts that I think that are important. My mission of spreading this information is done , or partially done. I would have liked to get my objective that was to build a simple working prototype and post it, by I have not able to get it yet. Until now I have been answering those that asked. From now I just say: read the patents, study them properly, and in my website you could find a summary of some good ideas. I dont like nor games neither smoke curtains. Until now I have just found One person in this forum that is good willing and he also has tried to teach explicitly what he knows.

This could be the simplest OU device to build, and technically is able to change many lifes, specially in poor countries. Now it is just the human factor what is stopping the advance. I guess it is the same kind of human factor that has stopped it since 1902.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AlienGrey on February 19, 2016, 05:22:25 PM
Sir..

Saw your post and have some time to respond..

I do not know any thing about Refrigeration or quite frankly speaking on any Electrical device. I'm a Lawyer and by some invisible force that kicks me that I have got in to this field.

I have tried to learn Electronics and this soldering thing got me such an allergy I have given it up. So if you say that the square device uses Figuera Principles it might well be and I do not know how your device works and so I have to agree with you particularly for I do not have any knowledge.

I used 220 volts AC from Mains. As far as I'm aware pulsed DC means simply one thing. If you give AC through a diode it produces half waves pulsed DC and if you give it through a diode bridge it will give full wave diode bridge..

BuForn is correct in saying that the Primaries do the job and the secondary coil just sits there if I understand the translation correctly. I do not  read spanish and I had a hard time requesting people to get it translated. Especially the last patent of BuForn.

I built a commutator, a custom built one as prescribed by Figuera design and it was not satisfactory. It created a lot of sparks when it ran fast and so the Electrical engineering student working with me made a step down gear to reduce the speed and we had to make it touch three points at one time to reduce the spark but it still had sparks at one contact place. So we gave up.

I have tried to use the FW diode bridge at 220 volts and it drew so much of current that the circuit braker tripped. So I do not use pulsed DC. I have tested it with 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer but the efficiency was low and so I gave it up. We have seen higher the voltage better is the performance. And when the coils are connected in parallel better is the performance.

My understanding is fairly limited on theory and so if what I write is nonsensical just simple plain ignore it as the blabbering of an ignorant person. I'm not a subject matter expert. 

I believe that when a coil is wire is looped around an iron core and current is passed electromagnet is created. The current is also present in the iron rods. This current is called Eddy current. This current is more if the magnetic field strength in the core is higher. So current can co-exist in iron rods along with magnetism. If you want to check this test the rods with a tester and you will see that the rods have current. Be careful and put on your rubber shoes and gloves and do not get in to any shock. Do not test this with DC for if you are suffer an accident DC will now allow you to withdraw your hand but AC will allow you to withdraw your hand and you can survive. I hope you are aware of these things. So yes current and magnetism exist together in iron rods.

The thing is this. You can make a given core a strong electromagnet or a weak electromagnet by controlling the current or by controlling the Ampere turns ( Number of turns per unit length). For the same current and same Ampere turns a smaller mass of Iron gets saturated but if you add more iron the magnetism is reduced. To reduce core saturation add more iron. That is the simple formula.

Ok So we have it here.

What is magnetism..We do not know much..

What is a permanent magnet.. When DC current is sent in the coils of wire the material becomes a permanent magnet. Depending on the combination of the material used the Permanent magnet may be a strong permanent magnet or weak permanent magnet. I'm also told that if we sent AC also through steel rods, steel will become permanent magnet always and to remove the magnetism it must be heated beyond the Curie Temperature ( what the heck is that? I do not know really) or we must provide current and bring down the voltage slowly using a Variac.

Soft iron rods are those that will become an electromagnet only when current is sent and will lose the magnetism the moment the current is cut off.

What is the difference between Permanent magnet and Electromagnet. Permanent magnets do not like electromagnets and oscillate violently if we keep them in our hands and move towards electromagnet. Some how this permanent magnet thing which is an inert lifeless thing knows that an electromagnet is present and oscillates in our hand. It does not like to be moved towards an electromagnet.  How the heck does it know that it is being moved towards an Electromagnet and why it does not like it.? I do not know..But this is how a permanent magnet behaves. So do magnets have life? We do not know. Permanent magnets also do not show any eddy current..Only Electromagnets show Eddy current. Permanent Magnet is cool to touch. Electromagnet is hot. How do I know? Without knowing any one of these things and the risks involved I used to stand on the wooden floor we have made and used to take the rods from inside the core by empty hand..God was so kind to me that I did not have any shocks for I was standing on the wood always. My driver tested it with tester and we were shocked oh my God Rod has current..Rod has heat and Rod has Magnetism..all in one place..This is the electromagnet.

So what exactly is magnetism? We do not know. Some very knowledgeable clients atttempted to teach me what the heck is Magnetism..I asked them hey you convert this rod to Permanent Magnet, Strong Magnet and Weak Magnet and Strong Electromagnet and weak electromagnet..The knowledgable clients did not know these practical things..So people do not know.

As I understand it, magnetism is like a gas. Same amount of core can have higher magnetism and can be saturated and can have lower magnetism.

You can compress gas and fill it up in a cylinder. The same gas can be given to a ballon and the balloon will become very big and the density of gas inside is so low that the balloon will starting floating in air. So we can think that the magnetism is like a gas.

Now this gas like Magnetism some how enters the iron rods when current is sent through the wires looped around it and a small amount of current is sufficient to create magnetism in a large amount of iron. This magnetism appears to come from air. Because apart from wire and current we do not have any thing else for this magnetism to come suddenly. It cannot come from another star. For we know Air is here and we also know that air has electrical charges. We call it static electricity..

Now because the magnetism is like a gas, it can be compressed and decompressed. If you provide a two primaries which current first like this
P1------>Y coil<---------P2 with the direction of rotation of current being same the situation is NS-NS-NS in all three cores. Ok..

Now if you make the Y coil secondary smaller than the primary coils the magnetism of both the primary coils each of 60 kgm enters the secondary of 30 kgm. So now we have magnetism compressed in the secondary coil.. Here the density of the magnetism becomes higher. Text books say that the strength of the magnetic field or saturation of the magnetic core or some thing like that but essentially it is a case where the density of the magnetism is higher. Let us say about 4 times higher than in the primary P1 and P2.

Now I gave you the example P1-S1-P2   Here we have primary current first moving like this ------>S1<------ and then they move like this
<------S1--------->

I think you would agree with me on this. When this happens the concentrated magnetism in S1 is weakened. So S1 is subjected to time varying magnetic field strength. Or the magnetism in S1 is made stronger and weaker. Electricity is induced when a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field is the rule of Electromagnetic Induction. We see that it is correct for secondary produces current. Connect the secondary to load lamps and lamps light up.

Again look at this The only thing that is done in P1 and P2 is for current move like this -----> and like this<------. That is all P1 and P2 does..

Now if you put P3 and P4 like this again and they do the same thing you have a similar situation and we will call the secondary placed there as S3..So S3 also produces a current.

But if you place all of them like a Train P1-S1-P2-S2-P3-S3-P4 . You see now the S2 gets magnetism increased and decreased. We need not provide any additional current for this in P1, P2,P3,P4..

This is some thing that you cannot agree and will not agree unless you do the experiment as indicated above. You will tell me where is this gas coming from in S2 unless we supply additional current..No need to supply additional current here.

Now forget your text books, forget your theories and listen to this dummy and do the test like this and connect the secondaries in series and connect the primaries in parallel and you will know. Please measure your readings without the S2 being present and with S2 being present as indicated. Any one any where can test these things. Primary does not require additional input to generate magnetism in S2 and hence additional output from S2.

This is how simply I can explain it. I apologize that I'm writing like this but this is the truth.

When Buforn says he has current and magnetism he refers like me ( He is also a Patent Attorney like me..Aha what a coincidence) to the Rods carrying Heat, as well as current as well as Magnetism..What a wonder of the world you see. It is so simple really. You need to create a large train like thing to get this magnetism thing to get in to iron. Most strangely if the wire has thick insulation more current is produced in the secondary and more current is drawn in the primary..No one talks about this except Daniel McFarland Cook in his 1871 Patent.

Is this a violation of Law of Conservation of Energy..No. The Law to be applied here is the Law of conservation of Energy for open systems. There is no violation of that law. Law of conservation for closed systems does not apply here. why? Neither Energy can get inside nor energy can get outside of a closed system. Here Magnetic poles are open.

Incidentally in your device Magnetism will leak enormously at the edges of the square. Magnetism likes to leak out of any system.

This is all I know..Please I beg you to understand that I do not know much..I cannot write about the improvements I have made to these concepts let us say improvements of dummy..but they are so commonsense.

I do not understand how Lenz law first comes if there is no secondary. I can tell you how to defeat Lenz law in a single core solenoid easily as I have already done it. That is a non issue really but Lenz law comes only if there is a secondary. Not otherwise.

I apologize if I have miscommunicated or hurt you in any way without intending to do so. Please I'm not trained in this subject and I do not know much about any thing. So I can only tell you what I have observed.

If you after advice on this free energy 'stuff' my advice to you is give it up before you kill your self and i have not seen any thing that works with out some one pulling a fast one in some way or another, unless you have a verry goog iseda no one has tried before, your going to wast money on it !

good luck

AG
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 19, 2016, 06:18:38 PM
Hi Mr. AG


Thanks for your advice..

Please post your advice on the stuff in the new thread.. I will explain..I think people do no read this thread any more..

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on February 19, 2016, 07:18:07 PM



..I think people do no read this thread any more..
Regards
Ramaswami

I will do it

And thanks Hanon
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on February 19, 2016, 08:46:57 PM
Hello

Quote
That is a non issue really but Lenz law comes only if there is a secondary. Not otherwise
Quote

Lenz law even does not need a single coil:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Dw_4GUYyk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Dw_4GUYyk)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU5RVQotz-o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU5RVQotz-o)

Kator01



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 20, 2016, 03:26:03 PM
Two user saying to have success, one in this forum, and one in the spanish forum, are stating the same: more than one single set is required, because sets seems to interact and increase the output.

Both users say that with one set they could not find OU. One user got it with 2 sets and same poles confronted, and the commutator. The other user think that a minimum of 4 sets are required. He also used same poles  confronted, but he is just using pulsed DC, as the 1902 patent.. Pay attention..!!

I need to build my second set !!

Randy, all the info that I think it is important about same poles confronted is collected in my website, in the Globe Sketch below my username

Good luck

 None of the patents show a single set of inducers and only one patent sort of details the source with which the device is started the rest make little mention of the source. The early ones are moving the Y coil between two poles a N and S without moving the iron cores. It is a totally different generator more like the wind generators that place the coil outputs in a formed disk and on the ether side of the disk are permanent magnets that are stationary.The disk with coils is what is moving through the magnetic fields as it rotates. It is not motionless like the 1908 version. Even in a rotor for an automotive alternator the rotating field magnet is designed so the alternating poles work to squeeze the fields so they extend outward away from the pole faces as the field is increased. The shape and over all geometry of the fingers making up the poles are carefully designed.At first glance it would look like the fields should just complete the magnetic path going form one finger to the next and never even try to reach out to the stator. A closer examination will reveal the air gaps from finger to finger are greater then from finger to stator. The easy path is not from finger to finger but from finger to stator and back to opposite finger. There is yet another flaw if you imagine the gap from finger to stator is crossed twice so the distance between the finger and stator compared to finger to finger is accounted for over the entire path and the gap from finger to finger is greater then the two times added together of crossing the gap from finger to stator. They creatively use the gap to control the route which the magnetic field will take using air gaps. Thats all fine dandy for the alternator. They did their work solved the problems and found a happy medium for all the problems. they get what they deserve ,a working generator for a automobile. If they went off willy nilly and did not solve the problems they would not have a working generator just a big pile of trash. You get out what you put in. Trash in trash out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 20, 2016, 06:01:14 PM
Doug, I do not understand  your post clearly

This is my current two sets system . What can be wrong in this prototype? I am not getting good results with poles NN

6 identical coils, 2 inch long, 4 inch diameter, 300 turns with 1 mm diameter wire. 2.5 ohm resistance, about 31 mH

Any recommendation is really welcome
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 20, 2016, 06:13:58 PM
Hi Hanon

Why not try NSNSNS which you promised to check any way earlier..

What is the input voltage..Increase it..

please check what happens and advice?

That is what worked for me. Iron core is so small and you are ignoring a major thing. But with what you check the other pole..

regards

Rams
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: perexime on February 20, 2016, 07:17:00 PM
Hallo
My humble advice is:
 
+iron
+cooper
Read the Joseph Newman's book. http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Newman1.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 20, 2016, 10:01:06 PM
Mr. Perxime

Thanks for the link on the Newman book. I am personally aware copper is highly magnetic but using thick wires would have caused a lot of current to be drawn.  that was a problem.

You have now given me another method to use high voltage and low amperage. We will now use this method to drive large copper coil.

We are aware copper is highly magnetic and produces enormous amperage. We did not knowhow to produce high voltage and high amperage output. You have opened my eys. Copper is very expensive and I do not know when I will do the experiments I have in my mind. God alone knows.

Hanon..You are using very thin wires and you must use thicker wires.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 20, 2016, 10:27:25 PM
Mr. Perxime

Thanks for the link on the Newman book. I am personally aware copper is highly magnetic but using thick wires would have caused a lot of current to be drawn.  that was a problem.

You have now given me another method to use high voltage and low amperage. We will now use this method to drive large copper coil.

We are aware copper is highly magnetic and produces enormous amperage. We did not knowhow to produce high voltage and high amperage output. You have opened my eys. Copper is very expensive and I do not know when I will do the experiments I have in my mind. God alone knows.

Hanon..You are using very thin wires and you must use thicker wires.


No copper no effects.Sorry.
Let's try to compute something....


Bufor stated 100W , 100V at 1A. You need enameled copper wire of 0.75 mm diameter to barely sustain 1A in the coil.
R=100V/1A=100ohm Wire has 0,0395 ohm/meter that means 2532 meters Each meter weight 3.95 gram
You need 10000 grams or 10 kg of wire.
Got it ? In reality I think he used larger wire to avoid overheating.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 21, 2016, 04:27:18 AM
Hanon;

 I believe the key to your dilemma may assume the form of Mr Robert Adams. he so stated that the key to his device was longer magnets compared to their width so this leads us to a point where some research on your part would of come in handy.
the research that I have done told me that an electromagnet only will put out a flux field as long as the coil length .....so that tells me by the pic you have posted that your flux depth from your coil is way short of it's intended goal or depth.
you have a 2" primary plus a 2" secondary plus at least 1/2" in gap between the first primary and 1/2" gap between the other primary, this equals 3".....(wrong)
your primary can not even reach to the other side of the secondary, that is why you have zilch for output. you need at least no less than the golden ratio of 1.618 which will give you 3.2" depth on your primary through the core. (Minimum)
i would even have gone 3.5 to 4 inches but 3.2 will work in your case. this is not even considering your core material that looks like very hard steel (wrong)
steel can only be used for primaries (Not secondaries) remember the secondaries reverse there polarities so something softer is a must.

so as you know i am a nut in this forum so take that info as you wish. but as an old dog you know my trick. Woof !
advice is as follows;
make your primaries longer, no less than 3.2 " shorten your gap in between the prime and secondaries to half of what you have now. and stick with the wire you have now just 6 layers bifiler. pm me i will help you out there and as for the other person, well those calculation are incorrect and i will show you why.

Figuera forever piece out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 21, 2016, 01:53:51 PM
I was going to suggest something different. In the stacked upright position use one primary inducer and lay the secondary on top to use for testing but I also noticed there was no controller to supply the inducer magnet from the battery. He could then change the depth of the cores and gaps while monitoring the effects on the secondary coil to get a feel for it. One of the patents ,the one where the coils are all layed out linear. The cores of the Y coil extend slightly into the coil of the primaries/inducers. The last few turns of the inducer are covering the Y core ends. I consider it cheating but at this point you need some results that will recharge your spirit. Aside from that you really need to work the controller issue out .The way the patent describes it for the type being used. There are slight differences one saying the inducer goes all the way off one says it does not. I dont believe either actually goes off but you have to consider perspective. If you and I were sitting across from each other at a table and we both raise our right arm and point right we will both be right and wrong at the same time. So when I ask you did you wind the coils right in relation to one another there is only a 50/50 chance of even conveying which way they are wound.Out of the 50 from your explanation there is only 50/50 I will have the same frame of reference in mind. I leave it to you to find a compass so that problem does not waste more time. You can wind a magnet seemingly correct that actually works backwards.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 22, 2016, 04:58:03 PM
I would also like to address a less obvious set of problems in the standard train of thought. When a person builds a electromagnet they tend use the length of conductor to reduce the current consumed in the circuit by extending the conductor to a length that provides the resistance to control the current. happily a stronger magnet can be formed by more turns of the conductor so the longer the conductor the more turns can be placed on the core. Nothing at all wrong with that it certainly does work as stated. Yet if that were the direction to the type of inducer magnet why is there the commutator and resister set up to control the current before the inducer magnets? Why add more parts without any reason? One of the other methods to increase the strength of a magnet is to increase the current over the same length of conductor. In which case the wire thickness would need to be thicker to handle the larger current without melting. In a steady state of current the thickness would have to be very thick.The core would have to be sized to accommodate the thicker winding. Or multiple parallel windings could be used which equal the thicker conductor. With greater current that is not steady ,that is to say it varies in some way the time constant for which the current is at it's maximum would be the indication of the conductors maximum capabilities. A wire that is rated for a maximum current in dc terms is meant for a period time sometimes even at a long period of time without over heating. The time which is in the case of a partially fluctuating current will be different. If at a rate of change the maximum is only for a fraction of a second with discrete steps down in forward voltage even in the case of it descending to a none zero voltage.
  Another reasonable curiosity is the use of the word reel in the description of the coils. Where the difference between the two terms may imply one way being to use a round conductor wire as in a coil, a reel can just as easily imply a spool of flat tape conductor made of any conducting material. As noted by Marathonman the length of a coil compared to the length of the core it is on will behave differently as will it's relative position on that core. Resulting from the electric current passing the turns of conductor which are covering a length of core material. many turns of wire to get the length of core covered increases the length of the wire which increases the resistance of the wire which reduces the current yet increases the strength of the magnet. What about that seams counter productive? The length of wire is said to increase the strength but reduces the current when an increase in current is one of the three items that will increase the strength. If it is reduced then wont the magnet be reduced in strength as well. Is it just the amount of core which is covered by the conductor which contributes more to the strength then the number of turns would imply. Twenty turns of wire which take up one inch of core length with one volt applied or a one inch wide conductor of twenty turns with one volt applied? Something to think about.  With the resistance of the current be controlled before the inducer magnet wouldn't that seem to indicate the inducers are wound to have little resistance if any so they can make the best use of current passing through them varied only by the controller making them capable of becoming stronger then just using more turns of conductor as a way to increase their strength?
       
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Glenn_FR on February 22, 2016, 08:47:42 PM
@Doug1
IMHO I think you're digging too deep...   Figuera himself described why he used the resistors in series with the electromagnet coils : as a way of being able to reduce the CURRENT in each set of coils in a controlled and orderly manner.  I don't see any reason to suspect anything more than that.
What he doesn't describe very clearly (not at all, even) is the exact shape and form of the electromagnets, whether he saturates the cores or not, etc. etc.
The resistors are not an issue.  I myself have built, and now use, a simple driver circuit allowing the electromagnets to be driven correctly out of phase.
The hard part is to determine the physical shape, dimensions and coupling of the electromagnets and the 'pickup' coils.

@all
I haven't posted my driver circuit as yet because, even though it is very simple ( 2 x (two transistors, two resistors and a diode)), it has to be biased depending upon the coil parameters (their inductance, notably).  The biasing needs an oscilloscope.  I'm working on devising a way of doing this without a 'scope. Stay tuned...
Glenn
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on February 22, 2016, 09:40:27 PM

Hello!

I am a retired low degree telecom. engineer living in S. Sweden and have this OU-tinkerig as a hobby.
I have followed the Figuera thread for a while now but note that not so many people talk about what  it is in the Figuera device that creates the OU-effect
 (and how).  If it then is true that he really made a working OU machine of course? Most of the interest seems to be in how to turn the E-magnets  :)

I have seen that mr CORE is trying Magnetostriction. ++ :)   Someone else mentioned magnetic saturation (Magnetic Amplifier).
In the Thane C Heins Bi-toroid transformer he used high value of permeability with low reluctance in the secondary core (type Metglas).
 
 But before 1908 when Figuera invented the "Figuera generator"  there was hardly such a refined materials.  In the patent you can read; "electro-magnets with cores of (soft) iron or steel".  Steel?!  Humm..   And working?

Talking about iron and copper..   Some OU-effect seems to come from the amount of copper and iron. See mr PEREXIME Reply #3147 on: February 20, 2016, 07:17:00 PM  and Joseph Newman's motor.      http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Newman1.pdf

Newman's cumbersome motor 5000 lbs= 1 866kg delivers 19 Watt !!!
It can be improved about ten times? But anyhow, how big should such motor (coil) be delivering power to a small town?  As a city block?
Over Unity, YES!    But, but, but....     You have to start up a new copper mine.

 Mr NRamaswami tells about his machine producing 50W out with 33W input.  OU thats good, congratulations! (if true) but how did it arise?  What cheated Lenz? 
Is it the weight here  100-> 200 kg? (267-536 lbs)  responsible for the OU production also?

I have made many many Figuera experimets myself with tiny coils about 0,2 kg and cores (radio antenna ferrite rod, Not Steel !!  ) , 3000 -->7000Hz,
and my best result are extremely near (+ -) 100% (output/input x100). I have only used a signal generator level AC and maximum 15 Volt DC when needed.
I am just looking for possible OU artifacts.

Arne


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 22, 2016, 10:39:40 PM
Sir..

You have every right to question if the OU is useful 33 watts in 50 watts out and what is the use. A question I myself asked. But you see I have managed to reduce the iron core heat and managed to draw only 0.15 amps when using 220 volts. No moving parts. No resistors and only coils were used. Why did this happen. It is so simple..

1. The core shape, geometry and direction of movement of current created the secondary core to have a higher degree of magnetic field strength and then lower degree of strength. Seconday was also wound along with the primary and so secondary core never lost any current and so magnetic field strength was reduced and increased but never collapsed to zero. I believe that it is the way current moves towards the center and the Hour glass shape that is responsible.

2. We now have to only reduce the number of primary coils and increase the number of two or three secondary coils wound as before along with the secondary and note down the primary input and secondary output. I believe that I have to add two more primaries and two more secondaries and make the output significantly high and input lower and run the device with a computer UPS to power a lot of lamps that is beyond the power of the UPS. Then I think the doubts would be over.

Let us see when I can do it..May be a month would be needed. It is tough to accomplish all this. But it is a simple device once mastered.

Respectfully,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 22, 2016, 11:51:39 PM
at this point you need some results that will recharge your spirit.

Very true. Thanks for your recommendations

Marathonman, you are right, my coil are of steel, the lowest carbon steel I could find for mechanizing into worshops

Do you think that this driving scheme could work?
http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg425965/#msg425965 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg425965/#msg425965)
A user in the spanish forum is suggesting that the inducer current must not get off completely at any time
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Berto3 on February 23, 2016, 12:24:24 AM
At the moment I refine this low voltage driving scheme. First experiments are hopeful.
The digital (staircased, not smoothed) sinus gives something extra to the pick-up coils.
http://overunity.com/16094/magnetic-mechanical-resonance-ideas/msg474870/#msg474870
Maybe the setup of Figuera was producing this kind of staircased sinus in a mechanical way.
This produced by the commutator and a resistor line up. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on February 23, 2016, 02:46:12 AM
Arne,

very good points. We have to take into consideration the conditions and technical possibilities in that time.
Now, another condition overlooked: what frequency could Figuera schieve with his rotary switch ?

Lets assume he used a electrical driving-machine with 300 to 600 rot/minute than this measn that he had a frequnecy of 5 to 10 Hz !

Les  look back to what woopy did in 2012 !!! which comes very close to what Figuera could achieve and I simply do not understand why no one payed attention.
I am sorry to tell you: No sinus- no triangle-, no square-wave - oscillation will be successful for obvious reasons... and also not the bucking mode.

The key in in this vid here and I will not spoon-feed people here because it is my firm believe that success only comes if you understand the principle of this low-frequency-generator first and the build it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlOGEnKpO-w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlOGEnKpO-w)

Here are my hints:

Blue pic is my analysis of the waveform and compare this to woopy´s result. Ponder on it.

Kator01








Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 23, 2016, 07:29:34 AM
Hello All,

Kator01,
I re visited woopy's first video...
And I thought ( and believed ) that it was the best thing since sliced bread...but what it doesn't show was ( and maybe it was because woopy didn't finish the experiment ) that the secondary was/is going to be more than what the primary was by adding thicker and more windings... I'm sure if it was that easy... a lot of people would have achieved what was expected...

secondly...IMHO the " Fiqueras " was/is a closed system... meaning it had nothing to do with Tesla's atmospheric electricity... I live in the Nation's Lightning capital... the last thing I want to do is place a copper ball 30' - 300 ' feet into the air

Lastly... I built the driver that Patrick had on his web site and it works...but when I approach this forum for the results of the cores ( that I also achieved very little results from the cores ) Bajac and Hanon were debating ( arguing ) about space between the cores, Ramaswami and MarathonMan were at odds ( and probably still are ) and a assortment of older forum dwellers and not to mention " aliens " from time to time...
So if you could re construct woopy's experiment and show the added windings and thicker wire... we could put another chapter of the Figueras to rest...

All the Best
R

PS but if it does work be sure not to tell us and disappear ( sorry for the sarcasm ).....................................LOL :-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 23, 2016, 02:22:49 PM
 Just to clarify :
 
Woopy´s design is based on the interpretation done by Bajac ( transformer with splitted primaries and air-gaps to divert the Lenz effect using two 90º unphased signals represented in top-view to justify his theory ). Woopy just tried to emulate what Bajac proposed in this forum.  Unfortunately, Bajac´s design has nothing in common with the principles that Figuera stated in his 1908 patent. For example Figuera never told anything about air-gaps, and the two signals that he used are opposite signals  (180º unphased), not 90º unphased as proposed by Bajac. Bajac was, in simple words, a free-style interpretation of the 1908 patent.
 
Just read the 1908 patent and compare with the proposal done by Bajac. IMHO I would not try to replicate Woopy´s 2012 design, but this is just  my opinion. I would just read carefully the 1902 patent, and later the 1908 patent, and between both patents I would try to guess what Figuera told us.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 23, 2016, 03:00:19 PM
I'm not disagreeing Hanon...

I'm just stating IMHO woopy could have stayed on the same lines in the 1st video and re wound the secondary and we could have put that part of the issue to bed...

but... He went with the Arduino and the rest is history.

All the Best
R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 23, 2016, 05:02:55 PM
Doug;
I wish i could afford the flat ribbon style conductor, just to darn expensive. and of course you are 100 percent correct. the controller and resistors control the currant NOT the coils. it took a little time for that one to sink in but it did.

Hanon;

I myself would stay away from any use of relays unless you like repairing your device quite frequently.
also if the currant in any electromagnet is reduced to far down the induction will stop just as Doug has stated and through my own research i found it to be true. the duel B field = duel E or H fields presented to the secondaries. just as he has stated so is fact that it takes to long for the field to build back up thus when induction ceases so does electric fields. (Fact)

Berto;

yes that is exactly what Figuera did with his mechanical device but the flux does not react that fast plus the flux in the core is smoothed out by the reluctance of the long air path back to the other end of the electromagnet. it slows the currant change in the core.

I personally had no luck at all with bajac's design nor am i aware of ANYONE that followed this set up producing any reasonable results. all i will say is good luck.

Randy;
I remembered you posting your findings but i forgot the core style you were working on.

Kator01;

I would like to hear your version of principle of this low-frequency-generator. enlighten us if you will.

also just to be aware of things if you use that style of switching (BLUE) you will lose induction in your secondary.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on February 23, 2016, 05:35:22 PM
Hello all!

--> Kator01
It is, no problem? making high frequency with magnetic commutators*. In old days Long wave transmitters used that.   *) The 'Alexanderson-alternator' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexanderson_alternator#Theory_of_operation 
I think mechanical/electrikal commutators can be made to create several thousands of Hz. Or with modern electronic technique of course without the (good ??) sparks.

Now to my test set up. See picture below.  (A)

My best belived results are 99-104 % (output W/input W x100).  RL adjusted to about 1/5 ?? of max. out power. This result must be very good since the  input coils have both ends open (magnetically). The primary coil bobins are close or amost close to each other with the secondary inside in the middle.    The core does not overhang (much) beyond the coil body. If so it gives a poorer result.    Duble core rods, RL max Watts, and transformer laminations gives a poorer result.    The contraption response is as a normal transformer when  loaded to max output, with rising Ampere and decreasing phase angle, but with much higher phase angle.

I have done my best in terms of instrument readings and used only Volt readings  the same probe or instruments to both input and output to minimize measurement errors. I have also tried to use the same instrument scales. Regarding measuring the phase angles I have no possibility to doublecheck this. I have to trust Velleman's reputation (PCLAB2000SE)  :)  .   

Pic. (A): Signal generator.  First a step up transformer, T1; 200Hz- 200kHz and split output phase 0deg. and 180 deg. .  (Not absolutely necessary. Later I used  parallel-coupled 'electromagnets' P1, P2 and just flipped one over.)   T2; The real thing! The OU Figuera Generator.. NO, No, no, right now just a strange transformer.
 P1, P2 primary coils. ext. 44 x 39 x 30 mm  int. 21 x 15 mm. Random wound  -->, <--, -->, <-- both the same CW, CCW.   0.35mm (AWG 28-27) Cu. Inductance with core; about 80-100mH, 19 Ohm.
S1 secondary 100 turns (as a small compact lump) 0.35 Cu direct wound over a single radio antenna ferrite rod 10 x100 mm.        Load; RL+ RLi about 115 Ohm  about 1/5 of maximum power out!!

Input freq;  about 5kHz.  Input voltage V1, V2; about 6,7 Volt  Input current; about 2 mA over Rpi1,Rpi2.  Phase angle; 83,2- 83,5 deg.   (cos ~= 0,1)  Output; about 0,65 Volt .

Picture (B) below.  To be continuid anodher day...

Bye!     Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on February 24, 2016, 01:55:32 AM
Hello

@randyFL: I agree what you say, Figueras maschine does not have anything to do with a athmospheric generator and yes, whoppy did not finisch the experiment...however he replicated exactly the rotary switch which ist NOT a commutator, because it does not change direction of current, ( as this is the main function of a commutator) it just modifies the strenght of the currrent according to the traces in the blue pic.

I have to add that the red lines represent the zero-level of current for each primary coil.

If you sum up  each length of a white bar-pair you will notice that the sum is constant during the ramp-period. However at the end of the ramp when the cycle starts all over agian ( current still running in the same direction) there will be a very short moment ( the contacts of the rotary switch need to approch the start-postition) during which the flux breakes down ( see red line
in whoppys trace = the time the flux in one coil is breaking down to zero while the flux in the other primary jumps to max level, building up flux through the secondary in the same direction as before ) and the voltage of secondary rises up sharply.

@marathonman: yes, thats what I thought first when I pondered this subject way back in 2012: there is no flux-change during one cycle.... but as you can see in whoopy´s replication.. it does. There is a flux-change without an overall-flux-change. Just think about how much of the flux is created in both primaries at one moment of time ? ( Magnetic wave along the seconday alsways moving in the same direction)

So I can say that Figuera was the first to invent a digital-techique. He moved the active generation of flux from one primary to the other without changing the overall flux-intensity and direction and he did it with a technique which has been discovered in the 80er by Mr. Hinrichs: loading a capacitor in small steps with the effect of the lowest entropy-losses. This is also true for loading a coil because coils also have a ohmic resistance.

@seaad: the Alexanderson-alternator did not use gliding contacts as far as I can read it in your link. See Paragraph: Theory of operation, he had c-formed pic-up coils in which current was induced.

@All: I can not enlighten you more that what I know now according to my analysis.

All I can see - overlooking the time since 2012 - that all possible deviations from the original patent have been presented and discussed at length and still this is going on.
Time for reframing IMHO

If I decide to give it a try ( replication) it will take some time. So  far I have not finished with the analysis of certain key-elements

Regards

Kator01




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on February 24, 2016, 08:33:56 AM

Hello fellow OU nuts!

i'm very encouraged by the level of experimentation which is taking place (often quietly in the background!), here and there, at OU.com these days - and not so much thread-hijacking by self-appointed 'experts' and naysayers

i'm currently involved in other experiments of my own at the moment, but i am interested to see what you guys discover about this technique

may i just make a couple of observations here -

 - i suspect that Mr Figuera was originally attempting to create an AC generator, without having to construct heavy rotational parts, hence his careful recreation of a look-alike 'sinewave' applied to the coils - at some point he realised that he had stumbled on to something unexpected and interesting in the behaviour of his device

 - when Woopy produced his 'landmark' experiment (referenced above), a big deal was made of the fact that the output was very much like a square-wave - however, my immediate reaction to seeing that waveform & his load was that it was probably more a result of 'clipping' by driving LEDs, than by the action of his transformer/coils - do we know if the waveform is approx 3v pk-pk?

Happy experimenting, folks
np
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 24, 2016, 10:50:24 AM
I thought the 1st video was unique in the fact that it:
One... had nothing to do with the primaries...
two... had nothing to do with gaps
three... was free


MarathonMan,
I bought iron from a supplier... had a machinist friend cut it into 7 transformers and square it... kinda like the picture...
In retrospect... I wished I had cut it into threes and left it round... I could have done the woopy experiment a long time ago with the 555 driver.....................keep working on your project.

Hanon,
Towards the end of the video woopy is seen pulling the device apart and takes the two primaries and puts them together without the ammeter moving ( not noticeably anyway )... that should have ended the debate ( argument ) on gaps. If woopy had 7 transformers instead of just one... that would have been at least 7 volts " Free "... Also my driver could have pushed 9 - 15 amps thru the coils... I don't know what Woopy had... so that 1st video experiment isn't over kiddo...................... I'm not poo pooing you repulsion theory... I'm just stating IMHO the " research " into the 1st video isn't complete.....

R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AlienGrey on February 24, 2016, 12:21:26 PM
Hello fellow OU nuts!

i'm very encouraged by the level of experimentation which is taking place (often quietly in the background!), here and there, at OU.com these days - and not so much thread-hijacking by self-appointed 'experts' and naysayers

i'm currently involved in other experiments of my own at the moment, but i am interested to see what you guys discover about this technique

may i just make a couple of observations here -

 - i suspect that Mr Figuera was originally attempting to create an AC generator, without having to construct heavy rotational parts, hence his careful recreation of a look-alike 'sinewave' applied to the coils - at some point he realised that he had stumbled on to something unexpected and interesting in the behaviour of his device

 - when Woopy produced his 'landmark' experiment (referenced above), a big deal was made of the fact that the output was very much like a square-wave - however, my immediate reaction to seeing that waveform & his load was that it was probably more a result of 'clipping' by driving LEDs, than by the action of his transformer/coils - do we know if the waveform is approx 3v pk-pk?

Happy experimenting, folks
np

Your a retrobate !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 24, 2016, 12:35:43 PM
- when Woopy produced his 'landmark' experiment (referenced above), a big deal was made of the fact that the output was very much like a square-wave - however, my immediate reaction to seeing that waveform & his load was that it was probably more a result of 'clipping' by driving LEDs, than by the action of his transformer/coils - do we know if the waveform is approx 3v pk-pk?

I guess you missed the part that was " Free "
And I agree... You're a " retrobate  "...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on February 24, 2016, 01:14:59 PM
Your a retrobate !

Quote from: RandyFL
I guess you missed the part that was " Free "
And I agree... You're a " retrobate  "...

LOL

...i must have had this thread confused with one hosted by friendly people doing interesting investigative work!
 
 
"retrobate", eh?

...not even Google knows what that means
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 24, 2016, 01:26:11 PM
Lol...
I had to look it up in the urban dictionary...

wait until you show a video on LEDs... there won't be any meat left on your bones...


All the best
R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on February 24, 2016, 01:44:31 PM
Hello again
In my last post (Reply #3163 on: February 23) I talked about that my test rig consumed an input current of about 4 mA AC . With the test set according to the image (B) below, I wanted to try out, if output was affected in some way when the AC signal is pulled up above the zero level by an applied DC current. The current is regulated by the potentiometer Rbias.
I can say that nothing special happens with the output. I have tested with transformer laminates, my ferrite rods and other iron materials. I have a signal generator that can produce all kind of waves, from staircase to all types you wish for. Nothing special happens with the output.
It took about 10 mA DC biasing in order to have a pure sinusoidal signal to the P1, P2. Even if I ignore this input power it further takes many many tens of mA to lift the signal above the zero level. If I now adds the supplied DC power to my AC power input my 100% efficiency will shrunk to a few percent. So it takes a huge OU-effect to overcome that.
Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on February 24, 2016, 02:40:23 PM
Lol...
I had to look it up in the urban dictionary...

wait until you show a video on LEDs... there won't be any meat left on your bones...



Whoa - what's with all the aggro, Randy?

i'm genuinely interested and impressed with all the good work going on here - and that includes all of Woopy's very practical and informative videos

i'm not sure how we get from me saying " i am interested to see what you guys discover about this technique", and trying to offer helpful observations about intriguing aspects of this project, to me being called names in response

i did have a thread on here which included driving LEDs - but then someone called Atomix93 turned up and trashed it, so there's already not a lot of meat left on it!

  http://overunity.com/16326/thats-not-a-knife-this-is-a-knife-er-ou-flashlight/msg472788/#msg472788 (http://overunity.com/16326/thats-not-a-knife-this-is-a-knife-er-ou-flashlight/msg472788/#msg472788)

...but don't let that stop you, if that's how you feel  :-)

have a nice day now
np
 

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on February 24, 2016, 02:42:10 PM
Hello guys!

It has been a few months since my last post in this forum. However, whenever possible I come to this forum to see what's cooking.

I felt the need to do this post because it seems to me that we are losing the focus in our goal for replicating the Figuera's devices. It is my personal opinion that it is irrelevant to argue who is right or wrong on the theory of operations of the Figuera's devices. Nonsense arguments on theory of operations shall not be the main objective in this forum. No one is right unless its theory has been proven with a working prototype.

That is why we should build as many different devices as possible and share the results. It is very important to publish all details of the device and test results of a non-working unit! I cannot express - strongly enough - the importance of posting the details of a non-working prototype. And that is why I consider the following to be the main purpose of this forum:

1) Built as many different devices as possible  because it will increase the possibility for deciphering the Figuera's mystery. Because we have very limited resources, each one of us might be able to build just a single prototype. It is to our advantage to have available different constructions of the Figuera's device. It really takes a major effort to build a prototype. You should build the device that you believe to be the one. It is your money and your time.

2) Post all results of the test and all construction details of the prototype being tested. The importance of posting the results of nonworking prototypes is that it will help us to look for patterns and clues of what the real device might have been. Do not feel embarrass for posting the results and details of nonworking prototypes. Trust me on this one, you would be making a huge contribution to the cause.

It is OK to share our theories but it is counterproductive to impose it on others. There are people in this forum that are purely 'thinkers' and that are prompt to negatively criticize the 'doers' when posting the results of nonworking prototypes. I do not have a problem with being a 'thinker', I consider myself to be one of them. But we need to post our theories in a constructive manner. Sometimes we fall into the trap of being harsh with the persons that do not agree with whatever we believe. We are just humans, but we need to constantly remind ourselves of what the goal of this forum should be about.

I have a theory that I believe and I am building my prototype around. I have not performed proper tests on my latest prototype because of other important matters. I am expecting to run the tests sometime by the last quarter of this year. I will post all details and test results, good or bad. If the results come out to be negative, I should go back to square one and re-evaluate my theory against the test results.

Finally, I have been very busy building a prototype for one of my patents. To this end, I bought a CNC machine to mill the PCB boards. I am posting a picture of the machine milling a board. I have found it difficult to learn the process of milling printed circuit boards. I had to get used to the following software: building and simulating electronic circuits, exporting to PCB boards and laying out the components, exporting to a CAD/CAM drafting application for preparation, and finally exporting to a GCode to be loaded into the CNC machine (MACH3). It has been an interesting experience, though.

I wish you good luck with your prototypes.

Thanks,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 24, 2016, 05:38:59 PM
Let me pose this question...
what if... Woopy had more than the 7 " transformers " say 10 of them and He increased the windings to within 5 volts and daisy chained up like in the Bujorn's patents says to do... what if ?

R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on February 24, 2016, 07:33:01 PM
Hej Arne, hello bajac - Kator  ..long time no see, greetings!

In my last post (Reply #3163 on: February 23) I talked about that my test rig consumed an input current of about 4 mA AC .

Very elegant circuit(s) Arne - nice work on the efficiency level.  i'm wondering if you could get a secondary for free, if you doubled up circuit A, placed the 2x T2 inline next to each other, then added a 3rd secondary between them.  Could that give you more certainty of overunity?  Just an idea

bajac, never apologise for being a thinker, we won't discover new country if we always stay on the same roads - some people can't think, so all they do is copy people who can  ;-)

nice CADCAM setup you've got there, i'm very envious of your PCB capability!  i bought a small laser etch machine recently, to try & use for PCB work and i feel your pain with all the software familiarisation!

Kator, looking forward to your analysis & practical input on the Figuera front

all the best
np
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 25, 2016, 04:05:40 AM
Nice CNC Bajac (drool, drool)

i hope everyone realizes that NYS can not be used. the spin direction is all wrong when one is taken high and the other low. this will cause the currants to be opposing one another thus the output will be very low,  also the whole core will act as one bar magnet as the attraction will be to strong between the north and the south to get any variation of flux.

a NYN on the other hand will allow you to vary the intensity because of the repelling action between them and also the spin direction is in the proper direction to allow the currant to be in the same direction supporting on another. as one is receding the other is gaining maintaining the pressure between them keeping between them a constant double electric field to the secondary. this can not happen with NYS. (impossible)

If you don't believe me do the tests your self to verify.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Kator01 on February 25, 2016, 11:35:24 PM
All,

as I said before: too many ideas deviating from the original patent and it does not stop:
Do you think that Figuera was fooling people ?

Kator01
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 26, 2016, 01:07:19 AM
Marathon:   Let them fight against giants ... They prefer it better than studying in deepth the patents.

----------------------------------------
"Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, "Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless."

"What giants?" asked Sancho Panza.

"Those you see over there," replied his master, "with their long arms. Some of them have arms well nigh two leagues in length."

"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills. Those things that seem to be their arms are sails which, when they are whirled around by the wind, turn the millstone."

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: perexime on February 26, 2016, 09:06:22 AM
The first one that shows a self-running working unit wins ☺👍
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2016, 09:46:54 AM
The first one that shows a self running working Unit that produces 10 Kilowatts or more wins. If you want to show a one watt unit a lemon battery would do..That runs on its own you see..Figuera claimed 15 kilowatts or 20 kilowatts. Let us be modest at 10 kilowatts or more self runner.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 26, 2016, 02:27:17 PM
If you don't understand spin direction you understand NOTHING.
i can put circles on any drawing but that doesn't mean it's OU.
maybe the idiot Einstein can help you people with your OU project.
oh, that's right he NEVER built anything.
or even Indian tech support for that matter. ha ha ha
Good luck people.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2016, 04:23:43 PM
Marathonman:

Why don't you show for this poor Indian dummy the working self sustaining generator via a video..See I can try to understand you see..Spin directions actually make my head spin in many directions and you are correct I cannot understand them..Whenever I try identical poles output is not coming. You have never disclosed the geometry of the identical poles..May be there is some secret hiding there.

Hanon was very critical of me that the device I built was more similar to Daniel McFarland Cook rather than Figuera device. I will make some wild imaginations and try to make a device that makes the iron always oscillated..It is impossible I know but I will try my wild imagination..If it works well I know how to boost the output..Permanent magnets Earth batteries this and that but it has to work for that..Let us wait and see. But what I'm trying to do is some thing low cost low tech that a person who is not able to understand the spins can do.

After all you do not need to know how the Air conditioner works or how this computer works to use the AC or computer you see. I also do not know how the cell phone works and how the various Apps work..I do not understand many things..What is wrong in trying to achieve the impossible..If we do not take action, we cannot know what will not work..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on February 26, 2016, 04:23:52 PM
The first one that shows a self running working Unit  producing 10 Kilowatts wins. If you want to show a one watt unit a lemon battery would do. That runs on its own you see. Let us be modest a 10 kilowatts self runner.
Assume that your OU-transformer today have  a weight of 100 Kg. Your free output  is 17 Watt (if true)  [50-33=17]   
That is about 5,9 kilogram iron / Cu per 1 free Watt. Feedback n=1.   10 000 free watt  x  5,9 = 59 ton (kilogram)    ???    (is my math right??)
A COP > 2 is a must.
It seems easier using a truck loaded with lemons But they have to be fresh!     ;) 
A
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 26, 2016, 05:06:38 PM
Your calculations show that you do not realize one thing. I have made a very weak electromagnet to find out if low input can result in COP>1 results. Earlier results have been above 400 volts and could not be tested. If you need to increase the output you only need to slightly enable the current flow through the primaries to be higher. That will create a more powerful magnetic field and more powerful secondary. Please check Magnetic field strength curve to see that with the increase of few ampere turns the magnet will go in to the saturation path. It is a steep curve.

This is not rocket science but calculations and safety precautions are needed here.

I suggest that you go through this material to learn this

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_hysteresis

http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetic-hysteresis.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturation_(magnetic)

You need to realize that I have used the geometry of the device to make use of very high weight but very low magnetic field strength to create a higher magnetic field strength in the central secondary.

We only need to increase the current slightly to get a jump in the output in secondary as secondary magnetic field strength will then immediately increase manifold. The input was 220 volts and 0.15 amps. if I make the input 220 volts and 0.5 amps the iron in primaries would go to saturation or at least the iron in secondary would go to saturation and then what we get is 500 volts+ in secondary immediately.

You speak to a person who has done numerous experiments and has got hands on experience. I'm dummy yes but a dummy who don't give up and learn continuously and work hard.

Genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration..Who said that..I think Edison..Right.. Thanks for recognizing my perspiration. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 26, 2016, 06:45:14 PM
Esto es lo que dice C.F. en las patentes, se alimenta una serie de bobina y luego se alimenta la otra, como un generador o una dinamo. Lo que se puede conseguir sin el cachivache con 2 diodos (pongo 4 para que se vea mejor) usando corriente alterna.
En cuanto a las recolectoras, si en una recogemos 12 volt tendremos que tener 20 para obtener 240 volt, o usar un transformador. Así si queremos obtener 240 volt en cada recolectora tendremos que bobinarlas con (¿20 veces mas vueltas?) mas vueltas, cada una de las colectoras.
La teoría es muy simple como lo explica C.F. lo que hay que pasarlo a la práctica. No se expone nada nuevo, con darle la vuelta a una serie de electroimanes tienen NN, SS, NS, SN, o lo que quieran. Las verdes recolectoras (que si es para recoger 240 volt, se conectan en paralelo y si recoges 34 volt en serie ). Azul y Roja son los electroimanes inductores.
La foto es de los reles que me hizo un conocido, para retroalimentación.
Sigo esperando al mono 101.

salud
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 27, 2016, 09:29:28 AM
Could you translate that in English please
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 27, 2016, 02:01:43 PM
Las traducciones que hago son con traductor de Internet y he recibido algunos mensajes, que no concuerdan con lo escrito en español.
Translations I do are with Internet translator and I received some messages that do not match what is written in Spanish.

Esto es lo que dice C.F. en las patentes, se alimenta una serie de bobina y luego se alimenta la otra, como un generador o una dinamo. Lo que se puede conseguir sin el cachivache con 2 diodos (pongo 4 para que se vea mejor) usando corriente alterna.
En cuanto a las recolectoras, si en una recogemos 12 volt tendremos que tener 20 para obtener 240 volt, o usar un transformador. Así si queremos obtener 240 volt en cada recolectora tendremos que bobinarlas con (¿20 veces mas vueltas?) mas vueltas, cada una de las colectoras.
La teoría es muy simple como lo explica C.F. lo que hay que pasarlo a la práctica. No se expone nada nuevo, con darle la vuelta a una serie de electroimanes tienen NN, SS, NS, SN, o lo que quieran. Las verdes recolectoras (que si es para recoger 240 volt, se conectan en paralelo y si recoges 34 volt en serie ). Azul y Roja son los electroimanes inductores.
La foto es de los reles que me hizo un conocido, para retroalimentación.
Sigo esperando al mono 101.

This is what he says C.I.F in patents, it feeds a number of coil and then fed the other as a generator or dynamo. What can be achieved without the gimmicks with 2 diodes (I put 4 so that it looks better) using alternating current.
As for the collectors, if a 12 volt collect we will have 20 for 240 volt, or use a transformer. So if we get 240 volts in each gatherer we have to bobinarlas with (20 times more laps?) More laps, each collector.
The theory is quite simple as explained by C. F. what you need to pass it into practice. is not exposed anything new, to turn around a series of electromagnets have NN, SS, NS, SN, or whatever they want. Gatherer green (if it is to collect 240 volt, are connected in parallel and if you collect 34 volt series). Blue and Red are the electromagnets inductors.
The photo is of the relays that made me known, for feedback.
I'm still waiting for the monkey 101.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 27, 2016, 02:45:00 PM
1908 Pat
" [size=0pt]As seen in the drawing the current once that has made it's function returns to the [/size]
[size=0pt]generator where taken. Naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of [/size]
[size=0pt]sign in the induced current, but a switch will do it continuously if wanted. From this current [/size]
[size=0pt]is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate[/size]
[size=0pt]the small motor which moves the brush or the switch. The external current supply,[/size]
[size=0pt]this is the feeding current is removed and the machine continue to operate without any help indefinitely.[/size][/b]
   There is no point with out being able to remove the external source of power which
started the machine into working. No transformer of mechanical work to electrical output ie prime mover, no continuous input from an external source such as in a step up or down transformer. The coils are a secondary issue, how they work together is a primary issue.Without the first problem resolved your wasting your time working on the second problem building to unknown specs. If the source of the magnetic field is removed the output of the generator has to be capable of powering the field and the motor rotating the brush plus the external load. What is the total output to power the external load and the motor and the field being used to produce the induction. Even for the case of using solid state electronic drivers there is a total of the load from the output to power the external load and the driver circuitry. If you have no idea of the total load by which to build the y coil and core how will determine how strong the field needs to be to produce the amount of induction to supply the total load. This is not like sitting in the back of the class so you can screw off all day and when the test comes you can cheat off the kids in the front of the class by looking over their shoulder to get the answers. not unless you have the ability of spiritual remote viewing by way of out of body travel. To a hammer everything is a nail. To a doctor everything can be fixed with drugs or surgery never do they seek to improve the living condition because that would take away all the sick people and in turn their income. If you think you can fix everything with more electronics instead of basic understanding of how a generator works in order to figure out what the electronics need to do then you will never finish. Because the medical doctor and the hammer will never be able to build a boat without knowing why it floats.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 27, 2016, 08:22:29 PM
Doug...

The answers to all your statements are there in the patent itself.
Feedback coil has a higher output than needed. This is why primary wires go to Earth to avoid runaway current. 1908 patent does not disclose the feedback coil clearly. 1914 patent does.
I think we can dispense with the rotary device but will not discuss it here. That a feedback coil was wound under the secondary indicates the polarity of the poles.
This patent is now very clear. I will do it in one or two months but will indulge in a bit of cheating to reduce core size.  Otherwise it is perfect. I am loooking at between 3000-4000 watts output only with my small cores. Let us wait and see if it works as expected. Except Moray device all other EM devices reported fall in this category as long as there is no motion in the cores. McFarland Cook Figuera Hubbard Hendershot Cater all devices follow the same principles.

There is nothing new except that we lost this information.

The devices comply with all expected performance criteria.

regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 27, 2016, 11:27:12 PM
Also commented by Ignacio in this old two posts from himself:

http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg423634/#msg423634 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg423634/#msg423634)

http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg425965/#msg425965 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg425965/#msg425965)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 28, 2016, 02:33:39 AM
En un alternado de coche, se auto alimentan las bobinas inductoras, con una pequeña parte de la electricidad producida por el propio alternador.
¿es valida esta respuesta?
In a car alternator, the field coils are self powered, with a small portion of the electricity produced by the alternator itself.
Is it validates this answer?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on February 28, 2016, 01:28:10 PM
In a car alternator, the field coils are self powered, with a small portion of the electricity produced by the alternator itself.
Is it validates this answer?
IMHO I think it does...

All the best
R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 28, 2016, 02:45:11 PM
Unfortunately I do not know any thing about Car Alternators and how they work. I understand they have a rotating core and the power for rotation is provided by the movement of the car. My understaning is that it is similar to a cycle dynamo. Probably it is not correct or may be correct.

Neither Buforn Nor Figuera discloses the full mode of the feedback coil. Figuera does not even mention the existence or placement of Feedback coil. Buforn disclosed it only in the 1914 patent possibly for he needed to show an improvement to get another patent.

I have tried the exact description of Buforn but it does not work. If there are number of turns voltage comes but there is very low amperage and the feedback coil is not able to match the primary coil input from the mains. But I have used only one module but Buforn shows 8 modules for operating the device. I was able to get only 168 watts maximum in the feedback coil wound. That is just one third of what primary input was. However it was only from one module. Possibly it will go up with series connection of the feedback coil in all the 8 cores.  Our friends are correct that it COP>1 cannot come from one secondary. Same applies for feedback coil as well.

I do have a doubt that the rotary device functioned as a spark generator for generating high voltage high frequency continuous current to go to earth points at the ends of the primary. Figuera says that a Switch will do it if necessary and I'm unable to understand it. What was the meaning of a switch in his time?

I'm fairly certain that the primary coils are thin wires that can withstand high voltage at low amperage. Secondary coils are much more thicker wires than the 4 sq mm wires I have used so far and are probably in the 15 sq mm wire to 25 sq mm wire size. We have got very good amperage when using thicker coils. BuForn may not be accurate that he indicates 300 amperes and 20000 watts but higher amperage wires must be used.

We will be repeating the COP>1 experiment we did earlier again for repeatability test. In one primary current moves from outer to inner and in the parallel primary current moves from inner to outer and in both the rotation is in the same direction. Viktor Schauberger calls the movement from outer to inner as implosion. I need to check whether that was the reason for the COP>1 output. In all other modes we were unsuccessful. If we go to saturation of the core Lenz law does not appear to apply but we are told that it is neither safe nor sustainable in the long run.

We will do another round of testing by Middle or March or end of March and I will update again. It is the cost of the thick highly insulated copper coils that is a problem here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 28, 2016, 03:37:24 PM
NRamaswami: no malgastes tu dinero. Solo replica un alternador, dinamo, generador, con el único cambio de que va ha ser inmóvil, 14 bobinas inductoras, y 7 recolectoras, la retroalimentación, se obtiene de la propia electricidad generada, en las 7 bobinas recolectoras.
Lo que has expuesto algunas veces es interesante, pero para otras cosas.

Ramaswami: do not waste your money. Only replicates an alternator, dynamo, generator, with the only change that will has to be stationary, inductive coils 14, and 7 gatherer, feedback is obtained from the electricity itself generated in the 7 gatherer coils.
What you have exposed sometimes interesting, but for other things.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 29, 2016, 03:20:18 PM
NRamaswami

 A car alternator is a generator it outputs three phase which is rectified to produce a smooth dc to power the car accessories and recharge the starting battery. If your alternator is in good shape you can remove the battery ofter the car is running.Or at least remove one of the battery connections. I don't know where I ever heard that before. The regulator the part which feeds the rotating field from a portion of the output is located before the rectifier or after the rectifier I wonder? So the rotating field is ac or dc in a generator/alternator? ignacio seems to be a sensible person. 
  Funny thing about an alternator is it can produce much more then 13.5 volts dc if the speed is kept up to get 60 hertz you can high jack the output where it delivers 120 volts. Is it a problem of being cryptic or is it a problem of not being able to think beyond specific directions in order to figure out something. These little generators are nearly everywhere so why not study what already works then change it to work differently. Dont forget it just isnt special without some blinking LED's. Im beginning to wonder if people have shares of stock in companies who make Led's on these boards.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 29, 2016, 05:31:13 PM
A car alternator rotor coils are "DC" electromagnets applied through slip rings after the diodes with 12 volts through regulator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 29, 2016, 07:22:09 PM
Marathon Man: Un alternador de coche bobinas del rotor son electroimanes "DC" aplicados a través de anillos colectores después de los diodos con 12 voltios.
Y alimentados, con la electricidad rectificada, generada en ellos.
C.F. dice, lo mismo. Pero, con piezas fijas, alimentando con corriente pulsada, 1/2 onda, a los electroimanes (histéresis). Con electricidad alterna, mediando un diodo, 1/2 onda a un lado y 1/2 onda, al otro lado, separadas en el tiempo.
Marathon Man: A car alternator rotor coils are electromagnets "DC" applied through slip rings after the diodes with 12 volts.
And fed with rectified electricity generated in them.
C. F. says the same. But, with fixed parts, feeding pulsed current, 1/2 wave, the electromagnets (hysteresis). With AC power, upon a diode half wave aside and 1/2 wave across, separated in time
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 29, 2016, 08:41:39 PM
ignacio; " C. F. says the same. But, with fixed parts, feeding pulsed current, 1/2 wave, the electromagnets (hysteresis). With AC power, upon a diode half wave aside and 1/2 wave across, separated in time"

I read this 10 times and still am drawing a blank. can someone  please help?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 29, 2016, 08:53:25 PM
Marathonman
You should of payed attention to the Telsa patent "how to get direct current from alternating currents"
 Diode chops it into half wave, one is being blocked and fed into the other inducer not blocking off but redirecting it to the other then the situation is different for dc you have to block the ac from cooking your dc source with more diodes properly placed.
 
 I would rather do it the way the patent says to do it. Im not a big fan of diodes they are not as robust as one might hope.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on February 29, 2016, 09:22:36 PM
Doug..Ignacio..

Thanks for the kind words. I do not have funds to invest in new projects. I will  continue with the present one. I think the goal is to get both higher amperage and higher voltage in secondary than in primary.

I have tested various modes. There is only one mode where under certain conditions COP>1 results come.

In all other modes we were not able to get COP>1.

There are many conditions for this and you violate one of them you are not getting it.

By March 15 I think redo the expperiments hopefully.

regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on February 29, 2016, 09:22:50 PM
Right Dou1
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on February 29, 2016, 10:11:21 PM
You guys seem somewhat confused about how an alternator works.  DC is applied to the slip rings.  Since these are slip rings the DC does not change.  It is a steady DC being applied to the coils of the armature.  This DC current creates a series of magnetic poles on the armature.   These poles passing the stator windings induce an AC 3  phase current.  The rectifier then converts that 3 phase AC to a rippled DC.  Because of the capacitance of the battery and the auto circuitry the ripples are smoothed out to make smooth DC.  This DC is then fed to the electrical system of the auto and the battery and a small portion is also now used to supply the power to the slip rings.  The regulator is between the DC of the system and the slip rings.  It monitors the voltage of the system and adjusts the current going to the slip rings to maintain a steady system voltage as the load and engine speed vary.  I hope this helps some.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 01, 2016, 12:14:47 AM
Doug;
I downloaded the Patent when you posted it. i will review more when i get time.
Diode info very true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on March 01, 2016, 01:18:04 AM
What everybody seems to be missing is, as the sine wave or square wave, or whatever wave is being induced, is you can collect during propagation and degragation (up & down).
Flyback is not in one spot, It's along the rise and fall.
Collect it, and use it.
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 01, 2016, 04:13:29 AM
The rise and fall you are referring to from the two electromagnets are causing a steady duel E field or H field if you prefer that can be collected in the secondary. with out this continuous variation of currant between the electromagnets induction can not and will not happen.
Flyback well ok just not in Figuera's device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 01, 2016, 04:52:14 PM
En los alternadores se usan electroimanes, en vez de imanes, por el simple hecho de poder regular el campo magnético y así poder aumentar o disminuir la potencia, subiendo o bajando la alimentación en ellos, en cambio, si fueran imanes fijos, tendríamos que aumentar las vueltas por minuto.
In alternators electromagnets are used, instead of magnets, for the simple fact of being able to regulate the magnetic field and thus to increase or decrease power, raising or lowering the power in them, however, if they were fixed magnets, we would have to increase turns per minute
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 01, 2016, 05:57:12 PM
Induction;
In electromagnetism and electronics, inductance is the property of an electrical conductor by which a change in current flowing through it induces an electromotive force in both the conductor itself and in any nearby conductors by mutual inductance.

Buforn even mentioned this in the patent, then if this is the case why in the world would Figuera put the core side by side instead of around each other to pick up additional inductance.

the pic i have below would maximize the induction from every core. all cores would be influenced by three other cores except the center core, it would be influenced by all six cores.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on March 02, 2016, 01:41:34 AM
It just occurred to me today that the Figuera patent might also tie into the
KUNEL PATENT: (DE3024814)
Patent Number: DE3024814 Publication date: 1982-01-28 Inventor(s):
Applicant(s):: KUNEL HEINRICH

It induces a coil without mechanical motion..

It was said that some one asked if it worked and Kunnel said
"it works but not as drawn - see if you can figure it out "

see the attached patent if interested.

I tested the Kunnel  "breaker coil" idea with a stack of magnets then
a spacer and then another like magnet and the result is

1. when like poles it will push another magnet from 1 3/4 inch but
2. when the last magnet is flipped into repel against the stack
   it must be 1/2 inch away to push another magnet.
So it looks like "a small force can be used to block a larger force"
and that is very good...

about my Figuera status.
I am having trouble getting the right wire size from my junk collection.
Once I have that I will program the PC to switch resistors on and off
to vary the flux through the serial or parallel port. I have such a program
but it needs to be changed and variable timing added.

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 02, 2016, 01:00:04 PM
Norm and Marathonman

  An insulted conductor does not limit you to copper. I replaced 6 diodes in my small portable welder which is a 220 volt wire feed and was marveling over the two transformers and all the beautiful shiny wire only to realize it had not one stitch of copper in that machine. It was all aluminum wound and varnished to look like copper. The only difference was that for each 5 layers there was air space with spacers to provide better cooling of the windings.It has a forced air fan that runs when it is connected to a power supply. There is guy on youtube who made a pretty beefy magnet for demos.He is a teacher and does demonstrations for his students on the power that a home made magnet can have. He used aluminum foil to wind his magnet and easily lifts 400 lbs plus runs a 12 volt wench to raise and lower the magnet when attached to a bar that can hold weights or people that all runs from a 12 volt car battery. Im not saying you need such a big magnet just that a conductor is a conductor and what it is made of is less the point of conducting if the price is such that it is more affordable then swap to different material. I keep 5 welders on hand because I abuse them and the wire is never what goes wrong, it's the rest of the parts like diodes and control boards and fan motors. That welder carries 12 diodes in all and they are far from easy or cheap and that is not even that big of a welder just used for small work short and quick. Not a big fan of diodes. Maybe you can find some al wire and re-purpose it if copper is hard to get.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on March 02, 2016, 03:01:44 PM
I did some better tests with the stack of magnets in a wood block to hold them well.
see attached photo for the setup.

results are.


 wood cylinder setup... and stack of 3 magnets and 4th after 1/8 wood gap
the magnet stack is placed on top so you can see how it is made. It goes
into the hole and is held there by an aluminum plate.

1. R = 1.5 inches pushes car
2. A = 5/8 pushes car when the "breaker coil pm" is flipped to repel the stack
  which simulates the Kunnel "breaker coil" flux change.
3. S = 1 inch  -single mag attracts car

so you can see that Kunnel even weakens the single magnet repel...

I corrected some incorrect words above.

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 02, 2016, 03:46:20 PM
Norman,
Kunel´s patent just uses one inducer  field while Figuera uses two opposing inducer fields NN. Kunel is based on flux linking induction, as transformers (no magnetic lines cut the induced wires) , while Figuera uses the second field to collide against the first field and move the fields to create induction by flux cutting the wires, as in generators. 


If Kunel says that his device works, then, or the device just produces a few watts (useless in real applications) , or I can not understand how he is not still a multimillionare after more than 30 years.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 02, 2016, 10:09:01 PM
So what you are saying Doug that one could use copper or aluminum foil to wrap primary or secondary coils. that would give the most bang for the buck. i checked on ebay and copper foil is not all that expensive. one 9.8 lb spool of 18 awg cost me 68.00. at 9 layer filler the same with foil would be around 6.5 to 7 feet.
it would seem worth while to do a core with it to find out.

thanks for the info.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 03, 2016, 11:08:44 AM
The car alternator is the answer until the Figueras is solved ( as MarathonM pointed out )...
If the pulley was larger it would naturally go faster ( more juice ) as Doug1 had stated it does run itself...
Left alone the diodes ( and they are sturdy enough ) they could power anything in the DC area... if taken out the alt. is 3 phase AC ...which incidentally the alt. could be refigured into a 3 phase motor with the b emf used to control it...
I'm not saying stop the Figueras research...I'm saying use the Alt. until its figured out...or invest in the LEDs and alternator company :-)

Lastly...
Ignacio ... please finish the translation ( the bottom part ) of post #3206

R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 03, 2016, 12:12:33 PM
Marathonman

 Yesterday I was at a building that next door they were replacing the roof of another building and the metal roof company was there with a machine that takes rolls of metal and shapes it into roofing panels. Interesting machine to watch while it works. More interesting is the giant rolls of material. Made me think of a seamless gutter type of set up. Wonder what they do with rolls that get damaged on the edge and cant be used? If that stuff goes back out as scrap to a scrap yard at scrap metal prices then that would be a very good resource even if the roofer does not work with Al the seamless gutter people do. If it is painted then it only gets the lowest price as scrap and if the paint is electrically insulating well, just knock me over with a feather. Going back today with my dmm and check the paint coating and start asking a 1000 questions. Made me think about cores in general as well on the same train of thought ,rolled material.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on March 03, 2016, 12:20:43 PM
The car alternator is the answer until the Figueras is solved ( as MarathonM pointed out )...
If the pulley was larger it would naturally go faster ( more juice ) as Doug1 had stated it does run itself...
Left alone the diodes ( and they are sturdy enough ) they could power anything in the DC area... if taken out the alt. is 3 phase AC ...which incidentally the alt. could be refigured into a 3 phase motor with the b emf used to control it...
I'm not saying stop the Figueras research...I'm saying use the Alt. until its figured out...or invest in the LEDs and alternator company :-)

Lastly...
Ignacio ... please finish the translation ( the bottom part ) of post #3206

R

Randy you have a couple of statements in the above quote that are incorrect.  If the pulley on the alternator is larger the alternator will turn slower not faster.  And the alternator does NOT run itself.  An external source of power has to turn the alternator.  And that power has to have enough torque to turn the alternator as the load on the alternator increases.  An alternator is just a modern more efficient type of generator.  There is really nothing special about it.  And as some others have said it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Figueras device.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 03, 2016, 12:40:27 PM
Ouch ! shot down with facts, that's gonna leave a mark. ha ha ha
randy why did you include me in that as i have never said that? have you been to Doug's house watching the cars pile up... ha ha ha ha. (inside joke)

Doug; that would be a cool machine to watch but i would like to focus on your point you are getting to ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 03, 2016, 09:20:13 PM
MarathonM...
sorry that was a mis quote... my bad ( or whatever that means )... I shouldn't come on here early in the am...

citfta... if I remember correctly... I ran my 67 289 cougar without the alternator connected to the battery ( after I started the 289 V8 ( with custom header exhaust pipes with twin super bee mufflers ) she ran without being connected... when I upgraded to a 1969 472 cubic inch V8 Cadillac sedan Deville ( ah the good old days ) I did it again... and yes I made the mistake this morning by saying ( typing ) " the pulley " ... the " pulley is larger on the DC or AC motor which leaves 4:1 or 3:1 ratio which incidentally pushes the alternator to 3 or 4 K rpms ... my bad ( again )

Lastly... I am not going to bring up an alternator in this thread again... it should be in another thread.

All the best
R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 03, 2016, 11:29:47 PM
Better to leave alternators out of this thread. Ignacio just used it as comparison, to show that alternators are feedback from the same electricity that they produce and that in alternators you may regulate the feedback to adjust the output... the same as Figuera stated in his patent.

And he showed the relays that he uses to switch off the AC power to the device once that the machine is running and it may use his own electricity as feedback. He posted his scheme with AC input with some diodes. I will try to test it this weekend.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 04, 2016, 01:44:54 AM
I agree 100%... I look forward to the test results.

As far as Ignacio's post # 3206 is that what He stated... I trust your translation better than a online translator. I used a online translator speaking to the Chinese people and was informed by a Chinese person that there's a difference between Mandarin and Cantonese translation... Go figure.

regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 04, 2016, 12:07:39 PM
 On the soon to be dead comparisons with an alternator I would like to mention that all the generators of typical construction have to be flashed in order to get them to begin producing. Even in the case of connecting to a battery and properly installing one in a vehicle with source they wont generate until and after they are flashed. I guess I dont have to wonder if anyone will remember that anymore. Same goes for any virgin generator and if the residual field completely degrades it has to be re flashed even if was working in the past. The other comparison is the alternating poles of the field rotor that run NSNS and so on around in a complete circle.The poles fields become squashed together pushing them further out from the pole faces when the field is increased. The magnetic poles go to the opposite pole face in both directions left and right of any pole being used for reference and meeting up with field of the same name from an adjoining named pole from the next set. It only shows that it can be directed and shaped to extend the distance the fields reach out from the poles faces.Where the fields are entering or leaving a pole face there is a tightly compressed dense field that is made of the fields from half of two other poles on ether side. It uses the circular shape for more then just the rotation.It is storing a large amount of flux between the two circles if the inner circle is the magnetic field by subdividing the single field magnet.
   The invention at hand is subdividing the current into discrete multiple magnetic fields that push against each other to direct the field to where it is wanted at the place where it can be used for induction. If the fingers from a field magnet of an alternator did not work in such a way that once the field exists the pole face and if those fields did not remain separate once they left the fingers of the alternator even in-spite of it being actually from a single magnet originally the fields would not reach into the stator windings and it wouldnt work. The behavior of the field or the flux if you prefer is the point. Using something that is a working model which there is plenty of description for that is easily found in everyday use.
  The fact that a prime mover is used to rotate the field should bring up some obvious questions. Why turn the magnet and not make it's strength fluctuate instead? Answer is because is it slow to change compared to the speed you want it to change. The total amount of flux in terms of lines of force takes too long to change in enough difference of that total ,so they just move it physically and keep the strength high enough to work. If that is the case where you have to keep the strength high enough to work in order for it be fast enough then you have to look at it in that light even if it is not turning and resolve the movement of the field another way. The comparisons are usually to make you think so I don't have to type a lot.
   Off subject the roofers were a no show sleet and rain.The area was completely cleaned up which was unusual but demanded by the customer because the proximity to an air port runway. I guess the prospect of an engine sucking up some building materials is frowned upon. Try try again, maybe they will be there today.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 04, 2016, 01:59:28 PM
Doug1

I find it extremely difficult to understand your logic of the difficulty of moving the fields. If that is the real problem increasing the frequency gives the immediate answer.  But transformers which are motionless are more efficient than  Alternators both at the same frequency. How do you explain this inconsistency with your idea of difficulty in moving the fields?

Logically I find it very difficult to understand. If that is the case Alternators should be more efficient than transformers but that is not the case as far as my very very rudimentary knowledge in this field goes. Please explain
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 04, 2016, 04:26:57 PM
So what your saying is that the pic i posted probably won't work because of the reshaping of the flux fields in proximity to one another causing the fields to be squished closer to the core it came from.
i would think the b field would be effected but not the electric field as nothing can shield that as has been proven.
i just thought that since they pick up additional flux from it's neighbor, why not have a lot of neighbors.
it seems to me it would but i will have to think hard and do tests on this matter.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 05, 2016, 12:58:22 PM
Marathonman

 No ,exactly the opposite.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 05, 2016, 02:24:11 PM
That's what i thought.  oh wait, to first half or second half.

Got pure iron cores in yesterday, wow they sure r purdy,  2 inch diam 99.9% pure love. ha ha ha !
tested with hammer and very soft, will start building my bobbins this week end and timing board will be in next week along with Mouser order.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 05, 2016, 11:22:37 PM
Study:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB_UKO7ilTA&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbUhy2sNQv8&ebc=ANyPxKp9sM5o3uy-LdT4YkndWaNID1j6fYW__uZ8U6LTi_3k2xbGpKbUNp0Y3_B9uVqEUWzRE4woCxyiRpwV3pVaRxaNbc5IQw
¿stupy?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 06, 2016, 11:38:20 PM
Yesterday I was testing the circuit posted by Ignacio on the 26th of february to use half wave in each inducer by rectifying AC with two diodes, post #3185 http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611) and frankly the shape of each of the two signals is quite good. Minimun current of 0.2 A and maximum current about 2A with 12 volt AC input. I used a resistor joining both diodes outlet in order to assure a minimun current,as base current, during all time.

I attach the pic with one signal. The other signal you may guess it unphased 180°. I post to show it because it is an easy way to implement the input signals. Maybe other people could also use it. Really simple.

Still testing this new driving circuit. So far no important results to share. Output was small but a very good AC shape at 50 Hz.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 07, 2016, 12:50:13 AM
Hello Hanon!

It's good that someone is finally doing the experiments. I followed this thread, but can't remember exactly if any encouraging results were actually obtained from members of this thread or at the spanish forum.
There was talk about getting OU from two or more segments, but was that just talk, or did anyone got the data from experiments?
I'm interested in all data that have been achieved with actual experiments.

I am also experimenting myself again after long time, but did not finish yet, will present the results in about a week or so.
I wish I had a frequency drive, so I could test for output at different input frequencies, in the Figuera patent there is the motor with the contact brush that the RPMs can be altered at, but in my setup there is only mains input frequency.

Wish you all the best and good experimenting!

Happy figuering everyone!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on March 07, 2016, 01:34:38 AM
Yesterday I was testing the circuit posted by Ignacio on the 26th of february to use half wave in each inducer by rectifying AC with two diodes, post #3185 http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611) and frankly the shape of each of the two signals is quite good. Minimun current of 0.2 A and maximum current about 2A with 12 volt AC input. I used a resistor joining both diodes outlet in order to assure a minimun current,as base current, during all time.

I attach the pic with one signal. The other signal you may guess it unphased 180°. I post to show it because it is an easy way to implement the input signals. Maybe other people could also use it. Really simple.

Still testing this new driving circuit. So far no important results to share. Output was small but a very good AC shape at 50 Hz.

Good share hanon - looks like a similar polarity-stripping action which Dieter was using when he got some interesting results earlier

I'm thinking of having a stab at the Figuera config - this approach may help me get started

I was thinking of trying to make use of both ends of each primary by adding a 2nd secondary and arranging the P S P S in a square, like a toroid of electromagnets

At the moment, the only difference i see between the Figuera config & a regular transformer transformer action is that in the Figuera setup the input waveform has a DC offset of 0.5 Vsupply - interesting!

I see that Arne (member seead) tried a circuit which added that offset but it didnt give him as good results as his 1st circuit which used true AC

Keep up the good work - good hunting!
np
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on March 07, 2016, 08:47:07 PM
I cobbled together Hanon's posted circuit from a few pages back and tested it
on a test bed I had setup for Flynn, Figuera, and Kunnel tests and got 53v out of
the secondary coil with 120v input. Since the coils are all in the same direction
I had to flip wires to make the poles alike in the center. When they are unlike there
is a solinoid vibration that can be felt and heard. The coils are 900 ohms from the
 water in valves in a washing machine. In the back right is a 4th coil that is the resistance that reduces the power in one coil by half - 1800 ohms. And the diodes
are there too. I drew the circuit on the plywood too. That reduced current did
not change the output much....that surprised me. The core is a bolt
 and the  C clamps are used to hold it in place for rapid prototype changes.

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

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

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

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

Better luck fellow experimenters.

Norman
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 08, 2016, 04:32:42 AM
Sounds like every one is beating there head against a rock with this circuit. the whole reason Figuera did what he did is because when two electromagnets is taken up and down in an orderly fashion a duel e field is created and maintained. when it is pulsed in the circuit you are using it is not plain and simple.
cuss me out all you want but in the long run who is right.

Sir; do you think your ohm's might be just a tad bit high.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 08, 2016, 01:21:02 PM
What why and where.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on March 08, 2016, 02:00:06 PM

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

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 08, 2016, 05:08:53 PM
Two pulses at 180 degress are fine but how to get two at 90 degrees ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 08, 2016, 07:53:55 PM
Yes ! two electromagnets basically occupying the same relative space of the Secondary alternating in time = duel or double strength E field. when one electromagnet is out of sink induction is lost and output drops dramatically.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 08, 2016, 11:41:23 PM
Yes ! two electromagnets basically occupying the same relative space of the Secondary alternating in time = duel or double strength E field. when one electromagnet is out of sink induction is lost and output drops dramatically.


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

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 09, 2016, 12:06:47 AM
What why and where.

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

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

Just trying to help and simplify. Take it or leave it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 09, 2016, 12:35:45 AM
Those who have a working device should give it a try and see if it work as the resistors array or not. It will just take 5 minutes to build it and test it. I can not say if it work, I can only say that the shape of the signals is really good (see pic attached in my previous post) I also got surprised when I saw the signal in the scope.

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

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

Who, when, where?  What did I miss?

By working device you mean just the part that feeds the electromagnets, right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 09, 2016, 01:45:05 PM
When people realize the following things all can have working devices..

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I intend to do it some time in the future when funds time and staff to do this all are available to me. Not now.  Very very expensive project.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 09, 2016, 02:55:45 PM
madddann;

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

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

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

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

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

Hanon;
You help a lot so keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 09, 2016, 05:23:30 PM
Marathonman..

I agree that is what the patent says.

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

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

Thanks for not disputing the rest of my statements.

Ramaswami




madddann;
Yes this is from experience, research and observation of the Figuera device. that is why induction falls off dramatically if one electromagnet is not in sink with the other.  two completely separate opposing electromagnets will have a massive e field compared to one electromagnet because of the sharing of same relative space of the secondary, not fiction (FACT).
I am working on my rewinding of my mag amp control. just for reasons of my own i have chosen 400hz cores and 400 hz AC for my mag amps which puts me at around 4 to 5 MS response time being controlled with 60hz timing board which is of course 16.6 MS.
Rswami;
2. The rotary device is a spark creator that creates high voltage and high frequency output and that becomes high amperage as well when it hits a copper sheets and that current is fed to the primary.
Good imagination but not in the Figuera device. i would like for you to please show this forum in the patents this statement. of course you can't because it is not there and is not what the rotary device is used for.i'm not trying to be mean or hateful, and definitely not trying to argue just stating FACTS.
the rotary device is a splitter of currant used to take each electromagnet up and down oppositely in an orderly fashion to maintain the e fields generated by each electromagnet over the relative space being occupied by the secondary. (FACT)
Hanon;You help a lot so keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 09, 2016, 05:48:14 PM
For those who still do not understand the objective of the bad-named "commutator" , really acting as a current distributor:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Berto3 on March 09, 2016, 05:57:42 PM
@ Rswami
Frankly, I don't understand your worry about the expenses for this Figuera project.
Why not making a small test setup to check the principles? I made a test setup for
50 dollar mainly for ferrite cores, copper and electronic parts. This Figuera setup is
build on a 40x40cm board with all the parts and meters, exept the oscilloscope.
The block- sinus wave oscillator and E-magnet drivers are build at a breadboard.
All is powered by a lead-gel battery of 6V and switchable to super capacitors.
The 2 inductor coils are 10mH and the 2 pickup coils (bifilar) are 40mH 320Ohm.         
One of my findings is that sparks, high voltage and high frequency not stands for
more current and real usable power. Yes, a LED will light up more but that's it. 
For that reason I made a digital (staircased) sinus. This gives a transfer of power
and spikes. But at the secondary coils I did not pickup excess power, not enough
to deliver back to the primary. I convert all secundary power back to DC and
measured volt and amps to get real power values. Testing is not that expensive.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 10, 2016, 05:11:20 AM
Berto

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

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

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

Leds will glow with little current if voltage is adequate.

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

When primary is given in parallel splitting is done immediately.

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

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

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

regards

Ramaswami


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 10, 2016, 11:23:15 PM
Nice pic Hanon plain and simple.

Got my cores cut for free today at machine shop, well actually a valve shop that does machining to. cut them to 9 inches then worked on bobbins. made them from craft felt bought from wall mart for 24 cents a square, cut them out with exacto blade and scizzors. then i wrapped the core with the felt, supper glued into place the covered with resin i got from lows. hell one small can of resin will make a shit load of bobbins.

and yes i took pictures of all from a camera i bought at a pawn shop. i will post the pics as soon as the usb cable comes in i had to order separately. two to three days only !
i will post pics of the winding of the bobbins also wound on a coil winder i bought off ebay for 39 bucks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 11, 2016, 09:04:37 PM
Good! Can't wait to see the pictures. So your cores are 9 inches each? What is the core thickness?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 11, 2016, 11:36:32 PM
Marathon Man, madddann:  So your cores are 9 inches each?: excitement 43 Kwatt, production 4 Mwatt? :'( 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 12, 2016, 12:20:28 AM
2 inch solid pure iron @ 99.8 or .9.
bobbins are turning out unbelievably good, supper light weight and strong. best move iv'e made in a while. i can even sand them to nice smooth finish.
the original plan was to use 3 inch cores but my mouth fell to the floor when i was quoted a price so i'll stick with 2 inch and to use cardboard from soda can cases but that was to flimsy so the felt turned out great.
Pics coming soon.

ignacio; 4 megawatt now that's funny.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 12:32:50 AM
Hannon
 Still have your two EI transformer cores?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 12, 2016, 01:50:33 AM
Yes, I already have them. As it is not easy for me to mechanized them I left them, and lastly I am testing with my other six coils that I showed in a pic. Why do you ask it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 12, 2016, 12:12:40 PM
Hanon;
Maybe you could add this pic to the one you posted above.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 12, 2016, 01:17:53 PM
marathonman: ignacio; 4 megawatt now that's funny. Jeje
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 12, 2016, 01:23:19 PM

marathonman: ignacio; 4 megawatt now that's funny.  9” * 14 =126” Jeje
Modify message

* CF.JPG (33.18 kB, 783x540 - viewed 1 times.)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 02:10:31 PM
Hannon

 That was a hint. If the circle with the bars that the brush rotates around making contact with two bars as it turns around the circle. This should have been enough in itself. As it is apparently not, the source of current taken from a foreign generator or source goes from the brush to the bars and from the bars to specific points along the length of the resister. From the ends of the resister is connected the inducer magnets. As the brush rotates around half of the circle it comes in contact with the bars in order 12345678 always in contact with two bars as it rotates.Then as the brush continues around the second half of the circle the order of contact becomes 87654321. Still in contact with two bars as it sweeps through the movement. The location of contact of the brush to the bars to the resister controls the amount of power going to either set of inducers in the proper amount at the proper time while keeping a force between them all the time while shifting the collision point of the fields in step with the rotating brushes movement. The amount of flux is maintained high at the point of collision and it is moved side to side with only enough movement to cross all the way over and back the distance of the Y coil. It is nearly impossible to depict in a static drawing. mostly it just causes confusion for a number of people. It would be twice as confusing to try and describe or depict with out the resister to show the function of part G.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 12, 2016, 02:22:28 PM
Doug:

Frankly I'm confused. The points 1 and 16 are connected to each other. So when the carbon brush touches points 1 and 2, Electricity goes to points 1,2,15 and 16. Please look at the connecting wires between the points. This is why just 8 wires are shown in the drawing going to the resistors. we have built this exact commutator built here but it needs to touch three points to touch always a minimum of two points and can only rotate slowly to avoid sparking. I concede that it was an effort by the unskilled people at construction but still when they contacts is made to two points current goes to four points and not two. Some how this is not stated.

But there is not much of difference any way as the situation is same regardless of two points or four points as the same thing is repeated. or Does it? If it does please explain it.

In all my efforts at making current when like poles face each other in a straight core have drawn a blank. Like poles generate power only when they secondary is a square with like poles at the corners of the square. Then electricity is generated. Not when it is a straight core. Perhaps I do not know how to do it.  I'm able to get output in a straight core only with opposite poles.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on March 12, 2016, 02:51:10 PM

 NRamaswami said
"I 'm able to get output in a straight core only with opposite poles."
My tests came out the same but I did not try the square setup. Any idea
what the watts in and out were?

I am about to give this up till someone else gets better results. I have tired Flynn,
Kunnel with permanent magnets  and Figuera configurations and had poor results. Like poles gave me real bad watts out and higher wattage in.

I do have enough wire to make that co-wound coil/transformer that
 NRamaswami suggested but will be tied up for a couple weeks.

Norman



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 04:20:36 PM
2nd part

 It makes little difference how the variation is created and this is clearly stated in the patent. Everyone knows a resister wastes power by converting to heat but it is perfectly worthy of describing what and why for the purpose of defining a function. The use of magnetic field blocking was not well known at the time, a time before diodes. You can reference Tesla patent "Direct currents from alternating currents".
  If a current makes a magnetic field and two fields facing each other cancel out each other induction is blocked or cancelled, if blocking is used and a easier path provided current will also be blocked not unlike the result of a diode this is an important part.

  Because you can use a field to block a field if you arrange it correctly. You dont need the resisters if your using fields properly to control the current which is making the fields. This is the lost art because the field stores current in a sense which it can give back and give back with gain if you are creative. While for the purpose of explanation the drawing shows the resister and the bars across the circle it is confusing in an attempt to be not confusing. Even the wires leading from bars to resister were drawn with a squiggle to prevent confusion. The circle is the path the brush travels over the bars/conductors  which is to say very thick conductors which could have been connected directly to the resister with out the use of wires. Makes no sense to use a thinner wire if you are going to need thick bars to handle the current,the wires will burn up. But for the sake of showing the way the brush travels in a circle turned by small motor with a brush that contacts the bars always in contact with more then one bar as it rotates to simulate the very motion of the moving fields like light chaser moving back and forth. It's actually kind of ridiculous no one has tried a programmable light chaser yet but thats nether her nor there.
  In an effort to conserve the power used to establish the magnetic fields in the first place, two things have to happen. First, no absolute reversal,that is to say no inducer is given an ac signal to make it reverse it's magnetic poles.It is too slow and too wasteful. Second as one of the inducers is reducing it's field strength at which time it is returning some current to the system without burning it off as waste. It is returned back into the resister or what ever substitute there is for the resister. After all only a small portion is used to turn the motor and excite the inducers from the output. Where did the rest of it come from once you remove the source and it continues to run indefinitely.( study mag amp proportionality) You don't really think you can pick off enough just from the output do you?  So if you consider there not being the resister except for purpose of describing the function you only have one other way to control the sweeping motion of the fields. For that period of time they used magnetic fields to control bigger magnetic fields not unlike a mag amp although a lot different to look at compared to today's mag amps. Within the space of the rotating brush and its bars is the logical space for a controlling magnetic field by using two fields which cancel each other in one sense to limit the amount of saturation and to enable the action of the rotating brush to be perfectly imitated and split into two separate feeds from one source that alternate in strength. That is to say the bars are actually the turns around a core respectively an EI core with very fat center leg using pretty thick wire just like in a early version mag amp. The two ends of the single winding lead off to the two induces, This was the first version of a variac that was able to fully rotate the brush in the 1800's.In reality it was a wheel. Which was convenient and fortunate ,since it was something few people would ever be exposed to who would have any foresight of what to do with it outside of it's original use. It was aptly named a Carl Ziess transformeter even though it was made by his business partner Abby who needed a way to control the light used in their high magnification microscopes used to study cells of living organisms including plants they way forestry people might when trying to determine some plant disease.The key improvements being the way they made the glass for the lenses and the way they altered the wavelength of the light using a variac and prism's to overcome imperfections of the lenses all done in the mid 1800's. If you mapped out the circle of friends of the people who made up the heads of ziess it's pretty impressive. So hold on to those transformers they might not be worth a damn as the magnets but they make easy controllers. Now if you find you miss the cryptic I am more then willing to return to it as it would have only taken about three sentences of cryptic direction compared to a novel. If you want to get really front row learn how you can use a variac to exceed the source voltage and then consider that advantage in this arrangement.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 04:28:12 PM
This is an old variac but not that old really, it was modified a couple times. Original the wiper ran all the round in the original version. To get it to run with gain the circle traveled by the wiper does not contact the outer most turns ref any manual of a modern variac that can exceed the mains voltage extrapolate and modify.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 04:31:46 PM
Always in contact with more then one of the bars

  Should have a dead give away from the start three years ago.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 04:35:13 PM
 Hannon I told you you would get it in about six months ,your six months expired some time ago. I am tired of waiting watching oil dry is worse then paint.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 12, 2016, 04:37:27 PM
Got sparks? Read a manual for ignition systems and suppress the sparks on the contacts the way the rest of world does or invent something new.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 12, 2016, 05:03:51 PM
ok???????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 12, 2016, 05:11:31 PM
????????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 12, 2016, 05:40:14 PM
Norman..

If you follow the patent exactly you will not easily get past cop>1.What is the principle stated in the patent? Lenz law is cancelled when secondary is placed between two opposing primaries and strength f the two opposing primaries is continuously varied.Now look at this..If you look at a primary coil it has a minimum of two layers..One going down the electromagnet and the other going up..If you extend the secondary coil and place them between these two primaries the strength of the turns of the two layers will continuously vary. Secondary placed inside these two layers will be nearly Lenz free.Now if you connect all three secondaries together your cop would increase.The secret is to make the primary draw as low as poosible and at as high a voltage as possible. For that we need to use thin wires.In AC if you use twisted multifilar wire each whe coil increases the inductive impedance. The coil was originally designed by Tesla to replace capacitors. So a multifilar coil can store a lot of atmospheric electricity and when its capacity is reached will release them suddenly.

There is another point here.. The secondary wire is a thick wire. When a thick secondary is induced by a high voltage carrying thin wire secondary develops high amperage.

When the turns of the secondary are induced without Lenz law the voltage of of secondary keeps increasing based on the turns of secondary voltage applid in primary and magnetic field strength of the core.

Inventors do not want to disclose. Our good friend Doug will only give cryptic advise and how do you expect an inventor not to confuse you or not to be cryptic.

With that said it is a modular device and you needmodules.

Do not saturate the core. Lenz law does not apply but it is dangerous and unsustainable to use that method.

Regards

Ramaswami

Ps: I did not use like poles for it is very cumbersome and more expensive to build.








Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 12, 2016, 06:50:05 PM
 Hello Norman6538, All

No problem. Just buy 150 kg iron (indian soft rods) and 50 kg copper wire (preferably tons=> more output) and follow instructions below    ;D

""Here is a clarification on the COP>8 output obtained.
Reply #2069 on: April 01, 2015, NRamaswami""

""Reply #2070 on: April 04, 2015, NRamaswami
Any way I will post this info here. Patrick Kelly felt that the information is given in several posts of mine and it is difficult for any one to comprehend that. So he has asked me to create a comprehensive file.
* Generator2.pdf (61.72 kB - downloaded 1163 times.) ""
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 12, 2016, 06:56:04 PM
Theory 8) 8) 8) 8)
Practice, Practice, Practice, Practice, :'(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 12, 2016, 07:57:12 PM
Saeed

That document is based on the concept that if we saturate the core Lenz law will not apply which is a fact. Output is then determined by thickness of wire and number of turns of wire in secondary. That will show cop>1 but is pretty useless for sustained operations.
Secondly that information was given from memory and there is an error. It shows series connection of primaries while we have made a parallel connection. So there is an error.


With a parallel primary you can do it. Heavy iron is a must to avoid saturation. Never exceed 1.2 tesla for safe and continued operations. FYI I have a self charging circuit powered by a 9 volt rechargeable battery. Operates at 37 khz and 9 volt. I am using it for more than a year. Battery loses charge but recharges itself if the device turned off in just ten minutes without any external input and gets maximum charge.

It is a pretty old circuit however. This is what convinced me that self oscillating circuit is possible.

If you want light leds then circuits are more than sufficient.

Ignacio..whatever I have written here is based on personal experimental results observed by me.

I am not competent to speak theory.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 12, 2016, 08:32:09 PM
Hannon I told you you would get it in about six months ,your six months expired some time ago. I am tired of waiting watching oil dry is worse then paint.

Forgive me for being so incompetent, or for being lazy and dedicating it few time each weekend. Or for both.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 12, 2016, 08:57:54 PM
I guess i'm the only one that understands mr Doug ,cryptic or not. that was fairly simple explanation.

ignacio; i hate to tell you this but you are loosing out on a lot of induction with your circuit. i think i'll stick with mine.

Rswaml; "Frankly I'm confused. The points 1 and 16 are connected to each other. So when the carbon brush touches points 1 and 2, Electricity goes to points 1,2,15 and 16. Please look at the connecting wires between the points. This is why just 8 wires are shown in the drawing going to the resistors. we have built this exact commutator built here but it needs to touch three points to touch always a minimum of two points and can only rotate slowly to avoid sparking. I concede that it was an effort by the unskilled people at construction but still when they contacts is made to two points current goes to four points and not two. Some how this is not stated".

no currant does not go to 1,2,15,16 because there is nothing to draw currant from 15,16 contacts. the brush makes contact with  1,2  2,3  3,4  4,5  5,6  6,7  7,8 then back again as it spins making the currant varied in each electromagnet high to low and back. what is so difficult about that. do you have no grasp of moving parts ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 12, 2016, 09:42:41 PM
That will show cop>1 but is pretty useless for sustained operations.
Thank you very much for your answer.  You're writing: ""but is pretty useless for sustained operations""  Does this mean that the device produces too much heat, seen from a safety perspective ? What more harmful could happen?
What reply / post  should I look in to find a properly connected and working cop> 8 machine even if it produces too much heat?
BR  Arne    (S e a a d)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 13, 2016, 12:58:02 PM
Thank you very much for your answer.  You're writing: ""but is pretty useless for sustained operations""  Does this mean that the device produces too much heat, seen from a safety perspective ? What more harmful could happen?
What reply / post  should I look in to find a properly connected and working cop> 8 machine even if it produces too much heat?
BR  Arne    (S e a a d)

Many thanks for the post. On principle I do not disclose information that is harmful. Your question what other harm can come is not fair. I cannot answer that. I have elaborately written how I have suffered from swollen feet for months together. Now after taking rest for 10 to 12 hours per day that syndrome is gone. But just imagine that I was working earlier 16 hours a day for many years and when the economy is down I have to sleep for 10 hours a day to avoid the feet from becoming swollen.

The problem is that the electromagnets I made contain a lot of air gaps. Therefore it is neither a pure Iron core nor a pure air core electromagnet.  I did not know but when a client and his wife visited me, it turned out the wife of client is a retired Magnetics Professor from IIT Madras and she has studied in Geneva in a University there. She strongly criticized me for not providing for magnetic shielding of large electromagnets.

What I have done is fairly simple. I made two 30 kgm primary magnets and one 15 kgm secondary in between. The secondary wire went under the primary wire in the primary closer to the core and we gave the quadfilar wires power. The Primary coils were arranged in NS-NS-NS configuation and the input was 220 volts and 7 amps. The primaries went like this. ----> Secondary<-----

We find that we can get COP>1 arrangement in this method both in series and in parallel. But when you do it in series the winding has to be very high and the COP>1 does not come until the secondary voltage is 360+ volts and then it suddenly it jumps to 600+. I have made controlled arrangements and brought the voltage up to 500 volts to be measured or 490 volts but could not measure the output amperage. 

I would sincerely advise you to avoid this kind of experiments. If you want COP>1 to 1000 you only need to increase the modules.

Safety tips: Primary magnetic field strength maximum 0.6 Tesla and secondary 1.2 Tesla

Device will be inefficient.

Remember that primaries are parallel and secondary is series.

If you use a thin very thin primary wire you can provide high voltage and low amps alone would be consumed. But if the secondary wire is placed between the layers of the two primary wires on the same core, with the two primary wire on the same core being parallel to each other you have the secondary subjected to multiple primaries in parallel. Such a secondary wire develops amperage when it is touched by a high voltage primary wire.

Secondary gets induction both due to Flux linking and flux cutting. The Lenz law effect is cancelled or minimized on the secondary in all places for the Primary coils exert emf vertically as I type this from top to bottom and bottom to top on the same core.  On the secondary the emf is ----> S<----- and backemf is <-----S----> and so the backemfs cancel out each other. This is in theory. In practice the lenz law effect can be seen till we reach COP>1.

However the Lenz law effect disappears when the secondary voltage is higher  than the primary voltage and secondary amperage is higher than the primary amperage. This is easily achieved by using a thicker secondary wire.

If you look at Daniel McFarland Cook he describes it clearly. He states that the insulation plays a major role. Other friends tell me that the Multifilar coils are capable of storing current like capacitors and that they must be twisted very well. But we have only used the coils in a twisted way from the beginning. The advice that I get is that it is better to put as thick an insulation between layers of multifilar coils as the coils themselves to store a lot of static energy. I'm advised that this enables the coils to store current from air like capacitors and so the input amperage drawn is low. I do not know but as the number of wires in the multifilar coils goes up the amperage drawn is very less. Also as the wire of primary is made thinner and thinner the amperage drawn is lesser and lesser.

I'm not sure about how all this works. 

The Earth Generator point is one thing that you do not appear to have understood clearly. I do not know if you have done it.

Earth points are here made in a 10 to 12 feet deep pit and then an iron pipe is rammed in and then it is surrounded by charcoal, (carbon), salt and another ingredient I have forgotten and then just one inch of the pipe is visible over the earth. After filing up the earth point like this then it is again covered with Earth and four bricks are built around it to mark the point. If you build another similar earth and measure the voltage difference between the two points it would be about 0.2 volts. When artificial high voltage is given to these two earth points there is a reaction between iron, carbon and salt and this releases chemical energy which is converted to electricity. So more amperage comes. The iron pipe must be of a type which will not get corroded. If the corrosion sets in the earth points do not work.

But you really do not need earth points to achieve COP>1 or 1000. You need lot of iron to remain within the safety margin. Primary iron weight is twice or more the secondary iron weight and this makes the magnetic field in the secondary to be higher than the primary naturally. And then you only need to build lot of modules for the secondary voltage to increase. Amperage increases in a thick secondary along with the voltage.  It is very simple really.

Do not make small devices and give lot of currents. Even if you do that remain within the safety limits and ensure that the electromagnetic shielding is there. I hope you recognize why I'm building huge cores.

Once you understand this it is very simple. 


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 13, 2016, 01:57:29 PM
--> NRamaswami
Thank you again for your answer.
Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2016, 08:22:03 PM
Blind leading the Blind.
it is amassing what a little self research will do for one's outlook and perspective.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 13, 2016, 10:11:42 PM
My tests done this weekend. Two sets with S-S configuration, and aislant between cores and powered with the diodes configuration. Input half waves 12 volts, between 0.4 and 3.1A. Output: AC type signal with 12.9 volts and a load of 12 ohms, therefore output of 12 watts for an input of around 30 watts
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 13, 2016, 11:14:10 PM
Hi Hanon!

For better power consumption estimate you could just put a watt meter before the transformer and see what it shows.

Keep experimenting! ... will post my results soon.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 13, 2016, 11:25:40 PM
¿Es esto lo que decías?
Is this what you said?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2016, 11:32:52 PM
it seems your circuit changes quite often.

Hanon keep up the good work, still waiting for usb cable....not long now.

Doug here is a pic of interest that could help some.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on March 13, 2016, 11:52:45 PM
¿Es esto lo que decías?
Is this what you said?

I had no interest in commenting on this  thread as I figured I would let the leaders of this thread work there idea's out. Hopefully they succeed! HOWEVER when I see members, such as ignacio start posting a very lame wiring diagram that is basically a complete ripoff of my circuit found at the link below then I must comment.

http://overunity.com/16425/self-sustaining-electricity-generator/msg476421/#msg476421 (http://overunity.com/16425/self-sustaining-electricity-generator/msg476421/#msg476421)

Snake, I don't mind that you use my circuit and hope that you find the anomalies I found. I ask that you give credit to the originator of the circuit. You have been posting the same lame circuit for some time. Now you added a capacitor after I claimed that a capacitor offsets the phase 90 degrees. I have already posted all the information in the above link. I ask that you call it the "Core Circuit"  going forward.

Please don't go thinking you have the intelligence to come up with something so elegant and simple. 

-Core

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 14, 2016, 12:25:03 AM
Core, I have seen Ignacio posting capacitors in between electromagnets months ago, maybe more than a year ago. You may check the posts list. Anyway your circuit is with N-S poles. You may check the last two pages and see the real polarity which is debated here. We are here to learn not to  claim property. I also wish you the best.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 14, 2016, 01:02:34 AM
núcleo: esto es, desviar una fase, en un motor trifásico, no hay que poner ningún nombre, es algo cotidiano, puedes buscar en Internet. ( la electricidad en el cobre, es como una manguera de agua, la desvías para donde quieras.
Este es el foro de Clemente Figuera.

núcleo: that is, a phase shift in a three-phase motor, do not put any name, it is an everyday thing, you can search the Internet. (Electricity, copper is like a water hose, the veer to where you want.
This is the forum Clemente Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 14, 2016, 01:37:25 AM
Hannon: el diseño de núcleo, no se parece en lo mas mínimo, al que he puesto yo, por lo menos en el aspecto eléctrico, físico y matemático. Es totalmente diferente. Gracias,
Hannon: nucleo design, does not seem in the least, when I put in it, at least in the electrical, physical and mathematical aspect. It's totally different. Thank you,
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2016, 03:20:15 AM
Core;
 you claiming a cap offsets 90 degrees, well everyone that knows anything about electronics knows this  so for you to claim this is insane. i posted for Randy a year and a half ago  a circuit of the same so if i claimed you ripped me off would be insane.
I am asking you please lets not bicker, argue or what ever. lets just do this together as human beings should.
i have made a lot of mistakes in this forum toward people and for that i am truely sorry, words can not even express how i feel but for now please lets try to get along.

we wont even have a life as we know it soon so i decided to enjoy other people and listen to there ideas.
some will just not work for the Figuera device and others will. some still don't even know how the device works and others do, in the long run we are still in this together whether we like it or not.

A voltage source and a series connected variable resistor may be regarded as a direct current signal source for a low resistance load such as the control coil of a saturable reactor which amplifies the signal. Thus, in principle, a saturable reactor is already an amplifier, although before 20th century they were used for simple tasks, such as controlling lighting and electrical machinery as early as 1885.

Things that make you go Humm !

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 14, 2016, 09:18:55 AM
Hanon:

Good work to see that you now have two modules. Did you test the NS configuration and what are the results?  We are in March and so I will build one more configuration and test and will post results.

Dear All:

Can any one give me instructions on how to build Tesla primary? What is the minimum voltage for the spark to fire continuously? What is the capacitor rating and wire rating for resistance and for voltage and amps?

Is a Neon Lamp work like an encapsulated spark plug? Can it be used to avoid the spark plug? Please advise.

Thanks. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: oscar on March 14, 2016, 10:54:06 AM
Hi hanon,

thanks for posting the results of your tests.
I think I understand the supply circuit you use and the fact that you work with 50 Hz frequency of the normal electricity network in your county.
So, if one full cycle of your 50 Hz mains supply is 0.02 seconds long, then the duration of one pulse hitting your primaries is half of this which is 0.01 seconds.

Is this correct so far?

And do you agree that (in accordance with Farady's law which states that the output depends on the rate of change):
if this pulse was shorter you would get more output?

And do you also agree that such a shorter pulse or quicker rate of change in a proper Figuera setup would be achieved by the commutator being run at a higher speed?

PS I am aware that there are more factors which influence the results but do you agree so far?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 14, 2016, 08:55:10 PM
Marathon Man; y todos, and everyone
Hay una diferencia clara en los esquemas o “diseños”, Núcleo usa, onda completa (perdidas por calor (bueno, cocina inducción) (histéresis)), y en C. F., usamos solo un lado de la onda, sin tener que, cambiar  la polaridad del electroimán, alimentado. También, Tesla (usando válvulas, no condensadores) y todos los demás.
There is a clear difference in the schemes or "designs" Core uses, full-wave (lost heat (well, kitchen induction) (hysteresis)) and CF, use only one side of the wave, without having to change the polarity of the electromagnet, fed. Also, Tesla (using valves, no capacitors) and all others.
Me he dado cuenta, que las anomalías, que detecto con su configuración, es debida, a que no calculo el Angulo Phi, (para el condensador).
I've noticed that the anomalies that detect its configuration, is due, not to calculate the angle Phi (for the condenser).
Lo anterior le vale para el y los que siguen ese apartado.
Vale mucho, conocer a las persona.
Y si, yo soy poco inteligente.
A mi solo me interesa, de donde emana el exceso de electricidad, en C. F.
That is true for you and those who follow this section.
Worth much, know the person.
And yes, I'm unintelligent.
I really only interested, from which emanates excess electricity in C. F.
Marathon Man: solo es cambiar, cables, de posición, es jugar, con la electricidad.
                           : is only change, cables, position, is playing with electricity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 14, 2016, 09:06:45 PM
 Marathon Man : Ignacio; Odio decir esto, pero usted está perdiendo a cabo en una gran cantidad de inducción con su circuito. Creo que me quedo con la mía.
                             : ignacio; i hate to tell you this but you are loosing out on a lot of induction with your circuit. i think i'll stick with mine.
« Reply #3275 on: ¿Es esto lo que decías?
Is this what you said?
Je Je
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: mikemongo on March 15, 2016, 12:07:53 AM
@Hanon
Nice work.
I think you are only utilizing half the EMF force of the inducers by not having induced coils on the outside of
them. 

I'm not sure what size the outer coils should be, but I think you would significantly boost the output of your configuration.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 15, 2016, 12:25:02 AM
Hi hanon,

thanks for posting the results of your tests.
I think I understand the supply circuit you use and the fact that you work with 50 Hz frequency of the normal electricity network in your county.
So, if one full cycle of your 50 Hz mains supply is 0.02 seconds long, then the duration of one pulse hitting your primaries is half of this which is 0.01 seconds.

Is this correct so far?

And do you agree that (in accordance with Farady's law which states that the output depends on the rate of change):
if this pulse was shorter you would get more output?

And do you also agree that such a shorter pulse or quicker rate of change in a proper Figuera setup would be achieved by the commutator being run at a higher speed?

PS I am aware that there are more factors which influence the results but do you agree so far?

Oscar, I think that I understand your questions and I agree so far. But I think that is not only the frequency  but beating Lenz out of the system. If the frequency is increased but Lenz is still there wont be much higher output. Figuera used a simple rotary commutator with a small motor, so he was using surely less than 3000 rpm

I attach the waveform of one of the driving signals just using the 2 diodes without any resistor between them. I measured voltage along a 0.47 ohm resistor, so that you may convert the reading to amperes. Each division in the Y axis are 500 mV. The second signal you may guess it to be 180° unphased. Zero voltage is the thick black short line below the trace . Intensity was varying from 0.7 A to around 3.3 A. Perfect shape   ;)  Why not to use this signal if it is so good?
(Forget the ghost trace, it was not the second signal, it was just the movement of the first signal in the scope screen)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 15, 2016, 03:09:29 PM
an inductive voltage divider is much more efficient than a resistive voltage divider, diodes not needed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on March 15, 2016, 04:48:53 PM
Guys after all the thinking, C.F. device is similar to Muller Dynamo.. IMHO..  ;D
I wonder what RomeroUK would say...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 15, 2016, 07:08:44 PM
Not even close NoyPi, if you were to study both set ups they are in dif league.


Here is something to ponder on.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 15, 2016, 09:31:13 PM
This last weekend I also tested with NS polarity using the driving signals from the two diodes. The induction was really poor, just 0.7 volts for a load of 12 ohms. Surprisingly the frequency of the output signal was doubled, instead of output at 50 Hz, output was at 100 Hz..¿??? I guess the induction of each electromagnet was mainly working in a different sense and I was just watching some residual current due to some imbalance in the two sets device.

Summary: much better induction with likes poles confronted (see results in a previous post: 12.9 volts)  than opposite poles (0.7 volts) using the two unphased signals creates with the two diodes in the inducers.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 16, 2016, 07:24:01 AM
Hanon:

What is the shape of your cores that you have not shown?

The only way you can obtain these results is by making small diameter long primary core and large diameter and short in length secondary. This is not indicated in the 1908 design. With NN polarity this core structure will capture all the dissipating magnetism and with NS the magnetism will become weak. You are not showing the core structure here..Please let me know what is the core structure.

This is again not going to be as efficient as a large primary small secondary NS pole configuration. Both I and Saeed have the same results. Marathonman who is so kind enough to call us both blind himself had to concede that the quadfilar wire is capable of saturating the core. Since the Figuera long pole type requires a lot of iron I'm shifting to the Cater Hubbard design which I have learnt to built. Principles are common any way.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: oscar on March 16, 2016, 08:26:32 AM
Hi hanon,
thanks for your reply and the additional information, but I do not understand your statement:
... I think that is not only the frequency  but beating Lenz out of the system.
The law of induction as discovered by Farady dictates that double the frequency will cause double the output.
Do you agree?
What makes you think that double the frequency won't lead to double the output straight away? Or to put it as a joke: "Why don't you speed up the commutator?"

What exactly is the problem you anticipate, regarding Lenz's rule or the Lenz  force?
In my understanding the Lenz effect (magnetic field of the induced opposing the one of the inducer) results in an opposing MECHANICAL force. A force opposing the MOVEMENT or rotation in electroMECHANICAL generators / dynamos / alternators, making it hard to turn these types of machines.
But in your setup there are no moving parts and in Figuera's setup only the commutator is moving. And in your and Figuera's setup the necessary mechanical force to keep the electromagnets from vibrating - as they will attract and repell each other -  is provided by the fixed positioning of the coils. So what problem does the Lenz force cause, in your oppinion? Can you be more specific?

And another question, if you allow: Why is the frequency of our electricity grids 50 or 60 Hz? Why not a higher or lower frequency? Do you have an opinion on this question?

Dear hanon, I hope to give you my answers to these questions and how they relate to the Figuera riddle. But maybe you can answers me first.
;-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 16, 2016, 09:00:38 AM
Oscar:

I think the Lenz law effect is present in motionless systems in the form of backemf.

Earlier in a solenoid I had a quadfilar primary and a single wire secondary. Both are 4 sq mm. 220 volts and 50 Hz. The quadfilar consumed 220 volts and 15 amps. The secondary produced 300 volts and 10 amps on load. The solenoid was iron core.

I can use a Neon lamp in the primary and use a fast charging and discharging RUN capacitor in series and slow charging and discharging capacitor in parallel along with high ohm resistor in series. Neon lamp is a spark plug and so will increase the frequency. Please provide the ratings for the capacitor in series and capacitors in parallel. I can test the device and find out in practical experiment what is the value of frequency and whether the Lenz effect is there or not.

High frequency is said to heat up the Iron core and so the core will have to be much bigger than at lower Hertz.

Low frequency may not be as efficient as high frequency for the same reasons you provide and Low frequency at 8 to 10 Hz can also resonate with Earths magnetic field and can cause health problems as well. A high voltage line carrying 50 or 60 Hz is said to cause cancers to people living near the line and constructing buildings are prohibited near high voltage power lines for this reason.

Aircraft are said to use 400 Hz but beyond that the wires and the iron core are said to heat up. But I really do not know the answer to this question and I can test and find out high frequency has on input and output. I do practical experiments and then find out and do not accept theoretical statements from any one.

It is possible that high frequency can cause the core to heat up very much and so much larger core may be needed. In so far as the rotary device is concerned if we increase the number of contacts to 100 then for one Revolution per second we have 50 Hz output or for 60 RPM we will have 50 Hz and by increasing the number of contact points or by increasing the Revolutions or by increasing both we can increase the frequency. It is not difficult to do. A spark plug cum resistor in series and a capacitor  in series and in parallel combination can do it much more easily.

Please provide the capacitor values and let me test and tell you the results.  Thank you. I do not accept theoretical statements and test and find out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 16, 2016, 05:51:39 PM
 Quote; "had to concede that the quadfilar wire is capable of saturating the core".

Sorry to spoil your parade but i Never said that as any one know with enough currant it will saturate a core.
also the statement about 7 hz being dangerous....you need a little more study in that area as this is incorrect.
also your statement about 400 hz is incorrect as some planes use up to 2800 hz again you need a little more research in that area as the use of high frequency allows for reduced size transformers.

Quote; "I think the Lenz law effect is present in motionless systems in the form of back emf".

This is absolutely correct as the declining electromagnet puts energy back into the system in the rotating part G of his system as i was so informed. see Figuera did not side step  lenz's law he counted on it to feed energy back into the system in the form of stored magnetic energy in part G from each electromagnet in the declining phase. as each electromagnet declines it feeds energy back into the system to replace only the losses though heat and wire loss which is very little.
the use of diodes will not let the system feed energy back into the system it block it.


MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 16, 2016, 05:57:19 PM
Bueno, a ver si me se explicar:
La electricidad viaja, en un solo sentido, (hay o no hay). ¡!!La ca sigue la electricidad, viajando en una sola dirección!!! Solo que, en un momento, viaja en una, y luego viaja, en la otra dirección. El problema es la que llamamos “negativa”, (al igual, el frió no existe, solo existe la disminución de calor, o disminución de vibraciones)
>>“todos” los aparatos de esa generación, que dan sobre unidad, se basan, en que se alimentan los (electroimanes) inductores, con una señal de corriente, en un único sentido, (ya que la c. alterna, va en ambos sentido, se ha de separar, cada dirección, para cada modulo (modulo = 2 electroimanes 1 inducida) (no electroimán de cada modulo).
>>Si usamos dos electroimanes, mientras uno atrae (con electricidad en una dirección) la inducida, la otra esta al mínimo, luego el electroimán opuesto (con la misma dirección de electricidad) atraerá la inducida, (eso debe estar claro). Así se evita, que haya que esperar la orientación del núcleo, produciendo calor, en él (cocinas de inducción).
>> Según el voltaje que usemos para alimentar: tenemos que con 12v 4amp =48watt, con 48v solo 1amp =48watt y si con 110volt 0.436amp = watt
Según el amperaje, solo pongo el de 110volt a 3amp =330watt ) con un reóstato se puede regular, subir y bajar el amperaje (yo con dos vasos de agua)
>>Viendo unos dibujos antiguos, que tenia guardados, donde se resalta la diferencia de la onda de C. F. y la semi-onda de corriente alterna (usando solo una dirección de la corriente) se puede observar, que la onda de C. F. es bastante más eficiente, que la semi-onda de ca.
Pongo el dibujo. Que sea más eficiente, no quiere decir, que no funcione con la semi-onda.
Well, see if I explain:
Electricity travels in one sense (to be or no to be?). !AC The electricity traveling in one direction! at one point he travels in one direction, and then travels in the other direction. The problem is what we call "negative" (as the cold does not exist, there is only the reduction of heat, or decreased vibration )
>> "All" these devices of this generation, which give over unity, they are based on the (electromagnets) feed inductors with a current signal, in one direction, (since AC, It goes both ways, They must be separated, each direction, in each module (1 induced electromagnets = 2) (not electromagnet of each module).
>> If we use two electromagnets, while one you attract (with electricity in one direction) induced, the other, this the minimum, then the opposite (same address electricity) induced attract electromagnet (it should be clear). This prevents, it will have to wait the orientation of the core, generates heat, it (induction cookers).
>> According to the voltage we use to power: we have with 12v 4amp = 48w;; 1 amp 48v =48watt; and if with 0.436amp 110volt = 48watt
Depending on the amperage, just put the one to 3amp 110volt = 330watt ) with a rheostat can be adjusted, raise and lower the amperage (I with electrodes on two glasses of water)
>> Viewing some old drawings, which had saved, where the difference wave CF is highlighted and the half-wave of alternating current (using only one direction of flow) it can be seen that the wave of CF is much more efficient, that the half wave of ca.
I put the drawing. Make it more efficient, does not mean not work with the semi-wave.
I hope I explained
 :'( :P :'(
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 16, 2016, 07:23:28 PM
Soy persona rural, agraria, sin cultura científica, un burro.
Soy un charlatán.
I am a rural, agrarian person without scientific culture, a donkey.
I'm a charlatan.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 16, 2016, 09:46:34 PM
It has nothing to do with half wave at all. Figuera's devise is using DC so there is no phase BS to deal with. he simply takes one electromagnet up as one is taken down to compensate for the loss of one very strong AC wave plain and simple because the declining electromagnet is still adding to the gaining electromagnet in the form of feeding the system. if your intelligence  can't handle that well i can't help that as that is your demon not mine.
just because you made it work doesn't mean it is efficient as it can be, yes you have it working but not Figuera style. you still haven't included ANY research to back it up just conjecture so i guess we are equal in that aspect. Diode block the recharging of the system that is why it is self sustaining ie... BOTH electromagnet working in unison not separate.
go ahead and keep your Diodes i applaud you but i will keep mine.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on March 16, 2016, 10:58:25 PM

they Rheotomes in the 1800s ,  tesla diagram fig2 , T = capacitor , S = rheotome , on the left is another , these are not commutators but easily called commutator today
Robert Adams motor used a rheptome with copper segments and adjustable brushes

shhows adjustable brushes on both instruments
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Canadian_patent_142352.png 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippolyte_Pixii
it says DC pulse was preferred over AC .

DC interupters dont give reversal but expand and colapsing field

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 16, 2016, 11:59:04 PM
Hi oscar,

I agree. In Figuera generator doubling the frequency could double the output, but just because it is a system designed to reduce the Lenz effect and it does not require motion. In this case it is supposed that more frequency more output. But this is not the case always: in common transformers doubling the frequency will not give extra output, because Lenz is increased with higher frequencies. I said that supposedly Figuera just used small frequencies arounf 50 Hz and he was getting 20000 watts from 100 watts input. So no high frequencies should be required to get the juice.

I do not know why the frequency of our AC is 50Hz or 60Hz. I do  ot know the reason behind those numbers

The results I have shown correspond to the setup on my post from the 13rd of March. Coils with 300 turns with wire  1 mm diameter. Core diameter 90 mm, coil length 50 mm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 17, 2016, 12:10:54 AM
massive;  i am assuming you mean rheostat not (rheotome) or (reptome).

Quote; "DC interupters dont give reversal but expand and colapsing field"

basically yes,  and that is what Figuera did with his electromagnet powered with DC. as the declining electromagnet is in the declining phase the inclining electromagnet basically shoves the declining electromagnet back into the core allowing it to recharge the system in the form of magnetic field in part G which is a cored Rheostat or Variac used with DC. yes, look it up a Vaiac can be used with DC but they call it a RHEOSTAT and that's is exactly what Figuera did.

the two companies i have narrowed it down to that built the part G was Otto and one from Doug was Zeiss. they are the most prominent companies in Germany at the time and they built precision Variacs and Rheostats not Resistors.

imagine that !

Clemente Figuera was a Genius.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on March 17, 2016, 01:54:07 AM
Rheostat supposedly invented by charles wheatstone 1843 , Rheotome possibly invented by Hippolyte Pixii 1832, he was an instrument maker

Tesla patent I linked has a basic diagram and Robert Adams used similar design in his motors

Rheotome is a component that has been lost from vocab of science

Rheo = current , Tome = break
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 17, 2016, 04:39:22 AM
So now that the history lessen is over what is your point about Figuera i don't all ready know??? please so clue me in.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 17, 2016, 07:14:08 AM
Marathonman:

Thanks for the guiding notes..I stand better informed. Well..

I have one more doubt.

When give current to electromagnets connected in series we have seen that the voltage applied is divided among the number of electromagnet inducers. For example if we give 220 volts to 2 electromagnets in series, the voltage on each inducer becomes 110 volts.

Now I believe that the situation is the reverse for induced electromagnets. The voltage of induced electromagnets when connected in series adds up. This is why Figuera connected the Secondary in series.

Am I right in this assumption or wrong? Please advise. How does this happen? Can you explain.

How the Voltage knows that it is induced voltage and so adds up and inducing voltage and so divides..How does this happen? Can you please clarify?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 17, 2016, 05:06:52 PM
NRamaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 17, 2016, 05:08:25 PM
Circuitos resonantes
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 17, 2016, 05:52:25 PM

Below is what Figuera used in his device except the power was introduced to the system through a copper slip ring through the top rotating brush and two taps at the bottom on both sides one for set N and on the opposite side one for set S.
No resistors were used in the Figuera device at all.

everyone is taking the picture in Figueras Patent literally, it states that it is only to get a idea of what is going on in part G. please read again ... there is no resistors in figuera's device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 17, 2016, 06:11:48 PM
Thanks Ignacio Thanks Marathonman..

Does this mean for pulsed dc when it is iduced and connected in series voltage will add up.

Would this apply even to inducers or only to induced?
please explain this diubt also. I am grateful for the answers.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 17, 2016, 06:28:01 PM
OK; marathonman
OJO - EYE
Hay dos tipos de reóstatos. Reóstatos que tienen resistencia continuamente variable y reóstatos [...
There are two types of rheostats. Continuously variable resistors having resistance and rheostats [...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 17, 2016, 07:38:38 PM
Ignacio: trace the dates and time back to Germany then decide for your self.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 17, 2016, 07:48:27 PM
 Marathon Man : Thank
NRamaswami:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 17, 2016, 08:59:48 PM
--> All
--> np  ;) ,  --> Natarajan  8)

A quote from an 'Oern' : "" If there is really magic in the CF device then it seems that we not yet even started to identify & vary the parameter(s) which hold the secret ""  And I (seaad) agree with this

From the patent:
" We will add also a rotating brush which is always touching more than one contact.
(so that the brush is always in contact with two of the commutator bars)
Now well, as one end of the resistor is connected to the electro-magnets N,
and the other is connected to the S, results in that when the brush is
connected with the first contact, the current goes all to the N electro-magnets,
and at the same time, the S are empty..   .. When the brush is connected to the second
contact, the current no longer goes all to the N,"
   s e a a d
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 18, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Arne, Marathonman and Ignacio:

Thanks for your explanations. I'm afraid that I have not correctly communicated my doubt.

When Electricity is given as inducing current in multiple primaries connected in series the voltage is divided. I know this from experience. When Primaries are in parallel the voltage does not divide but remains the same. This produces an increased effect on secondaries.

When Electricity is induced in secondaries connected in series the voltage does not divide but adds up.

Simply Electricity already produced and given to a coil in series gets divided. Electricity produced by magnetic flux in coils connected in series adds up the voltage.

Now my doubt is what causes this particular change in behaviour? How does the electricity know that it is inducing current or induced current. Please do not mistake me. This is very confusing really.

I have seen that an iron core has a particular point beyond which magnetism cannot be made stronger there. But if the iron rods air gap arrangement is present as in the devices made by me, Gyulasen earlier explained that the magnetic flux storage available in the air gaps can be as high as 24 times in the iron core itself. This explains why my rods did not melt and the devices did not catch fire.

But my biggest problem that lack of knowledge does not permit me to understand is that inducing Electricity is different  from induced electricity. They conduct themselves differently. I'm able to see from practical experiments that magnetism is kind of gas. But why and how Electricity behaves differently is not clear to me.  The explanations you have given me are factual observations. I have also made these observations. But I am not able to understand the How and why of this strange character of Electricity.

It is only because I determined that Magnetism is like a gas I felt that stronger magnetic field can be created in the smaller central secondary but I'm not able to understand the way Electricity conducts itself. The conduct changes based on whether it is inducing current or induced current. This is some thing not in the books but I'm also not able to understand. This is for what I wanted your insight.

Regards,

Ramaswami
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: oscar on March 18, 2016, 08:31:58 AM
Hi hanon,
thanks for your answers to my questions.
Here is my thinking on the topics "Faraday's Law" and "50/60 Hz":
In order to exploit the aspect of Faraday's law that x-times the frequency (turning the Figuera-commutator faster) will lead to x-times the output,  Figuera had to overcome a problem:
...High frequency is said to heat up the Iron core ...
That is correct
...so the core will have to be much bigger than at lower Hertz.
That is not the solution because with a bigger core more input-power is needed to magnetize it and so one meets the same problem again.

So theoretically it should be possible to get more output by raising the frequency but there is this practical problem. To find a solution let's look at one single cycle, when a single inductor gets energized by a single inducer:
The iron core gets magnetically polarized while the voltage in the primary rises.
The core gets magnetized.
Let's call this the first half of a cycle.
During the second half-cycle, electrical power will be created in the secondary. while the magnetization of the iron core subsides. At the same time, the voltage in the primary returns to zero.
This is true regardless of whether the primary is energized with a half wave of AC or a pulse of DC.

The faster you repeat this, the more output you will get in accordance with Faraday's law.
But once you reach frequencies above 60 Hz the output does not continue to rise. You meet a kind of barrier. The core heats up. Why?
Well, because it takes time for the core to de-magnetize (while the voltage in the primary returns to zero and the voltage in the secondary rises). If you hit the core with the next pulse of energy before the magnetization of the previous cycle has decayed - creating output in the secondary -  the energy of all subsequent pulses accumulates in the coil creating heat and no electrical output.

The natural amount of time this demagnetization requires, is an inherent characteristic of iron. Scientifically it is expressed as "Hysteresis".

I think Figuera discovered a trick, that made it possible for him to raise the frequency and get around the mentioned limitation of the iron core.
He supplied a higher frequency than 50 Hz.
But not to one single set of primary and secondary. Instead he used several sets and divided the high frequency among them in such a way, that each set was running at 50 Hz.

He used his commutator two-fold: To create the frequency from a source of DC (Battery) and it also served as a distributor, i.e. as  a frequency divider. Like a distributor of a petrol engine.

An example for the principle: If his commutator would be capable of supplying 400 Hz he would use eight sets. So each one would run at circa 50 Hz.

PS I have not built this. It just occurred to me following various postings of this forum.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on March 18, 2016, 09:00:57 AM

Good catch, seaad!  Nice quote & illustration relating to the patent  ☺

Wrt frequency of operation, oscar, NR, the magnetic BH curve has constant losses around the loop - important to remember this, since these particular losses will just increase linearly with frequency - choice of frequency will be a trade-off of several factors, it seems

thanks
np
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 18, 2016, 03:27:57 PM
 The quote from the Patent has been quoted many, many times so the actual point he was getting to eludes me.
there are no actual resistors in the Figuera device. the drawing was just used to get the point across not literally and even says so in the patent

Quote;
He used his commutator two-fold: To create the frequency from a source of DC (Battery) and it also served as a distributor, i.e. as  a frequency divider. Like a distributor of a petrol engine.

The commutator or part G has FOUR-FOLD;
1.  to create frequency from DC source.
2. to split the currant between primaries.
3. to store the energy kicked back into the system from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary core. the part G has a core that stores energy in the form of magnetic field that allows it to be self running replacing the losses from heat and wire losses which are small because the currant in the primaries are always the same direction.
4. Self regulation.

the use of diodes and transistors will block  the inductive kickback and not let the system store it magnetically rendering it incapable of being self running.

 anyone on this forum can trace back the time frame of the purchase and the companies involved in Germany it will easily be narrowed down to the device used but if you prefer to remain in your present state of mind well so be it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 18, 2016, 04:35:51 PM
marathonman:> but if you prefer to remain in your present state of mind well so be it.
Parece, que hablamos el mismo idioma.
It seems, we speak the same language.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 18, 2016, 08:58:17 PM
Quote from Patent:
To assist in understanding this idea, it is convenient to refer to the attached drawing which is no more than a
sketch intended to assist in understanding the operation of the machine built to implement the principle outlined
above.
Self Fucking explanitory !

Now on this pic below show me the Diodes, show me the caps and while your at it Show me the resistors.

A quote from an 'Oern' : "" If there is really magic in the CF device then it seems that we not yet even started to identify & vary the parameter(s) which hold the secret ""

Its quite obvious this person has not done ANY active research on the Figuera device AT ALL.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on March 19, 2016, 02:58:33 AM
Lots of good info here.

Going back to the fifties and sixties when I done radio and tv repair.
There were still some areas back then that were using 25 hertz for power.
 I can still remember those heavy bulky power transformers used in some of
those old black & white tv's. They were about twice the size of today's 60 cycle units.
    Another thing to keep in mind is that the old tube audio amplifiers all used
iron core transformers that had to deal with frequencies of 100 to 15000 hz.

Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on March 19, 2016, 03:12:50 AM
Yes, I think so Cliff. Especially if you read the 1914 patent. I believe its all there (IMHO).
CF device is consist of two systems and with in this resonance must exist between them.
Thanks to all put there effort.. I believe its only a matter of time that someone will show
his working device...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on March 19, 2016, 11:44:57 AM
http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/dlattach/attach/156294/
Show me the resistors.
Hi MM, is that not just a variable resistor?
The energy kickback ,Do you believe it can be positive sign and negative sign?
Thanks artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 19, 2016, 01:15:36 PM
For those who think that they rediscovered the key:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-10.html#post223105 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-10.html#post223105)


Can you predate that post?

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your souces"  (Einstein).   I guess who inspired to Einstein...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 19, 2016, 01:28:56 PM
--> NoyPi-
-->marathonman

Quote; NoyPi:  Reply #3320 on: Today  ""I believe its only a matter of time that someone will show his working device.""

  I did.  A Full report,  Reply #3163 on: February 23, 2016; seaad   and   NRamaswami have also told us severel times. (But not genuine Figuera devices??? IMHO Nobody living today have seen a true Figuera made device!)


Quote; marathonman:  Reply #3032 on: January 26, 2016    ""cks,   i have a two section unit that has produced overunity   but ill be G ""
 marathonman; Pls send us a report of your OU device with; measured electrical values, drawings, commutator units or similar, coils and circuit diagrams! A full report similar to mine.

Then all the misunderstandings (from us inexperted) will disappear!
Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on March 19, 2016, 03:09:11 PM

Quote; marathonman:  Reply #3032 on: January 26, 2016    ""cks,   i have a two section unit that has produced overunity   but ill be G ""

Les deux ballons d'air chaude?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on March 19, 2016, 03:15:03 PM
seaad, I think that's not going to happen, almost a full disclosure? think again. If I remember, RomeroUK was
the one who almost gave it. But for some reason he change his mind.
I'll be happy if someone could show a video of his working device, a close loop probably, just like everyone else, who done it. And to inspire someone just like me to build this device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 19, 2016, 04:02:09 PM
person<---> people
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 19, 2016, 06:47:33 PM
I'm increasingly concerned that in this thread the attitude is becoming if you do not agree with what we say or report any thing to the contrary even if they are factual observations you are not with us.

I believe that the only commutator that was ever displayed in this thread is the commutator video shown by me. At that time Doug1 asked why redo the same device? That is what prompted me along with my failure in building the proper commutator to try with device that will avoid the commutator totally.

Figuera patent shows three modules Two modules of Primary magnets having primaries connected in parallel. Within each of these modules themselves the primary electromagnets are connected in series. The secondary is the middle module of many electromagnets connected in series.

It took time for me to recognize that if all the electromagnets are connected in parallel then the effect on secondary would be an amplifying effect. This happens when we use the NS-NS-NS polarties. The Primaries are here equal and opposite in power.

The other thought process holds that the electromagnets should be powered up and down and one of them should be weaker than the other always and this thought process holds that it is necessary to use only identical poles. Here the two opposing electromagnets are never equal but always oppose each other. Opposition is through identical but strong and weak poles. MM insists that to test this set up the commutator is needed. Unfortunately I'm not successful there. Since I have found an alternative and working method and since the poles are not disclosed in the Figuera patent admittedly I have used only opposite poles.

I have interpreted that they will vary in intensity always to mean that the movement of electricity is first like ------>S<-------- and then like
 <--------S--------->. There is a continuous variation.

I have to concede that while it meets party the Figuera concept because there is no commutator that it is not a true Figuera Replication.

When the secondary is induced by many primary coils connected in parallel, the inducing primary does not suffer from voltage drop and consequently the induced emf of the secondary is higher. As a result the amperage of the secondary is also higher if the secondary is a thick wire with low resistance or low impedance. Secondly the asymmetric transformer core design where the primaries compress their magnetic field on a smaller secondary to make it more powerful seems to be more important to me than the commutator requirement.

Unfotunately very capable people have refused to give me any assistance on how I can connect the feedback coil to the exciting coil  Do I need two capacitors fast charging and discharing in series or one? Will I have phase matching problems if I use a single capacitor? Do I need to use slow charging and discharging capacitors two or one in number in parallel. Do I need to use a neon lamp which works at 220 volts to be added as spark gap to prevent fire hazard? Do I need to use the secondary which is in phase with the exciting coil and the feedback coil to be connected to the exciting coil so that that the vibration is always maintained?

But unfortunately I'm not a technical person. So I have moved out of the Figuera device just to avoid this controversy00000 and built the Hubbard modified device which I have experimented with. I have built 80% of the device as known to me. But without the answers to the above questions I will not be able to proceed. I selected the Hubbard to build but the principle of multiple primaries in parallel inducing a single series connected secondary is also applied here. That alone can show a COP>1 output. Just check it with 24 parallel primaries exciting a single secondary coil of adequate turns and thickness at high frequency and high voltage and see what is the input and output. A large single solenoid on which thin primaries and thick secondaries are wound one surrounding the other00000 is sufficient to tell you the resulting output vs input values. All primaries and secondary rotate current in the same direction though the alternating primaries can be started from top and bottom of the solenoid. It is wire on wire induction or flux linking but it also works. It is a simple small device that can be built to test the principle.

Figuera has limited the parallel primaries to just two only to ensure that he would cover more than two parallel primaries also.

I felt that the principle is more important than the exact replication due to my admitted incompetence in building the rotary device. But strangely that remains the only rotary device shown here in a video so far.

Those who guided me earlier refuse to even respond to my mails. Do not know why. If some one in the forum can answer how the feedback coil should be connected to the exciting coil please do let me know. I will try it any way on my own in April end and will post results.

Regards,

Ramaswami------


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 19, 2016, 07:18:32 PM
 I don't understand why everyone is so worried about everyone else research except their own non existent research.
if you have even close the hours i have been putting in on the Figuera device then you would know what time it is.

i have reread all of the energetic forum post's and printed the important ones, i have reread all the overunity post's and printed all of those that matter. i have downloaded all the patent's and all others pertaining to electromagnetism and the like rereading at least 30 times each. not only that i have listened to and studied some very profound post's from Doug and others...... all of this amounts to hundreds of hours of research.

The figuers Device is Two opposing electromagnets with a secondary in between. the primary electromagnets are wound with VERY low ohm high amperage wire or thick foil.
the system is using High voltage DC ran through a continuously rotating Variac or Rheostat wound with high amperage wire being driven by a small DC motor. the Rheostat has very low resistance because of the thick wire used with only two outputs and one input that is the rotating brush input. as the brush rotates the currant enters into the winding's and causes an magnetic field in the core of the Rheostat or Varidc if you prefer. the field in the core causes reluctance (resistance to currant flow) and as the brush rotates and gets closer to the Set N output the reluctance gets smaller because their are less winding's so that lets more currant flow and less currant to flow to Set S because of more winding's  (Reluctance). as the brush leaves Set N and approaches Set S the reluctance to Set N is increased and decreased to Set S allowing more currant to flow to Set S and less to Set N thus varying the currant to Set N and S continuously without Resistors just using a magnetic field of the core (Reluctance)

as Set N primaries increase Set S is decreasing but Set N shoves Set S out of the secondary core the fields from Set S is shoved back into the system to be stored by part G Rheostat or varidc in the form of a magnetic field in the core of part G. when the system needs to replace losses from heat or wire loss in can use the stored magnetic field in part G to replace these losses which are very small. this allows the Figuera device to be self sustaining or self running if you will.
thus the Part G of the figuera device has multiple rolls.
1.  to create frequency from DC source.
2. to split the currant between primaries.
3. to store the energy kicked back into the system from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary core. the part G has a core that stores energy in the form of magnetic field that allows it to be self running replacing the losses from heat and wire losses which are small because the currant in the primaries are always the same direction.
4. Self regulation through reluctance.

the two opposing electromagnets are NN in this device. they are not NS because the attraction between NS will be way to strong for ANY variation of magnetic field between them, basically making ONE LARGE MAGNET.
with them being NN the two magnetic fields occupying the same relative space of the secondary will have the same magnetic fields as one very large field in regular generators all while feeding itself through the declining electromagnet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 20, 2016, 08:14:07 AM
Nobody arrives at the destination without the work...
A. You do the work...
B. You pay someone else to do the work...
C. Or you watch someone else do the work...
Faraday taught himself, Tesla went to school...

Hope this helps
R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 20, 2016, 02:34:47 PM
Thanks Randy..

I will experiment and find out if it works aas intendedLet us see

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 20, 2016, 08:54:40 PM
Marathon Man: removing diode, more consumption
Al quitar diodo, mas consumo
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 20, 2016, 11:34:49 PM
Really ignacio well apparently Figuera didn't get your memo and all this talk of self running is all a lie.....get real.
the diodes in your Circuit will not let the declining electromagnet kick energy back into the system, it blocks it.
Good luck with your circuit, i sure won't use it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 21, 2016, 01:07:57 AM
Marathonman..

Can you please explain how the inductive kickback works as you say.

Patent of 1908 indicates that part of the secondary output is used to run the is used to recharge the  battery that powers the DC motor while a part of it is used to excite the electromagnets.

There is no mention of inducyive kickback being used in the patent.

Can you please explain it a little more clearly so people like me can understand it better.

Ignacio..

For a given resistance diodes increase the current drawn with increasing voltage. I have seen it personally well. So I am unable to underdtand your statement.
Please explain..

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 21, 2016, 03:07:13 AM
 NRamaswami Please reread post 3328 again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 21, 2016, 08:33:05 AM
Thanks Marathonman..Will do and ask you for detailed clarifications if needed.

Randy: Thanks for your kick on the butt.

Here is the thought process..(Repeat thought process but any one can do it now..it is so laughably simple)

I now do simulations by mind..probably how the old scientists invented back then..

The feedback system is so simple.

Let us look at a pulsed DC system for it is the easiest one to do.

Put a diode and then a lot of resistors in the form of 1 kgm coil of 32 AWG wire. You get lot of ohmic resistance. So Amperage drawn is low but voltage is high.

Air core coil. Divide the output of the coil in to two and power the two opposing electromagnets. Make the secondary in the center a smaller dia Iron core than primaries as I have shown in the pictures. The primary ends go to earth.  The primary wires are relatively thin wires and the secondary wires are thick wires. Make as many parallel primaries as are needed to ensure that the output from the secondary crosses the input voltage or if the amperage of output is high use a transformer to ensure that the transformer output is 220 volts .

The secondary is just opposite in phase with primary. Secondary Amperage and voltage higher than input. Primary input comes down with increased frequency. Resistance coil is a must for high voltage pulsed DC draws a lot of amperage unless the resistance value is high at low frequencies like 50 Hz or 60 Hz. This is not indicated by Core and Ignacio but I know it from personal experience.

The secondary once it reaches the primary input value needs to be connected back to primary input after the Diode but before the resistor. Part of secondary with a 220 volt rated metal oxide varistor will ensure that after the step up transformer. Secondary is also pulsed DC for primary is pulsed DC. Transformer changes the phase to match with primary. A neon lamp acting as a spark plug will not only reduce the amperage but will also increase frequency thus bringing down the input amperage even lower. This is only optional and we need not modify the frequency. If you want to show super duper high COP levels this can be used. But not necessary.

I repeat

We can use a capacitor to change the phase of secondary to match that of primary or use a transformer to ensure that the feedback input going back to the primary is just 220 volts and in phase with primary. 220 volt Metal Oxide Varistor will ensure this.

Figuera used an interruptted DC method at what frequency what voltage we do not know. I think that the coils of resistor just one is enough will take the inductive kickback or backemf and reduce the input (If my understanding of what Marathonman says is correct).

We do not need the complex commutator. Diode Bridge will work fine. Resistor coil is a must and without that it will not work for high voltage DC input obeys the V=IR rule. We can never expect to get the amperage down at higher voltage except by raising frequencies. But if we want to use a normal frequency the resistor coil is needed. This is not stated by Ignacio and Core has not conducted experiment with high voltage pulsed DC and I have done it and I know coils present no inductive impedance to pulsed DC and have only resistance value however you build the coil. I have not tested with spark plug to increase the frequency but all say that increasing the frequency will reduce the input amperage at primary and increase the secondary output..

The circuit is very simple. I will post it later in the day. I will use the big device I have to see if this can work. I think it should.

We just need to give the exciting current for a second. Then it is not needed any more and the system will work as Figuera says indefinitely. It is very cheap and can be made operational in any part of the world.

Electricity goes to the earth in one way and so earth current may not come back to the coils of primary. How it will act on backemf I do not know.

I need to test if this works and if it works we can put up a Video.

The device that I'm going to test will try to avoid the earth connection but the above is approximately what Tariel kapanadze video shows.

The spark plug only insures that the input frequency is high. Nothing more. It can be a Neon lamp simply. He uses an Air Core and a Tesla coil arrangement but I do not know about Tesla coils.

But otherwise the circuit is simple. 

Actually Core indicated this to me earlier but I could not understand his drawing. But Core has not experimented and so he has not included the Resistor coil. Figuera patent shows the resistor coil and this is what Marathonman says as inductive kickback capturing part of the Figuera device backemf. I think the resistance value ensures that the input value is low. But frankly I do not know if it is simple resistance or inductive kickback capture method. But it is correct that higher resistance will reduce the input amperage and can increase the primary voltage that enters the primary coils.

I ignore the NN or NS pole thing for both of them can be made to work. It is a single wire going to earth being divided in to two to make the primaries.

I will test this arrangement but I think others will do it faster than I do and post videos.

I hope that this helps..

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 21, 2016, 01:20:41 PM
 I have some questions:
 
Variacs are designed to work with AC. Could Variacs work fine from a battery? I guess common Variacs will not work with DC.  Maybe you will need a high frequency AC source, then apply the Variac and get a modulated AC output which can be later rectified to get the proper signal (low frequency) to each series of electromagnets
 
The proposal for the need to feed back each electromagnet from the one that is collapsing: Is it a theory? or Have it been tested (and confirmed) with a prototype? I suppose that before saying that it is mandatory we should be cautious and verify it with a proper device. If it is just a theory it would be better to advice people that it is just a proposal. If not, please provide some info about the tests done, blocking and not blocking the reversal feeding toward the other series of electromagnets.
 
Also about the use or not of diodes, the only way to discard that design is testing it (with and without diodes) and see the difference. Maybe Figuera did not use diodes (because they were not still invented in that time) but this does not assure that diodes are forbidden. I saw with an scope the two output signals and they had the proper shape for exciting each series of electromagnets (I posted the picture) . I did not get results, but the signals were fine. Maybe it was for any other reason I don´t know. It is better not to reject possibilities unless they had been tested properly.
 
Regards
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: batfish on March 21, 2016, 04:27:37 PM
For what it's worth, the following arrangement gives 2 pairs of inductors (one pair wired opposite to other to give same magnetic polarity) using A/C input with one diode for each pair. Others are likely to be able to test this configuration sooner than me.

Obviously this arrangement can be extended to give 2 sets of inductor pairs in series, each set wired in the opposite direction to the other.

Batfish


Batfish
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 21, 2016, 04:57:19 PM
I do not understand the Henrys shown for inducyors but you all appear to be testing with very smLl input.
Diodes and diode bridges are ok ar 12 volts to 50 volts bit thry eill condume large amperages as the voltage goes up.

In the arrangement posted by Batfish one of them should be thin wires of high resistance and
another thick wire and this is nothing but Daniel McFarland Cook design.
AC is induced AC in the above circuit and not supplied. But this is the primary.
I apologise that I have not uploaded the simple circuit for Ramaswami device and will fo so tomorrow.
Whatever knowedge I get I have a religious voe t disclosebit.in full and I will do so. No hiding  any thing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 21, 2016, 06:14:30 PM
NRamaswami:
Al usar 220 volt con series de bobinas (7bobinas) cada bobina, recibe ~ 31.4 volt si usas 110 volt (ok) ~ 15.7 cada bobina, con diodos esta bien.

By using 220 volt with series of coils (7 coils) each coil receives ~ 31.4 volts if you use 110 volt (ok) ~ 15.7 each coil, diode is good.

Question draw:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: batfish on March 21, 2016, 07:07:11 PM
This may be clearer: 2 sets of inducer pairs with 2 diodes per set:
[[N a1, Sa1],[N a2, S a2]]
[[N b1, Sb1],[N b2, S b2]]

The inductance is not significant - this is just to illustrate a possible arrangement.

Batfish
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 21, 2016, 11:53:16 PM
Yes Hanon variac's can be used with DC but to save confusion just call it a Rheostat that uses the magnetic field in the core (reluctance) to control the amperage NOT RESISTANCE.
Figuera did not have to use Diodes and would not of because they will block the energy being put back into the system. basically he did it the smart way using magnetics to control amperage.

it doesn't matter any way's even if the information was on the faces of people they would wipe it off and try something else. good luck you'll need it
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 22, 2016, 01:28:19 AM
Lo entiendes, es tu diseño.
you understand ? this is your design.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 22, 2016, 03:56:53 AM
Good God your stupid, i guess when God said brains you thought he said trains and yelled ! "I want a slow one"

Ya'll successfully fucked off a good forum that had posted enough information to get a working device..... then came STUPIDITY !

have fun Dumb asses with your third world tech support and circuits....ha ha ha ha !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on March 22, 2016, 04:39:54 AM
marathonman, you've crossed the line for no supportable reason.

please modify your last message, and think a little harder before you post next time. thanks.

tak
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 22, 2016, 06:55:30 AM
NRamaswami:
Al usar 220 volt con series de bobinas (7bobinas) cada bobina, recibe ~ 31.4 volt si usas 110 volt (ok) ~ 15.7 cada bobina, con diodos esta bien.

By using 220 volt with series of coils (7 coils) each coil receives ~ 31.4 volts if you use 110 volt (ok) ~ 15.7 each coil, diode is good.

Question draw:

Ignacio:

No  Patent will disclose full details.

From my experiments I already know that Parallel connected opposing Primaries in NS-NS-NS configuration work best.

While you divide the voltage with series connection for parallel Connection The voltage is not diminished. Consequently the output is higher. If you were to use AC we can use multifilar thin coils 10 to 12 in number and reduce amps drawn. In Pulsed DC the only thing that Counts is resistance of the Coil and frequency . So before Current enters the electromagnets you need to increase the frequency and frequency if possible.

Both of these things are done if you use a None Lamp that will light up at 220 volts and a big resistance coil of No. 30 to 35 AWG Kg coil properly wound as the array shown in Figuera Patent. You give this to the Primary as input and let the Primary ends to go to the ground.

Now the current drawn is very low and if you connect the secondary in series using thick wires the output of secondary will be far higher. You can easily get this.

The feedback coil comes from secondary and the phase is changed using either a capacitor or transformer to make the output exactly about 220 volts. Use a Metal oxide Varristor and a 0.5 Amp fuse to control the current and the voltage and give it again through a high resistance coil and neon lamp. The Diode Bridge is to be used to make the current full positive sign wave current. Since the current always flows in this method the full positive sign wave will always be above zero and a collapsing magnetic field is actually prevented.

Lenz Law is said to be absent when the magnetic field is not allowed to collapse and this happens in this kind of arrangement. But for that you need to use Diode Bridge. A half wave with diodes will result in the magnetic filed to collapse.

Using this method it is possible to produce electricity with a one time input to start the system and then the system will always run automatically until the components wear out. Then they have to be replaced and then the system can be again restarted.

Reducing the amperage reduces heat. Increasing the frequency increases heat. Therefore the core must be not a single iron piece but a lot of rods. Then it beoomes aero iron core where the air between the iron rods can hold a lot of magnetic field and the strength of the magnetic field becomes very high. The heat in the iron rods makes the cool air from the environment to flow in to cool the air and more ionized air moves out and air continues to circulate cooling the iron.

This core will work for any frequency. There is no need to make it above 25000 hertz for the output would be very high in the secondary. The pulsed DC output of secondary has to be made pure DC and then inverted to 50 Hz or 60 Hz AC using Inverter.

Here you can use the Primary core and can wind the coils under the primary and above the primary to reduce the size of the device. To prevent saturation of the core the Primary cores need to be much bigger in diameter and longer than the secondary core.

Please see the attached circuit.. Hand drawn..Not yet tested This circuit is the one that would ensure production of electricity in any part of the world. This has been hushed up for it will make many countries with poor population to grow rich very fast and not be dependent on fossil fuels or grid connections.

The Tariel video shows the two earth connections and the earth connections can be avoided and are not needed.

I have not yet tested the circuit. We await funds and electrical engineers. But it will work.

Let me know if you have doubts. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 22, 2016, 11:59:45 AM
 Seems to me running off mains power is not a good test of something that is intended to run itself. No matter how efficient it may be it is still dependent on the grid.I might even question if it is not just drawing excess power from customers nearby through the earth ground. If it were only one connection say the ground for safety that would be more reasonable.even then it might be arguable.
  Since your last step was to think about how you are going to make it work so it can be unconnected seems likely the first few steps might be such that it is too far removed from the principle for that to work. If you can use a gas powered portable generator and double the output that would be something useful as an improvement of portable generators. At the very least you would have a actual generator of electrical power in hand to study what a generator is. If you can use stored battery power and recharge that battery while running useful loads so it can start again later free from the grid that would be more to the spirit of the invention. A generator free of a rotating field magnet with a rotating or changing  field is an extraordinary notion and an impossible one if you do not know how a generator works in first place. If it is that easy to forget all the functions in a generator with a rotating magnet then make a list on paper and pin it where you have to look at it all the time until it is invading you dreams when your sleeping. The only thing being removed from the standard is the physical spinning of the magnet everything ells still has to exist and work properly. If your goal is to build some type of transformer of mains power I think that has been done and in use regularly everyday without so much as a thought.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 22, 2016, 01:57:10 PM
Thanks for the constructive criticism Doug:

We can simply use a single Earth connection or two earth connections both not being tied to the grid in any way or No Earth connection.

I have not shown a No Earth connection as it is vastly confusing and needs to be tested. I believe it will work but belief or principle is one thing and experimental result is another thing. Experimental results always triump over what we feel. Presently I'm building a device based on McFarland Cook and Figuera and Hubbard and Cater Hubbard device Combinations as modified by me as needed based on several experiments. Do not know if it will run on its own. In that device there is no earth connection. The iron is oscillated once and it continues the vibration and due to that oscillating electromagnet the secondary coils produce the output. I will test it first and then decide about  posting it based on results. 

With all my limited knowledge of what is a Generator or what is a battery I have to beg to disagree with you. The Tesla Radiant Energy Apparatus patent is a Generator. All it needs to be activated is a High voltage, High Frequency spark to hit the plate continuously. This is what the Tesla coil does. If we combine both we have a generator. Both of them have separate ground points. Can we say that Tesla was stealing energy from the grid when the grid as such was non existent. We can say Tesla was stealing Energy from the Earth and Environment and it would be correct but No body owns the Telluric Current and Static Electricity in the Atmosphere. So it is again not stealing really. I showed the prototype of the device under construction without Earth connection to one very knowledgeable person on the forum and he elected not even to discuss that and did not want to be part of that in any way. That was a confirmation to me that the device would work. Let me test and see. 

I'm really amazed by the refusal to accept the simple reality. Here the High Voltage lab professor refused to accept the voltage between two different earth points for the Learned professor claimed earth being neutral there cannot be any voltage between two different earth points and that they would consider it a shunted coil but are willing to accept that 20 amps of amperage was flowing in the shunted coil. How can the Volt meter show the difference in that case?

I have made a two separate ground connections which are not connected to the mains. If the ground used is the mains ground your argument is valid. If the ground point is a dedicated non mains ground point there cannot be any drawing of current from the Grid or stealing of current. So to avoid all confusions I'm making a no ground device. While lights will light up would motors run on that. We need to test.

Either Figuera was Right in creating a motionless Generator or You are right that it does not and cannot work like a generator. Secondly the input needed would be only for one instant and not a continuous one. Continuous charging of batteries should be possible but batteries suffer from charging rate and discharging rate problems. So batteries can be replaced by capacitors and they can power the inverter to provide the proper frequency output. Inverters and batteries do provide output when the power goes out. 

Not knowing much of Technical stuff I have to end up splitting my hair what is a Generator and what is not? One Professor said no Technical person would accept any thing that can be considered a violation of laws of physics as interpreted by them or their professional growth is gone.

I promised to get this knowledge that if I get this knowledge I would make it public domain so all can use it. I believe I have lived up to that promise. The No ground connection device is there but I need to test it before making any statement.
 
Even this self looping circuit is yet to be tested but I have seen higher amperage and higher voltage being produced in secondary than the primary and so I'm confident that this would work.

I'm grateful for the constructive criticism.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on March 22, 2016, 08:44:51 PM


No  Patent will disclose full details.

 

^^ this is a fact that gets past the majority of researchers .

one more name that needs to be added to motionless generator list is German captain Hans Koler but again the info released is useless . Koler ran his house with his generator .


there is voltage difference between clouds and earth all day long , this was studied in the 1800s . I wouldnt be surprised if Bose did research into telluric currents
good luck with your research
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 22, 2016, 09:02:00 PM
He was not the single one. Earl Amman run his house from output of his generator and many others also...
http://rexresearch.com/feg/feg1.htm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on March 23, 2016, 03:21:16 AM
@forest,
you mean to say that CF device can capture magnetic field lines of the earth? IF EM coil orientation was NN, we can attract fields from South Pole?.. Hmmmm......
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 23, 2016, 07:54:43 AM
@Forest, Massive..Thanks for the kind words.

It really amazes me that in this forum where people are supposed to do experiments and share their results with an open mind. We are not getting that kind of info unfortunately.

Electricity comes in Electromagnetism by oscillating or vibrating a magnet core and coils are wound around the magnetic core. It simply means that as long as the magnetic core is not static but vibrating or oscillating electricity is going to be produced. Whether that Electricity comes from Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter or Earth or Atmosphere we really do not know.

Every atom has a North Pole that contains a part of south Pole and a South Pole that contains a part of North Pole. What we see as Magnetic core is only a conglomeration of billions and billions of Magentic core atmos or molecules. No one knows where the current is coming from and how it is produced. When a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor is the Rule. We need not worry as long as it comes.

Open air cores work with high frequency currents. They work very well if the insulation is thicker. It beats me how thickness of insulator plays a role in electrical output. I do not understand it but that is the observation consistent observation made by me and made by others.

Majority of information about these coils are to put it mildly misleading.

When Wright Brothers wanted to fly an airplane they were considered crazy. Sending a satellite to orbit the Earth was considered impossible. Humanity has done it and once the imaginary impossibility is broken many fast developments have taken place in all fields.

Probably I had been chosen to give this information for I'm in no way connected with science and my growth does not depend on what I write whether it is consistent or not consistent with theories. I really do not know why a few people from other countries sent funds to me and asked me to continue with the Research. It again beats me why Patrick took so much of time to teach me through emails.

In 1871 McFarland Cook made the self oscillating device. But the patent provides patently partial information. It seems to be subtantially edited. I feel that I can just use  coils of wire alone and do the device but it is risky. So we need to provide for the safety features.

So this is the real task..

When a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor is the Rule. We need not worry as long as it is oscillated continuously. Ultra fast switch on and switch off circuits with capacitors or coils arranged as capacitors must then store the energy for continuous vibrations and the only thing needed is to start it.

I'm really sorry to say that not many here appear to do real experiments or make observations and share results. I do. This is the reason for my confidence.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 23, 2016, 10:10:59 AM
A curious quote from the 1914 patent  (page 28 in the pdf document with its translation)




Quote

"...and further more, as the current passes to the magnetic field and
returns from it by the two inlet and outlet ends of the resistor,
and as this field is made up of two series of N and S electromagnets,
...
...

... we have achieved the constant change of the intensity of
the current that flows through the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets
N, and S, and whose current, once that his mission is accomplished in the different
electromagnets, gets back to the source from which it was taken."




Strange. Maybe we have to reconsider some ideas discussed days before.


IMO I think that even if you waste the input current as heat ( 1A at 100 Volts in case of Buforn´s design) I guess you could still get the output to be overunity (20000 Watts, as per Buforn design)
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 23, 2016, 11:20:18 AM
Ramaswami

 Your Tesla argument is little bit silly . Tesla did at times connect to the grid after it was  produced which he helped to make possible. I have to assume he payed for his use or had it blessed off by someone in authority. Not having first hand proof it is assumed by most what happened when he ventured into the concept to provide free or cheap power to everyone at every point on the planet. That was a time when things were simpler and he didnt fair so well after that. It's easier to prove when your not using the grid then the argument dose not exist. Take it with a grain of salt after all the topic is re-inventing the wheel.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 23, 2016, 12:01:10 PM
Good quote Hannon.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 23, 2016, 07:26:30 PM
Doug

I do not know how to build a Tesla coil..Seems it is not difficult but we must follow exact formula for capacitor values. Please verify reports that a Tesla coil spark hitting the plate of the Radiant Energy device can create 100-1000 amperes. Tesla himself says the current is so much that it cracks the dielectric between capacitor plates and recommens the use of very powerful capacitors and very thick dielectric.


During my training I have asked Patrick why no one used this and he said he did not know.
Probably lightening fears are the reason. I do not think this device requires any grid connections.

We now use cell phones and it should be possible to capture electricity through resonant coils charge big capacitors and use that output.

I am working on a device. Will file a patent for it. Ask for funding and then post the device here.

Regards

Ramaswami



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 23, 2016, 09:33:17 PM
NRamaswami;
What part of Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE don't you understand. ????
Not Tesla, not junk parts, not other inventions. this thread is for Figuera not for your junk circuit dumping.
if any one is so sensitive they can't handle that, OH WELL my heart bleeds.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on March 24, 2016, 01:15:41 AM
@NRamaswami
Tesla coil and alike are dangerous stuff. My tinnitus get worst while experimenting on it.. Its better to consider your
health before building it. That its why I'm switching for more safe device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: core on March 24, 2016, 03:04:14 AM
A curious quote from the 1914 patent  (page 28 in the pdf document with its translation)

Quote
.and further more, as the current passes to the magnetic field and[/size]returns from it by the two inlet and outlet ends of the resistor, [/size]and as this field is made up of two series of N and S electromagnets,[/size]...[/size]...[/size]... we have achieved the constant change of the intensity of[/size]the current that flows through the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets[/size]N, and S, and whose current, once that his mission is accomplished in the different[/size]electromagnets, gets back to the source from which it was taken."[/size]





Strange. Maybe we have to reconsider some ideas discussed days before.


IMO I think that even if you waste the input current as heat ( 1A at 100 Volts in case of Buforn´s design) I guess you could still get the output to be overunity (20000 Watts, as per Buforn design)


This guy said the same thing.
http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg474275/#msg474275 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg474275/#msg474275)








Spend some alone time and think about this deeply. I agree, you really should reconsider.




-Core





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 24, 2016, 03:53:58 AM
Noypi:

High Frequency currents are beneficial. If you have had problems then you were sending the current in way that was injurious to you and one thing you could have done is to reverse the direction of current flow in Tesla coil.

Frequencies between 1.6 Mhz to 9.6 Mhz are inimical to human body. You have to avoid them.

Frequencies of 20000 to 40000 Hz are beneficial to human body but you cannot give them directly but would have to give through an air core solenoid to create a high frequency magnetic field. Then the part of the body affected should be placed in the air core coil and this will cure problems like Tennis Elbow Knee Pain etc. If you use square wave high frequency input it will kill parasites, viruses.

Please read the strong pdf and Hulda Clark Pdf.

Marathonman:

That Junk circuit I posted is the full Figuera circuit.

Please see this page http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted.  From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely

Instead of current splitting rotary device and DC motor and battery I have used Diode Bridge. Using diode bridge with a specific circuit arrangement will result in Full wave positive wave input which is always above +5 and would also provide a variable high frequency input. We need to give it just once from the Circuit. I have also built the circuit. We are going to modify the circuit to provide 500 volts input with milliamps and about 1000 Hz or more of input frequency.

What I provided is the exact Figuera circuit. We have removed the rotary brush and the wear and tear of the part. That is an improvement over the Figuera device. No moving parts any where. 

I'm sure you would disagree but study carefully.  See Figuera uses a small part of the induced current to make the machine self oscillating. That is what the circuit shows. The transformer is considered better than using a capacitor but a Run capacitor should work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 24, 2016, 12:00:13 PM
Ramaswami

 I have no interest in building a tesla coil if your speaking about the lightning machine. It is easy to follow directions for small ones used for demonstration purposes easy enough to find online. Your getting a bit scattered like kid in a candy store alone. The more you eat the more cranked up and scattered you get the more your looking to eat.
   Your lack of focus will end with an injury as you attempt to mix the wrong things together out of frustration and or confusion. You need a vacation with your family or who ever you care about the most to re-establish your priorities. I make no apology for being blunt. I really doubt I am the first one who said something to you to this effect.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 24, 2016, 02:06:57 PM
Mezclar, escribir textos largos, tergiversar, se usa para que las personas, no puedan prestar atención, al principio expuesto, muchos lo hacen para proteger su trabajo (sus posibles patentes) ¿?
<<Clemente Figuera: reproducir un Generador eléctrico, con las piezas inmóviles.>>

Mix, write long texts, misrepresenting, is used so that people can not pay attention at first exposure, many do to protect your work (possible patents)?

<<Figuera Clemente: Playing an electric generator, with stationary parts.>>

Ah, Gracias por el premio, (mierda de burro)
Ah, thanks for the award, (shit donkey)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2016, 02:20:55 PM
well since we know, well some of us that the rotating part G is a Rheostat/Varidc to vary the currant with magnetic field, why can't we use transistors to mimic the rotation of the brush and not have to use real resistors or diodes.

the first pic is my interpretation of the Part G with explanation of its use.

second pic not showing all transistors can be used to mimic rotation and still get the effects of the same device used, using magnetic's to vary the currant while still retaining the feature of being able to receive the declining electromagnet's kick back in the form of magnetic storage and not have resistors or diodes get in the way.

Figuera even said that switches can be used instead, so the transistors are the switches.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 24, 2016, 02:39:59 PM
Mejorando, Problemas: hay que usar transistores, que aguanten 3 amp. Y circuitos electrónicos, difícil para mucha gente.
you're improving,, Problems: need to use transistors that can withstand 3 amps. And electronic circuits difficult for many people..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 24, 2016, 02:59:27 PM
Doug:

Thanks for the kind words. I have no capability or intention to build lightening kind of machines. I have a Tesla coil commercial Violet Ray device that is 10 watts. 50000 volts 500 KHz and 0.0002 amps. It provides a spark when held very close to the skin  but is able to light up a 5 watts CFL lamp without touching it. This device is not powerful enough to give real reliefs. We need to build a coil that is about 40 watts to light up a neon lamp at high frequency so it can be used. That is the purpose for which I was looking at Tesla coils.

I have no competent Electricians to test high voltage. In India we do not have places to test High Voltage Lightening machines. Our places are very crowded. We cannot test them at remote mountainous places where lightening risk is very high. Other places are highly populated.

We will need to complete all this experiment within the next 10 to 15 days for the electrical student goes to Final year and he will have to study. The other person will leave me in about 10 to 15 days and will run his own small business service and will not be available.

So if we are able to replicate the device in the 10 to 15 days we are successful or otherwise I have to stop all these experiments whether it is successful or not. Neither funds nor qualified hands would be available after that. It is neither easy nor inexpensive to learn to wind coils. It is a physically tiresome work.
 
Thanks for your kind words again.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 24, 2016, 07:17:39 PM
Marathon,
I think now I get it. Thanks for sharing this info.

I found this link: http://sound.westhost.com/articles/variac.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/articles/variac.htm)
"Unlike any normal transformer, a Variac can be used with DC, although it is nothing more than a "rheostat" or variable resistor"

 The best design, at this stage, is the simplest one, so that a greater number of people may build it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 24, 2016, 08:07:19 PM

?????
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2016, 08:51:06 PM
Hanon; It's good to see the light bulb lit......now lets burn down the house....just sayin.

seaad; it's NOT ac.... Figuera's device used DC. ac will not work with this device.  (SORRY) you can't us ac to mimic ac wont work. DC to mimic AC.

ignacio: yah right, maybe some day you will catch up. the first pic is Figuera's Part G second pic is an alternative. if any one cant make that well it looks like it aint gonna be built. i would not use 3 ampers more like 20 to give head room.

just thought i would share my bobbin build made with craft felt for 24 cents a square, supper glue and resin.

and YES Doug i am aware of a possible heat issue. if that arises i will cut the core.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2016, 08:53:41 PM
And more.

last pic is my phone i got so ragged about for not posting pick's i can't get off my phone.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 24, 2016, 09:50:10 PM
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/magnetic%20amplifiers.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2016, 10:48:04 PM
I was using it as an example as to the extent of magnetic's has on the control of currant. you do know what reluctance is don't you.
what your trying to do i don't know or care but you are hampering the forward movement of this forum.

instead why don't you prove me wrong (in which you can't)

the Figuera device part G uses magnetic field to control amperage but i guess that is to far over your head or out of your range of intelligence to prove me wrong just post some stupid pic .

Figuera device part G is a continuously rotating Rheostat or varidc if you will with a continuously rotating field inside the core. as the brush rotates so does the field.
but i'm sure everyone is dying to know your Figuera device operation ...... so lets see it seeweed i mean seaad.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 25, 2016, 12:17:55 AM
Si, te dedicas a contestar suposiciones, terminaras desviándote, de tu idea, sigue derecho, y no hagas caso a las menciones. 

If you dedicate yourself to answer assumptions, you end up straying from your idea, go straight, and do not listen to the entries.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 25, 2016, 12:44:24 AM
--> MM
"" i'm sure everyone is dying to know your Figuera device operation""  They already know from one of my previous posts
     seeweed  ;D 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on March 25, 2016, 02:36:04 AM
Hj all:
  I'm having a hard time understanding why all you people are building a commutator that uses high wattage
power-wasting resistors, when the job can be done with only a few electronic components.
   Basically we only need 2 mosfets and and an op-amp to drive them.
The mosfets need to be a complementary pair. An N channel and a P channel, so that when a positive
voltage is on the up-swing, the N ch. current rises and  the P ch. current decreases. Of course just
the opposite happens on a down-swing.
  These fets require  no power to drive them and a cheap common op-amp like the 741 will do the job.
Mosfets are readily available in different voltage and current ratings. They can be easily paralleled to accommodate
whatever the current required.
The op-amp would be built as a sine wave oscillator to drive these things with an off-set
voltage to ensure that the sine wave never goes in the negative direction. Frequency can be changed at will.
So let's get going!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NoyPi on March 25, 2016, 07:09:05 AM
@cliff
This is why CF device needs resistor.. a quote from CF 30375 patent

"Those who sign, have devised a new method or process for producing
magnetic changes in the core, and this procedure consists of making
intermittent or alternating the current which drives the excitatory
electromagnets, in which case neither the nuclei, nor the induced circuit need
to be moved at all."

Resistor is  helps to create different phases. IMHO
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 25, 2016, 09:02:01 AM
 ignacio;
your answer speaks a lot of truth.


 NoyPi;

How in the world did you come up with resistors from that???

what i would like to know is ( those who sign) i have been thinking about this on the back burner for many months.

Cliff;

Was it you that stated the Figuera device used DC because there was no phase BS to deal with like with ac.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 25, 2016, 11:51:18 AM
Ramaswami

 You could have just said your trying to build a Rife machine in the 40 watt range.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on March 25, 2016, 03:41:43 PM
Noypi:
You're contradicting yourself. Changing phase can only be done with capacitors or coils. Resistors are immune to phase changes.
Patrick Kelly has a good section on electronic theory.

Marathonman,
Good memory. Ya that was me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on March 26, 2016, 12:33:42 AM
What if you did 36 alterations per minute?
It should still work right?  As long as there is a change of state, the period of time it takes shouldn't matter should it?
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 26, 2016, 11:20:21 AM
What if you did 36 alterations per minute?
It should still work right?  As long as there is a change of state, the period of time it takes shouldn't matter should it?
artv

 In the sense of functioning yes but it will not be very useful except to make a blinky light that goes on and off at almost 2 sec intervals.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 26, 2016, 01:37:24 PM
Marathon,
I think now I get it. Thanks for sharing this info.

I found this link: http://sound.westhost.com/articles/variac.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/articles/variac.htm)
"Unlike any normal transformer, a Variac can be used with DC, although it is nothing more than a "rheostat" or variable resistor"

 The best design, at this stage, is the simplest one, so that a greater number of people may build it.

Hanon;

 The break down is in transfer of information because most people here still think a Rheostat or Variac/Varidc are using resistance to alter the voltage and currant in which this is not the case.

magnetic field and intensity i(Reluctance) is used to control the currant of both devices above. as more winding's are involved it has higher magnetic field  in the core (Reluctance) resistance to change in currant. as the brush rotates closer to Set N less winding's are involved so that means less magnetic field in the core, less reluctance, less resistance to currant flow to set N and the currant going in the opposite direction to set S will have more winding's, higher magnetic field, higher reluctance, higher resistance to currant flow.

that is why i chose to give example in the pic i posted to give someone a better view on the Figuera part G but apparently all that happened was the focus on the pic used instead of the operation of the device

so if one was to study the Rheostat or variac's correct operation then one's outlook on Figuera's part G will come into focus.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 27, 2016, 10:28:21 PM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 27, 2016, 11:47:25 PM
Look at the new chapter in PJK ebook. Maybe you will note many "deja vu" to our lovely Figuera NN design:

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt22.html (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt22.html)
(link dedicated to the still un-believers)

Marathonman, It is great to see those good ideas explained with visual sketches so that we may get the idea. I really see a possible improvement to avoid wasting energy as heat. In my case I wont even regret in wasting those 100 input watts in common resistors if I could get back just another 100 watts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 28, 2016, 12:02:09 AM
OK seaad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 28, 2016, 03:48:26 AM
seaad
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 28, 2016, 07:38:52 AM
Ignacio:

How do the six collectors come from 4 Primary coils. Can you please show how you got the six secondary coils using four primary coils? Maximum number of secondary coils as disclosed by Figuera for four primary coils would be two and as disclosed by BuForn would be 3. How did you get six. Can you please show that?

The simple fact is this.. For a given secondary coil size where the primary is thinner and secondary is thicker if the voltage of secondary exceeds a particular value then amperage for secondary comes from the surroundings. Surrounding environment is agitated more if higher frequency is used. Are we successful in inducing this critical higher voltage decides the success or failure of the experiment. From your voltage readings and ampere readings shown it is clear that you are using a wire of lower thickness.

Secondly for an input of about 36 watts you are getting about 40 watts. Not the high wattage claimed by BuForn or Figuera.

The chapter 22 document is nothing new. It shows that if we place square coils of identical poles and use them as inducers the coil inside would be induced. The coil inside can also be used as inducer coil. In this case identical poles are touching each other and there is no connection between the coils that surround the identical poles. All of them are open magnetic cores like in induction coils and not transformer coils which are closed magnetic core. So transformer rules do not apply here.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 28, 2016, 12:42:01 PM

The "coil R" is always residing (in the copper) inside every coil.
 My pic.  Figuera AC-DC loss.jpg = simplified equivalent circuit diagram, simplified math.  My message = Avoid DC if possible.  You need a hell of OU to counteract DC loss!
But first you must produce OU somehow!  ::)       Don't we need a DC path to ground to make that proposed Figuera/marathonman  principle to work??   :-\
Anyhow some "coil R:s" are lurking (not wisible) in your pics.     Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 28, 2016, 02:33:41 PM
 I can just imagine Clemente pounding his head on his desk repeatedly muttering wtf. I need     a drink.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 28, 2016, 04:36:55 PM
Colectoras 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: en la foto 4 inductoras 6 colectoras.
El consumo lo da el ventilador.
¿¿¿La electricidad, debe ser “Radiante” ‘’???
CF Imita un generador, dinamo, alternador.
Si bajo el consumo, se convierte en electricidad radiante, ¿no es aprovechable?

Bus 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: in picture 4 inducers 6 gatherer.
Consumption is given by the fan.
¿Electricity, should be "Radiant" '' ???
CF Imitates a generator, dynamo, alternator.
If low consumption, it becomes radiant electricity is not profitable?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 28, 2016, 06:43:07 PM
I can just imagine Clemente pounding his head on his desk repeatedly muttering wtf. I need     a drink.


That's why he passed so fast, yeah. He knew further generation would be dumb a*es.  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 28, 2016, 06:46:52 PM
Why are you struggling so hard while the answer is given by Buforn ? 100V/1A gives 20kW output, the voltage is chosen as required by the amount of coils in series, amperage is chosen as required by the amount of copper
The problem is only huge ampere-turns
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 28, 2016, 06:58:48 PM
For this? radiant energy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 28, 2016, 07:05:33 PM
Cascada, alimentada, 100 metros cúbicos por segundo.
Cae en una superficie de 10 metros cuadrados.
Energía de 10 toneladas, aprovechada, por turbinas, generadores, noria etc.
Agua vaporizada, = ¿Energía radiante?
Vuelve a estar estable, la energía, no se ha transformado, solo, cambia de posición.

Waterfall, fed, 100 cubic meters per second.
Falls in an area of 10 square meters.
Energy 10 tons, harnessed by turbines, generators, wheel etc.
vaporized water, Radiant Energy =?
Becomes stable, energy, has not been transformed, alone, changes position.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 29, 2016, 12:48:29 AM
I can just imagine Clemente pounding his head on his desk repeatedly muttering wtf. I need a drink.

OMG i must of laughed for 30 min.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 29, 2016, 03:55:39 AM
@Forest, Massive..Thanks for the kind words.

It really amazes me that in this forum where people are supposed to do experiments and share their results with an open mind. We are not getting that kind of info unfortunately.

Electricity comes in Electromagnetism by oscillating or vibrating a magnet core and coils are wound around the magnetic core. It simply means that as long as the magnetic core is not static but vibrating or oscillating electricity is going to be produced. Whether that Electricity comes from Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter or Earth or Atmosphere we really do not know.

Every atom has a North Pole that contains a part of south Pole and a South Pole that contains a part of North Pole. What we see as Magnetic core is only a conglomeration of billions and billions of Magentic core atmos or molecules. No one knows where the current is coming from and how it is produced. When a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor is the Rule. We need not worry as long as it comes.

Open air cores work with high frequency currents. They work very well if the insulation is thicker. It beats me how thickness of insulator plays a role in electrical output. I do not understand it but that is the observation consistent observation made by me and made by others.

Majority of information about these coils are to put it mildly misleading.

When Wright Brothers wanted to fly an airplane they were considered crazy. Sending a satellite to orbit the Earth was considered impossible. Humanity has done it and once the imaginary impossibility is broken many fast developments have taken place in all fields.

Probably I had been chosen to give this information for I'm in no way connected with science and my growth does not depend on what I write whether it is consistent or not consistent with theories. I really do not know why a few people from other countries sent funds to me and asked me to continue with the Research. It again beats me why Patrick took so much of time to teach me through emails.

In 1871 McFarland Cook made the self oscillating device. But the patent provides patently partial information. It seems to be subtantially edited. I feel that I can just use  coils of wire alone and do the device but it is risky. So we need to provide for the safety features.

So this is the real task..

When a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor is the Rule. We need not worry as long as it is oscillated continuously. Ultra fast switch on and switch off circuits with capacitors or coils arranged as capacitors must then store the energy for continuous vibrations and the only thing needed is to start it.

I'm really sorry to say that not many here appear to do real experiments or make observations and share results. I do. This is the reason for my confidence.
One thing you should know is that The Members Of Committee Of 300 hates this forum and the only possible means to keep people away from the hidden secrets which people like you have been  exposing o this website is to infiltrate this platform wit there machineries which are trained to provide wrong information.

The first step to kick out Lenz is: Clockwise and Counter-clockwise Winding. ANYONE
 WHO DOES NOT WANT TO BE IN BONDAGE OF THE COMMITTEE OF 300 SHOULD NOTE THIS.

Now another rule: YOU MUST ALWAYS WIND YOUR COIL BE IT PRIMARY OR SECONDARY IN SPIRAL BECAUSE IT ONLY TYPE  OF WINDING THAT ALLOWS FOR ONE WAIT DIRECTION WINDING IN ALL LAYERS. WHICH MEANS YOU WILL BE ABLE TO WIND ANTICLOCWISE FROM OUTSIDE TO INSIDE IN ALL LAYERS IF YOU SO DESIRE OR ORTHERWISE IF YOU SO DESIRE TOO.
3. YOU MUST MAKE YOUR SPIRAL COIL TO BECOME A CAPACITOR BY GLUEING WINDING IN EACH LAYER AND FURTHER SEPARATE EACH LAYER WITH A SUITABLE DIELECTRIC. THE

USE SERIES CONNECT CT 4 TWISTED STRANDS AND ABOVE TO MAKE YOU PRIMARY. AND YOU MUST MAKE SURE YOUR PRIMARY WIRE IS THINNER WHICH YOUR SECONDARY IS THINNER.
FOR THE BEST PERFOMANCE, USE SERIES CONNECTED TWISTED THICK COPPER WORKS TO WIND YOUR SECONDARIES ALSO.
HIGH FREQUENCY IS A MUST TO ATTAIN OVERUNITY BECAUSE IT WHAT REDUCES YOUR PRIMARY INPUT AND THE HIGH  INFLOW OF AIR BASE ELECTRICITY IN TO YOUR PULSED COIL.

I think the best configuration is to switch at low voltage using Pure Sine Wave Variable Frequency Driver like the one sold on www.aliexpress.com and step up the pulsed low voltage with a t
Center-tap transformer.

If you can not easily build a 100% Practically Collapsible Multi-Function Twisted MULTIFILAR Wire Coil Winding Machine like mine as shown in the image, at a few Thousand Dollars, I Will Make and Ship one to you Wherever you are in the World.

You need not stress yourself manually twisting Coil like Sir John Bedini used to.
Just cut the check and I make a better looking and high powerful one for you.

The Destructive One World Order Of The Committee Of 300 must be stopped and the only Major way to stop those animals is by Making Your Own Self-powered LENZELESS RAMATRAFOGEN.
WHEN YOU STARTING TO GENERATE YOUR OWN ELECTRICITY WITH OUTSIDE OF URNING FUEL NOR DEPENDING ON SOLAR, you will be able to do a lot of things this Group of War Mongers hates to see or hear about.

Get your 100% Practically Collapsible Multi-Function Twisted MULTIFILAR Wire Making Machinery  Shipped To You Today!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 29, 2016, 05:21:54 AM
Dude, i don't know if you take medication or you smoked to much weed but you couldn't be any farther from Figuera's device if you tried. but that's ok though.
and damit that pic is big even for my 46 inch screen, i can just imagine a little screen. but that's ok to though.

take a chill pill and reread all the patents then have a brain storm, then come back swinging.
i'm sure you will get it eventually.

and you are right, fuck that committee. i hope they all taste their own blood from the hands of the people they paid to suppress us. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 29, 2016, 08:37:35 AM
Oscar:

I think the Lenz law effect is present in motionless systems in the form of backemf.

Earlier in a solenoid I had a quadfilar primary and a single wire secondary. Both are 4 sq mm. 220 volts and 50 Hz. The quadfilar consumed 220 volts and 15 amps. The secondary produced 300 volts and 10 amps on load. The solenoid was iron core.

I can use a Neon lamp in the primary and use a fast charging and discharging RUN capacitor in series and slow charging and discharging capacitor in parallel along with high ohm resistor in series. Neon lamp is a spark plug and so will increase the frequency. Please provide the ratings for the capacitor in series and capacitors in parallel. I can test the device and find out in practical experiment what is the value of frequency and whether the Lenz effect is there or not.

High frequency is said to heat up the Iron core and so the core will have to be much bigger than at lower Hertz.

Low frequency may not be as efficient as high frequency for the same reasons you provide and Low frequency at 8 to 10 Hz can also resonate with Earths magnetic field and can cause health problems as well. A high voltage line carrying 50 or 60 Hz is said to cause cancers to people living near the line and constructing buildings are prohibited near high voltage power lines for this reason.

Aircraft are said to use 400 Hz but beyond that the wires and the iron core are said to heat up. But I really do not know the answer to this question and I can test and find out high frequency has on input and output. I do practical experiments and then find out and do not accept theoretical statements from any one.

It is possible that high frequency can cause the core to heat up very much and so much larger core may be needed. In so far as the rotary device is concerned if we increase the number of contacts to 100 then for one Revolution per second we have 50 Hz output or for 60 RPM we will have 50 Hz and by increasing the number of contact points or by increasing the Revolutions or by increasing both we can increase the frequency. It is not difficult to do. A spark plug cum resistor in series and a capacitor  in series and in parallel combination can do it much more easily.

Please provide the capacitor values and let me test and tell you the results.  Thank you. I do not accept theoretical statements and test and find out.
There are many lies being fed to  public about Solid Iron and the maximum frequency they can withstand.
You just have go for it Practically and you will even further discover why are they misleading people especially students of Mechanical Engineering and Electronics and Electrical. 
60hz rate transformer E I stainless Laminate Can With stand upward of 1khz!

Now let's leave those useless beings in the name of the Committee Of 300 for now.
Let's talk about the main solution or alternative to Solid Iron that can further withstand high voltage.
Your only alternative is to use moulded core which is a mixture of Powdered Iron and Resin and Catalyst and Hardener. You can get Powdered iron and or Magnetite from those less greedy and Humble Chinese and Asians in general at www.aliexpress.com
Just search for Magnetite powder and or Iron Powder. If you will buy more than 1kg, then, simply go to Mabufactures directly or let me say if your country is in Europe or Asia or America, buy directly from nanufacture as shipping fee is lesser from China to 3 mentioned continents.

Let say you are low on budget you can stick a powerful and neodymium magnet to an Iron rod and use that to harvest Magnetite in your area and also at the sea side.

Now how do you make mould for your core?
Assuming you already know how to mix Resin and it 2 other parts in the right proportion, simply get Square  rod or Round Rod of say 10 or 8th diameter by say 20 feet.
Now cut the iron in length to the exact same length of your Primaries and Secondaries or the RamaTrafoGen. For instance, let say after you wind your Primaries using the BEST AND MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE WINDING STYLE which is spiral, the length of your primary tube or pipe reached one feet or 30cm, and you secondary 20cm, then you will cut the Iron Rod of either 10mm or 8mm to 2feet (60cm) and 20cm respectively. And you will then make a box which it maximum  length will be between 61cm an 62cm and it width will be determine by the amount of Iron Rods you would like to place inside the Collapsible box. Make sure leave at least 10mm space between the walls of the box and each Iron rod you place in the box. The box walls height if you are gonna use 10mm or 8mm square or round rod should be upto 15mm or 1.5 cm.
Note that you can also use Cement to make your Mould but you will need additional materials which is soft oiled nylon and 4mm or 6mm rods needed to make your Mould well solid.
Also, your Mould wall height will need to increase to at least 25mm or 2.5cm.
Now, you have prepared your Mould box simply apply oil onto the inside of the box all through and also do so onto the rods. Best is to use pure grease.
Now assuming you have finished is he'd oil or greasing the box and rods, Now area get them in the box and space them in accordance with the aforementioned spacing rules.
Afterwards prepare your 2part or 3part Epoxy, stir it rightly and pour the mixture into the Mould and wait for the solution to solidify.
Once it solidifies, then collapse the Mould to get your Main Plastic moulded core Mould.
So now after that, then it is time to start moulding your own Moulded Iron Core Rods Which can withstand high frequency an the megahertz.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 29, 2016, 02:11:15 PM
Dude, i don't know if you take medication or you smoked to much weed but you couldn't be any farther from Figuera's device if you tried. but that's ok though.
and damit that pic is big even for my 46 inch screen, i can just imagine a little screen. but that's ok to though.

take a chill pill and reread all the patents then have a brain storm, then come back swinging.
i'm sure you will get it eventually.

and you are right, fuck that committee. i hope they all taste their own blood from the hands of the people they paid to suppress us.
Baby!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 29, 2016, 04:53:30 PM
 ignacio
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #3361 on: March 24, 2016, 02:06:57 PM »
Mezclar, escribir textos largos, tergiversar, se usa para que las personas, no puedan prestar atención, al principio expuesto, muchos lo hacen para proteger su trabajo (sus posibles patentes) ¿?
<<Clemente Figuera: reproducir un Generador eléctrico, con las piezas inmóviles.>>

Mix, write long texts, misrepresenting, is used so that people can not pay attention at first exposure, many do to protect your work (possible patents)?

<<Figuera Clemente: Playing an electric generator, with stationary parts.>>

 ignacio
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #3371 on: March 25, 2016, 12:17:55 AM »
Si, te dedicas a contestar suposiciones, terminaras desviándote, de tu idea, sigue derecho, y no hagas caso a las menciones. 

If you dedicate yourself to answer assumptions, you end up straying from your idea, go straight, and do not listen to the entries.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 29, 2016, 04:54:51 PM
Comparisons
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 29, 2016, 06:05:37 PM
Why are you struggling so hard while the answer is given by Buforn ? 100V/1A gives 20kW output, the voltage is chosen as required by the amount of coils in series, amperage is chosen as required by the amount of copper
The problem is only huge ampere-turns

That is correct. But please do a small calculation on Iron Ns insulated copper wire costs and you know why we are struggling. Just calculate the amount of turns needed and the copper needed and the iron core needed to avoid over heating and you get the picture.
Essentially the problem is solved but it is high cost solution. There is no low cost solution here.
That is the problem. Buforn shows 6 to 8 Primary modules and the secondaties are to be organised as high amperage and lower voltage units which would have to be stepped up in voltage to be used.

But we need to get a minimum voltage out to cross all these hurdles and the cost of the core cost of insulated copper makes it a nightmare.

It is an expensive system. But a 20 KW generator is not cheap. Problem is it may well be the minimum size device with this method.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 29, 2016, 08:32:59 PM
That is correct. But please do a small calculation on Iron Ns insulated copper wire costs and you know why we are struggling. Just calculate the amount of turns needed and the copper needed and the iron core needed to avoid over heating and you get the picture.
Essentially the problem is solved but it is high cost solution. There is no low cost solution here.
That is the problem. Buforn shows 6 to 8 Primary modules and the secondaties are to be organised as high amperage and lower voltage units which would have to be stepped up in voltage to be used.

But we need to get a minimum voltage out to cross all these hurdles and the cost of the core cost of insulated copper makes it a nightmare.

It is an expensive system. But a 20 KW generator is not cheap. Problem is it may well be the minimum size device with this method.

Regards

Ramaswami


Well...yes. In developing stage it is costly, but when ready the next prototype should be 10 times cheaper then solar panels, everybody can do it -  and that's the whole problem for some people.
 Bussiness must change into something new, useful for everyone, world must change, people must change.
Really there is not much to say , it's all clear. Somebody more clever can easily compute the required magnetix flux for 20kW output at desired frequency, voltage etc. Then switch and get output.
The higher frequency the better - less material, higher output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 29, 2016, 09:21:32 PM
Sir..

Increasing the frequency of primary..yes I have kind of sorted it out. But how do you reduce the frequency in secondary..

And if the secondary is going to provide 20 or 30 kilowatt as it seems how can you reduce the core size if we use a 200 amps carrying wire. Core has to meet the size requirements hhere to avoid saturation. How can you reduce the core size by increasing the frequency is not yet clear to me.
Even if it is so high frequency is said to heat up core and large core cannot be avoided even if we go to high frequency. Higher output with high frequency ..yes I have to agree but need to test but core size can be reduced is applicale only for small units. Not for large ones..
And I do not think every body can do this..Not easy to master and very confusing.
Otherwise so many would have done it by now..
I intend to make an attempt with 120 amp rated.coils but need to check what kind of core size and coils are needed yo reach about 115 volts..Let me try..As everybody points out you need at least three secondary coils to cross cop>1 situation and then we need to loop it back again and the system should continue to run..This will take some more effort..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 29, 2016, 09:43:46 PM
Sir..

Increasing the frequency of primary..yes I have kind of sorted it out. But how do you reduce the frequency in secondary..

And if the secondary is going to provide 20 or 30 kilowatt as it seems how can you reduce the core size if we use a 200 amps carrying wire. Core has to meet the size requirements hhere to avoid saturation. How can you reduce the core size by increasing the frequency is not yet clear to me.
Even if it is so high frequency is said to heat up core and large core cannot be avoided even if we go to high frequency. Higher output with high frequency ..yes I have to agree but need to test but core size can be reduced is applicale only for small units. Not for large ones..
And I do not think every body can do this..Not easy to master and very confusing.
Otherwise so many would have done it by now..
I intend to make an attempt with 120 amp rated.coils but need to check what kind of core size and coils are needed yo reach about 115 volts..Let me try..As everybody points out you need at least three secondary coils to cross cop>1 situation and then we need to loop it back again and the system should continue to run..This will take some more effort..


Sir, it's just the way we make things. If you want ordinary current then it will cost a lot because of lots of iron and wires (however there are ways to avoid it) , but you can always rectify high frequency and use commercial inverter 10kW of more. You just eliminated total solar panels with a cheap device, do you see dangers ? And every commercial inverter can be replaced by a rotary frequency converter if you wish. It all depends on what you need to do with currents. I for example want to heat my house very economically  and I will never surrender until I do this. Besides there are other methods like Tesla method of rising amperage of small signal ;-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 29, 2016, 10:14:09 PM
Visto, que va para adelante: a lo PATENTABLE HUMM…..
Un controlador automático, para alimentar el circuito primario, en relación, al consumo en las colectoras, ya que  podrían aumentarse mucho el voltaje, quemando aparatos.
PD: usar generadores de las chatarras. Baratos.

Seen going forward: to PATENTABLE HUMM ... ..
An automatic controller to power the primary circuit, in relation to consumption in secondary, as could greatly increase the voltage, burning appliances.
PS: using generators scrap. Cheap.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 30, 2016, 12:20:04 AM
See, the RamaTrafoGen is a Convertible Motionless Motor Generator so the Primaries which has needs high frequency high voltage do act as a net Fitted with Rotor while the Secondary act as Stator.
Air is the source of electrons that flow in copper but can only be absorbed substantially by an harvester driven at high frequency because the air base electrons naturally do oscillate at high frequency. So you got to be a monkey if you wanna catch a monkey.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 30, 2016, 01:32:14 AM
What is this thread about? About RamaTrafoGen or about Figuera generator?

Darediamond, I dont like you. You posted a message into my site including your email to SELL  your design for some money to people who may read it. It really smelled to scam. Obviously your message is deleted. Just posted this in order everyone may know it and may know you. You are not welcome at my site anymore, particularly trying to sell scam designs in the name of Figuera generator. Scam artist.

Those designs are good enough to have a dedicated thread apart from this one. They are far away from Figuera's patents, and you are just adding noise to this thread.

Bye..bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 30, 2016, 02:56:16 PM
What is this thread about? About RamaTrafoGen or about Figuera generator?

Darediamond, I dont like you. You posted a message into my site including your email to SELL  your design for some money to people who may read it. It really smelled to scam. Obviously your message is deleted. Just posted this in order everyone may know it and may know you. You are not welcome at my site anymore, particularly trying to sell scam designs in the name of Figuera generator. Scam artist.

Those designs are good enough to have a dedicated thread apart from this one. They are far away from Figuera's patents, and you are just adding noise to this thread.
Bye..bye
Hanon, you do not have to hate a fellow human like you over a trivial thing.
If really  you made the post about figuera generator to benefit others then Practically tested ideas on how to improve the design should not irritate you.
The picture of the MULTIFILAR Wire Making Manchine I built was posted to benefit others not to "scam" anyone because I know there are People on here that would be able to build the machine perfectly merely looking  at the picture and without asking me any question let alone paying me a dime to make one for them.
Figuera this Figure that, if you do not open a thread about it, someone else will.
Afterall, you are not God the creator of everything.
Because you opened the thread so other experienced people should not share ways to make things better about "your thread topic" again?
Come on stop bragging and embrace humility.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 30, 2016, 04:33:53 PM
Afterall, you are not God the creator of everything.
Because you opened the thread so other experienced people should not share ways to make things better about "your thread topic" again?


I am not God, but at least I am the "creator" of my website I have the "power" to reject your messages asking for money to people. Period. Keep away from me.


Bye ... bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 30, 2016, 04:35:44 PM
If you look to the left of the threads... there are advertisers. If you wanted to advertise on Hanon's site you should've asked Hanon...if you wanna advertise here " why " ... you should make your own thread. Were trying to get to the bottom of the " Figuera " if you're NOT then you are just as Hanon said........... A noise ....

..................the winner of arguments has to prove it!

All the Best
R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 31, 2016, 01:10:11 AM

I am not God, but at least I am the "creator" of my website I have the "power" to reject your messages asking for money to people. Period. Keep away from me.


Bye ... bye

Yes, it is a thread you created but for what purpose? For the sake of it?
The first time I expressively use the word RAMATRAFOGEN you became angry and criticised me. So the issue is not even about what you saw as an ad in my post. It is about not using the word Figuera an basing comment on it primarily.
If your thread is a tally about providing solution then you would not from at contributors proven ideas expressed o the your thread.
Figuera device can be modified to perform better than was presented in the available patent. I know not how talking about that have become a "noise" to you. Hey, are you from Venus?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 31, 2016, 02:45:34 AM
"Figuera device can be modified to perform better than was presented in the available patent."

  I think the shortest distance between two points is still a straight line not all zig zaggy around a circuit board. It's like mouse traps, everyone has a better version but most of them are mostly better for the person selling them and the mouse who frequently evades the better traps.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 31, 2016, 04:14:58 AM
Doug

Straight line is the shortest line between two points is correct. I think I must follow Forest's indication to use high frequency to the primary.

I'm going to use now a secondary coil that can take 120 amps safely and up to 240 amps output and I'm going to use spark plugs in the primary. 300 volts is sufficient for spark plugs to work at less than 0.1 mm distance between the sparks. I'm amazed that we had created 100,000 volts sparks by the rotating charged contacts. We could not make the working rotary device but did make those sparks.

Can you please advise if my precaution of using about 190 meters of secondary coils ( actually 1900 meters of 4 sq mm coils - 10 coils wound together as a twisted coil using available wires and connected in parallel to make a big wire. I believe that I may be able to connect a few secondaries.

I did not know any thing about this information below..See

http://free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf See Page No. 3-6..Prof. Markov's Patent.

"Professor Markov’s Transformers
Professor Gennady Markov, General Director of STC "Virus" and author of many inventions and discoveries,
received an international patent for a new a transformer design which he created. His work involves a new law in
the field of physics and electrical engineering. He says: In 1831 Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction.
Then his ideas were further developed by Maxwell. For more than 160 years following that, no one advanced
fundamental electrodynamics by even a single step. Eight years ago, I applied for an international patent, valid in
20 countries, as I had created a transformer, which has already received four Russian patents. My discovery was
made despite the "laws" of the great physicist Faraday who said that “magnetic fluxes in a magnetic circuit should
be combined separately with the resulting combined flux moving in only one direction. Only then can you have a
working transformer”.

I dared to do the opposite: take a coil with two identical windings and operate them towards each other. This
creates equal magnetic fluxes, moving toward each other, which cancel each other out, but do not destroy each
other as Faraday and Maxwell claimed. I determined a new law: ‘The Principle of Superimposition of Magnetic
Fields in Ferromagnetic Materials’. The superimposition - is the addition of magnetic fields. The essence of the
law is that the magnetic fields are added, cancel each other, but they are not destroyed.
And here the important
part is "they are not destroyed" and that is the key fact on which my law is based."

This part that the flux becomes an additive flux is correct. Net Lenz law appears to be zero but it is actually not the case and Lenz law effects disappears either when the core strength in central is in excess of the primary core Magnetic field strength to when it saturates..

I think only because of the Electromagnetics principles stated Marathonman was earlier saying in this thread that the flux would cancel out if opposite poles are placed against each other. That is not really the case. Secondly this is an open magnetic path core and not a closed magnetic core as in transformers. It may match an induction coil but not a transformer. Turn ratios also do not work.

I have also seen how Ignacio has placed his 4 inductors and created 6 induced. Very intelligent but the flux available in those places is quite weak and we need to use thin wires to get higher voltage but for the same reason we do not get good amperage from those places at lower frequencies of 50 Hz as I have tested so far.

I take the indication from Mr. Forest quite seriously and I will now try with spark plugs to increase the frequency of the primary coils. Neon lamps that would work at 220 volts also can be used as encapsulated spark plugs.

I do not know if the amperage will go up or voltage will go up in secondary. It appears that secondary induced emf would go up. induced emf means only secondary voltage but here if the voltage.

Some times it is better not to know things and just do them and see the results after taking the precautions needed.

I will do this for the month of April and then I will post the results. I will take a Video as demanded by Core. If possible I will also buy watt meters and then show the primary and secondary wattage. I hope the Amperage will go up in secondary. Let us see. 


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 31, 2016, 04:55:16 AM
A FUCKING SPARK PLUG. what the fuck is wrong with you stupid morons?????? does anyone even read or follow the patents or do you people just pass a tray of crack around and post what ever falls out of your babbling mouths.

I have NEVER in my life ever heard such stupid shit in my life that has come out of your stupid uneducated mouth's of the people on this forum.

i will not sit by and let you stupid fucking morons ruin what so many have strove to accomplish in this forum of Figuera. trying to spread the truth NOT BULL SHIT to people that want to learn.

I personally hope all you fudge sickle bitches get shot by the fuckers that paid you to do so much damage. when my second device is built, the one i am building now i will send it around the fucking world and i hope all you fudge sickle bitches die.

if it's not Figuera GET THE FUCK OFF THIS FORUM !

Doug, Hanon, Randy and others...... i think it's hopeless.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 31, 2016, 09:06:26 AM
If you look to the left of the threads... there are advertisers. If you wanted to advertise on Hanon's site you should've asked Hanon...if you wanna advertise here " why " ... you should make your own thread. Were trying to get to the bottom of the " Figuera " if you're NOT then you are just as Hanon said........... A noise ....

..................the winner of arguments has to prove it!

All the Best
R
Talk they say is cheap. Keep up with your odd mentality.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 31, 2016, 09:37:00 AM
A FUCKING SPARK PLUG. what the fuck is wrong with you stupid morons?????? does anyone even read or follow the patents or do you people just pass a tray of crack around and post what ever falls out of your babbling mouths.

I have NEVER in my life ever heard such stupid shit in my life that has come out of your stupid uneducated mouth's of the people on this forum.

i will not sit by and let you stupid fucking morons ruin what so many have strove to accomplish in this forum of Figuera. trying to spread the truth NOT BULL SHIT to people that want to learn.

I personally hope all you fudge sickle bitches get shot by the fuckers that paid you to do so much damage. when my second device is built, the one i am building now i will send it around the fucking world and i hope all you fudge sickle bitches die.

if it's not Figuera GET THE FUCK OFF THIS FORUM !

Doug, Hanon, Randy and others...... i think it's hopeless.
Mara is that you are pained seeing figuera device being Practically demystified and further beneficially modified and presented by INTELIGEMT people like Mr. Ramaswami, Core etc or you have been converted to a Typical Robotic Zombie or what?

Any Electromagnetic Generator device that will achieve Overunity must have it Primaries switched at high frequency to reduce driving input power in Watt.
Ramaswami is toeing that line planning to use Spark Plug or Spark
Gap as he stated. Other ways to switch at high frequency includes the use of Mosfet and ICs. Mechanical way to switch at high frequency is the use of one and only Mechanical commutator but this have some disadvantages.
One Lenz is negated in any Electromagnetic Generator driven at high frequency high voltage(optional), the Radiant Power would easily multiply the output Power at the secondary.

Learn to be respectful of others even if you disagree with there views.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on March 31, 2016, 11:49:53 AM
Talk they say is cheap. Keep up with your odd mentality.

You're pushing yourself into the corner of irrelevance...by your insistence! How odd...

Good Luck in your endeavors...this is the last response.

Bye....Bye

ps Yes MarathonMan its " hopeless "
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 31, 2016, 12:41:18 PM
Marathonman:

I would urge you to go through the 1908 patent again..

See http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 The portions that need your attention are posted in bold below from the link.


PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267 (Spain)

Ministry of Development General Board of agriculture, industry and Commerce. Patents of Invention. Expired. Dossier number 44267. Instruction at the request of D. Clemente Figuera. Representative Mr. Buforn. Presented in the register of the Ministry in the 31st of october of 1908, at 11:55 received in the negotiated in the 2nd of november of 1908.
ELECTRICAL GENERATOR “FIGUERA”

BACKGROUND

if within a spinning magnetic field we rotate a closed circuit placed at right angles to the lines of force a current will be induced for as long as there is movement , and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the induced circuit moves.
This is the foundation of all magnetic machines and electric dynamos from the primitive, invented by Pixii, France and modified and improved later by Clarke until the current dynamos of today.

The principle where is based this theory, carries the unavoidable need for the movement of the induced circuit or the inductor circuit, and therefore these machines are taken as transformer of mechanical work into electricity.

PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION

Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns,  while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic  field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced  is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.

Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased and reduced in intensity;  since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical  induced current .It was considered the possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the electrical current which produces it.

The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.


Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.

In order to privilege the application to the production of large industrial electrical currents, on the principle that says that “there is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application of said principle.

This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

Let’s therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form and way that has been used to make the application.


I hope you read and realize that What Figuera sough for is a Patent for a Principle which is not granted now..The principle is clearly explained by him. It uses motionless electromagnetic generators where only the field is moved. This is what precisely I have done.

Secondly whether it uses a spark plug or not if the movement of fields compression and expansion of magnetic fields is done in the core, then the device is obviously based on the Figuera Principle. No one obtains patents for principles and only for specific devices. While you are focussing only on one specific device and does not appear to state the best mode of operating the device or its essential components since I have done this experiment many many times I do know that I have been following this principle.

I do not consider the rotary device as an essential feature of the Figuera device. It is of course true by exact replication of his device we can avoid patent problems but since I have found that the secondary wound under the Primary in inducing electromagnets also produce induced current and the opposing electromagnet principle is also applicable to them we only need to create two situations.

a. A saturation of central core where only secondary electromagnets are present or

b. the magentic field strength of the secondary is greater than the primary electromagnets

or C. The voltage of the secondary crosses a value where the induced electricity is in excess of the input.

Therefore your restrictive interpretations are negated by Figuera himself. Please read the Patent again..Claiming what I say only is correct and others are not correct is inappropriate.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on March 31, 2016, 12:59:14 PM
"I do not consider the rotary device as an essential feature of the Figuera device."

  That is only true if you can get it to work.By that ,to be working remove the source after it is working and have it continue to operate indefinitely. It's a short list of requirements to be working properly.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on March 31, 2016, 03:08:25 PM
Doug:

I have to totally agree with you on the self sustaining part..But you see I'm still learning..I have not studied Electrical Engineering and this feedback has been known to be tough. It is said to be also simple.

I have managed the hard part of getting a higher output than input. This is also verified by Saeed and also shown by Ignacio though he claims to have used identical poles. But it still falls within the principle.

Let me check if I can provide the feedback without risks. If I find a way out I will definitely do it. I'm just looking at a 220 or 230 volt output transformer that can be in phase with the primary and to which input can be given from the secondary. then we need to excite the primary coil through suitable means once and then the power would flow continuously. No moving parts. Fuse and Metal oxide varistor for current and voltage control would do. Let me check if it would work. I need some time to do this..

Some how this project is money draining. My income has come down sharply from the time I have started doing this and health has also gone down. I really do not know why I continue to do this..I have learned how to increase the amperage and voltage of the output from the device considerably. And I'm able to demonstrate both of these independently as well but so far I have not dared to provide the feedback. Let me check if it can be done.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on March 31, 2016, 04:13:04 PM
N Ramaswami: To loop back is a simple thing.  Just put a spark gap in parallel with the load to prevent runaway.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 31, 2016, 05:16:58 PM
Como pueden comprobar, las personas, intentan alejar de CF. O de los datos buenos.
Las pruebas que hicimos, año 2012, :> Batería de vehículo, inverter, vasos de agua (regular la electricidad) condensador, 4 bobinas de inducción, diodo, (consumo 220volt 0.8amp 176watt )= =) salida 2 taladros de 550watt + lijadora de banda 1200watt, + decapador 500watt, + radial 500watt todo encendido, +cargador de baterías 12volt 10amp.
Salud, se termina tiempo.

As you can see, people, try to stay away from CD. Or the good data.
The tests we did, year 2012:> vehicle battery, inverter, water glasses (regular electricity) condenser, 4 induction coils, diode, (consumption 220volt 0.8amp 176watt) =) output 2 holes 550watt + sander 1200watt band, + stripper 500watt, 500watt + radial everything on, + 12volt 10amp battery charger.
Health, time is up.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on March 31, 2016, 09:06:48 PM
You're pushing yourself into the corner of irrelevance...by your insistence! How odd...

Good Luck in your endeavors...this is the last response.

Bye....Bye

ps Yes MarathonMan its " hopeless "
Seeking " relevance"  on here relates to an haughty heart. Now I see clearly what you guys problem is.  What a surprising revelation!!!
WAAAAAOOO!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 31, 2016, 09:47:09 PM
Let's go back to a constructive debate. We should follow as close as possible what it is written in the patents.

A quote from the 1902 patent:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 01, 2016, 12:12:50 AM
NRamaswami: I have studied each and every paragraph of all the patents and almost word for word so their is Nothing you can tell me new.

Apparently you need to reread about part G about 50 more times and think out side that boxed brain of yours.
part G is the most essential part of his device, without it the device will not replace the losses from heat and wire loss or store the energy from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary.
it's all about magnetism, he uses it to produce electricity, he uses it to regulate his device, he uses it to store excess energy in the core of part G to replace losses. get off your asses and study magnetism, electromagnetism, reluctance and the like then the door to your boxed brain will open up.

Come on people start using your brain, you know the thing that rattles in the upper part of your body.
get of the ass and trace the dates in Germany to Figuera's time and you will see what was used.

Hanon; I thought we were working on 1908 ???? you keep me confused some times..... FOCUS !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 01, 2016, 07:30:08 AM
Marathonman:

You are behaving like a child. Avoid childish conduct.

1. The rotary device does only one thing. It makes and breaks contacts continuously. It needs to do it for the device to work.

2. The rotary device also uses high current and so the current needs to be reduced and the voltage increased. This is done in interrupted DC by providing resistance coils.

3. This does not mean that this is the one and only method of varying the magnetic field strength. Only thing needed to be achieved is to increase and decrease the magnetic field strength to achieve a higher output than input. This has been verified by not only me but others as well.

4. The rotary device also serves the purpose of avoiding the runaway current situation by providing the primaries to earth. The maximum that the primary can reach is the till magnetic saturation of the cores. Nothing more.

5. This can be done again by using a simple spark plug and providing the primarie end to the earth. No runaway current.

I try to understand by experimenting and making observations. I do not try to study and assume and give that assumption a sense of validity.

You need to Grow up first.

By the way where is the your first device?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: batfish on April 01, 2016, 09:57:29 AM
Como pueden comprobar, las personas, intentan alejar de CF. O de los datos buenos.
Las pruebas que hicimos, año 2012, :> Batería de vehículo, inverter, vasos de agua (regular la electricidad) condensador, 4 bobinas de inducción, diodo, (consumo 220volt 0.8amp 176watt )= =) salida 2 taladros de 550watt + lijadora de banda 1200watt, + decapador 500watt, + radial 500watt todo encendido, +cargador de baterías 12volt 10amp.
Salud, se termina tiempo.

As you can see, people, try to stay away from CD. Or the good data.
The tests we did, year 2012:> vehicle battery, inverter, water glasses (regular electricity) condenser, 4 induction coils, diode, (consumption 220volt 0.8amp 176watt) =) output 2 holes 550watt + sander 1200watt band, + stripper 500watt, 500watt + radial everything on, + 12volt 10amp battery charger.
Health, time is up.

Muy interesante, muchas gracias Ignacio.

My translation with questions/comments in square brackets:

"As you can see, people try to avoid CF [Clemente Figuera], or the good information.
The tests we carried out in 2012: car battery, inverter, buckets of water (to regulate the electricity) [simple if dangerous system for varying resistance by raising and lowering electrodes in water?], 4 induction coils [the inducers?], diode, (consumption [for variable resistance, inducers and diodes?] 220volt 0.8amp 176W )= =) output 2 x 550W drills + belt sander 1200W, + stripper [heat gun?] 500W, + circular saw all switched on, + 12volt 10amp battery charger,
Best wishes, no more time."

Three obvious questions:
* how long did it run?
* was the 12V charger recharging the car battery?
* what happened next?

As I said, many thanks for sharing this information.

Best wishes
Batfish



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: batfish on April 01, 2016, 10:19:39 AM
Ignacio, I realise that 'vasos' may mean 'pot[entiometer]s' - but the effect is the same: variable resistance.

Batfish
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 01, 2016, 05:16:57 PM
Ignacio, I realise that 'vasos' may mean 'pot[entiometer]s' - but the effect is the same: variable resistance.

Batfish
Consumo 176watt.
Produce +++2000watt
+- ½ hora  , caliente agua, (H, H, O, ¿?)
Al desconectar 1 aparato, subir mucho el voltaje.
Vaso agua, 2 electrodos, acercar, aumento amperaje.

176 watt consumption.
+++ Produces 2000 watt
+ - ½ hour, hot water, (H, H, O,?)
When disconnecting one machine, turn up the voltage much.
Cup water, 2 electrodes, zoom, amperage increase.

Que mas da. lo que diga yo, solo lo que hagas tu, es valido.

Who cares. what I say, just what do you, is valid.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 01, 2016, 07:12:33 PM
Solo pruebas rápidas, peligroso.
Only rapid tests, dangerous.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 01, 2016, 09:26:16 PM
Ignacio..

Avoid dangerous tests. We can always succed with another effort.

While may not be pure Figuera your effort is commendable but avoid taking too high risks.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 01, 2016, 09:57:52 PM
Ignacio..
While may not be pure Figuera your effort...

Ramaswami, Your device is the one that each day is farther from Figuera's design. Sparks, high frequency, high voltage,tons of iron required,  , earth connecttions, complex windings, primary and secondary winded one above the other...etc....Nothing of this is ever mentioned in the patents. I do not know what happened to your original design. Your design is more similar to McFarland Cook if so. Your posts are really messy and no clear design can be found there. Sorry for saying this but this is my impression.

Ignacio is using the capacitor to create a second unphased signal, the same thing that the commutator is doing in the 1908 patent. But you have never understood the commutator and I guess you do not know either the function of capacitors.

As fa as I have understood the two electrodes sumerged into water act as a current regulator. It allows to use 220 V AC as input even without any step down transformer. You may adjust  the current into the electromagnets by adjusting the distance between the two electrodes. In simple words is a kind of homemade variable transformer, for quick tests, not for continuous operation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 02, 2016, 12:08:48 AM
Hanon;

It's more and more like Bozo the Clown tech support and this thread is the Big Top Carnival.

in my opinion there is only a few people on this thread that is actually trying to make the figuera device even remotely like the patent describes. the rest fall into the above category. 


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 02, 2016, 12:17:21 AM
New version on the Patrick Kelly ebook in the section dedicated to Figuera:

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt3.html)

I miss some explanation about the opposite movement of the two fields back and forth.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 02, 2016, 12:28:26 AM
Hanon

I beg to disagree.When I started posting my results you wanted a simple device people can build at low cost. Unfortunately a device that outputs 300 amps in secondary of an Electromagnetic core must carry wire has to be a huge coil. The reported voltage is around 68 volts. Now condifder how many turns of that coil should be made to reach the voltage.Also calculate the size of the core that can provide the magnetic field to produce such an amperage. The size of iron core becomes obvious.If a device can be commonly used it must have safty features and should not cause health hazards.High frequency current does not cause injuries and is dangerous only if the wires come in contact with water. Figuera must have used 6 to 8 inch dia cores or more to get the reported amperage.And voltage.  I am only using a call rated to be safe at 120 amps and I do not expect to reach more than 60 volts and probably 40 ampps now. I will need to add more modules to get about 220 volts when I may be able to hit 120 amps for a total estimated input of 1000 watts.
For the reason of health envitonment we may have to put the device underground and run tesys for more than a month of continued operations. The rotary device G makes it impossible for the generator to work for long time.  It is bound to fail within a week or a month of continued operations. We have checked with high power carbon brushes but they also wear out.We have seen that many inconsistencies between the statement in the patent and our observations. We are not going to change the parts of a generator once in a week and make new connections again and again.
Principle is correct but some statements made in the patent are contrary to facts.
I have to admit that I have to meet several goal posts.
Safety of operations.
No health hazard
No risk of magnetic leakage of radiation
No excessive heat.
Sustainability of operation
A minimum of one or two months of maintenace free operation.
These are the goals now. If you want me to show less in

put and more outputand sustained operations I can do it now but the ririsks are not yet covered.

The entire thing may have to be placed underground to test all thisand to be accepted as safe.

If I have to use pulsed dc as it appears now I will need to use single coil.

But.please go back and look at your own posts to see that the patent does not disclose any thing concrete about the device even the polarity of the poles.

So I only look at the principle.

If you feel that I am straying away I will stop posting and happilly file a patent yo get funds to do the research. It is very difgicult to continue.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 02, 2016, 01:45:09 AM
Hannon

 Did Patrick spell your name wrong? lol
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on April 02, 2016, 08:33:26 AM
some thoughts about hanon last pic which shows two columns of oposing electromagnets.
why we dont use south poles just north ones? :) using both poles could give 2x output theoreticaly :)
columns coult be blaced in a line or in circle config
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 02, 2016, 01:07:26 PM
Posted a few pages back
"PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION

"Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion."

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 02, 2016, 02:40:27 PM
When the brush rotate around in contact with two or more bars. Are bars larger then wires? How long does it take to wear out bars? Even a motor commutator uses something more like bars then wires for the contact surface for the brush. Changing a brush out isnt that hard. How long do motors run with brushes? I'll bet it is longer then a month. Im not gonna say it is 10 years but it is way more then a month. thats without even getting into the better type brushes which are made to take a beating on really beefy motors. All that also excludes the notion of a wheel which will last even longer then a brush.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 02, 2016, 04:17:29 PM
The one person I respect in this thread is Mr. Antijon who spoke the truth that the primaries when given in parallel will have an amplifying effect on the output. I was aware of the same having done many experiments.

The only pieces information that is truthful in the Figuera patent description is that variation of magnetic field strength is sufficient and rotation is not needed and the not so clear image of the electromagnets. Rest of the information is misleading. The output voltage of 550 voltage disclosed in 1902 is also correct.

I do not intend to post or reply here. Simple fact is that the output voltage and amperage must be in excess of input voltage and amperage and it is easily achieved by using thin primaries with high resistance and thick secondaries with lot of turns. The output voltage has to be higher than the input voltage.

Even if I slog it out here due to electromagnetic radiation problems this is not going to be a common device. I intend to work on an Earth battery and no longer going to do this. It is very unfortunate but no one wants to live near high electromagnetic radiation fields. The whole device needs to be put inside the Earth for it to be accepted for common usage.

Thanks to all who responded either positively or negatively.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 02, 2016, 04:52:00 PM
Faraday cage? It needs a box anyway might as well be one that does more then just look pretty.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on April 02, 2016, 09:51:26 PM

IF there is input power , where is it coming from ?    circa 1902 canary islands . 
has anyone even had a look at Canary islands ?    google it

its doubtful they even had a generator in 1902 .  what fuel would it run on ?

what is the suggested freq out put of CF , 50 , 60 hz ?      to power what ?     
1902 canary islands , no washing machines , no tungsten light bulbs , no fridges .   AC motors ?   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on April 02, 2016, 10:51:59 PM
to massive :)
everything very simple :) in these times maybe earlier "all" understood that if they let it loose then there wont be anyone who will be cutting grass for free by their castles :) and they started to teach ALL bullshit till these days :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 03, 2016, 12:49:59 AM
This what you can get just by adding a capacitor  to an AC signal. In my case by using 95 uF to feed my coils, two groups of coils, each coil  with 23 mH. Voltage measured in each side of a 0.47 resistor. Just for information
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on April 03, 2016, 01:09:43 AM
Hi hanon what do you think of the last update of the pjkbook?
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf
Look at page 24...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 03, 2016, 01:39:21 AM
Hi wistiti,
I think it is a good revision because now it collects the polarity in repulsion North-North, and I think this is an essential part of the device.

I miss the 1908 patent text which was already incluided in the previous version. Also I miss a reference to a current regulator composed by resistors, that it is the one explained in the patent claims. Resistor are easier to understand for newcomers than the magnetic reluctance rheostat, which maybe is an optimization but it is more difficult to understand at first sight. For me the essential key is to swing back and forth the two magnetic fields. The method to do it (resistors, rheostat, capacitor, magnetic amplifier,...) is secondary. There are many possible implementation to get the same result.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on April 03, 2016, 02:05:19 AM
Hanon I made the circuit you refered to below but did not get the same wave forms on
a scope. I got the DC humps up but not down....Did you have any success with
this circuit?  Did anybody else make the circuit??? any results??

Norman

Hanon said abour march 10 or so...
 Yesterday I was testing the circuit posted by Ignacio on the 26th of february to use half wave in each inducer by rectifying AC with two diodes, post #3185 http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611) and frankly the shape of each of the two signals is quite good. Minimun current of 0.2 A and maximum current about 2A with 12 volt AC input. I used a resistor joining both diodes outlet in order to assure a minimun current,as base current, during all time.

I attach the pic with one signal. The other signal you may guess it unphased 180°. I post to show it because it is an easy way to implement the input signals. Maybe other people could also use it. Really simple.

Still testing this new driving circuit. So far no important results to share. Output was small but a very good AC shape at 50 Hz.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on April 03, 2016, 03:35:33 AM
Hi wistiti,
I think it is a good revision because now it collects the polarity in repulsion North-North, and I think this is an essential part of the device.

I miss the 1908 patent text which was already incluided in the previous version. Also I miss a reference to a current regulator composed by resistors, that it is the one explained in the patent claims. Resistor are easier to understand for newcomers than the magnetic reluctance rheostat, which maybe is an optimization but it is more difficult to understand at first sight. For me the essential key is to swing back and forth the two magnetic fields. The method to do it (resistors, rheostat, capacitor, magnetic amplifier,...) is secondary. There are many possible implementation to get the same result.

Thank you for the reply!
Yep again the same concept "bucking feild" as Chris Emjunky try to tell to everyone...
Thank again! You do a great job!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on April 03, 2016, 05:07:28 AM
Hi hanon what do you think of the last update of the pjkbook?
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf
Look at page 24...

I wonder if it is better to have a core for each coil with a small gap betwin the coil or one unique core for the set of 3 coils...???  Have you a input on this?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 03, 2016, 12:33:34 PM
I'm in the midst of checking that theory. according to Doug the heat issue is the reason the cores were separated so the primaries are not effected from the secondary.
i posted a pic of my cores with bobbins but have to wait till payday to finish my winder tension tree. all parts bought from Lows or home depot.
i will post pics when its done and of the cores when they are wound.

when i test the one core theory and i have heat issues i can always cut the core.

Massive;

Canary islands in 1902-08 that would be DC only, AC was not introduced to Canary islands  till later after Figuera's time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 03, 2016, 02:07:39 PM
There was also the Spanish American war going on at the time. So when was the war of 1914 anyway?lol You wouldnt believe how many people get stumped by that question.
  Marathonman

  Man is standing in a field hunting with a rifle. He slings it over his shoulder backwards to shoot behind him, He is using wad cutters so to compensate for shooting backwards he loads a shell that has the bullet inserted into the shell backwards. Which way is he shooting? Is the bullet going backwards?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 03, 2016, 02:26:12 PM
  Doug i don't hunt and couldn't even tell you what a wad cutter is.
the name wad cutter sounds like a brand of condoms. ha ha ha, yah i know i'm throwed to the curb.

I'm assuming your referring to my avenue i chose with the cores.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 03, 2016, 02:37:53 PM
I must clarify my last post: I showed two unphased AC signals, but I am not using AC in my tests. It was just to show that there are different methods to unphase a signal from the other. It was just an example. Figuera used a always positive signal and this is what I am using. His patent is based on moving the field no matter how, so the signals must not get reversed at anytime.

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 03, 2016, 03:16:01 PM
Marathonman

  Back emf for the sake of simplicity follows rules which are conditional and might not always act the same way under all conditions depending on what those conditions are.
  The difference between forward and reverse and the reason for one or the other can be altered by changing the conditions. A wad cutter is a flat faced slug that has no front or back they are the same only the motion has relevance.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 03, 2016, 04:00:58 PM
Norman,
I did not get fine results with that circuit. The signals shape was good but I could just get 12 watts output with around 30 watts input. I posted the results in the thread.

Wistiti,
If you look for a post I did on the 4th of July 2015 you will find an attachment with more OU devices with this same concept of polarity in repulsion.

About the Canary Island in those years: Figuera developed his first genetator in Canary Island in 1902. As he worked as engineer for the Spanish State he was moved to Barcelona between 1904 and 1906, I do not remember it fine. His last design in 1908 was done there, where he started his commercial relation with Buforn who continued his work after Figuera's death.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on April 03, 2016, 04:14:56 PM
Norman,
I did not get fine results with that circuit. The signals shape was good but I could just get 12 watts output with around 30 watts input. I posted the results in the thread.

Wistiti,
If you look for a post I did on the 4th of July 2005 you will find an attachment with more OU devices with this same concept of polarity in repulsion.

About the Canary Island in those years: Figuera developed his first genetator in Canary Island in 1902. As he worked as engineer for the Spanish State he was moved to Barcelona between 1904 and 1906, I do not remember it fine. His last design in 1908 was done there, where he started his commercial relation with Buforn who continued his work after Figuera's death.


Sorry but the last post from you i am able to see is from april 2013..??
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 03, 2016, 04:35:22 PM
Sorry. Post corrected. Post on the 4th of july of 2015, not 2005 as I wrote, jeje

Curiously I did the same last year in New Year Eve  when I sent a message to some friends saying Happy New Year 2005. One of them answered me: "I think it was a good year"  :D  :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 03, 2016, 04:48:37 PM
I wonder if it is better to have a core for each coil with a small gap betwin the coil or one unique core for the set of 3 coils...???  Have you a input on this?

Hi again,
If you look at the pictures posted by Ignacio on the 28th of march there a plastic aislant (insulator) between each core. I think he explained in the spanish forum that this is to fix the place for the poles. With just one unique core you do not know where the poles are located when moving the fields. I do not understand it perfectly but that is what he told.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on April 03, 2016, 04:53:06 PM
Sorry. Post corrected. Post on the 4th of july of 2015, not 2005 as I wrote, jeje

Curiously I did the same last year in New Year Eve  when I sent a message to some friends saying Happy New Year 2005. One of them answered me: "I think it was a good year"  :D  :D

Ok ive got it! :)
Thanks!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 03, 2016, 06:20:36 PM
Hanon;

It doesn't mater if it is one continuous core or separated you still need something to tell you where the field collision is and if you brought it past the secondary far enough.
if you haven't brought the field over far enough in both type cores the output will be reduced considerably.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 04, 2016, 12:09:53 AM
I post here a table with design references for coils. You may estimate the core dimensiones (cm x cm) and the turns per volt required for a design maximun power.

Nucleo : core dimensions , square (cm x cm)
Potencia maxima : Maximun power (W)
Vueltas por voltio : Turns per volt
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 04, 2016, 05:10:23 AM
As far as i know and read the trains in Barcelona Spain when Figuera moved there were DC because the speed controllers were DC Rheostats. AC controllers were not invented yet, not sure yet on AC to the houses though.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on April 04, 2016, 08:34:04 AM
hanon posted some pages back some pics.attached his original and modified. if we do like this?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 04, 2016, 01:23:22 PM
 Hi Gyvulys,
 
Yes. You are correct. If you read the 1914 patent by Buforn you could see a similar arrangement. You can watch into my site (click on the Globe Sketch under my name in the posts)
 
Welcome to the thread. I guess you have chosen the most promising thread to follow. Figuera is the man to follow. ;)
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 04, 2016, 03:11:28 PM
We're sorry your call is very important to us.All our operators are busy at this time.Please stay on the line and the next available operator will assist you.The current wait time is 100 years. Please enjoy the worst music we could find while you wait.

  I dont care who you are thats funny in any language.It would be even funnier with the right accent. Cmon Hannon admit it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 04, 2016, 03:22:43 PM
hanon posted some pages back some pics.attached his original and modified. if we do like this?

DIS-INFORMATION!!!!!

LIES!!!!!!

DO NOT FOLLOW THEM!!!

THE WORKING CONFIGURATION IS CCW >> CW>>CCW .....etc

Tesla never beat Lenz with same pole configuration.

Anyone can start Punching me as he or she pleases.

THE TRUTH MUST ALWAYS REIGN.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: matu on April 04, 2016, 07:15:55 PM
DIS-INFORMATION!!!!!

LIES!!!!!!

DO NOT FOLLOW THEM!!!

THE WORKING CONFIGURATION IS CCW >> CW>>CCW .....etc

Tesla never beat Lenz with same pole configuration.

Anyone can start Punching me as he or she pleases.

THE TRUTH MUST ALWAYS REIGN.

POR FAVOR ANTES DE HABLAR DE DISINFORMACIÓN... INVESTIGUE.

(Use San Google It Help you...  8) 8) )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on April 04, 2016, 07:30:17 PM
darediamond
noone was talking about it is TRUTH OR LIE OR DISINFORMATION. what i wanted to show that electromagnet has 2 poles.  why   should we use only 1 if it has 2? :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 04, 2016, 09:50:53 PM
We're sorry your call is very important to us.All our operators are busy at this time.Please stay on the line and the next available operator will assist you.The current wait time is 100 years. Please enjoy the worst music we could find while you wait.

  I dont care who you are thats funny in any language.It would be even funnier with the right accent. Cmon Hannon admit it.

Sorry, I do not understand it. ....? ? ?

Just that I posted, I will ask you a question, Doug: Which design rules have you followed to make your electromagnets? (Turns, wire diameter, power,....)  Do you know any link to find design rules for electromagnets?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 04, 2016, 10:25:30 PM
Hannon
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html  Use the formulas to double check if your using odd ball methods. Yes odd ball as in not what would be the first choice for a professional generator engineer.
  Dis-information ? How can a person use both pole faces when their coil is in the middle of the magnets body? Assuming your using induction from a magnetic field without electrically connected or continuous cores where the eddy currents are shared by both the magnetic field and the induced coils. That seems more like a transformer and not at all like a generator.In a transformer core the best you get out is if you operate it as a magnetic amplifier.
 CCW CW CCW That's all pretty meaningless with out the polarity of the magnetic fields in relation to time.
  Im still on hold sorry you don't get the humor maybe people in your country do not place people on hold when making a phone call.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 04, 2016, 11:12:58 PM
 Thanks for the link. I will revise it.

On hold? Am I missing something?

Reading your last posts:If you refer to my nick badspelling: yes, I translated the Figuera patents into english, and also I released openly three patents which were lost into the patent archives until 2012. When I started in the thread the only available patent (1908) was in spanish and Bajac, as he speaks spanish, posted his own interpretation with his idea of the split transformer with air gaps to divert the Lenz effect. I noted that to spread this device into the world it was required to translate the patents into english and promote this thread. Always it is important to access to the original text and design instead of relying on a personnal interpretation done by a forum user. Bajac posted his paper but he did not posted the patent in english. Let's say that that was not free access to the genuine info.

The War in Cuba was in 1898, and the I World War was in 1914, but Spain did not get involved in this last one. Therefore Spain as a country did not changed radically as consequence of the war. I do not know what could happen to Buforn's work in that year. He stopped paying the annual fees of his 5 patents in that year.      I do not know if you are still on hold or not.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 05, 2016, 01:17:25 PM
I was on hold an actual tech support with a question no one had ever asked before so they first had to figure out who could answer he question. I thought it was funny after all the tech support joking around.

  If you look at most images of a generator they are not a good representation of magnetic field in it's actual use. Im referencing a typical rotating generator. The field magnet is given dc to make the field magnet which is then rotated with prime mover.
  There is an amount of time required to build up a strong enough magnetic field to run the loads on the output. It's not instant. The turning magnet is steady once it reaches the amount of flux needed to power the load and the field magnet. It increases in it's strength slightly when the load increases or decreases when the load decreases. The field magnet which is rotated is an inductive element or part the same as in a motor which is subject to drag which causes slip.Where the field is moving round but the motor can not keep up exactly under the working conditions of the motor. So there is behavior or characteristic of induction when put under strain. When the rotating generator is under load how much of the magnetic field is used to induce and how much is to lock the motion together between the rotor and the stator. With a large load there should be the ability for the rotating field to slip just like it would in a motor. Implying there is a force resisting the motion which is a result of the load characteristics on the output side. So the magnetic field is amp'ed up to keep it locked together to reduce the chance of it slipping. That would increase the amount of heat built up in the field magnets core as it goes above the amount of current used to induce the current in the output winding using some of the current just to maintain the locked motion on the stator and field magnet. So at what point has any of this given any indication that the field magnets field has diminished to a level below the minimum required strength to induce. Which is a relative term, if your looking to have 5kw output the field magnet is always producing the level of field strength required for 5kw. The only thing producing the changing of the field in relation to the stator coils is it's movement as the field magnet is rotated. This movement by rotation is the only thing being removed from the normal generator. So something has to replace it and it alone. The magnetic field which was being rotated by the physical rotation of the field magnet is a separate thing from the magnetic field being used to induce an output. Your always trying to combine the two as a single property. In terms of accountability they have to kept separate so they can be adjusted to the conditions of the load. One is the work being done to apply force to make the field move the other is the field itself and the associated cost to make the field. This not my opinion its just how it works.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 05, 2016, 04:55:19 PM
Current generators are  saturable converters.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on April 05, 2016, 06:21:41 PM
forest
how much poles we use in current generators? example permanent magnet generator. how much poles of each magnet we use?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 05, 2016, 09:11:42 PM
forest
how much poles we use in current generators? example permanent magnet generator. how much poles of each magnet we use?
Do you think about one pole only ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on April 05, 2016, 10:16:31 PM
All that is required is a change, whether it be poles or pole strength , using like poles on opposite sides of a generating coil properly placed , uses the Lenz ,it doesn't fight you .
Lenz will always be there use it instead of trying to fight it.
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 05, 2016, 11:26:29 PM
Doug,
Your post seems to be quite profound. I have read and reread to try to follow it as far as my knowledge in electrical machinery allows me. Please tell me if I have understood it fine: there are two fields : one required to maintain the load charged and other to keep the machine rotating at its speed to counteract the dragging. Understood fine or not?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 06, 2016, 12:09:30 AM
I'm curious Doug as to what type tech support and the question asked.

All Figuera did was remove the hardest part, work to apply force to make the field move in the form of rotation.
as he said powering the electromagnets takes little as does part G motor.

Good call Shylo.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 06, 2016, 03:17:23 AM
The one person I respect in this thread is Mr. Antijon who spoke the truth that the primaries when given in parallel will have an amplifying effect on the output. I was aware of the same having done many experiments.

The only pieces information that is truthful in the Figuera patent description is that variation of magnetic field strength is sufficient and rotation is not needed and the not so clear image of the electromagnets. Rest of the information is misleading. The output voltage of 550 voltage disclosed in 1902 is also correct.

I do not intend to post or reply here. Simple fact is that the output voltage and amperage must be in excess of input voltage and amperage and it is easily achieved by using thin primaries with high resistance and thick secondaries with lot of turns. The output voltage has to be higher than the input voltage.

Even if I slog it out here due to electromagnetic radiation problems this is not going to be a common device. I intend to work on an Earth battery and no longer going to do this. It is very unfortunate but no one wants to live near high electromagnetic radiation fields. The whole device needs to be put inside the Earth for it to be accepted for common usage.

Thanks to all who responded either positively or negatively.
I think magnetic radiation can be prevented by using aluminium foil tape on the Device somehow or can it not?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 06, 2016, 04:26:31 AM
Marathonman

"Doug,
Your post seems to be quite profound. I have read and reread to try to follow it as far as my knowledge in electrical machinery allows me. Please tell me if I have understood it fine: there are two fields : one required to maintain the load charged and other to keep the machine rotating at its speed to counteract the dragging. Understood fine or not?"

There are two fields yes but what i want you to consider treating the magnetic fields as if they are made up of two parts for each single magnet. One part being the part which will flood over the coil causing induction the other part the force making it move. An extra amount which replaces the force of the prime mover.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 06, 2016, 01:28:58 PM
If your going to use both poles from a single magnet you end up needing to move the physical magnet to move the field in and out of relation the coil of induction. The time it takes for the field strength of an electromagnet to reach a high enough state is too slow ,it also has a lot of other things fighting it from going into the coil of induction in the form of load resistance and the time for the magnetic domains of the core to flip in the core with the coil being induced. If this were not true generator field magnets would not have to use dc to excite the field, generators would reach full output the instant the field starting turning and there would be no physical resistance to the rotation like the coging effect and there would be no additional strain against the rotation as the load is increased and there would be no lag in the output when a new load is introduced. In actual use as the load increases the engine or motor has to increase it's output of power to overcome the additional strain caused by an increase in the load. These things are not avoidable.
 Using two magnets in opposition you need only reduce the strength of one by just enough to enable the other with out reducing the weaker one so much that it takes too long for it to build up enough again. Just like when you use two permanent magnets and physically move the coil between them, the proximity of the coil to the closest magnet will be the one who's field is inducing the coil. The directional flow of flux of the two same poles are opposite each other giving rise to the change in flux which you need to have induction. When you use ac rectified and split into the two coils the field is dropping off too low. The opposite magnet is preventing it from building back up to a high enough strength. If this field of a single magnet were comprised of two different sources one for the DC field and one for the fluctuation the field will not be able to drop off only the portion used for the fluctuation is making the change. It even works that way in a properly built part G with the rotating brush. Im sure you can find a way to cheat the original design but I personally find the value to be in the conquest of the original.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 06, 2016, 10:33:52 PM
Doug1: estas tu desvariando....

Doug1: these your ranting ....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 07, 2016, 04:04:59 AM
Doug;
I'm sure you can find a way to cheat the original design but I personally find the value to be in the conquest of the original.

Been their am doing that, but you are right the whole Figuera device has been a real conquest and i can't thank you enough.  all people do is trip on your post instead of reading and studying what you said like some Mental Midget. you are a smart MF and i for one am glad you were on this forum.
these stupid tech support people from different countries should zip their mouths and listen but "NO" all they do is blast out stupid shit like a fertilizer spreader to all the minions.

Yes i will post my been their am doing that soon with pic's and proof.

Thanks Doug , would love to see a good pile up.

Tech support very funny.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on April 08, 2016, 01:59:11 PM
My 2 cents worth:


It has occured to me that these effects may only be present in large coils. This is something which Joseph Newman has noticed.


The reason is that coils have a negligible resistance, so a huge coil can be driven with very little current.


Is there any indication anywhere of the SIZE of Figuera's coils? - other than vague newspaper reports.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 08, 2016, 06:53:51 PM
My 2 cents worth:


It has occured to me that these effects may only be present in large coils. This is something which Joseph Newman has noticed.


The reason is that coils have a negligible resistance, so a huge coil can be driven with very little current.


Is there any indication anywhere of the SIZE of Figuera's coils? - other than vague newspaper reports.


I'm quite sure there are pictures somewhere...deep in newspapers archives.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 09, 2016, 12:13:21 PM
darediamond
noone was talking about it is TRUTH OR LIE OR DISINFORMATION. what i wanted to show that electromagnet has 2 poles.  why   should we use only 1 if it has 2? :)

Gyvuly, I love your show of gentleness which commands in-disputable respect.

In the Figuera TrafoGen, unless you mold a collapsible Rectangular Iron core, you can not use the remaining 2 other Poles.

You can Successfully use the other 2 poles if you convert your Paired Straigth Core Lenzless E.Mags to Motor not Motor Gen this time. Which means you will need Neodymium Magnets and set all North Poles on one side and south pole on another. So your pair or Neo.Mag Fitted rotor will have all North facing out on one Rotor and all South Facing out on the other. You can then use the Shaft to drive Whatever you wish.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 09, 2016, 03:41:12 PM
My 2 cents worth:


It has occured to me that these effects may only be present in large coils. This is something which Joseph Newman has noticed.


The reason is that coils have a negligible resistance, so a huge coil can be driven with very little current.


Is there any indication anywhere of the SIZE of Figuera's coils? - other than vague newspaper reports.

The Frequency at Which any type of Electromagnet is driven is the UNIVERSAL Determinant of the Amount Of Current it with draw.

This is why is better to use Solid state Switch to pulse a Coil in connection with AC which does not pave way for B.E.F though bef is useful if properly harvested and converted but a bit complex to deal with.

If you make Big High resistance coil and swith at low frequency, it will still consume High Amperage thaan a Small Coil made with thicker Gauge and Switch at High Frequency in the khz.

I am speaking from Practical Experience.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 10, 2016, 05:22:42 AM
Hi gang:

Been doing a lot of thinking about this thing and just wondering why Cf chose such
a high voltage of 550 volts when he could have tested it at 115 volts using only 2 units.
 I strongly believe that the higher voltage is the key to the whole thing.
I know he was quite aware of Tesla's high voltage experiments using only pulsed dc.

 I'm sure many of you are aware of aether vortexing as taught by "Physics" where he
said to pulse the coils with at least 300 volts using non-reversing dc.
  Others like Moray,Smith,Kapanadze,etc,etc. were all using HV. So all can't be wrong.

For those who ask "where does all this free energy come from", I would say the aether.
 Nature always trys to keep things in balance. But sometimes when a group of postively
charged particles accumulate in the atmosphere during a rain storm, they have a strong
tendency to  attract to our negative charged earth. So the lightning does a balancing act.
  So if nature can do it so simply, why can't we?

 Not sure but I think it was Tesla that said, these aether particles were so tiny that
an electron would look to be the size of a golf ball.

  Lots of electronic theory on this thread which is fine as long as we don't let it spoil
our main goal (which is very easy to do).

Cliff
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 10, 2016, 08:21:47 AM
Cliff

High amperage comes only at High voltage.

Only above 300 volts we see a sudden spike in voltage and amperage.

We have to keep the magnetism low in order to get these results. For this we need high input volage and low amperage.

Multiple modules required to reach these results without excessive magnetism and associated high magnetic waves.  Only moderate magnetic field strength in the core meets all these requirements.
Thicker wire can lower the voltage needed. I would suspect CF used either 10 sq mm or 6 sq mm
coils for the secondary wire.

Pulsed dc at high input voltage tends to draw lot of current and will require hugh frequency to reduce the input amps.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 10, 2016, 01:22:53 PM
Done new tests with this next method to excite the electromagnets:

http://s26.postimg.org/6a9a1xhdl/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg (http://s26.postimg.org/6a9a1xhdl/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg)

Very simple to build. You could give it a try. You just need to adjust the resistor to achieve an always positive signal.  If you use a variac before the transformer for the DC offset you may avoid using the resistor. Just adjust the voltage of the AC which creares the DC offset to get those two positive signals.

Although having good shape of both signals (voltage of 0.95 volts measured along a 0.47 resistor, then I =V/R = 2.0 A. The zero voltage line is marked with this two short black lines in the screen) I have not got good results with my two sets of 3 coils. I think my problem is in other part, not in the exciting signals. Maybe my electromagnets are not mightly enough to get to breakeven. I do not know.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 10, 2016, 03:06:48 PM
Cliff; "Been doing a lot of thinking about this thing and just wondering why Cf chose such
a high voltage of 550 volts when he could have tested it at 115 volts using only 2 units.
 I strongly believe that the higher voltage is the key to the whole thing.?"

Figuera's test as you say were done long before his final device. and you and you person below you should know Buforn spilled the beans about the voltage which is 100 volts @ 1 amp. it could even be an average through one cycle..... who knows. the device can be made to reach what ever voltage and amperage you want, it's not set in stone.

one thing everyone has to consider is that once the primaries are at voltage there needs to be some amount of magnetic field (Capacitance) in the primaries in order to feed Part G when shoved out of the secondary in the declining phase. i could be wrong but if the wire was to big (less windings) wouldn't their be less inductive kick to the Part G for storage.

another thing people are failing to realize is that once this thing is powered up and running that part G becomes the power supply when looped back to it's self feeding the primaries regulating the currant as it spins through reluctance in the core of part G.
if one wanted to make this thing switch with transistors all you have to do is use PNP's on the positive side to mimic rotation as long as they overlap in a make before break fashion. if the transistors are on the other side the inductive kickback from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the primary will be blocked from feeding part G and therefore it will not be self sustaining.

Hanon;
I am enjoying watching you bang your head against the table. i know you mean well but part G take care of all the currant change. you are over complicating everything.


if everyone is wondering how to get DC from the output that's AC in the figuera device just use Tesla's way and it is simple. no diodes, resistors or anything else needed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 10, 2016, 03:14:22 PM
Hannon

 The phase angle looks good but the magnitude sucks ass. You chose to follow the wrong winding theory which does not account for the self induction value of the coil and core.
  Should of could of, if you look at the patent again the current feeding the coils is controlled completely from outside the coil itself not as an artifact of the coils construction. If you built them correctly and supplied the current as you did they would have gone up in a blaze of glory anyway. I may be ranting again who knows. You don't have too many options for making a stronger magnet in this set up.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 10, 2016, 05:41:40 PM
Doug,
I am trying to control the current from the external exciter to the electromagnets, not from inside. My winding is just 300 turns of 1mm diameter wire in 11 or 12 layers around the core. I did not take into account the self induction because I am not instructed in this field. Please tell  me what I can do to solve it.  I thought the magnitude was right: maximun current 2A, minimun around 0.3 A, in perfect opposition.

Marathon,
I am trying to simplify it, looking for an easy method to excite the system. It could work with many methods IMHO, not just your DC rheostat part G, which for me is very difficult to build. For now my aim is just getting a proof of principle with a simple design. I am not looking yet for a perfect and optimized design. The method to excite the system that I posted before is really simple, maybe someone else could have a try: just a center tapped transformer with a DC offset. Dc offset  could be done rectifying AC, a DC source,...No waste heat if you could adjust the DC voltage using a variac before rectifying the AC to the required voltage. In this case I think Doug is right: the exciter method is right but my problem is in some other part, maybe the electromagnets. The problems is that I do not know how to solve it. More turns??
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 10, 2016, 07:27:08 PM
NRamaswami:

"High amperage comes only with high voltage."

There you go again with your total nonsense. My 12 volt 2000watt inverter takes 166 amps from my battery.
Never mind studying electronic theory, just stick with electrical!

Marathonman:

"Figuera's test as you say were done long before his final device. and you and you person below you should know Buforn spilled the beans about the voltage which is 100 volts @ 1 amp. it could even be an average through one cycle..... who knows. the device can be made to reach what ever voltage and amperage you want, it's not set in stone."

No, didn't say the 550 was a necessity. Was it because the 20hp motor used 550?

And we should all know "the higher the voltage, the better to attract the charged aether particles".
Not sure what you mean by Buform spilling the beans. Are you saying that the device is only putting out
100 volts @ 1 amp?
If you want to build a solid-state driver, don't use bjt transistors. They require too much driving power.
Use an N channel and a P channel mosfet. They perform in a reciprocal way, when amperage increases in one, it decreases in the other.
Some of them rated @ 50 amps and require zero amperage to drive  them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 10, 2016, 08:03:04 PM
cliff33


How do you plan to use mosfets to amplify sinewave signal ? Of course you can simulate Figuera rotary "commutator" with a lot of mosfets but that's more complicated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 10, 2016, 09:23:47 PM
Forest,

A 741 chip can be wired up to produce excellent sine waves.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 11, 2016, 04:02:31 AM
No sir i am saying Buforn saying 100 volt 1 amp in his patent as to spilling the beans, as in supplying it.

and no i mean using PNP's only, as in Mosfet's on the positive side only. if you use any kind of ic's on the negative side between the part G and the primaries you will loose all inductive kickback into the system. the declining electromagnet feeds the system from being shoved out of the primary.  the currant is being shoved into the system (Part G)  in the same direction as being fed.

part G is the most important part of the system. not only does it feed the system from stored magnetic energy from the declining electromagnet it regulates the currant in the form of reluctance from the winding's on it. not only that,  the field in part G is constantly rotating as the brush rotates so does the field and as the field is being fed from the declining electromagnet it is opposite from the inclining electromagnet being fed.

Doug is very smart and i would not be in the position i am in if it was not for him but he is not spilling all the beans as to say. sorry Doug ! most respect given.

Part G is the most important part in Figuera's system hand's down. everyone in this forum is guilty of completely overlooking part G it's not funny.
If one was to study part G one would find the key to happiness . 
imagine that !

Figuera's patent 1908 is DC fed only NOT AC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 11, 2016, 07:12:48 AM
NRamaswami:

"High amperage comes only with high voltage."

There you go again with your total nonsense. My 12 volt 2000watt inverter takes 166 amps from my battery.
Never mind studying electronic theory, just stick with electrical!


Cliff33:

What is nonsensical talk? assuming electricity supplied by a battery to an inverter to be equal to an output from the secondary of CF devicee is certainly nonsensical.

Have you ever experimented with this type of  device? Have you ever constructed and checked the output? You do not even have the basic qualification of experimental experience to talk about me.

Let us see if you can generate 166 amps at 12 volts in a CF device as output from secondary.

If you cannot walk your talk just shut up and learn to listen to people who do real experiments and make observations.

I'm really tired of the fraudulent lies and misinformation being tomtomed here as if it is the truth. Make misrepresentation a thousand times and then many will believe it to be true seems to be the motto.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 11, 2016, 02:48:47 PM
Marathonman

 "No sir i am saying Buforn saying 100 volt 1 amp in his patent as to spilling the beans, as in supplying it."

  lol and ya wonder how to scale the inducer coils or wind them or space them. Curious about it being slightly under voltage are ya? C'est la vie you'll figurea it out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 11, 2016, 04:59:40 PM
Yah, that is life. enjoy your laugh, it's what youv'e been doing on this forum for years is laughing at others while your Figuera system runs at home.

and "YES" your right, i will figure the problem out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 11, 2016, 05:42:46 PM
Marathonman,

"Spilling the beans" sounds like somebody disclosing a big secret lol!
Ya, I know what you mean now. His unit was running on 100 watts of power.
 
 I agree in what you're saying about not using negative, but both my mosfets will only be driven
with a positive going sine-wave signal.
  They will both compliment each other, so that when the gate on one goes more positive,then
the gate on the other goes less positive and vice-versa. The low voltage side of the sine-wave
will always be positive.


Forest,
 Not sure if I answered you correctly.
Both mosfets will be driven from the same source so the biasing will be a little bit tricky.
Still working on it.

 It takes 3-4 volts to get them to conduct so the bias has to be set accordingly.
   Once working properly, just 2 mosfets will take on the job of 7 power-hungry resistors.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 11, 2016, 06:50:35 PM
Interesting information to know.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 11, 2016, 11:58:24 PM
Cliff; "Been doing a lot of thinking about this thing and just wondering why Cf chose such
a high voltage of 550 volts when he could have tested it at 115 volts using only 2 units.
 I strongly believe that the higher voltage is the key to the whole thing.?"

Figuera's test as you say were done long before his final device. and you and you person below you should know Buforn spilled the beans about the voltage which is 100 volts @ 1 amp. it could even be an average through one cycle..... who knows. the device can be made to reach what ever voltage and amperage you want, it's not set in stone.

one thing everyone has to consider is that once the primaries are at voltage there needs to be some amount of magnetic field (Capacitance) in the primaries in order to feed Part G when shoved out of the secondary in the declining phase. i could be wrong but if the wire was to big (less windings) wouldn't their be less inductive kick to the Part G for storage.

another thing people are failing to realize is that once this thing is powered up and running that part G becomes the power supply when looped back to it's self feeding the primaries regulating the currant as it spins through reluctance in the core of part G.
if one wanted to make this thing switch with transistors all you have to do is use PNP's on the positive side to mimic rotation as long as they overlap in a make before break fashion. if the transistors are on the other side the inductive kickback from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the primary will be blocked from feeding part G and therefore it will not be self sustaining.

Hanon;
I am enjoying watching you bang your head against the table. i know you mean well but part G take care of all the currant change. you are over complicating everything.


if everyone is wondering how to get DC from the output that's AC in the figuera device just use Tesla's way and it is simple. no diodes, resistors or anything else needed.

How will the lenzless HIGH FREQUENCY AC OUTPUT from the Center Secondaries be tapped and used if HIGH FREQUENCY Diodes are not first employed to rectify that aforementioned output and then converted back to AC by Simply using an inverter?

Can you explain Mr?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 12, 2016, 01:01:38 AM
......
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 12, 2016, 01:08:42 AM
Interesting information to know.

The Figuera device is a Motionless Motor Generator with AC output. in convectional Motor Generators, YOU WILL HARDLY GET USEFUL OUTPUT WHEN YOU MOVE TWO NON-OPPOSING FIELD OVER A COIL LET ALONE GETTING AC OUTPUT.

SAME THING IS THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURE. WE HAVE DAY AND NIGTH. YOUR HEARTH IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS PROCESS TOO, IT PULSE, SWITCHING ON AND OFF.

SO WHICH THEORY SUPPORTS YOUR NORTH TO NORTH OUTPUT IN YOUR DIAGRAM ABOVE?

The Loads of Components available in this Era were not Available in Figuera's time that was why he used those cumbersome components available in is time.

I know if CF is alive today, he will directly use Solid State Integrated Switch namely Inverter instead of using any ready-made Lenz Oriented and Speed Limited Motors. In every inverter, there are readily Oscilators which have the capabilities that those ready-made motors deliberately made to obey Lenz law be it brushed or brushless do not have. You can even control there frequencies using Potentiometer Position at the appropriate designated  Pin on them.

There are several simple low power usage inverter circuits like the one in the attached picture available now and which can be developed to Power a CORRECTLY (N >> S >> N >> S  etc.) built Figuera TraFoGen.

Figuera had to deal with back E.M.F in is own overunity device because he used DC which emanates from Batteries switched by a mechanical means to Power is Lenzless TraFoGen Primary Coils.

But now in out time, that DC can be easily switched using the always 'Beautiful' ICs you have out there. One such of them is SG3524N. Place Variable resistor on it PIN6 leg and add other simple component as shown in the circuit and viola, you have a Compact Variable Frequency Inverter

One of the Major disadvantage in ready-made Motor-driven mechanical switch is that you, Your Frequency will be  limited by the Maximum Speed Of The Motor which are Always Amperage Hog.

The only solution to this is to build your own Low Amperage High Voltage Pulsed Motor which will require those costly neodymium Magnets.

But why go that slow and costly lane when you HAVE A FAR MORE BETTER OPTION IN THE NAME OF INVERTER??

WHY??

 
http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 12, 2016, 04:33:04 AM
You Build it the way you fucking want to build it and i will build it the fucking way I want to build it plain and simple.

as for my last post read the fucking head line "interesting info" that's it, that's all it said butt head.

There are several simple low power usage inverter circuits like the one in the attached picture available now and which can be developed to Power a CORRECTLY (N >> S >> N >> S  etc.) built Figuera TraFoGen.

well build it and quit fucking wining about it. then when youv'e exhausted all your money and the piece of crap doesn't work i'll be laughing my ass off saying "I TOLD YOU SO"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 12, 2016, 04:41:53 AM
Darediamond,
 
I'll not worry about rectifying the secondary voltage until I can prove to myself  that the thing works.
If can get 200 watts out for only 100 watts in then I know I'm in business and then will try for something better. No point in building an elaborate setup if it doesn't work.
  Hope this answers your question.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 12, 2016, 09:07:57 AM
You Build it the way you fucking want to build it and i will build it the fucking way I want to build it plain and simple.

as for my last post read the fucking head line "interesting info" that's it, that's all it said butt head.

There are several simple low power usage inverter circuits like the one in the attached picture available now and which can be developed to Power a CORRECTLY (N >> S >> N >> S  etc.) built Figuera TraFoGen.

well build it and quit fucking wining about it. then when youv'e exhausted all your money and the piece of crap doesn't work i'll be laughing my ass off saying "I TOLD YOU SO"

Marathon, stop all this your show of immaturity and your DELIBERATE misguidance effort because Tesla, Figuera, Burbosa, Ramaswami etc. can't be wrong winding there Coils CW on one side and CCW on the other side in other to cancel lenz.

I nullified the diagram in your so called "interesting info"  because I have Practically done several research about using ready-made motors to achieve overunity so IN NO WAY ARE YOU QUALIFIED TO TELL ME WHAT WILL WORK OR OTHERWISE with your spirit of deliberate misguidance.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 12, 2016, 10:09:51 AM
Darediamond,
 
I'll not worry about rectifying the secondary voltage until I can prove to myself  that the thing works.
If can get 200 watts out for only 100 watts in then I know I'm in business and then will try for something better. No point in building an elaborate setup if it doesn't work.
  Hope this answers your question.

No Cliff, stop the twist because my question is Universal. I asked "how will" not "what if' as you made it clear in your reply.

Marathon said there is No need for using High Frequency diodes to tap the output from the Secondary but you refuse to answer how will such action enable anyone to successfully utilized the Sec. output.

If you switch the Secondary at low frequency like 3600rpm or 60hz, too much amperage will be drained from your battery or Super Cap Bank so high frequency is the answer and what household devices operates at upward of 500hz anywhere in the world? Can you please mention one?

Figuera is not alive today to teach us how he REALLY set-up his devise to achieve overunity as presented in his Patent but the Primary principle he applied was also used by Tesla and in later days Burbosa and Mr Ramaswami of India. And that Primary Principle lies in Winding one Primary in Clockwise direction and Winding the other in Anti-clockwise and then linking them in PARALLEL not serial.

So could you please again answer my question rigthly

So please

So if you follow that foundation you will sure achieved what Figuera, Tesla and co achieved which is the Negation of Lenz the Limitation to Overunity achievement.


But wait, why take Paracetamol for another Man's headache? Are Marathon in disguise??
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 12, 2016, 12:04:59 PM
Darediamond

 How did they rectify ac back then? Do you think the person who was fighting for ac might have found or known of way to rectify ac without using rectifiers or diodes? So the people who were already set up with dc would not lose all their invested money on the dc operated equipment they had in place before ac was fully developed.All the towns that had invested in lighting the streets and a few homes of wealthy people had to be convinced ac could also be used to run the dc they had already invested in.
  Tesla filed a patent for it 1889, how long had he known about it before then? People were not sure which would become the dominate means for power transmission at the time some must of thought there was no way Tesla would win out and all the little details about how to manipulate ac were most likely for some not worth patenting. There is no way to know for how long the method was known before the patent filing. So few believed in ac who would bother except the those who were fighting for it. Rectifying ac is not dependent on vaccum tubes or ic's or diodes. They were made after the fact born from the original. The magnetic fields can be used to block the current of ac through cancellation without wasting it as heat to block it.
  If you dont know that or the how or have not tried it does that mean it does not work or exist. Im sure you will think it easier and cheaper to just bop on down to some electronics shop and buy some plastic parts and solder together a circuit board .So do it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 12, 2016, 01:54:35 PM
Dare Diamond:

Primary appears to be wound in CW and CCW directions but the rotation of current in both primaries is in the same direction.

Primary can be connected both in parallel and in series. If the input current is high a series connection would also work to generate high voltage and high ampreage in the secondary. Input wattage will be higher in serial connection and lower in parallel connection. But in both cases the current must move towards the center and then move away from the center.

Secondary coil must be far thicker in size than the primary coil. The secondary turns must be sufficient to generate higher voltage in secondary than the primary voltage.

One of our friends wanted me to post this quote for people confused about the need for higher voltage in secondary.

 the quote in the 1902 patent #30378

Quote
The current dynamos, come from groups of Clarke machines, and our generator recalls, in its fundamental principle, the Ruhmkorff induction coil.

So, the Ruhmkorff coil is the CLASSIC High Voltage Coil. Why would Figureas  refer to the Ruhmkorff coil if he didn't use high voltage. If he used low voltage he would have said the principles were similar to the Clarke machine.

Bottom line:
High Voltage needs to be used, as stated by Figureas. The fundamental principle lies in the Ruhmkorff coil as stated by Figureas.
End Quote..

The only difference is that high voltage secondary here is a thick wire. Not thin wire. Lenz law is defeated in this set up of two opposing primaries that focus the magnetic field in the center. Whether you wind the coil only in the center or also under the primary coils the result is the same. Lenz law is negated. Lenz effects are certainly there but they are cancelled out.

There is nothing more to this device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 12, 2016, 08:26:09 PM
Darediamond,



"How will the lenzless HIGH FREQUENCY AC OUTPUT from the Center Secondaries be tapped and used if HIGH FREQUENCY Diodes are not first employed to rectify that aforementioned output and then converted back to AC by Simply using an inverter?

Can you explain Mr?"


From your question, I can only assume that you believe that diodes have to be added to the output of the secondary.
Well yes ,but only if you want to drive a 12 volt inverter for 115volt 60hz output.
   I also assume that you believe you can't run a load directly off the ac secondary coil. Not true.

I'll be driving my primaries at much higher frequencies than CF ever could.
 I can use my ham rig to light up a 100 watt incandescent bulb using 4 mhz.
You can run any resistive load directly from the "y" output.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 12, 2016, 10:07:37 PM
K.I.S.S.   = Keep It Simple St....


Center tapped transformer + DC offset


One transformer wit turns ratio 1:20 and other with ratio  1:33.  220 V AC input . I regulate the voltage to the lower transformer (adjusting the ratio 1:33) to get the two signals to be always positive. I have simulated my four inducers ( 2.3 ohm and 23 mH )  (Software: easyeda.com )
 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 13, 2016, 07:03:50 AM
Darediamond

 How did they rectify ac back then? Do you think the person who was fighting for ac might have found or known of way to rectify ac without using rectifiers or diodes? So the people who were already set up with dc would not lose all their invested money on the dc operated equipment they had in place before ac was fully developed.All the towns that had invested in lighting the streets and a few homes of wealthy people had to be convinced ac could also be used to run the dc they had already invested in.
  Tesla filed a patent for it 1889, how long had he known about it before then? People were not sure which would become the dominate means for power transmission at the time some must of thought there was no way Tesla would win out and all the little details about how to manipulate ac were most likely for some not worth patenting. There is no way to know for how long the method was known before the patent filing. So few believed in ac who would bother except the those who were fighting for it. Rectifying ac is not dependent on vaccum tubes or ic's or diodes. They were made after the fact born from the original. The magnetic fields can be used to block the current of ac through cancellation without wasting it as heat to block it.
  If you dont know that or the how or have not tried it does that mean it does not work or exist. Im sure you will think it easier and cheaper to just bop on down to some electronics shop and buy some plastic parts and solder together a circuit board .So do it.

And what benefit is in applying a complex process when there is simpler, effective and efficient ALTERNATIVE?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 13, 2016, 07:20:22 AM
Darediamond,



"How will the lenzless HIGH FREQUENCY AC OUTPUT from the Center Secondaries be tapped and used if HIGH FREQUENCY Diodes are not first employed to rectify that aforementioned output and then converted back to AC by Simply using an inverter?

Can you explain Mr?"


From your question, I can only assume that you believe that diodes have to be added to the output of the secondary.
Well yes ,but only if you want to drive a 12 volt inverter for 115volt 60hz output.
   I also assume that you believe you can't run a load directly off the ac secondary coil. Not true.

I'll be driving my primaries at much higher frequencies than CF ever could.
 I can use my ham rig to light up a 100 watt incandescent bulb using 4 mhz.
You can run any resistive load directly from the "y" output.

"You can run any resistive load directly from the "y" output."

Unless connected in series, the Secondary output voltage will always be lower while amperage will be Higher if Thick AWG Wire like AWG#14 or 15 or 16 is used to wind them. So few HOUSEHOLD Resistive devices runs at low Voltage.

So to go universal powering all form of devices it is far better to turn the output of the Secondaries to DC using FAST SWITCHING RECTIFIER DIODES and link that output to an Inverter.

You can even make a Lenzless  Spiral Wound Primary Coils Center Tapped Transformer For your Inverter Driver.

It can be done.

Think outside the Box


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on April 13, 2016, 01:03:44 PM
Don't just talk about it... do it! And take a video of it running without a power source ( or disconnected from it ).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 13, 2016, 06:51:28 PM
Unless connected in series, the Secondary output voltage will always be lower while amperage will be Higher if Thick AWG Wire like AWG#14 or 15 or 16 is used to wind them. So few HOUSEHOLD Resistive devices runs at low Voltage.


Secondary voltage is dependent on turns ratio and voltage ratio follows suit.
e.g: If primary has 100 turns and secondary has 500. that's a ratio of 5 to 1.
 If primary is being pulsed at 10 volts then secondary voltage will be 5x10 = 50 volts.

Why would you want to prematurely change the  pulsed output to pure dc before testing for over-unity?
I could find many ways of loading that 50 volt output, just for testing.

We should all remember that Tesla's later years were exclusively devoted to experiments
in pulsed dc. Maybe it's just the pulsed dc that attracts the free energy. Nobody knows for sure.
We have to walk before we can run. Just one step at a time.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on April 13, 2016, 09:56:41 PM
Eagles soar, high above all, seeing everything..   even the truth
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on April 14, 2016, 09:05:32 AM
Nice investigation, seaad!  Would it be too much work to replace the 'rotary' coils with Figuera's 'resistors' in your LTSpice sim above and compare efficiency?   tack så mycket!  :-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 14, 2016, 10:04:44 AM
Unless connected in series, the Secondary output voltage will always be lower while amperage will be Higher if Thick AWG Wire like AWG#14 or 15 or 16 is used to wind them. So few HOUSEHOLD Resistive devices runs at low Voltage.


Secondary voltage is dependent on turns ratio and voltage ratio follows suit.

e.g: If primary has 100 turns and secondary has 500. that's a ratio of 5 to 1.
 If primary is being pulsed at 10 volts then secondary voltage will be 5x10 = 50 volts.

Why would you want to prematurely change the  pulsed output to pure dc before testing for over-unity?
I could find many ways of loading that 50 volt output, just for testing.

We should all remember that Tesla's later years were exclusively devoted to experiments
in pulsed dc. Maybe it's just the pulsed dc that attracts the free energy. Nobody knows for sure.
We have to walk before we can run. Just one step at a time.

"Secondary voltage is dependent on turns ratio and voltage ratio follows suit."

No that is not the case when Lenz is cancelled out and Secondary Wire Gauge is Higher than the Primary wire gauge.

AC is better because Back E.M.F is not generated with it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on April 14, 2016, 11:28:51 AM
Nice investigation, seaad!  Would it be too much work to replace the 'rotary' coils with Figuera's 'resistors' in your LTSpice sim above and compare efficiency?

I have tried with just resistors also in LT Spice sim. (Similar (DC-bias) test see my reply #3171 on: February 24, 2016)

 Output power becomes lower with resistors as well as the BMF spikes (400-4kV) at the transistor colletors.

 Inside the coils are already reasonable simulated winding-resistors.

We have to reinterpret the Figuera patent text as the devil reads the Bible. Or is there anyone here who can explain how the Figuera 0U occurs ??  ::)
  DC is 'Bad' but AC is 'Good' !
       Keep soaring...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on April 14, 2016, 12:52:34 PM

very thorough - that's Good!

...and the eagle flies... with the dove...

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 14, 2016, 12:57:18 PM
Seead,


I see that you have simulated the DC reheostat proposed by marathonman.


But I see that you just got one signal and that signal has positive and negative parts. In Figuera generator we need two signals and just with positive part. Is it possible to achieve with the rheostat?


One more question: Is your simulation software simulating a toroidal core? I guess that a toroidal core will not behave identically to a bar core.


As for you last statement, I write here my interpretation of the Figuera Generator:


The magic of the Figuera generator is that makes possible to convert two variable magnetic fields in time in the electromagnets (dB/dt) into a variable magnetic field in space (in the induced coils), as happens in all generators ( emf = B·v· Length )  moving back and forth the magnetic lines.


That´s all. A motionless generator capable of creating flux-cutting induction. Visit my site for a deeper explanation of this same concept. See the videos linked there.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 14, 2016, 05:06:20 PM
Another very simple method to drive the inducers. No waste heat in resistors.


FEEDING THE ELECTROMAGNET WITH TWO OPPOSSITE SQUARE SIGNALS FROM A VOLTAGE SOURCE


If you feed two square signals (in opposition) created with two transistors (in opposition: when one is ON the other is OFF and later the contrary) those signals once that reach each set of coils suffer a filter (as consequence of the inductance of the coils.RL Filter with time constant, tau = L/R) which converts them into two opposite sawtooth signals, as needed in the patent.

The electronic driving circuit for those signals could be quite simple: a 555 chip (or other) to create a low power pulsed signal. This signal could go directly to a power transistor to drive one set of coils. This same low power pulsed signal from the 555 chip also should go to a NOT gate to invert it. This inverted signal should go to a second transistor to create the second square signal in opposition to the first one. It can also achieved with a relay with two outputs: first on+off, later when switched  off+on. Another posibility is with two positives AC half waves fed alternatively. The RL filter will be superimposed over the shape of the input signal.

The simulation result attached below is for two a 12 V square signals at 35 Hz fed into two coils per set (each coil with 2.3 Ohms and 23 mH). Original square signals may reach zero voltage because the coils filter their dynamics and avoid reaching the zero level. Before reaching zero voltage the next pulse appears. Initial signal : square signal from 12 V to  0 V. As the inductance of the system determines the shape of the sawtooth it is recommended to have the possibility to vary the frequency of the square signal in order to adjust it to the best output. In the Excel attached you may find a simulation with different values of the inductance and the frequency.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on April 14, 2016, 08:49:08 PM
Seead,
I see that you have simulated the DC reheostat proposed by marathonman.
But I see that you just got one signal and that signal has positive and negative parts. In Figuera generator we need two signals and just with positive part. Is it possible to achieve with the rheostat?
One more question: Is your simulation software simulating a toroidal core? I guess that a toroidal core will not behave identically to a bar core.

Hello hanon, NP , all
 I have two input signals to the primarys, see the principle picture 'Figuera sim'.   And the pic 'LTSpice IV Figuera A2' shows the output signal. In Reply #3518

     That simulated DC rheostat proposed by marathon man is not a DC rheostat. It is an AC 'contraption', L:s with its r:s. And I assumed with an iron core! Acting as a transformer with multiple windings.
(But the simulator can only handle three, windings together, the three horizontal smaller rings)

 See the green curve pic 'LTSpice IV Figuera A3';  Signal going to the right Primary . (The pic-up point is slightly filtrered , to cut the huge kV- spikes in sight in the graph.)

 The signal going to the left Primary (Not shown here) is equivalent but with a 180 deg.(time) offset.       Red curve is the output across the Output resistor (100 ohm). Always swinging around the zero line !

The smaller pic.(A4) shows the marathon man 'contraption' whithout iron core, only the three coils with its internal resistance (7, 20,7 ohm). No coupling between the coils.

The smaller pic.(A5) with  three pure resistances (7,20,7 ohm) instead of coils.

The input signal to the primary windings goes always below the zero line independent of the type of 'rheostat'!    So help me God  :'(    And the efficiency always below 40%!     :'( :'( :'(
The DC simulating batt. voltage to all pic,s = 24V

I don't think the simulator know if the core is round. I haven't asked.. Lol
But slightly different (magnetical) coupling between the different windings is possible to define and I have used this possibility here.

I hope that the (dB/dt) overcomes the lost 60% in reality and additionally creates eaven more OU.  But my simulator don't know anything about (dB/dt).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 15, 2016, 12:21:58 AM
 "That simulated DC rheostat proposed by marathon man is not a DC rheostat. It is an AC 'contraption"

WRONG ANSWER!
and it is not simulated at all it is what Figuera used in his device. you can use all the simulators you want, none of them will simulate Figuera's part G because NONE of them are coded with all the proper parameters.

continuously rotating Rheostat that uses Reluctance to control currant in DC form, plain and simple.

Good luck all the same.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nul-points on April 15, 2016, 12:29:05 AM
That's an amazing amount of work seaad!    i know it's disappointing that the Efficiency is generally so much under unuty, but it's interesting to see how different even those particular 3 approaches perform (in prediction).  Nice to see that the waveform is coming out much as expected though.  Does the logic circuit include the 'make-before-break' action of Figuera's commutator G?   (Just wondering about those voltage spikes)

Thanks for doing all this 'programming' of the Sim & for sharing the results   ...it takes an eagle-eye for detail!  ;-)

all the best
np
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 15, 2016, 12:39:15 AM
What we know from Figuera patent is what it is written there: he just explains the use of a system of resistors to modulate the current to each set of electromagnets. The rest is our interpretation. I reiterate that IMO the real important idea is to move the magnetic fields back and forth in opposition, no matters the method you use to do it.

Some methods will be more efficient than others, but I think that when producing 20,000 watts you won't have to worry much if you are wasting some energy to excite the electromagnets. At my current degree of advance , I am now more concerned with using the simplest method to power the inducers that some more complicated devices. Also I do not have the ability to built mechanical devices. I understand that some people are now going for others methods.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 15, 2016, 09:04:06 AM
It was common for earlier patents not to disclose some material parts as trade secrets. I do believe that Figuera has omitted one part. This was permissible at that time. No one is able to do Daniel McFarland Cook device. The only time Figuera device produces COP>1 is when the core is saturated. Not otherwise. Or as Iganico has indicated that the secondary was connected to capacitors in series to increase the amperage. This is some thing I have not tested. I think the presence of resistors shows that it is either interruptted DC or pulsed DC as it will result in increased voltage to the primaries boosting the output. But it is only my idea why resistors are justified. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: perexime on April 15, 2016, 09:57:33 AM
100% Figuera  
http://free-energy-devices.com/PatD14.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on April 15, 2016, 02:27:08 PM
100% Figuera  
http://free-energy-devices.com/PatD14.pdf (http://free-energy-devices.com/PatD14.pdf)


No moving parts - selfrunner.......
So why don't we see these everywhere in 2016?
Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 16, 2016, 07:40:50 AM
That application was abandoned after the first office action. Whenever a device that is claimed to have COP>1 is sought to be patented USPTO generally asks for proof by a working device to be demonstrated before USPTO. No one produces such devices. The only exception to this case that I'm aware of is the Pyramid Electric Geneator of Peter Grandics http://www.google.co.in/patents/US8004250 This application was however refused in EPO. The first patent of Peter Grandics was refused in USPTO but the second patent was some how allowed without raising any questions. This patent stipulates a minimum of 500 volts output to exceed COP>1 which is consistent with my observations. However it requires LF or ELF frequencies which are inimical to health. So it is not going to be allowed.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on April 16, 2016, 08:48:47 AM
Hi all.
Here is a demostration of COP>1 filmed in front of the pattent office and the patent was refused, a clear demostration as the water from the pump.
In memory of the Great Joseph W Newman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xMm6qo-Hgc
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on April 16, 2016, 11:02:04 AM
to norman6538 (http://overunity.com/profile/norman6538.44/)[/size][/color]


very naive question :)
p.s  my opinion schools,universities created for population dumbing :) i think around 18xx 19xx rich ones understood that soon noone will be cutting their grass for free by their castles:) and they made a plan which u see now :) i dont say that school or university is bad it has its positive effects BUT it puts u in abox


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MagnaProp on April 17, 2016, 04:24:22 AM
No moving parts - selfrunner.......
So why don't we see these everywhere in 2016?
Norman
For the same reason Gary Webb was able to commit suicide by shooting himself twice in the head. Devices or people that can cause to much disruption can quickly go bye bye. Lots of economies rely heavily on exporting fossil fuels. When Saudi Arabia has to build large solar power facilities in order to keep making money exporting fossil fuels instead of using it up themselves, you know it's a rather important product that powerful people want to keep in circulation.

So far the Figuera device discussed in this thread is one of the best devices I have seen that makes sense to me. I see lenz in the system. However, the lenz appears to help it instead of hurting it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 17, 2016, 01:05:42 PM
I unfortunately have to make an admission of failure.

Both Ramaswami device and Figuera Device works well and produce COP>1 under the following two circumstances.

1. When the core is saturated. The core that I used is not a solid iron core but core made up of iron rods. This rod has significant air core component of at least 20% of the core and so we are able to go to high Tesla ranges without melting the iron. But the unfortunate problem is that the core at such high saturation is said to output very high Electromagnetic radiations which are inimical to health. Therefore I was advised that I should not go beyond 1.2 Tesla. I'm unable to get COP.1 at 1.2 Tesla.

2. There is a type of winding that I tried that produces COP>1 but again that type of winding is said to create 100 times more inimical radiation than the core at saturation.

3. It is not possible for me as indicated in the Figueras patent to get COP>1 or self sustaining devices under the safety margins. No hazard to health, 'environment and safe and sustainied operation of the device are the rules that I had to meet. In spite of my high efforts I'm unable to do it.

4. Unfortunately when I connected multiple primary coils in parallel the input voltage came down and input amperage went up. The secondaries are not merging. If we take the output value of each individual secondary I was able to reach 82 volts and when I connect the multiple secondaries together in series the combined voltage is never the combined value. It gets combined to produce a super high voltage only when the core is saturated. Larger cores draw amps like 25 or 30 amps from the mains. 200 watts lamps light up as if they are 500 watts lamps being powered under high voltage.

I have to admit my failure here. I have checked as Figuera type and as Ramaswami type and I used AC and I repeatedly face this problem.

I will test for one more time with pulsed DC using a special circuit where the output which will power the primary will be in 25 Khz frequency, with an output voltage of 500 volts and we need to check what is the amperage drawn. I'm going to use Mosfets or transistors that can handle high current draw and let me see if it works. The circuit will keep the pulsed dC at +5 to the top of the sine wave and it will never reach zero. This will not allow the magnetic field to collapse. Lenz law is not supposed to come unless the magnetic field collpases and this is the only test that I have to do.

If this does not work, I intend to stop my experiments and focus on my Practice.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 17, 2016, 01:55:27 PM
.... melting the iron. But the unfortunate problem is that the core at such high saturation is said to output very high Electromagnetic radiations which are inimical to health.

2. There is a type of winding that I tried that produces COP>1 but again that type of winding is said to create 100 times more inimical radiation than the core at saturation.

You are a scam artist. Your post are just to discourage people from replicating this device. All in your post is a big lie. Your are a brake in this project. Nothing is useful from your posts and just miguiding points as saturating the core (nonsense)????, melting the iron (stupidity)!!!!, radiation (a big lie) !!!!

I may guess that you are  misguiding people because you have some interests that nobody may be able to replicate this system.

I have a private message from you some time ago telling me that the advice about radiation was a lie.  In that time I realized you were a scam artist. That was my fault for not uncovering you. I am sorry for not telling that in the thread then. But never is too late.

You have come back to use the same argument to create terror. I am going to search for that message and I will release the text in short in the good of truth and justice. People will see the kind of person you are.

Bye ... bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 17, 2016, 03:17:08 PM
Oh, you just now realized this.....em,  it's about time you pulled your head out of your back side. Hanon has awaken.

MagnaProp;

So far the Figuera device discussed in this thread is one of the best devices I have seen that makes sense to me. I see lenz in the system. However, the lenz appears to help it instead of hurting it.

very good observation and totally correct.
i also believe you don't use Indian tech support with an assumption like that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 17, 2016, 03:38:30 PM
You are a scam artist. Your post are just to discourage people from replicating this device. All in your post is a big lie. Your are a brake in this project. Nothing is useful from your posts and just miguiding points as saturating the core (nonsense)????, melting the iron (stupidity)!!!!, radiation (a big lie) !!!!

I may guess that you are  misguiding people because you have some interests that nobody may be able to replicate this system.

I have a private message from you some time ago telling me that the advice about radiation was a lie.  In that time I realized you were a scam artist. That was my fault for not uncovering you. I am sorry for not telling that in the thread then. But never is too late.

You have come back to use the same argument to create terror. I am going to search for that message and I will release the text in short in the good of truth and justice. People will see the kind of person you are.

Bye ... bye


Hanon:

I have only told the forum what I have experienced and what I have seen. How can this prevent others from doing the experiments. Please check with others what is the safe margin for transformer cores (1.2 Tesla is what I'm told). COP>1 comes for a few seconds or 1 or 2 minutes but the iron roars. That is not safe is any one who does the experiment can see.

I'm least bothered about titles such as scam artist..You had not done the kind of large devices that I did. You had not suffered in the way I suffered.

We are dealing with Electricty at low frequency here. High amperage and significantly high voltage. If the results come I can say yes the results come. If results under safety conditions do not come, I have to tell this as well.

You must also remember that I'm not a scientist nor an Engineer. If I have some negative report from an experiment how does that make me a  scam artist.  I speak the truth.

I do not block any one from going ahead with these experiments and I wish all Success. If I cannot do some thing under safety conditions laid down what can I do? I have to say this openly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 17, 2016, 05:23:42 PM
LITERAL QUOTE FROM A PRIVATE COMMUNICATION FROM NRAMASWAMI TO ME ON THE 29TH OF SEPTEMBER 2015.



"There is no radiation from the central coil to affect us and the computers and the cellphones kept in the same room were on when the tests were run and they had no problem. So there was no radiation. But do not disclose this in the forum. "


I regret for not telling this before. I tried to be politely with you suggesting that your device was not as the design by Figuera and to start a new thread and go away from here. But you did not do it and even you create terror again with the lie on "radiation"


I just expose what you have done. It is your fault. It is not my fault. My only fault was not to tell it on the very next day to that message.


Bye... bye


PD: Never is too late for you to start a different thread to tell your important advances and discoveries. I invite/encourage you to do it ...


Bye ... bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 17, 2016, 07:02:59 PM



..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 17, 2016, 07:22:40 PM
..

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 17, 2016, 07:27:54 PM
..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 17, 2016, 08:01:28 PM
LITERAL QUOTE FROM A PRIVATE COMMUNICATION FROM NRAMASWAMI TO ME ON THE 29TH OF SEPTEMBER 2015.
"There is no radiation from the central coil to affect us and the computers and the cellphones kept in the same room were on when the tests were run and they had no problem. So there was no radiation. But do not disclose this in the forum. "
I regret for not telling this before. I tried to be politely with you suggesting that your device was not as the design by Figuera and to start a new thread and go away from here. But you did not do it and even you create terror again with the lie on "radiation
I just expose what you have done. It is your fault. It is not my fault. My only fault was not to tell it on the very next day to that message.
Bye... byePD: Never is too late for you to start a different thread to tell your important advances and discoveries. I invite/encourage you to do it ...
Bye ... bye

You are hiding your email to me why we should not disclose the opinion of one profssor and my detailed response the same day that I am receiving two different advices. I explained I do not have equipment tomeasure frequencies or radiations and both me and my driver are affected but not electrnic equipment and so I cannot post this kind of information. You agreed and kept quit for 7 months. Why? What did I write? If you have any dgnity post my explanation also. I will postit any way tomorrow.
In short I pointed out that one professor claimed if electronic equipment are not affected no problem.Two others disagreed. Fact was that On the other hand my driver had a blood clot in the brain and I had been suffering with swollen legs like elehant legs and asked what you would do under these two different advices received. I also pointed out that multifilar coils with secondary under them can provide all kinds of frequencies and I have posted info that I felt is safe alone to the forum. You did not object to this prudent view. Tomorrow I will post a summary of the personal health problems I communicated to you many times. With dates.

You please post how many emails I sent you about my personal health problems if you are honest.

I am also not denying that cop>1 results come easily if the core is saturated.

If the core issaturated core can be heated so much it will melt and the insulations will burn. This is careless and negligent conduct. In any case how many of you talkers have bought 300 kgmsofsoft ironand tested fo three years? I did. And I havethe honesty to accept that under safe and ustained use conditiond device as built me dpoes not work.
I have the honesty to admit failure. You must show the detaled explanation I gave you on the same say what prevents me from posting all I know.
This is low frequency high.voltage high amperage electricity.
Experiments cannot be carelessly conducted here.
You asked me not to stop in 2013. As a result of doing these experiments I suffered enommously. Are you ready to accept liability for my sufferings and time and effort? Are you ready to compensate us for oursufferings

The xomputer is now also affected.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 17, 2016, 10:51:31 PM
The xomputer is now also affected.

Also the keyboard seems to be affected by radiation.

Take care and bye bye. I will not reply you any further. I am just here to talk about technical subjects dealing with Figuera patents.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 17, 2016, 11:28:52 PM
Also the keyboard seems to be affected by radiation.

Take care and bye bye. I will not reply you any further. I am just here to talk about technical subjects dealing with Figuera patents.

Yes..after making defamatory statements when I point out facts you will run away. You have been posting wrong info on this forum to mislead people.

Don't run away. If you have any dignity post my reply email why I post only safe information on the forum which you accepted as correct 7 months back.

You cannot face truth. So you will only run away.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on April 17, 2016, 11:46:06 PM
Can you guys PLEASE STOP THE EGO WARS? I have learned from both of you.
Please stick to the following discussion models.

1. this is what I did and this is what the results were. What do you think?

2. Or I don't understand part 2 of your experiment, please explain.

PLEASE NO NAME CALLING NOR FOUL LANGUAGE IT OFFENDS ME BECAUSE
IT SHOULD.

Now back to your regularly schedule program....

Norman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 18, 2016, 12:02:11 AM
You have been posting wrong info on this forum to mislead people.

While your credibility in the forum keep on increasing with each new post which comes from your irradiated computer, I will keep on posting simple sketch of the Figuera patents:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 18, 2016, 12:22:42 AM
Norman..

The Figuera device or modfied form of Figuera device built by both work. But the problem is they work  only when iron reaches 2.7 tesla onwards to 3.7 tesla.
Iron will melt at 5 Tesla and will be enormously heated above 1.8 Tesla. So I used iron rods to create an air flow between the iron to cool it. Unfortunately Iron goes in to saturation and makes very high sound. The middle core is uper saturated that it started pulling any current carrying wire towards it. So I consulted other members of the forum. And professors here.
They all dismissed the idea of cop>1 for a few minutes and I was advised to keep the Tesla range not to exceed 1.2 Tesla. This is the maximum allowed for transformers for trouble free operations for a long time. I was unable to reach cop>1 under these safety conditions.
High saturation core affects the human body. My driver had a clot in his brain and for last two years I had a swollen foot full of edema. Now I sleep for 10 hours and the edema is gone. At the same time my cell phone and laptop are not affected. So one Professor here felt that running the device at high saturation may not be dangerous. Two other professors felt it is risky and should be avoided. My practical experience is we humans are affected and not electronic equipment. Patrick has warned me some type of coils that I wound would produce inimical radiations. So westopped them.As far multifilar coils they behave strangely. If I use 10 filar coils they consume only about 2 amps.
But if we remove one the coils and insulate both ends we have a 9 filar coil and f we do two we havean eight filar coil. These coils then draw 25 amps and secondary 200 watts lamps glow luke 500- 1000 watts lamps.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 18, 2016, 12:44:38 AM
I have discussed with Hanon many things but when I am not able to reach cop>1 using soft iron cores I have to admit it. Not every experiment will be a success. Senior members of the forum and Professors are responsiblepeople and they stipulate safety margins we must meet it.

I cannot take risks here. We are dealing with Electriity low frequency high voltage and high amperage

Simply because I admit failure under certain circumstances I cannot turn a scammer.

I have provided the maximum info here.  However I have no intention of providing further info.
and being abused here.

I have explained to Hanon 7 months back I cannot post info that isno safe and we have not determined to be correct to post in the forum. He agreed.

Now he is abusing me for makung a honest statement.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 18, 2016, 01:15:58 AM
However I have no intention of providing further info.

We will miss your unvaluable info. Good luck and take care.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 18, 2016, 02:51:16 AM
And i second that motion. hell all i ever herd was that voice of Charlie Brown's teachers, wha WHA, wha, wha, WHA.
constant Blabbering and saying 1000 words of NOTHING.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on April 18, 2016, 09:31:34 AM
Im with you Mr. RMaswami, you are the only person in this threath from who I learned something  ;)
Perhaps some people here are exceeding their atributions.
With this attitude  will pass 100 years and they will have nothing working
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pedroxime on April 18, 2016, 10:05:41 AM
And its truth than low freq magnetics is not healthy, I felt myself in my workshop ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 18, 2016, 02:23:12 PM
Pedroxime..Sir..I'm grateful for your kind words.

Please see below the whole discussion between Forum Poster Hanon and me on this topic. This would also tell you why he did not mention any thing for 7 full months.

---Quote begin---

Mail from Hanon on 30/9/2015

Rams,
 
In your previous email you said “There is no radiation from the central coil to affect us and the computers and the cellphones kept in the same room were on when the tests were run and they had no problem. So there was no radiation. But do not disclose this in the forum. “
 
It is a pity that you are stating facts in the forum that are not true. I wonder if there are more details that are not true. I can see here some personal interests to misguide the other forum users. I won´t disclose anything in the forum as I have been doing till now with your info, but I think this is not fair. Right now I do not know what it is true and what it is not true. What I know is that if you are doing things like this it is because the device works. It has been better to stay quiet and not say anything than tell untrue things to discourage people

My Reply on the same date:

You are correct. But I am observung both the things and I am getting two opinions from different experts. I was warned because the primary coils are multifilar and they have wire running below them all types of frquencies are possible. Check Multiple wave oscillator which cured cancers with 98% success rate. The frequencies it emits are harmful but it cured cancer. The device is now banned though it cured cancer.

If any one tests and suffers I am liable. This is why I tell people do not test. My legs suffer from swelling like an elephants legs and If I take treatment it goes out after two or three weeks. No infection has bern detected till date. My driver has a blood clot in his head. So I have warned the forum.

But another professor says if computers and cell phones are not affected there is no issue. Now you tell me what I should do. I have stopped testing. But the professors are insisting that I continue. To be on the safe side I have stopped. Apart from this there are no funds.

If you see the forum I come under concerted attack like no one has been subjected to. If some one replicates and suffers claims I am responsible what do I do? What do yo do if you are in this situation.

I had been severely criticised by a forum member for not closing the magnetic gap and keeping the rods open. You look at your mail you have indicated the same.

What I feel as safe and any one can replicate alone has been reported. You have a lot more information than what I had given the forum. You create a step up transformer using small primary multifilar wires and thick secondary wires. Make the output voltage to reach 400 volts give the secondary wires to earth. See what you observe. The issue is the multifilar coils.
How they are wound decides every thing. They appear to broadcast high and low frequencies. I do not have equipment to determine frequencies. Cater says MWO output inimical frequencies only but when the patient sat in the middle he had beneficial results. Look at me. Computers and phones are ok Legs are swollen joints are weak and I am lookoing like an old man now.

What would be your prudent advice. Just because I have done a lot of things do I owe it to the forum to disclose every thing..

Patrick does not teach all he knows. Under the circumstances unless we measure frequencies clearly and conclude they are harmless I have to give the same advice I gave the forum


My mail dated 1/10/2015 not controverted by Hanon.

XXXX

I was not wrong.

I am given to understand 50 -55 Hz AC is harmful to humans and animals and this is why we are affected. If we want AC output we need to cover the device with several layers of plastic and iron sheets to reduce the 50 Hz radiation to the minimum. The iron sheets block the radiation coming out. This is why people living near high voltage power lines are affected. 55 Hz Pulsed DC is said to be beneficial to human body.

To the contrary 20 Khz to 40 Khz AC or pulsed DC  is dangerous to virus, bacteria, pathogens and worms in human body. This is the basis of the Hulda Clark and Royal Rife devices. Cancerous cells or tumours have a thick outer layer and to make them open you need to give either electricity of less than 10 Hz and 20 to40 Khz simultaneously or 20 to 40 Khz and 2 to 40 MHz simultantously. The cell walls are weakened then to allow the 20 to 40 Khz electricity to kill the microbes and the tumour cells return to normal cells. This is what is done by Royal Rife by using a Neon Lamp and Lakhovsky by using his coils.

This is why we were affected and the computers and cell phones were not affected. I was very strongly criticsed by a senior scientist for not closing the open iron rods at the two ends and not covering the entire device with iron sheet and plastic sheet.

-----

Figuera has not shown the closing of the iron and it is possible that he suffered from the experiments and died. However if it was Pulsed DC he would not have suffered and the death may be due to some disease. Any way during 1908 the average life span was not very high in islands and he has lived a full life span for his times. 

There are many people in the forum who are extremely knowledgeable. They do know who is reporting the truth and who is misleading or giving false info. However I do not intend to get in to this again for some more time. I'm looking like a frail old man now and I need to receover in health and finances and only then I can do any thing.
-----------------------------
-----Quote End---

Unfortunately at this time I'm not able to understand the Multifilar coils. You make 10 filar multifilar coils they consume less 2 to 2.5 amps when secondary single wire is loaded. You remove one or two coils of the 10 filar primary coil and make it 8 or 9 filar then the coil consumes 25 amps. When it does it COP>1 is automatic. Iron is totally saturated.

I have personally enormously suffered. I had to spend a lot of treatment and take a lot of rest. I do not have proper technical education in this field. I am also not able to understand many of these things. Some people want me to take risks. I'm not interested in doing any thing that can harm either me or others. So the reports that I give are self edited.

There are many forum posters who are highly qualified and extremely knowledgeable. One of them indicated that Don Smith devices worked but he employed 3 MHz frequencies in open air core. That core gave a lot of harmful radiations and so the device was not accepted for use.  Many have told me that Multiple Wave Oscillator is a device that is banned in Europe and US. It would interfere with radio communications. There is an international treaty that permits some frequencies and bans others. I do not have much of knowledge in this. what I do know is this..For some unknown reason severe edema was formed in my foot and they were swollen like an elephant leg. I became so weak. I had to take Siddha medicines to recover and then sleep for 10 hours a day to receover my health. This is one of the reasons I have restricted the testing to just once per month.

I'm increasingly getting the feeling that the translation of the patent is not correct. It happens all the time. No blame on Hanon but translating old technical documents is a challenging job and there is a significant possibility for mistakes.

Unfortunately I do not read spanish. So I have to accept what others say.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 18, 2016, 02:48:35 PM
Hannon

 read try and play with what can be learned from this patent. just because something is new does not make it better. Better is a subjective term which does not imply to what end something is better. Is it better for commerce ,is it better in functionality, is it better in terms of longevity and so on. SS components work on the electrical only, they assume the waste of magnetic flux is exceptable. like when someone tells you a task is easy and that person will never be the one who is performing the work to get the task done. Sure it's easy,I tell you it is very easy to move mountains with a tea spoon.I will sit in my chair and watch you do the work and for me it is easy as pie.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 18, 2016, 03:25:29 PM
Steadily bumpin your gums RSWAMI and saying nothing as always and who give a shit what you and Hanon are quarreling about, PLEASE keep it to your selves. yall sound like a married couple.
i also thought you had your own thread....... i guess that went down the pipe of the flushing toilet.

Very true DOUG.


It seems to me that most people on this forum are having a tough time visualizing part G in the Figuera device.  the winding's on the core in part G acts to inhibit currant flow so with more winding's involved that equates to more reluctance (resistance to currant flow) so as part G spins the reluctance is varied between Set N and Set S. that is the reason i posted the iron bar being removed from the coil to get a grasp of what i was trying to convey. as the bar is removed from the coil less winding's are involved so less reluctance, more currant will flow.
part G also stores currant being shoved into it's core from the receding electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary in the form of a magnetic field that is in constant rotation from the rotation of the brush.  each half rotation of the brush the core of part G's magnetic field is being replenished from the declining electromagnets so as there is very little loss the magnetic field in part G is kept at a constant replacing only the little losses as needed.

it seems some people in this forum can not bend the mind around this concept and all they want to do is argue and post a lot of bull shit.

of course one can use transistors to mimic the rotation of the brush if one wants to but it has to be on the high side not on the low side as that would block all inductive kick back from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary. this is even what Figuera said in his patent, ie..... the use of switches.

part G also becomes the power supply because as we all know currant's true flow is from negative to positive so that means Part G will be the power supply in the form of a magnetic field varying the currant in the form of reluctance as the brush rotates.

the primaries are NN in design as because NS will interact with one another and you CAN NOT VERY THEIR INTENSITY of two opposite attracting magnetic fields. THIS WILL NOT EVER HAPPEN.
so Figuera used two NN magnets to mimic the different directions of magnetic fields without the powerful interaction getting in the way. this action of the two NN magnets causes a double electric field with the same intensity as a strong NS field. that is why the induction falls off dramatically if one electromagnet is not in sink with the other. the two primaries share the same relative space of the secondary causing this double intensity field.   B fields cancel E fields add
if you can't understand this concept i would suggest you start reading more, do more research or pick another free energy device to build that has training wheels.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 18, 2016, 06:15:00 PM
Marathonman

I accept that my knowledge is limited.

You have not fully disclosed how to make the part G as per your ideas and how the connections are to be made.

I have a circuit designed by PJK. The circuit provides Full positive sign wave pulsed DC and the lowest point is +5 not zero. Patrick has taught me that under these conditions back emf eill mot come.
The circuit was designed for 56 volts and 25 to 100 Khz output. I am modifying the circuit to output 500 volts and possibly 1 amp and 25 - 100 KHz.
I believe it meets all requirements as a neon lamp will be
placed between the output and the primary input. We will test both 500 volt pulsed Dc and 1000 volts interrupted DC. We are also going to modify the core materials.

Under the circumstances I expect the device to meet all principles.

However expectations are one thing and observations are another thing.

The principle as Patrick reiterates is common. Sharp high speed unidirectional pulsed dc of high freqquency of the order of 1 Mhz are needed to access zero ppoint energy.

Higher the frequency higher the voltage higher the amperage we can get COP>1 devices.
I am using lower frequencies but sufficiently high voltage. I know how to bring in amperage. I ned to reduce the heating of the core.

But I do believe I have understood this device. Let me see if it would work.

Part G as indicated by you would be a low frequency device.

I am looking at high frequency that is safe.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 18, 2016, 10:13:10 PM
Marathonman

I have tested NN or identical poles facing each other. The maximum I was able to get is to light up one lamp. For the same input in NS configuration 12 lamps were lit. For this I needed to make a large secondary. In smaller secondaries there is zero voltage. No output.

Now I am confused by your statement E fields merge or double and B fields cancel each other. Your are correct that B fields cancel. How do you say E fields merge.

Please advise how the coil in secondary should be wound? Do you want me wind The Tesla Bifilar coil as interpreted by Muhammed in his book on explaining Don Smith devices.
It is essentially a contra rotating coil. End of first wire connected to end of second wire and reversing direction? If you have any other suggestion for coil in the secondary please let me know.
I can easily test it and post results. I believe not in pet theories but I go by experimental observations.

No abusive conduct if results do not come as you expect. I have learnt that magnets makeus feel humbler and defeated me too many times.

If results come I will post it in public domain.

Please let me know your insight..

One more qustion..As I understand now wires conducting electricity have magnrtic field around them. How can there be an electric field without magnetic field..It looks crazy but let me test any way.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 18, 2016, 10:19:18 PM
Loner:
 I to believe the VTA works on similar concepts as the Figuera device except the Figuera device is low frequency drive and higher amperage output. yes that's low frequency drive as in Figuera did not have a 20,000 rpm DC motor in his house, Rswami. but good luck all the same.

 i think FS was a genius way beyond TB.

it's not really b field's cancel as per say because Lenz is used to Figuera's benefit.

we are all still learning and a few are way over our head's but i will not stop till it's done.

Their is only one person on this forum that has a full grasp of part G  and know's the significance or importance of it and i don't think i am to far behind in my description.

Quote; "The principle as Patrick reiterates is common. Sharp high speed unidirectional pulsed dc of high freqquency of the order of 1 Mhz are needed to access zero point energy. "

Totally opposite from Figuera's design.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 18, 2016, 11:57:51 PM
Loner,
As well as the similarities to the VTA, I find also many similarities with the Magnacoaster patent by Richard Willis. He also used two confronted north poles with a coil in between and distorted their fields with an external signal. I guess he also based his generator in obtaining flux-cutting induction by moving the field lines.

http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf (http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf)

This how it is said to work:

"We pulse an electrical charge into a set of coils that are wrapped by neodymium magnets.
This pulse dissipates the internal field of the magnets.
When the pulse stops, the magnetic field returns creating a supercharged electric output.
We then collect this high output back from the coils.
This high output of power is then rectified and returned to the battery that it came from"

A deja vu?

What do you think of this patent?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 19, 2016, 12:28:33 PM
Hannon

 You can always tell when someone was charged by the page for a patent by a greedy lawyer. It turns into a novel.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on April 19, 2016, 02:37:46 PM
Hanon thank you for the Willis patent. interesting points.
1. date 2009
2. the word overunity on p. 1
3. like poles of magnets
4. gap at magnet 2.

Sure has the Figuera likeness.

So I would summarize this as "permanent magnet enhanced/multiplies backemf".

And since this was dated 2004 it should be everywhere by now but I don't see
it so.......that means............

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 19, 2016, 10:06:31 PM
It means he had problems with the unit overheating and more then likely threatened with his life from the power cartel's.

Richard Willis device is pulsed and has a ringing effect in his core and if Figuera had this all induction would stop.

Similarities just ended.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 19, 2016, 11:18:47 PM
But the principle works:

https://youtu.be/aqDS8QQ_9Z0 (https://youtu.be/aqDS8QQ_9Z0)

 :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 20, 2016, 01:42:07 AM
Sorry two different devices of Richard Willis, one moving and one not.
so are you building Richard Willis device or Figuera's......

So what's your POINT ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on April 21, 2016, 02:22:21 AM
Loner,
As well as the similarities to the VTA, I find also many similarities with the Magnacoaster patent by Richard Willis. He also used two confronted north poles with a coil in between and distorted their fields with an external signal. I guess he also based his generator in obtaining flux-cutting induction by moving the field lines.

http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf (http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf)

This how it is said to work:

"We pulse an electrical charge into a set of coils that are wrapped by neodymium magnets.
This pulse dissipates the internal field of the magnets.
When the pulse stops, the magnetic field returns creating a supercharged electric output.
We then collect this high output back from the coils.
This high output of power is then rectified and returned to the battery that it came from"

A deja vu?

What do you think of this patent?

Different animal, endothermic (heat) device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 21, 2016, 02:54:54 AM
Dear All:

I have to stop my experiments as my driver who was working with me on this Project has resigned. He has got a Government loan and bought his own car and is going to run his own cab service. The other Electrical student is going to his Final year Engineering and so he would not come either. I have fortunately received some work from a large client after four years and so I have personally no time to spend on this now. Doing this going forward is going to be expensive and will involve a team and funding. I have provided most information I have. I will file a patent and then ask for Government grants. If I get the funding then I will move forward with the research. There are other components that are needed to be used here to make this system to work to produce output on its own and then to self sustain it. It is doable. The Patent does not disclose those components but if we work passionately and sincerely and experiment many times we are able to see the missing components.

The general rule of thumb is that the secondary must have 500 volts plus when the primary voltage is 220 volts. Alternatively the secondary must be a thick insulated wire 4 sq mm or bigger in thickness, thicker the better and must produce twice the primary voltage. The problem of heating of the core and Low Frequency rays will be there but can be contained by suitable means if there is one device for a community. If we try to make the device like a Battery and Inverter the health of the users is gone. This is the reality.

I have no intention to do this. The main problem is high magnetic field is not good for health as I have personally suffered. This device may be suitable in sparsely populated places but in densly populated country like India you cannot have this kind of device sending out electromagnetic radiations from many places around you. A large community oriented device is feasible but only in villages.

My interest in this device has gone only due to this problem. I would be able to solve all technical issues save the health issue for small devices. They are not workable. Only Large devices are possible.

Unfortunately some how people are leaving me. Narayanan who worked with me intensely in 2013 passed away. My Driver and Engineering student are walking out and those who insisted that I do this in 2013 have moved out. I have made excellent progress in 2013 but all my efforts to avoid the saturation of the core were meaningless.

When my legs have swollen with edema I first did not know what to do and pus had formed in the right leg thumb. I'm a diabetic and was severely worried. Then I met one Siddha Doctor who has filed a patent application for a medicine and this saved me and had removed all pus from the leg within 15 days and cured me. If you know of any diabetic person who is set for amputation give him this info. The medicine costs $1 per day and the full course of rejuvenating medicines would cost just $3 to 5 per day for 3 months. Of course this will never ever be allowed in Western countries.

Another thing that I learnt when I was affected second time is that we can easily remove the edema with a very simple commonsense method. I put a cotton bedsheet thick bedsheet on my foot and made many layers of it and then asked my driver to iron the bedsheet so it will become midly hot and will heat the swollen leg. The skin gets heated slowly and the pores on the skin open up and then excess fluid from the foot moves to the hot cloth to cool it. Once I learnt this method I was not afraid of edema.  This is a commonsense approach but the heating must be very slow heating process that will not harm us.

The bottomline is that you cannot learn to swim if you do not jump in to the water. When Figuera filed his patent working models must be produced and if they do all components need not be disclosed as trade secrets. This is why no one is able to replicate the devices of Daniel McFarland Cook and Figuera device.

There are other more efficient and safer methods that can be used to generate electricity. Those devices are safe and self sustaining. But unfortunately at this time, I could not complete the device. I'm sorry about it.


 



 




   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 21, 2016, 06:20:07 PM
Maybe, just maybe there is connection between Daniel McFarland Cook device and Figuera devices.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 21, 2016, 11:21:20 PM
If one was to study the coils field interactions then an educated guess could be attained.

my guess after research "NO"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 22, 2016, 07:42:56 AM
Pedroxime..Sir..I'm grateful for your kind words.

Please see below the whole discussion between Forum Poster Hanon and me on this topic. This would also tell you why he did not mention any thing for 7 full months.

---Quote begin---

Mail from Hanon on 30/9/2015

Rams,
 
In your previous email you said “There is no radiation from the central coil to affect us and the computers and the cellphones kept in the same room were on when the tests were run and they had no problem. So there was no radiation. But do not disclose this in the forum. “
 
It is a pity that you are stating facts in the forum that are not true. I wonder if there are more details that are not true. I can see here some personal interests to misguide the other forum users. I won´t disclose anything in the forum as I have been doing till now with your info, but I think this is not fair. Right now I do not know what it is true and what it is not true. What I know is that if you are doing things like this it is because the device works. It has been better to stay quiet and not say anything than tell untrue things to discourage people

My Reply on the same date:

You are correct. But I am observung both the things and I am getting two opinions from different experts. I was warned because the primary coils are multifilar and they have wire running below them all types of frquencies are possible. Check Multiple wave oscillator which cured cancers with 98% success rate. The frequencies it emits are harmful but it cured cancer. The device is now banned though it cured cancer.

If any one tests and suffers I am liable. This is why I tell people do not test. My legs suffer from swelling like an elephants legs and If I take treatment it goes out after two or three weeks. No infection has bern detected till date. My driver has a blood clot in his head. So I have warned the forum.

But another professor says if computers and cell phones are not affected there is no issue. Now you tell me what I should do. I have stopped testing. But the professors are insisting that I continue. To be on the safe side I have stopped. Apart from this there are no funds.

If you see the forum I come under concerted attack like no one has been subjected to. If some one replicates and suffers claims I am responsible what do I do? What do yo do if you are in this situation.

I had been severely criticised by a forum member for not closing the magnetic gap and keeping the rods open. You look at your mail you have indicated the same.

What I feel as safe and any one can replicate alone has been reported. You have a lot more information than what I had given the forum. You create a step up transformer using small primary multifilar wires and thick secondary wires. Make the output voltage to reach 400 volts give the secondary wires to earth. See what you observe. The issue is the multifilar coils.
How they are wound decides every thing. They appear to broadcast high and low frequencies. I do not have equipment to determine frequencies. Cater says MWO output inimical frequencies only but when the patient sat in the middle he had beneficial results. Look at me. Computers and phones are ok Legs are swollen joints are weak and I am lookoing like an old man now.

What would be your prudent advice. Just because I have done a lot of things do I owe it to the forum to disclose every thing..

Patrick does not teach all he knows. Under the circumstances unless we measure frequencies clearly and conclude they are harmless I have to give the same advice I gave the forum


My mail dated 1/10/2015 not controverted by Hanon.

XXXX

I was not wrong.

I am given to understand 50 -55 Hz AC is harmful to humans and animals and this is why we are affected. If we want AC output we need to cover the device with several layers of plastic and iron sheets to reduce the 50 Hz radiation to the minimum. The iron sheets block the radiation coming out. This is why people living near high voltage power lines are affected. 55 Hz Pulsed DC is said to be beneficial to human body.

To the contrary 20 Khz to 40 Khz AC or pulsed DC  is dangerous to virus, bacteria, pathogens and worms in human body. This is the basis of the Hulda Clark and Royal Rife devices. Cancerous cells or tumours have a thick outer layer and to make them open you need to give either electricity of less than 10 Hz and 20 to40 Khz simultaneously or 20 to 40 Khz and 2 to 40 MHz simultantously. The cell walls are weakened then to allow the 20 to 40 Khz electricity to kill the microbes and the tumour cells return to normal cells. This is what is done by Royal Rife by using a Neon Lamp and Lakhovsky by using his coils.

This is why we were affected and the computers and cell phones were not affected. I was very strongly criticsed by a senior scientist for not closing the open iron rods at the two ends and not covering the entire device with iron sheet and plastic sheet.

-----

Figuera has not shown the closing of the iron and it is possible that he suffered from the experiments and died. However if it was Pulsed DC he would not have suffered and the death may be due to some disease. Any way during 1908 the average life span was not very high in islands and he has lived a full life span for his times. 

There are many people in the forum who are extremely knowledgeable. They do know who is reporting the truth and who is misleading or giving false info. However I do not intend to get in to this again for some more time. I'm looking like a frail old man now and I need to receover in health and finances and only then I can do any thing.
-----------------------------
-----Quote End---

Unfortunately at this time I'm not able to understand the Multifilar coils. You make 10 filar multifilar coils they consume less 2 to 2.5 amps when secondary single wire is loaded. You remove one or two coils of the 10 filar primary coil and make it 8 or 9 filar then the coil consumes 25 amps. When it does it COP>1 is automatic. Iron is totally saturated.

I have personally enormously suffered. I had to spend a lot of treatment and take a lot of rest. I do not have proper technical education in this field. I am also not able to understand many of these things. Some people want me to take risks. I'm not interested in doing any thing that can harm either me or others. So the reports that I give are self edited.

There are many forum posters who are highly qualified and extremely knowledgeable. One of them indicated that Don Smith devices worked but he employed 3 MHz frequencies in open air core. That core gave a lot of harmful radiations and so the device was not accepted for use.  Many have told me that Multiple Wave Oscillator is a device that is banned in Europe and US. It would interfere with radio communications. There is an international treaty that permits some frequencies and bans others. I do not have much of knowledge in this. what I do know is this..For some unknown reason severe edema was formed in my foot and they were swollen like an elephant leg. I became so weak. I had to take Siddha medicines to recover and then sleep for 10 hours a day to receover my health. This is one of the reasons I have restricted the testing to just once per month.

I'm increasingly getting the feeling that the translation of the patent is not correct. It happens all the time. No blame on Hanon but translating old technical documents is a challenging job and there is a significant possibility for mistakes.

Unfortunately I do not read spanish. So I have to accept what others say.

Ramaswami, study page 20 and 21. You can buy Super Caps on aliexpress.com but you do not really need super caps.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 23, 2016, 09:58:17 AM
I actually did not want to write this but my conscience is hurting.

It appears to me that during the time of Daniel McFarland Cook and Figuera Iron rods refers to Permanent magnets. During those times only DC was used extensively. When we send DC through an electromagnet the core becomes a permanent magnet. Some are weakly magnetized and some are strongly magnetized. This depends on the material and the current applied.

Now we have AC used all over the world. So when the patents refer to iron core we simply tend to use iron core. I specifically used soft iron.

I discovered one important thing. The core takes amperage from the mains only until it is saturated. Once it is saturated the core does not consume more amperage from the mains. Of course Larger cores would take more amps.

However If we make a Permanent Magnet first and that Magnetism is made very strong to the point of saturation the current drawn from the mains will come down for it cannot demagnetize the iron if the saturation is already there.

If you look at Figuera he is using Interruptted DC. This will not demagnetize the already magnetized core. So the trick is to make the core a permanent magnet first. Then when you provide the current the amount of current taken up will be less. Once saturation is reached it is not going to consume more. To the contrary the secondary output is based on the number of turns and thickness of wires.

Now study Figuera patent once more. He teaches in Dynamos we need to rotate the core. As the core rotate and current is induced the iron on which the induced coils are made become electromagnets of opposite polarity. This impedes the movement of the rotor magnet. So we need to supply more mechanical energy to get less electrical energy. This problem is solved if we do two things.

A. Avoid the rotation of the core. This is now well understood.

B. Avoid the Lenz law effect or law of conservation of energy effect. Output cannot be greater is negated if the magnetic field does not collapse. This is again taught by using Full wave Diode Bridge Rectifier and making a circuit by which the wave is Full positive wave with the bottom of the Full positive wave not at zero but at +5 to +7. I'm told that this will not allow the magnetic field to collapse and if magnetic field does not collapse no Lenz law effect will come in to play is what I taught.

Simple minded Figuera made the whole thing permanent magnets.

Core asked me a specific question. How did you increase the magnetic field strength in the center to be more than the primary. it is easily explained by the smaller size of the secondary magnets. The secondary is 1/4th the combined size of the two opposing primary electromagnets and so the magnetic field strength is increased very considerably. What I have found is that it is not necessary to avoid the field in the primary to go waste and we can make use of it as well. Opinions and theories differ on this but I do not know theories and I have seen that it is possible to get higher output in a useable form than the input. Again the professors here disagree and state that only due to the fact that the secondary was connected to Earth points which resulted in increased rate of chemical reactions between iron and carbon in the Earth point that I got higher output.

The main problem is one of high magnetic field experienced in this device. This does not permit it to be a household device. It can be a community based device.

We need to remember when Figuera did this device there was hardly any electromagnetic field in the Earth. Today we are bombarded all over with EM Radiations in various forms and diseases have shot up manifold. After the introduction of Cell phones here we have lost a small bird species here which all disappeared.

This is a community device. it can be used in rural areas and after full shielding etc are taken. I can personally assure you that output is far higher than the input. But I do not have the technical knowledge to make it self sustaining.

I'm not convinced that the Figuera patent is disclosed in Full. Figuera talks about self sustaining generator and asserts that only after it is done he has filed the patent application. He also asserts that it will work indefinitely. This means that there is no moving parts in the device made by him.

All devices that are reported to be self sustaining generators appear to have used both Electrostatics and Electromagnetics. The Swiss Testatika devices uses both Electromagnetics and Electrostatics. Hans Coler device again used both Electrostatics and Electromangetics. Hendershot device again did the same thing. No information on Hubbard device. Daniel McFarland Cook strangely presents only the information on the Electrostatics component of his device. Two opposing capacitors mounted on two magnets. But the Magnetic information is not disclosed by him or is removed from the Patent.

I'm sure with this kind of information I have provided that it would be easy for others to develop a device that can run on its own. Unfortunately I'm not blessed with that kind of technical knowledge and I'm not convinced that this is a good or safe device any more. It can be a community device and can be built as a large device to power a village or rural place. It can also be used by rural households that can separate it from other places and can provide significant protective shield.

I think sufficient technical information has been openly given. I'm satisfied that some other competent person can now do this device and then make it self sustaining. On my part I need to focus on my practice.

My apologies that I could not complete the project.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 23, 2016, 12:26:03 PM
It appears to me that during the time of Daniel McFarland Cook and Figuera Iron rods refers to Permanent magnets. During those times only DC was used extensively. When we send DC through an electromagnet the core becomes a permanent magnet.

If you look at Figuera he is using Interruptted DC. This will not demagnetize the already magnetized core. So the trick is to make the core a permanent magnet first.


QUOTE FROM PATENT 30378, YEAR 1902

"The cores of all these electromagnets are  formed in such a way that they will magnetize and demagnetize quickly and not retain any residual magnetism"

As you see your views or "theories" are far far away from Figuera patents. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 23, 2016, 02:41:42 PM
Hannon
 If 30378 looks easier for you then go for it. That is the one that looks a motor with a square rotor that can not turn.Described as having the induced winding placed between the two halves. I personally dont care for that one ,it looks more difficult to maintain or replace windings but it might cut out the EMR so feared by some. I wont have any input on it though. No it's not really a square rotor but a cross sort of, rolls off not right.
  You have fun with that one. I have to get back to work this is only a 15 min coffee break.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 23, 2016, 03:46:46 PM
HaHa..What is this.. That Patent is not valid you see?Why?

It says opposite pole faces must be used to induce electricity..How come our NN or SS only team rely on this not valid any more patent..

You see this is the relevant part of the 378 Patent..

The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several
electromagnets are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole
faces separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are
formed in such a way that they will magnetize and demagnetize quickly and not
retain any residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole
faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes in one
piece, or several, or many. An excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating,
actuates all the electromagnets, which are attached or in series, or in parallel,
or as required, and in the induced circuit will arise currents comprising,
together, the total generator current. That allows suppressing the mechanical
force, since there is nothing which needs to be moved. The driving current, or is
an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign
alternately by any known method, or is a part of the total current of the
generator, as it is done today in the current dynamos.

Founded on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro
Blasberg, in the name and on behalf of the society "Figuera-Blasberg"
respectfully requests to be granted final patent of invention for this generator
whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that,
in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of
four excitatory electromagnets in each, and the induced circuit is marked by a
thick line of reddish ink, being this way the general arrangement of the
appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in
another form or grouping.
The invention for which a patent is applied consists in following note.

Note
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing
moves, which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines
thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.


Note is the claimed Portion. This is precisely what I did for a long time. I have then realized that If the core is already saturated peremanent magnet and cannot be demagnetized the current drawn will be lower while the output will be higher.

You only need to wind two electromagnets with 10 filar coils. Then remove one of them and insulate both its ends to make it a 9 filar coil. Then do it for another coil to make it 8 filar coil.

A 10 filar coil draws only 0.5 amps if it is serially connected and 2.5 amps if it is connected in parallel. But you remove one or two coils then the current drawn is 15 to 25 amps. The core is saturated and you get an enormous output in excess of the input.

If you place permanent magnets in the core the input is reduced in the primary as the amperage needed for making the core saturated is less and there is no complete magnetic field collapse.

In any case I have tested and speak from my experience and my own troubles.

Ah Ha.. What is a Coffee Break meant for.. Go to overunity.com and Bomb Ramaswami and enjoy the 15 minutes..You all made my day..

Enjoy your weekend..Bye Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 23, 2016, 04:58:06 PM
Doug, The real essence is in both patents, being the 1908 more detailed. NR seems to be affected by the radiation which emits his device. I am only posting quotes. In Spain there is proverb saying: No hay peor sordo que el que no quiere oir. Google it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 23, 2016, 05:49:17 PM
Thats a very nice way to put it Hannon. Out here and over yonder in the sticks we just shorten it to "you cant fix stupid".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 24, 2016, 01:48:41 PM
Doug:

That I'm so stupid is very well known. So do not bring your reputation down..I had been sufficiently stupid enough to disclose full information in public domain. I had also provided full information on how to replicate what I do. It was checked independently by at least one friend who found majority of my statements to be correct about the 2013 experiment but found that neither primary is drawing so much power nor is the output as claimed and that the voltage divided.

I had also gone to the University where the Professor refused to accept any voltage but treated it only as a shorted coil and accepted only the amperage. The other professor who is a Chemistry expert explained that it is only due to the Earth connections acting as an Earth battery that the results have come. The replicator could not make Earth connections.

By the way how many have fixed so far and if so where is the proof? How many have disclosed all that they have done?

I have repeatedly disclosed that while it is possible to get higher output than input I could not do a self sustaining device. I'm not a trained person and so there is nothing to feel ashamed to accept it. I have checked with a lot of people. I had been strongly criticised by a Professor who has done her PhD from a University in an European Country and has worked in IIT Madras and retired and has strongly criticised me for not providing for Magnetic shielding. I concede and agree that my knowledge is very limited.

Now you please answer these questions..Even if I do not do it others may be able to do it.

a. Is is true that if you do not draw loads from the secondary the primary does not have lenz drag or will not consume higher?

B. Can we provide a feeback to the primary from secondary by adding a capacitor to the secondary output which will be in phase with primary or use a transformer to do it?

I may not be able to do all but other replicators may be able to do it. I do not claim to know all nor do I make any theories that what I say is right and if you do not accept you are stupid. I do not make statements like that. 

Be calm. We have reached a very advanced level now. But I have my constraints. Funds. Trained staff. While we work in Airconditioned room the outside temperature is 107 to 108'F (42 to 43'C here)

The secret of the devices is simple. You should not use the secondary output to power the load. You all can call me stupid and deaf but I really do not care. This is the fact. Without using the secondary to power the load how it can be used to power the primary non stop. If you can advise me. If you cannot I have no problem. I donot claim to know all.

There are other devices that are non polluting and that hold significant promise and while they are dangerous, there is no EM Radiation from a saturated core.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 24, 2016, 02:39:09 PM
Quote; "The secret of the devices is simple. You should not use the secondary output to power the load. You all can call me stupid and deaf but I really do not care. This is the fact. Without using the secondary to power the load how it can be used to power the primary non stop. If you can advise me. If you cannot I have no problem. I do not claim to know all."

In this case i think the shoe fits quite nicely, not a clue in the world.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 24, 2016, 04:16:11 PM
Im shortening your name to NRI for future reference. Don't take it so harshly everyone starts out in exactly the same place.

"The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several electromagnets are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole faces separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they will magnetize and demagnetize quickly and not retain any residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes in one piece, or several, or many. An excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating, actuates all the electromagnets, which are attached or in series, or in parallel, or as required, and in the induced circuit will arise currents comprising, together, the total generator current. That allows suppressing the mechanical force, since there is nothing which needs to be moved. The driving current, or is an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign alternately by any known method, or is a part of the total current of the generator, as it is done today in the current dynamos."

 You dont have to be smart or clever to pay attention. I used the phrase before " to a hammer everything is nail." How is it done in a modern generator?

  " The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they will magnetize and demagnetize quickly and not retain any residual magnetism."
   
    With the above stated ask yourself why is there residual magnetism in a generator.Why is it there? What does it do for or against the generator which has it?

     "Several electromagnets are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole faces separated by a small distance."

       Don't over think it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 24, 2016, 04:17:49 PM
Yes..This is the difference between theoretical knowledge and Experimental observation based knowledge...One such example in our opinion is Daniel McFarland Cook device which is easy to see the missing component and how it would have worked to continuously oscillate the iron.

While cook says that he used only iron core, the description of the cook patent says that you just wave a iron rod to cause induction. Unless the iron rod is a powerful permanent magnet and the core is a pre-magnetized permanent magnet core this will not happen. It is in fact the easiest patent to replicate if our understanding is correct.

We will tell you later after testing it.

It is possible to take electricity out without using the secondary. Only experimental observations can give you this knowledge.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 24, 2016, 04:54:35 PM
A post worth to take it into account again:

http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg469355/#msg469355 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg469355/#msg469355)

Note that the claims in this patent do not mention the polarity. Again a patent with the claims without defining the electromagnet polarity. Therefore the legal protection is again open to any polarity:

"Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing
moves, which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines
thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets. "
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 24, 2016, 06:55:20 PM
Hanon

Claims must have antecedent support in specification. .

Claims are interprted and understood based on the wriien description in specification to avoid ambiguity.

Claims cannot stand on their own but must be supported by specification.

There is support for secondary to be placed between opposite poles only in the patent.

Do not confuse yourself.

Doug..I do not know..you may please explain it.

I will try to do a machine where no load is placed on secondary.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 24, 2016, 08:47:56 PM
I will try to do a machine where no load is placed on secondary.

But report the results in other thread. This is neither Figuera's design.

------

Have you read the link I posted before? I said that there are two possible translations, and both are 100% legally admisible.  The writing of the description is ambiguous : the "opposites poles at short distance" are both from the same electromagnet or are the poles from the two electromagnets? .Talking to you is like talking to a wall. You do not listen. I am afraid it could be a result of the radiation emitted by your device. I stop here communicating with you. IMHO a summary of your contribution to this thread: too many words, messy posts, too few principles, too much nonsense, and day by day further from Figuera's design, every post was different to the previous one, no single design may be extract from such a bunch of nonsense. Insanity posts. Answer to this post in order to get relaxed and then stop chatting with me in this thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 25, 2016, 07:43:10 AM
For the first time you are saying now translation can be of two types. Translation of specification or specification itself is not reliable.

You are on record that you are not capable of doing the rotary device of Figuera Patent of 1908. The only rotary device built and demonstrated by me did not perform well and so I have avoided it.

Saeed, Me and Ignacio reported the cop>1 results. Ignacio used capacitors to boost the amperage.

How come this is never objected to by you.

And finally you are not able to comprehend how output can be taken without using the secondary. Some one who says that is insane. This is the same as Wright Brothers trying to build an Aiicraft were considered insane.

Talking, talking and talking will not give your actual knowledge. You need to do experiments for that. My driver who has studied only up to 7th standard is now able to say why certain things work and why certain things do not work. This is experimental knowledge obtained through observations and sweating it out.

I do not care about your views now as you have admitted that the specification is not clear and translation may be subject to different interpretations. This entire thread has been built on the basis of the trust we had in you and in your translations. When you yourself depricate it what is the use.

However thanks to you we do know now what works and what does not work. If you have not insisted in 2013 that I continue we would not have learnt so much by our experimentation. And certainly I would not have suffered. So you are responsible for both these things.

I will not trust your translation nor the specifications in spanish any more. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 25, 2016, 04:30:49 PM
HaHa..What is this.. That Patent is not valid you see?Why?

It says opposite pole faces must be used to induce electricity..How come our NN or SS only team rely on this not valid any more patent..

You see this is the relevant part of the 378 Patent..

The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several
electromagnets are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole
faces separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are
formed in such a way that they will magnetize and demagnetize quickly and not
retain any residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole
faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes in one
piece, or several, or many. An excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating,
actuates all the electromagnets, which are attached or in series, or in parallel,
or as required, and in the induced circuit will arise currents comprising,
together, the total generator current. That allows suppressing the mechanical
force, since there is nothing which needs to be moved. The driving current, or is
an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign
alternately by any known method, or is a part of the total current of the
generator, as it is done today in the current dynamos.

Founded on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro
Blasberg, in the name and on behalf of the society "Figuera-Blasberg"
respectfully requests to be granted final patent of invention for this generator
whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that,
in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of
four excitatory electromagnets in each, and the induced circuit is marked by a
thick line of reddish ink, being this way the general arrangement of the
appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in
another form or grouping.
The invention for which a patent is applied consists in following note.

Note
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing
moves, which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines
thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.


Note is the claimed Portion. This is precisely what I did for a long time. I have then realized that If the core is already saturated peremanent magnet and cannot be demagnetized the current drawn will be lower while the output will be higher.

You only need to wind two electromagnets with 10 filar coils. Then remove one of them and insulate both its ends to make it a 9 filar coil. Then do it for another coil to make it 8 filar coil.

A 10 filar coil draws only 0.5 amps if it is serially connected and 2.5 amps if it is connected in parallel. But you remove one or two coils then the current drawn is 15 to 25 amps. The core is saturated and you get an enormous output in excess of the input.

If you place permanent magnets in the core the input is reduced in the primary as the amperage needed for making the core saturated is less and there is no complete magnetic field collapse.

In any case I have tested and speak from my experience and my own troubles.

Ah Ha.. What is a Coffee Break meant for.. Go to overunity.com and Bomb Ramaswami and enjoy the 15 minutes..You all made my day..

Enjoy your weekend..Bye Bye

"Note is the claimed Portion. This is precisely what I did for a long time. I have then realized that If the core is already saturated peremanent magnet and cannot be demagnetized the current drawn will be lower while the output will be higher."


But is this the only way to reduce input Starting and Running current?

Do not frequency play a part too.





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 25, 2016, 06:25:20 PM
I think there has been some confusion with the terms "opposite poles" and "opposing poles"

In my 30+ years of experience in the electrical field, "opposite poles" has always meant N-S or S-N and "like poles" has meant N-N or S-S magnetic polarity configurations.

Then, opposite poles NS, SN can only attract and similar or like poles can only repel. I am providing this clarification because it seems to me from some posts that the terms "opposite poles" and "opposing poles" are been treated as equal when in reality they mean different magnetic conditions.

"opposite poles" = NS or SN and "opposing poles" = NN or SS if "opposing poles" is read as "poles opposing to each other" since only like poles can repel each other. If within the reading context, "opposing poles" implies "poles opposing to each other" than the term can only be interpreted as NN or SS magnetic configuration. When reading the patent we need to be aware of the above.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 25, 2016, 06:41:34 PM
Since the sketch on the patent shows N-Y-S magnetic configuration, I do not understand why there is any issue with the magnetic polarity of the inducing coils.
To me, it is a "crystal clear explanation" in the patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 25, 2016, 09:21:19 PM
 So what are you insinuating Mr. Bajac?
Which configuration works?
N>>S or N>>N?
Since the sketch on the patent shows N-Y-S magnetic configuration, I do not understand why there is any issue with the magnetic polarity of the inducing coils.
To me, it is a "crystal clear explanation" in the patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 25, 2016, 09:31:05 PM
I think I must an apology toward NRamaswami. I have been thinking and I really think I have behaved poorly and used bad words with you. I am really sorry. The excitement took over me and I said things I know are not true. Surely he is the person who have been doing more test about this generator and he deserves I have behaved better. While he openly shared his info I still think that his test derived further and further from Figuera design. I really can not assure the effect of his device. I know for sure that Figuera design used low frequency and low voltage (from batteries). If he had been testing with HF is a completely different environment. I tried to persuase him to use lower frequencies, but not was fruitful. In summary I really think that Ramaswami is a good man and he had tried more than anyone to show his system and results. And I really think this. Sadly he started unfocusing with different design and he finisehd using HV and KHz in his test, completely apart from Hubbard, Figuera, Hendershoot devices which used low frequency from mechanical switching.

I am sorry for going mad and accusing him of some untrue statements. I shame on me for been so nervous. While we do not share the same patent design, I should have respected him. I could be thinking differently in the technical side but I should not have not gone further. It is a pity because he was the only who could have advance this project and share it openly in the benefits of everyone but he mixed designs and got testing a very different system. I got mad about earth points, KHz of excitation, surpassing the core saturation or using thing not supported in the patent text. Please do not mention radiation because Low frequency devices are free from radiation. I myself have been testing at low frequencies and nothing happens. And I encourage you to return to use those frequencies obtained by mechanical swithing as those used by Figuera, and stop using electronic switching at HF which did not exist in the early XX century. You are a person with hundred of ideas in your head. You are fine but need to focus into just one design and avoid mixing devices. That's the only thing I see and I may recommend you.

Sorry Ramaswami. I really feel sorry for attacking a good man. There are bad people around those forums , but I quarrelled with you, when you by heart tried to show your results. I may disagree in the technical side but the personal side is above that, and I  should have been kind in the personal level. If I have success anytime in the future you will receive a message from me with the clear specs of the device. Just for your work you deserve to share the reward.

Good luck in the OU projects and in life.

While writting this post I have stopped to think. I will take some time away from forums. I do not have much more to share. I wont answer questions. All the info I think of importance is collected in my site. Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 25, 2016, 09:52:50 PM
One more post: in patent the only part with legal validity and protection are the CLAIMS. The description and drawing wont give protection to the device. Just focus on the claims and avoid being misguided by drawings and ambiguous sentences.

Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 26, 2016, 12:24:44 AM
Quote;"Since the sketch on the patent shows N-Y-S magnetic configuration".

AND IT IS JUST THAT, "A SKETCH" to CONVEY an IDEA or "ACTION" NOT LITERALLY as in RELUCTANCE IS an ACTION caused by a coil of wire on ferromagnetic material causing resistance to currant flow which NO ONE in this forum can apparently understand and obviously you can't understand that the drawing is just that, "A DRAWING" DUH!. and say's so in the patent and YOU STILL disregard it. so you credibility just flew out the second story window. WOW that's precious.

so tell me Bajac do you even know what part G is or can't you get past the DRAWING.? I DO and if you can't i have a 166 piece crayola set that you and Ranswami can draw with and tell each other bed time stories how you built the Figuera device.  both of you two are full of **** like no tomorrow and all you two do is flap the gums and post fairy dust. sure both of you did a lot of LEFT HANDED research......it was just that LEFT HANDED RESEARCH, NOT FIGUERA.
yes i might of been misguided at one time but i AM NOT NOW and only post provable research.

INDIAN TECH SUPPORT with two free SHAM WOW's and some rubber spoons.

Don't stoop Hanon you are right toward these LEFT HANDED RESEARCHERS.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on April 26, 2016, 04:33:06 AM
Hi Hanon.
what is your site?
Tank you!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 26, 2016, 09:22:16 AM
Hanon:

I accept this apology. What is the size of the devices that you did? what is the weight of the core you used? Compared it with  the size of the devices and weigtht of the core that I did.

No harm is caused by 50 Hz current flowing through wires to power home appliances most of the time. However when this 50 or 60 Hz current is used to coil wires and make electromagnets the resulting magnetic field causes harm if we are exposed to it for a long time. I suffered only due to this. An Electromagnet is supposed to emit all types of frequencies to a certain extent and this is why Magnetic shielding is needed. You have done experiments very occassionally. You have used maximum of 1 sq mm wire. The coils are wound on small cores. The coils are moved away from the core as they turns became bigger. This is visible in the photos you uploaded.

I concede that both NN and NS can be used to make output but the Figuera pattern of a straight pole produces output only in NS poles. You need a square coil to make the NN poles to work to produce output.

It is only after much personal suffering that I realized that not doing the experiments without magnetic shielding caused the problem and even if magnetic shielding were to be present some waves can penetrate the shielding to a mild extent. This is what a Professor has told me.

If NN Poles are used as shown in Figuera patents we get even for very large magnets only 4 volts and no amperage. Only when NS poles are used for induction output comes.

By your post you are contiuning to provide misinformation that can potentially cause harm to others. You accept the fact that high intensity magnetic field at low frequencies cause harm when we are exposed to it for a prolonged period and then I will accept your apology. Not otherwise.

PS: After I made this post Hanon has pointed out that Figuera has used only 100 Volts and 1 Amp to produce output. I think that is considered a theoretical statement. Any way I have to accept the apology of Hanon.

Any one trying to replicate Figuera device must use magnetic shielding. I did not have this knowledge when I made the tests in 2013 and 2014 and suffered. Only last year I came to know that magnetic shielding is used for all electromagnet based tests by Universities. Here Universities limit students to 60 volts when they use high amperage and 200 milli amps when they use high voltage. In fact the equipment available itself is limited to 2 amps for high voltage labs and there are only very few facilities for High voltage experiments. The kind of experiments that we did would not have been allowed. I have one client who specializes in High Voltage transmission for trains and he explained that the voltage is brought down to 12 volts by large earth connections of the train compartments and so no one would know the voltage and up to 30 volts are permissible. I have tested with DC and at 27 volts you get a big shock and 12 volts we do not perceive the current.

Very high caution is needed. I thought that by increasing the size of the Cores I can reduce saturation. Unfortunately it only ended up increased magnetic field and more current to saturate the core. The results come only when core is saturated. I have received suggestions as to how the results can be achieved even at lower magnetic field strengths by competent hands but this is not disclosed in Figuera patents and so I do not want to post that information here. Secondly I have not tested them and ascertained them for a fact to post them here.

So if you want to replicate this kind of device do your utmost to take safety methods. It is not the success of the experiment that is important but the safety of the experimenter and the team. We cannot take chances when dealing with electricity.

If I have any thing to post in future, which I seriously doubt, I would post. I have no further information to share. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 26, 2016, 02:06:12 PM
So what are you insinuating Mr. Bajac?
Which configuration works?
N>>S or N>>N?

I do not know what works or what doesn't. That is the purpose of this forum, to find the answer to the million dollar question.

All I am saying is that the patent is clear about the polarity of the inducing coils. Stating that whatever is shown in the patent is not the real thing, and that Figuera wanted to hide the true invention, is a personal opinion or interpretation which we have not proven at this point.

It kind of surprises me how people rush into conclusions that are not supported in the patent. Statements such as "the sketch on a patent is not important" or "the key to the invention is in the claims" indicates a lack of knowledge on how patents are drafted. I am not implying that others interpretations outside the patent are not valid. What I want to say is that you should know the difference between an interpretation and a (fact) statement coming from the Figuera's patent application. Stating that Figuera's 1908 patent teaches the magnetic polarity of the inducing coils as NN or SS is plain wrong. IT IS A PERSONAL INTERPRETATION!!!

The patent sketches are so important that if you wish, you can submit your first temporary application based on sketches only. No words. And if the description contradicts whatever is shown on the sketches, it is the duty of the patent examiner to object and not allow this patent until the errors are corrected. On the other hand, the claims are useless or meaningless for determining what the patent is about. When I perform a prior art search, I do not bother on reading the claims. All I look for is the speciation part of the patent, that is, the sketches and the description sections.

Notice that Figuera's document is not an awarded patent but a patent application. This document contains claims that would have never been allowed in a final awarded patent because (even in 1908) still they were reading on prior art from the 1800s. That is why I once said that Figuera's patent application was very lousy and drafted by a very bad patent lower.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 26, 2016, 02:56:11 PM
Bajac:

Purpose of patent drafting is to give information and not to give information at the same time. Patent of 1908 claims patent for Principle itself and that would not be allowed. Drafting might have been deliberately intended to confuse and in that BuForn has done a good job.   

The device as disclosed in the drawings work only if NS-NS-NS is the configuration. If we use identical poles like NS-NS-SN then the voltage that comes is about 4 volts. No amperage. I have tested number of times.

The identical pole configuration works but that requires a different geometry  for Primaries and secondary and that is not shown in Figueras Patent. His 1902 Patent is quite clear that the opposite pole faces should be used so that the maximum attractive force could be utilised in the secondary. I think this has been tested by many now and so there is no million dollar question here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 26, 2016, 10:09:31 PM
Hi Hanon.
what is your site?
Tank you!


Wistiti, You may find my website clicking in the Globe Sketch which is located under my nickname in the posts.


Here I post the only sentence where Figuera defined the system in the 1908 patent. Later Buforn did the same in his 5 patents. Never mentioned North or South!!.  Strange, isn´t it? . Please read it thinking you are a lawyer who has to defend a certain arragement of electromagnets. Take your own conclusions.


Bye bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on April 26, 2016, 10:15:40 PM

https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258



23 april 1902 newspaper  article

"that the invention of electrical generator is not only mine , but that has been made in collaboration between me and the young and illustrated electrician Mr Pedro Blasberg in which I am associated to , as it relates to the technical part of the invention"

"SF has constructed a ROUGH apparatus by which in spite of its small size and defects , he  obtains a current of 550v which he utilise in his house for lighting purposes and driving a motor of 20 hp "




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 27, 2016, 12:36:32 AM
RSI, i see Doug is right your still trying to make a transformer into a generator. HILARIOUS. !

research part G in the time frame of Figuera and you will see they used Magnetic fields to control currant.
i guess it is to much for the brain to handle that currant through a coil with a iron or silicon iron core has reluctance, resistance to currant flow. not to mention the rotating field inside Part G's core but that is another story in it's self.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 27, 2016, 09:43:16 AM
Dear Mr. Marathonman:

My experiments are over. Edison failed about 1086 times and I failed about 100 times.  The 1902 report says that the Figuera took the energy from the Atmosphere. Used a small device. Using the atmosphere essentially means using electrostatics or capacitors. None of the patents show any capacitor. The only thing that I have noticed is that thick insulation produces good results and once we reach saturation of the core secondary output is dependent not on primary input but on the number of turns and thickness of wires of secondary and the size of the core.

I'm afraid of sparks and afraid of capacitors. I know the sound a capacitor makes when it is suddenly discharged and the kind of spark it can make at that time. Not interested in doing these dangerous things. Moreover I have started getting some work. It is better to focus on my practice and earn some money rather than spending money on these projects. Bye Bye..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 27, 2016, 11:08:53 AM
The 1902 report says that the Figuera took the energy from the Atmosphere. Used a small device. Using the atmosphere essentially means using electrostatics or capacitors. None of the patents show any capacitor.


I have a press clipping, that I have not translated (it doesn't give any technical detail), where Figuera stated that his invention did not dealed with atmospheric electricity. Newspapers named his machine that way  (energy from the surroundings, atmosphere,...) but it was just a bad definition of his generator, and he was totally contrary to the name given by reporters. Basically he stated that although he believed that in the future the power of rays could be collected his invention rely on a more close source of the electricity. He wrote about the vibrations on the molecules created by the electricity, as a force in itself. He stated: " The big mistake is to suppose, and settle, that we are going to use the electricity of the atmosphere and the clouds. This is not that way; not even close"


The part I love more is the end of that press clipping:


 " When dealing with electricity you can't  and you mustn´t pronounce the word 'impossible'   ".


 :)

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 27, 2016, 08:27:33 PM
The so called 'athmosperic electricity' was used in two context. One is electrostatic field, second is ether. Later it was completly misunderstood.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on April 27, 2016, 10:44:28 PM
The article is signed off  ,  C Figuera and P Blasberg


Pedro is not a no body , he played his part
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 27, 2016, 11:18:06 PM
Curiously Pedro Blasberg became later the director of the gas factory in the Canary Islands. He disappeared from everything related to the generator. And his career had a huge progression: from electrician to director of a gas factory. Something here stinks ....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 28, 2016, 01:10:38 AM
For a certainty, you can turn a Transformer into a Generator if:

1. Lenz is 100% Practically Negated like Thanes Heins did with his Transformer.

2. High Frequency is used to Run the Primary.

3. The Secondary Wire is Substantially THICK

Lenz negation, High Frequency application and Thick Gauge usage is a M U S T!!

Why?

When lenz is negated, the Secondary will NOT RELY ON THE INPUT OF THE PRIMARY TO POWER A LOAD. This means that when you load down the secondary, it will not draw more power from the Primary but instead, it will draw the needed Electrons from the AIR at the correct operating Frequency as the are is constantly charged by Forces that holds the Planet Earth Upon Nothing in the Space. Thanes Heins did this and other people who replicated his work achieved this effect too.Y

When you wound a coil and switch or Pulse it at 60hz, it will generate weak magnetic strength and draw High Current. But if you increase the Frequency to 600hz, the magnetic strength will enormously increase while it Amp draw will reduce.

But the Point here is that once you wound your whole Transformer to Negate Lenz effect, what will determine the amount of Overunity Power it will be able to generate is How thick your Secondary wire is and the Speed(Frequency) of Rotation of the Flux of the Primary over the Secondary.

The thikcer your secondary wire is, the Lesser it resistance. The lesser it Resistance, the Higher the Speed or Frequency at which the secondary winding can be driven. The Higher the Speed the secondary can be driven at, the Higher the Amount Of Bait Electrons that will be available to attract the Atmospheric electrons into the Lenzless Pulsing Secondary.

The only limitation is the amount of Maximum Frequency the Core of the TrafoGen can withstand. So it is best to use Moulded Core.

Remember that the Principle of Overunity lies in using 1 to generate 100 or more. So you need to drive your Primary at High Frequency to reduce amp draw.

Your Primary Wire Gauge Ratio could be 1:4 i.e Primary 1mm diameter Coated Copper Wire while Secondary 4mm diameter Coated Copper Wire or better 1: 8  where the 8mm could be further divided into 1mm in eigth places and converterd to Bifilar Wire (the best effect).

You Must make sure the Resistance in the Primary is very much Higher than the Resistance in the Secondary.

Spiral Winding gives the Best Result. So wind your Primary and Secondary in like manner.

Do not put any winding under the Two opposing Primaries Spiral Windings.

You Must Wind your Opposing Primaries in CC<> CCW and if you wanna go express then CC <> CCW <> CC <> CCW <> CC etc. is the  only correct configuration. <> denotes the intermediate Secondaries. When you  have multiple Secondaries, it is best to use Fast Switchicing Diodes to Rectify there Outputs and separately Link them to individual High Capacitance DC Capacitors and further use High Amp Rating Diodes to ink the Capacitors in S  E  R  I  E  S.

When you use Capacitors and Diodes with Field Coils this way, the Voltage and Current are Multiplied together unlike in battery case.

Also, the earlier referred to attracted Atmospheric Electrons lured by the bait electrons on the Secondaries get easily locked and converted to Hot Electricity. So this help TO EXTREMELY RAMP UP THE OVERUNITY EFFECT MORE THAN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IF THE SECONDARY COILS ARE JUST CONNECTED IN SERIES STRAIGHT AWAY WITHOUT THE INTERMEDIATE HIGH FREQUENCY DIODES AND HIGH CAPACITANCE DC CAPACITORS.

Other names to High frequency diodes are fast recovery diodes, fast switching diodes etc. You can get them cheaply from chineese at www.aiexpress.com

The overunity setting of this device necessitate AC usage as kickstarter. Thus a Variable Frequency Pure Sine Wave Inverter must be used.

I have in my earlier comment post a PWM inveter circuit and have stated how it can be easily made to be adjustable frequency. So search for that post. But you can do better. I would recommend buying Moulded Core on same aliexpress to make your own Center tapped inverter Transformer so as to easily drive your primaries at high frequency and take records of the best frequency.

Lest I forget, When you wind a Transformer and drive it at say 60hz and it Secondary output is maximum of 60W while it Primary is consuming 60W (turns Ratio), AT 600HZ, THE PRIMARY OF THE SAME TRANSFORMER WILL BE CONSUMING LESSER WATTAGE WHILE IT SECONDARY OUTPUT WILL BE AT MINIMUM OF 60W STILL.



BUT BECAUSE OF LENZ WHICH IS MADE TO BE BY THE WINDING STYLE OF MOST TRANSFORMER OUT THERE, WHEN SUCH TRANSFORMERS ARE LOADED, then the primary will start to draw more current and Overunity achievement get badly marred.

The Secret here is that, A Transformer is Readily a Generator Provided You Wind it to Negate Lenz and drive it Primary at High Frequency.

 








Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 28, 2016, 10:11:43 PM

2. High Frequency is used to Run the Primary.


Totally contrary to the teaching of Figuera. Figuera used mechanical switching, therefore he could have just used low frequency excitation. He did not used spark gaps nor electronic circuits, so he could not get high frequency. Please read the patent and study it. Figuera used around 100 V and 1A.

You see. It is not me the one who is suggesting using HF. HF is asociated to high voltage and therefore microwaves. Take care. This is totally contrary to the low frequency generator of Figuera. Which is the maximum frequency that you may get with a mechanical switching? 50 Hz, maybe 100 Hz? This device is as the one from Hubbard, Hendershoot generator, all powered at low frequencies. Please do not propose systems far away from the patent design.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 29, 2016, 01:27:52 AM
Totally contrary to the teaching of Figuera. Figuera used mechanical switching, therefore he could have just used low frequency excitation. He did not used spark gaps nor electronic circuits, so he could not get high frequency. Please read the patent and study it. Figuera used around 100 V and 1A.

You see. It is not me the one who is suggesting using HF. HF is asociated to high voltage and therefore microwaves. Take care. This is totally contrary to the low frequency generator of Figuera. Which is the maximum frequency that you may get with a mechanical switching? 50 Hz, maybe 100 Hz? This device is as the one from Hubbard, Hendershoot generator, all powered at low frequencies. Please do not propose systems far away from the patent design.

Hanon, when will you change for better? When?

In one of my comments where I deliberately and beneficially nullified Marathon's mechanical switching image, I stated the reasons why I did and why anyone who wants GENUINE and Long-lasting switch should not use Mechanical Switch which I have practically tested.

Below is the said comment again:

"The Figuera device is a Motionless Motor Generator with AC output. in convectional Motor Generators, YOU WILL HARDLY GET USEFUL OUTPUT WHEN YOU MOVE TWO NON-OPPOSING FIELD OVER A COIL LET ALONE GETTING AC OUTPUT.

SAME THING IS THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURE. WE HAVE DAY AND NIGTH. YOUR HEARTH IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS PROCESS TOO, IT PULSE, SWITCHING ON AND OFF.

SO WHICH THEORY SUPPORTS YOUR NORTH TO NORTH OUTPUT IN YOUR DIAGRAM ABOVE?

The Loads of Components available in this Era were not Available in Figuera's time that was why he used those cumbersome components available in is time.

I know if CF is alive today, he will directly use Solid State Integrated Switch namely Inverter instead of using any ready-made Lenz Oriented and Speed Limited Motors. In every inverter, there are readily Oscilators which have the capabilities that those ready-made motors deliberately made to obey Lenz law be it brushed or brushless do not have. You can even control there frequencies using Potentiometer Position at the appropriate designated  Pin on them.

There are several simple low power usage inverter circuits like the one in the attached picture available now and which can be developed to Power a CORRECTLY (N >> S >> N >> S  etc.) built Figuera TraFoGen.

Figuera had to deal with back E.M.F in is own overunity device because he used DC which emanates from Batteries switched by a mechanical means to Power is Lenzless TraFoGen Primary Coils.

But now in out time, that DC can be easily switched using the always 'Beautiful' ICs you have out there. One such of them is SG3524N. Place Variable resistor on it PIN6 leg and add other simple component as shown in the circuit and viola, you have a Compact Variable Frequency Inverter

One of the Major disadvantage in ready-made Motor-driven mechanical switch is that your Frequency will be  limited by the Maximum Speed Of The Motor which are Always Amperage Hog.

The only solution to this is to build your own Low Amperage High Voltage Pulsed Motor which will require those costly neodymium Magnets.

But why go that slow and costly lane when you HAVE A FAR MORE BETTER OPTION IN THE NAME OF INVERTER??

WHY??

 
http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html"

So do you get the drift now Mr. Hanon?

Figuera's time was 1800 ours is 2000 what a stark difference. Must we now still stay hooked to keep the organic fish? No

High Frequency must be used to keep down massively the Primary input Wattage.

Now that advance and easier to integrate chips are available, you can separately switch a coil at whatever level of voltage. Even you can switch 12V dc or ac at 500khz if you wish. But that you can never do such using a Mechanical Switch like Copper Commutator and Carbon Brush.

So please STOP telling me not to encourage people to go for BETTER and SIMPLER Options which are not available  in Figuera's era.

You must use High frequency so as to enable you to loop the system easily powering the Primary with a Battery and low Wattage Inverter.

Discharging batteries at high amperage will get them weak quickly. So you just need to make sure you are not discharging your batteries above the Maximum rated amperage. And the only way to ensure this is to drive your Primary at High Frequency people.

Like I said yesterday, if at 60hz your Primary is consuming 200W, if you increase the switching speed to say 600hz or more, the input wattage will drop to 20W or less and the Ouput wattage will increase. And if you are able to achieve that, then you can just use a 100W Variable frequency Pure Sine wave Inverter to Power your Primaries and do the Self-charging thing on the other side of the Motionless MoGen and Further tap Power to Power your devices.

You do not have keep to Figuera style to succeed. All is need is common sense. You need to know what to Add and What to Subtract simple.





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 29, 2016, 03:29:52 AM
It's amazing, people that DON'T even Know what PART G is are suddenly an EXPERT on Figuera with no working device giving out advice on how to build a free energy device.

NOW THAT'S PRECIOUS.

Hanon can i interest you in two SHAM WOW'S and some rubber spoons for the invaluable Tech support you just received.
you should be thrilled.

The heart pulses in a vortech motion. meaning it twist's as it contracts, if you want to sound like you know anything at least research it first.

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on April 29, 2016, 01:13:13 PM
Once the machine is operating where does the power come from to operate it? If it comes from the machine itself why would i care how much it uses to operate?
  The short bus runeth over?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on April 29, 2016, 09:33:09 PM
Darediamond:


But why go that slow and costly lane when you HAVE A FAR MORE BETTER OPTION IN THE NAME OF INVERTER??

WHY??

 
http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html (http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html)"


This chip only puts out 60hz for a regular dc to ac power inverter and you still need the power amplifiers.
 An 8 pin op-amp or even a 555 chip can be made to put out a sine wave at any frequency you want.
It's a far easier solution for experimenters than a complex 16 pin ic that has features we don't need.
   I agree with you that higher frequencies would greatly increase efficiency. This was proven years ago when
they stopped using bulky power xformers in computer power supplies & instead are pulsing very small xformers
in the khz range. Ultra light units that can put out 20 amps.
Don Smith said that doubling the frequency would quadruple the output.
     I don't think HV is necessary for this unit to work. We only need a strong magnetic field that keeps varying in
the one direction. It can be made as strong as you like just by reducing circuit resistance.
    Because magnetism & electricity are so closely related, you can use either one to attract free energy.
 High voltage potential of a single polarity is one way. Or a strong magnetic field that varies only in the one direction
is the other.
    Too bad people get confused between the two and want to use both at same time.
Here I will state my theory along with the dozen of others on this thread.
   Charged particles of matter (only pos. or only neg.) are attracted into the strong magnetic field of the air gaps.
Therefore the more air-gaps or units the more energy we get. This is also why CF used 7 units.  Magnetic exposure
to the environment, I think is the key. This being so, then the width of the air-gaps might need to be optimized.
   CF was trying to replicate the theory of a dc dynamo which has a half dozen or so coils whirring past a magnetic
field coil. The more coils, the more power.
   That's the main reason for his 7 units. Other reasons are:
1. A coil too large in diameter will suffer inefficiency.  Outer layers not getting as much magnetic field as the inner.
2. Not enough room for larger coils.
3. Coils with large circumference will need much longer wires for same amount of turns.


       

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 29, 2016, 10:43:45 PM
Darediamond:


But why go that slow and costly lane when you HAVE A FAR MORE BETTER OPTION IN THE NAME OF INVERTER??

WHY??

 
http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html (http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html)"


This chip only puts out 60hz for a regular dc to ac power inverter and you still need the power amplifiers.
 An 8 pin op-amp or even a 555 chip can be made to put out a sine wave at any frequency you want.
It's a far easier solution for experimenters than a complex 16 pin ic that has features we don't need.
   I agree with you that higher frequencies would greatly increase efficiency. This was proven years ago when
they stopped using bulky power xformers in computer power supplies & instead are pulsing very small xformers
in the khz range. Ultra light units that can put out 20 amps.
Don Smith said that doubling the frequency would quadruple the output.
     I don't think HV is necessary for this unit to work. We only need a strong magnetic field that keeps varying in
the one direction. It can be made as strong as you like just by reducing circuit resistance.
    Because magnetism & electricity are so closely related, you can use either one to attract free energy.
 High voltage potential of a single polarity is one way. Or a strong magnetic field that varies only in the one direction
is the other.
    Too bad people get confused between the two and want to use both at same time.
Here I will state my theory along with the dozen of others on this thread.
   Charged particles of matter (only pos. or only neg.) are attracted into the strong magnetic field of the air gaps.
Therefore the more air-gaps or units the more energy we get. This is also why CF used 7 units.  Magnetic exposure
to the environment, I think is the key. This being so, then the width of the air-gaps might need to be optimized.
   CF was trying to replicate the theory of a dc dynamo which has a half dozen or so coils whirring past a magnetic
field coil. The more coils, the more power.
   That's the main reason for his 7 units. Other reasons are:
1. A coil too large in diameter will suffer inefficiency.  Outer layers not getting as much magnetic field as the inner.
2. Not enough room for larger coils.
3. Coils with large circumference will need much longer wires for same amount of turns.


       

I strongly agree with what you said here ''I don't think HV is necessary for this unit to work.'' because we can now easily switch the Primaries without using Mechanical Switch.

The benefit of using variable frequency inverter lies in it type of Voltage which is far beneficial as regards cancellation of BACK E.M.F Generation and the option of Voltage Application adjustment. All-in-one you will say.

When you use mechanical means to switch a coil, that will attracts B.E.M.F which will need H.V Film Capacitors to quench using the correct capacitance. I knew this from Practical test. In other words, if you do not absorb those sparks with the Non-polarised  H.V Film Cap, the resulting spark will kill the Commutator and render it useless as a Mech.Switch. DC is mostly associated with Mechanical Switching and low end IC to Mosfet Switching and as for using IC and Mosfet, that B.E.M.F is a pain in the butt too because the spark will be occurring inside the Mosfet which can render it permanently useless in a jiffy.

So the best option is to make a Varible Frequency Pure Sine Wave inverter. As this allows you to switch at low Voltage and use Transformer to amplify such low voltage to higher Voltage if necessary.

That IC will output 60hz if you use Fixed Resistor on it Pin 6. But if you use variable Resistor, you will be able to arrive at more high frequency.

That is cumbersome when compared to AC application which does not pave way for B.E.M.F and far suitable with powering Figuera prototypes because it posses Iron Core.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 29, 2016, 10:56:29 PM
It's amazing, people that DON'T even Know what PART G is are suddenly an EXPERT on Figuera with no working device giving out advice on how to build a free energy device.

NOW THAT'S PRECIOUS.

Hanon can i interest you in two SHAM WOW'S and some rubber spoons for the invaluable Tech support you just received.
you should be thrilled.

The heart pulses in a vortech motion. meaning it twist's as it contracts, if you want to sound like you know anything at least research it first.

It amazes me how you wrongly assume I know nothing in Practical about the disadvantages of your proposed mechanical switch which I nullified based on my Research.

What tech support do you have to offer?

Teach us something we do not know Mr. Marathon.....

What happen to your device?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on April 29, 2016, 11:42:45 PM
All,


Are you sure that you want to follow a felow as the one that send  messages as the copied below. Just for your information.


I just say: read the patents, study them, and later test every possible polarity. But follow the patents !!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 30, 2016, 09:37:43 PM
Building Part G the way figuera Built it as we speak, by the way lets hear your interpretation of part G that you so called nullified. oh my god what a good laugh.  EVERY ONE can be at ease now that  darediamond has nullified part G.
you offer nothing just like Rswami does, just a lot of hot air that NO BODY follows that has any common sense.

My final device is almost complete how about yours, and i did say "FINAL".

Hanon i wouldn't follow the nut case if you paid me to. i think i'll stay my path."the right one"

and by the way Hanon didn't bow, he came to his senses, because i sent him all of my research plus he has his own and he quit listening to stupid shit.
imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 30, 2016, 11:03:29 PM
All,


Are you sure that you want to follow a felow as the one that send  messages as the copied below. Just for your information.


I just say: read the patents, study them, and later test every possible polarity. But follow the patents !!!

Wao, you are worried with a simple thing even thinking I am trying to be relevant to your gained followers which I am even one of  but with an extreme 'friendly' C A U T I O N !!!

Oh, maybe you think I hate Jews? That can never be.

Well, I fear no criticism either in the open or otherwise so YOU coming out here to paint white as black does not move me at all.

I am not a Racist and I can never be.





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on May 01, 2016, 12:37:44 AM
Marathon, what is special about Part G of Figuera device? It is a MECHANICAL COMMUTATOR that will always needs to be replaced. It is Primarily used to switched the incoming DC voltage from batteries which CF used to power his coils.

This is not theory but practical: you can only at maximum get 100hz from ready-made motor driven commutator. I have tested this myself. 
The CF "Part G" will require an additional feature needed to absorb the High Voltage BEMF Spike to make the commutator run smoothly.
Now tell me, are there no better and simpler alternatives to all the complexities involved in building the Part G today in the name of those excellent Integrated ICs and there assistant in the name of Mosfet?

The slow-motion Part-G can be simply replaced with a Variable Frequency Inverter because as you yourself knows, Inverter Ultimately Possesses  the needed functions and nullifies the cumbersome functions of the Part-G in that it turns smothly DC to AC which is directly being switched on and off by the IC on it board. As for AC being generated by the inverter, no B.E.M.F will be generated by the coils because there frequency will not gets to 0. And because of the way an inverter works, you can easily switch at low voltage and get High Voltage.

No Noice, No Sparks, No wear and tear.

When you use a mechanical means to switch a Coil, it is the voltage that determines what the frequency will be. But with an Inverter, that is not the case because you have the Option of using a POT to adjust the IC output Switching Speed or Frequency at low Voltage as you wish. So you can separately adjust the Frequency to High Level  while maintaining the Voltage at  low level. Imagine that beautiful flexibility which aids Perfect Research and records taking smoothly.



The figuera device can only easily attain overunity without Earth Connection Provided High Frequency in the Khz is applied to the primaries and Lenz is canceled with the correct winding style or direction which Nicola Tesla himself introduced.

Now tell me which Motor in history till date can provide 5kz frequency or 300000rm?
 Can you refer to one?
 Or do you wanna disprove the fact that when a coil that was formerly draining 3A from a battery at say 100hz is now driven at 2000hz it Amp draw will reduce extremely to Milli amp range?

You do not even understand what I meant that Hanon formerly bowed so your line "because i sent him all of my research plus he has his own and he quit listening to stupid shit. imagine that!" is utter nonsense.

Building Part G the way figuera Built it as we speak, by the way lets hear your interpretation of part G that you so called nullified. oh my god what a good laugh.  EVERY ONE can be at ease now that  darediamond has nullified part G.
you offer nothing just like Rswami does, just a lot of hot air that NO BODY follows that has any common sense.

My final device is almost complete how about yours, and i did say "FINAL".

Hanon i wouldn't follow the nut case if you paid me to. i think i'll stay my path."the right one"

and by the way Hanon didn't bow, he came to his senses, because i sent him all of my research plus he has his own and he quit listening to stupid shit.
imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 01, 2016, 04:01:30 AM
Does retardism run in your family.
Study part G if you can then reply.
other than that good luck with your Figuera  journey. with the path you going you'll need all the luck you can get.

oh by the way i am pursuing both entities of part G moving and NON MOVING and your knowledge of pat G is pathetic..... trust me you don't know shit about part G, must follow Einstein.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 01, 2016, 07:18:24 AM
Not clear to me what the confusion is all about.

We have two groups..

One Group wants do the Figuera device as described in the patent.

Other group wants to follow the Figuera Principle described in the patent due to the sparking problem in the rotary device Part G.

Part G as interpreted and described by Marathonman seems to be slightly different and he appears to have done research in to old tech and old components.

Now my understanding of Figuera Patent is simple.

We need to rotate the magnet inside a dynamo. Because it is difficult the magnet is lower powered. If the magnet is made very powerful like the Neodymium magnets it will be very difficult to rotate it. This is why we have Low RPM Neo Magnet alternators.

Now if we do not rotate the core but give it pulsed DC or interruptted DC or AC the core becomes an electromagnet., The surrounding coils are also magnetised and they also produce power like in transformers. The advantage of this method is you can wind as many secondaries as you want and connect them in series. Primary can be made up of thin wires and secondary can be made up of thick wires.

Figuera has made another change. He has connected the cores directly. So there is no leakage of magnetic flux between the primary and secondary. I have seen that secondaries produce higher output than input only when the primary core is saturated. I have used AC only and not pulsed DC or interrupted DC. When using AC only if the secondaries merge higher output comes. Invariably this did not happen to me at lower magnetic field strengths but only at saturation. This is not considered safe and as I have personally experienced it is also not safe.

But it is correct that this enables us to use higher frequencies than what is normally given to primary. Higher the Frequency lower is the amperage.

The main problem with the Part G as I and Mr. Dare Diamond have built is the sparking problem. He describes a method of quenching sparks using HV capacitors but I do not have that kind of knowledge. But higher frequencies normally draw only lower amps and higher frquencies must also have higher voltage to draw some minimum amount of amps. Otherwise the magnetic field created is very low. Whether this will work in pulsed DC is something that I have not tested and so I cannot say any thing on it. Increasing the Frequencies reduces the amp drawn is some thing I can attest to for high frequency devices that I have built work for a long time even when using a 9 volt battery. They draw very littel amps.  They produce a low magnetism which is suitable for the human body. If we are going to use an electromagnet I would think High Frequency must be accompanied by High Votlage to draw reasonable amps.

Marathonman seems to have found an old record for Part G and seems to be building it. We need to wait and see how that device functions. His description of the device and its function is different. it is possible that he has got a Golden egg but he has not put up any device so far.

It is possible that if I had used pulsed DC the secondaries would have merged. The problem is at 220 volts a Full Wave Diode bridge Rectifier when connected to the Electromagnet draws too much of an amperage that the office circuit breaker cuts in. Therefore I need to arrange for high resistance coils to be made and then put in between the Diode Bridge Rectifier and the primary coils and then see if at lower magnetic field strength th secondaries merge. If they do merge and increase the voltage of the secondary at lower magnetic field strength, I would have built a device in accordance with the principles of Figuera but not the device as described by Figuera. The problem will be one of sustaining the device on its own and then inverting the pulsed DC to AC.

I think all of us have done very significant work here. There is no reason to fight whether Pure Figuera device alone should be built or following his principles are enough. Focus on Research and avoid fraternal fighting.

At the end all of us are trying to do something good and there is no need to fight among us. I do not have high resistance coils and I need to organize them. But once I do it it will be a simple any one can do device for there is no complexity.  Let me see if I can organize it.

No infighting and what you are saying is all correct. Marathonman would deserve our congrats if he can show the part G device as he describes because none of us including Hanon who did not even attempt it were able to built it. It is full of sparks for almost 6 to 8 inches when rotated at 1000 RPM. That is almost 450,000+ volts. I did not know what to do. Ultimately the device I produced had a frequency of 1 Hz to 2 Hz and still had a spark at a place.

DC commutators very rugged are built here but they are not similar to What Figuera has described. They appear to create a very mild spark which the carbon brush seems to be capable of handling. But these are ready made commutators and to order a single rotary device as Figuera has done will cost so much. it is possible that marathonman has done it and we will have to wait and see.

For those who cannot do it, I do not see what is wrong in following a simplified approach that they are capable of doing it. So without any infighting try to make further progress.



 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 01, 2016, 03:05:56 PM
Part G can be made two ways, MOVING and NON_MOVING. both will work and both i am building and will share my results when done.
as i have described part G's function in earlier post i will not bore you with the same details but i again stress the importance of part G. it has multiple roles and needs to be in the system.
i have studied part G's magnetic field interactions, rotation and it's interactions with the declining electromagnet and found its extremely vital roles are not replaceable with modern day ic's except the switching on the high side can be done with transistors if one wanted to as this will still mimic the rotation of the original Part G and not interfere with the declining electromagnets feeding part G as it is shoved out of the secondary core into it's own core.

i have also concluded the the winding of the primaries are very important and can not be wound with the currant entering the back of the coil because it will be nulified from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary into it's own core. as this is done the currant in the declining electromagnet will travel out of the back of the coil interfering with the original currant powering the coil in the first place.
so the primaries have to be wound with the currant entering the front of the coil and exiting the rear so when the primary is shoved out of the secondary the currant will travel the same direction as the original currant feeding part G in the process.
this could quite possibly be Hanon's problem with his device but i don't know for sure as i did not wind them.

the two pics i have posted of course will not have as many windings on them as shown because the reluctance will be to great and the currant will be to low. as Doug has stated the currant only has to be taken down just enough in the declining electromagnet to clear the secondary as it is being shoved out from the secondary from the inclining electromagnet. the pics are one like Figuera did and the other with switches (Transistors). the arrows are the actual currant flow.

this is the reason everyone is having so much trouble with NN because the two electromagnets HAVE to have constant pressure between them or INDUCTION falls off dramatically. if they are not in unison you will get very low output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 01, 2016, 06:09:42 PM
This is the wiring scheme i am referring to, the currant enters the front and exits out the back. just pay attention to spin direction while winding your coils.

Thanks for the pic Hanon with corrections.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 02, 2016, 02:23:48 PM
I think that this post is in order.


An auto-transformer or a reactor with taps should not be used as a wired resistor because of its inherent inductance.


The wired resistors are built is such a way that its magnetic field cancels out by winding tuns in opposite directions. If you do not believe me, just measure the inductance of the wire wound resistors. I once was also wrong about it.


I felt that this clarification was important for the people that are serious about replicating Figuera's device. Otherwise, I would not even bother to answer to persons who call others S***t.


Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 02, 2016, 07:10:47 PM
Mr Bajac, i would like to get your interpretation on part G knowing resistors were not around at that time. if you state anything about the picture i will bust out laughing so please if you will tell us your most intelligent answer on the construction of part G.???

the Figuera part G is NOT nor ever will be Resistors. Figuera used a Magnetic field to vary the currant through part G and i said nothing of wire resistors. resistors waist power through heat, magnetic field does NOT.

 Figuersa used the reluctance of the winding's magnetic field on a core to vary the currant NOT Resistors so that means your still wrong.

Sorry about the S**T thing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 02, 2016, 10:31:20 PM
Marathonman:

First I'm actually not able to understand your thought process on Part G.The disclosure in the Patent on Part G refers to resistor coils as indicated in the patent text and drawings. However I have some reason to believe that this 1908 Patent is some how edited and not genuine.

Before I proceed further I would advise you to avoid making any harsh statements and proof read what you write before posting it. No offensive comments please. Attacks on Indian Tech support looks actually extremely prejudiced racist to me. For Your Info, India strongly advocates free movement of skilled personel across all borders and advanced countries are strongly opposed to this for they thing Indian and Chinese workers will steal the jobs of their own nationals. India has one of the largest Scientific and Technological pool and hundreds of thousands of Engineeers and scientists come out every year. Unfortunately there is no funding for them to do research and getting funding for good projects is difficult. So the cream of the talent normally move to advanced countries and in US a very significant percentage of NASA scientists are those who came from india. With our poverty we have a peaceful democratic system, we have built all kinds of missiles, Nuclear weapons, space programs, satellites and satellite launch Rockets and we have a large and diverse country. I'm very proud to be an Indian and given the kind of violence in other places we live in a relatively peaceful place. We are an open society and all our faults are well published, criticised and we do not even consider it an interference in Internal affairs and listen to such critiques. And we are not sending a large mility to attack other countries and commit murders in the guise of protecting our national interests.

I'm not impressed with abusive comments against fellor forum posters and would most respectfully request you to stop this.

Now coming to Figuera my understanding is this.

In Dynamos we need to rotate the magnet. When the magnet starts rotating the coils placed on iron cores that receive the magnetic flux (increasing and decresing magnetic flux or time varying magnetic field) become opposite poles of the rotating magnetic core. So these opposite poles attract the magnet and prevent the movement of central magetic core. Therefore we need to apply mechanical energy to rotate the magnet against the breaking effect of opposite poles of induced magnets. This causes more input in and less output out. Transformeration of mechanical energy to electrical energy is deemed to happen.

Now Figuera has identified two things.

a. Rotating magnet sends out a weak field outside and it is this weak field that creates the opposite poles and the output in the Dynamo. So if the secondary is placed between two primaries secondary will be subjected to two forces at the same time. Both Centripetal and Centrifugal forces of the primary magnets will act on the secondary placed in the middle and this will efectively cancel out the Lenz law losses. Secondary will course will move the current in a direction opposite to the Primary but there appear to be a claimed Lenz law cancellation effect. Unfortunately this I have not witnessed. I was able to reach high COP figures and today we know how to make the output higher than the input. My understanding on Back EMF and Lenz law could be wrong.

Unfortunately I'm not able to continue due to lack of trained hands in this field. We have also conceptualized how the feedback mechaism worked in interrupted DC output. I have not done it and so will disclose it after repeat testing it. I do note that no one has shown a motionless self  sustaining generator as claimed by Figuera.

I will need to wait and watch what you post. But no personal attacks or inappropriate words. Please oblige.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     


Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 03, 2016, 12:24:22 AM

the Figuera part G is NOT nor ever will be Resistors.


Sorry but I have to disagree in this. The 1908 patent describes a resistor system to vary the current intensity.  Maybe your design may be more efficient, but if resistors are described in the patent is because that implementation works. We should keep always in mind what is described by Figuera in the patent  and what is designed by the rest of us. Patent should be our Bible. Anyway IMHO the essence is moving the magnetic fields no matter how you do it.

Ramaswami, The patent is not altered. It was lost for more than a century in the patent archives. I had the luck of touching the original papers writen by Figuera in 1902 and 1908. Very old documents. Maybe you are now re-reading the patent and you are dicovering new things which does not fit with your previous interpretation. The fair play is to accept the design described in the patent as it is writen, not to state that the documents were altered. The luck we have in this case is that the patent was lost and passed unadvertedly for a century. The first time that it was scanned was the day that alpoma asked for that around 2010. Old patents from the spanish patent office were not scanned by default. They were just scanned by request. Those patent were not available in the web because they were not scanned. When requesting for scanning them you have to prepay by bank transfer a certain amount to the patent office in order that they do it and send it to you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 03, 2016, 06:43:48 AM
Hanon;

I find it hard to believe that Bankers who bought the 1902 Patents and shelved them would not have altered the 1908 to 1914 patents. It could have happened only if they were not following it. But for a century they were forgotten and never reported. We do not see any report of the 1908 device in newspapers and certainly Figuera or BuForn would have tried to get it publicity so at least BuForn the financier of second set of patents could get money and recover his costs. This is where I find it difficult to believe that the patents were left intact for more than 100 years. But this is a doubt. Nothing more.

The strange thing is that the principle works. Even in AC the principle works. But there is Lenz law effect until we reach saturation. This I can confirm. Probably the backemf was still there in my coils but because the primaries are thin and secondaries are thick the backemf was overcome by the way we wound the coils when the core reached full saturation. If backemf is avoided today we can make it a simple device.

There are a lot of other concepts but without testing them and verifying them to be correct I cannot agree to theories. let us wait and see what Marathonman produces.

Patent shows resistors. I'm confused by Marathonmans statement that there are no resistors and Part G is different. Let us wait and see until Marathonman produces his device and demonstrates it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2016, 12:51:34 PM
the Patent is using a drawing to conceptualize the function of part G,  if your Brain is to weak to wrap around the concept then i am waisting my time on this forum.
OPEN your mind bone heads  and study part G if possible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 03, 2016, 01:43:28 PM
This is a waste of time. At this point, if you do not understand how a mechanical switch or collector works, then you have a problem.


Because the switching is make-before-break it implies that the element will be temporarily shorted out. If this element is an inductor in lieu of a resistor, you should expect substantially more sparking/arcing.


Who is the bone head now?


I am stopping this nonsense argument now. Is your goal to confuse the people participating in this forum?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 03, 2016, 03:07:01 PM
In view of my inability to either use the rotary device or use the Full Wave Diode Bridge Rectifier that drew very high current from the mains I learnt few lessons.

1. If we use AC and multiple secondaries we have the problem of secondary voltages not merging.

2. To use pulsed DC through Full wave Diode Bridge Rectifier we need to get a High Resistance coil but that will also allow adequate current to pass through it. If we have 1 to 4 amps current to flow through the coil then the magnetic field can be increased or decreased at will. Unfortunately I was unable to find any suitable resistor.

3. I have just found a resistor. It is called NiChrome wire. These wires come in their own gauges and are used for a different purpose. About 100 feet of wire can have 100 ohms. The wire can also allow up to 5 amps. Both insulated and uninsulated wires are available. We need to wrap them as resistance coils with spaces to avoid shorting if they are uninsulated and then wind plastic sheets over them for the many layers of the coils. Even steel wire is sold by some vendors and are available on Ebay but NiChrome that contains Nickel, Chromium, Aluminium or Nickel Chromium and Copper seems to be the best. Price is not very high.

4. A Diode Bridge Rectifier with this kind of resistance coil can be used to send 110 volt and 100 Hz and 1 Amp pulsed DC safely to the coils. The number of turns of wire will decide the magnetic field strength here. A Flyback diode can be used on the primary to reduce the backemf on both primaries.

5. I'm advised that in this kind of pulsed DC, the voltage of multiple secondaries can easily merge by connecting the wires in series through fast discharging diodes. We can make it interrupted DC as used by Figuera by using a capacitor and a spark gap in parallel. This will increase the Frequency further but because this is interrupted DC the induction in secondary will be there.

6. Pity after I have stopped I get this information. But I'm sharing it here so others can benefit. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2016, 04:33:32 PM
"Is your goal to confuse the people participating in this forum?"
No sir your doing a good job of that on your own from the start.

Rswami; i posted a year ago about Nicrome wire, guess you missed that but that's before i found out about part G's REAL IDENTITY.

Quote from Patents: To fix ideas is convenient to refer to the attached drawing which is no more than a sketch to understand the operation of the machine built using the principle outlined before.

now i suggest people start researching a little more then going by a drawing that says it's just a drawing or listening, following someone that goes by a fricken drawing.

that's just plain stupid and foolish.

so again i say lets hear your Fairy dust version of part G or would you rather we click are heals together in the land of OZ.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 03, 2016, 09:21:41 PM
Yes, that is true, the drawing is just descriptive to make easier to understand the invention. We must not give much importance to drawings.

The real key part of patents are the CLAIMS. Claims are the part which gives legal protection to the patent. What it is written in the claims is protected, the rest are just the technical description. The 1908 patent was granted few months after the filing date. I do not remember who said it was not granted. It was granted. The ones which were not granted were the ones from 1902 because nobody took care of replying to the patent office and they were cancelled without being valid, just for some minor details as the lack of scale in the drawings or that the title did not corresponded exactly in the patent text with the one in the filing form. I guess Figuera just filed the 1902 patents to sell them inmediately to the bankers, and later bankers did not take any care of correcting those smalls mistakes. Obviously their intention was not to commercialice those generators....so why to take care of patents. Better to leave it die and be forgotten.

This is from wikipedia:
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2016, 10:07:45 PM
The  dark  ages  still  reign over all  humanity, and  the  depth  and persistence     of  this domination   are only  now    becoming clear.    This dark   ages   prison   has no  steel bars, chains, or  locks.  Instead, it is locked by misorientation   and   built   on   misinformation.   Caught    up in  a   plethora   of   conditioned   reflexes  and driven   by   the   human  ego, both   warden   and   prisoner  attempt  meagerly to compete with God.     All    are  intractably   skeptical   of   what  they   do   not understand.      We  are   powerfully   imprisoned   in   these  dark   ages simply  by   the   terms  in  which   we   have   been  conditioned   to  think.

-- R. Buckminsiter Fulle


it's time to think outside the box people.

Quote; "is placed in communication with a resistance whose value varies from maximum to minimum and vise versa, and for that reason the  resistance is connected to the electromagnets N on one side and to electromagnet S on the other."

where in God's name does it say RESISTORS ???? probably right next to where it says NORTH and SOUTH POLES.

the resistance he is referring to is reluctance formed from the magnetic field caused by the winding's on the core.  as it spins the reluctance (resistance to currant flow) is varied because as the currant flows through the wire it will cause a magnetic field that resists currant flow according to the number of winding on the core of part G.
self explanatory, the more winding's you have the more reluctance (resistance to currant flow) you have and less winding's the more currant will flow.  so when the brush rotates the currant is varied between set N and set S. part G's winding's magnetic field allows more or less currant through thus varying the field between set N and set S.
it does not take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out people, all it takes is for you to get off your butts and do the experiments your self to prove the validity of these simple truths.
 if you so chose to follow a person that follows a drawing that says it is just a drawing to convey an idea or action. then there is NO HOPE for this FORUM.
Stupidity is free experiments are not and takes action..... which do you chose is entirely up to you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 03, 2016, 10:16:13 PM
Marathonman: I'm sorry I missed out the Nichrome wire post of yours.

Unfortunately I'm not able to understand any of this logic. It is very confusing.

Earlier when Core made a proposition Hanon asked him not to post saying that this thread is meant only to redo the same device exactly. The postings of Marathonman were of the same type. Hanon is now agreeing..Do not understand head of tail of the stands. 

Now Hanon is showing the Patent claims that show resistance is present. Marathonman says has no need to rely on the drawings.

Patents are interpreted based on specification and drawings and abstrct for prior art search and based on claims for enforcement of legal rights obtained. Patent is granted only for claimed subject matter but claims must have antecedent support in specification and drawings to be granted.

I have tried to vary the amount of current that goes in to multiple primary electromagnts N and S and the result is not good. Only when the electromagnets are equal in intensity very good results are obtained.  This is in AC.

It is possible that this is an interrupted DC type of induction. It is possible to get a secondary output only when the magnetic field is varying. That happens in AC, pulsed Dc and possibly interrupted DC.

High outputs in secondary come only with High Voltage inputs. I have lowered the voltage and increased the current using step down transformers and used both AC and pulsed DC varying the current without any useful effect. High Voltage and possibly High Frequency is needed.

The Electronics based High Frequency is practically useless. The resistors are 5 watt or maximum 10 watt rated normally. What is the use of trying to make a circuit with a 1 to 10 watt resistor when we are trying to use a 30 Amp and 60 volt rated transistor to create high frequency output. Naturally the circuit boards fry up. I think both Randy and I wasted a lot on Electronics.

Given the difficulties with rotary device, it is best to go to the the capacitors and spark plugs to create the input source.

I'm still doubtful that the rotary device was used to generate very high voltages from a small battery. I can confirm that a 12 volt battery can be used to create high sparks when the rotary device rotates at 1000 RPM. That must be a lot of voltage. 

The spark if captured by large copper plate capacitor would have had sufficient voltage and amperage and then all this talk of needing a small output from the secondary being used to power the rotary device  to excite the electromagnet and the DC motor to run the rotary device makes sense. Copper plate capacitors are not mentioned or perhaps the rotary contacts themselves acted as capacitors.

Otherwise none of my experiments except when saturating the core show the patent to be possible.

The resistors may have been used to waste excess current and retain the voltage or increase the voltage if there was no spark. V=IR in Pulsed DC or interrupted DC as well. If the resistance is increased the voltage must go up.

Patent may be talking about varying the current while it might have been the effect of Voltage increase and decrease in opposing electromagnets. Even if there is no spark if the contact points are made DC Parallel Plate capacitors ( very easy to do) the capacitance and voltage would have increased immediately. Normal capacitors have lower capacitance with increased voltage rating. Higher the voltage higher the output is what I have observed.

Let me wait for what Marathonman produces and see what it does. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 03, 2016, 11:36:27 PM
Once the machine is operating where does the power come from to operate it? If it comes from the machine itself why would i care how much it uses to operate?
Seems that wasting 100 watts in heat is not good to produce 20,000 watts output, as Buforn claimed in his patents.

I do not know why we are arguing when the essential idea is to move the two magnetic fields back and forth, no matter how to do it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 04, 2016, 01:36:11 AM
This nonsense can only be explained with one word: JEALOUSNESS!

I mean, I do not understand why I am being attacked just because I was able to make a paper on the Figuera's device based on the sketch, only.

Think about it. I have never said that the sketches are more important than the writing in a patent, or vise versa. I did say that I liked the paper that way because it was not driven by the writing in the patent. Nevertheless, I was right on the money.

Instead of going ballistic because I was able to make the paper on the Figuera's sketch only, why don't you tell me whatever is wrong with the paper. Of course, I can only accept substantiated and analytic claims. Not just broad statements that have no scientific support.

I am sorry for you guys, but I cannot help with your suffering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 04, 2016, 02:28:35 AM
Bajac"

Just saw your post..

I think you indicated the air gap to be present between the cores if I'm correct. If not I apologize.

How can there be an air gap between opposite poles? The iron will lierally crush any material that you put in there. Alternately if were to put a strong material the magnetic flux will be considerably reduced. Assuming you put holes (best case) between the air gap to let the magnetic flow continues what is the advantage of it in having a continuous iron core? I have always used continuous iron core. Never had any problems. The continuous iron core made up of rods however has many airgaps that let the air flow through the core so it cools the rods.

I'm unable to accept the idea that the cores have an iron gap.Can you please advise on this?

Again I apologize if you did not suggest the air gap theory. I have not read your paper on Figuera and now for me the interest is only to learn what others do as I have failed in my efforts. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 04, 2016, 02:36:25 AM
One more thing, I did stated that the patent claims are useless for understanding the concept. The reason being that if the subject matter is not disclosed in the specification (sketches and description) part of the patent, then it cannot be claimed. If you specification describes a mirror, i.e., you are not supposed to claim a car. The patent laws are so strict on this respect that it is not allowed to add any new subject matter to the patent once it is submitted. You will have to resubmit a new patent, which might not be allowed if whatever was first disclosed make the new subject matter obvious.

Interestingly, your claims are allowed to infringe on other patents as long as you add novel and nonobvious material. For example, the first patent for the vacuum tube was the diode, which consisted of the anode and cathode only. Then, the patent for the triode consisting of the anode, cathode, and gate was also awarded. Because the structure of the triode is basically the diode claimed in an earlier patent, the owner of the triode patent had to pay royalties to the owner of the diode patent. That should tell you that what is in the claimed is not necessarily what the invention is about. Do you follow me?

Don't get me started on the patent area. I am pretty good at it!

I do not need to write a post with 3,000 words of nonsense to make my point and be understood. It is only done by a person who normally does not understand what he/she is writing about.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2016, 02:55:19 AM
 JEALOUSNESS! of what,  a moron that knows squat of part G.  hell you miss lead people for years why stop now. your the reason people are still gagging on the drawing.

WHERE is YOUR WORKING DEVICE. "NOT"  BECAUSE YOU DO NOT HAVE ONE. you think because your some big time electrician that people should listen to your NONSENSE.

hell my 13 year old roommates grand daughter even said that guy's stupid. he don't know sqat. crap i laughed for an hour.

Good luck people YOU WILL NEED IT.

PS. your paper was a complete JOKE that is worthless except for starting the fire place.  HOW PRECIOUS !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 04, 2016, 03:07:15 AM
JEALOUSNESS! of what,  a moron that knows squat of part G.  hell you miss lead people for years why stop now. your the reason people are still gagging on the drawing.

WHERE is YOUR WORKING DEVICE. "NOT"  BECAUSE YOU DO NOT HAVE ONE. you think because your some big time electrician that people should listen to your NONSENSE.

hell my 13 year old roommates grand daughter even said that guy's stupid. he don't know sqat. crap i laughed for an hour.

Good luck people YOU WILL NEED IT.

PS. your paper was a complete JOKE that is worthless except for starting the fire place.  HOW PRECIOUS !

You have just proved my point. THANK YOU.

You are acting like a kid who does not have what it takes to make it a constructive forum. Because you lack the basics, you go on a rant calling people names behaving like an ignorant. You look very frustrated and explosive. You should take some time off the forum to prevent posting things that you will later regret.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 04, 2016, 03:14:01 AM
Bajac"

Just saw your post..

I think you indicated the air gap to be present between the cores if I'm correct. If not I apologize.

How can there be an air gap between opposite poles? The iron will lierally crush any material that you put in there. Alternately if were to put a strong material the magnetic flux will be considerably reduced. Assuming you put holes (best case) between the air gap to let the magnetic flow continues what is the advantage of it in having a continuous iron core? I have always used continuous iron core. Never had any problems. The continuous iron core made up of rods however has many airgaps that let the air flow through the core so it cools the rods.

I'm unable to accept the idea that the cores have an iron gap.Can you please advise on this?

Again I apologize if you did not suggest the air gap theory. I have not read your paper on Figuera and now for me the interest is only to learn what others do as I have failed in my efforts.

NRamaswami,

I think the air gaps is one of the points of conflicts or arguments. I referred to the air gaps because it is what the sketch shows and because it made sense with the analysis described in my paper.

It is OK if you do not believe that the air gaps should exist. I respect your opinion. And because you are the one spending time and money on the prototype, you should go with what you believe.

You see, Matathoman, I am not getting mad or calling people names because they do not agree with me. But it will be difficult to change at your age. You already stated that you are a grandfather.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 04, 2016, 08:47:11 AM

I was able to make a paper on the Figuera's device based on the sketch, only.
.....

 I liked the paper that way because it was not driven by the writing in the patent.
.....

Nevertheless, I was right on the money.



Crystal clear, that you did not read it the patent to make your paper.

You invented the air gap requirement which is not mentioned in the patent text. Even the patent text states that there is no neccessity for the inducers and induced to be separated. Read the patent and look for that sentence. I already quoted it months ago. You design, while being genuine, is not what is explained in the patent. I wont go into further discussions: I feel that I follow the patent ideas. And you feel the same. No way of resolving  this.

I just say to everyone: read the 1908 patent and read the Buforn´s patents many times. This is the only path to study the system. In the other hand your paper is just a document which tries to replace the patent ! Big mistake ahead !! 

Why to be guided by your own paper when we have the patent text instead?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2016, 12:39:35 PM
you are completely misguided with the figuera device and completely wrong with your completely UNNEEDED paper that wasn't even following the patent. ONLY A FOOL would follow this type of person that adds his own dreamed up BS into the patent. you might as well put on a blind fold at a gun fight.
YOUR paper means absolutely NOTHING to me or to any one else that has a brain. all it does is show your arrogance and stupidity.
where is your device NOW.... probably in the trash pile with your paper you wrote.

Part G is as i explained. if one was to get off the back side and reread all patents, then study part G in the time of the patent you will see i am right.
STUDY PART G and the truth will set you free, or follow a fool and be chained for life.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 04, 2016, 01:42:18 PM
Crystal clear, that you did not read it the patent to make your paper.

You invented the air gap requirement which is not mentioned in the patent text. Even the patent text states that there is no neccessity for the inducers and induced to be separated. Read the patent and look for that sentence. I already quoted it months ago. You design, while being genuine, is not what is explained in the patent. I wont go into further discussions: I feel that I follow the patent ideas. And you feel the same. No way of resolving  this.

I just say to everyone: read the 1908 patent and read the Buforn´s patents many times. This is the only path to study the system. In the other hand your paper is just a document which tries to replace the patent ! Big mistake ahead !! 

Why to be guided by your own paper when we have the patent text instead?


So what? You do it your way and I will do it mine. It should be beneficial to the objectives of this forum and not a cause for frustration and fighting.

This "patent application" is in error because there is a conflict between the sketch and the description part. This is a cause for "rejection" and a final patent shall never be allowed with such an error. If a patent is awarded with such an error, it can be a cause for a recall or cancellation. This should be a reason to stop the nonsense of forcing others to do it in one particular way.
If the Figuera's document were a final awarded patent, then it would be a disgrace for the Spanish patent office. The patents laws are clear, conflicts between the sketches and the description parts of the specifications shall never exist in a final awarded patent.
Again, stop the nonsense and go back to work! To me, a picture or sketch is worth a thousand words. I am not forcing anyone to agree with me, so why the nonsense?
You are wrong about "No way of resolving this!" JUST SHOW ME YOUR WORKING UNIT!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 04, 2016, 09:09:13 PM

This "patent application" is in error because there is a conflict between the sketch and the description part. This is a cause for "rejection" and a final patent shall never be allowed with such an error.


This is what you have to say to justify the "air gap theory" which is not even mentioned in the patent text ? You see errors in the patent text where there aren't. The patent was valid and it was in force for some years in Spain.

The patent was granted. I told you but you did not believe me. Below is the proof  ( Fecha de concesion = Granting date ). I do not matter if you do not want to listen, but please do not misguide people with your deep interpretation of the patent.

I just say people to read many many times the 1908 patent. And for more details they can refer later to the last patent by Buforn (1914) whose claims and drawings invalidate completely your view of an air gapped transformer with splitted primaries. This 1914 patent is also translated into english and available for everyone. The patent should be our Bible. Not your paper, which IMO is a way of fitting your theory into this device, paper which , as you recognized,  was done without even reading the patent text, just by watching the patent sketch. !!!

At least I agree with you that we should get back to work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 04, 2016, 09:34:03 PM
This is what you have to say to justify the "air gap theory" which is not even mentioned in the patent text ? You see errors in the patent text where there aren't. The patent was valid and it was in force for some years in Spain.

The patent was granted. I told you but you did not believe me. Below is the proof  ( Fecha de concesion = Granting date ). I do not matter if you do not want to listen, but please do not misguide people with your deep interpretation of the patent.

I just say people to read many many times the 1908 patent. And for more details they can refer later to the last patent by Buforn (1914) whose claims and drawings invalidate completely your view of an air gapped transformer with splitted primaries. This 1914 patent is also translated into english and available for everyone. The patent should be our Bible. Not your paper, which IMO is a way of fitting your theory into this device, paper which , as you recognized,  was done without even reading the patent text, just by watching the patent sketch. !!!

At least I agree with you that we should get back to work.


WHAT DO YOU CALL THE SPACES IN THE ATTACHED PICTURE? WHY DO YOU TRY TO HIDE THE FACTS?


THIS IS MY LAST POST ON THIS ISSUE. YOU CAN KEEP GOING ON YOUR OWN.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 04, 2016, 09:45:08 PM
Where are those gaps in the Buforn patent from 1914?

That without mentioning that this piled setup in the 1914 invalidates your theory of the spliiter transformer. Please read the patent!!

Am I the only one thinking that those spaces drawn in the 1908 patent sketch are just to demarcate clearly the edges of each coil?  They are not even mentioned in the patent text.

This is not convince you. It is just to convince people to replicate what the patent says. Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 04, 2016, 10:31:25 PM
Hanon, Bajac, Marathonman and all other Friends from Spain

A personal request.

This patent document of Figuera appers to me to be fake.

Why?

Please see this attachment.

The spanish patent office does not have any application in its records filed by any Clemente Figuera or Clemente Figueras.

How did Hanon get these supposedly old patents?

As Bajac points out the Patent is some thing that cannot be worked. The commutator design provided by Marathonman is valid but the wikipedia page on that tells clearly that the disadvantage is that the carbon brush will wear out and needed frequent replacement. So how come the patent says that once the machine is started it will continue to run indefinitely.

Apart from some claimed old Newspaper Articles is there any solid proof that these claimed patents are not fake?

Please do the search yourself in the European Patent Database and I went to the Spanish Patent office website and searched. Look at the attachment.

Can any other spanish friend visit the Spanish Patent office and ask for copies. Please do not tell me that records are not available. Older records than that are available in European Patent Database and that is the largest repository of Patent documents.

Please check and advise. Bajac I think you can verify. Please do it.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 04, 2016, 11:53:06 PM

This patent document of Figuera appers to me to be fake.

Why?

Please see this attachment.

The spanish patent office does not have any application in its records filed by any Clemente Figuera or Clemente Figueras.

How did Hanon get these supposedly old patents?



Come on!!!  You may just have asked me and I would have given you the link before stating those strong and false statements against myself. This is not fair play

Here go how to find it:


http://consultas2.oepm.es/InvenesWeb/faces/busquedaInternet.jsp (http://consultas2.oepm.es/InvenesWeb/faces/busquedaInternet.jsp)

In the field "Numero de Solicitud"   write     P0044267

Huala!!!  The patent appears!!! Magic.!!!

Please delete all those false statements against me.

If you may view the original copy you just have to move your ass toward the patent office. Ask for an appointment and visit the patent archives, as I did twice, in 2012 and in 2013

I will take soon a long vacations from this infested forum. I see too many people trying to dinamite this project. I see some interests in some people to hide the real design of this device for some reason I may guess.

All important info is in my website. You will find it there. This thread is full of garbage


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 05, 2016, 12:01:27 AM
AND their you go again taking the drawing literally. ITS JUST A DRAWING TO GET THE POINT ACROSS.

FIguera was more secretive then Buforn was. it was the only patent pic that was missing the core drawn in, trust me the cores are their just not drawn in the pic. i have studied all patent for two years and trust me they are their with NO gap. maybe a small gap between the coils but not on the core.
but what ever floats your boat go for it, it's only money.


Hanon; you are totally correct.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 05, 2016, 12:43:00 AM
Hanon, Bajac, Marathonman and all other Friends from Spain

A personal request.

This patent document of Figuera appers to me to be fake.

Why?

Please see this attachment.

The spanish patent office does not have any application in its records filed by any Clemente Figuera or Clemente Figueras.

How did Hanon get these supposedly old patents?

As Bajac points out the Patent is some thing that cannot be worked. The commutator design provided by Marathonman is valid but the wikipedia page on that tells clearly that the disadvantage is that the carbon brush will wear out and needed frequent replacement. So how come the patent says that once the machine is started it will continue to run indefinitely.

Apart from some claimed old Newspaper Articles is there any solid proof that these claimed patents are not fake?

Please do the search yourself in the European Patent Database and I went to the Spanish Patent office website and searched. Look at the attachment.

Can any other spanish friend visit the Spanish Patent office and ask for copies. Please do not tell me that records are not available. Older records than that are available in European Patent Database and that is the largest repository of Patent documents.

Please check and advise. Bajac I think you can verify. Please do it.


NR,

I trust 100% the rescuing work done by Hanon and alpoma. There is not reason to think there is something fishing going on with the documents.

All of these issues are the results of the lack of expertise of the Spanish patent lawyer, the Spanish patent examiner, and the Spanish patent office at the time the documents were submitted. The low quality of the work performed by the three subjects above indicates a poor professionalism on the practice of the patent discipline at the time. Anyone can see the difference on the quality of an European or American patent and this patent. I do not think the patents were altered but it is a result of bad practice at all levels.

The only patent that I have found to have a strong indication of tampering with is the patent awarded to Daniel McFarland Cook in 1871(?). In the description of the patent there is reference to a figure having a circuit 'D' but it is not found in the patent document.

On the other hand, stating that a sketch shows air gaps in the magnetic circuit just to make something more visible is a statement of a person who does not really understand how the performance of a magnetic circuit is affected by a discontinuity of the iron core, no matter how small this discontinuity is. Do you think that Figuera was that stupid?







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 05, 2016, 03:57:30 AM
Hanon:

I'm very Happy that I posted this question. The link you provided did not work and I had to search the Spanish Patent office website. Glad I did that.

Please see what appears in the attachment.

This is not a Patent. This is an Invention Disclosure document. See what it says..

INVENES is not a record, but a database of technical disclosure. If you need an update on the legal status of the file or bibliographic data on your information, you should consult the database "CEO" , accessible from the website of the SPTO, or by clicking on the iconRecords Consultation SPTO


A Technical Disclosure document is what enabled Prof. Figuera to write some inconsistent patent application which Bajac has been attacking as not correct. An Invention Disclosure document is filed as a concept. This is done to obtain the priority date. Generally within two years of this date claiming priority from this document a Patent Application proper can be filed. The information is never published and so is secret.

I'm unable to see any description, Drawings, claims, written opinion, PDF of complete data. This is a kind of a Pre-Provisional Application document that is kept in the Patent Office in a sealed cover and if the period of 24 months is over without a patent being filed the application is deemed abandoned and the priority date goes.

The document shows a Publication No. I have checked for the Publication No in Espacenet which has all published applications of all countries. In fact we used to get earlier published applications in India from this site before the Indian Patent Office digitized all records.

This is an invention disclosure document. To see what is an Invention Disclosure Document please see

http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/disclosure_document.jsp

Please also see that this kind of Invention Disclosure Document program has been withdrawn all over the world now.

Please see the instructions of USPTO on this subject..

Disclosure Document Program [EXPIRED 01 February 2007]

A service provided [BEFORE 01 February 2007] by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is the acceptance and preservation for two years of "Disclosure Documents" as evidence of the date of conception of an invention.

A paper disclosing an invention (called a Disclosure Document) and signed by the inventor or inventors may be forwarded to the USPTO by the inventor (or by any one of the inventors when there are joint inventors), by the owner of the invention, or by the attorney or agent of the inventor(s) or owner. The Disclosure Document will be retained for two years, and then be destroyed unless it is referred to in a separate letter in a related nonprovisional patent application filed within those two years.

THE DISCLOSURE DOCUMENT IS NOT A PATENT APPLICATION. THE DATE OF ITS RECEIPT IN THE USPTO WILL NOT BECOME THE EFFECTIVE FILING DATE OF ANY PATENT APPLICATION SUBSEQUENTLY FILED.

These documents will be kept in confidence by the Patent and Trademark Office without publication in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 122(b) effective November 29, 2000.

This program does not diminish the value of the conventional, witnessed, permanently bound, and page-numbered laboratory notebook or notarized records as evidence of conception of an invention, but it should provide a more credible form of evidence than that provided by the mailing of a disclosure to oneself or another person by registered mail.

Content of the Disclosure Document

The benefits afforded by the Disclosure Document will depend directly upon the adequacy of the disclosure. It is strongly recommended that the document contain a clear and complete explanation of the manner and process of making and using the invention in sufficient detail to enable a person having ordinary knowledge in the field of the invention to make and use the invention. When the nature of the invention permits, a drawing or sketch should be included. The use or utility of the invention should be described, especially in chemical inventions.

Preparation of the Disclosure Document

A standard format for the Disclosure Document is required to facilitate the USPTO's electronic data capture and storage. The Disclosure Document (including drawings or sketches) must be on white letter-size (8.5 by 11 inch) or A4 (21.0 by 29.7 cm) paper, written on one side only, with each page numbered. Text and drawings must be sufficiently dark to permit reproduction with commonly used office copying machines. Oversized papers, even if foldable to the above dimensions, will not be accepted.  Attachments such as videotapes and working models will not be accepted and will be returned.

DISCLOSURE DOCUMENTS DISCONTINUED EFFECTIVE 01FEB2007

Other Enclosures

The Disclosure Document must be accompanied by a separate cover letter signed by the inventor stating that he or she is the inventor and requesting that the material be received under the Disclosure Document Program. The inventor's request may take the following form:

"The undersigned, being the inventor of the disclosed invention, requests that the enclosed papers be accepted under the Disclosure Document Program, and that they be preserved for a period of two years."

A Disclosure Document Deposit Request form (PTO/SB/95) can also be used as a cover letter. This form is available at the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/ or by calling the USPTO Contact Center at 800-786-9199.

A notice with an identifying number and date of receipt in the USPTO will be mailed to the customer, indicating that the Disclosure Document may be relied upon only as evidence and that a patent application should be diligently filed if patent protection is desired. The USPTO prefers that applicants send two copies of the cover letter or Disclosure Document Deposit Request form and one copy of the Disclosure Document, along with a self-addressed stamped envelope. The second copy of the cover letter or form will be returned with the notice. It is not necessary to submit more than one copy of the document in order for it to be accepted under the Disclosure Document Program.

DISCLOSURE DOCUMENTS DISCONTINUED EFFECTIVE 01FEB2007

WARNINGS to Inventors

The two-year retention period is not a "grace period" during which the inventor can wait to file his or her patent application without possible loss of benefits. It must be recognized that, in establishing priority of invention, an affidavit or testimony referring to a Disclosure Document must usually also establish diligence in completing the invention or in filing the patent application after the filing of the Disclosure Document.

Inventors are also reminded that any public use or sale in the United States or publication of the invention anywhere in the world more than one year prior to the filing of a patent application on that invention will prohibit the granting of a U. S. patent on it.  Foreign patent laws in this regard may be much more restrictive than U.S. laws.

The information in this brochure is general in nature and is not meant to substitute for advice provided by a patent practitioner. Applicants unfamiliar with the requirements of US patent law and procedures should consult an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO.

It is not clear to me now how you have been saying that this is a granted Patent when the Spanish Patent office says that this is only an invention disclosure program. This essentially means that it is just a concept. Two or three years later these documents would have been destroyed in the normal course. It is the duty of the office to destroy these documents that are considered secret.

How on earth you claim you made a photo of these documents which should have been destroyed about 98 years back and is claiming that it is a granted patent?

Woud you please explain? If we go in to the BuForn Patents I'm sure we will also find them to be Invention disclosure documents. As far as the 1902 Patents are concerned you have already declared that these applications were abandoned by the banks.

Please advise how you got the old texts that would have been destroyed in the normal course as a duty of the office.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 05, 2016, 04:39:04 AM
why the hell do you have to talk or babble i may say so much. GOOD god,  you run your mouth SO MUCH..... WHY ! because your a FUCKING PATENT LAWYER. who the hell wants to hear your bull shit day after day, i sure the fuck don't.
you are nothing but a troll looking to run to the patent office when someone exposes some real shit. that's why i haven't posted ALL  MY FUCKING SHIT.

i am sorry but fuck i am sick of your Babbling bull shit. who GIVES A SHIT ABOUT YOUR DUMB ASS. GO troll another FORUM with your STUPID SHIT ! you fucking PATENT TROLL.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 05, 2016, 04:55:31 AM
Marathonman:

Shut up your ugly mouth. We all know you are a misinformation agent who has been abusing the members of the forum and misleading all.

Where is your device? Idiot. You are neither capable of doing any thing nor have demonstrated any device. What have you done? Show us.

I'm going to put up all the emails of Hanon to this forum and every one here are going to get to know what kind of people you fellows are.

If you do not tender an apology I will have a criminal complaint filed against you and Stephan in Germany where Stephan lives and teach you both a lesson. Stephan is putting up this forum and he has a duty to have already kicked you out. I have already complained to him but he has done nothing.

You have indulged in rascist abusive comments and you are going to be put in the place where you belong soon.

you reap what you sow. The time for punishment has come to you now.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 05, 2016, 09:03:45 AM
I copied the final link to make easier to access


In case it does not work let´s do it the long way:


Access into    www.oepm.es (http://www.oepm.es)    . Then go to "INVENES: Invenciones en español" . Then go to "Busqueda Avanzada". Then in the field "Numero de solicitud" write   P0044267  . You will find the patent, but as all old spanish patent is not digitalized. Ask for a scanned copy, you are free to do it. I guess is just around 15 € by bank transfer referencing the code they give you for that request. INVENES is not a register of legal status of patents. INVENES is the database to find all spanish patent. Patent after 1950 (I guess) are available to download as PDF there.

Edit: I found the direct link to the patent:  http://consultas2.oepm.es/InvenesWeb/detalle?referencia=P0044267 (http://consultas2.oepm.es/InvenesWeb/detalle?referencia=P0044267)

This is finally my last post into this forum. All I tried to do in this last 3 years and a half is to help,  and to promote this device. And try to keep the design as close as possible to the patent itself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 05, 2016, 01:58:39 PM
NR,

Clemente Figuera's work is not invalidated because the documents are either final patents or patent applications. I strongly believe it is real just from the character of the inventor and the newspapers articles only. Whatever we getting from the patent documents is an invaluable information that has given us an extremely good starting point. I consider Figuera's story fascinating and his work only second to Tesla. Even more, the simplicity of Figuera's design makes it better than Tesla's in many applications.

I do not want to be misunderstood. When I complained about the patent document, I was referring to the sloppy way it is presented and not to its validity. I message has always been that because of the contradictions in the documents, we cannot not be certain about the device. According to the documents there are more than one way of making the device.

Please, note that the Figuera's documents are kind of normal for a patent application. During the prosecution process, the application should be taken to the next level based on litigation with the patent examiner and correction of all errors.

That is why forcing an interpretation as Figuera's  is wrong. Of course, you can have a preference. My preference is that the device had air gaps.

However, your questions are valid and no one should get personal about it. It is always better to know all the facts.



Hanon,

Just take a vacation from the forum. There is no need to abandon the forum.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 05, 2016, 02:51:49 PM

Seriously?!?!

All are entitled to their opinion, I would highly recommend those who agree with your assessment carefully review Tesla's technologies which are closely related to that which is being debated here.  One will surely find that no comparison can be made between the work and position of the two.  If one is lucky, and that is a HUGE if, the review of Tesla's work might give one a few insights into exactly what it is that folks are not seeing in the technology under debate. 


Regards


Your right! Tesla is on a different level. However, if you compare the simplicity of the Figuera's devices you can conclude that they are simpler, safer, and more reliable for average power production/consumption. Most of the Tesla's devices deal with high voltage and high frequencies.

Let me say it differently. Suppose there were two electric generators in the market today, a generator constructed based on Figuera's concept and the other based on Tesla's concept. I have to say that Figuera's would have the low power commercial advantages because of the following:

1) Figuera's device would be able to produce a 60Hz AC voltage directly. Tesla's device would require a conversation unit.
2) The lower operating frequency of the Figuera's device makes it more reliable and safer. High frequency switching can generate all kind of EM and noise.

For high power application the Tesla concept should have the advantage because of a much higher power densities.

I could be wrong but it is my honest opinion.

I do agree with you that Tesla is on its own level. Do not take me wrong.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on May 05, 2016, 03:01:05 PM
Hi guys!
Can someone point me to some video of figuera replication?
Thank's
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Seeking4thetruth on May 05, 2016, 06:00:02 PM
I have registered here (after having being reading it since several years ago) only to give thanks to Hanon and to all the other contributors to this thread for all their help and data they've given. Also, I'd like to ask you, Hanon, to stay in this forum. Without your collaboration this wouldn't have been the same.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Turbo on May 05, 2016, 09:16:43 PM
Sir Erfinder it's good to see you are still on the job after all this time.
Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 06, 2016, 02:30:26 AM
Erfinder,

I am kind of puzzled with your post. Could you, please, let me know the specific Tesla's device that you are referring to?

I am asking the question because I do not know of any low voltage low frequency FE device from Tesla. I do not know if you have read the two papers that I published some time ago describing a probable way that the Edwin Grey's device and the TPU might have worked based on the Tesla technology.

I am a Tesla fan and I have read a lot about him. But I am not a Tesla expert.

Thank you for the info.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 06, 2016, 04:36:38 PM
Someone asked me for the link to the documents that I published a while ago about the Tesla technology. Here are the links and documents:

This is the thread where I posted the document related to the TPU: http://overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VyynkvkrKCg (http://overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VyynkvkrKCg)

I was not able to find the threads for the Edwin Grey devices where I posted the attached document.

I think there is a pattern among the devices made by Grey and Marks, they mimic the Tesla coil operation but using different type of embodiment. See the similarities that I described in the documents.

I was working on the spark device shown in the document. I was preparing myself to carry on with the experiments. I even bought an adjustable 30KV DC power supply and I was in the process of finishing a metal cage box and a meter to detect any dangerous radiation. Then I stop the work when I learned about Figuera and Cook. I did not like to fool around with experiments that require the use of  high voltages and high frequencies.

I think the Cook's devices is the simpler of all FE. It does require a UPS unit to convert the energy to a AC sine voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 06, 2016, 11:53:39 PM
The term was coined in May 1888 by Oliver Heaviside.The notion of “magnetic resistance” was first mentioned by James Joule and the term "magnetomotive force” (MMF) was first named by Bosanquet. The idea for a magnetic flux law, similar to Ohm's law for closed electric circuits, is attributed to H. Rowland.
Magnetic flux always forms a closed loop, as described by Maxwell's equations, but the path of the loop depends on the reluctance of the surrounding materials. It is concentrated around the path of least reluctance. Air and vacuum have high reluctance, while easily magnetized materials such as soft iron have low reluctance. The concentration of flux in low-reluctance materials forms strong temporary poles and causes mechanical forces that tend to move the materials towards regions of higher flux so it is always an attractive force (pull).
In a DC field, the reluctance is the ratio of the "magnetomotive force” (MMF) in a magnetic circuit to the magnetic flux in this circuit.
it is sometimes known as Hopkinson's law and is analogous to Ohm's Law with resistance replaced by reluctance, voltage by MMF and current by magnetic flux.
The magnetic reluctance  of a magnetic circuit can be regarded as the formal analog of the resistance in an electrical circuit.
Magnetic reluctance, or magnetic resistance, is a concept used mostly in the analysis of magnetic circuits. It is analogous to resistance in an electrical circuit, but rather than dissipating electric energy it stores magnetic energy. this concept was and still is not widely used except for a select few. very few new about Magnetic Resistance but apparently Clemente Figuera did.
This is exactly what Figuera did with his continuously rotating Part G. using reluctance as his resistance and having the ability to store magnetic energy in part G core to replace losses occurring from wire and heat which is small.  both halves of windings used to vary the resistance to currant flow to set N and set S  as the rotating brush makes contact in a continuous fashion.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2016, 06:33:41 AM
Clemente Figuera was more of a genius then i first realized. very few people used a magnetic field to limit or rather in Figuera's case vary the currant on a continuous basis with part G. Nicola Tesla was one of them also.

that is why i posted a pic of a bar being pulled out of a coil because that is what is happening in Figuera's part G. using a magnetic field to vary the currant between set N and set S.
this can be verified by EVERYONE in this forum at home.
as part G rotates it becomes the controller for the entire device using a magnetic opposing field and reluctance in part G to very the currant that is in constant rotating motion.
all currant is available to the primaries because everyone knows currant runs from negative to positive so that leaves part G to vary the currant. as the currant travels through the winding it causes a magnetic fields that resists the flow of currant, so more winding less currant less windings more currant.
also as the declining electromagnets are shoved out of the secondary the energy is stored in part G in the form of a magnetic field being replentished every half turn or every declining phase of the electromagnets.

so that tells me that part G is not only more valuable them meets the eye, it CAN NOT be replaced with IC's.

well at least on the low side anyways.

this is a lost art that most do not know about and probably can't find in any junk books of today.

"RELUCTANCE" RESISTANCE TO CURRANT FLOW ! "MAGNETICALLY"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on May 08, 2016, 12:14:30 PM
look at figure 17 people....do you see Figuera? I do

http://free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt22.html

Jegz
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2016, 06:32:46 PM
Quote; "I do not agree with the mechanism you have selected (reluctance).  I don't think it practical nor even necessary to regulate current by varying reluctance.  It is far simpler to perform the exact same task via controlled manipulation of reactive cross section, specifically, XL."

I think it is as simple as it gets and the exact mechanics is of no consequence,  just the fact that he used magnetic field to control currant for which i am glad that someone FINALLY understands what i am saying. that he did not need wasteful resistors to vary the currant in his part G.  thank you !
using this method it stores the energy in the form of a magnetic fields NOT wasting it through resistors, much, much more efficient .

i don't see figure 17 coming remotely close to the output of Figuera device but i could be wrong. wouldn't have been the first time. Figuera's device uses two separate electromagnets occupying the same relative space in space causing one large or duel e field and the other having two complete separate spaces....em not to sure about this one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on May 09, 2016, 11:29:42 AM
Marathon man. The concept is the same..in actuality figuera is the somplest and is the kind of machine that could solve the problems of a rural villager who doesnt have time to learn zero point resonance  mumbo jumbo.The whole idea of this rendition is to use the oscillator to distort the position of the blochwall and induce current in L2 which are counterwound/bucking coils hence cancel back emf. regarding output that is dependent on the combination of variables used.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 09, 2016, 04:51:21 PM
Similar Yes, using another coil to manipulate other coils what Figuera achieved with just two coils working in unison. good set up though and your right Figuera is the most simple of them all. it's just most can't understand the logic behind part G being thrown off by the drawing and Patent wording even though it is very simple set up of using magnetic field to manipulate currant.
Figuera even said it was so simple he couldn't believe no one thought of it before.

I'm building both moving and non moving part G, thinking of finishing non moving first but have core for both now. i have studied part G for quite some time and figured out that i can use Transistors on the high side (ONLY) to mimic rotation and not interfere with the kickback into part G from the declining electromagnets being shoved out of the secondary core feeding part G every half rotation. (NO IC's CAN BE ON THE LOW SIDE)  field rotation in part G will still take place and other functions, i just have to make sure that the primaries are balanced just like Doug has stated.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on May 11, 2016, 09:39:32 AM
just wondering though how I would go about creating a true sine wave from part G such that the induced current wont need to be passed through rectifier then an inverter to give a frequency that wont damage sensitive equipment
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 11, 2016, 05:58:28 PM
Why would you need a true sine wave from part G? part G is DC feed and the frequency is controlled in the original part G by a DC motor. the speed you set of the motor or high side transistors is what set the frequency in the secondary output.
if you set the motor or transistor timing at 60 rpm/hz then your output from your secondaries will be 60 hz as the polarity if i am correct will change every half turn of part G just like a sine wave so the need for a inverter is not necessary.
i think you are getting the two circuits mixed up, part G and the primaries are DC. the secondaries are AC so that means the frequency is controlled by the motor or Transistor timing.
i hope this give a little clarity to the situation.
MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on May 12, 2016, 07:29:16 AM
youre the one who doesnt understand what I mean..even a conventional generator putting out 60 hz may not be true sine wave and  could potentially damage sensitive equipment hence needing conversion to dc and back to ac with a true sinewave inverter...hence the term inverter- generator producing 'clean power'...what Id love to see is actual solid state  circuits at part G that (assuming L1 and L2 are identical in length that produce a perfect sine wave, hence reducing the components needed to build this device.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 12, 2016, 03:01:06 PM
Yes i understand your your concern now, well i guess your going to have to build it to find out since the people that have a working device have not post that info.
i'm curious as you mention L1 and L2 are you planing to build Figuera's device or the one in previous post.

i will be using solid state to control the timing on one of my part G builds using that to control high side transistors. it wont be sine wave timing but the reaction in part G to the secondaries will be sine wave, how true the sine wave is i will not know until i build and test it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 12, 2016, 10:45:03 PM
Hello All
It seems we all get hot around the collar... at some point here. Take a break from the forum...and come back whenst you regroup. But let's keep moving forward...

We must be making some progress when Bajac, Erfinder and who knows... may be Clemente himself ( spiritually ) shows up...

This thread has a direction, and I don't have any desire to start a new one. 

this thread has direction...let's stay focused on it...

Erfinder I remember you from that other forum with the " Ufo " fella...
hope all is well

R

ps Bajac...........what about your progress report/s.... sheesh
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 13, 2016, 02:23:30 PM
"this thread has direction"

You've got to be joking right. this thread has no direction because nobody on this site studies the patent in any detail. i was once lost but pulled my head out of my back side and realized THE DRAWING IS JUST A DRAWING to emphasize the actions of the device.

who here has actually studied part G more than five minutes. well em....hey i have for many months, wow that something new "research".
while i know i am not any authoritative on any subject i have made many strides in the part G department, enough to know the DRAWING is just that a DRAWING and the fact that part G IS NOT RESISTORS. imagine that !

so with no resistors involved you have to ask yourself, "how in the world did Figuera's device very the currant". the ONLY thing left and the ONLY LOGICAL EXPLANATION is a MAGNETIC FIELD.

it has been proven many, many times that a magnetic field slows currant down to a crawl.  do the study yourself at home, take a coil of magnet wire, hook it up to your variac if you have one then place a load on the wire and put a piece of iron or what ever you have in the coil and see what happens. OMG ! did i just see the light i used for a load get dim. imagine that !

well then we have the Figuera device part G that does the same thing as the above experiment except it does it on a continuous basis every time it rotates. sure you can get more technical and start calling it XL and what not's but bottom line Figuera used a magnetic field in the core of part G to very the currant through his primaries.

their is more to part G fella's then a simple drawing.

the more winding's you  have on part G the more currant will be curtailed. just remember you only need to very the currant enough to clear the secondary.

Happy Figuering.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 13, 2016, 04:02:00 PM
Quote; "Just to be straight....I stated that this thread has "a" direction, implying that my introducing Tesla was off subject.  Whether this thread has direction is a matter of opinion.  Whether it does or not is not why I decided to post."

i wasn't questioning the post at all and understood your intentions. i was basically referring to the direction as a whole.

Impedance through self induction works for me. what ever label you want to use.  Figuera used magnetic field in part G not resistors, this much is true.

Yes!  Figuera was true Genius.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 13, 2016, 09:30:44 PM
For the record, I was.

it seems Mr Figuera understood more about magnetic fields then all the lousy collage books in America combined.
it took me about a year to find what i have and that wasn't from any present day book let alone any publication from about the 40's on.
modern day physics or magnetic publications are completely useless especially when it comes to any thing pointing to Einstein. 
i don't think it is coincident that in the US is completely void of any decent magnetic research. JP Morgan started this type of BS and it must be broken, it broke Tesla's back.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 13, 2016, 10:09:27 PM
Fortunately Clemente Figuera was not the only one. If one person is telling you are an idiot, then it's most probably mad man, but when 100 are telling the same , then definately something is wrong ... The Truth cannot be hidden forever. The climate change is the proof the current economy must collapse due to false foundations.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 13, 2016, 11:36:53 PM
Mr.Forest..What is the truth that is hidden? Can you tell me that?

Mr. Er Finder..Sir..You appear to be very knowledgeable. Why do you say that Figuera was not a Genius? He was living in an island that is close to Morocco. He did not have the funding or facilties of Dr. Tesla. If you think that the 1908 Patent is unworkable because Prof. Figuera makes the claim that the rotary device will work continuously and the device will run indefinitely and so he is not a Genius as it is against physics. (Normal wear and tear prevents an electromechanical device from running continuously or indefinitely and it is not possible) I would agree with you. But Are you sure that the Patent of Prof. Figuera has not been tampered with?

You can go here www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

Figuera Principle is valid up to this point where the quote ends.

---Beging quote---

PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267 (Spain)

Ministry of Development General Board of agriculture, industry and Commerce. Patents of Invention. Expired. Dossier number 44267. Instruction at the request of D. Clemente Figuera. Representative Mr. Buforn. Presented in the register of the Ministry in the 31st of october of 1908, at 11:55 received in the negotiated in the 2nd of november of 1908.
ELECTRICAL GENERATOR “FIGUERA”

BACKGROUND

if within a spinning magnetic field we rotate a closed circuit placed at right angles to the lines of force a current will be induced for as long as there is movement , and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the induced circuit moves.
This is the foundation of all magnetic machines and electric dynamos from the primitive, invented by Pixii, France and modified and improved later by Clarke until the current dynamos of today.

The principle where is based this theory, carries the unavoidable need for the movement of the induced circuit or the inductor circuit, and therefore these machines are taken as transformer of mechanical work into electricity.

PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION

Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns,  while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic  field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced  is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.

Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased and reduced in intensity;  since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical  induced current .It was considered the possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the electrical current which produces it.

The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.

Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.
In order to privilege the application to the production of large industrial electrical currents, on the principle that says that “there is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application of said principle.

This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

Let’s therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form and way that has been used to make the application.

----End Quote--------------------------------

After numerous experiments I have come to the conclusion that the patent disclosure ( it was not a patent application) has been altered. Some one published the information in 2013. I do not know who? A patent information disclosure document is not a patent application and it is a secret document for ever. No priority date is obtained by the filing of the document except to prove who is the first inventor when the patent application is filed and if there is any dispute.

It is impossible for an electromechanical device like Part G which Tesla admits will create a lot of sparks to run indefinitely. It is against the law of wear and tear of mechanical devices. However Mr.Er Finder would do a big mistake if he thinks that this is the device of Figura.

I will not dare say this unless I have reason to believe. Today I'm not in a position to do any experiments as the team of people that did the experiments have moved away from me all due to different reasons. I pesonally cannot do much as these result in high voltage currents and I'm not a qualified Eelctrician or Electrical Engineer and I needed the support of other competent hands to do what I described to them.

Mr. Forest.. Please read the porition of the patent quoted above. That is genuine information. Correct to my experimental observations. I did not know how to make the device run on its own. After all I'm not a qualified person. But let me tell you that giving a lower input and getting a higher output is easy. Very easy. You just need to open your mind a bit.

Regards,

Ramaswami



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on May 14, 2016, 02:11:58 AM
I'd just like to mention the 60hz sine wave problem.  As both dc pulses from the primaries are occurring at the same time
one is on the increase while the other is decreasing.  These 2 pulses are effectively added together to form a much larger
pulse that activates the secondary.
  To get a sine-wave output, driving these pulses at 60hz is only the first step. There'll be much hash mixed in with 60hz.
So the secondary will have to be tuned to resonance at 60hz to get a decent sine-wave.
   It would be nice to eliminate the dc inverter. But that inverter does have other advantages besides the pure sine-wave output.
You could  pulse the primaries at whatever frequency you choose at somewhere between 100 to 600hz.
You could then rectify the output for pure 12 volt dc to run inverter.


  Anyone who studies electricity should know that 60 cycle power is highly inefficient.
A higher freq. means the units could be much smaller, not to mention that faster pulsing means the capture of more free energy.
   I'll soon be ready to try out my own unit as I just got in some power transistors which I needed.
Anyone ordering these things from China should be aware of factory rejects or seconds.
  I received 10 pnp tranistors a few weeks ago and they all checked bad with open emitters. Can't complain because the price was so low
and free shipping.   It's the long waiting time that really matters.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 14, 2016, 02:35:35 AM
   I'll soon be ready to try out my own unit as I just got in some power transistors which I needed.
Anyone ordering these things from China should be aware of factory rejects or seconds.
  I received 10 pnp tranistors a few weeks ago and they all checked bad with open emitters. Can't complain because the price was so low
and free shipping.   It's the long waiting time that really matters.

"  they all checked bad with open emitters. Can't complain because the price was so low
and free shipping.   It's the long waiting time that really matters."

So it doesn't matter that they don't " work "...

R
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 14, 2016, 06:06:04 AM
OMG all 10 were bad, i'm very sorry Clif but i couldn't help from laughing. i received my 14 IXGK400N30A3 from Mouser and all of them were good.
although solid iron will go higher than that frequency, i think i'll stick with 60 for now just to see how things work out. another fact is that if you run it at a higher frequency part G core has to be able to handle it also.

and by the way if you build part G and do a shotty job it will spark like mad but a certain person i know used a grinding tool just for that purpose and said it couldn't be any more perfect. and also stated that if the brushes are very good quality their is surprisingly very little wear.
I see the broken record is back.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 14, 2016, 11:58:49 AM
Mr Ramaswami


Here is the Truth: "a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity."  Not a single generator in history was converting mechanical energy into electricity and the total pollution and green gases emission and the whole multi-billion "worth" industry is a piece of CRAP. This energy is wasted, completely lost in the job of breaking the natural occurrence of magnetic dipoles in generators. Exactly and precisely it was first explained by Clemente Figuera (maybe because those patents were prevented from destruction). I know that this was not the oldest attempt to explain faulty generators. Daniel McFarland Cook tried to patent his generator obviously based on the same ideas. Ed Leedscalnin talked about the same and so on.... Hidden knowledge perpetually covered from the times of Faraday.




P.S. I have a question to those of you who knew electronics. If I make a transistor amplifier to amplify small sinewave from a Wien bridge oscillator into a 100V 1A current still sinewave, would the inductance react with reactance to this one as to the ordinary sinewave current from grid ? Let's imagine a single transistor amplifier connected to the 100V DC source and driven by a signal from such a generator. Somebody ?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 14, 2016, 06:06:48 PM
Mr. Forest:

I apologize to beg to disagree with you. If what you say is the truth, ( I would accept it, if and only if) please describe a simple device that can generate Electricity without these wastage. Please do not say Figuera for there is not a single Figuera device shown operating as described by Figuera.

Please do not say Cook for one person who indicated he has built a Cook device refused to answer me and there is no known cook device.

You please describe a simple device that can work without mechanical motion and can produce more output than input. I will then try to replicate it and see if it works or not. If it works Great. I validate your device and replicate it and it also becomes open source. Right?

I have conducted hundreds of experiments for more than 3 years now. I have concluded that there are at least two types of fundamental particles associated with Electricity. One is very small particle that can travel very fast and likes material with lot of resistance. This particle is responsible for Voltage. The other particle is comparatively very thick and can capture and hold a lot of charge and can release the charge but it requires material with low resistance and it needs thicker wires. Thicker the wire better it is. I have produced 500 volts or more in the secondary with some type of coils and you connect it to load the voltage drops to zero if there is no amperage. Because the coils can be made to block the movement of the particle that causes amperage. There are other coils that can light 10x200 watts lamps or more even at 30 volts and higher the voltage brighter the light and hotter the lamp. I have already posted the pictures of some experiments.

I do not want simple statements and I'm prepared to accept statements. Back it up with a simple device that can be made by people. I agree from my experiments that Figueras principle is correct.

There is yet another member in the forum who has indicated he has built a self sustaining device.  He can also tell us.

It will be very difficult for me to do these experiments myself and I have to ask some students to do it. So if you have any device that you have already tested say it in the forum but if you do not have any thing working,,except some conspiracy theories how can I believe your words? Pray tell me. Please do not tell me about any non working device as it will be a waste of my time, effort and money. If you do not have any such device let us see if others describe any such device.

Let me try my hand at this if no one can describe after a few weeks.

Sir..Erfinder I always try to learn from other people. I have no intention or competence to argue. I keep my mind open and try to learn always.

That said I can confirm What Mr. Marathonman indicated about magnetic research.  There is only one advanced Magnetics lab for Research and it is in US. Only prior vetted competent people can enter that. There is no funding for Magnetics research in India after 1940 so much so that this area lacks competence in India right now. I can confirm all this is true.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on May 14, 2016, 06:42:40 PM
Forest:
P.S. I have a question to those of you who knew electronics. If I make a transistor amplifier to amplify small sinewave from a Wien bridge oscillator into a 100V 1A current still sinewave, would the inductance react with reactance to this one as to the ordinary sinewave current from grid ? Let's imagine a single transistor amplifier connected to the 100V DC source and driven by a signal from such a generator. Somebody ?




I am assuming  you'll be driving just ONE of the primary coils at 100v/1A with 60hz sine wave. Then I would say "yes" the output would be like
that from the grid.  But why try to replicate an ordinary transformer?


   Because there are TWO primary coils to be pulsed, then you will need two separate amplifiers.
I'll be using a wien bridge oscillator to drive two different transistor amplifiers. A type npn and a type pnp.
Study the "G" switching diagram to give you a better idea as to what needs to be done.




Marathon:
 Yah, I threw those 10 bad transistors into the garbage along with that broken LP record lol.


 






Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 14, 2016, 08:09:16 PM
Forest:
P.S. I have a question to those of you who knew electronics. If I make a transistor amplifier to amplify small sinewave from a Wien bridge oscillator into a 100V 1A current still sinewave, would the inductance react with reactance to this one as to the ordinary sinewave current from grid ? Let's imagine a single transistor amplifier connected to the 100V DC source and driven by a signal from such a generator. Somebody ?




I am assuming  you'll be driving just ONE of the primary coils at 100v/1A with 60hz sine wave. Then I would say "yes" the output would be like
that from the grid.  But why try to replicate an ordinary transformer?


   Because there are TWO primary coils to be pulsed, then you will need two separate amplifiers.
I'll be using a wien bridge oscillator to drive two different transistor amplifiers. A type npn and a type pnp.
Study the "G" switching diagram to give you a better idea as to what needs to be done.





Cliff33


That's exactly what I want to do  :)  Two amplifiers and two sinewave signals. First I will try single sinewave with other circuit, I was simply not sure if the coil will react to this amplified signal with reactance or not. I knwo that simply using diode bridge will nullify reactance and coil only react to the first change of DC current. I need sinewave of any chosen frequency for LC circuit also (another related project).Thanks for confirmation.
Do you have schematic with two transistor amplifiers ? I suppose transistors should have the same Hfe
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 15, 2016, 12:55:03 AM
Cliff; LP record is hilarious Transistors are not, sorry you got taken. i have some new 2N3055's you can have, with heat sinks.

Just for future info the field of an AC coil can not build up fast enough in the Figuera device unlike DC low ohm's that is lightning fast. just saying !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on May 16, 2016, 01:56:14 PM

ps Bajac...........what about your progress report/s.... sheesh


Randy,

I should start the test of the device by next month, June 2016. At this time I am tied up with a patent application that is taking all of my time.

With respect to the power supply to be used with the Figuera device, I am researching two approaches:

1) Two true sinusoidal inverters or UPS. If the UPS equipment have a way of adjusting the phase angle, then it might be possible to have two of them connected to generate two voltages with adjustable phase angles. The problem seems to be that manufacturers do not add this feature to small UPS units. Large UPS units can be specified with a phase angle adjustment feature for synchronizing UPS units configured in parallel.

2) It looks like this will be the way to go. I am looking for connecting two identical universal motors and a larger induction motors on the same shaft. The goal is to operate the two universal motors as generators and the induction motor as the prime mover. I will modify the field winding of the universal motors and connect them in series to be used as the exciting magnetic fields. It should be able to adjust the phase angles of the voltages coming out of the generators by changing the relative position of the armature winding of the universal motors working as generators. I am still looking for two identical universal motors rated between 0.5 and 0.25 HP.

There are people proposing to use inductors and/or capacitors to generate the two voltages, which works OK for small signal circuit applications. But the ball game changes for power applications because of the high loads (low impedance) to be connected. 

Bajac



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2016, 12:34:41 AM
Quote;"The time it takes for the field strength of an AC electromagnet to reach a high enough state is too slow ,it also has a lot of other things fighting it from going into the coil of induction in the form of load resistance and the time for the magnetic domains of the core to flip in the core with the coil being induced.
If this were not true generator field magnets would not have to use DC to excite the field."

good clear statement Doug, and you wonder why Figuera used DC. imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 17, 2016, 07:59:31 AM
Something to think about....
"

As near as a layman can understand, Mr Perrigo's theory is the revolution of the earth sets up a form of electric currents that are forever present in the ether. His theory is to capture those electrical impulses in very much to same way that a radio antenna picks up the programs broadcast from WDAF. Instead of a machine to turn the radio impulses into music, Mr Perrigo has a machine to turn the ether's electrical store into controlled power. He declares it is really no more mysterious than the fact that an electric dynamo picks electricity out of the air, although the dynamo must have a power to revolve it while his device sits perfectly still and seemingly produces many fold more electricity than a dynamo of the same bulk.[/font]
Demonstrating the different nature of this electricity, Mr Perrigo showed how high voltage could be transmitted over hair-size wires and light a series of electric lamps although a sufficient power of the well known electricity to light those lamps would have melted the small wires immediately.[/font]
"  http://rexresearch.com/perrigo/perrig.htm (http://rexresearch.com/perrigo/perrig.htm)


as you see Figuera was not the only one who was convinced that dynamo is not transforming mechanical energy into electricity....


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 17, 2016, 08:05:11 AM
Please read it carefully as it the best description of history of free energy inventor struggle http://rexresearch.com/perrigo/perrig.htm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 17, 2016, 03:40:35 PM
Unfortunately, Mr Perrigo has a flood of accusers who swear that he faked his electric car demo by hiding the batteries inside hidden parts of the car.




But, on a  positive note  I've had a thought.  What if the Figuera drive coils were wound Cw and ccw.  This would negate lens.


Also the resistors.  What if they were wire wound in the same way ie cw and ccw.  That would also negate Lens.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 17, 2016, 04:13:23 PM
Mr. A. King 21

The coils may look CW and CCW wound but the current has to flow in the same direction if it is to produce output in the shape of Figuera device of  straight core.

Lenz is cancelled if Permanent magnet core is used in the device. Magnetic field is already present. You just need to send high voltage to oscillate the existing static field using the resistors. Otherwise DC or pulsed DC will draw high amps V=IR in DC.

It is enough if we oscillate the static magnetic field already present to get a significant output in secondary. The two electromagnets that move towards and away from the central core automatically cancel backemf. I do not know how to draw but backemf of one Primary supports the opposite primary always and both backemf are nullified in the process by the design.

If P1 current goes like this ---> the back emf if <-----. However the P2 current at that time goes like the backemf of P1,. The back emf of P2 likewise goes in the way current moves in P1. Both backemf are therefore cancelled.

If you are using identical poles  a square coil or four coils that are at 90' to the secondary must be placed to tap the output. This is cumbersome and is not indicated by the drawings. I have checked both and this also works but it is easier to do the opposite poles method.

In my view the resistors are there to reduce the current and increase the voltage and the core is a permanent magnet core.

I can do a small experiment if you can advise me how to make steel a strong permanent magnet and that cannot be demagnetized by the current. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 17, 2016, 05:13:51 PM
Harry Perrigo was a honest man. Nobody is going to put so much efforts into invention and risk his life for a fake device.
You people, already have all the required parts to build Figuera device. It's all on this forum and in patents. Just think a little.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2016, 06:09:54 PM
I petty much think your all wrong about the Lenz law but that is just my opinion.

the Lenz's law is not thwarted or side stepped at all and a matter of fact Figueras counted on it using it to his advantage.

as the primaries of NN polarity, one is taken up while the other is taken down. the Lenz law states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. so when the declining electromagnet is receding the lenz effect kicks in and causes the field to react in the opposite direction to maintain said field that is already their causing the pressure between the two primary electromagnet to be maintained. as long as the two primary electromagnets are in unison the pressure between the two electromagnets will be maintained also, if not the induction falls off to the lowest peak between them which will be almost nill.

again the Lenz law is not side stepped in the Figuera device and NEVER will be. THIS IS A FACT and can not be refuted and if one had done proper research one will find this to be absolutely true.

PS. i to believe Perrigo to be an honest man.... "BUT" at the present time i am working on the Figuera device and have no time for other devices nor another full time thread.
also the dynamo is  transforming mechanical energy into electricity,  as so stated in the patent. where the electricity comes from is of no consequence because Figuera is referring to the act of not where it is coming from. the "ACT OF" in the present day Generators the system used is turning the generator with a motor and this "ACT OF" is wasteful to no end. so Figuera designed a motionless Generator to remove this "ACT OF" mechanical work to energy thus ending with an very efficient motionless generator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2016, 06:29:24 AM
CLICK THIS LINK IF YOU WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE FIGUERA DEVICE IS DOING,  OF COURSE THE SECONDARY IS IN THE MIDDLE.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060525100959/http://www.gocs1.com/gocs1/Psionics/SCALARBEAMER_files/scalarbm3.gif

Exactly as stated in my previous post. imagine that !

Thanks Hanon.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2016, 06:50:42 PM
Pic says it all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2016, 10:06:52 PM
AS does this one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 21, 2016, 07:13:03 PM
just a little reminder of what is happening in the Figuera device.
i can not stress enough that people should click the link from the above post to see the true relationship between the Primary Electromagnets and the actions and reasons for the very strong E Field.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 22, 2016, 08:06:35 PM
Oh hell did you mean to say B field because I smell curry burning.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 22, 2016, 11:09:35 PM
No i didn't, all i smell is beans and tortillas from my neighbors house the curry must be from your neighbor. ha ha ha
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 23, 2016, 01:10:59 AM
 Do you have any problems with this explanation of back emf?http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/sc545_notes04/back_emf.html (http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/sc545_notes04/back_emf.html)

 How much would expect to lose if you used an ac source signal to run a generator at rated frequencies of 50 to 60 hrtz with the above in mind? Take into account nothing will be rotating like a motor only the magnetic field is moving. How much extra power is used to kill and flip the polarity of the field being used for induction when every flip of polarity takes the full amount of power for every flip?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 23, 2016, 05:30:11 AM
Doug; I have one question ? who is talking about AC?
the Figuera device is DC plain and simple. i don't need convincing.

what gives ????
and yes it would take substantial power to flip every time, can i calculate that.... no.
even with pure iron it would be impractical.

PS. good link
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 23, 2016, 02:45:44 PM
No one yet ,but it always comes back at intervals of time and it is due up to resurface where connecting to a mains supply some how has some relevance to not connecting to a mains supply in order to produce your own supply separate from said mains supply.
  Yea when you put it that way it makes ya scratch your head and say wtf.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 23, 2016, 04:53:21 PM
As you have already commented that all Generators are all DC excited, and has any one ever wonder why.??? aparently not.
I think because most people are so conditioned to the BS of the wheel work of the last 100 years and present day establishment they can't see out side the box or fathom the implications and advantages of DC excitation in Coils.

the same thing with part G. almost no one on this forum can fathom the idea of magnetic resistance and the extreme advantages of using such technics compared to using heat death power wasting resistors. nor the fact that the core of part G stores magnetic energies in the process.

the Universe we so live in is a PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE and will be here Billions of years after we are long gone. so it is up to us to figure out how to tap into this machine and live our lives according to the Laws of nature and the Universe not by the Bureaucratic BS so imposed on us at the present time by our nations  leaders.

may God  have mercy on their twisted, corrupt soles.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on May 24, 2016, 07:29:08 AM
OMG all 10 were bad, i'm very sorry Clif but i couldn't help from laughing. i received my 14 IXGK400N30A3 from Mouser and all of them were good.
although solid iron will go higher than that frequency, i think i'll stick with 60 for now just to see how things work out. another fact is that if you run it at a higher frequency part G core has to be able to handle it also.

and by the way if you build part G and do a shotty job it will spark like mad but a certain person i know used a grinding tool just for that purpose and said it couldn't be any more perfect. and also stated that if the brushes are very good quality their is surprisingly very little wear.
I see the broken record is back.

You need to connect in Parallel HV AC Capacitors to the Primary coil leads to absorb spark PERMANENTLY on the carbon brushes and or in the Transistors provided you wish to use that to switch "Part G".

You do not have to use expensive Oil Filled High Voltage AC Capacitors like mine which I bough on Aliexpress.com

You can use CBB CAPACITORS rated at 400v 3.5uf . All you need do is to connect them in series to match the 10 fold
Voltage coming as BACK emf from the Primaries to the Carbon Brush.

What  I mean is if u supply 200v to your primaries, at low frequency and depending on how well your primaries is made to be a Capacitor, you will at least get 2000v as back emf. So you will need 5 or 6 CBB Caps rated at 400vac to do the Job of Spark absorption.

It is easier to absorb Spark in Mechanical Switch or oscillator than Solid State Switch like MOSFET etc because..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on May 24, 2016, 09:42:23 AM
Clemente Figuera was more of a genius then i first realized. very few people used a magnetic field to limit or rather in Figuera's case vary the currant on a continuous basis with part G. Nicola Tesla was one of them also.

that is why i posted a pic of a bar being pulled out of a coil because that is what is happening in Figuera's part G. using a magnetic field to vary the currant between set N and set S.
this can be verified by EVERYONE in this forum at home.
as part G rotates it becomes the controller for the entire device using a magnetic opposing field and reluctance in part G to very the currant that is in constant rotating motion.
all currant is available to the primaries because everyone knows currant runs from negative to positive so that leaves part G to vary the currant. as the currant travels through the winding it causes a magnetic fields that resists the flow of currant, so more winding less currant less windings more currant.
also as the declining electromagnets are shoved out of the secondary the energy is stored in part G in the form of a magnetic field being replentished every half turn or every declining phase of the electromagnets.

so that tells me that part G is not only more valuable them meets the eye, it CAN NOT be replaced with IC's.

well at least on the low side anyways.

this is a lost art that most do not know about and probably can't find in any junk books of today.

"RELUCTANCE" RESISTANCE TO CURRANT FLOW ! "MAGNETICALLY"

I made mention of IC in conjunction with Inverter which convert DC to produce AC which is readily being oscillated by the IC on the board of the inverter.

Part G stores to Back EMF to keep the Primaries from "freezing'' so as not to stop the needed non-zero frequency in variance.

That variance in frequency is ready available in Pure Sine Wave Inverter generated AC.

And when that is employed No back emf is generated, no freezing, NO NEED of Part G.

However, I am strictly open to options on how to arrive at using low current to drive the Primaries at 60hz or 3600RPM. Maybe that is what the Part G is correctly doing.

You know what is needed to be achieved is  a  SELF POWERED DEVICE  THAT USES  ONE TO PRODUCE AT LEAST 1000. And that is possible because the Secondary is always absorbing free electricity from the Air as it is being switched by the Primaries.

But how can you achieve self-powering state without using high voltage via either inverter?

Remember, that with an Inverter, you can:

1. Supply 12vdc and get 12000ac

2. Separately increase or decrease frequency

3. Separately increase voltage without increasing frequency.

4. Switch at low voltage and get high voltage high frequency

The primaries of Figuera device are connected in parallel to make them work in unison at the same time as the current is being oscillated in them from left to rigth , rigth to left viva. And this same task is readily present in Alternate Current which Inverter do generate.
 When we are talking about self powered, that rules out Government supplied electric source as the kick-statting power source in any ou device. So the need for independent power source wjich is made with IC, Mosfet, Ttansistor, Diodes, Transformer, Resistor etc.

I am planning to lower my input current at high voltage (1500ac) to say 70mah using high frequency and thus abolish battery totally in my own version of Figuera device. Super Capacitors Connected in series will be the Power Source of the inverter. Also once low input wattage get achieved, then low high frequency homemade inverter will further be employed.

To me  I think using AC is the best. All is needed is proper winding of the primaries which will enable them to act as Capacitors at high Voltage.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 24, 2016, 04:09:25 PM
Well Doug you were right, it sure didn't take long for AC to pop up.

Are you kidding, comparing DC being varied to AC is like night and day and you have to be blind not to see the difference.

and for everyone's information the Figuera device does NOT collect BEMF. "WHY" because the currant is constantly supplied to the Primaries just varied in intensity so NO BEMF EVER occurs. what does occur is the declining Primary electromagnet is shoved out of the Secondary and feeds part G.
IF BEMF ever occurs in the Primaries it means that the currant was not maintained in a proper manor so outlined by Figuera and all induction will be lost. AC will kill the induction from the primaries because of the fact that it takes to long for the domains to flip. if constant pressure is not maintained between the Primaries induction WILL BE LOST.

so go ahead with you AC contraption, i would love for you to spend lots of money on it. in the long run all i will say is "i told ya so"
the Patent it's self and all posted research information points to DC but do as you must.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on May 24, 2016, 11:12:42 PM
IMHO Figuera device nullifies the Faraday Law because one side of the coil (from one side to the point of collision of magnetic lines of the two repelling fields) the magnetic field is increasing (dB/dt >0) while in the other side of the coil the field is decreasing in the same amount (dB/dt<0). Therefore the total effect due to the Faraday Law is cancelled out.  Faraday Law is the one with a minus sign    emf = - N • A • dB/dt   , but in this device the minus sign (flux linking induction) is cancelled out totally or partially.  Induction is just done by flux cutting which is represented by the Lorentz equation   emf = B • v • Length  , and this equation do not have a minus sign. For me  both equations are different: Faraday Law is based on the Maxwell equations, while the motional emf equation is based on the Lorentz force, which is not part of the Maxwell equations as far as I have read.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/elevol.html#c3 (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/elevol.html#c3)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on May 25, 2016, 12:43:13 PM
I think your interpretation of what you read is wrong. If it feels like it was written a little odd it's because of a  failure in the writing to lock down the frame of reference of the observation with clarity. Anyone could speak for hours about two train engines locked together facing each other traveling down a train track with out any distinction between engines. Chances are the interpretations will more often be wrong then write. Add in the track is a circle and in an attempt to find clarity time is introduced. More isnt always good unless you want to cover it from every frame in order to prevent more confusion.Less might be in order.
  Marathonman
  I thought you had a better grasp on the principals of the mag amp the dc from ac patent and a complete understanding of the variac and how it works. Specialization is a sociopolitical tool of controlling the general population. To a hammer everything is a nail. The hammer thinks it has it going on and can do anything just by hitting what ever it is. If this was a room full of medical doctors the scripts would be knee high wall to wall and when that fails start chopping out organs and flesh. If the patent says the output is running the load and suppressing the input and in a typical rotational type using the output through a regulator and supplying itself in well known ways. Whats the best approach to consider?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 25, 2016, 09:13:28 PM
Who the hell EVER said i had a "COMPLETE" understanding, it sure wasn't me. as for the mag amp's i have many cores i have been tinkering with and am almost their with the Tesla patent. as for the Figuera part G i am still struggling with the self running part, as if you don't already know that . more then likely it's through the Core of part G. that is the last of the puzzle as far as i am concerned.

"Specialization is a sociopolitical tool of controlling the general population." WTF is this shit.

Erfinder: you are not telling me anything i don't already know. Yeh sure anyone can blast an F-in coil up with any kind of signal and get some kind of output but i guarantee you will not get as much as the proper timing for the Figuera device. the link i posted from Hanon shows the Primaries at work over the secondaries. this is exactly what is going on in the Figuera device and you sure are not going to get that precision with YAH HOO timing.
Good luck buddy.
 i will believe it when i see it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 26, 2016, 03:55:30 PM
I to think your opinion is worth Squat but in the long run YOU have yours and I have mine. Ranswami will be glad to help you.
end of conversation as i have better things to do like build the real part G.


Good day sir.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 26, 2016, 09:08:25 PM
Like i said smart mouth bitch END OF CONVERSATION. Go about your own FUCKING WAY.
"protected concept" Public domain Retard.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on May 26, 2016, 11:10:56 PM
@marathonman
Quote
the same thing with part G. almost no one on this forum can fathom the idea of magnetic resistance and the extreme advantages of using such technics compared to using heat death power wasting resistors. nor the fact that the core of part G stores magnetic energies in the process.

Maybe we could play a game of fact or fiction. This is where you tell me how you believe part G is supposed to work in detail and I tell you exactly how it works in reality. You see I built and tested both the inductive and resistive versions of the Figuera switching device many months ago before it probably even occurred to you that the resistance may have inductive qualities. So how exactly do you think it is supposed to work?. Where's the beef?.
AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: RandyFL on May 27, 2016, 01:35:41 PM
Lets agree to disagree...
And move on.

R
ps every bit of info is a bonus if it gets us closer!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 27, 2016, 03:45:33 PM
"blind confidence in something you have yet to bench."

That's hillarious and shows your ignorance as to my extensive work bench tools.  SO why didn't you people post your findings??? seams to me all that happened was the mouth started flapping and no posted results.

neither of you two has posted absolutely NOTHING in this thread SO YOU put your money where your MOUTH is and post your finding instead of standing in the dark running your mouth.

Post your findings and share your results, it's that simple.
or is that to much to ask from self appointed superior beings.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on May 27, 2016, 06:29:07 PM
@marathonman
Quote
That's hillarious and shows your ignorance as to my extensive work bench tools.  SO why didn't you people post your findings??? seams to me all that happened was the mouth started flapping and no posted results.

A tool means nothing without knowledge and understanding behind it, it is not unlike a man with a garage full of race cars who doesn't know how to drive them. For instance when I first built the switching device I hung all the inductor/resistors in the geometry as depicted in the patent from wire allowing movement. Do you know why?, I did this to measure the actual physical forces present on the circuit elements as they relate to one another. The inductors physically repelled indicating Lenz Law is in full effect and this was also verified with a magnetometer and a DSO plotting voltage/current versus external field strength and direction. You see simply using a DSO to measure voltage is kind of like groping about in the dark because it always relies on speculation that everything should act as it should externally. It's kind of like pretending you know what your doing without actually knowing.

I also cradled the inductor/resistors in my hands as my programmer pinged the system at various frequencies and magnitudes. It is these minute details which matter, real observations, which generally lead to a better understanding of how all the forces present actually relate to one another. This is what science is all about, this is the fun part, not cut and paste diagrams claimed as fact based on sheer speculation. This make believe world many seem to live in is not reality, physically holding something in your hand at the bench and understanding what is actually happening and what may be possible is reality. It's like a puzzle, a mystery and successfully placing one piece gives us insight into what the next piece looks like and where it fits into the bigger picture... one piece at a time.

Quote
Post your findings and share your results, it's that simple.
or is that to much to ask from self appointed superior beings.

I don't think so. I share with a few like minded people who I think are willing to do the experiments and learn from them however most are simply spectators. I would probably just bore them with the basics they obviously already know. I seem to be fascinated by the mundane, you know I'm not so sure everyone understands exactly how a simple resistor actually works. I measured a simple length of resistive wire doing something I never expected and have never read about, imagine that... spending hours testing the properties of a length of resistive wire, lol.

I am not a superior being but I aspire to be one...why wouldn't we?, which means trying not to degrade others and use foul insulting language to make my point. It is not a sign of great insight nor credibility let alone civility, I'm sure all of us can do better in this respect.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 28, 2016, 12:20:33 AM
I agree !

I also tested with my first moving commutator some resistive wire but not as extensively as you did.  that is when i realized the device did not use resistors at all but used magnetic field to vary the currant, also verified by a acquaintance of mine.

Thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 09, 2016, 10:02:03 PM
So suddenly there is no disinformation to post anymore?

NNorth to North is nonsense!!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shylo on June 10, 2016, 12:04:59 AM
Hitting a coil with a north pole on both sides only works if you space the magnets properly.
Or time the magnetic influence seeing the coil.
Same thing.
artv
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 10, 2016, 06:41:55 AM
So suddenly there is no disinformation to post anymore?

NNorth to North is nonsense!!

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 10, 2016, 06:51:19 AM
Hitting a coil with a north pole on both sides only works if you space the magnets properly.
Or time the magnetic influence seeing the coil.
Same thing.
artv

Maybe the "Part G" fellow and his likes would have another frivolous theories to present to counteract you now.

In addition to your statement, the Magnet will sooner or later get demagnetized. So why go the hard way when Opposing Poles is the answer? "Part G" fellows, over to you...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 18, 2016, 11:03:59 PM
No thank you ! i don't see the need to argue with a closed minded status quo person that has no desire to achieve just ridicule.
if you take two north opposing electromagnets and take one down and the other up in unison to mimic the magnetic rotation of the original dynamo...ie  north and south poles of a Generator, you will achieve a very strong steady electric field to be collected by the secondary. if you have done the proper research you would know this is true but i guess you choose to bump the gums instead. so be it as i don't care i just report what i find and know.
some knowledge is beyond the comprehension or capacity of others so one has to move on regardless.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 20, 2016, 07:14:45 PM
I made a mistake, on the Graph above i inadvertently placed the induced in the wrong direction. this graph is the proper direction of induced. SORRY!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on June 20, 2016, 07:24:48 PM
what of the counter emf? is it necessary to have the induced wound in a manner to avoid this or the presence f counter emf is of no consequence in this design?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 20, 2016, 09:56:30 PM
With my first set of small cores i observed no counter emf at all. there was no influence from the secondary currant draw on the primaries almost like they were invisible. it's almost as if the two primary fields dominate the counter emf of the secondary.

the Patent is confusing at first because it says that any change will cause emf, while this is true in a regular generator not Figuera's device.  then it says an it must be in orderly fashion. as i have found out that the later is the fact. a complete orderly cycling of the primaries in complete unison. if the pressure between the primaries falls to low the induction falls also. there is no reason to take the primaries all the was down to zero....why ? it takes to long for the field to build up and induction will suffer. by using DC there is no phase BS to tend with and keeping the primaries up in strength only taking the receding electromagnet down far enough for the increasing electromagnet to push it out of the secondary then back up again all while maintaining pressure between the two primaries. when it is shoved out of the secondary the the power stored in the field is transferred to part G to be stored magnetically for future use. every half turn the declining electromagnet feeds part G and the only power losses it has is through heat and wire losses which is replaced easily from its second secondary, thus being perpetual after the initial start up.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on June 20, 2016, 10:16:59 PM
and how do we design part G to be such that the magnetic field never hits zero? and what are the implications of the signal that will be on the output end?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 26, 2016, 08:18:54 PM
Part G is a continuous wind and the reduction of currant is dependent on how many winds are on part G's core. i do not have the math prowess to calculate that so i had to take the hard road and wind then test, well the first time was wrong so i added a few more winds and that was it. see both primaries have to be balanced and has to match the other exactly when taken high and low, if not the pressure between them will drop and induction will fall to half of what is achievable. you have to remember part G or rather the whole system is DC and part G is basically a Variac but with DC.  the opposing magnetic fields will help regulate the saturation of the core which will regulate the currant on an continuous basis.
the pic below is a simple test from a friend that suggested the use of a paper clip on a straw to test where the two fields are at all times. the metal paper clip will follow the two NN fields as a visual indicator of how far your fields move and to let you know weather or not the fields clear the secondary.

William J Hooper did a simple table top demo in one of his lectures that proved the figuera device is NN design in an pure B x V device. the pics below prove scientifically with out a doubt many, many years later that Figuera's device is NN orientation. according to Hooper when two North opposing magnetic field are present near each other the B fields are cancelled but are additive. when one is moved at a certain velocity in and out from the wire and the other the opposite a pure B x V field is created. to be precise B X V = (-B) X (-V).   This will cause the B fields to be cancel = 0 but both products are positive and additive as explained in the pic below.

the only difference between Hooper's demo and Figuera's device is his test has the magnets vertical and Figuera's were Horizontal. their is no difference in the outcome the results are the same B X V = (-B) X (-V) both positive and additive.

the other pic is the proof that NS electromagnets are not possible in the Figuera device. if the north magnet is taken high and the south magnet is taken low the currants are the opposite direction so the cancel out allowing only a small currant to flow because the peaking magnet minus the declining magnet will amount to almost nothing. that is why EVERYONE that uses NS will end up with nothing because they paid NO attention to spin, B field's, and induced direction. assumption will bite you in the ass every time as i am totally aware of this.
output will be normal AC from the secondary at what ever frequency you so choose, assuming you core will allow it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 26, 2016, 08:24:47 PM
FYI off subject sorry.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 26, 2016, 09:59:04 PM
Part G is a continuous wind and the reduction of currant is dependent on how many winds are on part G's core. i do not have the math prowess to calculate that so i had to take the hard road and wind then test, well the first time was wrong so i added a few more winds and that was it. see both primaries have to be balanced and has to match the other exactly when taken high and low, if not the pressure between them will drop and induction will fall to half of what is achievable. you have to remember part G or rather the whole system is DC and part G is basically a Variac but with DC.  the opposing magnetic fields will help regulate the saturation of the core which will regulate the currant on an continuous basis.
the pic below is a simple test from a friend that suggested the use of a paper clip on a straw to test where the two fields are at all times. the metal paper clip will follow the two NN fields as a visual indicator of how far your fields move and to let you know weather or not the fields clear the secondary.

William J Hooper did a simple table top demo in one of his lectures that proved the figuera device is NN design in an pure B x V device. the pics below prove scientifically with out a doubt many, many years later that Figuera's device is NN orientation. according to Hooper when two North opposing magnetic field are present near each other the B fields are cancelled but are additive. when one is moved at a certain velocity in and out from the wire and the other the opposite a pure B x V field is created. to be precise B X V = (-B) X (-V).   This will cause the B fields to be cancel = 0 but both products are positive and additive as explained in the pic below.

the only difference between Hooper's demo and Figuera's device is his test has the magnets vertical and Figuera's were Horizontal. their is no difference in the outcome the results are the same B X V = (-B) X (-V) both positive and additive.

the other pic is the proof that NS electromagnets are not possible in the Figuera device. if the north magnet is taken high and the south magnet is taken low the currants are the opposite direction so the cancel out allowing only a small currant to flow because the peaking magnet minus the declining magnet will amount to almost nothing. that is why EVERYONE that uses NS will end up with nothing because they paid NO attention to spin, B field's, and induced direction. assumption will bite you in the ass every time as i am totally aware of this.

The Figuera device is also ZPE harvester which needs high frequency to lower primary input current at high voltage.

The part G can be replaced with a DC Pure Sine Wave Variable Frequency DC to AC inverter as WHAT THE PART G is ensuring is constant frequency that does not nosedive to 0  before it pick up over and over.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 26, 2016, 10:45:53 PM
Ac can not be used in the Figuera device as been said MANY, MANY times before. the field CAN NOT build up fast enough.

your interpretation of the Figuera device is all wrong.
Scientific proof has been laid out and yet you still chose to ignore it.
all i can say is good luck fella you'll need it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: dieter on June 27, 2016, 07:29:31 AM
I think the term "ZPE" is used quite inflatory these days. It is the name of an anomaly, in which helium, contrary to fundamental laws and unlike all other elements, remains liquid at zero degrees kelvin. Despite the lack of thermal energy, the day is saved due to zero point energy, even tho nobody can say what it actually is...

Hey wow you guys are still onto the figuera project. That's cool.
When watching fields under that green magnetovision foil, I noticed when N vs N is very close, the fluxdensity can be highly increased. And a coil left of the frontline must be moved only a few millimeters to the right for a complete polar flip.

Anyway, wish you all the best. And remember, it's about the result, not the talking.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 27, 2016, 08:06:50 AM
Ac can not be used in the Figuera device as been said MANY, MANY times before. the field CAN NOT build up fast enough.

your interpretation of the Figuera device is all wrong.
Scientific proof has been laid out and yet you still chose to ignore it.
all i can say is good luck fella you'll need it.

Marathon,  you do not seem to understand what I am hammering. How do we in this modern time make the primaries consume less Wattage while switching them to and fro to energise the middle output coil?

Is there no solid state alternative to Part G because from my practical research, low frequency will make the primaries consume high wattage?
 
How will lenze be cancelled if he coils are wound in same direction as you have been hammering that CC to CC or CCW to CCW are the correct positions?


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 28, 2016, 01:52:58 PM
When did Figuera mention cancelling Lenz Law? Your fixated on something you dont even clearly or completely understand. Even if you could cancel it in a generator you wont cancel it in the load that is attached to the generator so how would that work exactly? Or do you intend to have a free wheeling gen that does no work. Even Harry Potter had to wave his wand and speak his spells to make something happen. the only way to have no resistance to change is to do nothing and change nothing.. Can you recognize when Lenz has been eliminated?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on June 28, 2016, 09:05:50 PM
Marathon,  you do not seem to understand what I am hammering. How do we in this modern time make the primaries consume less Wattage while switching them to and fro to energise the middle output coil?

Is there no solid state alternative to Part G because from my practical research, low frequency will make the primaries consume high wattage?
 
How will lenze be cancelled if he coils are wound in same direction as you have been hammering that CC to CC or CCW to CCW are the correct positions?


I think its been stated enough times that the induced coil appears as a ghost trace on oscilloscopes in the figuera setup. however if you must I see no reason why a bucking coil shouldnt be applicable in this case...centre point being pos and the two ends terminated as negative
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 30, 2016, 12:03:58 AM
When did Figuera mention cancelling Lenz Law? Your fixated on something you dont even clearly or completely understand. Even if you could cancel it in a generator you wont cancel it in the load that is attached to the generator so how would that work exactly? Or do you intend to have a free wheeling gen that does no work. Even Harry Potter had to wave his wand and speak his spells to make something happen. the only way to have no resistance to change is to do nothing and change nothing.. Can you recognize when Lenz has been eliminated?

For a certainty, youbare a spammer operating 2 or more accounts on here for the sole purpose of misleading. The will be the second time Dough1 will bebappearingnas Marathon!!

You can not event cover your tracks smartly.

I think someone else ough be employed to replace you on here your Committee Of 300 paymaster.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on June 30, 2016, 12:12:50 PM
deradiomond

 Thats pretty funny i needed a good chuckle. Everyone has to be something even if it is to be consistently wrong as that thing they are. On the upside you are consistent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 01, 2016, 05:22:33 AM
deradiomond

 Thats pretty funny i needed a good chuckle. Everyone has to be something even if it is to be consistently wrong as that thing they are. On the upside you are consistent.
;D ;D Marathon is the Mask On Dough1 Face Vice-Versa. Hmm... What a bang!
Liers everywhere hmmm....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 02, 2016, 04:08:32 PM
Your free to think what you wish.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 02, 2016, 05:48:31 PM
Your free to think what you wish.
The more  you reply the more you expose yourself. I am free to think what I wish you said again?

Thank God  for making you speak this way to expose your true person.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 03, 2016, 06:59:45 PM
I can care less what you think about me, i actually do a lot for the people i care about, even strangers every now and then.it is the device i care about.
 if you would pull your head out of your back side and study some of my pic post you will see the truth right in front of your eyes.

your right you are free to think what you want but when you come to the table with a garbage mind and add nothing to the table but a big mouth with no scientific data to back it up one has to wonder of your motives.

everything i have posted in the last 6 months will get someone a working Figuera device all backed up and proven. William Hopper proved 60 years later that the Figuera device is a pure B X V device.

that's two opposing electromagnets one taken up while the other taken down. if you can't understand that the we need to cease our conversation from this moment on because their is no hope for you.

Doug your right all they want to do is argue and spout stupidity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 04, 2016, 03:38:51 AM
F.Y.I.

Download this book:
 "The Inventions Researches and Writings of Nikola Tesla," by Thomas Martin, The Electrical Engineer, American Institute Electrical Engineer, NY, 1894.

http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaBook.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaBook.pdf)

Go to {read} Chapter XXIII, page 109, "Tesla Polyphase Transformer."

Referring to Fig. 94 on page 109 - replace the "Generator [left-hand device in diagram] with Figuera's Commutator.

A commutator is also referenced in the text. The "Generator" operation works in a similar manner to Figuera's commutator; although the generator would be pseudo linear versus stepped.

Is the B-EMF eliminated in this design since strength changes in magnetic field rotate 'around' Ring A and need not reverse or fall negative? Can this design support an Asymmetric Transformer scheme, thus providing more out than in?

This was published by the AIEE in 1896 and Figuera's patents, I believe, were dated around 1902, so it may well be directly related.

FIN
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on July 04, 2016, 09:12:41 AM
F.Y.I.

Download this book:
 "The Inventions Researches and Writings of Nikola Tesla," by Thomas Martin, The Electrical Engineer, American Institute Electrical Engineer, NY, 1894.

http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaBook.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaBook.pdf)

Go to {read} Chapter XXIII, page 109, "Tesla Polyphase Transformer."


Referring to Fig. 94 on page 109 - replace the "Generator [left-hand device in diagram] with Figuera's Commutator.

A commutator is also referenced in the text. The "Generator" operation works in a similar manner to Figuera's commutator; although the generator would be pseudo linear versus stepped.

Is the B-EMF eliminated in this design since strength changes in magnetic field rotate 'around' Ring A and need not reverse or fall negative? Can this design support an Asymmetric Transformer scheme, thus providing more out than in?

This was published by the AIEE in 1896 and Figuera's patents, I believe, were dated around 1902, so it may well be directly related.

FIN

That Tesla reference is unrelated and serves only to complicate matters. Figuera is elegantly simple. The part G in Tesla's device is an alternator! Part G is a variable resistor for DCin Figuera's case.no relation whatsoever!.The patent states that this is a polyphase transformer  to ease power distribution to various loads of different requirements simultaneously to improve efficiency. Back emf can be suppressed in the induced coils of said transformer  but the aim of this thread is to understand Clemente Figuera design...there are other threads where Tesla's polyphase transformer can be discussed..including the TPU thread..kindly let's stick to the subject matter.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 04, 2016, 05:20:41 PM
Oh, OK - Sorry...  :-[
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 04, 2016, 06:49:21 PM
That Tesla reference is unrelated and serves only to complicate matters. Figuera is elegantly simple. The part G in Tesla's device is an alternator! Part G is a variable resistor for DCin Figuera's case.no relation whatsoever!.The patent states that this is a polyphase transformer  to ease power distribution to various loads of different requirements simultaneously to improve efficiency. Back emf can be suppressed in the induced coils of said transformer  but the aim of this thread is to understand Clemente Figuera design...there are other threads where Tesla's polyphase transformer can be discussed..including the TPU thread..kindly let's stick to the subject matter.

Very good catch and assumption is correct Jegz. the Figuera devise is a B x V   -B x-V  pure BV device both being positive and additive thus having no relation to Tesla's polyphase devise. no offence SolarLab but very good reading none the less. any Tesla is good reading, the god of men shoved in a hole thanks to J P Morgan's GREED.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 04, 2016, 09:37:41 PM
F.Y.I.        {{{If you ruffle easily Please DO NOT READ}}}  ;)

The term "Polyphase" is subjective with respect to Tesla's US381970, it appears to have more of a likeness to a multi-tap transformer or generator capable of 1, 2, 3 or more phases depending on configuration and number of windings.

Fundamental point being - this approach might satisfy Figuera's "self running" requirement if, for example, an asymmetric transformer winding scheme were employed - possibly bi-filar or tri-filar; spacial (phase offset); and so forth. Consider a variety of options. Tesla was very good at these things and some of his techniques are well worth considering - especially in light of the time frame of developments (1888 - 1910). Worst case - some "food for thought."  I have yet to see a completed replication of Figuera's work.

Note that Tesla's three (3) Claims do not appear to coincide with those of Figuera's although the apparatus may appear similar. Figuera's patents might well be considered an enhancement of this invention, or, quite possibly, a completely different invention. However, because of the similar nature of it's objective, this patent does serve to enhance the operational knowledge, at least to some extent, of Figuera's intent.

Tesla Patent US381970 dated May 1, 1888. "SYSTEM OF ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION"

Quote from Page 1, lines 15 thru 17:
"This invention relates to those systems of electrical distribution in which a current from a single source of supply in a main or transmitted circuit is caused to induce by means of suitable induction apparatus a current or currents in an independent working circuit or circuits."

Quote from Page 1, lines 61 thru 68:
"... A similar arrangement is to wind coils corresponding to those described in a ring or similar core, and by means of a commutator of suitable kind to direct the current through the  inducing-coils successively, so as to maintain a movement of the poles of the core and of the lines of force which set up the currents in the induced coils. ..."

Quote from Page 1, lines 84 thru 93:
"... While I do not herein advance any theory as to its mode of operation, I would state that, in so far as the principal of construction is concerned, it is analogous to those transformers which I have above described as electro - dynamic induction - machines, exept that it involves no moving parts whatever, and is hence not liable to wear or other derangement, and requires no more attention than the other and more common induction-machines."

Also: Tesla Patent US382282 "Method of Converting and Distributing Electric Currents" dated May 1, 1888. Appears similar to 381970 but with only two (2) claims.
Also: Tesla Patent US390413 "System of Electrical Distribution" Oct 2, 1888.
and US382280 and US382281 "Electrical Transmission of Power"   The list goes on, and on!

Tesla's complete patents: (some drawings may be missing - refer to single patents to ensure completeness)
https://ia800205.us.archive.org/9/items/CompletePatentsOfNikolaTesla/Complete_Patents_Nikola_Tesla.pdf (https://ia800205.us.archive.org/9/items/CompletePatentsOfNikolaTesla/Complete_Patents_Nikola_Tesla.pdf)

Anyway - Have a great Summer everyone! And good luck...

FIN
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on July 05, 2016, 12:07:18 AM
Dude. Yes Tesla was smart and perhaps this device has overunity potential depending on coil configuration or assymetry, but the purpose it served was for carrying loads with different voltage requirements provided from a single power source...case and point arc lamps and incandescent bulbs simultaneously.

Even that assymetry you speak of has nothing to do with Figuera.

As far as similarity to figuera? other than the fact that it uses wires? ....Clemente Figuera's device is very simple...and only simple solutions will save this world.

The pdf you shared has a clearer explanation than the excerpt from "Inventions writings and researches of Nikola Tesla"...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 05, 2016, 04:59:32 AM
Hello jegz,

Normally I do not respond to posts [info provided is only F.Y.I., and on occasion is found to be of value]; but, due to a flight delay, I make this rare exception - time permitting.

Briefly, Symmetric Transformers/Systems (normal) can not achieve an efficiency greater than 100% and fall to near 94% (if well designed and constructed) with no load. BEMF will reduce this considerably when loaded.

Asymmetric Transformers/Systems can achieve an efficiency of greater, or less, than 100% - an example is Bi-Filar wound which can significantly reduce BEMF.

Please see this link, in particular post #7, for much greater detail and discussion:

 http://zaryad.com/forum/threads/asimmetrichnye-transformatory-v-sverxedinichnyx-sxemax.8970/ (http://zaryad.com/forum/threads/asimmetrichnye-transformatory-v-sverxedinichnyx-sxemax.8970/)

The forum is Russian. If you do not read/write Russian you can use "IM Translator" Firefox Add On and get an English translation - the authors there write very well so the translation works quite good; plus the forum is heavily moderated! BTW, IM Translator is free, can translate a full web page, has three translators, provides a technical Russian dictionary, in-line translation, etc. It's excellent, but not perfect yet (Russian language is complex and a bit difficult, but the people are great - and somewhat nice crazy!)...

A broader OU Theory subject link is:
 http://zaryad.com/forum/forums/obschie-principy-ustrojstv-alternativnoj-texniki.136/ (http://zaryad.com/forum/forums/obschie-principy-ustrojstv-alternativnoj-texniki.136/)
And again, some excellent discussion and information...

Must run (fly) - have a very good day!
To quote Red Green: "Remember, I'm pulling for ya, we're all in this together."

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 05, 2016, 12:32:46 PM
What are you going to save the world from?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 05, 2016, 01:15:47 PM
Look how the VTA by Floyd Sweet was supposed to be designed…
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 05, 2016, 05:35:34 PM
And this is how the Magnacoaster by Richard Willis (Patent WO2009065219A1) is described in the patent....

Compare those designs with Figuera's 1908 patent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 06, 2016, 07:26:33 PM
It never ceases to amaze me how you people can blindly post stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with Figuera's device at all.

Read and digest William Hopper Motional electric field paper. you will find that the Figuera device is a pure BV device hands down. he proved that not only is Figuera's device is NN orientation but that it is a pure BV device with B fields cancelling but are positive and additive. just because the B fields are cancelled does not mean the Electric fields are. they are in fact not cancelled and are positive and additive with the Secondary residing in the space where B = 0 but E fields are alive and present.
this man proved with out ANY doubt 70 years later that the Figueraa device is pure BV in nature. if you doubt him you need to see his credentials before you run the mouth to disagree.

Hanon i know not where you are coming from because the Figuera device is a completely different operation. Magnacoaster uses a ringing effect and Figuera's device is pure BV in design and basically may be the only one of it's kind. it is a overlooked simple fact the hidden BV field.

I really can't understand why no one can connect the dots especially when the dots are so simple to construct. once my light bulb lit the knowledge flowed in freely.

E = B1 X V1 + (-B1) X (-V2) = 2B1 X V1 so basically E2 when B = 0
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on July 06, 2016, 10:17:47 PM
@marathonman
Quote
It never ceases to amaze me how you people can blindly post stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with Figuera's device at all.

Read and digest William Hopper Motional electric field paper. you will find that the Figuera device is a pure BV device hands down. he proved that not only is Figuera's device is NN orientation but that it is a pure BV device with B fields cancelling but are positive and additive. just because the B fields are cancelled does not mean the Electric fields are. they are in fact not cancelled and are positive and additive with the Secondary residing in the space where B = 0 but E fields are alive and present.
this man proved with out ANY doubt 70 years later that the Figueraa device is pure BV in nature. if you doubt him you need to see his credentials before you run the mouth to disagree.

Hanon i know not where you are coming from because the Figuera device is a completely different operation. Magnacoaster uses a ringing effect and Figuera's device is pure BV in design and basically may be the only one of it's kind. it is a overlooked simple fact the hidden BV field.

The problem I see is that last week the secret wasn't the hidden BV field it was something else and everyone was stupid because they didn't understand it. The week before that it was something entirely different and again everyone was stupid because they didn't understand that either. No offense but it's hard to believe you have credibility when the supposed secret of how it works keeps changing on a weekly basis. So which secret is it, this one?, last weeks secret nobody understands or the one before that nobody understands?.

As well it is William J Hooper not William Hopper and I read the document in question many years ago most recently a couple months ago. William J Hooper's work was a variation on the work of Wilhelm Weber known as Weber Electrodynamics. Keep in mind this magical science you have just discovered was being debated in the late 18th century by some pretty big names you may recognize such as Ampere, Gauss as well as Weber. All had units of measure named after them which is a very big deal in the field of science. So this is by no means new in fact it is very old and fairly well documented it's just that few have been able to put all the pieces together.

This is just a thought but I think there might be more open and constructive debate about this if you lost the fucking attitude and started talking like a normal person. I mean it get's old really fast and is kind of counter productive in my opinion.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 06, 2016, 11:57:06 PM
Figuera: a coil between two magnetic fields in movement

http://i.makeagif.com/media/10-13-2014/K7jseC.gif (http://i.makeagif.com/media/10-13-2014/K7jseC.gif)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 07, 2016, 01:15:27 AM
well excuse my stupid unintentional miss spelling. William Hooper is the closest i have came to describing the figuera device. if it was just a coil between two magnetic fields then why hasn't anyone on here built it, if it's that easy. get real ! probably because no one has the balls to admit they have NO clue about the Figuera device. study the field interaction for months then come back to the table with something useful.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on July 07, 2016, 04:41:23 AM
@marathonman
Quote
well excuse my stupid unintentional miss spelling. William Hooper is the closest i have came to describing the figuera device. if it was just a coil between two magnetic fields then why hasn't anyone on here built it, if it's that easy. get real ! probably because no one has the balls to admit they have NO clue about the Figuera device. study the field interaction for months then come back to the table with something useful.


Don't get me wrong I have read your posts and you do keep changing your mind. This is a very good sign because it means your learning new things while many others continue to spin their wheels. I won't even tell you how many times I have changed my mind concerning these patents and many many others. You have come a long way however you still have a long way to go.


Here is the problem I see, when we come out and say this is the way it is then change our minds we have backed ourselves into a corner and limited our options. Were much better off to say , I think this is more relevant, I think this is a better answer, what do you guys think?. Being honest with others and ourselves means we never have to remember what we said.


For example, in Hooper's motional field a variation of Weber's electrodynamics there would seem to be a field convergence where two fields cancel and two fields add. The question is under what circumstances and how does it relate to the Figuera patent?. You know a long time ago I read a story about a Scottish engineer who was building canals. In one instance a wave like disturbance was formed in the canal which moved as an independent body. It traveled at high speed down the canal for miles and appeared unaffected by the canal losing almost no energy. He called it a "wave of translation" later known as a solitary or Soliton Wave.


I have this curse whereby I can't remember my anniversary, what I ate yesterday or what I did at work however I can recall every science and technology article I have ever read in my life. The Soliton wave sticks out because it's a rule breaker in that it is a self-reinforcing completely independent phenomena once certain precise physical conditions are met. In consideration of these facts maybe we need to be a little more critical of our circuit layout and "geometry". Maybe we need to pay more attention to "how" a current is switched and under what "specific conditions" it is switched versus simplistic terms such as frequency and duration. It is fascinating stuff... what do you think?.


AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 07, 2016, 11:15:33 AM
 quote; "Maybe we need to pay more attention to "how" a current is switched and under what "specific conditions"  it is switched"
  i have been trying to convey that very thought (poorly i might add) for the last 6 months. this device can not be switched in any haphazard fashion by some yahoo timing.
 i completely agree.


  You need corrected, I haven't changed my mind about the Figuera device in about 6 or 7 months because i know the exact function and working's of each device but i just recently properly IDed the device and contrary to ANY one on this forum, i know the Figuera device is a pure BV Motional Field Generator. their is NO other explanation to describe the device's function because if the pressure between the electromagnets is not maintained the induction will fall to the output of just one electromagnet, in which you know it or not is one quarter of a quadrature generator.
both electromagnets amount to 1/2 of the quadrature if running properly.....i.e. pressure maintained between them. in order for the pressure to be maintained between them a complete and orderly variation of currant has to be maintained and never reaching Zero or reversed like with AC.  if AC is attempted you will NEVER attain the pure BV function.  also the function of part G is not only to split the currant (with two opposing fields) it functions as a magnetic resistor in the process storing power in it's core in the form of a magnetic field to be used every half turn of the brush, thus being fed every half turn by the declining electromagnet being basically shoved out of the secondary by the increasing electromagnet.

see while every one was posting erroneous information  (the same stuff for 6 month) i took myself to Figuera school and have been posting the real deal since.  so much so that i was approached buy a friend's business partner that wants to fund me building the Figuera device, my presentation is next week. see i realized i can put the device on a toroid and then stacked in a nice and neat package to power the house, car and God knows every thing else for that matter.

so you see i can care less about all the negativity and bad mouthing because  i know the figuera device and have planes for it. i just thought that i would clue people in but i see that will never happen.

Good luck in your adventure Mr. allcanadian
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 07, 2016, 12:14:54 PM
Maybe reading this page will clarify some aspects:


https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on July 07, 2016, 05:41:15 PM
@Hanon
Quote
Maybe reading this page will clarify some aspects:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/

In my opinion that was an excellent presentation and I would agree that any normal transformer action should be avoided. We know it cannot work as we want therefore it must be something else at work here. I would agree the Figuera patents are misleading and he was one very clever individual.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 07, 2016, 07:07:55 PM
While i agree it is a good presentation, you lack the subtle detail of each device. you have had that information for quite a while and i have fed you quite a lot of info personaly but yet have not advanced any farther with the info. it's like your refusing to think each process in depth ignoring subtle details that are needed to get the device operational.

it's like you were handed a screwdriver and a screw but refuse or lack the knowledge to screw the screw into the wood. all i can say is you need to learn to use the tools in front of you or find a new hobby or profession because staring at it for years and posting the same information accomplishes NOTHING.

if the people of this forum don't take the time to completely study each piece of Figuera's device,  then there is no hope of this forum of ever building a working Figuera device.
i  on the other hand have taken the info i have gathered, (from different sources) studied each piece separately and taken that info to a whole other level. the difference is i didn't sit on the information and go no where with it. i studied it intensely every waking hour trying to visualize what is actually happening in the primary/secondary relationship and acknowledging the fact that part G has a magnetic field being shifted each half turn and that the winding's on the core are the actual resistor the patent is describing in the form of two opposing magnetic fields.
 if you take a core and put 20 wraps of wire on it,  connect a light bulb to each end then a power supply negative to each light bulb. touch the positive side at different intervals, the light bulb's will light at different intensities as the positive wire is moved from left to right on the  wire wraps. well how did it do that, well there are two opposing fields created as the currant enters the coil of wire and are varied as more or less winding's are involved. this is exactly the process of part G as the brush is rotated on a continuous basis.

i would  suggest every one on this forum try this at home for your own sake. this will bring you to the next level of your understanding of part G.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 07, 2016, 08:35:22 PM
While i agree it is a good presentation, you lack the subtle detail of each device. you have had that information for quite a while and i have fed you quite a lot of info personaly but yet have not advanced any farther with the info. it's like your refusing to think each process in depth ignoring subtle details that are needed to get the device operational.

it's like you were handed a screwdriver and a screw but refuse or lack the knowledge to screw the screw into the wood. all i can say is you need to learn to use the tools in front of you or find a new hobby or profession because staring at it for years and posting the same information accomplishes NOTHING.

if the people of this forum don't take the time to completely study each piece of Figuera's device,  then there is no hope of this forum of ever building a working Figuera device.

Said that, all that I can say is that I do not have a workshop, I do not have much free time, I do not have skills nor instruction into the electric area,  and I do not have the commitment to invest the amount of money required for a brand new gadget from a workshop. Call me lazy or miserly, if you wish.

Said that, all that I can say is that my only merit here was to have translated the patents into english, do research and expose openly and clearly what I guess is the right design in order everyone may have access to it. My merit was to be here for more that 3 years and keep this thread alive. I felt I was doing a good thing to people and society.

Said that, all I can say is that the only word used by Figuera in his 1908 for his current splitter device was "resistencia" which can be translated as "resistor" in electric terminology, or as "resistance" in general terminology. I just expose what is written in the patent. The rest are add-ons not described in the patent. While resistors are a wasteful mean to regulate the current, they accomplish that task and it is what Figuera described.Period. If you have a more optimized method to split the current you are free to do it. It may work, or it may be the key part. Or not.But Figuera never wrote about reluctance, toroids, or storing energy as magnetic flux in the toroid in his 1908 patent. And this is the true. Do not state that the patent says what is not said. For example in PJK ebook into the Figuera section is included your "part G" design as if it was described into the patent itself. I would have liked to keep separated what is written in the patent from what is our interpretation. I told that to PJK but he refused my idea, he deleted the patent translation in his last revision to Figuera section and he kept you part G as a key part of the machine. I hope you are right because if not maybe future users may try to replicate a device which is not the one literally described in the patent. I you see my site you will see that I kept separated the translations from the interpretations. I know this is a good practice. Suppose a monk in the Middle Age translating a book by Plato and inserting in the book his own interpretations. Now we could not know which the original ideas of Plato were or not.

Summary: Figuera just described a method to split the current to one or other set of electromagnets. This is the fact included in the patent description and claims (translation)

And now my interpretation: Figuera just wanted to move the two opposing magnetic fields to create motional induction in the central coil, aka flux cutting induction. I guess he does not need anymore than that to get his generator working. Nor in Magnacoaster, neither in the VTA are required a toroidal "part G" to work. Those devices just distorted the two magnetic field between two NN poles to get induction in their central coil, as Figuera did. Figuera did it in a more ordered and optimized sequence than those, but I think (my interpretation) they all rely on the same basic principle: getting motional induction without moving the magnets but just moving the magnetic lines.

Said that, all I can say bye bye forever. I am fed up. Good summer, good life and good luck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on July 07, 2016, 09:42:48 PM

Back to basics.


For those who really want to replicate this thing,just study Patrick Kelly's comments.
He says " Because of the splitting of the primary into two parts, Lenz's law
has been abolished for this design, allowing a spectacular performance where
the current drawn from the secondary winding has no effect on the current flowing
in the two halves of the primary winding. There is also no back -EMF as current
flows continuously in both halves of the primary winding."


In spite of the varying magnetic field the "current flows CONTINUOUSLY"
How is this possible?


Well here is an example:
Lets say we decide to use 11 amps as the total primary current for both halves.


We could set coil A at 9 amps and coil B at 2 amps
Next G position:  A at 8 amps and coil B at 3 amps
Next G position:  A at 7 amps and coil B at 4 amps
Next G position:  A at 6 amps and coil B at 5 amps
Next G position:  A at 5 amps and coil B at 6 amps
Next G position:  A at 4 amps and coil B at 7 amps
Next G position:  A at 3 amps and coil B at 8 amps
Next G position:  A at 2 amps and coil B at 9 amps


So now you can see that the sum total of current through both primaries is ALWAYS 11 amps!
With no change in current, we have no change in voltage. Both Lenz and BEMF is gone.


I'm working on a circuit to work this way but being 83 years old my shaky hands cut down
on my fine soldering skills.


Of course for anyone attempting the original design this basic principle would also apply.
 The simple sketch of CF's circuit is not that simple at all.He had to do some fancy calculating
to get the exact ohmic value of those seven resistors just right.
 If you're building just one unit then you will need nine resistors to prevent
excessive current flow at both ends.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 07, 2016, 10:20:42 PM
Oh stop being a baby Hanon, i'm not attacking you just you keep posting the same stuff over and over and do nothing with the info at hand. i want you to raise up to the next level so please don't pout and run away without taking good information and run with it.

Very good Mr cliff i see some advancement and someone is finally using their brain. good post !
after you finish your design, get it working,  then you can work on building the real part G to make it self running.(Magnetic resistance)

an easy way to cheat and avoid all the calculations is download this calc tool. i use it very much in my studies and research. http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/calc/

it is cheaper to use magnetic fields to curtail currant flow then resistors. you must of spent a small fortune on high power resistors.

good to see active participation and not sit on the knowledge.  i'm sure you remembered to make your timing circuit make before break (timing overlap) so no bemf occurs in your primaries. (simple cap will do that)  just remember that each primary must handle half of the secondary output. 14.8 lbs force shifted side to side = 1 kilowatt so each primary must put out 7.4 lbs force shifted side to side. but can be divided even further depending on what force you are comfortable in dealing with. just remember these are opposing electromagnets and will fly apart and tear things apart when they do so please be careful and secure them properly.

Happy building Mr. cliff
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 07, 2016, 11:27:04 PM

For those who really want to replicate this thing,just study C.F's comments.
He says " Because of the splitting of the primary into two parts, Lenz's law
has been abolished for this design, allowing a spectacular performance where
the current drawn from the secondary winding has no effect on the current flowing
in the two halves of the primary winding. There is also no back -EMF as current
flows continuously in both halves of the primary winding."


 >:(  >:(

Why do you quote Figuera "..." with sentences that he never wrote down? He never told that. Where is that written? Where?

Guys, you see the problem with interpretation. People put words in Figuera mouth because of their own interpretations. Please keep separated Figuera's words from your words. I have read tens of times Figuera's patents and he never used the words: north, south, Lenz, back emf, so your post is not a quote from Figuera.

That's why I kept the original spanish text into the patent translation, so that if anyone does not trust the current translations he can re-translate them from the original text. For me Figuera's words are sacred, and must be kept intact forever.

I left because I have no new info to present and share. I know that I post again and again the same, hoping to convert newcomers, but as I said I am fed up with the agressivity in this forum.

The sketch I post below was done by marathonman after my suggestion that I think that Figuera used to resistors arrays instead of just one to have two exactly simetrical and opposite signals, the trick is to mantain always the same resintance in the two resistors arrays to guarantee a constant sum of the two current intensities. Cliff, this is for you. I have also another sketch of that by myself but it is handmade and it is not so pretty as this one.

Bye bye, (I hope not to go back to defend Figuera)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: cliff33 on July 08, 2016, 01:55:38 AM
Hanon:
 
Sorry for the misquote. I got this info from chap.3 of PJK's book. So I modified my post.
I've always had great respect for Patrick and all of his research.
Keep up the good job of translating.
 




Marathon:
  Thanks for the comments, but no I will not be using any resistors or coils to vary magnetic field.
The "G" device also is not on my agenda.
I'll just be using two power mosfets for my system. Good mosfets don't consume any power, they just vary the amperage.
We all have our different ways which is good.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on July 08, 2016, 02:02:51 AM
Hi Hanon,

I appreciate all your work in translating the patents. From your site I offer a mechanical emulation of the field movement you portray, this is made with cylinder magnets, not ring magnets.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on July 08, 2016, 04:34:38 AM
@marathonman
Quote
it is cheaper to use magnetic fields to curtail currant flow then resistors. you must of spent a small fortune on high power resistors.


I use arc welder copper clad carbon gouging rods as power resistors which are inexpensive. I just slit the copper cladding and peel it off or some copper on the ends can stay on if you want to solder then into a circuit. I have used them as dummy loads for years and they are pretty much bulletproof. They also work well as current shunt resistors and I have had no issues to date.


AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 08, 2016, 12:08:14 PM
Hello jegz,

Normally I do not respond to posts [info provided is only F.Y.I., and on occasion is found to be of value]; but, due to a flight delay, I make this rare exception - time permitting.

Briefly, Symmetric Transformers/Systems (normal) can not achieve an efficiency greater than 100% and fall to near 94% (if well designed and constructed) with no load. BEMF will reduce this considerably when loaded.

Asymmetric Transformers/Systems can achieve an efficiency of greater, or less, than 100% - an example is Bi-Filar wound which can significantly reduce BEMF.


Please see this link, in particular post #7, for much greater detail and discussion:

 http://zaryad.com/forum/threads/asimmetrichnye-transformatory-v-sverxedinichnyx-sxemax.8970/ (http://zaryad.com/forum/threads/asimmetrichnye-transformatory-v-sverxedinichnyx-sxemax.8970/)

The forum is Russian. If you do not read/write Russian you can use "IM Translator" Firefox Add On and get an English translation - the authors there write very well so the translation works quite good; plus the forum is heavily moderated! BTW, IM Translator is free, can translate a full web page, has three translators, provides a technical Russian dictionary, in-line translation, etc. It's excellent, but not perfect yet (Russian language is complex and a bit difficult, but the people are great - and somewhat nice crazy!)...

A broader OU Theory subject link is:
 http://zaryad.com/forum/forums/obschie-principy-ustrojstv-alternativnoj-texniki.136/ (http://zaryad.com/forum/forums/obschie-principy-ustrojstv-alternativnoj-texniki.136/)
And again, some excellent discussion and information...

Must run (fly) - have a very good day!
To quote Red Green: "Remember, I'm pulling for ya, we're all in this together."

SL

The information provided by SolarLab is correct to my personal observation. I no longer post as I do not do any experiments now.

A few years back we wound a 18 inch long and 4 inch dia plastic pipe with 12 layers of 4 sq mm wire with each layer having approximately about 83 to 85 turns. This was used as the secondary. On this we wound a quadfilar coil made up of four parallel 4 sq mm wire connected as a 
quadfilar coil. The input was 3300 watts and the output was 3000 watts (300 volts and 10 amps) and was able to power 17 x 200 watts lamps very brightly). The efficiency was 91% on load. Input was 220 volts and 15 amps. That was wound as a symmetrical transformer. The core was iron rods with gaps in between. I have since found insulated iron wires which can be inserted without air gaps and that would increase the efficiency.

I no longer do any research as my foot get swollen due to some unknown problem. But I think the above experiment can be repeated easily with insulated iron wire as the core material without any airgaps to increase the efficiency. I think the efficiency will then increase much higher.

This is still a symmetrical transformer but the primary is a quadfilar coil which provided inductive impedance to 220 volts AC current. It is possible it will reach COP=1 or slightly above 1 even with a symmetrical transformer where the closed magnetic path is avoided.

I have not tested with a closed magnetic path and so I cannot say if it will or will not work. The info provided by Solarlab is correct.

Regards,

Ramaswami

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on July 08, 2016, 06:23:44 PM
It's been a long time since I looked at this thread. I'm glad I took another look.

When I originally built this device I did not get good results using NYS coils with PWM, and after studying how DC generators were built over a hundred years ago I came to the conclusion that the difference that made the generators work was flux cutting of a constant strength inducer field. I say constant but I am aware that the strength was increased at times to keep a constant voltage output at increased load.

Now I see that Doug and Marathonman and Hanon have figured out how to achieve that flux cutting and constant strength field so I am going to give this another shot.

Doug and Marathon man, great catch on the mag/amp/variac. You know if you look at the patents the resistance above the commutator is always drawn in a rectangular block. Maybe this was to represent a coil on a iron core tapped at intervals and selected by the commutator brush? Wouldn't that function similar to the variac?

Cadman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on July 09, 2016, 08:31:11 PM
F.Y.I.

Another explanation/method of Symmetric and Asymmetric (non-symmetric) by Vladimir Utkin (his latest publication?) entitled "OVERCOMING THE LENZ LAW EFFECT:"

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapter22.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapter22.pdf)

An older Vladimir Utkin Publication [Free Energy: Nikola Tesla Secretes for Everybody," 14th June, 2012:

http://www.free-energy-info.com/VladimirUtkin.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/VladimirUtkin.pdf)

FIN
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 16, 2016, 06:45:35 AM
Good to see ya Cadman, lone time no hear. i have but one thing to say and that is.

   After three years of constant study, research and on hand experience, i have concluded that the Figuera device operates in said capacity according to the 1908 patent and the following is my interpretation of said free energy device.
in the patents  it can be seen how ingeniously and by mechanical methods, how the engineer tried to generate electrical energy inside a coil by varying the flow of two opposite and opposing magnetic fields, trying to get into the machine the same characteristic behavior of a conventional generator, but without moving parts.

                                               What is the Figuera device

    In a standard generator we have what is termed a quadrature. the incline and decline of the north magnet and the incline and decline of the south magnet.  also we have what is termed "the cogging effect".  the  cogging effect is where the rotor passes the stator electromagnet and opon passing the electromagnet an extreme attraction force wants to pull the rotor back in to register (alignement) causing the motor to bog down from the heavy load of the attractive force. this extreme force from present day generators has been the same since the days of Praxii in France and has not changed. thus we are left with a system that is completely crippled from the cogging effect and inefficient beyond belief. the amount of fuel used in this type of system is staggering and certainly benefits only the Oil Companies and tax hungry Governments.

 in the Figuera device both electromagnet accounts for only 1/2 of a quadrature but with no cogging effect what so ever  since the device is stationary and no moving parts.  thus allowing the half quadrature to be much more efficient in terms of  power usage (input)  verses power output. since the cogging effect has been removed the amount of power that was wasted on rotation is now available to the system  for use to power it's electromagnets and rotating brush motor which amounts to very little leaving a system that is so efficient it powers it self and the load indefinitely.  once the system is started with an external power supply, it can be removed and the system remains running with no noise, lubrication,  pollution or waste products to deal with. the implication of such a device is utterly mind boggling and a game changer to the average human.  allowing each and every human to grow their own food 24/7 365 days a year,  pump their own water, power their own home and personal vehicles. thus changing the very Evolution of the human race advancing toward a more productive, peaceful,  harmonistic society riding the powerful elite of their choke hold on the human race through control.
The Figuera device consist of a complimentary set of primary opposing electromagnets (Set N and Set S) between them resides an output coil/core (Y) governed by a controller part "G" that varies the currant allowed through the the primary electromagnets.
the primary electromagnets are varied in currant in unison, one taken high, the other taken low,  just enough to clear the secondary then reversed. in the said action a unique condition takes place in the area the secondary output coil resides in causing a condition known as a Motional Electric Field. as both primaries are occupying the same relative space in space,  we have a set of conditions where both B fields (Magnetic fields) are opposing one another therefore effectively cancelling each other out. in this unique condition,  both fields are effectively equal zero but the electric fields of both electromagnets remain intact therefore doubling the effective E field compared to one electromagnet alone.
by using a DC source through part G,  the original source is effectively split into to two separate feeds allowing the primary electromagnets to be varied separately in unison allowing the cancellation of B fields and the additive E fields to remain to be collected by the secondary, a condition known as a pure BV field. the secondary according to the patent is "properly placed" in this area that is effectively zero B field zone but where the Electric field is actively present and doubled in strength.
Superimposed magnetic flux from the two sets of electromagnets (Set N and Set S)  consists of one electromagnet with left to right spin taken high, and one electromagnet with right to left spin taken low in unison. thus we have a unique condition in the space surrounding  the secondary: the resultant magnetic flux, due to superposition of fields, is zero; and the resultant Motional electric field intensity is E = B1 x V1 + (-B1) x (-V2) = 2B1 x V1, or E2,  double the intensity attributable to one electromagnet alone, where B1 is the magnetic flux due to the electromagnets and V1,  the electron drift velocity in, say, the in and out direction. although the magnetic flux energy in the device is reduced to zero, the electromagnetic induction giving rise to what we term the Motional electric field has by no means been cancelled nor reduced in any way as both are positive and additive .

another unique condition of the opposing primary electromagnets is that while one electromagnet is taken high, the other is taken low but in doing so in it's receding action,  the rising electromagnet basically shoves the receding electromagnet out of the secondary core into it's own core from where it's magnetic field was born.  this action causes a considerable amount of magnetic flux to be confined in the said core  thus allowing the magnetic energy to be shoved out the back of the receding electromagnet into part G to be stored in a magnetic field for later use therefore feeding it's self every half turn of part G. if the receding electromagnet is taken down to far or the primary electromagnets are not in complete unison the pressure between them will cease and induction will fall low to  the output of the peak of the rising electromagnet.

                                                             Part G

after much research into the origin and function of part G,  i was able to narrow, with the help of a colleaque, the origin, device and manufacture of the part G device to Germany and Zeiss or Otto as the manufacturer. both companies produced precision variac of the highest quality and were the go to companies for quality workmanship. more then likely it was Zeiss as the dates and events are to easily lined up.
 one little known fact is that DC can be used through a variac and produce similar effects of currant restriction through variation with a twist of a knob. Figuera on the other hand chose to have the core wound with one continuous wind, one end to Set N and the other to Set S  all while varying the currant through the rotating brush making contact with two winding's at a time in a make before break scenario to avoid currant disruption to the primary electromagnets. this action would be detrimental to the function of the device if bemf were allowed to take place as all induction would cease and power production would come to a halt.
part G is a magnetic resistance device rarely used in today's modern world, a forgotten relic in a world of silicon ic's that can be had in any style, shape or form. part G is unique as it splits one DC feed into two separate independent feeds. this feat is accomplished through two opposing fields as the currant enters part G  through it's winding's causing two opposing magnetic fields. these two magnetic fields restrict the amount of saturation of the core restricting currant flow through reluctance (magnetics).
part G is connected to the primary electromagnets to allow the inductive kick back from the receding electromagnet to be stored in it's core every half turn of the rotating brush,  thus allowing the stored magnetic field to be converted into currant feeding the primaries as the brush rotates. this action of part G is similar in action of an inductor allowing energy to be stored  and used,  as the brush rotates so does the magnetic field.

when constructing the device a second secondary can be wound on the output core allowing said secondary to be used for the sole purpose of powering the device to replace losses occurred through heat and wire loss, which accounts for very little aiding the inductive kickback from the declining electromagnet allowing the device to be self sustaining.
once this device is started with an external power supply, the supply can be removed and the device will run indefinitely powering what ever you so choose.

scientist's of our present day say that free energy is "impossible" yet their are over 10,000 free energy device patents in the united states and over 40,000 globally,  most of which were illegally seized by the patent office under the guize "of national security". funny thing is the US patent office is not even part of the US Government ( independently owned and operated)  yet they are continuously allowed to do so,  steeling average citizens free energy patent.  the suppression of free energy is coming to an end as all through out the world are becoming aware  of the ability to self sustain. Maxwell and Faraday proved with out a doubt, that free energy is possible. if this was not so then why did J. P. Morgan, a rich banker, spend million trying to hide the fee energy equations through Heaviside, Lorentz and possibly Einstein through bribe monies. J. P. Morgan even went so far as to pull school books and had them changed and put back into circulation. he was also responsible for the suppression of the most gifted person of our time, yours truly Nicola Tesla. reducing him to the point of feeding pigeons for the remainder of his life.
if perpetual motion is not viable, then apparently our Universe did not get the memo, wouldn't that be awkward if the world stop spinning tomorrow.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 16, 2016, 08:09:47 AM
Good to see ya Cadman, lone time no hear. i have but one thing to say and that is.

   After three years of constant study, research and on hand experience, i have concluded that the Figuera device operates in said capacity according to the 1908 patent and the following is my interpretation of said free energy device.
in the patents  it can be seen how ingeniously and by mechanical methods, how the engineer tried to generate electrical energy inside a coil by varying the flow of two opposite and opposing magnetic fields, trying to get into the machine the same characteristic behavior of a conventional generator, but without moving parts.

                                               What is the Figuera device

    In a standard generator we have what is termed a quadrature. the incline and decline of the north magnet and the incline and decline of the south magnet.  also we have what is termed "the cogging effect".  the  cogging effect is where the rotor passes the stator electromagnet and opon passing the electromagnet an extreme attraction force wants to pull the rotor back in to register (alignement) causing the motor to bog down from the heavy load of the attractive force. this extreme force from present day generators has been the same since the days of Praxii in France and has not changed. thus we are left with a system that is completely crippled from the cogging effect and inefficient beyond belief. the amount of fuel used in this type of system is staggering and certainly benefits only the Oil Companies and tax hungry Governments.

 in the Figuera device both electromagnet accounts for only 1/2 of a quadrature but with no cogging effect what so ever  since the device is stationary and no moving parts.  thus allowing the half quadrature to be much more efficient in terms of  power usage (input)  verses power output. since the cogging effect has been removed the amount of power that was wasted on rotation is now available to the system  for use to power it's electromagnets and rotating brush motor which amounts to very little leaving a system that is so efficient it powers it self and the load indefinitely.  once the system is started with an external power supply, it can be removed and the system remains running with no noise, lubrication,  pollution or waste products to deal with. the implication of such a device is utterly mind boggling and a game changer to the average human.  allowing each and every human to grow their own food 24/7 365 days a year,  pump their own water, power their own home and personal vehicles. thus changing the very Evolution of the human race advancing toward a more productive, peaceful,  harmonistic society riding the powerful elite of their choke hold on the human race through control.
The Figuera device consist of a complimentary set of primary opposing electromagnets (Set N and Set S) between them resides an output coil/core (Y) governed by a controller part "G" that varies the currant allowed through the the primary electromagnets.
the primary electromagnets are varied in currant in unison, one taken high, the other taken low,  just enough to clear the secondary then reversed. in the said action a unique condition takes place in the area the secondary output coil resides in causing a condition known as a Motional Electric Field. as both primaries are occupying the same relative space in space,  we have a set of conditions where both B fields (Magnetic fields) are opposing one another therefore effectively cancelling each other out. in this unique condition,  both fields are effectively equal zero but the electric fields of both electromagnets remain intact therefore doubling the effective E field compared to one electromagnet alone.
by using a DC source through part G,  the original source is effectively split into to two separate feeds allowing the primary electromagnets to be varied separately in unison allowing the cancellation of B fields and the additive E fields to remain to be collected by the secondary, a condition known as a pure BV field. the secondary according to the patent is "properly placed" in this area that is effectively zero B field zone but where the Electric field is actively present and doubled in strength.
Superimposed magnetic flux from the two sets of electromagnets (Set N and Set S)  consists of one electromagnet with left to right spin taken high, and one electromagnet with right to left spin taken low in unison. thus we have a unique condition in the space surrounding  the secondary: the resultant magnetic flux, due to superposition of fields, is zero; and the resultant Motional electric field intensity is E = B1 x V1 + (-B1) x (-V2) = 2B1 x V1, or E2,  double the intensity attributable to one electromagnet alone, where B1 is the magnetic flux due to the electromagnets and V1,  the electron drift velocity in, say, the in and out direction. although the magnetic flux energy in the device is reduced to zero, the electromagnetic induction giving rise to what we term the Motional electric field has by no means been cancelled nor reduced in any way as both are positive and additive .

another unique condition of the opposing primary electromagnets is that while one electromagnet is taken high, the other is taken low but in doing so in it's receding action,  the rising electromagnet basically shoves the receding electromagnet out of the secondary core into it's own core from where it's magnetic field was born.  this action causes a considerable amount of magnetic flux to be confined in the said core  thus allowing the magnetic energy to be shoved out the back of the receding electromagnet into part G to be stored in a magnetic field for later use therefore feeding it's self every half turn of part G. if the receding electromagnet is taken down to far or the primary electromagnets are not in complete unison the pressure between them will cease and induction will fall low to  the output of the peak of the rising electromagnet.

                                                             Part G

after much research into the origin and function of part G,  i was able to narrow, with the help of a colleaque, the origin, device and manufacture of the part G device to Germany and Zeiss or Otto as the manufacturer. both companies produced precision variac of the highest quality and were the go to companies for quality workmanship. more then likely it was Zeiss as the dates and events are to easily lined up.
 one little known fact is that DC can be used through a variac and produce similar effects of currant restriction through variation with a twist of a knob. Figuera on the other hand chose to have the core wound with one continuous wind, one end to Set N and the other to Set S  all while varying the currant through the rotating brush making contact with two winding's at a time in a make before break scenario to avoid currant disruption to the primary electromagnets. this action would be detrimental to the function of the device if bemf were allowed to take place as all induction would cease and power production would come to a halt.
part G is a magnetic resistance device rarely used in today's modern world, a forgotten relic in a world of silicon ic's that can be had in any style, shape or form. part G is unique as it splits one DC feed into two separate independent feeds. this feat is accomplished through two opposing fields as the currant enters part G  through it's winding's causing two opposing magnetic fields. these two magnetic fields restrict the amount of saturation of the core restricting currant flow through reluctance (magnetics).
part G is connected to the primary electromagnets to allow the inductive kick back from the receding electromagnet to be stored in it's core every half turn of the rotating brush,  thus allowing the stored magnetic field to be converted into currant feeding the primaries as the brush rotates. this action of part G is similar in action of an inductor allowing energy to be stored  and used,  as the brush rotates so does the magnetic field.

when constructing the device a second secondary can be wound on the output core allowing said secondary to be used for the sole purpose of powering the device to replace losses occurred through heat and wire loss, which accounts for very little aiding the inductive kickback from the declining electromagnet allowing the device to be self sustaining.
once this device is started with an external power supply, the supply can be removed and the device will run indefinitely powering what ever you so choose.

scientist's of our present day say that free energy is "impossible" yet their are over 10,000 free energy device patents in the united states and over 40,000 globally,  most of which were illegally seized by the patent office under the guize "of national security". funny thing is the US patent office is not even part of the US Government ( independently owned and operated)  yet they are continuously allowed to do so,  steeling average citizens free energy patent.  the suppression of free energy is coming to an end as all through out the world are becoming aware  of the ability to self sustain. Maxwell and Faraday proved with out a doubt, that free energy is possible. if this was not so then why did J. P. Morgan, a rich banker, spend million trying to hide the fee energy equations through Heaviside, Lorentz and possibly Einstein through bribe monies. J. P. Morgan even went so far as to pull school books and had them changed and put back into circulation. he was also responsible for the suppression of the most gifted person of our time, yours truly Nicola Tesla. reducing him to the point of feeding pigeons for the remainder of his life.
if perpetual motion is not viable, then apparently our Universe did not get the memo, wouldn't that be awkward if the world stop spinning tomorrow.
Wao! If it is not Sir Marathonman then it is a counterfeit. Whenever overunity.com comes to my mind, it is you and Ramaswami that ring on my mind. Yes I am an ardent critic of you but I still do respect your views.
Do not get it twisted.....ANY OTHER MARATHONMAN IS A COUNTERFEIT!!
WE have one on here, just one and it is the ORIGINAL!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 16, 2016, 03:42:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9c_KttvQPU
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 16, 2016, 04:56:47 PM
YES IT"S ME!
OMG! i'm still laughing 3 hrs later Doug. OH SHIT that was funny!
the sad part is some other fool with no life at all recorded 12 hrs of cricket shit.
 i know it falls on deaf ears but i had to show what i know.
all i can say is read and learn, use the ears instead of the mouth cuz that their is good stuff.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 20, 2016, 04:20:38 PM
YES IT"S ME!
OMG! i'm still laughing 3 hrs later Doug. OH SHIT that was funny!
the sad part is some other fool with no life at all recorded 12 hrs of cricket shit.
 i know it falls on deaf ears but i had to show what i know.
all i can say is read and learn, use the ears instead of the mouth cuz that their is good stuff.

And you think you have not been making a fool of yourself all this while? Even your friend Hanon affirms to it look at is comment here http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-27.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on July 22, 2016, 08:07:36 PM
Hey Marathonman and Doug1.

I get what you have been saying, both of you. It took awhile but I read yours and Doug1's posts again and smack, it hit me right in the face. You guys really did spill the beans. Part G as you two describe it may not be absolutely required but it's a definite plus!

I just finished my coil design specs and have started the material gathering process. My this is expensive! I will build a single module to experiment with and tweak. This will not be a self runner at first unless I just get lucky, but if it performs per calculations then adding the remaining modules will undoubtedly make it a self runner and also put out some good usable wattage.

I do have one major unknown and that is the effect of the magnetic circuit through air in regards to the amp turns required. At this point that is the thing that can derail it all. Seeing how the opposed fields compress and concentrate may make it irrelevant but it is still a concern.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 22, 2016, 08:19:32 PM
Absolutely Wonderful i am excited that someone light bulb lit. i have to say thought part G is absolutely necessary for self running.
very happy for you cademan, now there is three of us that are not stuck on stupid.

Good luck eliter.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on July 22, 2016, 10:20:29 PM
If i want to replicate, can i follow what is in the pjkbook???
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 22, 2016, 10:38:49 PM
Follow post # 3780 and you will do fine wistiti and/or read Doug1 post.
good luck.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on July 22, 2016, 11:20:01 PM
Thank you!
For the 'G' part have you some info for building one or where i can buy it..?
Other question do the primary and secondary have a magnetic core or air ones?
How much set (Primary and secondary) is the minimum for it to work?
Sorry for the many question... ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 24, 2016, 08:07:34 AM
Sorry, no magnetic resistive devices on the market. you will have to build it.
Wow! really.
can be made for one light bulb or 1 million light bulbs. sky is the limit.
no need to be sorry, except for question #2.

read patent and repeat.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 24, 2016, 09:32:45 PM
Well, I didn't name you directly, but regardless, I don't believe hearsay, and nor should anyone else. Skepticism is a part of due process, and it keeps us safe from playing a role in someone's fantasy.

Unnecessary, but thanks. If he has a working model but refuses to share, he can:
A. Keep quiet
B. Kiss my ass
C. Both of the above

I pick C.

Lies, lies. When you first started posting your "ring dynamo" idea, we, the regular members of this thread, schooled you until you learned the basic principles. Remember that? We told you it wouldn't work, but you adamantly denied, and claimed that everyone else will have a "non working device". In the end everything we said started to sink in, and now you claim our ideas as your own. Anyone can look back and see that "your" new design is the same design we've been going over for a long time. If anyone should be credited with the design it should be Hanon. He stuck with it even though I and others were trying different configurations. In the end, Hanon proved to be correct.

Funny that you say that. If we look back to this post: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg467996/#msg467996 we see you "helping" a new member, who, by the way, has already constructed part of a driving circuit. He generously shares with us his knowledge, experience, schematics, and waveform, and you berate him in your arrogance. Congratulations, you helped another lost soul find his way to the fairy man's benevolence.

You want to talk about intelligence? Really? Come on man, drop the gloves, let's do it. You're a hundred years too soon to talk about intelligence. And please, work on your spelling and grammar before you try to school someone. My college English professor would be hitting you with his umbrella.

Who else if not same MARATHONMAN. The kite!
"Brush bright the ego of a Fool to keep him Fooooooooolish Viva" Dare Diamond
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 24, 2016, 11:33:23 PM
Your ignorance simply amasses me. there's a wealth of knowledge on the table yet you choose to ignore it and do what do best, run your mouth.
i'm really impressed.
and you wonder why you don't have a working device. so now your on two forums spreading your stupidity, how quaint .
you remind me of Einstein, he to was border line retarded and amounted to nothing,  spouting nonsense.

please do this thread a favor and move on to another thread if all you come with is negativity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on July 25, 2016, 12:08:05 AM
Sorry, no magnetic resistive devices on the market. you will have to build it.
Wow! really.
can be made for one light bulb or 1 million light bulbs. sky is the limit.
no need to be sorry, except for question #2.

read patent and repeat.
Ok thanks!
So for the G part do you recomand me to follow the pjkbook?
Ciao!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 25, 2016, 01:41:48 AM
 tests are being done now to determine if part G can be put on a laminated straight block core. this will allow a more simple implementation of part G. especially if transistors are used on the high side in make-before-break set up.

for now i would say "YES'  but be fore warned part G is a bitch to wind in the toroid form because of the thicker wire used.
when Figuera was describing part G's commutator bars he was actually describing the winding's them selves which were "thick" wound over the core.
another good piece of info is part G can be laminated typical toroid but remember the toroid va rating must be more then supplied power to  each of the primaries.
so let's say you had as an example; 500 watts going to your set N (high) and 250 watts to set S (low) then that's 750 watts. i would have part G's core rated at no less than 1250 watts.
it doesn't matter how many watts you feed the primaries because the inductive kick back from the receding electromagets replace the power used every half rotation of part G. as long as that is followed it will be self running.

MM.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 26, 2016, 01:51:55 AM
Your ignorance simply amasses me. there's a wealth of knowledge on the table yet you choose to ignore it and do what do best, run your mouth.
i'm really impressed.
and you wonder why you don't have a working device. so now your on two forums spreading your stupidity, how quaint .
you remind me of Einstein, he to was border line retarded and amounted to nothing,  spouting nonsense.

please do this thread a favor and move on to another thread if all you come with is negativity.
How smart are you in covering your lousy tracks?

You ain't smart at it all.
No I am not spreading negative thought about you. Those words about you are not mine. Are they? No they are not. And till date, youbhave not changed for better.
It took the pruning effort of many members on here before you stop using vulgar words and now left with oudated "evangelical lies".

Oh, can you show us your own personal working device?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 26, 2016, 01:16:01 PM
I don't have to cover my tracks, people make mistakes. it is all about learning from them in which i did and then some. my knowledge of the Figuera device surpasses most everyone on this forum except Doug. why ? because of my desire to succeed and learn.
i freely share what i have learned and if that's a crime then i am guilty as charged.
i would suggest you quite living in the past and get back to your research.

i really doubt your on this forum to learn though, your actions say otherwise. this is probably why no one listens to you because of your ill intentions.
i almost feel sorry for you, NOT!

good day Mr. darediamond
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 27, 2016, 01:45:21 AM
Mr. Darediamond:

I very rarely come and check this site nowadays.

If you are using identical poles as primary NS-NS-SN or N-Y-S as it is claimed with a straight bar in the center the output as I have measured is zero wattage normally. To check when the output can come we tested with a very large magnetic core and we managed to get some output in the secondary but the efficiency was very very low. For the two magnetic fields cancel each other out.

However it is possible to take out significant electricity using identical pole primaries to oppose each other. What happens then is that the magnetic fields will repel each other and move side ways. The closer the two identical poles the greater is the magnetic deflection. You can test this with two permanent magnets. Identical poles will repel each other.

The simple trick is to put a Cross like strucutre in the middle of the Y coil. Then the secondary will have three cores one in X Axis, one in Y Axis and one in Z axis. If you wind coils on the Y axis core and Z axis core and connect them you would have a Lenz Law free output. The Lenz law effect is not present for the magnetic field is deflected or scattered from the primaries and does not go back to the primaries. But putting this up is a little complex and difficult exercise. The secondary must be inside the core dia of the two primaries and must be cross inserted at the middle and windings must be on the cross. In order to increase the magnetic field strength you can use multifilar coils.

If pulsed DC is used the output of many of these secondaries can be combined and as voltage increases in pulsed DC amperage also increases. The primary input would be very negligible and secondary output would be higher. This is one of the two ways the identical pole primaries opposing each other can produce significant output. However the Figuera device does not show this cross in the middle but shows a straight core. Only a NS-NS-NS type of arrangement would work for that geometry.

You can easily test this and report the results yourself. I'm unable to replicate these arrangements as I'm not presently well. Any one on the forum can test this.

I have not tested the specific arrangement that is being promoted by Mr. Marathonman and therefore I cannot say any thing about it. Experimental results always triumph theoretical postulations. We can only learn from such experimental observations.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 27, 2016, 03:44:20 AM
words of wisdom and scientific truth shall set Figuera free.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 27, 2016, 07:58:53 AM
I don't have to cover my tracks, people make mistakes. it is all about learning from them in which i did and then some. my knowledge of the Figuera device surpasses most everyone on this forum except Doug. why ? because of my desire to succeed and learn.
i freely share what i have learned and if that's a crime then i am guilty as charged.
i would suggest you quite living in the past and get back to your research.

i really doubt your on this forum to learn though, your actions say otherwise. this is probably why no one listens to you because of your ill intentions.
i almost feel sorry for you, NOT!8

good day Mr. darediamond
Who needs to be felt sorry for if NOT you Marathon man, the Kite.
You are yet to learn from your childish blunders because you are still stinkingly repeating them.
Ever since you have been on this thread, Never have you shown a live part of your Figuera Gen nor a Machine you build to make it coils or any other parts.
I asked you earlier to show people on here homebuilt part G or in whole your working Figuera Generator but you will only resort to insultive replies.

What the hell is your problem?

What?

I am a Builder. An hardened self-trained one and you as well thouhg arrogant is aware of that. The very First or Second Post I made on this thread which you insulted me about proves myself acclaimed status. I designed tools and machines on my own as well as learning from others. SO LIKE I TOLD YOU SOMETIMES AGO, YOU ARE NOT IN ANYWAY QUALIFIED TO TEACH ME NOR TELL ME TO GO INTO RESEARCH. I am not all knowing mind you because I Dare Diamond is like every other Man is imperfect. However to learn from someone like you requires one eye closed and one eye Vividly opened.

What you are sharing is outdated. The Part G is cumbersome. High Frequency AC from a Pure Sine Wave Inverter is all the Figuera Gen Needs. The Capacitance of The Primaries and the type of Core used would as well determined the Output.

North to North is hogwash because the saying which I is true is "DO NOT KILL THE DIPOLES" So the lezless effect in the center will be high and low as the AC switches one side to North and the other to South and Vince versa at each cycle. So the attraction will be in left at one cycle.and rigth because North is the Husband while South is the Wife to say it in a more simpler manner.

Garry Stanley motor as well uses the same Principle of not killing the Diapole.

Where does your own Odd theory comes from?

Bucking Coil is only useful for the Secondaries which can be wound under each Primaries and still tap the Center too which will then makes the Output secontons 3.

You DO NOT BUCK THE PRIMARIES AND EXPECT ANY USEFULL OUTPUT.

SHOW US YOUR WORKING MODEL THAT SUPPORTS YOUR N to N claim. But I know you will never do that.
Wanna insult me again to keep up with your lies spreading?/
Let's hear you....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 27, 2016, 03:49:26 PM
It's obvious you can not nor will ever be able to think out side the box. no abstract thinking so your Figuera device will never come to fruitation.
just because you can't understand Figueras device doesn't mean other can't.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Seeking4thetruth on July 27, 2016, 04:04:38 PM
Could someone post a completed and updated circuit diagram of the Figuera's device, taking into account all the discoveries already made in this thread, please?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 27, 2016, 07:30:11 PM
Daredummy your as ignorant as they come.

post your stuff and ill post mine.
I haven't seen shit from you either, i wonder why with your warped thinking.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 27, 2016, 08:49:23 PM
Daredummy your as ignorant as they come.

post your stuff and ill post mine.
I haven't seen shit from you either, i wonder why with your warped thinking.
4 hours ago, the spirit of disobedience in you nearly calmed down but you disrupted him and that make him go haywire. See what he is making you do now. Just listen to yourself and have a rethink. Many people have challenged you in the past but you never give any sensible and convincing defense of what you are promoting. But there one thing you always do: keeping to immaturity; acting like a baby.

Marathon The Kite for how long?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on July 28, 2016, 05:32:05 AM
Could someone post a completed and updated circuit diagram of the Figuera's device, taking into account all the discoveries already made in this thread, please?
I hope so too!!!
But as always, the "ego" seem to take over the rest... We are all here for the same goal... But just with not the same knowledge.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 28, 2016, 12:34:43 PM
QUOTE  "I have read everything I could find from Doug1 and from you, a lot of goodies there.
So I followed you from the start to now and I have seen the progress you have made, very good research and nice pictures to explain.
It is very helpful when I try to understand how the Figuera device works.
I felt that I have enough info now to start my self.
I have also read the patents available on line too.

I have seen Darediamonds posts, I really don't know what he is trying to achieve?
Seems like he is trying to confuse things and to make you and doug1 to be pissed and leave the thread.
I guess he want the research to stop, I don't see any other logical explanation."

this is a direct quote from another new person, i get these types of PM's on a daily basis from many, many people. do you ever stop and wonder why ??

people of this forum, there is many ways to wind your primaries, just use common coil winding techniques. as for the part G well it is a magnetic resistor/splitter and needs to be wound according to your primary/secondary ratio and core material.
if you are using a 1-1.6 ratio then i have to take my receding primary down only 1/3 rd of the way to clear the secondary. if you use a 1-1 ratio then you will need to take it down half way to clear the secondary.
get my drift.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on July 28, 2016, 04:33:23 PM
These are a few circuits that I will be testing.

Doug or MM, care to comment?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on July 28, 2016, 08:36:24 PM
QUOTE  "I have read everything I could find from Doug1 and from you, a lot of goodies there.
So I followed you from the start to now and I have seen the progress you have made, very good research and nice pictures to explain.
It is very helpful when I try to understand how the Figuera device works.
I felt that I have enough info now to start my self.
I have also read the patents available on line too.

I have seen Darediamonds posts, I really don't know what he is trying to achieve?
Seems like he is trying to confuse things and to make you and doug1 to be pissed and leave the thread.
I guess he want the research to stop, I don't see any other logical explanation."

this is a direct quote from another new person, i get these types of PM's on a daily basis from many, many people. do you ever stop and wonder why ??

people of this forum, there is many ways to wind your primaries, just use common coil winding techniques. as for the part G well it is a magnetic resistor/splitter and needs to be wound according to your primary/secondary ratio and core material.
if you are using a 1-1.6 ratio then i have to take my receding primary down only 1/3 rd of the way to clear the secondary. if you use a 1-1 ratio then you will need to take it down half way to clear the secondary.
get my drift.

MM
You can come up with whatever to egg yourself on. But then truth is Dough1 is not part of your lies for the second time again here on this page http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-11.html he quoted Renowned  UFO Politics about what the correct polarity is and he was schooled about it.
If show us all  via live clean clear demonstrations how N-N or Same Pole will  produce output then the story will change.
Just do it. Action speaks more than words.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on July 28, 2016, 10:13:00 PM
My understanding of one of Faraday's experiments is that he pushed a bar magnet toward a loop of wire that had a galvanometer attached to the ends of the wire. When he pushed one pole of the magnet toward the wire, the galvanometer deflected in one direction, and when he retracted the magnet the galvanometer deflected in the opposite direction. The magnitude of the deflection was proportional to the rate of change of the flux through the loop.

If he went to the other side of the loop and caused the same pole of the magnet to approached the loop, the deflection of the galvanometer was opposite that of the initial approach deflection. In other words a magnet approaching a loop from the right produces the same deflection as a magnet receding from the left and vice versa.

My further understanding is that in a setup with 1) two bar magnets facing each other separated by a nonmagnetic bar glued between both like pole faces to keep them separated by a fixed distance and 2) a stationary loop with an attached galvanometer is wrapped around the nonmagnetic bar; if the magnets are moved back and forth, the galvanometer will move back and forth with twice the deflection magnitude as that of a single magnet moved at the same rate.

That says to me that Marathon Man is right: that the electric fields produced in a coil by two like poles of electromagnets facing each other when powered by voltages 90 degrees out of phase are additive.

With that in mind, I have attached a set of calculations for a single phase magnetic circuit based on that principle to produce 16KW. It appears that such a unit will fit in an area less than two feet square by a foot high, and weigh about 300 pounds. One of my major concerns is cooling requirements, as it will have losses amounting to about 1500 watts. I don't know how to calculate the temperature rise and would appreciate help in making that determination.

I have used the equations and methods outlined in some books that have been referenced earlier in this forum and are mentioned in the attached document. Because I want to have a proper understanding of the principles involved, I ask that forum members look the document over and point out errors due to improper logic, misunderstanding of principles, or stupidity. When exploring unfamiliar territory, I need all the help I can get. I would appreciate your comments, criticism, and corrections, as I am want all of us to be able to build these devices with defined outputs without having to mess around with trial and error.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 28, 2016, 11:16:11 PM
again, i am amazed i even respond to your continued delirious delusions and miss quotes. look at your post again, you will realize he is talking to Hanon NOT Doug1. DUH!
ufopolitics is wrong also, if you take a north electromagnet up and a south electromagnet down the spin directions are opposing, that means the induced currant will be opposing also. you people never cease to amaze me. the Figuera device can "NOT" nor ever will be a north south electromagnet. this is,  and will always be a scientific fact no matter how hard the bone head try's to make it work it just won't happen.
do you people ever stop to realize why no video has EVER been posted getting high output with N/S set up.
BECAUSE IT WILL NOT WORK ! DUH !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 28, 2016, 11:18:29 PM
MM, you have to learn one very important subject. Do not feed the trolls.

Obviously they just want to argue and spoil the thread for some reason..... I dont care, there is so much garbage already in 250 pages here that is imposible to dig for good designs. All important info is collected is my site, which is a troll-free place.

I am 100% with you, maybe just some discrepancies in the part G which for me is not pure Figuera, but it may work also.

As I always add some technical data, contrary to trolls, here goes some good data to know:

http://overunity.com/14711/is-faradays-induction-law-correct/msg489010/#msg489010 (http://overunity.com/14711/is-faradays-induction-law-correct/msg489010/#msg489010)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 28, 2016, 11:54:32 PM
very well put, and thank you very much.

but i beg to differ on part G though. it is and will all ways be a rotating magnetic resistor that stores the kick back from the receding electromagnet being pushed out of the secondary. no one on this forum can change that, not myself, Doug1 or Figuera himself  if he was alive.
it can be made non moving also but the function will never change no matter how hard one tries.

PS. i don't follow Feynman because i think he's full of shit but Hooper, now your talking. he proved the validity of the Figuera device 70 years later.

Sam6;

Wow ! where do i start. your heat and copper losses are way off.  there is no air gap.  your amper turns for the primaries are not even in the ball park. that many turns has way to much induction to respond adequately in time.   the total weight of the devise is about twice of what you need.

i have a 20k output planned and it weighs 135 lbs  plus wire.
you have to realize those equations are for a standard mega loss generator and some do not apply here and others not so severe.

i do applaud you efforts though, it's good to see someone using their brain.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 29, 2016, 01:46:46 AM
Cadman, sorry i almost forgot about you.

the two top circuits will not work as they will block the inductive kickback from the receding electromagnet from reaching part G. nothing can be between the primaries and part G on the low side or self running will never take place.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gmolina on July 29, 2016, 06:42:11 AM
Figuera principle, animation of magnetic field behavior.

GM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on July 29, 2016, 03:06:08 PM
Thank you MM.

I suspected the top two circuits were no good based on what you said earlier about the inductive kickback, but I wasn't sure.

So the bottom two circuits are viable.

I am aware that the diode bridge may not be a good means of rectification for this, but I want to try it anyway. I am referring to the Tesla patent for rectification that Doug spoke about. I hope that is not necessary.

So, judging from your reply to Sam6, heavier wire for the inductors, fewer turns, more amps, low inductance for rapid field response, no air gaps, more than two inductors to get the combined high output wattage.

That's a lot of information. Thank you very much!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gmolina on July 29, 2016, 03:45:17 PM
My understanding of one of Faraday's experiments is that he pushed a bar magnet toward a loop of wire that had a galvanometer attached to the ends of the wire. When he pushed one pole of the magnet toward the wire, the galvanometer deflected in one direction, and when he retracted the magnet the galvanometer deflected in the opposite direction. The magnitude of the deflection was proportional to the rate of change of the flux through the loop.

If he went to the other side of the loop and caused the same pole of the magnet to approached the loop, the deflection of the galvanometer was opposite that of the initial approach deflection. In other words a magnet approaching a loop from the right produces the same deflection as a magnet receding from the left and vice versa.

My further understanding is that in a setup with 1) two bar magnets facing each other separated by a nonmagnetic bar glued between both like pole faces to keep them separated by a fixed distance and 2) a stationary loop with an attached galvanometer is wrapped around the nonmagnetic bar; if the magnets are moved back and forth, the galvanometer will move back and forth with twice the deflection magnitude as that of a single magnet moved at the same rate.

That says to me that Marathon Man is right: that the electric fields produced in a coil by two like poles of electromagnets facing each other when powered by voltages 90 degrees out of phase are additive.

With that in mind, I have attached a set of calculations for a single phase magnetic circuit based on that principle to produce 16KW. It appears that such a unit will fit in an area less than two feet square by a foot high, and weigh about 300 pounds. One of my major concerns is cooling requirements, as it will have losses amounting to about 1500 watts. I don't know how to calculate the temperature rise and would appreciate help in making that determination.

I have used the equations and methods outlined in some books that have been referenced earlier in this forum and are mentioned in the attached document. Because I want to have a proper understanding of the principles involved, I ask that forum members look the document over and point out errors due to improper logic, misunderstanding of principles, or stupidity. When exploring unfamiliar territory, I need all the help I can get. I would appreciate your comments, criticism, and corrections, as I am want all of us to be able to build these devices with defined outputs without having to mess around with trial and error.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam

Hi, please consider that Figuera is a DC device, can recalculate with the signals proposed in figure attached.

GM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on July 29, 2016, 08:57:40 PM
Marathon Man
Thanks for your comments. Since I seem to be suffering from an advanced case of optical recticosis, I would appreciate you sharing how you make the calculations for for your 20 KW unit so I can learn the correct method.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 29, 2016, 09:12:03 PM
Just so people know, when i am referring to the inductive kick back i am referring to when the receding electromagnet is shoved out of the secondary core into it's own core. when this happens the magnetic field at high pressure is converted in currant being pushed out the back of the coil into part G to be stored in the form of a magnetic field,  thus allowing the device to be self running.

there is no bemf involved in the Figuera device "EVER". if there is,  your timing apparatus is incorrect and induction will cease.
diodes block, Tesla's rectification does not, this is a good thing.

Sam6; i will pm you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Seeking4thetruth on July 30, 2016, 12:07:07 AM
Very sad that no one in this thread is able to upload a whole circuit diagram of the device (not the 1908's one, but a modern drawning of the device). We are not even asking you to spend millions of dollars and hundreds of hours of time in building the device by yourself, but a simple and modern circuit diagram (using in MS Paint, it should take few time to sketch out).

We are not even asking for photos, or videos, or audio files. Just a modern circuit diagram of the Figuera device. Period.

Meanwhile, during the two hundreds and a half pages of the thread, some circuits diagrams have been upload, but from certain parts of the device and not the device itself. How is anyone supposed to build by himself nothing if there is not even a full diagram of the device yet? I checked Hanon's webpage as well, and there wasn't one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on July 30, 2016, 02:00:08 AM
@seeking4thetruth

I have earlier posted pictures of coils I worked with.

It is easy to reach Cop> 1 in Figuera. I have not built a self runner.

I believe there are 4 to 6 members in the forum who have built self runners but they will not admit  it.

I have done various experiments and I have checked the patent databases. The 1902 and 1908 patents are substantially misleading though proper design has been deciphered by many who do not bother to post. I do not think the documents online show real devices of Figuera. However if we see how magnets behave then we can find out. This has been done.

No one learns swimming by reading how to swim?..

You must jump in to the water to learn to swim. There is a lot of information and misinformation in these 250 plus pages and you need to experiment and learn.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 30, 2016, 02:21:13 PM
mm and sam
  If the frequency is fixed or needs to be fixed then the strength of the field is the only other variable to the output. Regulation of the input is where your getting lost. You already know enough to work it out you just lack the self confidence or the method to keep your thoughts in place. Make a dynamic paper model of part G place it fixed on a dry erase board so you can do the calculations on the board as the contact sweeps through it's motion accounting for every action and counter action in reference to time. There is no point in cheating or taking short cuts.You cant cheat yourself and have it work out.If when your done you can conceive of some modern equivalent substitute then good for you. There is a artistic value to the original design that you will miss out on. I guess some people are more about getting rich writing books about getting rich from writing books about how to become rich while others just enjoy the act of useful work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 30, 2016, 02:49:13 PM
This is my circuit i am presently working with if you must know.
drawn for simplicity and understanding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 31, 2016, 01:32:44 AM
I have just read that Utkin has ordered to remove his documents from Patrick Kelly ebook. Chapter 22 was the key for many OU devices as Figuera generator and many others: two magnetic fields in repulsion being moved or distorted. In order to keep this info online I post here a copy of the files from chapter 22, the pdf file of that chapter and some sketches
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on July 31, 2016, 04:46:42 AM
This is my circuit i am presently working with if you must know.
drawn for simplicity and understanding.
Thank you!
Do it show a "Split/gap" on the core?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 31, 2016, 08:42:11 AM
Split but no gaps. if you have to cut the core secure it with 4 pieces of flat bar on either side of cut, top and bottom then secure with flat head bolts. make your cut, then take some resin and reattach. when dry it would be good with a layer or two of glass cloth and resin so it doesn't fly apart from the pressure and hurt some one. then make your bobbins (from experience).

ps. Hanon,  it sounds like Utkin has his device stuck where the sun don't shine. doesn't bother me a bit because i never followed him anyways. i have dedicated my life to Figuera.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on July 31, 2016, 01:53:59 PM
An interesting reading about scalarbeamer and its polarity:

http://www.gocs1.com/gocs1/Psionics/SCALARBEAMER.htm (http://www.gocs1.com/gocs1/Psionics/SCALARBEAMER.htm)

Gennady Nikolaev : "...in the space where the the total vectorial magnetic field of two magnets is equal to zero, the total value of scalar magnetic field of two magnets is  maximal."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on July 31, 2016, 05:15:21 PM
Hannon

 The condition to two fields in respect to time and strength are why it is zero. Two objects exerting the same amount of pressure on each other cancel out in the middle while the force if the two subjects are elastic will expand in the only direction left which is out in the direction where no force is applied. Thats not what is happening in the generator exclusively the force is not equal in respect to time or strength except at the minimal level to do away with the additional time to build up sufficiently at the rate of speed required. Reversal takes time and magnetic friction generates heat none of which are useful except to cook food or heat water.

 I feel for Vlad he should have chosen a better venue.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Seeking4thetruth on July 31, 2016, 05:38:35 PM
This is my circuit i am presently working with if you must know.
drawn for simplicity and understanding.

Thanks for the diagram, MM.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 31, 2016, 08:46:31 PM
Hannon

 The condition to two fields in respect to time and strength are why it is zero. Two objects exerting the same amount of pressure on each other cancel out in the middle while the force if the two subjects are elastic will expand in the only direction left which is out in the direction where no force is applied. Thats not what is happening in the generator exclusively,  the force is not equal in respect to time or strength except at the minimal level to do away with the additional time to build up sufficiently at the rate of speed required. Reversal takes time and magnetic friction generates heat none of which are useful except to cook food or heat water.

 I feel for Vlad he should have chosen a better venue.

But at that minimal level, allowing each electromagnet to retain relatively high magnetic field strength without sacrificing efficiency that is normally associated with AC.
it is maintained across the entire space occupied by the secondary allowing the E field to be expanded and doubled in strength.


S4T; you r welcome.

the pic below is what i am talking about when taking precautions when cutting laminated cores.
MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 31, 2016, 09:30:12 PM
Sorry to be off subject.

Hanon; the link to Bendini is exactly as was this device used for communication purposes.

pic below.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 01, 2016, 02:21:38 PM
Back on topic lol
I can only conclude based on the amount of info available people do not know or understand the difference between a transformer and a generator. Until you do you will only be able to make transformers.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on August 01, 2016, 05:55:48 PM
doug1:  can only conclude based on the amount of info available people do not know or understand the difference between a transformer and a generator. Until you do you will only be able to make transformers
 Sólo puedo concluir en base a la cantidad de información personal disponible no conocen o no entienden la diferencia entre un transformador y un generador. Hasta que lo haga sólo será capaz de hacer los transformadores

!!!!!!!!OK!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 01, 2016, 08:15:49 PM
OH WOW ! that really helped a lot.
so now we need an interpreter.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on August 01, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
Transformador = Transforma; Transformer  =Transforms

Generador = Genera; Generator = Generates
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 01, 2016, 08:56:26 PM
transformer  -> saturable reactor
generator -> current amplifier
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 02, 2016, 03:33:34 PM
I don't know about anyone else but this is how I see it.

Transformer: Motionless induction. Induced emf from a magnetic flux of varying strength. Flux linking.

Generator: Motional emf. Induced emf from a magnetic flux of constant strength. Flux cutting, number lines of flux traversed per conductor in unit time, or number of conductors traversed by unit flux in unit time.

Added: To me the big difference between a Figuera generator and a transformer is the flux intensity.  Figuera intensity = 1, trafo intensity = 1÷2
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 02, 2016, 07:55:40 PM
A transformer is 1/2 quadrature with flux linking according to dogma's wrong assumption.

A generator is full quadrature with flux cutting according to dogma's wrong assumption.

what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. ?
i'd rather have a cold beer anyways,  since i can't smoke a joint till i retire because of Corporate America.. Booyah !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 03, 2016, 05:53:34 AM
Hi guys
Can someone point me to some clear post about the construction of the ´g' part...?
I have build the one in pjkbook (nicelly explain) but i wonder if ther are better way to do it..?
Thanks for the help!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 03, 2016, 09:26:23 PM
again, i am amazed i even respond to your continued delirious delusions and miss quotes. look at your post again, you will realize he is talking to Hanon NOT Doug1. DUH!
ufopolitics is wrong also, if you take a north electromagnet up and a south electromagnet down the spin directions are opposing, that means the induced currant will be opposing also. you people never cease to amaze me. the Figuera device can "NOT" nor ever will be a north south electromagnet. this is,  and will always be a scientific fact no matter how hard the bone head try's to make it work it just won't happen.
do you people ever stop to realize why no video has EVER been posted getting high output with N/S set up.
BECAUSE IT WILL NOT WORK ! DUH !
Marathonman, words and vocabularies can he easily be easily developed and expressed. You know why? Talk is CHEAP.

I challenge you now at this hour onward to solidify your Theory with a Solid Video Demonstrational Presentation to nullify what Patrick Kelly recorded about Ramaswami Transformer in the Popular Book His.

Ramaswami gave it PRACTICALLY with N-S-N-S  but you at giving I theoretically with N-N. You earn no respect with that Man.

Make 2 separate Partnered Input Coils with one secondary and connect them in Rama way band Marat way and shows us all at one take which one produces output  and which one failed.

Enough of those meaningless theory oriented diagrams.

Willbyou ever do for this?

I doubt it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 03, 2016, 09:27:44 PM
again, i am amazed i even respond to your continued delirious delusions and miss quotes. look at your post again, you will realize he is talking to Hanon NOT Doug1. DUH!
ufopolitics is wrong also, if you take a north electromagnet up and a south electromagnet down the spin directions are opposing, that means the induced currant will be opposing also. you people never cease to amaze me. the Figuera device can "NOT" nor ever will be a north south electromagnet. this is,  and will always be a scientific fact no matter how hard the bone head try's to make it work it just won't happen.
do you people ever stop to realize why no video has EVER been posted getting high output with N/S set up.
BECAUSE IT WILL NOT WORK ! DUH !
Marathonman, words and vocabularies can he easily be easily developed and expressed. You know why? Talk is CHEAP.

I challenge you now at this hour onward to solidify your Theory with a Solid Video Demonstrational Presentation to nullify what Patrick Kelly recorded about Ramaswami Transformer in the Popular Book His.

Ramaswami gave it PRACTICALLY with N-S-N-S  but you at giving I theoretically with N-N. You earn no respect with that Man.

Make 2 separate Partnered Input Coils with one secondary and connect them in Rama way band Marat way and shows us all at one take which one produces output  and which one failed.

Enough of those meaningless theory oriented diagrams.

Willbyou ever do for this?

I doubt it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: guest1289 on August 04, 2016, 12:43:27 AM
Is it possible that running an Electric-Motor Enabled The Figuera-Device To Be Self-Running ?
(  referring to either,  the electric-motor that was part of the Figuera-Device,  and/or,  to the electric-motor  which was not part of the Figuera-Device,  but which he ran using the Figuera-Device  )
  -  Could it be that when the  Figuera-Device  ran an   electric-motor,  that the   electric-motor  was what enabled the device to be a Self-Running-Device( without any power being inputted from outside the Figuera-Device and electric-motor ),   SINCE  electric-motors are also electric-generators,  and electric-motors take a while to stop moving,  when their input-power is turned off  ?
 
  (  What about when it just ran an incandescent-light-bulb,  was the device still self-running then.

     THE FOLLOWING IS A  STUPID : If the device was still self-running when it just ran an incandescent-light-bulb,  could it be that when you turn of an incandescent-light-bulb( you'll notice it takes some time for the heated-element to fade ),  that that Cooling-Down-Process of the heated-element itself, actually generates a tiny bit of current after the input-power to the globe has been turned off.
        Of course,  you could easily test this.    )
____________
   Different Subject
   - Could A Device Be Made,  That Would Output A Bigger Electromagnetic-Field Than The Electromagnetic-Field Inputted Into The Device  ?
      What about instead of measuring  the electrical-input of the device,  and it's electrical-output,   you measured it's input electromagnetic-field inputted into the device,  and the electromagnetic-field outputted from the device.
     Yes I Know,    that the electrical-input should be the exact equivalent of the  electromagnetic-field inputted,   but what if there is some sort of  anomaly occurring,  maybe due to different materials used in one part of the device, to that of another .
____________

   I can't contribute anything to this thread,  so I won't make any more posts here,  instead I will start a thread called "An Electric-Motor Turning An Electric-Generator Which Powers The Same Electric-Motor ?" ,  which does actually relate to the Figuera-device
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 04, 2016, 03:19:59 AM
well then can you take the two idiots DD and RSM with you.

if any Mother Fucker doesn't think my research isn't sound well i guess you need to take your getto ass to a physics web site and try to learn to read.

every fucking thing i posted in the last 9 months can be verified unless your a getto nigga named darediamond that has Rswami up his fucking ass. both of you are complete fucking IDIOTS. trying to turn a transformer into a fucking generator. STUPIDITY AT IT'S FINEST !

if you people of this forum believe this totally deranged psycopath moron,  then there is no hope for this thread.
so stick it up your getto nigga ass dareasshole you fucking piece of shit.

ps my black mechanic friend down the street gave you that nickname getto nigga. he thinks your an idiot piece of crap to. imagine that !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 04, 2016, 05:24:36 AM
well then can you take the two idiots DD and RSM with you.

if any Mother Fucker doesn't think my research isn't sound well i guess you need to take your getto ass to a physics web site and try to learn to read.

every fucking thing i posted in the last 9 months can be verified unless your a getto nigga named darediamond that has Rswami up his fucking ass. both of you are complete fucking IDIOTS. trying to turn a transformer into a fucking generator. STUPIDITY AT IT'S FINEST !

if you people of this forum believe this totally deranged psycopath moron,  then there is no hope for this thread.
so stick it up your getto nigga ass dareasshole you fucking piece of shit.

ps my black mechanic friend down the street gave you that nickname getto nigga. he thinks your an idiot piece of crap to. imagine that !
See your life?

Just a simple challenge. you go crazy!

Empty Barrel.
Well, you can Cry Me A.River, A N I M A L!!

I will always say it, you are not good enough as an agent of disinformation running multiple accounts to misled people.

Arrant Nonsensical Marathonman The Kite.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 04, 2016, 05:54:32 AM
Everybody, please view the reply The Popular Chris Sykes gave to Hanon on the same Bucking Primary which Marathonman is promoting here at : http://overunity.com/15395/partnered-output-coils-free-energy/30/

I am after success of everybody around the world to successfully build the Figuera Genertor easily in a more simpler and yet advance way. But you need to understand that you cannot kill the DIAPOLE and have your way forward.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 04, 2016, 06:38:13 AM
The Figuera Generator works on Power Of Com inuos reverse Addition not Repulsion.

Lenz is negated and output is constantly generated.

How?

The Primaries are wound in such a way that when they are connection d to power source, they generated N and South Pole in one cycle and South and North Pole in another Cycle. Thus this creates central  high and low oscillation because magnetic field of the South always flows to the North. So when Primary A on my he Left hand side generated North at one cycle and primary B generated S , attraction will be towards the Left. But when Primary B on the rigth h and side on the  second cycle generated North while Primary A generated South, Attraction will be towards the Rigth hand side.
This was what Alternate Current does. But being that Figuera lacks that during his time, he used a Make before Commutator to achieve this.

The Part G as a whole is an Alternate Current Generator which gives no way for back EMF just like in present day AC.

But do we still need to go that cumbersome lane? NO.

Why?

We now have super efficient means of turning DC into AC without Moving a Needle.

You can now build High Frequency Pure Sine Inverter to power any properly  wound Figuera Generator.

And this further allow single Unit to generate Tremendous Power as you can now EASILY INCREASE THE FREQUENCYBOF THE PRIMARIES TO LOWER THER INPUT OR RUNNING CURRENT TO INCREASE THE CENTRAL OR SECONDARY OUTPUT POWER. JUST MAKE SURE YOU USE FERITE CORE OR MOULDED CORE TO MAKE YOUR UNIT AS THAT CAN WITHSTAND ENOMOUSE OR CRAZY SWITCHING SPEED AS HIGH AS 1MH AND ABOVE.

DO not let anyone fool you with bucking primaries, it will Never work just like Mr. Ramaswami and The Man Of Lenzless Output Partner Coils Mr. Chris Sykes answered Hanon.

The IC AND MOSFET in Inverter is a far Better Alternative to that Cumbersome Part G because youbwill not need more Copper Wire to increase resistance in order to operations at same voltage to keep the input current down. No, you will not. All you will need do is to increase the output frequency of the oscillator in your inverter using a Potentiometer placed at the appropriate pin leg of the IC.

Make sure the transformer in your inverter is made with Moulded core too so as to tolerate High Frequency.

You can not buck the primaries and generate useful output in Figuera generator. But you must Buck the secondaries. That is the secret alteration done to Figuera Patent.

To buck the Secondaries, you must follow Chris Sykes Idea of Partnered Output Coils or Gary Stanley Ant-lenze Idea.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 04, 2016, 07:33:25 AM
Hi Hanon,

I appreciate all your work in translating the patents. From your site I offer a mechanical emulation of the field movement you portray, this is made with cylinder magnets, not ring magnets.
I like your concept for the g part!!!
Good idea. Have you try it??
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 04, 2016, 08:37:09 AM
Can you build variable frequency pure sinewave inverter ?  :-( it's not that easy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 04, 2016, 04:34:18 PM
Can you build variable frequency pure sinewave inverter ?  :-( it's not that easy.
Forest, the world is a global village. Simply go on to www.Fiverr.com to contract the build of a variable frequency pure sine wave inverter to an electronic Engineer on that site.

You simply go onto www.Aliexpress.com and buybtye components from one single Single Seller on the website and getbitbshipped to your outsourced be left tonic Engineer on www.Fiverr.com

One the E.E person receives the components from China and completes the job, he or she will then later ship the completed Job to you at wherever you are in the world.

You begin this process by postinhba Job or Offer on fiverr .com

You can even limit region of applicants so as to make things easier and faster.


To make an Inverter Variable Frequency, justvput an Adjustable Resistor on the output frequency leg of the IC on the board of the Oscillator Circuit simple.

The attached circuit produces pure sine wave.
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on August 05, 2016, 12:17:09 AM
Marathon Man
 #3811 on: July 28, 2016, 11:54:32 PM » You said you would PM me regarding methods you use for your 20KW unit. Great! How do you go about that? Unless you have some other method you can use my email...  briceelectric@yahoo.com.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 05, 2016, 07:05:11 AM
I'm disappointed to see the abusive language of Mr. Marathonman.

I have tested the geometrical pattern of the electromagnetic core with identical poles opposing each other and connected through a straight bar. Zero wattage. The Part G is a current interrupter which makes the current supplied interrupted current or pulsed DC input.

Significant output comes only if the poles are NS-NS-NS in a straight core as shown by Figuera.

I'm in the midst of handling a few Litigations and few more upcoming ones. I however will try to arrange for a video of the coils and show how the  polarity works in a straight core. Once the video is posted showing NS-NS-NS works and NS-NS-SN does not work, the argument and the abusive language must end.

If was not difficult to make videos earlier but we did not know what would be the effect on the cameras as the electromagnets we used are large.

If I have learned one thing it is this.. Magnets have their own way of action and we need to understand that to make electricity from them. If we do not go along with them, nothing can be done. To learn that we need to do a lot of experiments as the disclosure on magnets are very basic.

Actually there are only two principles to be understood. If opposite poles are facing each other, if the Magnetic field moves horizontally the electrical field moves perpendicular to the magnetic field but the magnetic field moves in an orderly way. Here the force is attractive between the opposite poles.

When Identical poles are facing each other the magnetic waves are dissipated in all directions as the force is repulsive. In this situation the best mode of taking the output is to create at least four coils which are perpendicular to the magnet in the middle of the identical poles and each arranged perpendicular to them. Then the magnetic field moves through the + shaped core as that is the easiest path. This is not shown in the patent of Figuera filed in 1908. Therefore the polarity is simply NS-NS-NS

I think a picture speaks 1000 times more powerfully than words. A video would speak a million times more powerfully than words. Please give me some time and I will have this organized.

Regards,

Ramaswami

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 05, 2016, 05:38:57 PM
Ramaswami,

Part G is a splitter of current. Says so right in the patents.

Quote
I have tested the geometrical pattern of the electromagnetic core with identical poles opposing each other and connected through a straight bar. Zero wattage.

Then please explain this https://vimeo.com/155371838

which is found here on Hanon's page https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/

As you said "A video would speak a million times more powerfully than words."

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 05, 2016, 06:18:32 PM
The problem with Ramaswami and Darediamond is because they are just using pulsed DC or AC to feed the generator. They did not have ever used the two signals created in the commutator properly built. Therefore they just have results with North-South polarity. With North-North they have null results with pulsed DC or AC as expected because they are not moving the fields. North-North requires the use the comutator described in the 1908 patent. Period.

I do not know how Ramaswami says that North-North, or South-South, does not work if he have never built the commutator as the patent describes. And he just repeat and repeat that the commutator is just to pulse the current. This is totally false. Also are false some statements done by Darediamond some days before telling that the commutator may be sustituted by a sine wave inverter. False. Please study the commutator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 05, 2016, 07:50:57 PM
Mr. Cadmon

The video in vimeo link you gave moves an iron core.

The Figuera patents are about not moving the core.

2. I am not talking about voltage. But wattage or Voltage and Current to be produced.

3. The only video of working rotary device described in the patent in this thread so far is one posted by me many months back. Even at very low frequency I could not get it to work. But it was able to swith on and switch off an incandescent lamp. It produced a lot of sparks even at 15 Hz and the carbon brushes were wasted quite fast.

Figuera himself says the Part G can be replaced by a switch.

4. The animation does not show the geometry of the device shown in 1908 nor 1902 patents. It shows a different geometry and is a simple animation.

My videos will show real cores producing current and voltage and also lighting lamps. Motionless iron cores. They will not be self runners though.

No more theroretical pep talks. Only videos of workung devices that are able to power lamps at the least. I can probably show you 8000 watts to be powered.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 05, 2016, 08:19:50 PM
OK Mr. Ramaswami.

I think you are missing the point in the video but I have no desire to argue with you or anyone else here. Life is too short.

To anyone who watches that video and only sees a moving core, please look more carefully at the setup and see everything else that is there. Is the flux balanced from one end to the other? You should be able to imagine how the flux will be arranged in the two setups. The strength of the magnets does not change. Their polarity is not alternating back and forth. The method of actuation is the same. The coil is the same.

So what must be the cause of one induced emf being higher than the other? The video relates to the Figuera generator. How?

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 05, 2016, 08:50:09 PM
OK Mr. Ramaswami.

I think you are missing the point in the video but I have no desire to argue with you or anyone else here. Life is too short.

To anyone who watches that video and only sees a moving core, please look more carefully at the setup and see everything else that is there. Is the flux balanced from one end to the other? You should be able to imagine how the flux will be arranged in the two setups. The strength of the magnets does not change. Their polarity is not alternating back and forth. The method of actuation is the same. The coil is the same.

So what must be the cause of one induced emf being higher than the other? The video relates to the Figuera generator. How?

CM

Mr. Cadman..

Science is not about imaginig things. It is about making experiments observing experimental results and then moving step by step to increase your understanding and create a working prototype and then a saleable product.

What prevented Mr. Hanon or you or Mr. Marathonman or Mr. Doug from making working devices and posting pictures or videos online so whether there is any current or not could have been verified using a motionless core.

No animations no imaginations no assumptions please. Videos of devices that work in the presence of reputable witnesses please.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 05, 2016, 09:16:14 PM
Mr. Ramaswami,

Can't disagree with that. Except the imagining things part. If you have no imagination you will never conceive any working invention. And if a person is closed minded and not willing to entertain new ideas, well, that's their loss.

I never posted a video because the one I made with a N-S configuration wasn't any better than a regular generator. Like yours, it wasn't a self-runner. When I get the new one finished I'll be happy to post a video.

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 05, 2016, 10:04:48 PM
Mr. Ramaswami,

Can't disagree with that. Except the imagining things part. If you have no imagination you will never conceive any working invention. And if a person is closed minded and not willing to entertain new ideas, well, that's their loss.

I never posted a video because the one I made with a N-S configuration wasn't any better than a regular generator. Like yours, it wasn't a self-runner. When I get the new one finished I'll be happy to post a video.

CM

Mr. Cadman..

Thank you for stating that you verified NSNSNS configuration and it is not better than a generator.


English is not my first language and I may be wrong.

Imaging means accepting things that do not exist to be true.

Creative thought process on the other hand is what you appear to mean by imagination. It involves coming up with ideas and then making calculations and projections and finally verifying it with experiments. If the results are different from the one projected either the idea is wrong or the projection is wrong or materials used are not suitable to implement the idea.

This is the investigative process of verifying everything and only when results obtained by one person can be replicated by another independent team the idea and the projections can be treated as valid.

If you are referring to this creative thought process and the investigative validation process as imagination I am not short of it.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 05, 2016, 11:49:41 PM
Mr .Ramaswami,

I believe English as a second language is the cause of many a dispute on these forums. English is weird, with much meaning derived from context.

I only verified that I could not get OU with a N-S device, but someone else may be able to. I think the N-N setup has more potential, and I will see if I'm right. This N-N device of mine does not exist yet, it's imaginary.

Yes, imagination, the creative thought process. To look at a core with magnets on the ends and to see in my minds eye the shape of the concentrated flux of the N-N opposition. To imagine that area of high flux, never decreasing in intensity or polarity, moving back and forth through another coil and inducing an emf at all times. Then imagining a N-S configuration with the flux of each inductor combining into one field, then the center of that field, at the bloch wall where the flux is the weakest, moving back and forth through another coil and inducing an emf.

I have a folder with all of your build info saved in it as well as the pdfs of P. Kelly. No disrespect but I think your device is an AC transformer, a very imaginative and clever transformer but not Figuera's generator.

Regards to you,
CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 06, 2016, 12:17:55 AM
Thank you very much Mr. Cadman ...one of the rarest times I received compliments here..

The reason why you did not get cop>1 is very simple. The phase and frequency of both the primary coils must match  or otherwise we have the sum of separately measured voltages in secondary coils to be high but when we connect them all together the combined voltage is less than the sum of the voltages of secondary coils. The problem is solvable May be easily but I need to investigate verify and independently have it replicated and only then I can post an update.

And I have not disclosed all to be honest.

A self runner I believe is possible but Patrick indicated that it result in lightening strikes and so I did not do it.

Most of the theories stated here are well imaginative thoughts.

You are correct on NN being Lenz law free. But to do that you just need to apply your mind and experiment.

The 1902 patents are NN. You may try that to get NN to work.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 06, 2016, 01:20:26 AM

You are correct on NN being Lenz law free. But to do that you just need to apply your mind and experiment.

The 1902 patents are NN. You may try that to get NN to work.

Regards

Ramaswami

Am I reading fine? Is this bipolarity? Or just to create confusion? Now you have changed your argumentation. Two hours ago  NS polarity was your design.

I can only conclude that you want to create a mess to your followers. Good luck.

Quote

Figuera himself says the Part G can be replaced by a switch.


False.  Please copy the exact quote where that is stated, if you can find it.  I just want want the quote, not anymore
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 06, 2016, 01:37:45 AM
Mr .Ramaswami,

I believe English as a second language is the cause of many a dispute on these forums. English is weird, with much meaning derived from context.

I only verified that I could not get OU with a N-S device, but someone else may be able to. I think the N-N setup has more potential, and I will see if I'm right. This N-N device of mine does not exist yet, it's imaginary.

Yes, imagination, the creative thought process. To look at a core with magnets on the ends and to see in my minds eye the shape of the concentrated flux of the N-N opposition. To imagine that area of high flux, never decreasing in intensity or polarity, moving back and forth through another coil and inducing an emf at all times. Then imagining a N-S configuration with the flux of each inductor combining into one field, then the center of that field, at the bloch wall where the flux is the weakest, moving back and forth through another coil and inducing an emf.

I have a folder with all of your build info saved in it as well as the pdfs of P. Kelly. No disrespect but I think your device is an AC transformer, a very imaginative and clever transformer but not Figuera's generator.

Regards to you,
CM

Mr. Cadman

I am afraid some of your statements are not correct to my limited observational knowledge.

 Magnets have to oscillate or increase and decrease in strength to produce time varying magnetic field strength. Electricity is induced in a conductor subjected to time varying magnetic field strength is the observed law of induction. Intensity has to increase and decrease and higher the rate of change or higher the frequency higher is the induced emf in the secondary as per ohms law. Polarity need not change for NN type of devices to operate. Your statements are contrary to these principles.

Similarly regarding NS also your statements do not match my observations.

Regarding the Ramaswami device It is improved version of Figuera

Many here are constrained by theoretical knowledge and not mastering that as well. I learned from observations and had to do nearly 200 experiments and had to fail to learn step by step.

The 1908 patent hides a key component and 1902 patent where The poles are identical poles are edited as opposite poles. If you are particular about NN configuration please try them. Both 1902 patents are NN only.

Regards

Ramaswami



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 06, 2016, 05:15:17 AM
Hanon, Doug and MM.
I have dismantle some selenoid for replicate this project....
The primary black 24/12 vdc are 83 ohm and the output yellow are 2,6 ohm.

Im now working on the "famous" g part...
Since no one want to share clear "diy" description of it,i will follow what is in the pjkbook... :(

Im all ears open for some advice...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 06, 2016, 01:40:10 PM
Westi

 Resize your picture please, it is 3,264px × 2,448px any photo editor program should be able
to shrink it down.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 06, 2016, 02:09:09 PM
Hanon:

As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted.

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258\

I think this is your translation..

Can you tell me what is the meaning of the coded words..There is a lot of significance there. You have not looked at it. Just translated it without caring to verify by experiments and understand its signifcance. Bookish knowledge or quoting other peoples articles or patents cannot give you working knowledge. Practical hands on experimentation, observation and understanding is required.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 06, 2016, 04:10:57 PM
Westi

 Resize your picture please, it is 3,264px × 2,448px any photo editor program should be able
to shrink it down.

Ok it is resize.
Sorry for that!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 06, 2016, 05:00:17 PM
Continuous = Direct Current. That sentence is just about rectifying the generator AC output to converted into DC current, if wanted/required.

I am still wating for the quote where Figuera ( supposedly according to your post)  said that part G can be replaced by a switch as you stated before. Please quote it literraly. This is a proof in order that your followers may decide about the credibility of your statements. You wont find that quote because it does not exist. But you wont take any care because your aim to creare confusion is achived anyway

If the Ramaswami transformer is an improved design of the Figuera generator, as you stated,  go and create a new thread about it. Please. Do it and leave the rest of us to replicate the original design.

Wistiti, I think your primaries have a huge resistance, 83 ohms. With 24 V you will just get around 0.3 A and your magnetic field will be too weak. I prefer designs based on high amperes to get a strong magnetic field. I add two links to homemade electromagnets with microwave oven transformers using around 13 A to lift arounf 100 Kg. Note that those electromagnets have a closed magnetic path, while in Figuera they have open magnetic circuits and then their strength will be much smaller that those examples

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHcII2sIVdg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHcII2sIVdg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpSHTvzoZII (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpSHTvzoZII)

A couple of links to calculate the strength of an electromagnet. Note that closed circuits use distance of 0.1 cm or much shorter as air distance between the elecfromagnet core and the metal lifted from one pole to the other. Open circuits use a distance along air of several centimeters, decreasing a lot its strength. The distance is named in those equations as "g"

http://www.daycounter.com/Calculators/Magnets/Solenoid-Force-Calculator.phtml (http://www.daycounter.com/Calculators/Magnets/Solenoid-Force-Calculator.phtml)

https://www.easycalculation.com/engineering/electrical/solenoid-force.php (https://www.easycalculation.com/engineering/electrical/solenoid-force.php)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 06, 2016, 05:26:21 PM
Thank you Hannon for your reply!
I will learn with this configuration first (it is the only coil i curently have Under hand...) But i understand what you say about the magnetic intensity of the "primary". I may look for much ticker wire, maybe the primary of a MOT will do it right...

Have you any advice on the output section and the "G" part?

Thanks again for your help!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2016, 10:45:59 PM
Quote; "If the Ramaswami transformer is an improved design of the Figuera generator, as you stated,  go and create a new thread about it. Please. Do it and leave the rest of us to replicate the original design".

I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY !

take your TRANSFORMER not (GENERATOR) to another thread. mater of fact i thought you did that already. what happened nobody cared for your bull shit lies so you came squirming back to totally screw this thread up. your dream of your device being an improved  design is a complete fallacy created in your own mind that NO ONE CARES TO PARTICIPATE IN. yet your ignorant to see this fact that is right in front of your FACE.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2016, 11:05:41 PM
wistiti ;

your primaries should be the lowest ohm's possible. part G controls the currant allowed through the primaries not the other way around.
this calc tool is easier to use, no mm squared to deal with.

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/electromagnetism/solenoid

and a vary ignorant comment about myself having more than account. well all i can do is to tell the accuser to contact the owner or site maintainer  and check my web address assigned to my account and check for other registered accounts. thus you will see you are blowing smoke up every ones ass and wasting every ones time polluting this website with your bull shit comments and suggestions .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 07, 2016, 12:22:56 AM
OK Mr. Ramaswami.

I think you are missing the point in the video but I have no desire to argue with you or anyone else here. Life is too short.

To anyone who watches that video and only sees a moving core, please look more carefully at the setup and see everything else that is there. Is the flux balanced from one end to the other? You should be able to imagine how the flux will be arranged in the two setups. The strength of the magnets does not change. Their polarity is not alternating back and forth. The method of actuation is the same. The coil is the same.

So what must be the cause of one induced emf being higher than the other? The video relates to the Figuera generator. How?

CM

Cadman;  you are wasting your time talking to these simple mined single sided individuals that take things at face value. (visually)

 just like the table top demo William Hooper did,  he moved the magnets in unison exactly as the video did. this causes a double intensity E field to form. the goof can't see what is really happening because of his extremely narrow mind and inability to see outside the box.

this is the Figuera device all day long. they moved the magnets, Figuera moved the magnetic field, plain and simple. ( except to a few)
and in order to do this Figuera figured out that he could get completely separate feeds from one DC feed by opposing magnetic fields in part G. this device can be built by anyone at home to prove it's validity.

take some bare wire and wrap a iron or laminated core that has been coated with (your choice)) an insulator. put about 20 winds of thick or rectangle wire around the core (not touching) then secure. take two twelve volt car bulbs and attach the two ends of the core to each of the positive side of the bulbs. take the remaining bulb wire and connect to the negative side of the battery. now take the positive side, with attached wire and touch the core winding's in the middle.
what do you think will happen, both bulb intensities are the same. now touch at either end of the coil and see what happens, one bulb will be bright and the other dim. do the other end and see the bulb that was bright is now dim and the dim bulb is now bright.  if this is done in rapid succession this will mimic the actions of the figuera device completely.

Congratulations you just built your fist Figuera part G consisting of a splitter of currants and a magnetic resistor.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 07, 2016, 01:57:31 AM

take some bare wire and wrap a iron or laminated core that has been coated with (your choice)) an insulator. put about 20 winds of thick or rectangle wire around the core (not touching) then secure. take two twelve volt car bulbs and attach the two ends of the core to each of the positive side of the bulb. take the remaining bulb wire and connect to the negative side of the battery. now take the positive side, with attached wire and touch the core winding's in the middle.
what do you think will happen, both bulb intensities are the same. now touch at either end of the coil and see what happens, one bulb will be bright and the other dim. do the other end and see the bulb that was bright is now dim and the dim bulb is now bright.  if this is done in rapid succession this will mimic the actions of the figuera device completely.

Congratulations you just built your fist Figuera part G consisting of a splitter of currants and a magnetic resistor.

MM

Marathonman, Thanks for providing this simple test. I will do it. Just one question. You wrote to use an iron or laminated core. Does that core need to be a toroidal core or just a straight core may be used in this test?

--
While I am still waiting for the quote that Ramaswami told that Figuera wrote, I link below another great sentence from Ramaswami:


The Part G is a current interrupter which makes the current supplied interrupted current or pulsed DC input.


Confusion: This is the aim of some guests of this thread. I have no doubts now.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 07, 2016, 02:20:30 AM
straight core my friend, just a simple little test.

yes we know hanon, it like, he's a rock, trying to tell another rock about sponges. DUH ! the irony.

it's actually the fluctuating DC that makes it all work ln part G . pulsed dc or ac will not work , END OF STORY.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 07, 2016, 02:41:07 AM
MM,

This is the second time you have revealed this little test. I bet people will start paying more attention to what you've said now.

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 07, 2016, 05:23:38 AM
Thanks for the G part info!  :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 08, 2016, 01:46:29 AM
The problem with Ramaswami and Darediamond is because they are just using pulsed DC or AC to feed the generator. They did not have ever used the two signals created in the commutator properly built. Therefore they just have results with North-South polarity. With North-North they have null results with pulsed DC or AC as expected because they are not moving the fields. North-North requires the use the comutator described in the 1908 patent. Period.

I do not know how Ramaswami says that North-North, or South-South, does not work if he have never built the commutator as the patent describes. And he just repeat and repeat that the commutator is just to pulse the current. This is totally false. Also are false some statements done by Darediamond some days before telling that the commutator may be sustituted by a sine wave inverter. False. Please study the commutator.
What is it is to be studied about Part G which you are wrongfully promoting? Are you saying in this modern times, there is no 100% better efficiency to that Part G of a thing?.

Shows us your working model to support Part G being better than Alternate Current which do switch Polarity Without going down to Zero frequency.

Figuera Generator is Simple to build that why you and your cohorts are bent on misinformation deliberately.

When you Fluctuate DC via an Iron core be it moulded or otherwise what do you get as output current? Is it not Alternate Current?

How do you make the Primaries consume low current if you utilized low frequency like 60hz? And how do you generate extremely Powerful Flux if you do not utilise Twisted Serially Connected Multi strand Wire?

You want to Move the Magnetic Field by Bucking the field, WHAT SENSE IS IN THAT WHEN IT IS WIDELY KNOWN THAT:
1: South Pole Flux always flows to North??
2: Alternate Current will only allow for constant continuous Flux Pole Switching on each Primaries because AV do not have POLARITY like Pulsing DC nor DC?

The Figuera Gen utilises AC which the Part G is producing outrightly.

And the Oscillation or High and Low,  Low and High is caused by Alternate Current Application because at one cycle Primary On The Left will have South and North and Simultaneously, Primary On the Rigth.will have South and North Vice-Versa  and this will create Addition of Power at the center Where the secondary is not repulsion (Bucking Mode).
The interpretation of this is Motor Generator without applying Permanent Magnet as it is widely applied in AC Generators.

Now to get Pure Lenzless output, Buck the Secondary by Splitting it into 2 go the way of Chris Sykes A.K.A EMJunkie to connect them together.
 Download is guide on Partnered Output Coils here http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/Guidelines%20to%20Bucking%20Coils.pdf to understand deeper why the secondary must be bucked.

Do not let anyone think for you; Think it out by yourself so to get librated.






Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 08, 2016, 02:06:10 AM
To create addition of Flux in Figuera Gen, wind your primary on the.rigth and left in same direction and connect there leads in Parallel.

But to get pure lenzless output,  split your secondary into 2 and wind each part in Opposite directions and connect there leads in parallel.

To use low amount of Wire to generate HighbAmount Of Flux, divide your length of wire equallybinto multiple part and twist it together and use that to make your Primaries.

To use a single setup to generated high amount of Lenzless Output Wattage and keep heat down,You must use High Frequency, Moulded Core or large amount of Solid Iron Rods stucked into big plastic pipes.






Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 08, 2016, 03:13:42 AM
Cadman;  you are wasting your time talking to these simple mined single sided individuals that take things at face value. (visually)

 just like the table top demo William Hooper did,  he moved the magnets in unison exactly as the video did. this causes a double intensity E field to form. the goof can't see what is really happening because of his extremely narrow mind and inability to see outside the box.

this is the Figuera device all day long. they moved the magnets, Figuera moved the magnetic field, plain and simple. ( except to a few)
and in order to do this Figuera figured out that he could get completely separate feeds from one DC feed by opposing magnetic fields in part G. this device can be built by anyone at home to prove it's validity.

take some bare wire and wrap a iron or laminated core that has been coated with (your choice)) an insulator. put about 20 winds of thick or rectangle wire around the core (not touching) then secure. take two twelve volt car bulbs and attach the two ends of the core to each of the positive side of the bulbs. take the remaining bulb wire and connect to the negative side of the battery. now take the positive side, with attached wire and touch the core winding's in the middle.
what do you think will happen, both bulb intensities are the same. now touch at either end of the coil and see what happens, one bulb will be bright and the other dim. do the other end and see the bulb that was bright is now dim and the dim bulb is now bright.  if this is done in rapid succession this will mimic the actions of the figuera device completely.

Congratulations you just built your fist Figuera part G consisting of a splitter of currants and a magnetic resistor.

MM

Hi MM.
I have test it on a ferite rod but can  not see a particular difference in the brightness of the bulb... :-\
I have put insulating tape between the ferrite ans the bare wire. When i touch with the + of the batt on the left side or the right. The intensity of both bulb are the same...
Any advice are welcome!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 08, 2016, 07:28:35 AM
It will never cease to amaze my how someone can deviate from a patent so much with out ever understanding the patent in the first place. and spout off changes that can NEVER be proven scientifically or otherwise. to me that is just plain stupidity. so i guess Faraday, Maxwell, William Hooper and others are all wrong.
please my stomach hurts from laughter.
there is no bucking fields as you say,  they are opposing but when one it taken high the other low the currants will be in the same direction.
do this thread a favor and READ THE DAMN PATENTS!. i guess that's to much work and it's easier to flap the mouth. if you hadn't noticed NO ONE LISTENS TO YOUR BULL.
READ THE PATENTS !
wistiti; i think your core is to small and try silicon iron not ferrite. ferrite core will not produce a strong enough magnetic field. and also make sure the winds are not touching,  or use coated wire and sand the top of the wire coil.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 08, 2016, 08:31:41 AM
It will never cease to amaze my how someone can deviate from a patent so much with out ever understanding the patent in the first place. and spout off changes that can NEVER be proven scientifically or otherwise. to me that is just plain stupidity. so i guess Faraday, Maxwell, William Hooper and others are all wrong.
please my stomach hurts from laughter.
there is no bucking fields as you say,  they are opposing but when one it taken high the other low the currants will be in the same direction.
do this thread a favor and READ THE DAMN PATENTS!. i guess that's to much work and it's easier to flap the mouth. if you hadn't noticed NO ONE LISTENS TO YOUR BULL.
READ THE PATENTS !
wistiti; i think your core is to small and try silicon iron not ferrite. ferrite core will not produce a strong enough magnetic field. and also make sure the winds are not touching,  or use coated wire and sand the top of the wire coil.
You are always worried by my post thinking I am seeking attention. I laugh in Chinese.

It is simple, shows us your working Device applying your Bucking Theory of the Primary.

Will you ever do that?

Never! What a pity!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 08, 2016, 10:17:37 PM
SHOW US YOUR FUCKING NON EXISTENT RESEARCH . YOUR AS RETARDED AS YOUR STUPID PROPOSAL . AND CAN NOT SCIENTIFICALLY BACK UP A F-IN DAMN THING. WELL I SHIT IN CHINESE, JAPANESE, AND TAGALOG.
I'LL POST IT WHEN PEOPLE ARE READY FOR IT NOT WHEN GETTO NIGGA SAYS SO. YOUR A SORRY PIECE OF SHIT THAT HAS NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN DRAW ATTENTION TO YOUR SORRY ASS BECAUSE OTHERWISE  NO ONE WOULD PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR SICK ASS.
YOU ARE A VERY LITTLE MAN AND I USE THAT TERM LOOSELY.
LEAVE THIS FORUM , NO ONE WANTS YOU HERE, YOU DISRUPT THE VERY REASON PEOPLE ARE HERE. YOU GIVE NOTHING, YOU ADD NOTHING TO THIS FORUM BUT LIES, DECEPTION, AND STUPIDITY BASED ON UNPROVEN THEORETICAL BULL SHIT UNLIKE MINE THAT CAN BE PROVEN BY ANYONE.
YOUR A SICK FUCK AND YOU NEED TO LEAVE THIS FORUM.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 08, 2016, 11:49:23 PM
Marathonman for how long will you remain crazy?

For how long?

Come on taken some  herb concussion and get well.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 09, 2016, 12:16:06 AM
Marathonman,

I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W).  I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.

I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance,   XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.

Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures

PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 09, 2016, 12:31:04 AM
Marathonman,

I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W).  I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.

I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance,   XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.

Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures

PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.
You who have been schooled severally by respected Goal achievers still keep up with fruitless experiment. Youbcan please keep quiet to let truth reign. I remember how your friend the Kite A.K.A Marathonman, crazily pounce on Ramaswami in the past.

He made a horrible mistake trying that with me because I Dare Diamond an Hardened Truth Seeker Takes No Shit!

The bullshit both of you are promoting here was what Chris Sykes nullified band schooled you on sometimes ago.

Other people on YouTube also gain power Bucking the Secondaries not the Primaries but you Motos are here disrupting things spreading lies in all variations you know.

Are you people humans at all?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 09, 2016, 06:14:46 AM
Marathonman,

I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W).  I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.

I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance,   XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.

Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures

PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.

Thank you hanon for sharing!
It seem you have the same results as i...
Mabe the split winding on a toroidal core (like in the chapt.3 of pjkbook) work better...? I Will try it when i have some spare time.
Ciao!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 09, 2016, 11:42:00 AM
Try with resistive wire  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 09, 2016, 02:57:07 PM
Marathonman,

I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W).  I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.

I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance,   XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.

Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures

PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.

I stand corrected, there has to be frequency involved. ops brain fart. that's why the rotating brush set up works through inductive reactance.
so the straight core will work as long as there is a constant change from one end to the other.

good catch Hanon.

Forest; i used resistive wire on my first set up and it got hot with continued use.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on August 09, 2016, 05:13:36 PM
 Reply #3848 on: August 05, 2016, 12:17:09 AM »
Marathon Man
 #3811 on: July 28, 2016, 11:54:32 PM » You said you would PM me regarding methods you use for your 20KW unit. Great! How do you go about that? Unless you have some other method you can use my email...  briceelectric@yahoo.com.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam

Considering that Marathon Man has not yet replied to my request for information about his methods for producing a 20 KW Figuera device weighing about 120 pounds, I created a spreadsheet (attached) for designing a Figuera single phase power section. The results show a unit that is much larger than Marathon Man's. It has been explained to me previously that I really don't know what I am doing, so I would appreciate forum members looking this over, pointing out my errors, and showing me how to correct them, as I want to get this right.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 09, 2016, 08:00:46 PM
Hi,

I post below a couple of videos about the test suggested by Marathonman

A) Straight core with 30 turns of wire powered with DC. Touching at different points of the coil does not change the light intensity of each lightbulb. This simple test does not work powering with DC in a static wiring scheme.

https://vimeo.com/178144784 (https://vimeo.com/178144784)



B) One Variac powered with DC. I used a variac (or autotransformer) to power two lightbulbs designed for 12 volts and 5 W from a 12 volts battery. This method works to regulate the intensity of each lightbulb in opposite way. But I have noted that this method presents a complex dynamic response: it seems that two effects are acting simultaneously. One effect acts very quicly to change the intensity. A second effect seem to react a bit slower that the first effect and it rebalances the final intensity to each lightbulb. You may only note this second effect when moving slowly the roll in the variac, when you stop there is a second action changing the light intensity after some tenths of second. If you move quickly the roll back and forth there is not enough time to see this second effect. In summary the dynamic response seems to be quite complex, maybe because of different magnetic fields fighting into the toroidal core. Only using about 1/4 of the total variac length I got a total regulation of the light intensity between the maximun light intensity and almost zero light intensity.

https://vimeo.com/178144785 (https://vimeo.com/178144785)

Any suggestion?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 09, 2016, 08:54:09 PM
By DC do you mean steady battery power or rectified by diode bridge AC or maybe pulsed like with one diode rectification?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 10, 2016, 08:31:35 AM
Direct Current allows for Zero Balance PULSING but cannot on it own Oscillate

Alternate Current allows for Non Zero Balance PULSING  but CAN on it own Oscillate.

The application of the Former by Figuera in his time necessitated the need for mechanical Inverter in the name Of "Part G"

With Alternate Current, you can easily create Continuous Reversible Motional Movement Of Polarised Current and thereby making a Motionless Motor.

But with Direct Current without any aid, THIS IS NOT POSSIBLY AS THE POLARITY HERE REMAINS NON- REVERSIBLE .

So Witt AC , you generate No Back E.M.F but with D.C, you will get back emf.

Thus in to create a True Non-Back E.M.F oriented Oscillation, you use Alternate Current.

This is what Figuera achieved with his "Part G" mechanical  Inverter.

But why must you use  AC in Figuera Device?

The answer stems from the Motionles Motor Generator Principle.

How?

The Rule of Magnetism says Like Poles Repel and Unlike Poles Attract.

The South Pole Flux of any Magnet always Flow to the North. This Creates constant one way attraction.

Now in Figuera Gen, primarily there 2 Electromagnets which acts as Primaries and One Intermidiary Winding which is the Secondary.

When Powered, Electromagnet also generates North Pole and South Pole.

With AC, the poles will be alternating but with DC the Poles will remain constant.

So if you place 2 electromagnets in a positive opposing fashion and Power them with DC you will get non-alternating Attraction. If you place 2 electromagnets in  negative opposing fashich.and power them with DC, you will get non-alternating Repulsion.

So in each case, there will  be No PRODUCTIVE SWITCHING OF CURRENT.

The application of AC will cause a reverse results as it Will allow for Alternate Switch in both modes.
But the Mode we need is the Attraction Mode not Repulsion Mode because YOU CAN NOT KILL THE DIPOLE AND EXPECT ANY USEFUL OUTPUT.

NO YOU CAN NOT.

Now  having get to know what is the correct type of current to apply, how then can you wind your coils to get North South North South and South North South North polarities at each Cycle of the applied Alternate Current at each Cycle?

Wind Both Primary Electromagnet in either Clockwise or Anticlockwise direction and CONNECT THERE LEADS IN PARALLEL. YOU MUST NEVER BUCK THE PRIMARIES CONNECTION WHEN YOU WIND THEM IN SERIES I.e start to end and start to end.

When you connect wind and connect them this way, once powered with AC, there be continuous Additive Power Of Polarity Switching and thus an Alternating Motionles Motional Motor will be achieved. This will have a Greater Power Generation Ability on The Central Secondary Winding in between the Additive Power Alternating Poles.

If Direct Current is Applied here, the Output will be low because there is no CORRECT To and Fro moment of Current.

Now how do you overcome Lenz in the Secondary?

Simple Split the Secondary Winding into 2 and Wind one part In Clockwise and The other Part in Anti-Clockwise Direction and connect there leads in series. This Bucks the Output and thus Negate Lenz.

Have got to know the forgoing, how then do you make the Set Up A Self-Runner?

You must utilise a Super Capacitor Powered Variable Frequency Pure Sine Wave Inverter.

The Rule is: Once Lenz get negated in a Motor/Generator, just increase the frequency of the Engine to further reduce the starting and Running current that would be needed by the Primaries and the Secondary will start generating enormous amount of Current in at least 10 fold of the input current.

You wanna go Offgrid? Then you must make your own Inverter.

The essence of Powering your inverter with Supercaps lies in the ability of the Caps to store enormous amount of Current and simultaneously getting recharged while getting discharged.

Ensure you drive your Primaries at High Frequency to keep the start and Running Wattage below 250W.
You do not have worry about building variable frequency inverter driver.Get one for yourself here
http://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?catId=0&initiative_id=SB_20160809220635&SearchText=inverter+driver+board
Get someone in your localty to make center tapped transformer for you and buy high current Mosfet like IFP3205 to use with your readymade Inverter Drivers and CenterTapped Transformer.

You need to make AXIAL HANDRAND CRANK PERMANENT MAGNET GENERATOR WHICH YOU NEED TO ALWAYS USE TO CHARGE YOUR SUPERCAP BANK TO KICKSTART YOUR FIGUERA GEN.

FORGET BATTERIES. BUY MAXWELL SUPERCAP OF 3000F 2.7v  X 10pieces and connect them in series to achieve 27V 300F. Your Inverter must be 12v rated inverter so that your super cap bank will be getting discharge at lower voltage via a dc to dc 300W step down converter ot Transformer and it will be getting charged at 24V or 26V using an AC to DC Converter.

Remember, internal resistance of SuperCaps are very low so they get charged quickly and remained charged without blowing up provided you do not exceed there voltage rating unlike batteries.

Just make sure youndrive your primaries at high frequency to reduce the input wattage.

Use Twisted Serially Connected Multistrance Wire to make your primaries to generate extremely high FLux and move that Big Flux rapidly over your thick gauge wound bucking secondary to generate Massive Lenzless Current.

Youbcan also wind Bucking Secondaries under Each Primaries. There output will be lenzless too as long as you follow the winding and connection of leads rules.

Goodluck.

Do not use thin wire to Wind the Secondary. USE MUST USE VERY THICK WIRE.










Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 10, 2016, 01:43:41 PM
Reply #3848 on: August 05, 2016, 12:17:09 AM »
Marathon Man
 #3811 on: July 28, 2016, 11:54:32 PM » You said you would PM me regarding methods you use for your 20KW unit. Great! How do you go about that? Unless you have some other method you can use my email...  briceelectric@yahoo.com.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam

Considering that Marathon Man has not yet replied to my request for information about his methods for producing a 20 KW Figuera device weighing about 120 pounds, I created a spreadsheet (attached) for designing a Figuera single phase power section. The results show a unit that is much larger than Marathon Man's. It has been explained to me previously that I really don't know what I am doing, so I would appreciate forum members looking this over, pointing out my errors, and showing me how to correct them, as I want to get this right.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam

Mr. Sam6

I'm not technically competent to write this. Since you have asked for sharing the knowledge I write this but request you to understand my lack of knowledge but hands on practical approach.

In my opinion the calculations are not correct. They calculations appear to be based on Theory and what can be done and what should not be done. This is dead wrong.

See I did not know that air gaps in the core are inefficient. So we had air holes.

I did not know that we need to very tightly pack or otherwise the iron will scream. So to avoid scraming of the iron we had to pack them as tightly as possible but we had still air gaps.

Air gaps led the inefficient operation of the device. But you see the air gaps also resulted in air from the surrounding moving in to cool the heated iron always and net result is a flow of ionized air in to the core.

We did not know that we cannot operate beyond 1.2 Tesla or 1.3 Tesla for a magnetic core ( solid core here and not core with air holes). So we went on to provide increaesd current or turns of wire until the screaming of the iron is high and the iron is heated.

At these ranges I would later calculate and learn that we are crossing easily 5 Tesla ranges. See it was an inefficient air gap filled core that enabled this to work. Otherwise the iron would have melted and wire would have burnt out. But for the way we built the core the operation was not safe.

You are showing a Ampere turns curve for different materials and we were there at the top saturated position. Mr. EMJunkie has indicated in a saturated core the differences between frequencies of wires disappear and wires behave only as resistors and would end up burning on the device. Wires also got heated but did not burn up for the simple reason air was always flowing in from the outside to the inside. We had a continous high stream of ionized air in to the core.

Mr. Patrick Kelly has earlier calculated using some University Chart that the curve reaches the saturation for Soft iron at 3.6 Tesla. I felt that it is more like 2.9 Tesla is sufficient but what has happened is that the core was able to consume the current up to easily 5 Tesla. The central core was screaming so much that we stopped the tests and had to reduce the current.

How do we reduce the current..Connect in parallel current consumed increases and connect in series the current consumed reduces. When current is reduced for the same number of turns the magnetic field is also reduced and is brought in to the safe range.

I have repeatedly tested and found only when the core is saturated COP>1 results occur. Theory agrees as at that range wire works only like a resistor.

Thicker the wire lower the resistance and lower the resistance greater is the current and voltage induced in secondaries.

Your calculations appear to be based on theories. There is nothing wrong in that approach but you need to check if the theory can be knocked out by experimental verification by changing the parameters of the theoretical calculations. If the parameters are changed would the theory still hold good or the theory must be varied for the varied parameter is an experimental observation to be made. I'm told that this is based primarily on how the iron material molecules arrange themselves at different conditions and for the same soft iron sourced from one place the results can be one and for another soft iron batch sourced from different area results can be different for the inner molecular structures of the material can easily change and composition can easily change.

Let me admit it. I have no competence to discuss or say all these things except for the fact that I inadvertendly and without any knowledge made a different type of core. In my opinion the core shape and the air holes and the high saturation of the core contributed. In the opinion of another learned person it was the material and the inner changes that happened at high saturation points that contributed to results.

I have tried to stick to safety norms and it was always cop<1 as long as safety norms are followed.

It is actually the lack of knowledge of magnetism and our lack of knowledge of what is a safe procedure and what is not and what is an efficient core structure and what is not that led to our observations.

I believe that your assumptions are wrong. You need to test, verify until the iron screams so much and tells you to reduce the input current that you can go up. Solid cores will easily cause very high heating.

It is a fact observed by us that air gaps reduce the efficiency of operations. But Air gaps are needed to operate at high core saturations. The core is saturated heated but is safe to operate. I see a lack of attempt here by sticking to what can be done and what should not be done.

Unless you experiment, vary the theoretical parameters and ignore them and experiment, observe and verify and validate what is safe and how safety can be increased to reach core saturation all these theoretical calculations would not lead any successful results.

Again the knowledge of how magnets operate appear to be very strictly restricted and Research and Development for Magnetism as far as I have found is zero in India. But whether you get funding or not also depends on whether you follow safety protocols laid down or not. Therefore I do not and would not say that only this would work and this would not work. We do not realize how shapes operate to focus magnetic fields and how the magnetic fields respond and how the electricity is generated from such different types and shapes of magnetic fields.

To admit it openly we were kind of idiots without any knowledge. So we just played around but I invested my own money.

Since we did not know that this should not be done we did them all. We actually varied the parameters laid down in protocols for safe operation and violated them happilly. That is the reason for the results we saw.

The results can be easily reproduced but we do not know if the large magnetic fields that are open and that let air to get ionized air affect our health. Except for me others appear to be not affected. I'm 53 now and probably the middle age and sedantary work style and long hours of work caused the health problems to me. But I do not want to do these things for I do know now what is safe and what is not. When you are told that some thing is not safe you are not going to do it.

Current needs to flow in in helical coils and when the wire becomes a resistor and is heated the current drawn will come down and so how to use the maximum safety and generate a large and saturated core is the essence of the project. I do not know if you have calculated for 3+ Tesla ranges to be achieved in the core. If you did not the calculations are not valid.

Please let me again admit that I'm technically not qualified to post this but this is what we practically observed. I have posted this info so you can avoid all this to be relearnt.  But please understand that I'm not asking you to do any experiment and you take responsibility for the experiments yourself and please also understand that the device as per safety norms is not safe to operate.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 10, 2016, 06:30:48 PM
Hanon;

 Very good video presentation. it clearly shows that movement (frequency generation) is why Figuera chose his rotating part G.  varying inductive reactance  is definitely taking place here. so the movement of the brush or movement with transistors in make before break  set up is the way to go. he chose DC so he didn't have to deal with phase bs of AC and DC allowed for highly efficient electromagnets as opposed to AC.

it also told us that very few winding's are required to get this variation and that a straight core can be implemented as long as there is movement. so try your staight core again but with movement. might need to change wire though. ie. magnet wire with top sanded.
i will pm to discuss further.

very good, good work.

Sam; if your material you are using has a flux density of 21,500 (hypothetically) then do not go over about 19,500 - 20,000 as this will just be a waste of power. if you keep your operation no higher than the knee of the curve you will be just fine. if you so chose to except other advice and operate at a much higher saturation you will risk overheating of your primary elctromagnets. just remember each primary is only accountable for half the pressure required for your secondary output.

MM

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 10, 2016, 07:15:47 PM
Thank you Hannon for sharing your experiment!
My next test for the "g" part will be on a laminate steel toroid. I will wind it with 10 awg copper wire in 2 part 180° like in the pjkbook.
Ciao!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 10, 2016, 09:30:34 PM
Reading about Daniel McFarland Cook patent ( patent number US119825 ) I found this post which I think it is quite useful for those who want to read "between lines" and see some underlining principle:


http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1616.msg27550#msg27550 (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1616.msg27550#msg27550)


Daniel McFarland Cook invented an "electro-magnetic battery" as he called. Some people suggest that his coils were storing energy, as a battery or as a Leedskalnin´s perpetual motion holder (PMH). I guess that while one coil is getting filled up the other coil is emptying and its energy is then used for the coil which is getting filled up, maybe creating some kind of phase shift between them. I can see in that patent some similiarities to Clemente Figuera idea of two fields powered up and down in opposition. But this is just my guess.


Other people see in this patent some kind of mutual interaction between both coils. Also a likely option.


Cook: " My invention relates to the combination of two or more simple or compound helices and iron cores or magnets in such a manner as to produce a constant electric current without the aid of a galvanic battery."


What about if Cook placed his coils aligned (one after the other) instead that in parallel?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 10, 2016, 10:58:30 PM
Good catch hanon. It's all connected.Alfred Hubbard took design and added more coils ....
And so on...


Consider your test with variac. If the frequency of turning is fast enough what would be the result ?If you replace bulbs with a transformer would it stopped induction if frequency is high enough ? Isn't that like permanent magnet then ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 10, 2016, 11:39:30 PM
Work in progres...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on August 10, 2016, 11:45:26 PM
Attached is an updated spreadsheet for designing a Figuera device to replace the one I posted earlier. That one had some errors in the formulas for calculating lines required to generate a voltage and in automatically selecting the maximum side of a coil from a list.

In playing with the numbers I found that for a 16 KW unit, there appears to be an optimal oversizing factor for the inducer coils. 5000 ampere turns produces 500 lb device with high losses; 10000 amp-turns produces produces a smaller device with reduced losses; a 15000 value produces a heavier machine with even fewer losses. There seems to be a sweet spot somewhere around 10000 amp turns.

I also played with removing one of the output coils. The output was significantly reduced of course, but the losses were disproportionately high because three of the original four coil/core elements were still in use. There is a significant penalty for removing the second output coil - even if there were no joints to consider.

mm
I found your PM. Thanks
The B values selected in the example are at the knee of the BH curve for soft iron plates to give good regulation. You are right. Increasing B beyond that point requires too many ampere-turns to get a commensurate increase in performance without having a significant core size increase.
Sam
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 10, 2016, 11:49:56 PM
forest;  Are you referring to D.C. OR C.F. device.  just curious.

wistiti; your deck need resurfaced and sealed before it gets to bad.   just sayin. your toroid as wound will have a hard time getting a brush to rotate across it. precision is required most in this area.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 11, 2016, 06:12:24 AM
forest;  Are you referring to D.C. OR C.F. device.  just curious.

wistiti; your deck need resurfaced and sealed before it gets to bad.   just sayin. your toroid as wound will have a hard time getting a brush to rotate across it. precision is required most in this area.


D.C. I wonder if C.F. knew the link between his and  D.C., quite possible
currently there are probably 3 people
N.B
C.L
T.K
 :-*
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 11, 2016, 06:50:41 AM
I haven't studied Mr. DC's work but it seams one coil overpowers the other coil and vise verse but not opposing like Figuera. ???
i can't really say one way or the other so ill stick to my ole buddy, ole pal, Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 11, 2016, 12:06:16 PM
Do not be deceived by there lies in all variations they have been presenting it .

You cannot create a continuous To and Fro Motion in A Motionless Stator applying Direct Current.

At http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg.htm we read:
 "An electromagnetic generator without moving parts includes a permanent magnet and a magnetic core including first and second magnetic paths. A first input coil and a first output coil extend around portions of the first magnetic path, while a second input coil and a second output coil extend around portions of the second magnetic path. The input coils are alternatively pulsed to provide induced current pulses in the output coils. Driving electrical current through each of the input coils reduces a level of flux from the permanent magnet within the magnet path around which the input coil extends. In an alternative embodiment of an electromagnetic generator, the magnetic core includes annular spaced-apart plates, with posts and permanent magnets extending in an alternating fashion between the plates. "

The non-zero balance of Ever Effective and efficient Alternate Current creates The needed Motion in Motionless Motor Genertor.

You must led the primaries add up power to create the To and fro or and down movement but you must let the secondaries subtract or cancel out each other to generate lenzless Output Current.

Be Wise.

Part G is a DC to AC converter in mechanical way. But we are in new Era so we need no mechanical inverter again as Solid state DC to AC inverter nowbabounds cheaply.

Be wise.
Do not allow those good for nothing agents of Illuminati or the Olympians or The Committee Of 300 rigth on this thread and other threads keep deceiving you.

They are liars.

Liberate yoyrself.

Figuera, Chris have done his  part. Ramaswami too have. Vladimir Utkin also contributed.

Do your self abfavour by following them.

Wind your Primaries in Attraction Mode  but your secondaries in Repulsion Mode and Utilise AC to activate the Motionless MOGEN youbhave just created.

May you succeed in Jesus name. Amen
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 11, 2016, 02:32:02 PM
recommended reading for someone special. http://www.webmd.com/drugs/condition-962-Mental+Disorder+with+Loss+of+Normal+Personality++Reality.aspx?names-dropdown=DE (http://www.webmd.com/drugs/condition-962-Mental+Disorder+with+Loss+of+Normal+Personality++Reality.aspx?names-dropdown=DE)

 Chirp chirp

 I had to feed it, I just couldnt help it. I felt a moment of sympathy for the under developed. It's like watching the special Olympics you have to be encouraging and tell Timmy he did a great job. Give him some hope that he might find some purpose in life. Let him think he actually matters. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: matu on August 11, 2016, 02:53:20 PM
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 11, 2016, 03:21:09 PM
Some good advice or way to go for the rotating contact of the G part??
I have see the variation of intensity in the lightbulb by rotating manually but have hard time to avoid sparking...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 11, 2016, 05:17:54 PM
Please, stop this maddness. Figuera device can be powered by AC and pulsed DC. Tha's obvious why the latest is powered by pulsed DC, I thought we already discovered why... ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 11, 2016, 06:18:41 PM
Please, stop this maddness. Figuera device can be powered by AC and pulsed DC. Tha's obvious why the latest is powered by pulsed DC, I thought we already discovered why... ?
Forest are you being forced?
Did you just say AC can be applied to C.F device?
How come you let that out ?

Well there is no madness anywhere but there is  deliberate Deceitful propagandas to prevent people from getting liberated.

When you vibrate Direct Current and Pass it through an Iron Core Electromagnet, what do youngest as output? You wanna tell me it will remain Pulsing DC?

Is there no Iron Core in the Part G?

Is not the Motor driven commutator acting as Vibrator for the  copper wire wound Toroid?

What output do you then get from the toroid?  Pulsing Direct Current Still or ALTERNATE CURRENT?

I request you teach me what I do not 'actually' Know.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 11, 2016, 07:22:08 PM
Some good advice or way to go for the rotating contact of the G part??
I have see the variation of intensity in the lightbulb by rotating manually but have hard time to avoid sparking...

I think with due respect that the sparking is good.

Assume that the whole of part G is rotated at high speed. I have observed 6 inch long sparks. Very low input of a 12 volt dc is sufficient to get this. Higher the primary voltage higher the secondary output voltage and current.

Is  550 volts sufficient to create a unidirectional spark.

Then the de ception is that the part G and input can be both removed once the part G rotates and creates spark. The primary voltage will be inyially high and then will be reduced.

Pulsed Dc also works and has the disadvantage that it needs high resistance coil to keep the current drawn low. In AC current dawn is is less due to inductive impedance. In Pulseddc this is not available and we need to add high resistance coil to reduce primary current.

Doug..your post is inappropriate and not appreciated. You are highly respected person. You have made many theoretical postulations and none attacked you. Not fair for you to attack others.

Hanon..My guestimate is that some body who has very occassionaly posted here might or could have possibly vuilt the cook device and found it produced pulsed dc or dc. No hard info. No admission it was done but that is my assumption.

Problem is every body talks but no one would give information and are trying in a way to get information of others. Let us post in a constructive way.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 11, 2016, 07:41:50 PM
Forest; Prove it, just don't move it, with the mouth. show us your ac driven FIGUERA device. right when pigs fly. to all who think ac can be used or part G can be replaced, you would be luckier getting a hooker and some crack.

please all of you, show this forum your ac driven device, ops ! you can't, because your living in a fantasy land with einstein,  quarks, strings and empty atoms.
you people should be ashamed of your selves for even posting such nonsense.

very appropriate Doug, you took the words right out of my mouth.


'theoretical postulations" omg!  what a moron, you have no idea what this man has and has done. you are not even in the same ball park let alone the same planet. i laugh at your post and spit on the very ground you walk on.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 11, 2016, 08:46:37 PM
AC definately works because that was used as first replacement of rotating generator by Figuera. NRamaswami explained correctly  the reasons why Figuera switched to pulsed DC. Resistance is the only limit then.Cleverly choose wires and you can get huge ampere-turns and good resistance for example ...All has to match.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 11, 2016, 08:51:45 PM
When they are hit hard out of there deceitful hiding, they start shovi g facing and crying like baby.

Competent Scientists have been applying AC to actualise Motional To and Fro movment in wire wound motionless magnetic core, the KITE is here crying nil of success stories of readily available Practically proven Theories.

Go tell Naudin, Thomas your story  to get a better summary of it Marathonman turned Dough.

You have been the one promoting lies and you ougth to defend it when  challenged before making a similar demand.

What do you still have to offer?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 11, 2016, 08:54:45 PM

When they are hit hard out of there deceitful hiding, they start shoving faces and crying like a baby.

Competent Scientists have been applying AC to actualise Motional To and Fro movment in wire wound motionless magnetic core, the KITE is here crying nil of success stories of readily available Practically proven Theories.

Go tell Naudin, Thomas your story  to get a better summary of it Marathonman turned Dough.

You have been the one promoting lies and you ougth to defend it when  challenged before making a similar demand.

What do you still have to offer?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 11, 2016, 09:55:02 PM
Marathonman And His Old Part G And Bucking Primaries Chapter 20  Pages 261 lol.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 11, 2016, 10:23:52 PM
The Part G like I have been saying is a mechanical Inverter and unless you do what I did last year over a test Pulsed Motor I built in 2015 , you will never have a smoothly running Part G.

I shared the video with Ramaswami so get it from him to learn.

However do we still really need to use that cumbersome Part G to convert D.C to A.C?
 Practically NO is the answer because Motionless or non-mechanical D.C to A.C Inverter can now be easily bought or even built.

I am not against the Part-G per say. what I am against is making it appear as the only best option and of course telling  lies about the correct polarity of Figuera Gen which Marathonman the Kite is doing actively.

Infact I know 2 other mechanical means of converting  DC to AC.

Ramaswami,  Direct Current and Pulsing DC do not have frequency. But Pulsing DC can only be achieved using half bridge rectifier which means using one diode on one of the AC leads from an A.C source.

You can only make a D.C and Pulsing DC have frequency by passing them via a Transistor or MOSFET or mechanical Commutator.

So if you use thin gauge to wind the Primaries of your C.F MoGen, then you must use High Frequency and High Voltage.to quench there thirst for current. Increasing Voltage is not enough if you wanna really achieve overunity with.ease.

Also, the higher the frequency, the higher the Output Wattage ( V *I)

You do not  need high current to generate conc Flux. All you need is Serially Connected Multi strand Wire and High Frequency and optionally High Voltage.

But you must remember that your core must be Big enough to withstand the high frequency you will be applying or else, there will be Heat and Saturation. The Higher The Frequency, the Stronger The Flux Becomes. The Higher the speed at which you switch or Move the Flux, the higher the output Wattage Becomes.

You need not to saturate the Core to achieve over unity all you need is proper winding and connection style of the underlying, overlapping and central Secondary Windings as you can now have 3 split Secondaries for 2 opposing Primaries. The Secondaries must be in Opposing Mode I.e: NN or SS while the Primaries must be in Addition Mode I.e NS NS.

You must Buck the Secondaries.
Again it is best to use Moulded core as the unit will be smaller and Still Generate high output because it can withstand High Frequency.

Marathonman now over to you.....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 12, 2016, 12:42:40 AM

Be Wise.

Part G is a DC to AC converter in mechanical way.


Another one who does not understand the commutator Part G. Please read the patent again. Or maybe for the first time.

AC = 1 signal

Commutator = 2 signals, one to feed each set of electromagnets.


Quote

Wind your Primaries in Attraction Mode  but your secondaries in Repulsion Mode and Utilise AC to activate the Motionless MOGEN youbhave just created.


Supoose two primaries and two secondaries coils in the middle of the primaries. If the primaries are in attraction mode the only field transversing both secondaries is:
N ---------------> S. As per Lenz, the induced field of each secondary will be <-------- in one secondary and  <-------- in the other secondary. Both opposing to the primary field. How the hell are you going to buck both secondaries? Impossible. No way

If the primaries are in repulsion their fields will be N -------> <--------- N  . In this case one secondary will oppose to its closer primary field: <--------  and the other secondary will oppose to the primary field of the other primary coil:  -------->. There you have two bucking secondary coils. Perfect bucking output coils. In this case you may use pulsed DC. You just need to collide two fields in the center point, right in the point between both secondaries coild, no need for movement of the fields in this design based in flux linking.

Summary :

Attraction  N ------------------------>  S
                       <--------    <---------

Repulsion  N ----------> <-----------  S
                       <---------    --------->

See this sketch of Daniel Dingel device. The second sketch is drawn by me
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 12, 2016, 04:38:04 AM
 Diamond no inverter needed no work is mo beter.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT20j9lJYK8  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT20j9lJYK8)





 Shhh it's conspiracy dont tell diamond there is only one person on the internet.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gmolina on August 12, 2016, 05:10:29 AM
Another one who does not understand the commutator Part G. Please read the patent again. Or maybe for the first time.

AC = 1 signal

Commutator = 2 signals, one to feed each set of electromagnets.


Hi, Hanon you can get two opposing poles with 2 signal of AC out of phase 90º.

See attach.

GM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 12, 2016, 06:57:36 AM
Gmolina,

Figuera used two signals unphased 180°, not 90°. The patent states clearly that when one was at maximum the other was at minimum and viceversa. That why he patented his commutator and included it in the patent claims. In other cases he has said that AC was valid. If that were the case some very smart guys as Darediamond will had used AC from other known method in that time, as a common geneerator, and they had bypassed the patent protection. That is not the case.

I wonder if people really had read in deepth the patents. At least the patents and understand them. Later you may test all possibilities with the polarity NN , SS,  NS. But for clear reason I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 12, 2016, 12:34:25 PM
GM

 Your charts are what is confusing you. They show the wave form seen by a scope which measures time not the direction of the field in respect to time. The field is in one direction left to right high to low and then reverses direction and low to high. It's to be expected after all that is what people see on a screen from a scope or in a text book. Time seems to be the greater consideration not direction. If you really think about it a scope should show the field in only one full cycle bouncing back and forth not an endless repetitive log of cycles giving the wrong mental image. Some one ells decided for you how you should think but forgot to tell you or define the image is only to view time as a long string log. The output is ac and the general image like ripples on a pound traveling along to some distant point. Nah thats a contradiction, they dont move like that. They move back and forth a very short distance never actually traveling any distance because they move back just as far as forward. That is a net gain of distance of zero. So when your mind is thinking of field direction changing you still have a length of distance traveled as part of your thought. It screws up the thought process. If you had a coil in a field and rotate the coil in the one direction the field never changed just which side of the coil that was facing the pole of reference. if you use the N for reference the N is pushing on both sides of the coil one side then the other side and so on. That is a simplification because it excludes the magnetic field set up in the coil by induction when it is output to load and lenz law comes into play.Then you have an extra field to include into the mix. Unless you subscribe to the notion there is no connection to the load and or the load has no reaction to the changing field of the generator. Thats like saying you did work without working. So in essence that would be a welfare generator. Have not actually seen one of those.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 12, 2016, 01:16:33 PM

 I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations

I would strongly disagree. What is stated in the Disclosure Document filed by Figuera as shown in the Spanish Patent Office website must be experimented as it is and observed. If the Experimental observations do not tally with what is stated in the disclosure document then we need to change the parameters until we get the desired result.

Generally when Loaded all transformer primaries will draw more current to adjust for the load. How do we defeat that? That is the big question that none has even attempted to answer but Doug has raised that question now. Did any one posting here do it..I would guestimate that possibly yes.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 12, 2016, 01:18:37 PM
Gmolina,

Figuera used two signals unphased 180°, not 90°. The patent states clearly that when one was at maximum the other was at minimum and viceversa. That why he patented his commutator and included it in the patent claims. In other cases he has said that AC was valid. If that were the case some very smart guys as Darediamond will had used AC from other known method in that time, as a common geneerator, and they had bypassed the patent protection. That is not the case.

I wonder if people really had read in deepth the patents. At least the patents and understand them. Later you may test all possibilities with the polarity NN , SS,  NS. But for clear reason I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations

Hanon,  stop attaching Hijacking to me.

I am not seeking attention in anyway here.

I only present tested and proven Ideas.

No deliberate confusion.

No one have come to disprove the Link I post about The MEG.
The Magnetic DiPole must be complete before you can create genuine reversible high and low Motion in Figuera Device.

Patents contents are always most times altered to prevent the inventors efforts and resources being hijacked. So you have to think outside the box extremely widely to put things in order.

Chris told you youbcan not Buck the Primaries to generate useful output in the secondary let alone attaining overunity.

The Primary must be adding power at every Cycle of the Part G not subtracting Power or Buck each other. So this is why AC is essentially useful as it will give more output power than applying Vibrating DC which will only have one sided additive Power.

The case here also applies to Permanent magnet Alternators.or Generators. If you make an axial permanent magnet Gen and arrange your magnets in All North on one side and all south on one side on the Rotor, the amount of DC Output Power you will generate will be lower to if you apply Alternating Rotor Magnet assembly I.e NSNS on each rotor.

The Lenz negation is achieved in the way you.wind and connect your Output Coils. Simple.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gmolina on August 12, 2016, 02:44:39 PM
Gmolina,

Figuera used two signals unphased 180°, not 90°. The patent states clearly that when one was at maximum the other was at minimum and viceversa. That why he patented his commutator and included it in the patent claims. In other cases he has said that AC was valid. If that were the case some very smart guys as Darediamond will had used AC from other known method in that time, as a common geneerator, and they had bypassed the patent protection. That is not the case.

I wonder if people really had read in deepth the patents. At least the patents and understand them. Later you may test all possibilities with the polarity NN , SS,  NS. But for clear reason I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations

Hi Hanon, i respect the Figuera original design, please see my previous posts, i'm newbie posting here, but i'm not newbie in this fields, i say two ac signals not two ac voltages is  very different, in my graph you can see N and S letters, this refer to a magnetic field not a voltage. I repeat, i respect the Figuera original design in my experiments, but all people here need have a open mind to other ideas, just like part G of mm, or ac ideas of Mr Ramaswami, or Darediamond, and try, not in papers, try in experimentation, because in the depth of all this, not matter if is Figuera, Cook, Hubbard, or a mix, i'm sure that all here are looking for energy freedom. I understand that this is a Figuera thread, but remember that Figuera time is very different to our time.  And i think that all is experimentation, observation and results.

Thanks

GM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 12, 2016, 04:51:13 PM
Opposing Polarity will not work whether yo uapply AC or DC.

Nort to North nor South to South will never get the central secondary empowered so to speak.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 12, 2016, 06:05:36 PM
WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE WILL WORK except pure DC (but DC may be created at output  :P  )
Even so glorified N-N or S-S poles against themselves will work. The point is every method has it's own drawbacks. What you got is what you put into ;-) if you put crap you got crap, if you put poles against , you got the phenomenal rate of change but weak field so I expect some huge voltage but tiny current and so on....just think clearly...
You can put whatever signal you wish and the effect will be different... So PLEASE stop this maddness and do not fight .


I have an idea to remove necessity of resistors by using electronics. Many of you surely know or have a DC lab power supply with regulated current. Similar method could be used to create DC-DC converter for example 150W which could limit output DC to required amps dynamically. One of the method is to use combined diodes and thyristors in bridge setup to adapt input current to the required level. I have no experience with such circuits so I'd be glad if someone could explain if it can keep output voltage steady or how to modify it  ?



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 12, 2016, 06:31:09 PM
I wish i could kill the stupidity because it's running rampant on this thread.

You people are completely WRONG ! one north electromagnet taken up while a south electromagnet taken down will not work because the spin directions are opposing. does your feeble tittle minds even comprehend what the hell i just said. probably not because small minded people think small together.
I REPEAT, SPIN DIRECTIONS ARE OPPOSING with a N/S set up. look it up on any fucking Physics web site of your choice, just do it.
you will find that all you N/S'ers are completely wrong from the git go. of course you people probably WON'T look it up because you to stupid to do the research and would rather run your big fat fucking mouth instead just for the sake of arguing and to save your sorry asses from complete Embarrassment. your research in the figuera device is piss fucking poor and lacks ANY SCIENTIFIC DATA TO BACK UP YOUR ABSURD CLAIMS.
all the data i have posted CAN be backed up scientifically and COMPLETELY proven with out one single notion of doubt unless your a complete idiot like daredummy of rstupid that post the most outlandish, Ridiculous shit i ever heard that has nothing to do with the Figuera device what so ever.
when GOD said get in line for brains, you two must of thought he said trains and both of you got on the slowest one you could find. ha, ha, ha, that's funny stuff there.

i repeat, repeat, N/S spin direction when used in the Figuera set up will not work, look it up yourselves "if" you can read. the ONLY way Figuera could get a stationary dynamo to work is with two opposing electromagnets, one taken up, while the other taken down causing not only the B fields to cancel but the Electric field to be doubled in strength.
with N/S set up the attractive forces are to strong to vary any kind of field what so ever.

my 1 year old grand child knows not to put the square block in the round hole because it wouldn't fit, i would suggest you two simple minded people do the same. being stuck on stupid does nothing but back step this thread and hamper what we are trying to achieve. if you can't handle the truth or the reality of the Figuera device then i would suggest you two clowns get your own thread and call it "Figuera's device, pee wee hermin style" or even " IDIOT 101" advanced class at 7 pm.


'WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE WILL WORK except pure DC"
   COMPLETELY WRONG STATEMENT,  i would expect a little better from you Forest since you've been on this site for so long. stop feeding the simple minded trolls, pets are not allowed.
your statement is so far from the truth it's not funny, this tells me you and the trolls have not built even a demo device to back up you claims.
 there is, and never will be resistors in the figuera device what so ever. resistors wastes electricity that is why figuera chose to it magnetically, no unnecessary waste.

part G can never be replaced or removed because the kick back from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary is stored in part G's core in the form of a magnetic field similar to an inductor,  to be used at the next half turn of the brush, feeding the next set of electromagnet.
this part can never be replaced with an inverter either as there is no place to store power in the form of a magnetic field. i'm not being disrespectful to you but you need to study the patents a little more before you post such completely wrong statements.

this is for all the misinformed people that think N/S will work. study the bottom graph, do you not see the induced are opposing in the Figuera device,  DUH !. if you can read then it will tell you it won't work PERIOD ! this graph was pulled from a physics web site so if you disagree with it then i guess the whole world is wrong and only you are right. get real !
now, look at the top graph, do you not see the fact that the induced of N/N set up in the Figuera device are in the same direction, meaning they support each other while B field cancel causing double intensity E field. if you can not understand this simple scientific fact that is staring you smack dead in the face then you are to stupid to attempt a Figuera build.
 i can though, draw it out for you in crayola crayons,  with nice pretty colorful pictures with pop up's that can help you understand my meaning,  but "if", and only "if" you talk nice to me.
i again say N/S WILL NOT WORK ! study the bottom graph and pull your heads out of you ass before it's to late to build a device. our whole way of life will change shortly at the hand of evil people that want us in bondage. people like the BUSH'S, OBAMA'S, CLINTON'S, ROTHSCHILD'S, ROCKEFELLER'S and so on,  will destroy this world.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 12, 2016, 06:37:14 PM
THIS FORUM IS DAMN NEAR USELESS.

A couple of us decide that marathonman's and Doug's and Hannon's ideas are worth pursuing to us and what happens?

Can we have an exchange of ideas? HELL NO!!!! THE YAMMERING SPHINCTERS SHOW UP with page after page of NO YOU GOTTA DO IT MY WAY bullshit.

JEEZZUS


Marathonman, unfortunate timing on this post. It wasn't aimed at you, or the new guys.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 12, 2016, 07:08:40 PM

Suppose two primaries and two secondaries coils in the middle of the primaries. If the primaries are in attraction mode the only field transversing both secondaries is:
N ---------------> S. As per Lenz, the induced field of each secondary will be <-------- in one secondary and  <-------- in the other secondary. Both opposing to the primary field. How the hell are you going to buck both secondaries? Impossible. No way

If the primaries are in repulsion their fields will be N -------> <--------- N  . In this case one secondary will oppose to its closer primary field: <--------  and the other secondary will oppose to the primary field of the other primary coil:  -------->. There you have two bucking secondary coils. Perfect bucking output coils. In this case you may use pulsed DC. You just need to collide two fields in the center point, right in the point between both secondaries coild, no need for movement of the fields in this design based in flux linking.

Summary :

Attraction  N ------------------------>  S
                       <--------    <---------

Repulsion  N ----------> <-----------  N
                       <---------    --------->


I attach a new sketch to clarify what I meant. This is not Figuera 1908 patent. I just added here because it refers to the bucking coils subject mentioned in some post.


If two inducers are placed in repulsion and two induced coils in between, then each induced coil is just transversed by one inducer field, the one from the nearest inducer. That's the key. Both inducer fields collide in the center in a point between both induced coils and are expelled from the core. Therefore each induced coil is under the action of one inducer field. The two induced fields, which oppose to each inducer field, will be bucking each other  <------------   ------------->  . With vectors :   B1induced + B2induced = 0 . I have not tested it, but theoretically it is a perfect bucking system.


Repulsion  N ----------> <-----------  N    (inducer coils)
                       <---------    --------->         (induced coils)

.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 12, 2016, 07:37:01 PM
...and that a straight core can be implemented as long as there is movement. so try your staight core again but with movement. might need to change wire though. ie. magnet wire with top sanded.

I have done that test with a straight core and moving the contact point along the coil turns and I have not noticed any variation on the intenesity in any of the two bulbs. I guess that the inductance of the straight core is much lower and the effect over the final impedance is almost null. Also the frequency in my test is very low. In a toroidal core maybe the inductance is greater, as consequence of a stronger magnetic field, and the final effect is big enough to be noted in the bulbs as my other video shows. Also I may guess that you have not done the simple test that you posted for us some days ago to prove the part G theory of magnetic resistance. I hope your part G to be designed with good physical background and not the background that you used when posted that simple test.

https://vimeo.com/178585834 (https://vimeo.com/178585834)

Note: my bulbs are built for 12V and 5 watts. Therefore the intensity across each one is I = 5/12 Amperes, and their ohmic resistance is R = V/I = 12*12/5 = 28 ohms. A big increase in impedance is required to modify this value and be noted in the light intensity.

From the moment I did the video with the variac powered with DC I realized the the proposal of magnetic resistance in part G could be valid. Anyway I still think that simple resistors, even wasteful, will make the same job: moving the fields.  And it is easier to design and build for non instructed people in this subject of magnetism as myself

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 12, 2016, 08:46:50 PM
Cadman;
we know !
 by the way,  i love this statement   "Can we have an exchange of ideas? HELL NO!!!! THE YAMMERING SPHINCTERS SHOW UP with page after page of NO YOU GOTTA DO IT MY WAY bullshit. JEEZZUS"
 well i would love to hear a rendition of "I'm dreaming of a white Christmas" by the YAMMERING SPHINCTER DUO.
does any one have any breath mints, it smells like shit on this thread.

Hanon;
The test you did with the variac is valid and prove what i have been saying for almost a year. the reason your other test did not work was the fact that the core was way to small. look at the size difference and you will see i am right.
wistiti did the exact same test and noticed a change in intensity but his test was on the toriod he posted.
 Doug told me the winding of the toroid core was a bitch to wind, boy was he right, the wire and core i chose with out a vise is almost impossible. that is why i did not post pics yet because i got so frustrated that i put it down before i slammed it on the ground.  i do not have a vise right now but will get one soon.
that is part of the reason why i am considering a 1500 to 2000 va straight core but have no funds at this moment  but it doesn't matter whether it is straight or in toroidal form,  the outcome will still be the same as long as the core is large enough. my theory of part G and your variac test is one and the same whether you think is is or not.

the choice of resistors use is of course your choice,  but you know it will never be self running and high power resistors are crazy expensive that will get hot, fore warned.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 12, 2016, 11:43:51 PM
I wish i could kill the stupidity because it's running rampant on this thread.

You people are completely WRONG ! one north electromagnet taken up while a south electromagnet taken down will not work because the spin directions are opposing. does your feeble tittle minds even comprehend what the hell i just said. probably not because small minded people think small together.
I REPEAT, SPIN DIRECTIONS ARE OPPOSING with a N/S set up. look it up on any fucking Physics web site of your choice, just do it.
you will find that all you N/S'ers are completely wrong from the git go. of course you people probably WON'T look it up because you to stupid to do the research and would rather run your big fat fucking mouth instead just for the sake of arguing and to save your sorry asses from complete Embarrassment. your research in the figuera device is piss fucking poor and lacks ANY SCIENTIFIC DATA TO BACK UP YOUR ABSURD CLAIMS.
all the data i have posted CAN be backed up scientifically and COMPLETELY proven with out one single notion of doubt unless your a complete idiot like daredummy of rstupid that post the most outlandish, Ridiculous shit i ever heard that has nothing to do with the Figuera device what so ever.
when GOD said get in line for brains, you two must of thought he said trains and both of you got on the slowest one you could find. ha, ha, ha, that's funny stuff there.

i repeat, repeat, N/S spin direction when used in the Figuera set up will not work, look it up yourselves "if" you can read. the ONLY way Figuera could get a stationary dynamo to work is with two opposing electromagnets, one taken up, while the other taken down causing not only the B fields to cancel but the Electric field to be doubled in strength.
with N/S set up the attractive forces are to strong to vary any kind of field what so ever.

my 1 year old grand child knows not to put the square block in the round hole because it wouldn't fit, i would suggest you two simple minded people do the same. being stuck on stupid does nothing but back step this thread and hamper what we are trying to achieve. if you can't handle the truth or the reality of the Figuera device then i would suggest you two clowns get your own thread and call it "Figuera's device, pee wee hermin style" or even " IDIOT 101" advanced class at 7 pm.


'WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE WILL WORK except pure DC"
   COMPLETELY WRONG STATEMENT,  i would expect a little better from you Forest since you've been on this site for so long. stop feeding the simple minded trolls, pets are not allowed.
your statement is so far from the truth it's not funny, this tells me you and the trolls have not built even a demo device to back up you claims.
 there is, and never will be resistors in the figuera device what so ever. resistors wastes electricity that is why figuera chose to it magnetically, no unnecessary waste.

part G can never be replaced or removed because the kick back from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary is stored in part G's core in the form of a magnetic field similar to an inductor,  to be used at the next half turn of the brush, feeding the next set of electromagnet.
this part can never be replaced with an inverter either as there is no place to store power in the form of a magnetic field. i'm not being disrespectful to you but you need to study the patents a little more before you post such completely wrong statements.

this is for all the misinformed people that think N/S will work. study the bottom graph, do you not see the induced are opposing in the Figuera device,  DUH !. if you can read then it will tell you it won't work PERIOD ! this graph was pulled from a physics web site so if you disagree with it then i guess the whole world is wrong and only you are right. get real !
now, look at the top graph, do you not see the fact that the induced of N/N set up in the Figuera device are in the same direction, meaning they support each other while B field cancel causing double intensity E field. if you can not understand this simple scientific fact that is staring you smack dead in the face then you are to stupid to attempt a Figuera build.
 i can though, draw it out for you in crayola crayons,  with nice pretty colorful pictures with pop up's that can help you understand my meaning,  but "if", and only "if" you talk nice to me.
i again say N/S WILL NOT WORK ! study the bottom graph and pull your heads out of you ass before it's to late to build a device. our whole way of life will change shortly at the hand of evil people that want us in bondage. people like the BUSH'S, OBAMA'S, CLINTON'S, ROTHSCHILD'S, ROCKEFELLER'S and so on,  will destroy this world.

Mr Kite, spin direction of AC do not collide when set up correctly. At each cycle,  the Polarity are always altered which reaching zero unlike in DC application.

You talk about Textbooks, I talked about Proven Ideas like the M.E.G of Thomas etc., can you see the difference?

The Secondary coils must be bucked not the Primaries.

Does AC Generators utilizes SS or NN rotor Manet arrangement?

Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?

We are tired of your useless diagrams please.

Point us to a device that emulates your theory if you can not at least be a man to practically defend yourself.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 13, 2016, 02:17:52 AM
"We are tired of your useless diagrams please."

Well sir were "ALL" tired of you big mouth and completely stupid ideas. imagine that ! besides i know it is just your irritating mouth running because i have people pm me all the time thanking me for my detailed drawings saying it helps them understand.


"Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?"
 YES ! the Figuera device you idiot, unlike ANY generator in the world.

"Does AC Generators utilizes SS or NN rotor Manet arrangement?"
 are you that fucking desperate and stupid you have to ask SUCH a stupid question. oh, well, i forgot whom i was talking to.

"Mr Kite"
You damn right i'm soaring high in the sky while looking at your stupid little self on the ground. what's your iQ 85

NO BODY WANTS YOUR LOOSER ASS ON THIS THREAD, NO BODY LIKES YOUR RIDICULOUS COMPLETE NONSENSE POSTING OR IDEAS.

please leave this thread,  you are chaotic, disrupting and a down right piss ant of a man that gives black men a bad rap. you are nothing but a big mouth, jive taking, getto running piece of crap.

"if you can not at least be a man to practically defend yourself."
 unlike yourself that closely resembles a "BITCH"

dude, no one on this thread wants you here, no one likes your idea's, no one cares to listens to your mouth run constantly. and if need be everyone will sign a petition to bar you from here, so do us all a favor and leave this thread. can you understand english, leave this thread for ever.
i bet you road the "special bus" to school, you know the special needs bus.

 Doug, tell him he did good today cuz i'm not.

well guys i guess this thread is over and done with, as long as this moron remains we will never get any where. i already know how it works so no sweat off my balls, but i tried to pass it on only to be blocked by utter morons.

good luck with this IDIOT !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 13, 2016, 06:14:14 AM
I think rather than personal attacks videos showing what works and what does not work irrespective of whether there is COP>1 or COP<1 would be far better to make progress here.

Mr. Cadman..You have indicated that the Ramaswami device configuration works but is COP<1. Why don't you try it with a diode in the secondary alone to making the secondary output to flow in one way which will merge in the voltages. The Primary can remain AC so that the inductive impedance reduces the current drawn. Half of AC would be not used though in the secondary output. Please see in such a case what is the voltage and amperage in secondary and whether it is COP<1 or COP>1.

My problem is entire team which worked on this project with me has left. I have used large cores and it requires a team to build the coils again and take a Video and show. I will most certainly post some video when time and money permits.

The problem that I see that both the identical pole and opposte pole arrangements work with different types of Geometries. In a straight pole only the opposite pole works. But it is a simple observation from experiments and there is no need to attack each other and use abusive language towards each other.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 13, 2016, 07:21:23 AM
"We are tired of your useless diagrams please."

Well sir were "ALL" tired of you big mouth and completely stupid ideas. imagine that ! besides i know it is just your irritating mouth running because i have people pm me all the time thanking me for my detailed drawings saying it helps them understand.


"Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?"
 YES ! the Figuera device you idiot, unlike ANY generator in the world.

"Does AC Generators utilizes SS or NN rotor Manet arrangement?"
 are you that fucking desperate and stupid you have to ask SUCH a stupid question. oh, well, i forgot whom i was talking to.

"Mr Kite"
You damn right i'm soaring high in the sky while looking at your stupid little self on the ground. what's your iQ 85

NO BODY WANTS YOUR LOOSER ASS ON THIS THREAD, NO BODY LIKES YOUR RIDICULOUS COMPLETE NONSENSE POSTING OR IDEAS.

please leave this thread,  you are chaotic, disrupting and a down right piss ant of a man that gives black men a bad rap. you are nothing but a big mouth, jive taking, getto running piece of crap.

"if you can not at least be a man to practically defend yourself."
 unlike yourself that closely resembles a "BITCH"

dude, no one on this thread wants you here, no one likes your idea's, no one cares to listens to your mouth run constantly. and if need be everyone will sign a petition to bar you from here, so do us all a favor and leave this thread. can you understand english, leave this thread for ever.
i bet you road the "special bus" to school, you know the special needs bus.

 Doug, tell him he did good today cuz i'm not.

well guys i guess this thread is over and done with, as long as this moron remains we will never get any where. i already know how it works so no sweat off my balls, but i tried to pass it on only to be blocked by utter morons.

good luck with this IDIOT !

You ain't soaring high in any sky.because up there like a weight.of a kite, you are a fraction to infinity being carried hitter and titer. No Balance, no grip.

Have been avoiding to label you a racist  but it is evident you are.

Can't even make your abusive speech without exhibiting such attitude. Evidently you a low human. Extremely low. You ain't Marathonman but rather a Maggot.

The N-S-N-S you are kicking against is a working principle.

People who thanked you for your ideas have now been able build a working Figuera Device in line with your useless non-practically proven useless bucking Primary Idea rigth?

Still with all your barking, you can't practically defend your self-wound baseless principle.

You called yourself a grand but defy the reality because you display no iota of maturity on here. and rigth from the day you replied to one of my posts, I see a need to drive you high and low like your Part-G.

I refuse to call rubbish rubbish, I say lubbish.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 13, 2016, 11:24:43 AM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 13, 2016, 02:45:20 PM
 MM
I dont need to tell someone they did a good job they will know if they did for themselves. People who need a pat on the back for showing up to work are annoying. Personally I would be happier if they do not show up because they tend to do the least amount of actual work and take the credit for all the work done by all the people who did.

  "Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?"
 YES ! the Figuera device you idiot, unlike ANY generator in the world.

   All of them work off the same principles the same rules.Clemente just got rid of rotating the magnet but kept the changing magnetic field with the strength required to produce a viable output. That in itself should be enough to figure it out. Once you understand a rotating generator you should be able to come up with a way the same way Clemente did. So easy a child could do it. Remember that statement?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 13, 2016, 03:46:14 PM
MM
I dont need to tell someone they did a good job they will know if they did for themselves. People who need a pat on the back for showing up to work are annoying. Personally I would be happier if they do not show up because they tend to do the least amount of actual work and take the credit for all the work done by all the people who did.

  "Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?"
 YES ! the Figuera device you idiot, unlike ANY generator in the world.

   All of them work off the same principles the same rules.Clemente just got rid of rotating the magnet but kept the changing magnetic field with the strength required to produce a viable output. That in itself should be enough to figure it out. Once you understand a rotating generator you should be able to come up with a way the same way Clemente did. So easy a child could do it. Remember that statement?
And you are not even doing the rigth work. Are you?
 "Clement just got rid of rotating the magnet but kept the changing magnetic field"  And yes that would now.mean he bucked the Primaries or made use of N to N or S to S  to achieve rotating magnetic field? 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on August 13, 2016, 07:56:47 PM
Dare & Rama. We are all here because we are looking for answers ..part of that includes having differences in opinion and that's perfectly fine.Its obvious Marathonman enjoys using foul language and will look for any opportunity to do so....even call someone nigger just because of a circuit diagram.  please be the bigger man and stop responding ..keep tinkering ..that's where the rubber meets the road  ..I wish you all the best

Hanon, as much as you may hold the view that this thread is being hijacked, think of Don Smith or TK who took Tesla's ideas and coupled them with technologies that were not available to him at the time and in the process improved them...Which is why the idea of using AC instead of part G could be feasible..as there is motion of magnetic flux but one where the B fields of the inducers are aproaching and retreating (assuming N....N configuration)..whether this is more efficient or not , only time will tell...but its no reason to stop asking questions..bottomline flux cutting is still achieved, its now only a matter of figuring out how to strengthen the inducer magnetic field strength for the least input possible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 13, 2016, 08:51:18 PM
Dare & Rama. We are all here because we are looking for answers ..part of that includes having differences in opinion and that's perfectly fine.Its obvious Marathonman enjoys using foul language and will look for any opportunity to do so....even call someone nigger just because of a circuit diagram.  please be the bigger man and stop responding ..keep tinkering ..that's where the rubber meets the road  ..I wish you all the best

Hanon, as much as you may hold the view that this thread is being hijacked, think of Don Smith or TK who took Tesla's ideas and coupled them with technologies that were not available to him at the time and in the process improved them...Which is why the idea of using AC instead of part G could be feasible..as there is motion of magnetic flux but one where the B fields of the inducers are aproaching and retreating (assuming N....N configuration)..whether this is more efficient or not , only time will tell...but its no reason to stop asking questions..bottomline flux cutting is still achieved, its now only a matter of figuring out how to strengthen the inducer magnetic field strength for the least input possible.
Jegz, thank you for the nerve cooling words.

I might be wrong, but base on the 2 test I have done, the only way To Strength the inducer magnetic field is via application of Serially Connected Twisted Multifilar Coated Copper Wire.

Yet another way additionally is to wind the Primaries in Spiral . God if you do this, you gonna get Extremely Powerful Flux or Inducer Magnetic Field with low input although low input to the primaries is determined by the amount of Frequency you apply. With higher frequency application, what you gonna achieve is reduction in starting and running current and this will pave way for a Self runner system with ease.

The catch in Multifilar wire is that asnyou dive the wire further you will be increasing the Flux or Magnetic field it will be generating.

Praically this is whatbis mean:
Let say you bougth a 2kg of AWG#31 which is 0.30mm in diameter. If you divide it into 2 part, you will have 1000grams per part.  If you divide it into 20 parts, you will have 100grams per part but if you divide it into 200 part or STRANDS, you will have 10grams per part or strands.

Now if you twist 2 part together and use that to make your emag, the flux strength will be extremely low to the flux strength of 20 strands and the flux strength of 20strands will be extremely low to the one of serially connected twisted 200 strands which it strands are 10g each.

You can se that each level makes 2kg still. And even if iu apply he same voltage at beach level or part, you will not get the same Flux nor Magnetic field strength.

I have tested whatbis stated above.

640Ohms is the ohmic value of 2kg of AWG30 or SWG28 and that needs a minimum of 500V AC or.DC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 13, 2016, 09:19:36 PM
...
Mr. Cadman..You have indicated that the Ramaswami device configuration works but is COP<1. ...

No, sorry, I have never ever built a "Ramaswami" device. I built a N-S pole, 2 inducer, 1 induced, PWM DC sine wave setup that was COP<1, and that was before you made your first post in this thread.

I have learned a lot since then and I have a clear build concept to follow now.

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 13, 2016, 09:22:26 PM
"When you negate Lenz in a Coil or transformer, to achieve overunity, just increase the magnetic flux and frequency and the Zero Point Energy Field will flow freely into your Coil to multiply your Output.
The use of Bifilar will not give much Magnetic Flux like using serially connected 20 strands and above.
The rate at which you drive the Concentrated Flux will determine the amount of Radiant Energy the Secondary will be able to Pump out for you. Also, the Gauge number of your secondary matters.
Though it can be used that way, Partnered output coils are actually overunity Generator in Disguise so treat them as such by using thin Gauge like 0.31mm wire for your Primary which must be wound with Multifilar wire of that stated gauge. Now drive the Powerful output FLUX of that Primary with HIGH FREQUENCY. Wind your secondaries with Thick gauge like AWG15 or AWG 8 etc. to get concentrated Electrons from the environment and thus keep down the driving current from the power supply.
Note: the amount of Flux your primary is outputting and the gauge of of your secondaries will determine the amount of usable power that will be available in the Primary. Your Core Must be Moulded Core be it industrially manufactured or homemade (recommended). You need High Frelquency, Super Strong Flux from the primary to fully turn bucking output coils into Overunity Generator. Your Core must be Big enough to withstand the Flux your Splitted Pralled Primaries will be Producing.
*Do not limit yourself to 20 strands as I mentioned earlier, you can go as high as 200 strands.
0.31mm coated copper wire is 5grams per 24foot 5inches. So 200 strands of that twisted together will give 1kg which you can even divide into two to make it 400 strands and connect each strand in series to the next one provide you can patiently do so.
Hint: To remove coating of enamel on each leads at a time, briefly subjet them all to burning Gas.
AWG#30 is 32ohms per 100g and 1.5ohms per 5g. Generally, the higher the ohmic value of a coil, the higher the needed voltage to drive to generate it Maximum Flux.
Learn to make Litz wire making machine. You need it. There are 2 versions now which can be made using wood like I did.
To get high magnetic flux high current is not needed so using thinner gauge is better as that will require high voltage which will also aid the flow of z.p.e over the secondaries and reduce input current further.
You can power your bucking coil using AC to avoid back emf of DC. Just make an High Frequency Pure Sine Wave Inverter which Have Moulded Core Center tapped High Voltage Transformer and supply the output of the Transformer from the inverter to your Bucking Coil Overunity TrafoGen Primary and use Diodes to rectify the higher output with High frequency diodes like HER508 and Invert it again to Generate AC and from there, make the set up self charging by converting the AC from the second inverter to DC using an AC to DC converter and link that to your Battery or better High Farad Serially Connected Super Capacitor Bank(The BEST OPTION)
Good luck."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 13, 2016, 11:39:18 PM
Jegz

Thanks for your kind words.

I can confirm that if we increase the number of wires in the multifilar coil inductive impedance increases enormously and very low current is drawn but high magnetic field is achieved in primary core. We have done this even before I started posting here and has disclosed it in one of my first posts.

I will not post here until I can post a video.

Thanks again
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 14, 2016, 03:51:24 AM
Hannon

 Patience. Just wait for it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 14, 2016, 02:23:13 PM
Jegz

Thanks for your kind words.

I can confirm that if we increase the number of wires in the multifilar coil inductive impedance increases enormously and very low current is drawn but high magnetic field is achieved in primary core. We have done this even before I started posting here and has disclosed it in one of my first posts.

I will not post here until I can post a video.

Thanks againr

Sir,
You do notnhave to increase turns of wire in Multifilar. All you need do is to increase turns without using additional wire.

How do you do this?

Simply divide into further sections the same Multifilar wire you made your primaries with and connect the new leads in series still.
Each leads will store the same amount of energy and when in series, the.power will add up and that makes it Super Powerful.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 14, 2016, 03:56:28 PM
And you are not even doing the rigth work. Are you?
 "Clement just got rid of rotating the magnet but kept the changing magnetic field"  And yes that would now.mean he bucked the Primaries or made use of N to N or S to S  to achieve rotating magnetic field?

 He eliminated rotation and moved the field of greatest influence over coil Y. Flux leaves one side and re=enters the other side of a magnet. It has direction which is constant. Out of the north into the south. The Y coil is effected by a changing field, induction ring any bells with you? It's the direction of flow of the field which is what happens when you flip a single magnet near a coil. If you use the strength of one of the fields to move the point of collision of the two fields you have a difference of flux flowing in different directions from the two opposing magnetic fields with out turning a large mass to flip the field of a massive single magnet. You can control the strength of each of the two magnets. The difference between a transformer and a generator will be your undoing. Enjoy your cop 1 trafo. I still defend your right to trial and error. Just remember the objective as you get increasingly further from Clemente's generator design. It's not even close to a bucking coil design. There is no double coil in the Y's that wouldnt work as per the design in the patent but I would not expect you to understand why that is. You have Beardon on the brain itis.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 14, 2016, 10:18:18 PM
He eliminated rotation and moved the field of greatest influence over coil Y. Flux leaves one side and re=enters the other side of a magnet. It has direction which is constant. Out of the north into the south. The Y coil is effected by a changing field, induction ring any bells with you? It's the direction of flow of the field which is what happens when you flip a single magnet near a coil. If you use the strength of one of the fields to move the point of collision of the two fields you have a difference of flux flowing in different directions from the two opposing magnetic fields with out turning a large mass to flip the field of a massive single magnet. You can control the strength of each of the two magnets. The difference between a transformer and a generator will be your undoing. Enjoy your cop 1 trafo. I still defend your right to trial and error. Just remember the objective as you get increasingly further from Clemente's generator design. It's not even close to a bucking coil design. There is no double coil in the Y's that wouldnt work as per the design in the patent but I would not expect you to understand why that is. You have Beardon on the brain itis.
You can keep running your mouth. What is real is real and you hve finally aligned with it at last.
But you actually  finally lost it all Marathonman if you know what that means anyway.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 14, 2016, 11:19:13 PM
KEEP CALM,
FORGET THE PATENTS
AND
FOLLOW DARE AND RAMA IDEAS
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 15, 2016, 12:05:19 AM
KEEP CALM,
FORGET THE PATENTS
AND
FOLLOW DARE AND RAMA IDEAS
.

Neither should destructive  Wolves like you be fed. You keep on infiltrating EMJunkie's Partnered output Coil thread with your Disinfomational deceitful Scheme and he kept honestly answering to educate you about what is genuine and otherwise. But unknown to Chris, you are a Wolf in sheep's leather.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 15, 2016, 05:37:48 AM
dareasswhole;
 you have got to be the most ignorant bastard i have ever come across. Doug lives back east and i live in Texas you dumb ass wipe. so now your attacking everybody that doesn't follow you fucking bull shit ideas that you have not even tested, oh excuse me your whole "two" tests and now your some big shot Figuera know it all,  fucking please getto man. how much are you getting paid to disrupt this thread you monster pile of shit.
i talked to homeless people that understand the Figuera device better than you do. all you have is the meg up your ass but i guess you like it up there fag.
YOU are the one spreading disinformation and constantly running your big fat mouth. you are a piss ant of a man and i curse the loose woman that bore you. i bet she's really proud of her retarded son. hows the little special bus ?.

read and study the patent dumb ass or can you shut that big F-in mouth of your long enough. probably not!

to all the retards of the world,  "darefaggot"  the two test wonder,  is going to dawn his pink cape and save the world with his totally screwed up idea. your a retarded bastard and to stupid to realize it. your right Hanon lets all completely loose our F-in mind and follow this completely insane moron of a person that has an IQ of 85.
dareasswhole i would let you clean my toilet let alone follow your stupidity. i have never met a more stupid, ignorant person in my life then you that doesn't know when to shut his big fat getto mouth.

i pittey stupid people like you, always trying to steel the show to make up for his lacking of a real man. come on getto man fag, lets hear more of your stupid, outlandish getto idea's. better yet let's see your getto device work, come on stupid we want to see your getto device work, all the 85 IQ people want to see your getto device work

better to be a wolf than a faggot with a meg sticking out his ass. ha, ha, ha, ha
by by getto man.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 15, 2016, 08:12:42 AM
dareasswhole;
 you have got to be the most ignorant bastard i have ever come across. Doug lives back east and i live in Texas you dumb ass wipe. so now your attacking everybody that doesn't follow you fucking bull shit ideas that you have not even tested, oh excuse me your whole "two" tests and now your some big shot Figuera know it all,  fucking please getto man. how much are you getting paid to disrupt this thread you monster pile of shit.
i talked to homeless people that understand the Figuera device better than you do. all you have is the meg up your ass but i guess you like it up there fag.
YOU are the one spreading disinformation and constantly running your big fat mouth. you are a piss ant of a man and i curse the loose woman that bore you. i bet she's really proud of her retarded son. hows the little special bus ?.

read and study the patent dumb ass or can you shut that big F-in mouth of your long enough. probably not!

to all the retards of the world,  "darefaggot"  the two test wonder,  is going to dawn his pink cape and save the world with his totally screwed up idea. your a retarded bastard and to stupid to realize it. your right Hanon lets all completely loose our F-in mind and follow this completely insane moron of a person that has an IQ of 85.
dareasswhole i would let you clean my toilet let alone follow your stupidity. i have never met a more stupid, ignorant person in my life then you that doesn't know when to shut his big fat getto mouth.

i pittey stupid people like you, always trying to steel the show to make up for his lacking of a real man. come on getto man fag, lets hear more of your stupid, outlandish getto idea's. better yet let's see your getto device work, come on stupid we want to see your getto device work, all the 85 IQ people want to see your getto device work

better to be a wolf than a faggot with a meg sticking out his ass. ha, ha, ha, ha
by by getto man.
You keep exposing yourself the more. I am glad you always fall for the cheàp bait thrown at you in Random. Wao so surprisingly revealing!

As usual, No balance ,No Grip exact character of a loose Kite.

See, you are on your own. Keep on barking and shoving faces.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 15, 2016, 01:09:49 PM
Dont get yourself to wound up MM. He is the one who is trying his best to keep anyone from from the truth. All his efforts are to drive people to another type of device not related to the title of the thread by simple methods or tactics. Bait and switch, false accusations. You even pointed out he could go to the site manager and ask if we have the same ip address but he is not interested in the truth contrary to his statements. For some reason which is unkown he doesnt even give a method to his madness. Just be prepared to purchase the eventual circuit driver after you waste a lot of money and time on piecing together with poor instructions his dream circuit. What ever that is. He is a tool like a left handed wrench. Throwing around the phrase dont destroy the dipole. I doubt he even knows what that means based on his design. It will be better to just wait him out as he performs the hope girl two step. He is eager for commerce even stating the world as a single resource of cheap labor. He is the opposite end of the spectrum to any person who wishes to be independent or self sustained. Notice what people he is stroking. anyone who is going to help lead everyone away from the patent. He could with out any effort start another thread for his personal theory but he insists on hijacking this thread. Very curious to know what is in it for him? I guess time will tell, there is enough time to wait and see even if it takes a couple years. MM imagine what you can do in that time. I think i will just lurk and watch the car wreck ,I have my score cards and my comfy chair and plenty of coffee a perfect view of the impact sight. Just have to wait for the blinking yellow light to confuse the hell out of him. I call dibs on any change in his pockets the alternator and starter spark coil packs if he is driving a gas'r.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on August 15, 2016, 01:22:05 PM
We are Insulting people's mothers now? there are lines self respecting men don't cross.


Fact

1.The patent was filed in 1908 ;the technology was primitive compared to what we have today
2.We have No idea whatsoever as to the exact coil configuration used as that was not expressly stated in the patent.
3. Part G was depicted a s a set of resistors
4.The jury is still out on whether the poles are attracting or in repulsion mode..this wasn't expressly stated either.

Therefore
Suggestions by forum members to use off the shelf components such as inverters only serve to make the process easier for people who lack a rich technical background..and last time I checked they comprise most of the world's population.

Coil configuration is fair game at this point in time. whatever will give the most bang for your buck is most welcome..I strongly suggest guys take heed of what Dare is saying about how to wind those coils in litz and multifilar fashion (although Im sure most of you know this already). Same thing for bucking coils.

If you don't want to spend time winding a variac and trying to figure out the ratio of turns then use AC as suggested..the motion of the flux will be different but the flux cutting shall still be achieved without physical motion as envisioned by Clemente . and this is where Bucking coils will likely be needed should you choose to go this  route .

Once you visualize this then it is upon you to decide whether you will

A) use 60/50 hz input frequency  but in the process require a shitload of wire to create a strong magnetic field, but end up with an output that's 60 hz and clean/ready to use
B)use high frequency input and need less wire on L1 but need additional components to return to mains frequency at L2..you will either go air-core way or have to get your hands on magnetite to use as a cheap metglas core alternative

These ideas are being suggested not because the aim is to hijack the thread but because they are easier to implement. If you want to build part G no one is stopping you. You guys are acting like its herecy being committed..is this a forum or is this a Spanish Inquisition?..then again Hanon and Clemente are..lol

Its duplicity, on one hand to shut down alternative suggestions and improvements by some while at the same time pushing a different rendition of part G from others which is not in the patent...or citing William Hooper's patent  which came 60 years later..theyre all valid ideas

Newsflash
There is already a working COP>1 device following the principles being suggested  by Dare giving 2.5 times OU..verified by Jlnaudin as well...Im assuming most have heard of it...if we brainstorm peacefully I see no reason why we can't do better

GEGENE!
http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/indexen.htm







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 01:51:00 PM
Spanish Inquisition? Could I have the Domeniqus roule by this theatralic act ?

What is the "Power Factor" ? Probably a magnetic force "Lever Factor" !?

           Gegene ,a kind of Hectors Transverter , the Roto(r)verter static.

                                        Peswiki : Rotoverter

Induction motors operate by locking the rotor to the rotating magnetic field of the stator. Most loads do not require the magnetic field to be at full strength to achieve the desired mechanical power output. Lowering the input voltage to the motor with a Variac is a simple test anyone can do to prove this principle. Most drill press motors will run quite well on 60 volts input. Cutting the Voltage in half also cuts the current in half, which cuts the Power input by 75%! Once the motor is Power Factor Corrected for this voltage, the motor will appear to run on NEARLY NOTHING!!!!
Probably there is a really simple solution,based by step up and step down voltage transformation circuit. 

 
     
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 15, 2016, 04:14:43 PM
I HAVE SOLVED IT.

If you combine Figuera's patent with a MEG, a rotoverter, a GEGENE and a SSG plus Tesla's magnifying transmitter you can output it through darediamond's copied inverter schematic  (you can build it easy) and have COP>gazillion!

All you have to do is wind #31 inverse twisted multifiler (200 strands at least for HUGE magnetic field) spiral cone shaped bucking pancake coil on your core (must be molded) and pulse it at 1.21 GHz to excite the aether and the zero point energy will flow in and give unlimited power!

Complete plans and never before revealed secret details only $19.95 US
Paypal accepted
--
Honest!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 04:43:22 PM
I HAVE SOLVED IT.

If you combine Figuera's patent with a MEG, a rotoverter, a GEGENE and a SSG plus Tesla's magnifying transmitter you can output it through darediamond's copied inverter schematic  (you can build it easy) and have COP>gazillion!

All you have to do is wind #31 inverse twisted multifiler (200 strands at least for HUGE magnetic field) spiral cone shaped bucking pancake coil on your core (must be molded) and pulse it at 1.21 GHz to excite the aether and the zero point energy will flow in and give unlimited power!

Complete plans and never before revealed secret details only $19.95 US
Paypal accepted
--
Honest!

Please include your functional prototype and I will send you,later after testing the functionality of your device  ::) ,let me calculate, okya: $ 24,95 US  , freight included !

In-quis you believe ? ;) No Cadman world but https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2mRA03dWUI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2mRA03dWUI)

http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/bf_2.png          100 in : 20000 out ?
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tagor on August 15, 2016, 05:37:26 PM


Newsflash
There is already a working COP>1 device following the principles being suggested  by Dare giving 2.5 times OU..verified by Jlnaudin as well...Im assuming most have heard of it...if we brainstorm peacefully I see no reason why we can't do better

GEGENE!
http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/indexen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/indexen.htm)

with 900 W in and 2.3 kW out it is very easy to do a selfrunner !

did you see any selfrunner ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 15, 2016, 05:43:08 PM
with 900 W in and 2.3 kW out it is very easy to do a selfrunner !

did you see any selfrunner ?


Yes, you need to construct simple HF transformer and HF power diode bridge.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 05:47:05 PM

Yes, you need to construct simple HF transformer and HF power diode bridge.

But this is a very L(ow)F transformer :
 https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=FR&NR=667647A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19291018&DB=EPODOC&locale=de_ep
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 15, 2016, 06:28:23 PM

...then again Hanon and Clemente are..lol


That sentence defines perfectly what you are.

------------------------------------

Going back to technical subjects. It is not a matter of simplicity or old methods vs. new methods. It is a matter of different things:

AC:  1 signal

Commutator:  2 signals

The same???. For more details, read the 1908 patent

I only say to follow the patent.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 07:08:18 PM
"AC: 1 signal     Commutator: 2 signals "
I think, "YES",there is the need to read the "1908" publication :
https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-44267.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-44267.pdf)

a. the "Figuera" is only( = no es más) the functional transformation of the Faraday-induction laws
Este  principio,  no  es  nuevo  puesto  que no  es  más que  una  consecuencia  de las Leyes de la inducción sentadas por Faraday en el año 1831: lo que sí es nuevo  y  que  se  quiere  privilegiar  es  la aplicación  de  este  principio  a  una  máquina que produzca grandes corrientes eléctricas industriales, que hasta la presente  no  se  pueden  obtener  sino  transformando  en  electricidad  el  trabajo  mecánico.

b.Now to the description :
DESCRIPCIÓN     DEL     GENERADOR     DE     EXCITACIÓN     VARIABLE “FIGUERA”

the work principle
Aquí,   lo   que   cambia   constantemente   es   la   intensidad   de   la   corriente excitadora  que  imanta  los  electroimanes excitadores  y  esto  se  consigue valiéndose de una resistencia a través de la que, una corriente apropiada, que se toma de un origen exterior cualquiera imanta uno o varios electroimanes, y, conforme  la  resistencia  va  siendo  mayor  o  menor,  la  imantación  de  los electroimanes  va  aminorando  o  aumentando  y  variando,  por  lo  tanto,  la intensidad  del  campo  magnético,  o  sea del  flujo  que  atraviesa  al  circuito inducido.

the operation:
El funcionamiento de la máquina es el siguiente: se ha dicho que la escobilla “O”  gira  alrededor  del  cilindro  “G”  y siempre  en  contacto  con  dos  de  sus delgas.  Cuando  está  en  contacto  con  la delga  “1”  la  corriente  que  viene  del generador  y  pasa  por  la  escobilla  y  delga  “1”,  va  a  imantar  al  máximun  los electroimanes  N  pero  no  los  S  porque  lo impide  toda  la  resistencia;  de  modo que  los  primeros  electroimanes  están  llenos  de  corriente  y  los  segundos vacíos. Cuando la escobilla está en contacto con la delga “2” la corriente no va entera   a   los   electroimanes   N   porque tiene   que   atravesar   parte   de   la resistencia; en cambio a los electrodos S va ya algo de corriente porque esta tiene  que  vencer  menos  resistencia  que en  el  caso  anterior.  Este  mismo razonamiento  es  aplicable  al  caso  en  que  la  escobilla  “O”  cierre  el  circuito como en cada una de las distintas delgas hasta que terminadas las que están en    una    semicircunferencia    empiezan    a    funcionar    las    de    la    otra   semicircunferencia  que  están  directamente  unidas  a  las  otras.  En  suma  la resistencia hace el oficio de un distribuidor de corriente; pues to que la que nova  a  excitar  unos  electroimanes  excita  a  los  otros  y  así  sucesivamente;pudiendo  decirse  que  los  electrodos  N  y  S  obran  simultáneamente  y  en opuesto  sentido  pues  mientras  los  primeros  van  llenándose  de  corriente  se van    vaciando    los    segundos    y    repitiéndose    este    efecto    seguida    y ordenadamente   se   mantiene   una   alteración   constante   en   los   campos magnéticos  dentro  los  cuales  se  halla  colocado  el  circuito  inducido,  sin  más complicaciones  que  el  giro  de  una  escobilla  o  grupo  de  escobillas  que  se mueven  circularmente  alrededor  del  cilindro  “G”  por  la  acción  de  un  pequeño motor eléctrico.

This
Como  se  ve  en  el  dibujo  la  corriente  una  vez  ha  hecho  su  oficio  en  los diferentes   electroimanes   vuelve al   generador   de   donde   se   ha   tomado;   naturalmente que en cada revolución de la escobilla habrá un cambio de signo en la corriente inducida; pero un conmutador la hará continua si así se desea.De esta corriente se deriva una pequeña parte y con ella se excita la máquina convirtiéndola  en  auto  excitadora  y se  acciona  el  pequeño  motor  que  hace girar la escobilla y el conmutador; se retira la corriente extraña o de cebo y la máquina  continua  su  misión  sin  necesidad  de  que  le  presten  ayuda  ninguna para suministrarla indefinidamente.
seems similar to
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19940318&CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19940318&CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3)

The following spanish text is only -more/less- a repeat.

hanon,pardon,could you give me a detailed link related to "AC : 1 signal Commutator: 2 signals"
edit:  # 734  http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-25.html   
 ::)     Figuera Clemente wrote about direct or alternating current output
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 15, 2016, 08:06:12 PM
QUOTE;
"Fact

1.The patent was filed in 1908 ;the technology was primitive compared to what we have today
2.We have No idea whatsoever as to the exact coil configuration used as that was not expressly stated in the patent.
3. Part G was depicted a s a set of resistors
4.The jury is still out on whether the poles are attracting or in repulsion mode..this wasn't expressly stated either."

While granted it was a while ago somethings can't be replaced as in part "G". it will never self sustain with out it. NEVER !
fairly simple to deduce after trial and error, there is only so many ways to wind a coil especially of the time frame.
it even says it was drawn in an elementary way to get the understanding across, do you seriously think he would waste power unnecessarily like that. do you not have the ability to see past a simple drawing that says it is just a drawing, well em, i guess not.
the jury is not out, six plus people says the polarity is NN including one that has a working device. not to mention my demo device with 100 watts in and 300 watts out all at NN set up.
most of the speculation on N/S on this device was backed by no or little research and the ones that did do research got little to nothing out because of the opposing induced.

completely irrational statements backed by irrational thinking with no research what so ever leads one to no where very fast and does nothing but distract the real purpose of this tread and it's followers.

and i'll be darn if i am going to stand around while some unintelligent lemming  from the pic below runs his mouth at every thing i post about the Figuera device that can be verified by any real semi intelligent researcher. i have over three years and mega thousands of hours of research in each piece of the Figuera device and have read every patent no less than 50 times each reading between the lines.

you, my friend,  are sadly mistaken if you think i don't know what time it is with the Figuera device.

you people aren't  even in the same ball park as me.

ps. GEGENE! is not even close to the Figuera device. no resemblance what so ever.
and not a single cuss word from my sailor mouth, yah ! ex military.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on August 15, 2016, 08:10:24 PM
That was a joke. sorry if you were offended Hanon.
Yes figuera uses 2 signals to create Variation in magnetic field. The same can be achieved with 1 signal..the difference will be that Set Y will have a magnetic field approaching from both sides simultaneously...but flux cutting will be achieved in a motionless manner nonetheless
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 15, 2016, 08:16:35 PM
Jegz

Figuera was a suppressed scientist who lived in an island. The patent texts as we  shown are edited.. from our experiments we see that they are significantly altered. By whom I do not know.

The Figuera devices is so simple and that is why it troubles many. Even after 108 years.

The 1902 patents used the gap between identical poles. But the patent text says opposite poles. How do I know..experimental observation.

The 1908 patent is not even a patent application but is a disclosure document program. These documents are secret forever. How can they be obtained is a mystery to me. The 1908 patent drawings show the secodary to be placed within opposite poles. But by modifying the geometry it is possible to use identical poles also though it is cumbersome and risky and the drawing does not show it.

Now I have already built these coils but the problem is that the voltages do not merge in AC always.

We have learnt how to reduce AC input at primary. The current is there in secondary. Wevonly need to use large cores. I only Need to merge the voltages of secondaries. If any one can suggest on it I can show a video easily.

Can I use diodes  and DC capacitors in series to merge the voltages of two secondaries. Please advise. Then I can show the video of a device within days.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 15, 2016, 08:40:09 PM
That was a joke. sorry if you were offended Hanon.
Yes figuera uses 2 signals to create Variation in magnetic field. The same can be achieved with 1 signal..the difference will be that Set Y will have a magnetic field approaching from both sides simultaneously...but flux cutting will be achieved in a motionless manner nonetheless

Will not work. at least in the Figuera set up it won't, but good luck.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 08:48:43 PM
Ramaswami,
 an original patent-publication copy:
 https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Patentes%20Constantino%20de%20Buforn%20Clemente%20Figuera#page/n1/mode/2up (https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Patentes%20Constantino%20de%20Buforn%20Clemente%20Figuera#page/n1/mode/2up)

In october of 1908, suddenly Clemente Figuera filed a new patent (no. 44267) . As far as we know Mr. Figuera died very few days after filing this patent. Was it his legacy?. Was this the final piece required to complete the puzzle? Was it an improvement over the previous generator? Was it a brand new generator? We don´t know for sure yet.
After his death in 1908, his partner, Constantino de Buforn Jacas, filed 5 new patents (47706, 50216, 52968, 55411 and 57955) between the years 1910 and 1914. The important features of all those patents is that they are almost identical. And they are an exact copy of the design patented by Figuera in 1908. The very same design and in some cases the very same text to describe the machine. Buforn was clearly patenting as his own invention a machine created by Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 15, 2016, 09:18:13 PM
LancaIV

I have studied these patents and did significant experimentation.

The most efficient was the last straight pole arrangement of Buforn. It is missing in the link given by you.

If you look at the circuit design of Buforn and Figuera they are different.

Patents of improvement are always filed year after year by all on the original idea and Buforn I understand financed Figuera in his last years.

Now my question is how did they merge the secondary voltage? If I have the answervto that I have done the devivce.

We know today higher the primary voltage higher the secondary voltage and higher the frequency higherbthe secondary voltage. High Frequency may not be needed. We have also built thevrotary device but it is not perfect and we switched to AC.

If you know hoe to merge secondary voltages please let me know.

Thanks

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 10:10:08 PM
http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg455688#.V7IgutcrwSM (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg455688#.V7IgutcrwSM)

#2376 answer ?

100 W in and 20000 W out under 1 Ampére in  and 300 Ampéres out condition
http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf) page 43/44

http://alpoma.com/figuera/Bf_1.pdf (http://alpoma.com/figuera/Bf_1.pdf)

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19831209&CC=FR&NR=2528257A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19831209&CC=FR&NR=2528257A1&KC=A1)
L'esitation de la bobine peut entre  faite par une autre source d'alimentation et sera commandée par un relai temporisé electronique, comme il peut y avoir une bobine sur chaque pole  de l'aimant, ou que l'aimant inducteur soit remplacée par un électroaimant.

means in geral manner :
 the electric magnets in the Figuera/Buforn machine can be also permanent magnets

   

 

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 15, 2016, 10:24:15 PM
That was a joke. sorry if you were offended Hanon.
Yes figuera uses 2 signals to create Variation in magnetic field. The same can be achieved with 1 signal..the difference will be that Set Y will have a magnetic field approaching from both sides simultaneously...but flux cutting will be achieved in a motionless manner nonetheless

probably DC to pulsed DC= signal ,not pure AC( 1 Hz= 2 pulses)  as output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 15, 2016, 11:29:31 PM

Figuera was a suppressed scientist who lived in an island. The patent texts as we  shown are edited.. from our experiments we see that they are significantly altered. By whom I do not know.

Of course, they were edited because the patents do not fit your proposal. Very reasonable.


Quote

The 1902 patents used the gap between identical poles. But the patent text says opposite poles. How do I know..experimental observation.


Bipolarity at it best. This guy has always defended NS polarity. Maybe he is reconsidering his original idea now. Always is good to evolve.



Quote

The 1908 patent is not even a patent application but is a disclosure document program. These documents are secret forever.


False. A big big lie. The 1908 patent is a patent.  Even it was granted and is cathegorized as a granted patent in the patent office. What a great patent lawyer the one who is not able to recognize a patent. But I wont discuss any further with this guy. He is completely deaf. I even posted how to search for that patent in the official database.

This guy just want to discredit Figuera saying that he did not filed a patent. What a lie!!  And that his machine emits radiation to discourage people from doing tests

This is my belief: I think some people have got a running device and now their only aim is to discredit those who has help to promote this generator, to confuse other users with futile ideas, to spoil this thread and to create fear telling that this machine emits radiation. They want to block this generator for going public to make profits for themselves.

They only offer confusing very long posts without any sense and content. And the next post is completely different to the previous one.

A real pity....But they are happy because they are succeeding, and now I have been called inquisitor.  This is a sad day for this project.

As I have been telling I wont feed trolls so I take some days on vacation in the forum while they continue destroying this thread

I only say to study the patents and not to listen to trolls


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 15, 2016, 11:34:47 PM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 16, 2016, 12:52:09 AM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on August 16, 2016, 01:53:48 AM
@Hanon
Quote
“Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and
accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine.”


The key work here is accomplishments and until such time as someone here has accomplished something tangible they can prove it's all just speculation at best. What happens here is one group supposes their speculation without proof is somehow superior to another's speculation without proof then judges them accordingly. This is in fact everything Tesla despised hence his quote.


In effect Tesla is saying do not judge me based on what others say or believe judge me on what I have done...period. What Tesla said was time will ultimately tell the truth because it is not petty like man, it is not judgmental like man, it does not rely on speculation or beliefs like man... the truth does not have a shelf life like vegetables.


So how about you give your fellow man the benefit of doubt, consider what they say, consider their perspective and learn from it. Consider how you might learn from what they say and believe, right or wrong, to improve your own understanding.


In any case we should thank you because if I am correct you brought this technology to light and for that I thank you. I have learned things I never considered from these patents, I imagined things I never thought possible. I may be wrong, I may be right but as Tesla implied, if I can prove it then I'm the fucking man regardless of what anyone thinks or believes...such is life.


AC



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2016, 05:00:35 AM
Hanon;
I do not believe what you said at first but the rest is right on the money. people that don't have a running device are ruining this thread with corrupt lies and deceit to benefit themselves, for what purpose i have no clue.
i have risked everything to promote the true Figuera device even at the risk of loosing the respect of my piers. someone in this forum will not step up to the plate but then again he has a family to protect and i completely respect his point of view as a man, husband and a father. i am single so i will sacrifice everything to get the real Figuera out there. i am forever grateful  for the incredible information that was bequeathed to me throughout the last few years. i just wish people could see the wonderful knowledge in front of them placed upon this thread.

Rswami; your research into the Figuera device is very Controversial at best and as far as i am concerned, the original hyjacker of this thread, proven by Pjk him self along with the link to this thread  (disgusting). doesn't follow the patent at all and by all accounts is a cop >1 TRANSFORMER not a generator contrary to your belief. i have no desire to exchange words but your TRANSFORMER is not a GENERATOR of  any sort, therefore,  you have no basis to brag that you built a cop>1 Figuera device of any kind and there fore should be ashamed of such allegations. your device is not even in the ballpark of the Figuera device. if you would have studied all the patents at any length you will see you are incorrect from the start but you being you, probably not.  good luck all the same.

it makes me sick to my stomach to see such wrongful information posted on this thread designed to derail new people from the truth and in the long run you will be judged.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 16, 2016, 06:24:05 AM
Dont get yourself to wound up MM. He is the one who is trying his best to keep anyone from from the truth. All his efforts are to drive people to another type of device not related to the title of the thread by simple methods or tactics. Bait and switch, false accusations. You even pointed out he could go to the site manager and ask if we have the same ip address but he is not interested in the truth contrary to his statements. For some reason which is unkown he doesnt even give a method to his madness. Just be prepared to purchase the eventual circuit driver after you waste a lot of money and time on piecing together with poor instructions his dream circuit. What ever that is. He is a tool like a left handed wrench. Throwing around the phrase dont destroy the dipole. I doubt he even knows what that means based on his design. It will be better to just wait him out as he performs the hope girl two step. He is eager for commerce even stating the world as a single resource of cheap labor. He is the opposite end of the spectrum to any person who wishes to be independent or self sustained. Notice what people he is stroking. anyone who is going to help lead everyone away from the patent. He could with out any effort start another thread for his personal theory but he insists on hijacking this thread. Very curious to know what is in it for him? I guess time will tell, there is enough time to wait and see even if it takes a couple years. MM imagine what you can do in that time. I think i will just lurk and watch the car wreck ,I have my score cards and my comfy chair and plenty of coffee a perfect view of the impact sight. Just have to wait for the blinking yellow light to confuse the hell out of him. I call dibs on any change in his pockets the alternator and starter spark coil packs if he is driving a gas'r.
Why do you and your cohorts think like a.baby always.

Who is hijacking your thread?

You brougth up a concept, you are challenged to practically defend it and boom, you go HAYWIRE. No sane person on here is a Python.

Can't you think for yourself?
Or are you a programmable Robot?
Stop being a Kite at least for your own good as youbcan do better if you really want to.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 16, 2016, 06:50:55 AM
QUOTE;
"Fact

1.The patent was filed in 1908 ;the technology was primitive compared to what we have today
2.We have No idea whatsoever as to the exact coil configuration used as that was not expressly stated in the patent.
3. Part G was depicted a s a set of resistors
4.The jury is still out on whether the poles are attracting or in repulsion mode..this wasn't expressly stated either."

While granted it was a while ago somethings can't be replaced as in part "G". it will never self sustain with out it. NEVER !
fairly simple to deduce after trial and error, there is only so many ways to wind a coil especially of the time frame.
it even says it was drawn in an elementary way to get the understanding across, do you seriously think he would waste power unnecessarily like that. do you not have the ability to see past a simple drawing that says it is just a drawing, well em, i guess not.
the jury is not out, six plus people says the polarity is NN including one that has a working device. not to mention my demo device with 100 watts in and 300 watts out all at NN set up.
most of the speculation on N/S on this device was backed by no or little research and the ones that did do research got little to nothing out because of the opposing induced.

completely irrational statements backed by irrational thinking with no research what so ever leads one to no where very fast and does nothing but distract the real purpose of this tread and it's followers.

and i'll be darn if i am going to stand around while some unintelligent lemming  from the pic below runs his mouth at every thing i post about the Figuera device that can be verified by any real semi intelligent researcher. i have over three years and mega thousands of hours of research in each piece of the Figuera device and have read every patent no less than 50 times each reading between the lines.

you, my friend,  are sadly mistaken if you think i don't know what time it is with the Figuera device.

you people aren't  even in the same ball park as me.

ps. GEGENE! is not even close to the Figuera device. no resemblance what so ever.
and not a single cuss word from my sailor mouth, yah ! ex military.
Oh Mr Marathonman, you can keep falsly egging yourself on. But I will keep on challenging you to show us what you claimed to have practically built.

Cameras are fucking cheap.  So  whybdo you keep parabolating?

There people of papers on here who are satisfied with your drawings. I an hardened self-made builder and others like
me  are MORE THAN THAT. We are not Zombies like your people.

You  brought up first then you must defend it first but never younwill do that as all you enjoy.doing is insulting like you did at me when I made my first post on this thread.

Even though I do not agree with his Ideas, the young man Hanon is endlessly More Mature than you a grandpa.
 It is not about age, it is about deep thinking that foster sound Mind Maturity but do not have it.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 16, 2016, 08:51:57 AM
May I request all who differentiatea between a Generator and a Transformer to explain what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer? I have never ever hidden the fact that I'm not trained in Electricity and Magnetism. Apart from doing a lot of experiments and varying the parameters I cannot claim any formal technical knowledge in Electricity and Magnetism. As far as my very limited knowledge and understanding goes a Transformer does the job of stepping up or stepping down the voltage. When the voltage is stpped up the current is reduced and when the voltage is stepped down the current is increased. Transformers of this kind are used in many devices and also used for Electrical transmission. In a Transformer the output is always less than the input. Or a Transformer is always COP<1.

Generators on the other hand produce Electricity using the principle of Electromagnetic induction.

As I see it the Figuera device and all other devices whether they rotate the magnetic core or do not do only one thing. They create a time varying magnetic field. A conductor subjected to this time varying magnetic field gets induced Electricity. When we rotate a core as Figuera observed the magnetic drag applies and so we need to provide far higher mechnical energy than the output Electricity. But if we do not rotate the core but rotate only the magnetic field in the core we need to give only a small amount of electrical energy.

Regarding the statement that the magnets in Figuera device can be permanent magnets yes that is very true from my observations and from a theory.

I do not know if this is true or not. But Patrick has taught me that if the magnetic field does not collapse to Zero Lenz law effect would not come in to play and so if we use a circuit with full Wave Diode Bridge and make the output wave +5 to +5 at the bottom and the wave is made in to a full positive sign wave never reaching zero Lenz law would not apply but the magnetic field will be oscillated and electricity would be induced in the conductor. I had the circuit built but the output was only in milliamps and Patrick for safety reasons has limited the voltage to 40 volts. The circuit repeatedly broke down. Even when it worked there was no magnetism in the coils for at 40 volts and milliamps it is not even one watt of input and you do not expect to generate output with that. The circuit can work if the core is permanent magnet of high strength and if the voltage is high. What I have been taught is that Lenz law can come only if the magnetic field collapses to zero to reach no magnetic field condition but if the magnetic field does not collapse to zero and some magnetizm is always present no Lenz law effects can manifest. But again I do not know if this is accurate.

One thing that strikes in the Figuera circuit and BuForn circuit is that the Primaries always go to the Earth. Only if the Voltage is high there is a need to connect to the Earth. If the core was a Permanent Magnet core electricity need not be spent to generate magnetism in the primary coils. I can very assertively say that higher the voltage in the primary higher the voltage in the secondary. This I have observed from direct experimentations.

Patrick wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device first but it did not work. I have now made it to work.

Since the Hubbard device did not work we tried with Figuera device. Single module only and it was COP<1. We tried to do the multiple modules as shown in the 1908 patent and were disappointed that the results mentioned do not manifest and voltage did not merge. So we built a large core and tried again and it was COP<1 and so I put the secondaries under the primaries as well and tested and in one experiment the secondary voltages merged and the output was COP>8. Because the output was 620 volts or so I directed my staff to disassemble it as they used to experiment carelessly. We have subsequently built many devices and found that we need to cross a particular Voltage in the output coil for the secondary to cross the COP>1 and then it suddenly zooms. If we use permanent magnet core and use high voltage electricity as input to oscillate the permanent magnet core high frequency is not needed and output can be high.

There are many here who do not conduct experiments and post only theory. I do not find fault with them. The labour costs are very high in Western countries and it is not easy to build large cores and experiment. We have wound all coils manually and we have used lot of soft iron.
About 75 kgms of iron, or about 15% of iron bought by me for these experiments have become very mild permanent magnets. This magnetism is destroyed only if we heat the rod.

Now let me know how a motionless device that does not move core but rotates the magnetic field but provides much higher output than input can be called a Transformer and not Generator. Let me also know if the Figuera device acted in violation of the principles of Electromagnetic induction.

Actually these devices are very simple to construct. They are large and need to be built manually and are costly but the principles are very simple. You do not need high frequency but a high voltage input would suffice. High Voltage when combined with permanent magnets always produce COP>1 for high voltage low amperage input is sufficient. Secondary can be thick wire and it would produce both high voltage and high amperage. The permanent magnets need to be large. There is nothing more.

High Frequency is not problem if proper materials are used and I had been taught by a competent person that if we use high votlage and high frequency and ferrite core the size of the devices can be brought down easily.

The French Patent that shows the device to be placed inside a refrigerator is very intelligent. Commonsense approach to keep the cores cool. I do not think many modules are needed and a single module would do.

In my experiments the best one is Ramaswami device and then the Hubbard Configuration and then the Figuera configuration.

I have not attempted to build a self runner for Patrick has warned me that it can result in runaway currents and may even bring in lightening for the self sustaining device is said to bring in extra energy from the environment and can attract lightning and prefer living beings than iron to strike. Is this true or not I do not know but why take a risk when I'm not competent? So I have avoided doing that.

Let me know what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer now..While some people claim they have a working Figuera device and 100 watts input and 300 watts output but would not show it at least there should not be any difficulty in explaining what is the difference between a Transformer and a Generator so at least the confusing language is avoided or understood and an ignorant person like me can learn something.

Regards,

Ramaswami
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 16, 2016, 09:40:32 AM
May I request all who differentiatea between a Generator and a Transformer to explain what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer? I have never ever hidden the fact that I'm not trained in Electricity and Magnetism. Apart from doing a lot of experiments and varying the parameters I cannot claim any formal technical knowledge in Electricity and Magnetism. As far as my very limited knowledge and understanding goes a Transformer does the job of stepping up or stepping down the voltage. When the voltage is stpped up the current is reduced and when the voltage is stepped down the current is increased. Transformers of this kind are used in many devices and also used for Electrical transmission. In a Transformer the output is always less than the input. Or a Transformer is always COP<1.

Generators on the other hand produce Electricity using the principle of Electromagnetic induction.

As I see it the Figuera device and all other devices whether they rotate the magnetic core or do not do only one thing. They create a time varying magnetic field. A conductor subjected to this time varying magnetic field gets induced Electricity. When we rotate a core as Figuera observed the magnetic drag applies and so we need to provide far higher mechnical energy than the output Electricity. But if we do not rotate the core but rotate only the magnetic field in the core we need to give only a small amount of electrical energy.

Regarding the statement that the magnets in Figuera device can be permanent magnets yes that is very true from my observations and from a theory.

I do not know if this is true or not. But Patrick has taught me that if the magnetic field does not collapse to Zero Lenz law effect would not come in to play and so if we use a circuit with full Wave Diode Bridge and make the output wave +5 to +5 at the bottom and the wave is made in to a full positive sign wave never reaching zero Lenz law would not apply but the magnetic field will be oscillated and electricity would be induced in the conductor. I had the circuit built but the output was only in milliamps and Patrick for safety reasons has limited the voltage to 40 volts. The circuit repeatedly broke down. Even when it worked there was no magnetism in the coils for at 40 volts and milliamps it is not even one watt of input and you do not expect to generate output with that. The circuit can work if the core is permanent magnet of high strength and if the voltage is high. What I have been taught is that Lenz law can come only if the magnetic field collapses to zero to reach no magnetic field condition but if the magnetic field does not collapse to zero and some magnetizm is always present no Lenz law effects can manifest. But again I do not know if this is accurate.

One thing that strikes in the Figuera circuit and BuForn circuit is that the Primaries always go to the Earth. Only if the Voltage is high there is a need to connect to the Earth. If the core was a Permanent Magnet core electricity need not be spent to generate magnetism in the primary coils. I can very assertively say that higher the voltage in the primary higher the voltage in the secondary. This I have observed from direct experimentations.

Patrick wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device first but it did not work. I have now made it to work.

Since the Hubbard device did not work we tried with Figuera device. Single module only and it was COP<1. We tried to do the multiple modules as shown in the 1908 patent and were disappointed that the results mentioned do not manifest and voltage did not merge. So we built a large core and tried again and it was COP<1 and so I put the secondaries under the primaries as well and tested and in one experiment the secondary voltages merged and the output was COP>8. Because the output was 620 volts or so I directed my staff to disassemble it as they used to experiment carelessly. We have subsequently built many devices and found that we need to cross a particular Voltage in the output coil for the secondary to cross the COP>1 and then it suddenly zooms. If we use permanent magnet core and use high voltage electricity as input to oscillate the permanent magnet core high frequency is not needed and output can be high.

There are many here who do not conduct experiments and post only theory. I do not find fault with them. The labour costs are very high in Western countries and it is not easy to build large cores and experiment. We have wound all coils manually and we have used lot of soft iron.
About 75 kgms of iron, or about 15% of iron bought by me for these experiments have become very mild permanent magnets. This magnetism is destroyed only if we heat the rod.

Now let me know how a motionless device that does not move core but rotates the magnetic field but provides much higher output than input can be called a Transformer and not Generator. Let me also know if the Figuera device acted in violation of the principles of Electromagnetic induction.

Actually these devices are very simple to construct. They are large and need to be built manually and are costly but the principles are very simple. You do not need high frequency but a high voltage input would suffice. High Voltage when combined with permanent magnets always produce COP>1 for high voltage low amperage input is sufficient. Secondary can be thick wire and it would produce both high voltage and high amperage. The permanent magnets need to be large. There is nothing more.

High Frequency is not problem if proper materials are used and I had been taught by a competent person that if we use high votlage and high frequency and ferrite core the size of the devices can be brought down easily.

The French Patent that shows the device to be placed inside a refrigerator is very intelligent. Commonsense approach to keep the cores cool. I do not think many modules are needed and a single module would do.

In my experiments the best one is Ramaswami device and then the Hubbard Configuration and then the Figuera configuration.

I have not attempted to build a self runner for Patrick has warned me that it can result in runaway currents and may even bring in lightening for the self sustaining device is said to bring in extra energy from the environment and can attract lightning and prefer living beings than iron to strike. Is this true or not I do not know but why take a risk when I'm not competent? So I have avoided doing that.

Let me know what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer now..While some people claim they have a working Figuera device and 100 watts input and 300 watts output but would not show it at least there should not be any difficulty in explaining what is the difference between a Transformer and a Generator so at least the confusing language is avoided or understood and an ignorant person like me can learn something.

Regards,

Ramaswami
 

No Ramaswami, you are not Ignorant. They can keep themselves in there imbalance state like there Part-G a.k.a High and Low.

Attached is the circuit you need to merge the output power from the secondaries of the new device you made.

I will P.M you with further details to make the circuit work better.


More blessing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 16, 2016, 10:01:43 AM
May I request all who differentiatea between a Generator and a Transformer to explain what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer? I have never ever hidden the fact that I'm not trained in Electricity and Magnetism. Apart from doing a lot of experiments and varying the parameters I cannot claim any formal technical knowledge in Electricity and Magnetism. As far as my very limited knowledge and understanding goes a Transformer does the job of stepping up or stepping down the voltage. When the voltage is stpped up the current is reduced and when the voltage is stepped down the current is increased. Transformers of this kind are used in many devices and also used for Electrical transmission. In a Transformer the output is always less than the input. Or a Transformer is always COP<1.

Generators on the other hand produce Electricity using the principle of Electromagnetic induction.

As I see it the Figuera device and all other devices whether they rotate the magnetic core or do not do only one thing. They create a time varying magnetic field. A conductor subjected to this time varying magnetic field gets induced Electricity. When we rotate a core as Figuera observed the magnetic drag applies and so we need to provide far higher mechnical energy than the output Electricity. But if we do not rotate the core but rotate only the magnetic field in the core we need to give only a small amount of electrical energy.

Regarding the statement that the magnets in Figuera device can be permanent magnets yes that is very true from my observations and from a theory.

I do not know if this is true or not. But Patrick has taught me that if the magnetic field does not collapse to Zero Lenz law effect would not come in to play and so if we use a circuit with full Wave Diode Bridge and make the output wave +5 to +5 at the bottom and the wave is made in to a full positive sign wave never reaching zero Lenz law would not apply but the magnetic field will be oscillated and electricity would be induced in the conductor. I had the circuit built but the output was only in milliamps and Patrick for safety reasons has limited the voltage to 40 volts. The circuit repeatedly broke down. Even when it worked there was no magnetism in the coils for at 40 volts and milliamps it is not even one watt of input and you do not expect to generate output with that. The circuit can work if the core is permanent magnet of high strength and if the voltage is high. What I have been taught is that Lenz law can come only if the magnetic field collapses to zero to reach no magnetic field condition but if the magnetic field does not collapse to zero and some magnetizm is always present no Lenz law effects can manifest. But again I do not know if this is accurate.

One thing that strikes in the Figuera circuit and BuForn circuit is that the Primaries always go to the Earth. Only if the Voltage is high there is a need to connect to the Earth. If the core was a Permanent Magnet core electricity need not be spent to generate magnetism in the primary coils. I can very assertively say that higher the voltage in the primary higher the voltage in the secondary. This I have observed from direct experimentations.

Patrick wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device first but it did not work. I have now made it to work.

Since the Hubbard device did not work we tried with Figuera device. Single module only and it was COP<1. We tried to do the multiple modules as shown in the 1908 patent and were disappointed that the results mentioned do not manifest and voltage did not merge. So we built a large core and tried again and it was COP<1 and so I put the secondaries under the primaries as well and tested and in one experiment the secondary voltages merged and the output was COP>8. Because the output was 620 volts or so I directed my staff to disassemble it as they used to experiment carelessly. We have subsequently built many devices and found that we need to cross a particular Voltage in the output coil for the secondary to cross the COP>1 and then it suddenly zooms. If we use permanent magnet core and use high voltage electricity as input to oscillate the permanent magnet core high frequency is not needed and output can be high.

There are many here who do not conduct experiments and post only theory. I do not find fault with them. The labour costs are very high in Western countries and it is not easy to build large cores and experiment. We have wound all coils manually and we have used lot of soft iron.
About 75 kgms of iron, or about 15% of iron bought by me for these experiments have become very mild permanent magnets. This magnetism is destroyed only if we heat the rod.

Now let me know how a motionless device that does not move core but rotates the magnetic field but provides much higher output than input can be called a Transformer and not Generator. Let me also know if the Figuera device acted in violation of the principles of Electromagnetic induction.

Actually these devices are very simple to construct. They are large and need to be built manually and are costly but the principles are very simple. You do not need high frequency but a high voltage input would suffice. High Voltage when combined with permanent magnets always produce COP>1 for high voltage low amperage input is sufficient. Secondary can be thick wire and it would produce both high voltage and high amperage. The permanent magnets need to be large. There is nothing more.

High Frequency is not problem if proper materials are used and I had been taught by a competent person that if we use high votlage and high frequency and ferrite core the size of the devices can be brought down easily.

The French Patent that shows the device to be placed inside a refrigerator is very intelligent. Commonsense approach to keep the cores cool. I do not think many modules are needed and a single module would do.

In my experiments the best one is Ramaswami device and then the Hubbard Configuration and then the Figuera configuration.

I have not attempted to build a self runner for Patrick has warned me that it can result in runaway currents and may even bring in lightening for the self sustaining device is said to bring in extra energy from the environment and can attract lightning and prefer living beings than iron to strike. Is this true or not I do not know but why take a risk when I'm not competent? So I have avoided doing that.

Let me know what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer now..While some people claim they have a working Figuera device and 100 watts input and 300 watts output but would not show it at least there should not be any difficulty in explaining what is the difference between a Transformer and a Generator so at least the confusing language is avoided or understood and an ignorant person like me can learn something.

Regards,

Ramaswami
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 16, 2016, 10:28:36 AM
When you subject a coil of wire to a Zero Frequency induction, what output will you get? Zero

Before a generator can produce output power then the coils in it must be constantly energised by constant movent of magnetic field which is mostly from Permanent Magnet.

Transformers works because the magnetic induction from there primaries as FREQUENCY or in other words, they oscillate to and fro.

So you can replace Permanent magnet with electromagnet and generate power. Every Transformer have Electromagnet as it Primary to induce the secondary winding or Coil much like what is happening in device called POWER GENERATORS.

However, in true sense, A Transformer (Mostly Motionless) is a Generator while Generator (Most times Motional) is a Transformer as the Speed of the Rotor, Amount of Turns of Coil, The Gauge of Wire and Strength of Permanent Magnet determines it total output power.

So in trafo, you induced via electromagnet in gen, you induce via permanent magnet. You calculate turns of wire in both to get your needed output Wattage.

In Trafo, the Electromagnet is the Primary in Gen, The Permanent Magnet is the Primary. The only difference is The former uses Iron to convey induction with ease while the later uses Air to Convey induction with ease.

So Marathonman, what are Trying to Twist?/You ain't even doing da Twist Smartly.

A Trafo is a Generator vice-versa.

The additionally needed word is Lenzless Transformer or Lenzless Generator. And you cannot achieve that with any style of induction.

YOU CAN ONLY ACHIEVE LENZLESS OUTPUT POWER WITH COIL WINDING DIRECTION AND PROPER CONNECTION. SO IT IS ABOUT THE WIRE NOT THE INDUCTION.




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 16, 2016, 02:36:02 PM
Attached is a confusing device. Principle of Figuera device and this device is same. Electromagnetic Induction. How does this device is to be wired? NS or NN? It confused me for many many months. All devices work on the same principle only. Let me know how this device is to be wound and connected and how it can be made to produce output and how it can be made to produce high output. It is a simple device only.

Only when your dear and near ones or worst you are hospitalized and in need of blood you recognize that all human blood is the same red color and only thing that is needed is compatible blood group for blood transfusion. Until that time bombastic talks are made in arrogance.

Life is very simple and Nature is very simple and Peaceful. But it takes a lot of time to understand it.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 16, 2016, 06:47:13 PM
Attached is a confusing device. Principle of Figuera device and this device is same. Electromagnetic Induction. How does this device is to be wired? NS or NN? It confused me for many many months. All devices work on the same principle only. Let me know how this device is to be wound and connected and how it can be made to produce output and how it can be made to produce high output. It is a simple device only.

Only when your dear and near ones or worst you are hospitalized and in need of blood you recognize that all human blood is the same red color and only thing that is needed is compatible blood group for blood transfusion. Until that time bombastic talks are made in arrogance.

Life is very simple and Nature is very simple and Peaceful. But it takes a lot of time to understand it.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Rama " bombastic talks are made in arrogance" meeen lol! They dun know! There in there land, it is Kites that rule the sky!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2016, 08:34:50 PM
YES ! i can see the resemblance in this circuit to the figuera Device, with my f-in eyes closed. your as ignorant as they come hijacker. ha, ha, ha, ha.

think you can make the pic any larger, doesn't quite fit my 42 inch screen. another so called Figuera builder hard at work. yah right !.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 16, 2016, 09:20:11 PM
It's a shame that putting someone on your ignore list here doesn't actually hide their posts like it does over at Energetic Forum. Here I just see a little added text at the top of their posts "You are ignoring this user".

Gee, that's just what i wanted.

Over at EF it hides everything they post.

Soooo nice.

(And yes the box is checked in the user settings here)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 16, 2016, 10:10:10 PM
Back to business.

I wanted to give this to Hanon, so I hope he finds it amongst the noise when he returns.

Building the inductive part G vs using resistors is really pretty simple. A variac is just an autotransformer.
You don't have to build a working variac using a toroid and all, you can wind a multi tapped autotransformer using plain old E-I transformer laminations and wire it to your 'commutator'.
The commutator doesn't have to be round or cylindrical either BTW.

Download this pdf if you would like to know how to design an autotransformer from scratch. It's easier than you might think.
I believe this was written in 1909.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Auto_transformer_design.html?id=trMoAQAAMAAJ

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 17, 2016, 12:36:02 PM
 And the world is safe for another day.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on August 17, 2016, 12:46:01 PM
Rama that looks like a hubbard device . I recall you mentioning on this forum you had tried it as per Joseph Cater's instructions and it didnt work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jegz on August 17, 2016, 12:49:50 PM
Thanks Cadman. I find the older books to have more useful information for the layman than today's technical books. seeing as Electricity was a was a newphenomenon they had to publish books in a manner a farm boy could understand. Archive.org is a treasure trove
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 17, 2016, 02:27:29 PM
Rama that looks like a hubbard device . I recall you mentioning on this forum you had tried it as per Joseph Cater's instructions and it didnt work.

Jegz..Yes it looks similar to a Hubbard Device. No one really knows what was the Hubbard device and the info is pure speculation is what Patrick has told me. But this device is also in Joesph Cater Book.

That device is magnetized and produces output irrespective of whether you send the current in NN or NS modes. It can have a single signal or double signal or multiple signals and all work. Very strange. This is due to the Geometry of the device. In a way it is similar to the 1902 motionless generator of Figuera also. Information on that device is very limited any way. There was no confusing Part G there but it was one of two patents bought by the Bankers.

If we use high Voltage input, high resistance wire for Primary, permanent magnet core and thick high insulated wire in secondary output is bound to be higher.

All these devices work on a simple principle.

But even very competent people here decline to accept COP>1 results can come from any device and provide a rather useful explnation that higher output comes from the secondary coils connected to Earth points with Earth points acting as chemical batteries which is also scientically correct. They do agree that the Results can be maintained for months witout violating Law of conservation of Energy. Whether the output comes from the Earth, Atmosphere, Vaccum or Jupiter who cares as long as it can be made useful and can be done in a cheap way and can be made any where on Earth. If the dictum is you cannot violate a certain scientific law then so be it. My only concern is that this can become useful to a lot of people at a lot of places and very cheap.

I have no team now. What I have shown is the photograph of the device we made it to work a few months back. It was not intended to be COP>1 or any thing like that but intended to understand how things work in nature. If high voltage, high frequency and suitable materials are used then even this device can increase the output manifold.

I have to make a small Figuera 1908 device and take a video and show that it would produce output in the central Y coil only when the straight core is placed NS NS NS and for it to be NS-Y-SN we need to have a different geometry. I will do it within a week. These coils are difficult to wind and we need a team and I need to ask people come and do it. Small coils are very inefficient and are useless really.

Regards,

Ramaswami

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 17, 2016, 02:44:27 PM
I have to make a small Figuera 1908 device and take a video and show that it would produce output in the
central Y coil only when the straight core is placed NS NS NS and for it to be NS-Y-SN we need to have a different geometry.
I will do it within a week.

Mr. Ramaswami

When you show this to prove your assertion also please show the exact complete physical construction
 details, electrical circuit including power source details, coil winding direction and any ground connections.

If you are to prove anything then you must be thorough or else it will only lead to further arguments
 and confusion.

Respectfully,
CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 17, 2016, 03:27:49 PM
How about this rswami, stop posting other stuff not pertaining to Figuera. this is not your dumping grounds for your every whim. you have hijacked this forum ever since you gave pjk your bull shit transformer. STOP DOING THIS.
if it's not Figuera don't post it or GET YOUR OWN THREAD.we don't care about your BS transformer crap, that is why this thread is called Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE not rwami dumping grounds.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH, STOP HIJACKING THIS THREAD.
you wouldn't know how to build a Figuera device if it bit you on the ass. you have to understand the patent first, that you are incapable of and proved it many times over. you and daredummy have NEVER understood the patent, adding your BS to it before EVER understanding it in the first place. you will never understand because your broke interrupting minds won't let it happen.
you two are some sick hijacking individuals bent on ruining this thread, how sad.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 17, 2016, 03:50:46 PM
Mr. Ramaswami

When you show this to prove your assertion also please show the exact complete physical construction
 details, electrical circuit including power source details, coil winding direction and any ground connections.

If you are to prove anything then you must be thorough or else it will only lead to further arguments
 and confusion.

Respectfully,
CM

I totally agree Sir.. I will give specific construction and show how it works and how reversing the direction of current flow stops the output in the central coil. we will only have a single N and single S and single Y magnets as shown by Figuera.

Mr. Marathonman:

I have avoided coming here and posting here for it drains my energy and wastes my time. It is only the abusive language that you used that forced me to reply and respond. By the way why don't you show your 100 watts in 300 watts out working device as a video? Who or what prevents you from doing it? I certainly would like to see it as are all members here. I have shown the other device only to emphasise that geometrical shapes matter. Otherwise why would I post it. You need not feel concerned. Do not worry.

Regards,

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 17, 2016, 04:04:09 PM
It's a shame that putting someone on your ignore list here doesn't actually hide their posts like it does over at Energetic Forum. Here I just see a little added text at the top of their posts "You are ignoring this user".

Gee, that's just what i wanted.

Over at EF it hides everything they post.

Soooo nice.

(And yes the box is checked in the user settings here)

Man would that be nice. i could block out the N/S ERS for ever. oh heaven.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 17, 2016, 04:13:15 PM
I totally agree Sir.. I will give specific construction and show how it works and how reversing the direction of current flow stops the output in the central coil. we will only have a single N and single S and single Y magnets as shown by Figuera.

Mr. Marathonman:

I have avoided coming here and posting here for it drains my energy and wastes my time. It is only the abusive language that you used that forced me to reply and respond. By the way why don't you show your 100 watts in 300 watts out working device as a video? Who or what prevents you from doing it? I certainly would like to see it as are all members here. I have shown the other device only to emphasise that geometrical shapes matter. Otherwise why would I post it. You need not feel concerned. Do not worry.

Regards,

Ramaswami

 I don't have a single concern when it comes to your BS. i don't follow confused individuals that spout utter nonsense.

well the video you are waiting on won't happen since i sold it to someone on this forum to buy my cores. matter of fact, i sold it to someone who ran their mouth like you. imagine that !
if i build another and give it to you would you leave also, probably not, you like running your mouth and hijacking this thread to much.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 17, 2016, 10:10:43 PM
I don't have a single concern when it comes to your BS. i don't follow confused individuals that spout utter nonsense.

well the video you are waiting on won't happen since i sold it to someone on this forum to buy my cores. matter of fact, i sold it to someone who ran their mouth like you. imagine that !
if i build another and give it to you would you leave also, probably not, you like running your mouth and hijacking this thread to much.
Mundane excuse as usual.
We need not your guidance just simply defend your baseless theory practically simple.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 18, 2016, 07:31:03 AM
No Center-taped transformer as it Split Primary wound to generate Repulsive Poles.

It is always from Start to End and Start to End which makes serial winding and thus produces North South North South Polarity.

How come the Part-G crews are preaching N-N as a way of creating Reversible High.and Low motion?

You can not buck the Primaries and generate usable output.

The Power of the Splited Primaries Must add up for the Secondary to function nicely.

You only buck the Secondary to negate Lenz.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 18, 2016, 07:44:18 AM
Forest are you being forced?
Did you just say AC can be applied to C.F device?
How come you let that out ?

Well there is no madness anywhere but there is  deliberate Deceitful propagandas to prevent people from getting liberated.

When you vibrate Direct Current and Pass it through an Iron Core Electromagnet, what do youngest as output? You wanna tell me it will remain Pulsing DC?

Is there no Iron Core in the Part G?

Is not the Motor driven commutator acting as Vibrator for the  copper wire wound Toroid?

What output do you then get from the toroid?  Pulsing Direct Current Still or ALTERNATE CURRENT?

I request you teach me what I do not 'actually' Know.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 18, 2016, 08:03:36 AM
YOU ARE THE DUMBEST PERSON ON THIS FORUM.
constantly spread bull shit lies.
constantly spread your crappy circuit non tested at all, just bull crap unprovable theories from a warped ass mind.
you need to go back to school getto man.
your trash with an even trashier mind.
piss pore researcher you are. whats the matter baby, no one following your bull shit unproven lies.
"defend your baseless theory"
i would tell you the same thing but your to stupid to prove your theory. iv'e proven mine many times over, your just to stupid to see it. to busy flapping your jaw.
by-by getto man.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 18, 2016, 08:24:40 AM
YOU ARE THE DUMBEST PERSON ON THIS FORUM.
constantly spread bull shit lies.
constantly spread your crappy circuit non tested at all, just bull crap unprovable theories from a warped ass mind.
you need to go back to school getto man.
your trash with an even trashier mind.
piss pore researcher you are. whats the matter baby, no one following your bull shit unproven lies.
"defend your baseless theory"
i would tell you the same thing but your to stupid to prove your theory. iv'e proven mine many times over, your just to stupid to see it. to busy flapping your jaw.
by-by getto man.
Moron you are and you are practically proving that over and over. At least you are defending something about yourself and that is state of foolishness.

Always abusive from day one.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 18, 2016, 12:52:00 PM
Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.

 I think you have already achieved lenz free.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 18, 2016, 01:20:28 PM
If we have not the finances and lab workpower to realize experiments we can look for the technical
results from other searchers Fleming/Lenz magnetic force orientation  controle.

A nice industrial family list in this publikation offered :
https://www.google.de/patents/US8242658 (https://www.google.de/patents/US8242658)
but going to this document :
https://www.google.de/patents/US6707208 (https://www.google.de/patents/US6707208)
 So even though high turn coils produce higher flux per-amp of current circulating, ampere-turns, they also generate more reverse EMF and thus require higher voltage. A new and more effective way of interacting with these counter electromotive forces is one of the primary benefits to which the invention is directed.

The control of flux in accord with the invention is achieved by the use of permanent magnets arranged in a particular manner with each other and with magnetic flux shunts so that the magnets and shunts can function as unidirectional flux “gates”, which can be used to manage flux much like diodes manage electric current.

               permanent magnets and shunts + which can be used to manage flux like diodes

It is commonly understood that a permanent magnet pole will only pass flux in one direction, i.e. from the south pole to the north pole. The magnet will not allow flux to pass from the north pole through to the south pole. Thus, if you have oppositely polarized poles on a magnet or multiple magnets arranged with their poles opposite in polarity, or in some way oriented differently, then you have a one-way flux “gate” which can be used to manage flux similar to the manner that multiple diodes manage electrical current.

But this is only an example how this inventor tried to resolve the motor counter magnetic force.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Figuera device ,with non mechanical movement (excluded the commutator), needs his own solution.

divide et impera (the machine): voltage and or frequency dividing
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=diode&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=&IN=kazumi+masaki&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=diode&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=&IN=kazumi+masaki&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs
comment/answer:
Hola, gracias por comentar mis experimentos, el generador Figuera que intento replicar parece fácil, pero todavía después de tres años, nadie, al perecer, ha sido capaz de reproducir, este video que comentas es de hace tiempo, cuando Patrick Kely lo explicaba así en su libro, pero después de leer las patentes está claro que no es así como se describe en ellas, no obstante, ya entonces me dí cuenta experimentando que para que el flujo magnético pasara por el núcleo de la bobina inducida, las polaridades debían ser Norte - Norte y Sur - Sur ya que otro caso como tu comentas, el flujo saltaría de un extremo de la C a la otra, sin pasar por el centro. Yo por ahora todavía no he dado con la clave, pero no pierdo la esperanza y sigo intentándolo con cualquier novedad que se me ocurra o que vea por internet, si encuentro algo interesante lo subiré en vídeo. Saludos
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 18, 2016, 04:59:22 PM
darediamond,

I have a question for you that relates to the subject matter of this thread, in particular the 1908 and later patents.

Imagine a hypothetical inducing coil as depicted in the patents.
The coil has a core with 32 cm^2 cross sectional area perpendicular to its length.
There are 500 turns of  wire on this core.
10 volts DC and 1 amp of current flow through this coil.
Suppose this coil produces a flux strength of 24000 gauss which is used to induce an emf in the adjacent secondary y coil.

Without adding any magnets or additional coils, or changing the voltage or amperage flowing through the coil, or the number of turns of wire, how can this coil be modified to increase the flux strength to 48000 gauss?

I know how I could accomplish this but I am curious as to what method you personally would employ.

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 18, 2016, 05:59:00 PM
Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.

 I think you have already achieved lenz free.

Doug..who did you address here..not clear..please advise.

Lenz law is negated only when the primary will not consume more current irrespective of highr load being placed on secondary.  This is the strict rule..who has accomplished it here..Please advise.

LancaIV

With due respect in Japan people file patent applications to be publihsed and refused called defensive patent applications. This is done to prevent the competitor from obtaining patents in a technology and to create prior art. Check if the patents are granted or refused. If they are abandoned or refused understand these are defensive patents to prevent others from getting a patent. This is why you see large number of patents to be filed. Without experimental observation repeated validation and independent replication we cannot rely on patents.

It is like news channels broadcating or telecasting news that suits the interests of their owners. We can take some gidance from patents but it cannot be taken as truth unless we verify it.

Cadmon.. I have already explained the answer to the question you posted in my earlier posts. Even Core asked me the same question and I answered it. Core indicated that he would agree with Doug that the device I made was a transformer only and not generator. I do not understand this really.

I can only do experiments once in three weeks or so.. If the results are worth posting I will post them

Regards

Ramaswami


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 18, 2016, 06:16:17 PM
Dear Ramaswami,
you are right !
Cause this there is ever need of avaliation : person,object,claim and approvement.

    Person: Prof.(University Osaka) Dr. Kazumi Masaki ( now R.I.P.)
    object: health,energy
    claims: many publications
    approvement: commercial use
f.e.
     http://www.pollin.de/shop/dt/MDE4OTgxOTk-/Bauelemente_Bauteile/Bausaetze_Module/Bausaetze/Bausatz_Elektronische_Akupunktur_KEMO_B136.html (http://www.pollin.de/shop/dt/MDE4OTgxOTk-/Bauelemente_Bauteile/Bausaetze_Module/Bausaetze/Bausatz_Elektronische_Akupunktur_KEMO_B136.html)

http://www.genilax.com/en/ (http://www.genilax.com/en/)

Beside : patent application and patent publication and to grant the claims is differently treated
by the W(orld)I(ntellectual)P(roperty)O(rganisation)-members.
Often in US granted claims are later in the european office/-s(headquarter Munich and now also Den-Haag) denied,withdrawn.

And to do the re-/search with healthy doubts:
http://www.rexresearch.com/kenyon/kenyon.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/kenyon/kenyon.htm)               125% ?
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=17&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19770505&CC=DE&NR=2624810A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=17&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19770505&CC=DE&NR=2624810A1&KC=A1)
use the (bad machine) translation function
 Bei dem aiifänglichen Test wurde ein Schalten oder Umpolen nicht versucht, sondern die Spannung wurde direkt von der Gleichstromenergiequelle 24 zu den Anschlüssen 20 und 22 der Ankerspule 18 zugeführt0 Die Gleichstromenergiequelle erzeugte 32 Volt Gleichstrom, Die Geschwindigkeit der Ankerspule 18 wurde mit Hilfe einer 8 mm-Filmkamera mit 50 Bildern pro sec, bestimmt. Die Stromkurve nach Fig. 2 wurde automatisch auf einem Aufzeichner mit einer Aufzeichnungsgeschwindigkeit von 125 mm/sec0aufge tragen0 An der oberen Grenze des Schemas nach Figo 2 ist der von der Spule durchwanderte Abstand gezeigt, gemessen in 1,6 mm - Stufen für jede 1/15 Sekunde der Spulenbewegung. Wie aus Fig. 2 ersichtlich ist, verblieb der durch die Spule 18 während dieses Versuches fliessende Strom relativ konstant während einer Periode "t", die 50 Millisekunden Dauer überschritt und während welcher Zeitperiode der Strom ungefähr 0,4 Ampere gemittelt betrlg. Wie angedeutet ist, betrug die während dieser Bewegung erzeugte Kraft 2,4 kg (5,3 pound), welche notwendig war, um die Schwerkraft des Ankers 18 zu überwinden, den die Magnete 11 und 12 vertikal ausgerichtet sind.

    [0012]    Der Spannungsabfall an dem A er 18 betrug 32 Volt, und be dem durchschnittlichen Eingangs Strom von 0,4 Ampère war die durchschnittliche Eingangs energie während dieses Stufenabschnittes der Kurve nach Fig. 2 12,8 Watt. Dieser relative Stufenabschnitt der Kurve trat ein, wenn sich der Anker 18 über die Verbindungsstelle 14 bewegte. Die maximale Geschwindigkeit, die ebenfalls über der Verbindungsstelle 14 eintrat, betrug o,76 m pro Sekunde. Die mechanische Energie wird von dem Produkt der Kraft und der Geschwindigkeit dargestellt, welche bei Verwendung von o,76 m pro Sekunde als Geschwindigkeit und 2,4 kg als Kraft eine mechanische Energie von 13,25 llfoot-pounds" pro Sekunde ergibt0 Um die "foot-pounds" pro Sekunde in Watt umzuwandeln, ist der Faktor 1,356 woraus sich ein in Watt ausgedrückter Energieausgang von 17,967 ergibt. Es wurden Versuchsdaten abgeleitet, indem Elektronenoszilloskopen verwendet wurden. Diese Daten bestätigen die Ergebnisse der Aufzeichnung nach Fig. 2.

original document page 17 input/output  12,8/17,967
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          " The german patent office does not grant overunity motors or generators !"
    There is a patent publication with clamed 120% generation efficiency ,granted in DE !

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=6&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19980305&CC=DE&NR=19632897A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=6&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19980305&CC=DE&NR=19632897A1&KC=A1)
Gegenstand der Erfindung ist eine Kraftmaschine des oben angeführten Typs, die elektrische Energie in magnetische/mechanische Energie wandelt, und bei welcher der Wirkungsgrad, das Verhältnis von abgegebener Nutzleistung zur zugeführten Leistung, η = P   ab  /P   zu > 1,2 ist.
                                          2000 grant after examination
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=DE&NR=19632897A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19980305&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=DE&NR=19632897A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19980305&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 18, 2016, 06:35:22 PM
Ramaswami,

The question was posed to darediamond only. I wish to get his personal solution to the question.

CM

EDIT:
... Cadmon.. I have already explained the answer to the question you posted in my earlier posts. Even Core asked me the same question and I answered it.  ...

How curious. I ask darediamond and you answer using words as if I addressed you.

Nah! Must be imagining things.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 18, 2016, 07:26:16 PM
darediamond,

I have a question for you that relates to the subject matter of this thread, in particular the 1908 and later patents.

Imagine a hypothetical inducing coil as depicted in the patents.
The coil has a core with 32 cm^2 cross sectional area perpendicular to its length.
There are 500 turns of  wire on this core.
10 volts DC and 1 amp of current flow through this coil.
Suppose this coil produces a flux strength of 24000 gauss which is used to induce an emf in the adjacent secondary y coil.

Without adding any magnets or additional coils, or changing the voltage or amperage flowing through the coil, or the number of turns of wire, how can this coil be modified to increase the flux strength to 48000 gauss?

I know how I could accomplish this but I am curious as to what method you personally would employ.

CM
I have made a post in which covers answer to our question. Search for it. Granted I have few posts posted on his thread so you should be able to find your way via.

Goodluck Mr.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 18, 2016, 08:28:40 PM
A couple of members are having trouble getting the autotransformer book from Google so I have uploaded it to overunity.com/downloads under this title:

AUTO-TRANSFORMER DESIGN by Alfred H. Avery

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 18, 2016, 09:07:30 PM
I have made a post in which covers answer to our question. Search for it. Granted I have few posts posted on his thread so you should be able to find your way via.

Goodluck Mr.

No thank you. I asked you for your view on a pertinent question but if all you have to offer is attitude then you can keep it for yourself.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 19, 2016, 01:57:41 AM
No thank you. I asked you for your view on a pertinent question but if all you have to offer is attitude then you can keep it for yourself.

"
I know how I could accomplish this ......."

Those are your words there. So what benefit will my strategy add to yours?

Learn to device better intelligible way of toying with a fellow man Intelligence.
Goodluck
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 19, 2016, 02:36:43 AM
To Farmhand and Shadow:

You are off the mark.. What is the purpose of the rotary device..To create an interrupted or alternating current that will change signs when it moves from one point to another point.. When your mains supply is already alternating current the rotary device today is not needed and remove the rotary device and the resistor setup and just feed directly from the mains.. That way you get sign wave and 50 Hz or 60 Hz current automatically. Figuera did not disclose the best method of carrying out the invention and so he disclosed a weakest method of carrying out the invention. His disclosure substantially hides one important point. Both the primary electromagnets must be of equal strength for the device to work best. They should not be of weaker compared to one another. Of course his set up made the two electromagnets alternately stronger and weaker and we did not test that but in our tests we got the best results only when both the primary electromagnets are of equal strength.

Simply this is an amplifying transformer. Two step down transformers  acting as primary electromagnets set up in such a way that the opposite poles of the two are facing each other and in that place you place another secondary of many turns to step up the voltage. Then what you get is both amperage and voltage increase. In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that.

The set up is NS - NS - NS  The bolded outer electromagnets are the step down transformers where the secondary is placed near the core and the primary of many turns and preferably bifilar or trifilar or quadfilar is wound upon it. I used Quadfilar primary. Secondarly is a single wire. In the middle electromagnet you increase the number of turns many times and many layers. In all I used about 1300 meters of 4 sq mm wire out of which about 500 meters were primary and 800 meters were secondary. The electromagnets were built on a plastic tube 4 inches in diameter and 18 inches length. We used soft iron rods to create the electromagnets. 3 such devices were placed in the NS-NS-NS configuration. That is all that is needed to test and verify the results. This device works.

However be careful. When you give 220 volts electricity the electromagnets take about 7 amps but the output is really dangerous 630 volts and 20 amps output..You may get more or less depending on the number of turns and depending on the input voltage.

This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true. If you use the output of the first module to feed the second module and the output of the second module to feed the third module you are going to get increasing voltage and amperage. Any one can test it and see the results themselves. But be extremely careful as the resulting voltages are deadly as the amperage also is very high.

Making the device self sustaining is of no problem really. The output is high voltage and higher amperage. Secondary current will flow in the direction opposing the primary current. When you provide a step down transformer to use the electricity, the output of the step down transformer will flow in a direction oppising the feeding secondary current. So the output of the transformer will be in phase and synchronise with the primary input. Now all you need is a make before break change over switch and change the source of feeding current to the output of the transformer. A part of the transformer output is enough to keep the unit running. Rest of the transformer output is given to load. The original feeding current is removed and the system will continue to work. I have not done this part. But I think given this information any number of posters here can replicate the results.

If you use this in an Electric car, the car can run any amount of distance. Only thing is that we need to convert the AC output to pulsed DC output to run a DC motor or may be use a capacitor to make it a perfect DC current to run it. A Battery, an inverter and this set up and then converting to pulsed DC through a bridge rectifier and then a capacitor to make it perfect DC is all that is needed. May be use a solar panel to keep the battery charged. Since the battery would be used only at the starting time, it will not diminish and in any case the alternator present in the car will keep charging the battery.  This is an extremely simple device really and I do not know how you people who are all experienced electrical engineers have missed the mark.

Let me see comments that will call all this a mirage. But do test it yourself and check the results before calling my results bad..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 19, 2016, 05:00:00 AM
Erfinder; well put. nothing wrong with drinking a beer with intelligent friends contemplating life's numerous amazement's.

Cadman; no intelligent response will ever be given if that is what your waiting for. deception seems to be our key advisory with no growth in the process.

see it took me a while to except NN also, but once i pulled my head out my back side i learned so much in the process.
it's funny to think it took William Hooper 70 years to prove Figuera's design. that is like Tesla, way ahead of his time. even then Tesla told Walter Russel to bury his knowledge for a thousand years until humanity was ready for it.

if William Hooper would of known about Figuera's device things would of been different. i think Hooper would of been blows away by the simplicity and elegance of His device.
to think two opposing electromagnets would create a very strong E field is crazy until you do the "RESEARCH" into the device. and most of all,  the sheer genius of part G is mind boggling, to split an incoming DC signal into two separate signals using two opposing fields then varying each one individually but in unison is sheer utter genius, not to mention the declining electromagnet feeding the core of part G every half turn of the brush to feed the next high set is down Right amazing.
the man had one hell of a mind on him i tell you that.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 19, 2016, 05:48:27 AM
Quote from Teselkola;
Would you take piano lessons from someone who couldn't actually play the piano, even though he has read a biography of Beethoven?

does that remind you of anyone cadman ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 19, 2016, 05:22:12 PM
darediamond,

I have a question for you that relates to the subject matter of this thread, in particular the 1908 and later patents.

Imagine a hypothetical inducing coil as depicted in the patents.
The coil has a core with 32 cm^2 cross sectional area perpendicular to its length.
There are 500 turns of  wire on this core.
10 volts DC and 1 amp of current flow through this coil.
Suppose this coil produces a flux strength of 24000 gauss which is used to induce an emf in the adjacent secondary y coil.

Without adding any magnets or additional coils, or changing the voltage or amperage flowing through the coil, or the number of turns of wire, how can this coil be modified to increase the flux strength to 48000 gauss?

I know how I could accomplish this but I am curious as to what method you personally would employ.

CM

dear member,
I am not self-blended enough and impressed by your statement ,so I ask you : how ?
Only the Figuera device related or your solution unlimited the magnetic sphere related ?
The coil modified: 2d to 3d geometry,fill factor ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 19, 2016, 08:34:20 PM
All else equal, volts, amps, wire turns, core length, then doubling the cross sectional area of the core doubles the flux.
The flux density remains the same but people forget the density is per area

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 19, 2016, 09:22:40 PM
Frequency also has some barring.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 19, 2016, 09:35:41 PM
http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics)
This means that if the cross sectional area A of a ferrite doubles, Magnetic flux also doubles.

Yes,okay,I thank you a lot for this advice !
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-field-current-carrying-wire/v/magnetism-6-magnetic-field-due-to-current (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-field-current-carrying-wire/v/magnetism-6-magnetic-field-due-to-current)

This let me remind to an offered image from member GM,timely up to 1 decade before,who showed us that for permanent magnets not the wide or lang is important but the N- or- S-pol active area !

Analogon.

1+1=2

http://gap-power.com/replications-by-others.html (http://gap-power.com/replications-by-others.html)               em force + pm force = ........
 In the video he demonstrates the power of a magnet's lifting capacity of 6.99 grams. He then demonstrates the lifting capacity of the coil of 21.57 grams.  He then demonstrates the lifting capacity of the combination, magnet and coil, in amplification mode, which is 76.65 grams. My thoughts on this is: ... 6.99 grams + 21.57 grams = 28.56 grams, which is what one would expect the result to be. But no, it was 76.65 grams. 76.65 divided by 28.56 = 2.68 times more power. He then demonstrates neutralization mode and how the magnetic force was completely blocked, with a lifting capacity of 0.0  grams.

There is a push&pull attraction/repulsion force difference

The amplification mode is known as experimental results by the Flynn brothers.
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood4.gif (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood4.gif)
https://web.archive.org/web/20020610043439/http://flynnresearch.net/Software.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20020610043439/http://flynnresearch.net/Software.htm)

Here the open/closed permanent magnet path circuit result:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood5.jpg (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood5.jpg)

and here the static or rotoric use:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood10.gif (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood10.gif)

If there are constructed such devices,in conjunction from electro- and permanent magnets,
which is the amplification mode force effect formula ?

http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20technology%20white%20paper.pdf (http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20technology%20white%20paper.pdf)
page 5
Low power consumption per unit of force/torque. PPMT devices generate twice the magnetic flux strength and four times the force of an equivalent direct field coil system for the same electrical input.
No  power  consumption for  latches,linear actuators,or  rotary  actuators to  hold  force.
Since  PPMT devices  derive  their  primary  motive  force  from  permanent  magnets  they  hold  with  full  force  during power-off conditions.

The problem what I see: this progress was in a 40 years schedule by known use of material specifications.

WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE USED MATERIALS AND PRODUCTION QUALITIES
OF THE FIGUERA DEVICE




Sincerely
              OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 19, 2016, 09:46:59 PM
sounds like that reply was ran through 256 bit encryption before posting. can you de encrypt for us to understand please.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 20, 2016, 04:21:30 AM
All else equal, volts, amps, wire turns, core length, then doubling the cross sectional area of the core doubles the flux.
The flux density remains the same but people forget the density is per area

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics


This is elementary Sir..

When you increase the duameter of the core the volume and hence mass of magnetic core  increases. Why?

Volume of cylinder is pi x r x r x h or it is 3.14 x radius squared x height.

If we use 18 inch long and 4 inch dia pipe the mass of iron is approximately 29.5 kgm. But for a 18 inch long and 6 inch dia pipe the mass is about 60 kgms.
Therefore the magnetism increases significantly and hence flux increases.

What you have not stated is to maintain the same number of turns more wire will be needed and it will consume more current again and if my limited understaning is correct it will also increase the inductance and hence flux. Output is directly proportional yo mass of iron core.

With due respect these are basic principles and observations sir.

Naturally our good friend Marathonman finds answer of lancaIV to be wriiten in coded language. What can we do? He is so lucky he sold away the part G for a considerable fee. If it was with him he could try to understand.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 20, 2016, 04:51:33 AM
Quote
i
http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics)
This means that if the cross sectional area A of a ferrite doubles, Magnetic flux also doubles.

Yes,okay,I thank you a lot for this advice !
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-field-current-carrying-wire/v/magnetism-6-magnetic-field-due-to-current (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-field-current-carrying-wire/v/magnetism-6-magnetic-field-due-to-current)

This let me remind to an offered image from member GM,timely up to 1 decade before,who showed us that for permanent magnets not the wide or lang is important but the N- or- S-pol active area !

Analogon.

1+1=2

http://gap-power.com/replications-by-others.html (http://gap-power.com/replications-by-others.html)               em force + pm force = ........
 In the video he demonstrates the power of a magnet's lifting capacity of 6.99 grams. He then demonstrates the lifting capacity of the coil of 21.57 grams.  He then demonstrates the lifting capacity of the combination, magnet and coil, in amplification mode, which is 76.65 grams. My thoughts on this is: ... 6.99 grams + 21.57 grams = 28.56 grams, which is what one would expect the result to be. But no, it was 76.65 grams. 76.65 divided by 28.56 = 2.68 times more power. He then demonstrates neutralization mode and how the magnetic force was completely blocked, with a lifting capacity of 0.0  grams.

There is a push&pull attraction/repulsion force difference

The amplification mode is known as experimental results by the Flynn brothers.
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood4.gif (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood4.gif)
https://web.archive.org/web/20020610043439/http://flynnresearch.net/Software.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20020610043439/http://flynnresearch.net/Software.htm)

Here the open/closed permanent magnet path circuit result:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood5.jpg (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood5.jpg)

and here the static or rotoric use:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood10.gif (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood10.gif)

If there are constructed such devices,in conjunction from electro- and permanent magnets,
which is the amplification mode force effect formula ?

http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20technology%20white%20paper.pdf (http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20technology%20white%20paper.pdf)
page 5
Low power consumption per unit of force/torque. PPMT devices generate twice the magnetic flux strength and four times the force of an equivalent direct field coil system for the same electrical input.
No  power  consumption for  latches,linear actuators,or  rotary  actuators to  hold  force.
Since  PPMT devices  derive  their  primary  motive  force  from  permanent  magnets  they  hold  with  full  force  during power-off conditions.

The problem what I see: this progress was in a 40 years schedule by known use of material specifications.

WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE USED MATERIALS AND PRODUCTION QUALITIES
OF THE FIGUERA DEVICE




Sincerely
              OCWL

I think there is a reference that Figuera did magic using permanent magnets.

I would guess that he used high voltage and low amperage in primary permanent magnets and oscillatwd them and seconday was soft iron to incemrease induction .

From experiments I do know that higher the input voltage higher tje output. If secondary is placed within NS poles of two permanent magnets output will increase naturally if we give high voltage to primary. Electricity of very mild amount is needed to make it an electronagnet.

The rotary device was probably used to create high voltage sparks and a step up tranformer from secondary continued to provide high voltage to primary.

Violet ray devicesthat are 10 watts provude 50000 volts and very low amps microamps fir healing purposes. The rotary device can easily produce super high voltages from low input.

Thus is a guess but think can work. We need to test.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 20, 2016, 07:35:11 AM
Well you were right Marathonman, it's a complete waste of time.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2016, 08:43:24 AM
yep, we now have three bobble heads to deal with. this forum is over run with em and we will never get any where as long as they are here. i will of course but the sharing is over as the bobble heads keep introducing completely irrational ideas confusing every new comer to the point passing on the Figuera. that's the whole point of trash talkers to misdirect and confuse all the while getting paid.

just email me if you have any questions, this thread is ruined.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2016, 09:05:09 AM
quote;"Of course his set up made the two electromagnets alternately stronger and weaker and we did not test that"

now the whole world knows Doug, Hanon, Cadman, Wistiti, Sam6 and many others, that all posted has been a complete fabrication of deception designed to mislead all the new people.
i even want the moderator to read the deception and lies from this person darediamond and Rswami. all this time they gas "NEVER" even tried the patent as written,  bad mouthing all of us in the process. how disgusting is that. read his post moderator and decide for yourself

MM non deceiver.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
this is to the moderator, can we start a new thread to rid the trash.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 20, 2016, 11:40:46 AM
Ramaswami,
I  do re-/search for several decades.
But not for my one.
And I am learning. Day by day.




I phoned and spoke or have had letter/e-mail correspondence  with several (also rexresearch listen) inventors.
Thomas Cosby,Keith Kenyon,.... .(some now R.I.P.)


Also with overunity.com-member JackH.(R.I.P.)
http://tesla3.com/free_websites/zpe_hilden_brand.html (http://tesla3.com/free_websites/zpe_hilden_brand.html)
http://tesla3.com/free_websites/zpe_hilden_brand_valve.gif (http://tesla3.com/free_websites/zpe_hilden_brand_valve.gif)
double the flux line to four times the magnetic force

wind converter  wind-ing    winding coil
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19801118&CC=US&NR=4234289A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19801118&CC=US&NR=4234289A&KC=A)
 Little has been done in the way of molding, shaping, directing, or increasing the velocity of the incoming fluid upon the rotor arrangement. In theory, the power available from a fluid current is proportional to the cube of the fluid current velocity. Therefore, the most powerful fluid driven machine would be one in which means are provided to increase the velocity of the arriving fluid and which is designed for maximum efficiency.

                                       Bionik-Professor research:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19850314&CC=DE&NR=3330899A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19850314&CC=DE&NR=3330899A1&KC=A1)
most important sentence ,automatic espacenet translation:

  The invention is based on the finding that fluid mechanics is an analogy between Elektrotechnikund.  This is that an electromagnetic field around a beliebiggebogenen wire-shaped conductor and a flow field to an arbitrarily shaped vortex thread by the same law describes the Biot-Savart law. The variables "increase in magnetic field strength" and "speed increase" therefore correspond to each other. As magnetic field strength can thus concentrate indemman a current-carrying conductor wound into a coil, you can also indians Strömungstechnik achieve a speed increase by winding a Wirbelfadenzu a coil. If one arranges a plurality of co-rotating weevil soan that their axes lie on a circle, they will rotate due to the opposite side for induction to the center of the circle. The induction is growing while mitder number of vertebrae. The winding speed increases and the Wibelfäden nähernsich the form of lying close to dic-ht ring vortices. The velocity field that induce this ring vortices in its interior, forms the sought concentration effect.           

Biot-Savart law also known as Ampére law also known as Laplace law
but unknown Laplace-turns or Biot-Savart-turns
                                                but Ampére-turns !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       fluid or magnetic flux velocity acceleration ! How ?

I have had one development project with Dr.Pavel Imris to realize his "paper development" of capacitive winding technology to reality.


Beginning with the winding : the several (experienced) professional motor winder did not delivered the wished quality.
The stator : bad precision. And so on .....
 
Germany : the project has been a technical and financial fiasco.


Time equal I worked with a portuguese technician whose capacitive winding electro-magnet development reached ,after technical approvement of the physical prototype functionality in the Lisbon INPI office,"granted patent" status.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
permanent magnets: if you ask a "permant magnet "manufacturer about an example they will explain to you that there are up to 4000 different "permanent magnet" variations ! Which is the right solution for your device ?


Do you know something about the coil material quality 1915 ? Copper coil ? Pure ? Isolated ,how  ? Oxid coating ? The connection ?
The used iron ? The active area distance ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Figuera device is a Phantom ! There is the magic !
I think the only inspiring moment in this device is : the 100 W in and 20000 W out hypothesis !

Another Phantom:
 https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=9&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19931012&CC=US&NR=5252176A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=9&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19931012&CC=US&NR=5252176A&KC=A)
Very nice C.O.P. !         Do you believe in words and numbers  ?
                                     
                                    Only the concentrator function :
https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Me8f27951cfa65597959ddb0493480fc1o0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=333&h=113 (https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Me8f27951cfa65597959ddb0493480fc1o0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=333&h=113)
                                    The accelerator function :
                                    Raman ? Einstein-Bose ?

Probably here,and not in the Physics-Award list,is the answer:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Nobelpreistr%C3%A4ger_f%C3%BCr_Chemie (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Nobelpreistr%C3%A4ger_f%C3%BCr_Chemie)

I mean that some collegium peers(=fathers) are waiting for the "q.e.d." .

For me the overunity-/free energy effect is not important,my Praeambel is :
                cheap machine and energy generating/converting cost
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 20, 2016, 03:22:07 PM
lancaIV..Sir..You appear to be highly skilled in the art as are many other members here.

With due respect Academics are over informed and so they make a simple thing very complicated and end up with that confusion.

Now you have given your credentials. How on Earth Ramaswami who did not know the difference between Voltage and Amperage in March 2013 was able to do these experiments. Why none has asked this question is surprising to me.

This is what happened..

In February 2013 I went to Coimbatore by train. The whole topic in the Train was the loss of employment caused to nearly a million people due to lack of electricity and closure of industrial units. About 100 of my clients had also shut down shop and electricity cut was at that time 14 hours to 16 hours per day. I was so concerned about the implications for my income and the troubles for the people who lost employment. I asked a client who owns wind mills what Research they are doing on Electricity Generation and he said none and we do not know any thing. We give orders to foreign companies and they install it and then maintain it. I also had occassion to look at Patricks website. When we returned home as guests have come I and my mother stayed in the office. When I woke up in the next morning I saw an old man sitting six feet above my legs with his back to me and he was eating what I thought was my fortune. I'm a charitable man and has been giving money to charties. I some how started shouting He is eating He is eating. The man was visible black colored small and old man. He did not notice me. On hearing my sounds my mother woke up and she could not see any one. Trying to comfort me she said there is none why are you shouting. I then showed my finger at this man and said he is here he is here. When I pointed my finger at him the old man realized that I have seen him and turned his head towards me for a second and was surprised and with a look a child caught stealing he turned his head back and moved to the west and slowly disintegrated in to thin air. My mother was not able to see him.

I was so terrified that I could not sleep. I went on to study Patricks site and on March 3, 2013 contacted him first and Patrick offered to train me up and taught me and asked me do Cater Hubbard Device as given to him by some trusted source. The device did not work and Patrick disappeared that he is retiriing. Then Mr. Narayanan who is RIP came to me for working on the project and I set up a team of few drivers to wind the coils and Narayanan and myself to do the Research. Since Patrick wanted me to do Hubbard and Figuera and Hubbard was a failure we elected to do Figuera. There are many days when I wanted to stop and whenever we feel that this is the last experiment we will make some progress. So by 22nd July 2013 we had built a working Figuera device but it was COP<1. Then I thought why don't we put up coils under the primaries as well and why should we waste that field. The voltages merged and reached 620 or 630 volts at no load and so we connected to Earth the two secondary wires and the amperage was shown as 20 amps. Input was 220 volts and 7 amps. The result has been explained here after several months by a Chemistry Professor that we have caused an electrochemical reaction in the Earth points by the high voltage differences and that is the reason for the higher output. The Professor guaranteed that the same result will not come again after a few days as the electrodes in the Earth point would have got oxidized and corroded and output would be less. He turned out to be correct. However I was encouraged by another client that if we were to use 316L Iron as electrodes the iron would not corrode and the reaction can take place for almost a month.

I have subsequently learned significantly but have elected not to put any thing to writing. Patrick in the meantime contacted me again and complimented me and then disappered again. Some how whenever I give up this project some one comes and provides a guding note.  I had been supported with funds by some friends as well and the device I did was replicated by another friend in another country and he could not achieve the results and the wires did not consume the amperage my wires consumed. He is a highly trained person and he checked the output of all secondaries and found out that the secondary voltages did not merge and the sum of the secondary voltages is higher as I had observed. In a strange way we had both higher current drawn and core saturation and voltages also merged.

With due respect to your efforts I would only say what the Book Tough Times Never Last, Tough People do says.

If you think you have exhausted all possibilities remember that you have not.

I had been advised not to write sensitive information and I have avoided doing it. But the problem in this device is it is very heavy and is physically challenging to wind and load the irons and then test.

I have not filed any patents. The information is there right before your eyes. But you are looking at many patents and with due respect confusing yourself. It is very simple really and all I can tell you is that in old days insulated iron wire appears to have been used for primary coils. Iron wire would become magnetized when it conducts electricity and it will also magnetize the core. How it will behave. I'm yet to test this.

No amount of reading how to swim in the water can enable us to jump in to the water and swin like an expert. We need to jump in to the water to learn to swim. There is nothing that can beat experimental observations and knowledge so gained. I have learnt without being influenced by any knowledge due to lack of knowledge in this field. And I believe that some invisible force has guided me and forced me to do these experiments and has forced Patrick to spend a lot of time teaching me over emails. I have not met any one personally and have not even spoken to any one. Incidentally one of the initial supporters felt enraged by my saying that NS-NS-NS is the correct combination of Figuera and has demanded me to return the funds he voluntarily and overruling my objectons sent me. I have returned to him 75% of whatever he has sent and would return the remaining 25% by next week.

This project is very simple really. This is all I can tell you. As you can see there are many abusive comments and bullying threats demanding that I leave. I would have already left except for the fear that the old man may appear before me if I do not continue.

I would most respectfully say that you have placed yourself in a dark room, closed your eyes and then put a thick black cloth on your eyes and you are now asking where is the Sun and I do not see the Sun and so it does not exist and cannot exist. I apologize for writing like this but this is exactly what you are doing. It is simple really.

Best Regards,

Ramaswami

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2016, 04:04:09 PM
I request that people please stop posting book long post of giberish. please read the patent. i repeat, PLEASE read the all patents before you post half a page of nonsense.
the Rswami device is not Figuera device period, it's a transformer, and as such i request you move off this thread as it does not pertain to the Figuera device at all. please move off this thread and get your own thread as you are disrupting the very fabric of this thread.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 20, 2016, 04:58:28 PM
Dear Ramaswami,why are you so aggressive ? :-\
My first given example was an inventor device from India,too:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=DE&NR=2733719A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19790215&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=DE&NR=2733719A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19790215&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
Kalicut/Calcutta

It looks really simple
( comparing with this not more years less younger concept of an optimal efficiency machine
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19801209&CC=US&NR=4238717A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19801209&CC=US&NR=4238717A&KC=A) )

I am -your findings and your person related- neither your enemy nor your friend ! ???

The Figuera device is one idea,magnetic force amplification to convert this in a work process to electric power another
and finally also your -"earth (battery)cell"effect similar- findings.

If it is simple : Bravo ! If it uses no/rare material comsumption: better !
                                   If it is economical : HEUREKA ! 

here an experimeter store: https://web.archive.org/web/20030601205520/http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/forsale/store/contents.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20030601205520/http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/forsale/store/contents.htm)
 with free e-bay plans:
 Earth Battery , your point recitating
"The result has been explained here after several months by a Chemistry Professor that we have caused an electrochemical reaction in the Earth points by the high voltage differences and that is the reason for the higher output. The Professor guaranteed that the same result will not come again after a few days as the electrodes in the Earth point would have got oxidized and corroded and output would be less. He turned out to be correct."     related.

But using copper wire ,not iron wire ::)

I have no problem with simple results.

Do you know this "water-egg/granate" concept,not consuming the device,
only refillable water+coal powder as fuel :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=FR&NR=633752A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19280203&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=FR&NR=633752A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19280203&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)

but doing the math:
 Un exemple : il est avéré qu'un minuscule  récipient cubique de   o-  3o (le côté, d'un  poils moyen de 15   kilogs,  en pleine   charge, contient 55o éléments complets dont voici la  puissance électromotrice Tension : 66o volts.   

    Intensité : 1,5 ampères pour une. Résistance intérieure : de   44o  ohms.  force qui ne se dégradant que de   i  !à volts par  heure, laisse une   marge  de  force utile  lar gement   suffisante  pour entraîner un moteur  de   1o  HP à   15oo tours, durant 3o heures  au minimum,  force à   peu  près gratuite et renouvelable à  tout instant par une simple   réimbibition  des  sachets de charbon (opérable en quelques mi  nutes).   

660 V x 1,5 A =  990 VA                  x 30 hours/heures(au minimum ::) )      = 55 "water-eggs" á 12V
10 hp motor ~ 7450 W(VA) motor  x 30 hours   = much power        :o full load ?

                                      carbon + zinc + water : with no emission

                                   (990VA x 30 hours)/15 Kg 1928 publicated :
                actually 2016 a recycleable battery available with that power storage ?
                   only as       carbon  +           water :     hydrocarbon fuel cell

without doubt: it is written !
with      doubt: it is as working ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 20, 2016, 05:04:36 PM
lancaIV


Earth battery are not galvanic solutions ? https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US160152.pdf


 ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 20, 2016, 05:23:53 PM
forest,yeah,but the water(hydrogen/oxygen=radical) does the catalytic effect !
Your example: not water,but sulphur ! probably + ambiental oxygen (air and rain/fog water)

from the US160152 description: primary -without insulation

North/south orientation is known by Bioculture or http://www.electrocultureandmagnetoculture.com/links.html (http://www.electrocultureandmagnetoculture.com/links.html) !    http://www.rexresearch.com/hhusb/hh5elc.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/hhusb/hh5elc.htm)
Stupid humoric question ,related this "rexresearch article" sentence
 
Under the influence of the electrical current, the numerical proportions between ( hemp) power plants of different sexes :

is your generated electricity male :P or female  :-* ? Transgender :o


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 20, 2016, 06:34:28 PM
lancaIV..

Sir I apologise if you found my language to be aggressive. I do not understand the French or Spanish in your posts.

The way Earth points are made here is simple.

One iron pipe of 2 inches wide and 8 feet length is inserted into an Earth pit filled with charcoal and water and salt ie sodium chloride. A copper wire is connected to this Iron pipe. That is all.

Copper plates are easily oxidised and wasted than steel. The good materials are non mgnetic and non corrosivec steel or Titanium. Submarine grade material.

I have not studied much about these concepts. I share what I did and what I found.

Chris Stykes the other day mentioned that when core is saturated the wires wiund on the core will behave only like resistors and there no phase or frequency difference. In 2013 we did not know any thing. But later on another friend advised us that the safe limit is 1.2 Tesla and 12 amps is the safe limit for current in 4 sq mm wure when it is coiled. When we followed these safety limits we could not cross cop=1 itself.

I used very cheap material.soft iron rods hammered in to plastic tubes made the core. And we used first copper and then aluminium insulated wires. Soil content can change the results as are the materials used for the core. But we can prepare the soil.

I think since we had an air core plus iron core we could go to high Tesla ranges and still it was safe for us to get results. Normal solid cores would have resulted in so much of heat that wures would have burned away. I have several copper wures that have got the color of copper changed to slightly black. I think it is due to excessive heating due to high saturation.

In all honesty I did not know why and how those results came. I am trying to understand.

Patrick has warned me not to try to do any self runner as the system will then try to take energy from the atmosphere and it results in lightening strikes and lightening prefers living beings than metals to strike. So I have avoided doing these things.

I have zero knowledge in other things. The professors here would have dismissed the statements and observations except for the fact that I handle their patents and they know me to be honest and trustworthy. This is how they looked at 
the Earth point possibility. We need to use non corrosive material for Earth. Copper would easily be oxidized and it is more expensive and will  easily stop the desired work.

I lack specific knowledge on this subject.

The Earth points have to be kept wet for results to come.

We did a lot of things wrong and today I can say if you follow safety norms we will not get results we got. There is also the possibility that iron rods in the core oscillated increasing frequency. But I do not know these things.

You can look deeply at the Figuera device and see if any component is missing or if the patent could have been edited. We found two anomolies.

The 1902 patent says that induced must be placed between opposite poles. We found that it is identical poles that give best results.

In 1908 patent it says the two magnets must have alternately higher and Lower magnetic field strength. We observed that both the primaries must be of equal or nearly equal strength to get best results. Since we used AC the oscillation is there always.

Please do not trust patents. They can be used only as guiding materials. They are wriiten to hide real facts.

I do not understand any language other than English and Tamil and if my writing style is found to be aggreesive I apologise again.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 20, 2016, 10:52:45 PM
step-by-step lecture research:
at first the articles about the invention,later the original spanish publications

http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)
So says Mr. Figueras, who is consistent with his scientific creed, has based his significant invention on harnessing the vibrations of the ether, building a device, that he names as Generator Figueras, with the power required to run a motor, as well as powering itself, developing a force of twenty horse power. Should be noted that the produced energy can be applied to all kinds of industries and its cost is zero, because nothing is spent to obtain it. All parts have been built separately in various workshops under the management of the inventor, who has shown the generator running in his home in the city of Las Palmas.

What has been the electrical output from the Figuera device ? Input 100 VA, 100V and 1 Ampére ! Output 300 Ampére and ? Volt ?

"It is stated in the original communication that Prof. Figueras '' has constructed a rough apparatus by which he obtains a current of 550Volts"
Measured or estimated- based by the motor nominal VA input and lightning consume ?

                                                                   remember:
In my post before I showed you the written numbers from the french inventor Meredieu:
660V and 1,5A as source for a 10 hp motor
 AC or DC ?

my result about the first listed 30375 patent :
a variable force -switchable-electromagnet as solution explained

30376:
In summary: in the machine that it is requested to have a privilege, the excitatory magnets are constructed as those in the current machines, and in the number, size and desired arrangement. The core consists of a group of as many electromagnets as those of the excitatory side, and the wires in the excitatory electromagnets and core electromagnets disposed in series or parallel or as required for the excitatory current, whose aim is to convert them in powerful magnets and to create the magnetic fields which are formed between the poles of each excitatory electromagnet and its corresponding electromagnet in the core. Both, exciter electromagnets as those in the core, which are also exciters, are terminated by expansions of iron or steel, placing face to face these expansions and disposing them in such a way that in front of a pole of a name there is placed a pole of opposite name. The core is composed of motionless electromagnets around shaft, and nor those magnets neither the exciter ones rotate. The induced circuit formed by wires coiled in a drum type configuration rotates around its axis, inside the magnetic fields, accompanied by a collector and a pulley, so that any motor may put them into movement.

=  Mukherjee
"Electric generator without external mechanical energy source - uses conventional generator and electric unit carrying field magnets and armature"     working principle:

    unifying Figueras splitted only electro-magnets using -two parts-concept
    part II : http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera-blasb.jpg  (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera-blasb.jpg)
   

30377
But, as the distribution and establishment of magnetic fields is always the same and independent of the rotation, the undersigned inventors have thought that it is not needed to move the core for the induced coils to cut the existing lines of force between the pole faces of the exciter electromagnets and the core, producing this way the induction, and it is enough that the induced circuit will be separated by a very tiny distance from this core, only rotating the induced coil, for which, it is not required a great strength since, with copper being diamagnetic, simply it is sufficient with the necessary effort to overcome the air resistance, friction of brushes, and higher or lower attraction from currents to currents, effort which is easily obtained using a suitable electric motor driven by an independent current, or by a part of the total current given by the machine. This procedure allows to obtain currents remarkably identical to those existing today in dynamos, but without using driving force which is today used and wasted away, almost entirely, in rotating the soft iron core.
 
The Figuera device has physical rotating parts and a motor makes part  !

30378
The current dynamos, come from groups of Clarke machines, and our generator recalls, in its fundamental principle, the Ruhmkorff induction coil.
 In that -Clarke- machine the induction machine is created by movement of the induced circuit:
 in the generator, induction occurs because of the intermittences of the current which magnetize the electromagnets, and in order to achieve these intermittences or changes in sign, only is required a very small quantity or almost negligible force, we, with our generator, produce the same effects of current dynamos without using any driving force at all.

In the arrangement of the excitatory magnets and the induced, our generator has some analogy with dynamos, but completely differs from them in that, not requiring the use of motive power, is not a transforming apparatus.
As much as we take, as a starting point, the fundamental principle that supports the construction of the Ruhmkorff induction coil, our generator is not a cluster of these coils which differs completely.

 It has the advantage that the soft iron core can be constructed with complete indifference of the induced circuit, allowing the core to be a real group of electromagnets, like the exciters, and covered with a proper wire in order that these electromagnets may develop the biggest attractive force possible, without worrying at all about the conditions that the induced wire must have for the voltage and amperage that is desired. In the winding of this induced wire, within the magnetic fields, are followed the requirements and practices known today in the construction of dynamos, and we refrain from going into further detail, believing it unnecessary.

Enough for today

Sincerely
              OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: guest1289 on August 21, 2016, 02:12:41 AM
How many have actually kicked back in your favorite chair, or sofa, with a nice adult beverage, possibly chilled, and contemplated what Lenz was suggesting?  It's not a bad idea, contemplating that which he suggests through his penned observation.  Laws are made by men to govern men!  Lenz did not pen a law, he placed his thoughts on paper, and shared those thoughts with like minded men of his time.  Influential men in his time, with vested interest in the future shaped the future using ideas presented to them by insightful individuals.   They decide which ideas would become the ideas which all men would structure their lives around.  Place yourself in the position of the man who made the observation, respect the position of those few who comprehended its ability to bind the ignorant together.


When Lenz's observation is truly comprehended, we observe that the way forward is as simple as creating a beat, those among you who can will comprehended what has just been given.  Lenz is not holding any of us back, ignorance, and its cousin arrogance is. 
 

     Maybe you could start a thread proving why Lenz's-Law is incorrect,  but hopefully also explaining it in terms that people like me can understand,  since I only understand the basics of why a magnet falling down a copper pipe,   falls slower than outside of the pipe,  or why the magnet will float when moving across a sheet of copper,  eddies,  and that they claim that a transformer can only function by using moving-magnetic-fields.

       Think up a Test or Device,  that will really Amplify  the error( errors ) in Lenz's-Law

    You'd think you could present your proof to  MIT university,  due to the following :
    http://overunity.com/16782/mit-graham-gunderson-video-release-of-the-conference-demonstration/
__________

    I am starting to wonder if proof why Lenz's-Law may be incorrect,  could be the  imaging-research( electron-microscope research ) which shows that the magnetic-field( consists of ) forms tiny vortices emanating from the surface( Magnetic Tubes of Force ),  WHICH DIRECTLY LEADS ME TO MY QUESTION :

    NOTE : Think of my question as a generator, not a motor

     My Only Question Is :
      -  If you have a  'Free-Spinning-Disc-Magnet' on a shaft,  and then you bring a  'Straight-Wire-Carrying-Non-Pulsed-DC-Current'  near( but not touching ) to one-half of the 'Disc-Magnet'( OR, to the surface of the outer-edge of the 'Disc-Magnet' ),  WILL IT CAUSE THE 'DISC-MAGNET' TO SPIN  ?

       (  OR,  would this generate any electricity ? )

    The diagram-below shows my question,  the large-circle is the Disc-Magnet,  and the wire is labelled X.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 21, 2016, 02:43:14 AM
step-by-step lecture research:

30376:

30377

The Figuera device has physical rotating parts and a motor makes part  !

30378
induction occurs because of the intermittences of the current which magnetize the electromagnets, and in order to achieve these intermittences or changes in sign, only is required a very small quantity or almost negligible force, we, with our generator, produce the same effects of current dynamos without using any driving force at all.

Enough for today

Sincerely
              OCWL

I am only posting this because I believe you to be sincere and open minded. Please note the evolution of these first patents. The next patent 44267 is the first patent with the infamous 'part G' and the claim of self running. It is a completely new and different machine evolved from the previous versions. Part G coupled with the resistance is what indicates DC exciting current. The proponents of the N-N and S-S polarity arrangement, myself included, have adopted that view through testing and the lack of specific mention of AC current (as is in common use today) in this and later patents.

It is critical not to mix the properties of these first patents with the later versions.

Regards
CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 21, 2016, 11:13:38 AM
Between the later patent publications read ,especially marathonman and 100% Figuera device related  and in original language :


1.problem: translation/transduction from an uncommon/foreign language (also today a great problem: automatic translater comparision)

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOv19wRBnvftioqQ-W8IScg (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOv19wRBnvftioqQ-W8IScg)
clearly only one view from the object and trial by prototyping

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89DyGj1nHcU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89DyGj1nHcU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0K7ToVjkh4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0K7ToVjkh4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c01LV-k-Piw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c01LV-k-Piw)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYnm64SZuCU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYnm64SZuCU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es6PbrJRCsE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es6PbrJRCsE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVIbNk-ELUE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVIbNk-ELUE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJQF0-H7RQM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJQF0-H7RQM)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbfnhKL-po (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbfnhKL-po)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSunv5bnj_w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSunv5bnj_w)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_yJZfbZB4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_yJZfbZB4)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4H06wl1O-o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4H06wl1O-o)


How many comments ? How many followers ? net-wide ?

second youtube-experimenter:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMyDmJ_wt7YeP5hshuvgc2Q (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMyDmJ_wt7YeP5hshuvgc2Q)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 21, 2016, 12:07:26 PM
Between the later patent publications read ,especially marathonman and 100% Figuera device related  and in original language :


1.problem: translation/transduction from a uncommon/foreign language (also today a great problem: automatic translater comparision)

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOv19wRBnvftioqQ-W8IScg (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOv19wRBnvftioqQ-W8IScg)
clearly only one view from the object and trial by prototyping

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89DyGj1nHcU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89DyGj1nHcU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0K7ToVjkh4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0K7ToVjkh4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c01LV-k-Piw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c01LV-k-Piw)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYnm64SZuCU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYnm64SZuCU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es6PbrJRCsE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es6PbrJRCsE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVIbNk-ELUE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVIbNk-ELUE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJQF0-H7RQM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJQF0-H7RQM)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbfnhKL-po (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbfnhKL-po)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSunv5bnj_w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSunv5bnj_w)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_yJZfbZB4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_yJZfbZB4)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4H06wl1O-o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4H06wl1O-o)


How many comments ? How many followers ? net-wide ?

second youtube-experimenter:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMyDmJ_wt7YeP5hshuvgc2Q (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMyDmJ_wt7YeP5hshuvgc2Q)


Thank You. That is useful comment ! I think it would work if he place output coils at 90 degrees on the central core part. Like he experimented here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siaYNVDCG4U  I hope someone translate those videos
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 21, 2016, 01:49:23 PM
http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)
44267
The principle where is based this theory, carries the unavoidable need for the movement of the induced circuit or the inductor circuit, and therefore these machines are taken as transformer of mechanical work into electricity.
               ----------------------------------------------------------------------
"transformer" has been for Buforn/Figuera the used expression for "Converter" and not the today
common used meaning to differ between rotatoric motor/generator and static/no mechanical move
 "transformer" !
 
But this is the translated version,original language version ?
 (will become later compared ,if possible)
             -----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was considered the possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the electrical current which produces it.

~ 30375  from their experience knowledge

target:
The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.

concept principle:
This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

                                                       
       DESCRIPTION OF GENERATOR OF VARIABLE EXCITATION “FIGUERA”

                  cylinder “G” powered by the action of a small electrical motor.
                (cadman,for me the infamous "part G"defines the G-enerator)
                +  the excitatory current which is taken from an external and foreigner generator.       (alternatively :batteryset)

As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted.  From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.

                          feedback circuit ,dynamo principle(Siemens)
 
                                                     conclusion 44267
     
The machine is essentially characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, between whose poles the reels of the induced are properly placed. Both circuits, remaining motionless, induced and inductor, are able to produce a current induced by the constant variation of the intensity of the magnetic field forcing the excitatory current (coming at first from any external source) to pass through a rotating brush which, in its rotation movement, is placed in communication with the commutator bars or contacts of a ring distributor or cylinder whose contacts are in communication with a resistance whose value varies  from a maximum to a minimum and vice versa, according with the commutator bars of the cylinder which operates, and for that reason the resistance is connected to the electromagnets N by one of its side, and the electromagnets S at the other side, in such a way that the excitatory current will be magnetizing successively with more or less strength to the first electromagnets, while, oppositely, will be decreasing or increasing the magnetization  in the second ones, determining these variations in intensity of the magnetic field, the production of the current in the induced, current that we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite  the electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.

           Today we know such a machine concept by the name : Rotoverter !
            I think somebody thought this had been a: Transverter !
            http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/files/Trans-verter%20R%20and%20D.pdf (http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/files/Trans-verter%20R%20and%20D.pdf)
           errare humanum est
     
          [ I please you really moderatly for "pardon me?",marathonman,cause indirectly off-thread   
           Transverter/ static dynamo ? : let us go (virtual) to (L)A Corun(h)a,Northwest-Spain:
           https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=ES&NR=2265253A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=4&date=20070201&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=ES&NR=2265253A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=4&date=20070201&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
           automatic description translation:
 http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=ES&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=2265253&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.1&SRCLANG=es&TRGLANG=en   

           "Definitive Protection" 2008,approvement from paper values ?
           or by functional prototype testing and result acceptance ?!
           energy source : a costa de la degradación de los imanes permanentes

           http://www.buscar-abogados.com/abogado/maria-isabel-esteban-perez-serrano/ (http://www.buscar-abogados.com/abogado/maria-isabel-esteban-perez-serrano/)
          advocare : advogado/abogado: lawyer ]
         
          marathonman,it is not easy to stay in angelii manner,my satanii part "juckt kraeftig"

           Sometimes it is dangerous to believe in "transforming"-books and descriptions/publications:
           https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6D1YI-41ao (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6D1YI-41ao)
           
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 02:28:18 PM
NRamaswami

  I dont like addressing you because your name is too hard to remember how to spell. Pick a short nick name something easy something you approve.

   (Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.)
 
    Where does this state how the magnetic field was created that was used for the observation? The observation is regarding what? The focus of the observation is on what part? The definition of work is what? Break it down, what where when. Keep the answers short simple direct.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 21, 2016, 05:05:02 PM
Doug

You may please call me Rams if it is easy to use.

I have to decline to accept the bait. In theoretical knowledge you are a Tiger and I am a cat. Not fair game here.

I only shared my experiments and observations.

lancaIV..sir..the one more observation that I need to share is that increasing the primary voltage dramatically increases the secondary wattage. You can reduce the primary amperage by using multifilar coils with plastic iron sheet plastic placed between layers of primary multifilar wire. Magnetism is intense. Input is AC. Cause is increasing inductive impedance in primary.  I can only experiment once in a month now and if I have reportable results I will share.

My coils are fairly large. They are heavy.  It takes time and effort to winfmd them and experiment. 

Marathonman.. here is a deal you cannot refuse.  You tender an unconditional apology to all including Mr. Dare Diamond and I will not post here in this thread. You know I am honest. 

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 06:07:59 PM
 If you drop a rock is it theory it will fall to the ground? Im sure there was time when the result was theoretical.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 21, 2016, 06:45:41 PM
Ramaswami,
what is written and explained will not become forgotten !
But we have at first concentrate our workpotential in one direction !

As "Figuera thread" the Figuera-details has all to become clear and understandable !

100V/1 Ampére in                           and                              550 V/300 Ampére out
                                               (hypo-)thesis
small motor                                                                                     G-enerator

                I will use the Mukherjee generator/controle unit  F1/F2 relationship:
                a.first objective difference Mukherjee is not a pulsed "generator" device
                   pulsed systems have got extra  power saving effect potential (duty cycle !)
 
                                                        Figuera device     
                                                      550/   100 V tension     
                                                      300/       1 A current
   
               the tension drop = 5,5 times would give 300/(5,5x5,5) A current as VA input need
               let us roughly give 100V á "10"A = 1000VA what differs from the written 100 VA

                                     really sad,this difference ! unexplainable ?

                                                     Mukherjee device link II :
                                        the above relationship F1/F2 has been by
                2x magnetic field force relationship between generator/controle unit

                                        recitating from the publication:
              Bei dem erfindungsgemässen Generator, bei welchem die Permeabilität des Generatorfeldkerns 10,000 und die der elektrischen Einrichtung 100 000 beträgt, ist die Feldstärke der elektrischen Einrichtung um das 10-Fache grösser als die des Generators. Wenn die Spulenlänge in beiden Ankern gleich gehalten wird, wird 1/10 des Generatorstroms in der elektrischen Einrichtung verbraucht, um die Gegenkraft auf der Welle zu kompensieren, d.h. BLI = 1OB  x L x 1/10. 

 Somit wird 1/100 oder 1% der Generatorenergie von der elektrischen Einrichtung verbraucht.

                  for someones better understanding,google translated:

The inventive generator in which the permeability of the generator field core 10,000 and the electrical device is 100 000, the field strength of the electrical device to 10 times greater than that of the generator. If the coil length is kept the same in both anchors, 1/10 of the generator current is consumed in the electrical device in order to compensate the reaction force on the shaft, i.e. BLI = 1Ob x L x 1/10.

  Thus, 1/100 or 1% of the generator energy is consumed by the electric device.
 
                            a 10 to 1 generator/controle unit magnetic force field relationship gives :

                       (550VX 300A) / 100 = 165 VA   ::) one step-by-the-other

                                          enough C.O.P. ? No >:(

                             Mukherjee link III,conductor length related :

Wenn bei dem erfindungsgemässen Generator die Spulenlänge des Ankers der elektrischen Einrichtung 1/5 von der des Generatorankers beträgt und der Durchmesser ihrer Anker gleich gehalten wird, wird die Hälfte des Generatorstroms in der elektrischen Einrichtung verbraucht, da BLI = 1OB x L/5 x 1  Dies bedeutet, dass 1/4 oder 25% der Generatorenergie in der elektrischen Einrichtung verbraucht werden. Zieht man den anderen Verbrauch von 5 bis 7%, wie vorstehend erläutert, in Betracht, so ergibt sich ein Verlust von 30 bis 32%. Man erhält also 68 bis 70% der vom Generator abgegebenen Energie auf Kosten von 30 bis 32% Abgabeenergie und ohne dass eine andere externe Energie verbraucht wird.Zur Erzeugung von soviel Energie mit einem herkömmlichen Generator mit einem Wirkungsgrad von 80% müssen das 5/4-Fache oder 125% dieser Energie kontinuierlich zugeführt werden.

                               ito dito:
If in the inventive generator, the coil length of the armature of the electrical device 1/5 that of the generator armature and the diameter of its armature is held equal to one half of the generator current is consumed in the electric device, since BLI = 1Ob x L / 5 x 1 This means that 1/4 or 25% of the generator energy is consumed in the electrical device. Subtracting the other consumption of 5 to 7%, as explained above, into consideration, the result is a loss of 30 or 32%. So 68 to 70% of the votes from the generator power is obtained at the cost of 30 or 32% output power and with no other external energy consumed enthrall generating as much energy with a conventional generator with an efficiency of 80% to the 5/4 -fold or 125% of this energy can be supplied continuously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         (magnetic force field x conductor length)/(magnetic force field x conductor length)

                         balance of power
                         balancing the power
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 21, 2016, 07:11:04 PM
Sir..

What I observe is this. .

Here mains voltage is not constant.  It flutuates between 190 to 220 volts. In the same set up output of secondary is 30 volts when input voltage is 220 volts. Output of secondary drops to 18 volts when input voltage is 190 volts. We have 50 hz here.

Similarly if you increase the voltage to 1000 volts frpm 100 volts output voltage will shoot up. Secondary resistance being constant when secondary voltage is increased the amperage also raises. Amperage is based on secondary wire thickness and amazingly thickness of secondary insulation.  I understand thick wire producing higher amps but I do not understand the insulation part. Information on insulation is available in Daniel McFarland Cook patent and in Joesph Cater book. No where else.

Don Smith wrote double the voltage quadruple the output. This is true for secondary. 

I cannot write on specific numbers as I have not experimented andobserved but if you increase primary voltage secondary is bound to increase. If you are inclined to experiment please pm me.

Doug..Intensity of magnetic field and input voltage are the two things that matter from my
observations. Please explain in simple English for people like me to understand if you feel otherwise.

Regards

Ramaswami

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 08:15:33 PM
 Lenz is more about the reaction in the induced circuit and not so much about creation of field used to cause the reaction which is being observed. There is a physical force which opposes the force used to cause induction. The conditions for which this effect can exist are limited.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 08:20:58 PM
This one is more detailed.

If a change in the magnetic field of current i1 induces another electric current (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current), i2, the direction of i2 is opposite that of the change in i1. If these currents are in two coaxial circular conductors ℓ1 and ℓ2 respectively, and both are initially 0, then the currents i1 and i2 must counter-rotate. The opposing currents will repel each other as a result.
Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 08:32:14 PM
 The implication is simple. You cant get more then 100% out of 100% more often you get less if your deploying conversion. No work is done in the form of new work it is simply the same work.
  Not a theory.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 08:38:22 PM
If magnetic flux is in motion what can oppose it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 21, 2016, 08:40:38 PM
Constantino de Buforn Jacas publications:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patents-by-buforn-post-1908/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patents-by-buforn-post-1908/)
The Patrick Kelly version confirms cadmans #4030 version for the Figuera configuration concept.

Buforn original copy in PDF : https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patentes-buforn.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patentes-buforn.pdf)

the last applied Buforn patent application :
https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 08:43:21 PM
Im sure you have a couple magnets laying around.Take one of them and place it close to everything in your environment and find something that will push the magnet away.

 Im not trying to make you look foolish, your the one who insists on the down and dirty with hands on proof.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: matu on August 21, 2016, 09:00:12 PM
Hello...

watch this video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Crq9j-f6Z7g

.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 09:14:19 PM
 Matu

 He should at least get his hands a little dirty. So there you have it.For all you belly aching you could have just used a couple a magnets to figure out there is third field created between the two active fields in motion. The two active fields are kept separate from the center field and only the force is used to move the central field. the only difference from a rotating generator to motionless and the difference between a generator and transformer. Transformers use one field which is consumed in the load through the secondary. All other improvements aside even a child could it.
  Generators have to be flashed leaving a week field locked in the cores once it starts to rotate the field breaks into two one moving and one not. Figurea or Baforn state there is no residual magnetism when not operating. When do two magnets cancel each other out? NN or SN.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 21, 2016, 09:19:08 PM
Oh you dont see the permanent magnet dropping off to zero flux on ether side just the movement under the glass which is limited in distance.If he moved it far enough the effect would be lost.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 21, 2016, 09:30:33 PM
No..I understand that part of Lenz law is applicable to a single primary single secondary situation.  It is not exactly the case when other variables are present. 

Take the example of magnetic amplifiers impacting a transformer. There are videos online to show the effect.  Lenz law effect is neutralise here. Why.

Similarly if you put two primaries to focus their strength in the center and oppose each other what happens the middle section is enormously increased in field strength. Thus is called additive flux if I understand correctly.

Wikipedia calls it conservation of momentum as the action between an electrin and a proton. Here the flux cannot oppose.  It has to add.

Secondly what I observed has been explained to me as amperage coming in from the earth battery where the reaction was increased manifold.  Patrick has taught me that Figuera device is an asymmetrical transformer while Lenz law is applicable to symmetrical transformers.

Notwithstanding theory we have observed many times 104 to 116.% output when we wind secondary on both sides of primary but we have ignored it as meter error.  It is only when we had very high readings and after the Electrician passd away and I had chest pain I posted the info.

Please explain how Lenz law can be explained when you introduce magnetic amplifiers. You are the first to introduce this concept anyway here.

When proper geometrical shapes are used identical poles opposing each other eill cause an induced current to flow in properly placed secondary coils. Both the primaries in that instant are repelling each other. The output should be without Lenz. Again we have two primaries here.

What you applies to what is normal einding patterns normally used.

I also know how the magnetic drag can be reduced in a rotating device and consumption of current reduced. But I haven't tested them for generation as they are very small units.

LancaIV. . Sir how are you able to modify your posts after my reply. Once sime reply is posted I cannot modify my posts. Amazing.

Any way with due respect the device is very simple. There is a missing component in the patent and no one has focused on it. I think the information overload has prevented people from taking action and observing things.

Regards

Ramaswami

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 21, 2016, 09:48:19 PM
Oh..This is the difference between transformers and generator. .well. Doug I used soft iron rods and weak residual magnetism is present in about 15% of the rods. They are very weak though.

You can say impurities are the reason.

Can you point out the specific part of the patent thatvsays no residual magnetism is present.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 21, 2016, 10:05:58 PM
The above calculation is only an approximate calculation, in the small losses, such as copper losses are not taken into account in the armature of the electrical equipment, energy losses for rotating the inertia around the machine with the required angular velocity and the like. The bill is intended to show that a large amount of energy can be obtained by only a fraction of the output power, but not some form of external energy is consumed.

angular velocity ? a trial : http://milesmathis.com/angle.html
                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"......how are you able to modify your posts.."
Ramaswami,this function is to moderate myself ! ;) After teste-phase you will get this ability,too !

Sincerely
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 21, 2016, 11:23:12 PM
This is from a 2012 version of Patrick Kelly ebook, chapter 3, about Richard Willis generator and a simplified version done from a user called silverhealtheu.

"
The input power supply is fed to an electromagnet but is converted into a pulsed supply by the use of an interrupter switch which may be mechanical or electronic. As can be seen, the arrangement is particularly simple although it is an unusual configuration with the electromagnet core touching one of the permanent magnets and not the other. The magnet and electromagnet poles are important, with the permanent magnet North poles pointing towards the electromagnet and when the electromagnet is powered up, it’s South pole is towards the North pole of the permanent magnet which it is touching. This means that when the electromagnet is powered up, it’s magnetic field strengthens the magnetic field of that magnet.

There is a one-centimetre gap at the other end of the electromagnet and it’s North pole opposes the North pole of the second permanent magnet. With this arrangement, each electromagnet pulse has a major magnetic effect on the area between the two permanent magnets

...
Silverhealtheu.   One of the EVGRAY yahoo forum members whose ID is ‘silverhealtheu’ has described a simple device which appears to be not unlike the Richard Willis generator above.

The device consists of an iron bar one inch (25 mm) in diameter and one foot (300 mm) long. At one end, there is a stack of five neodymium magnets and at the opposite end, a single neodymium magnet. At the end with the five magnets, there is a coil of wire which is strongly pulsed by a drive circuit. Down the length of the bar, a series of pick-up coils are positioned. Each of these coils picks up the same level of power that is fed to the pulsing coil and the combined output is said to exceed the input power.

"

Look for the similarities with Figuera...



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on August 22, 2016, 08:40:25 AM
fyi

silverhealtheu = bolt on this forum
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 22, 2016, 09:26:38 AM
This is from a 2012 version of Patrick Kelly ebook, chapter 3, about Richard Willis generator and a simplified version done from a user called silverhealtheu.

"
The input power supply is fed to an electromagnet but is converted into a pulsed supply by the use of an interrupter switch which may be mechanical or electronic. As can be seen, the arrangement is particularly simple although it is an unusual configuration with the electromagnet core touching one of the permanent magnets and not the other. The magnet and electromagnet poles are important, with the permanent magnet North poles pointing towards the electromagnet and when the electromagnet is powered up, it’s South pole is towards the North pole of the permanent magnet which it is touching. This means that when the electromagnet is powered up, it’s magnetic field strengthens the magnetic field of that magnet.

There is a one-centimetre gap at the other end of the electromagnet and it’s North pole opposes the North pole of the second permanent magnet. With this arrangement, each electromagnet pulse has a major magnetic effect on the area between the two permanent magnets

...
Silverhealtheu.   One of the EVGRAY yahoo forum members whose ID is ‘silverhealtheu’ has described a simple device which appears to be not unlike the Richard Willis generator above.

The device consists of an iron bar one inch (25 mm) in diameter and one foot (300 mm) long. At one end, there is a stack of five neodymium magnets and at the opposite end, a single neodymium magnet. At the end with the five magnets, there is a coil of wire which is strongly pulsed by a drive circuit. Down the length of the bar, a series of pick-up coils are positioned. Each of these coils picks up the same level of power that is fed to the pulsing coil and the combined output is said to exceed the input power.

"

Look for the similarities with Figuera...
North South for Motor North North for Generator in the motionless MoGen of Silverhealtheu.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 22, 2016, 11:37:08 AM
Ramaswami,
to have one free energy vulgo "overunity" machine is one thing ! 
To reach the "thesis"-level(Doctor-degree,docere=dozieren/teach) another !


The "thesis"-degree,Dr.-title hono(u)r, you get by academy peers ,Professors/Docents !           For honor ! = industrial "open source"
Commercial this "thesis"-level is the "patent grant" ,examination by patent office "peers" !       For industrial production !


                    A patent application gives you the possibility to get object claims examination and approvement or object claims deny !


                                 Anyone are against application for the "patent grant"-ing status : Why ?
                                 Monopole-(market power)?
                                     
                                 
                                 Condition : only examination/peers approvement interests (and/ or cheap mass-production) :
                                 200 estates in the U.N.O. , application only for 1 estate 
                                 but the examination result will become world-wide "technical standart" ! 


                                Second : safety-approvement (TUEV,UAL and other recognized laboratory organisations)
                                Third : Warranty (machine longivity,hazardfree, no rare materials, no ambiental risc )
                                Fourth: scaleabilty
 
                                = sustainable development       


                               Some grams "machine" are not the breakthrough !
                   It is only the demonstration for a long path -over all instances !


                               Target: each household/consumer worl-wide -private and commercial
                         
                               there are atomic bombs and atomic reactors.
                               there are fusion bombs but no fusion reactors
                   (probably beginning of commercial energy production: 2050,I.T.E.R.)   


                               Now we got informated about high energy conversion densities :
                          MW per " 1 gram machine" as nano-foil (+ two different currents/streams)
http://overunity.com/16727/real-water-power-that-could-be-the-game-changer/15/#.V7rVA9crwSM (http://overunity.com/16727/real-water-power-that-could-be-the-game-changer/15/#.V7rVA9crwSM)

               Onced "Impossible !" in theoretical numbers  making this to future standart = NORM !


                                                      some generations before:
                               Trains with more than 20 Km/h velocity ? The cows will becoming mad !
                                                                 Mad-cow-syndrom
                             
           The first  free energy/overunity machines appeared more than 100 years before .
           denied as perpetuum mobile machines(1.kind) or academical withdrawn as 2.kind machines :
                                           ambiental/human health riscs :
            uncontroleable chain reaction with "point of no return"-entering:
                                                      self-destruction

   
            The Messieurs Biot and Savart has been members of the Parish Academie of Science,
            the first institution worldwide which denied the possibility of such machines.

            I reed in one of them bibliography that there has been the hypothesis
            in the 19.century from a french inventor about a
            "watermotor- with perpetuum mobile effect";
            Biot (or Savart) helped him to realize the hypothesis to reality/thesis !

            Neither this french inventor is today known,nor  Biot and Savart and their law
           -outside academies ! 
           We can call them "dissidents": working against the Dogma/Doctrin

       
            Projects risk examples, total professionality/experience and up to billions financial units
            investment and menpower hours :
            Tata Nano,Thyssen Brazil steel plant,Siemens production plant GB

            Friendly partners will become your enemies, meant enemies probably friends and partners
            over the development instances.
            -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Lorentz-Kraft(=force),wikipedia german edition
           
            Biot-Savart law and Biot-Savart force
            https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentzkraft (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentzkraft)
           
            deutsch/german
Kraft zwischen zwei stromdurchflossenen LeiternSiehe auch: Ampèresches Kraftgesetz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amp%C3%A8resches_Kraftgesetz) Verknüpft man die Formel für die Lorentzkraft auf stromdurchflossene Leiter mit dem Biot-Savart-Gesetz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biot-Savart-Gesetz) für das Magnetfeld um stromdurchflossene Leiter, so ergibt sich eine Formel für die Kraft, die zwei stromdurchflossene dünne Leiter aufeinander ausüben, was in der Literatur auch als ampèresches Kraftgesetz (nicht zu verwechseln mit dem ampèreschen Gesetz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amp%C3%A8resches_Gesetz)) bezeichnet wird.[3] (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentzkraft#cite_note-3)
Wenn die beiden Leiter dünn sind und einander parallel gegenüberliegen wie die gegenüberliegenden Seiten eines Rechtecks (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechteck), dann ergibt sich die schon von der Ampère-Definition (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentzkraft#Definition_der_Ma.C3.9Feinheit_Ampere) her bekannte einfache Formel für den Kraftbetrag      F  12     {\displaystyle F_{12}}  (https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/35bd8bf2dd739f74f6c888ae839d364d7ca8cf8d (https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/35bd8bf2dd739f74f6c888ae839d364d7ca8cf8d)) der aufeinander wirkenden (nach dem Wechselwirkungsprinzip (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechselwirkungsprinzip) gleich großen) Kräfte:
      F  12   = ℓ ⋅    μ  0    2 π        I  1    I  2    r     {\displaystyle F_{12}=\ell \cdot {\frac {\mu _{0}}{2\pi }}{\frac {I_{1}I_{2}}{r}}}
 Dabei ist     ℓ   {\displaystyle \ell }  die (bei beiden Leitern gleich große) Länge der Leiter,     r   {\displaystyle r}  ihr gegenseitiger Abstand und
      I  1   ,  I  2     {\displaystyle I_{1},I_{2}} sind die Stromstärken in den beiden Leitern.


english translation by google:
Force between two current-carrying conductors
See also: Ampèresches force law

Related to the formula for the Lorentz force acting on a current-carrying conductor with the Biot-Savart law for the magnetic field around current-carrying conductor, the result is a formula for the force to exercise the two current-carrying thin conductors each other, which in the literature as ampèresches power law ( not to be confused is designated by the Ampere's law). [3]

If the two conductors are thin and parallel to each other are opposite as opposite sides of a rectangle, then the already forth known by the ampere definition simple formula results for the amount of force F 12 {\ displaystyle F_ {12}} {\ displaystyle F_ {12 }} of interacting (equal to the interaction principle) forces:

    F 12 = ℓ ⋅ μ 0 2 π I 1 I 2 r {\ displaystyle F_ {12} = \ ell \ cdot {\ frac {\ mu _ {0}} {2 \ pi}} {\ frac {I_ {1 } I_ {2}} {r}}} {\ displaystyle F_ {12} = \ ell \ cdot {\ frac {\ mu _ {0}} {2 \ pi}} {\ frac {I_ {1} I_ { 2}} {r}}}

Here is ℓ {\ displaystyle \ ell} \ ell the (for both conductors of the same size) length of the conductor, r {\ displaystyle r} r their mutual distance and I 1, I 2 {\ displaystyle I_ {1}, I_ {2 }} {\ displaystyle I_ {1}, {2}} I_ are the currents in the two conductors.


Lorentz-force,wikipedia english edition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force)    somebody reads about Biot and or Savart
                                             Or Laplace/Ampére (force) ?     

                                                        Does this matter ?             
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lorentz-force is the nuclear force ,the only used perpetuum mobile science : the atomic radiation activity during the decay cycle=
                                                                                                                          during elementar transformation


accelerating the force and forced decay by Biot-Savart force(or Laplace/Ampére force)


Lorentz-Transformation gives us e=mc²            c= velocity of light              X²= acceleration        m=result from (M1-M2) decay


Nikola Tesla did a structural change : e=tc²            Minkowski( Einstein was one of his students) RAUM(space)-Zeit(time)

https://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=39663 (https://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=39663)
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/electromagnetics-and-energy.912307/

                                                             Does this really matter ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 22, 2016, 11:43:56 AM
APPARENTLY YOU TWO LOVE TO HEAR YOUR SELVES TALK.

do we think we can keep the topic confined to Figuera device and not write a book on chatter, PLEASE !

Hanon;

what is your point in posting those devices.? what are you trying to convey.?  even "if" remotely,  they do have some slight similarity what can it do to help a completely differently operating device.?  i am really not trying to make you upset but  those devices operate completely different from the Figuera device.
it would seem to me that only a few people on this web site are actually pursuing a build of the device and the rest are nothing but a distraction and a waste of time,  filling this thread with gibberish and denying those that want to learn.
Rswami;
Don't hold your breath, it won't happen in your lifetime. you and your kind are a distraction to this thread and forum in general.
MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 22, 2016, 01:20:38 PM
Doug

You may please call me Rams if it is easy to use.

I have to decline to accept the bait. In theoretical knowledge you are a Tiger and I am a cat. Not fair game here.

I only shared my experiments and observations.

lancaIV..sir..the one more observation that I need to share is that increasing the primary voltage dramatically increases the secondary wattage. You can reduce the primary amperage by using multifilar coils with plastic iron sheet plastic placed between layers of primary multifilar wire. Magnetism is intense. Input is AC. Cause is increasing inductive impedance in primary.  I can only experiment once in a month now and if I have reportable results I will share.

My coils are fairly large. They are heavy.  It takes time and effort to winfmd them and experiment. 

Marathonman.. here is a deal you cannot refuse.  You tender an unconditional apology to all including Mr. Dare Diamond and I will not post here in this thread. You know I am honest. 

Regards

Ramaswami
But why would my friend, my darling 5&6 Mr.Marathonman nott want you to post on here again? Why did make such request? Definitely the correct practicals and theories made available by you is giving some people heartache.

For Motion in the primary, it is NSNS vice-versa I.e Clockwise to Clockwise and leads connection in parallel or Clockwise to anticlockwise and lead connection of n series.

For Lenz Negation ii the secondary, it is NN vice-versa which is Clockwise to Anticlockwise and lead connection in Parallel only.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on August 22, 2016, 03:21:28 PM
Rams

Oh..This is the difference between transformers and generator. .well. Doug I used soft iron rods and weak residual magnetism is present in about 15% of the rods. They are very weak though.

You can say impurities are the reason.

Can you point out the specific part of the patent thatvsays no residual magnetism is present.

Regards


Ramaswami

 Your over simplifying it. For getting there are separate cores. I will look for it later this evening.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 22, 2016, 03:40:51 PM
Transformer is really not transformer but saturable reactor. The essence is flux linkage and common core in the sense that the load applied on secondary effect the saturation of core which effect primary current. This feedback mechanism is the problem , second one is Lenz law and so on....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 22, 2016, 03:41:02 PM
Sir..

What I observe is this. .

Here mains voltage is not constant.  It flutuates between 190 to 220 volts. In the same set up output of secondary is 30 volts when input voltage is 220 volts. Output of secondary drops to 18 volts when input voltage is 190 volts. We have 50 hz here.

Similarly if you increase the voltage to 1000 volts frpm 100 volts output voltage will shoot up. Secondary resistance being constant when secondary voltage is increased the amperage also raises. Amperage is based on secondary wire thickness and amazingly thickness of secondary insulation.  I understand thick wire producing higher amps but I do not understand the insulation part. Information on insulation is available in Daniel McFarland Cook patent and in Joesph Cater book. No where else.

Don Smith wrote double the voltage quadruple the output. This is true for secondary. 

I cannot write on specific numbers as I have not experimented andobserved but if you increase primary voltage secondary is bound to increase. If you are inclined to experiment please pm me.

Doug..Intensity of magnetic field and input voltage are the two things that matter from my
observations. Please explain in simple English for people like me to understand if you feel otherwise.

Regards

Ramaswami
For every 200ohms resistance, minimum of 500V is needed.

When you exhaust the maximum voltage a coil can bear, the remaining factor or property that will allow you to continually generate high magnetic field is Frequency which is universal. The needed voltage of a coil have something to do with it Maximum Ohmic Value or Resistance Value. But the maximum applicable Voltage is determined by the Resistance and LEVEL OF WIRE.INSULATION.
Normally, you would want to stay below the radar so as not to get your coil burnt.

The Maximum frequency your coil can bear is determined by the type of Core of your Coil. Air core Coils have little or.NO LIMITATION to the amount of Frequency it can withstand. While Iron Core is the opposite.

However, to use generally safe frequency of 60hz to drive your coil at the applicable voltage/resistance level and still generate massive Magnetic Force or Flux, then Twisted Serially Connected Wires must be applied. But would this allow for a self-runner? Arguably No is the answer because low frequency of 60hz will make the primaries to consume High Amperage which the Battery can not easily absorbed even if the secondary winding will provide it in 10 fold or more .Butteries have charging current and discharging current limitations. So to achieve overunity using batteries to power your device, it is require that your Primaries must consume below the maximum charging current of your battery or Batterry bank.
 
The Higher the input voltage the higher the output voltage but the effect will not be Extremely Powerfull as when the other factor is applied. The factor is increment in frequency.

When you coninually increase the  rate or speed of switching, the Primary will continually drop input current but increase the more Output AMPERAGE. AND IN TOTAL, OUTPUT POWER IN WATT!

You need no HIGH INPUT CURRENT TO Generate High Magnetic Force you simply need ***HIGH FREQUENCY*** HIGH VOLTAGE*** and Optionally Twisted Serially Connected Multifilar Wire ( TSCMW).

Radiation emitted at high frequency is not a barrier, Simply place your Derive in an Alluminium Box. You can optionally perforate it for proper ventilation.




How big and permeable your core is determines your applicable maximum amount of frequency to your coil.

Now a days, you need Pure Sine Wave inverter (motionless Switch) to Run Overunity Devices. So building one that have variable frequency is a MUST.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 22, 2016, 05:13:39 PM
So Mr. Forest

Once core is saturated primary will not draw further current. Right.

Core saturation problem solved.

Core heating problem solved

Lenz law problem solved

Controlling the EM radiation and reducing it is alredy solved and solutions are available but it it needs to be kept in secluded areas.

Feedback problem can be solved easily but there are valid concerns about drawing excessive energy from environment. Figuera solved it using very low frequency if the patent info is genuine.  I think it is highly edited info. So I cannot rely on it. There is no info on feedback circuit in any patent.  But there are other methods.

If Time money and health permits I will do it in future.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 23, 2016, 12:24:59 PM
If the Figuera device is a static machine(except the commutating function doing motor)
cutting the lines and the angular momentum, an example (one from the Flynn papers citing docs):
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=WO&NR=2009112877A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=5&date=20090917&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=WO&NR=2009112877A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=5&date=20090917&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
The above-mentioned principles are also value for the Tran-energy machines without permanent magnet(s) in the core(s) of the magnetic circuit(s)

Keiichiro Asaoka : static dynamo machine ,no C.O.P. explaining
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19990720&CC=US&NR=5926083A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19990720&CC=US&NR=5926083A&KC=A)

C.O.P. 1,8-4,8 ;with permanent magnet (Figuera device without)
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=JP&NR=2003102164A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=20030404&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=JP&NR=2003102164A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=20030404&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)

We know the cycle duration from batteries and capacitors/condensators :
what have been the working quantities in hours of the Figuera/Buforn device ?
The average motor/electro-imans/magnets service life in the beginnings from the last century ?

We are reading about 20000 W output : how long ? Economical numbers ? HF pulsed DC output ?

Pulse : Dirac surges and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea)
                                                electron-proton-positron (to plasmon-ics)
The development of quantum field theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory) (QFT) in the 1930s made it possible to reformulate the Dirac equation in a way that treats the positron as a "real" particle rather than the absence of a particle, and makes the vacuum the state in which no particles exist instead of an infinite sea of particles. This picture is much more convincing, especially since it recaptures all the valid predictions of the Dirac sea, such as electron-positron annihilation. On the other hand, the field formulation does not eliminate all the difficulties raised by the Dirac sea; in particular the problem of the vacuum possessing infinite energy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy).

Modern interpretation:
Conclusion:
additive to "positive energy machine"(heat) we will develop "negative energy machine"s (cold)

quantum field converter: energetic electron to thermic electron : eV-dependance
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=4720642A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19880119&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=4720642A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19880119&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)

Because electron became named  -not by me,but by international convention- ion :
                                            thermic + ion = thermion
                                            hot and cold "electricity"
                                            with  PTC/NTC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 23, 2016, 06:49:56 PM
Jeez lancaIV,

I thought you were going to do a systematic study and breakdown of the Figuera patents. ?

We really don't need to comprehend every other generator patent, dirac surges,  quantum field theory, the Dirac sea, electron-positron annihilation, negative energy machines, ad nauseam.

Focus man! :D

Regards
CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 23, 2016, 07:07:24 PM
                                       Cadman : #4030 ! #4031 !
                                    what-you-read-is-what-you-get ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 23, 2016, 07:25:39 PM
Sir. .That 20000 watts with 300 Amps means about 67 volts. I tried to do it but it is not working.  300 volts and 70 amps could be credible or even thevreported 550 volts at 35 amps is very credible. Will require a 10 sq mm wire to handle that current.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 23, 2016, 08:32:24 PM
                                       Cadman : #4030 ! #4031 !
                                    what-you-read-is-what-you-get ?

Analysis paralysis !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 23, 2016, 08:47:00 PM
Sir. .That 20000 watts with 300 Amps means about 67 volts. I tried to do it but it is not working.  300 volts and 70 amps could be credible or even the reported 550 volts at 35 amps is very credible. Will require a 10 sq mm wire to handle that current.

Regards

Ramaswami

Ramaswami, this VA-relation is new for me ! Which publication ? 
If it is written 100V and 1A to 300A and totally 20000 W then the tension has to be in the 67V range( pure mathematical by dividing,not VAr including et cet.)

Questionable: 1928 15 hp for heating , Canaries Islands ? Un Palacete mucho grande ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands) climate
Average low °C (°F)
15.0
 (59)[/color]
15.0
 (59)[/color]
15.7
 (60.3)[/color]
16.2
 (61.2)[/color]
17.3
 (63.1)[/color]
19.2
 (66.6)[/color]
20.8
 (69.4)[/color]
21.6
 (70.9)[/color]
21.4
 (70.5)[/color]
20.1
 (68.2)[/color]
18.1
 (64.6)[/color]
16.2
 (61.2)[/color]
18.0
 (64.4)[/color]

In the european south home heating has not been common.
In my chamber there is not a heater,2016 !

But pardon,Canaries make part from the african shelf ,only geopolitical spanish-european !
Patent publication: Trustable numbers ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 23, 2016, 09:31:16 PM
Analysis paralysis !

Cadman,the Figuera/Buforn Jacas device is a "Maer",something like a "dreammachine" with absolutely
no detailed description for DIY.    "terra incognita"
paralysis: parar =stopping/hold on
Ja=yeah,introducing educated knowledge and quantum possibilities in these concept,
a 2.kind ppm-machine
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 23, 2016, 10:37:22 PM
Ramaswami, this VA-relation is new for me ! Which publication ? 
If it is written 100V and 1A to 300A and totally 20000 W then the tension has to be in the 67V range( pure mathematical by dividing,not VAr including et cet.)

Questionable: 1928 15 hp for heating , Canaries Islands ? Un Palacete mucho grande ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands) climate
Average low °C (°F)
15.0
 (59)[/color]
15.0
 (59)[/color]
15.7
 (60.3)[/color]
16.2
 (61.2)[/color]
17.3
 (63.1)[/color]
19.2
 (66.6)[/color]
20.8
 (69.4)[/color]
21.6
 (70.9)[/color]
21.4
 (70.5)[/color]
20.1
 (68.2)[/color]
18.1
 (64.6)[/color]
16.2
 (61.2)[/color]
18.0
 (64.4)[/color]

In the european south home heating has not been common.
In my chamber there is not a heater,2016 !

But pardon,Canaries make part from the african shelf ,only geopolitical spanish-european !
Patent publication: Trustable numbers ?


Sir..I do not know climate in European countries.

The 550 volts ibfo is from the 1902 press clipping.

The 100 volts 1 amp input and 20000 watts output at 300 amps I think is in the last patent of Buforn. That would require 10 coils if 10 sq mm to be wound in parallel and connected in parallel.  For this the core must be very large.

On the other hand 670 volts and 30 amps is easier to do and then can be stepped down to ueable electricity.  It is easier to do it and a six inch dia and 18 inch long secondary core can do it. If the input voltage is higher and permanent magnet was used for primary then primary amp can be lower. I would think 1000 volts input at 1 amp wth permanent magnet core in primary can do this easily if we have large cores.

Higher the input voltage higher the secondary wattage. Observed by me. Permanent magnets core would avoid the need for electricity to create electromagnets. We already know by using multifilar coils and plastic uronsheets and plastic between layers in primary current drawn can be considerably reduced.

It is quite possible that the resistor array was used to boost voltage in the ciils from a battery source as the rotary device made the dc into Ac. it could well be that the batteries used are total of 100 volts.   It is possible that the srep down transformer was used to again feed the rotating device durectly eliminating the need for batteries.

The Engineering student who works for me now tells me that the rotary device is a special commutator and if properly bult will be sturdy.  We could not build it.

The first 1908 patent is a disclosure document. Subsequently this could have been run.

The questions are us the input voltage boosted to 1000 volts and if permanent magnets are used in primary.  If the answer is yes the results of 20000 watts I can assure you are doable. Figuera says very little current is needed to excite the primary.  That is what makes me think he used permanent magnets.

What type of steel is the best permanent magnetic material. Can you please find out and advise me.

Regards

Ramaswami





I think 420 gradevsteel rods if stronly magnetised once will not be demagnetised until and unless we heat them above their curie temperature but my knowledge is limited here.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 23, 2016, 11:09:14 PM
Looking for the Oersted/Gauss-values from permanent magnets in the beginning of the last century
I mean that commercial C5/C8 Ferrite pm will do their job,
alternatively as DIY-solution  http://www.instructables.com/id/Permanent-Magnets/ (http://www.instructables.com/id/Permanent-Magnets/) .

But: this is not the original -no permanent magnets- Figuera/Buforn version

Moderatly I would give the advice to begin a new thread : semi-static F.-B.-R.(amaswami) dynamo ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 24, 2016, 11:17:12 AM
http://phys.org/news/2016-08-physicists-discovery-nature.html (http://phys.org/news/2016-08-physicists-discovery-nature.html)
Citing physicists' understanding of the standard model, Feng speculated that there may also be a separate dark sector with its own matter and forces. "It's possible that these two sectors talk to each other and interact with one another through somewhat veiled but fundamental interactions," he said. "This dark sector force may manifest itself as this protophobic force (http://phys.org/tags/force/) we're seeing as a result of the Hungarian experiment. In a broader sense, it fits in with our original research to understand the nature of dark matter."



Buforn Jacas wrote in the 1914 papers about the"new physics"-view of electro-magnetism and matter .
(Also as argument for the unknown machine-internal process)


Hundred years later the search and findings do not stop.
In the labs measurements are in the "pico"-level.





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 24, 2016, 04:20:31 PM
We interrupt this program for a brief musical interlude from the 'Man in Black' Mr. Johnny Cash!

"I hear the train a comin'
It's rollin' round the bend
And I ain't seen the sunshine since, I don't know when..."

We now return you to your current program "All there is to know about everything"


Smile
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 25, 2016, 11:22:28 AM
not copper but iron windings: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2984608_Eddy_Currents_Theory_and_Applications (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2984608_Eddy_Currents_Theory_and_Applications)
eddy currents / load  dis-/advantage
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19820302&CC=US&NR=4318019A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19820302&CC=US&NR=4318019A&KC=A)


rotor/static core ~ dynamotor
http://rexresearch.com/alxandr/3913004.pdf (http://rexresearch.com/alxandr/3913004.pdf)


Cadman, 50 Hz x 60 sec by 220 V (European grid)         for 3000 RPM standart     2016
               60 Hz x 60 sec by 110V                                    for 3600 RPM standart     2016


Cadman,you know it all : 1928 ? Pardon,I do not know it ! Figuera-Buforn generator/ load inrush current relation ?  Only resistive load ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 25, 2016, 01:21:33 PM
Ramaswami,
a great importance : 1 A to 300 A ! How ?

Conductor:conductor (input-)beginning and conductor-end(-output),conductor length and diameter
Conductor: quantity and turns quantity
Conductor: Ampére-turns ~ RPM strictly to differ from Ampére-conductor-windings/turns
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampere-turn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampere-turn)

 10 A conductor or 10x 1 A conductor ( Figuera/Buforn "commutator" : how many connections ?)

how many independant receiving Ampére-coils here,parallel or seriell connection(?) :
 http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Patents/DE3024814.pdf (http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Patents/DE3024814.pdf)

from 100 Volt to your recitated 550V : resistor/resistance relation and effect ?
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20020405&CC=JP&NR=2002101679A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20020405&CC=JP&NR=2002101679A&KC=A)

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=JP&NR=2007028879A&KC=A (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=JP&NR=2007028879A&KC=A)

Probably something for your engineering student !?

 Asking about Ferrit(iron,not steel) (included Ferroelectric):
in the last years this element became a new "reborn" in the labs with some surprising effect-range
Ferrit-Nitrite(META-material) magnets with up to 100 MGOs as alternative to Neodym supermagnets
and Ferrit crystals as alternative to silicium/silicon "green ferrite",IR-em-waves converting
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 25, 2016, 03:54:36 PM
Dear Sir

We habe seen that it is difficult to get high amperage at lower voltages ad it needs a large iron core. It is easier and cheaper to get high voltage and lower  amperage output.  But what is the type of devices that were in use one hundred year's back is difficult to understand today.

These are large electromagnetic devices and demand a team work of five people tp prepare them.

I am not aware of Ferrit. Is it the same as Ferrite which has zinc added to it and can work at high frequency.  Can you please explain more.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 25, 2016, 04:27:08 PM
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20011123&CC=FR&NR=2809241A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20011123&CC=FR&NR=2809241A1&KC=A1)
 french to english translation: " ........rusty soft iron......"
 
soft ferrit cause low permittivity and remanenz for electro-magnetic purpose with HF(=signals)
~ Met-glas,amorph metals

accelerator are also called collider: how many signals do reach the Target or Particle ?
electro-magnetic bombardement with signals/pulses/waves

The physical (Laplace) operator is called Puls-/Frequency-/Time-/Wave-generator !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace_operator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace_operator)  for the "photon energy hunt roulette" by phonon

HF ~high RPM power densities from motor or generator or transformer up to 1KW/0,1KG
are reachable but this has -later- to become realized by active machine cooling

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19800610&CC=US&NR=4207487A&KC=A
motor/generator        20000 PM 2000 KW/280 Kg ~ Helmut Schiller PAM motor(or generator)

transformer power density compressing technique : Prof.Markov/Ed Sines

http://www.rexresearch.com/szabo/szabo.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/szabo/szabo.htm)
The self-reliant EBM plant uses its own self-generated electromagnetic fuel. The research and development work of this hi-tech technology began in 1980 in four laboratories in Toronto, Houston, London and in Budapest, managed for ELECTRO ERG LIMITED (EEL) by the GAMMA Group, under Professor L. I. Szabó's leadership.

                                          Menpower and Time investment !

                     
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 25, 2016, 06:19:50 PM
Sir.

If rusted soft iron is what you ment then I have been using high nreds og kilograms of it already.  When we the experiments if we pour 200 ml water into the cores and conduct the experiments the iron gets rusted in no time what is the big deal.

We found that iron got ionised so fast and water evaporated.  If this is the kind of iron that can also become a permanent magnet it explains why soft iron became a permanent magnet in my experiments though a weak Permanent magnet I now have to heat it to remove the magnetism and hen the rods are slightly heat pour water over them and again apply strong magnetic field through a solenoid to make them strongly magnetised.  880 volts Ac given through thin multifilar coils can make current consumed to be 0.25 amperage in primaries and we can raise the current to 300 volts and 10 amps in one secondary coil or 600 volts and 20 amps in two secondary and three primary coil cores. We can test this using a step up transformer and we can use an independent secondary coil to feedback the primary of the step up transformer. This I can test easily.  But I need to wait for the team to assemble first. We can control the voltage and current in the feedback coil easily. 

So rusted oft iron is all that is needed. I have however ndreds of kilograms of it.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 25, 2016, 06:41:11 PM
Cadman,you know it all : 1928 ? Pardon,I do not know it ! Figuera-Buforn generator/ load inrush current relation ?  Only resistive load ?

How about a little reality check

Just ask yourself;

What materials and technology did Señor Figuera have access to? What industrial base existed at that time to manufacture those materials?

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 25, 2016, 06:50:41 PM
Cadman,this are the questions ! Search range !? Only Spain or Europe or world-wide ?
 Answer which would only get : several different types !
I would say,each machine: unikum ,1928 ! No industrial mass production norm !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 25, 2016, 06:58:09 PM
powdered ferrite related :a little mad idea -not from me- is to treat minerals like " sea animals",aquarium-like  : feeding them !
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19931111&CC=DE&NR=4222678A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19931111&CC=DE&NR=4222678A1&KC=A1)

recitating Prof. Szabos view : an "electro-magnetic fuel"
 
soft ferrite related:
powdered ferrite to ferrite block and if you use the material bonding resonant frequency you will get this machine effect :
http://www.igus.eu/wpck/6328/app_vector10_Nierensteinzertruemmerer?C=DE&L=en (http://www.igus.eu/wpck/6328/app_vector10_Nierensteinzertruemmerer?C=DE&L=en)

or welding parts = arc welder function

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figuera device: interview 1902
https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Interview_Figuera_1902#page/n1/mode/2up (https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Interview_Figuera_1902#page/n1/mode/2up)
"with the power to run a motor developping a force of twenty horsepower"
electric motor efficiencies 1928 to get +/- generator output
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on August 25, 2016, 08:02:35 PM
Cadman,this are the questions ! Search range !? Only Spain or Europe or world-wide ?
 Answer which would only get : several different types !
I would say,each machine: unikum ,1928 ! No industrial mass production norm !

Search range:

Elementary Dynamo Design W. Benison Hird 1908
Dynamo Electric Machinery Silvanus Thompson
Fourth Edition Vol I 1893 ?
Fifth Edition Vol II 1896
Seventh Edition Vol I 1904
Auto-Transformer Design Alfred H. Avery  1909

Search range: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/
Dates: 2014 - 2016
Key words: Doug1, marathonman, Hanon

Search range: https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/

I am 100% serious

CM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 25, 2016, 09:13:46 PM
serious ?  :o
https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Interview_Figuera_1902#page/n1/mode/2up (https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Interview_Figuera_1902#page/n1/mode/2up)
"... All parts have been built separately in various workshops(mean offices) under the management
of the inventor,..." Delivered from France,Germany and so on !

In the papers are only cited: Pixii ( from wikipedia: electrification)
Around 1832, Hippolyte Pixii (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippolyte_Pixii) improved the magneto by using a wire wound horseshoe, with the extra coils of conductor generating more current, but it was AC. André-Marie Ampère (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9-Marie_Amp%C3%A8re) suggested a means of converting current from Pixii's magneto to DC using a rocking switch. Later segmented commutators were used to produce direct current.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrification#cite_note-4)
William Fothergill Cooke (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fothergill_Cooke) and Charles Wheatstone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Wheatstone) developed a telegraph around 1838-40. In 1840 Wheatstone was using a magneto that he developed to power the telegraph. Wheatstone and Cooke made an important improvement in electrical generation by using a battery-powered electromagnet in place of a permanent magnet, which they patented in 1845.[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrification#cite_note-5) The self-excited magnetic field dynamo did away with the battery to power electromagnets. This type of dynamo was made by several people in 1866.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 26, 2016, 01:06:06 AM
LancaIV. .Sir. .

Can you please the links for the specific patents that you indicated in your last post. The principle stated is correct but the circuit needscto be changed if we change the geometry.  We can do away with the rotary device totally to achieve the same result claimed in the Figuera bpapers. I thought it hides only one component but it seems to hide two if we change the geometry.

Please post the old patent links of pixxi and others thatbused permanent magnets to boost output.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: wistiti on August 26, 2016, 03:59:40 AM
Youppiii!
:)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 26, 2016, 11:59:34 AM
                                          Re-Inventing The Wheel ,
                   here: Re-Inventing The Electric Circuit For Self-Excitation
Let us do a temporal improvement list (if possible including concept papers):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fothergill_Cooke (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fothergill_Cooke)
then studied medicine in Paris, and at Heidelberg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidelberg) under Georg Wilhelm Munke (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georg_Wilhelm_Munke&action=edit&redlink=1). In 1836 he saw electric telegraphy, then only experimental: Munke had illustrated his lectures with a telegraphic apparatus on the principle introduced by Pavel Schilling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Schilling) in 1835. Cooke decided to put the invention into practical operation with the railway systems; and gave up medicine.[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fothergill_Cooke#cite_note-FOOTNOTEBurnley1887102-1)

Early in 1837 Cooke returned to England, with introductions to Michael Faraday (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Faraday) and Peter Mark Roget (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Mark_Roget). Through them he was introduced to Charles Wheatstone, who in 1834 gave the Royal Society (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Society) an account of experiments on the velocity of electricity. Cooke had already constructed a system of telegraphing with three needles on Schilling's principle, and made designs for a mechanical alarm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Schilling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Schilling)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Wheatstone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Wheatstone)
Electrical generatorsIn 1840, Wheatstone brought out his magneto-electric machine for generating continuous currents.
On 4 February 1867, he published the principle of reaction in the dynamo-electric machine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo-electric_machine) by a paper to the Royal Society; but Mr. C. W. Siemens had communicated the identical discovery ten days earlier, and both papers were read on the same day.


from Faraday to early motors(and permanent magnets to electro-magnets)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor)
Perhaps the first electric motors were simple electrostatic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_motor) devices created by the Scottish monk Andrew Gordon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Gordon_%28Benedictine%29) in the 1740s.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Gordon-2) The theoretical principle behind production of mechanical force by the interactions of an electric current and a magnetic field, Ampère's force law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amp%C3%A8re%27s_force_law), was discovered later by André-Marie Ampère (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9-Marie_Amp%C3%A8re) in 1820. The conversion of electrical energy into mechanical energy by electromagnetic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetism) means was demonstrated by the British scientist Michael Faraday (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Faraday) in 1821. A free-hanging wire was dipped into a pool of mercury, on which a permanent magnet (PM) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_magnet) was placed. When a current was passed through the wire, the wire rotated around the magnet, showing that the current gave rise to a close circular magnetic field around the wire.[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-SparkMuseum_.28Motor.29-3) This motor is often demonstrated in physics experiments, brine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brine) substituting for toxic mercury. Though Barlow's wheel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barlow%27s_wheel) was an early refinement to this Faraday demonstration, these and similar homopolar motors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_motor) were to remain unsuited to practical application until late in the century.
  (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/98/Jedlik_motor.jpg/200px-Jedlik_motor.jpg) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jedlik_motor.jpg)   Jedlik (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%81nyos_Jedlik)'s "electromagnetic self-rotor", 1827 (Museum of Applied Arts, Budapest). The historic motor still works perfectly today.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-TravelHungary_.28Dynamo.29-4)   In 1827, Hungarian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungary) physicist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicist) Ányos Jedlik (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%81nyos_Jedlik) started experimenting with electromagnetic coils (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_coil). After Jedlik solved the technical problems of the continuous rotation with the invention of the commutator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutator_%28electric%29), he called his early devices "electromagnetic self-rotors". Although they were used only for instructional purposes, in 1828 Jedlik demonstrated the first device to contain the three main components of practical DC motors: the stator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stator), rotor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_%28electric%29) and commutator. The device employed no permanent magnets, as the magnetic fields of both the stationary and revolving components were produced solely by the currents flowing through their windings.[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Guillemin_.281891.29-5)[6] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Nature-6)[7] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Blundel_.282012.29-7)[8] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Thein_.282009.29-8)[9] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-9)[10] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-10)[11] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Electropaedia_.28home.29-11)
 Success with DC motorsAfter many other more or less successful attempts with relatively weak rotating and reciprocating apparatus the Prussian Moritz von Jacobi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moritz_von_Jacobi) created the first real rotating electric motor in May 1834 that actually developed a remarkable mechanical output power. His motor set a world record which was improved only four years later in September 1838 by Jacobi himself. His second motor was powerful enough to drive a boat with 14 people across a wide river. It was not until 1839/40 that other developers worldwide managed to build motors of similar and later also of higher performance.
The first commutator DC electric motor capable of turning machinery was invented by the British scientist William Sturgeon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sturgeon) in 1832.[12] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-12) Following Sturgeon's work, a commutator-type direct-current electric motor made with the intention of commercial use was built by the American inventor Thomas Davenport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Davenport_%28inventor%29), which he patented in 1837. The motors ran at up to 600 revolutions per minute, and powered machine tools and a printing press.[13] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Garrison_.281998.29-13) Due to the high cost of primary battery power (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_%28electricity%29), the motors were commercially unsuccessful and Davenport went bankrupt. Several inventors followed Sturgeon in the development of DC motors but all encountered the same battery power cost issues. No electricity distribution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_distribution) had been developed at the time. Like Sturgeon's motor, there was no practical commercial market for these motors.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Nye_.281990.29-14)
In 1855, Jedlik built a device using similar principles to those used in his electromagnetic self-rotors that was capable of useful work.[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Guillemin_.281891.29-5)[11] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Electropaedia_.28home.29-11) He built a model electric vehicle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle) that same year.[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Hungarianscience_.28Frankfurt.29-15)
A major turning point in the development of DC machines took place in 1864, when Antonio Pacinotti (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Pacinotti) described for the first time the ring armature with its symmetrically grouped coils closed upon themselves and connected to the bars of a commutator, the brushes of which delivered practically non-fluctuating current.[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Antonio_Pacinotti-16)[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Klein-17) The first commercially successful DC motors followed the invention by Zénobe Gramme (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z%C3%A9nobe_Gramme) who, in 1871, reinvented Pacinotti's design. In 1873, Gramme showed that his dynamo could be used as a motor, which he demonstrated to great effect at exhibitions in Vienna and Philadelphia by connecting two such DC motors at a distance of up to 2 km away from each other, one as a generator.[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-gamme-18) (See also 1873 : l'expérience décisive [Decisive Workaround] (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippolyte_Fontaine#1873_:_l.27exp.C3.A9rience_d.C3.A9cisive) .)
In 1886, Frank Julian Sprague (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Julian_Sprague) invented the first practical DC motor, a non-sparking motor that maintained relatively constant speed under variable loads. Other Sprague electric inventions about this time greatly improved grid electric distribution (prior work done while employed by Thomas Edison (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison)), allowed power from electric motors to be returned to the electric grid, provided for electric distribution to trolleys via overhead wires and the trolley pole, and provided controls systems for electric operations. This allowed Sprague to use electric motors to invent the first electric trolley system in 1887–88 in Richmond VA, the electric elevator and control system in 1892, and the electric subway with independently powered centrally controlled cars, which were first installed in 1892 in Chicago by the South Side Elevated Railway (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_Side_Elevated_Railway&action=edit&redlink=1) where it became popularly known as the "L". Sprague's motor and related inventions led to an explosion of interest and use in electric motors for industry, while almost simultaneously another great inventor was developing its primary competitor, which would become much more widespread. The development of electric motors of acceptable efficiency was delayed for several decades by failure to recognize the extreme importance of a relatively small air gap between rotor and stator. Efficient designs have a comparatively small air gap.[19] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Ganot_.281881.29-19) [a] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-20) The St. Louis motor (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=St._Louis_motor&action=edit&redlink=1), long used in classrooms to illustrate motor principles, is extremely inefficient for the same reason, as well as appearing nothing like a modern motor.[20] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-21)

Emergence of AC motors In 1824, the French physicist François Arago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Arago) formulated the existence of rotating magnetic fields (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_magnetic_field), termed Arago's rotations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arago%27s_rotations), which, by manually turning switches on and off, Walter Baily demonstrated in 1879 as in effect the first primitive induction motor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_motor).[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Babbage_.281825.29-23)[23] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Thompson_.281895.29-24) [24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Bailey_.281879.29-25)[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Vuckovic-26) In the 1880s, many inventors were trying to develop workable AC motors[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Jonnes_.282004.29-27) because AC's advantages in long-distance high-voltage transmission were counterbalanced by the inability to operate motors on AC. The first alternating-current commutatorless induction motors were independently invented by Galileo Ferraris (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Ferraris) and Nikola Tesla (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla), a working motor model having been demonstrated by the former in 1885 and by the latter in 1887. In 1888, the Royal Academy of Science of Turin published Ferraris's research detailing the foundations of motor operation while however concluding that "the apparatus based on that principle could not be of any commercial importance as motor."[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Vuckovic-26)[27] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Ferraris_.281888.29-28)[28] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-TFI_.28now.29-29)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-30)[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Smil_.282005.29-31)[31] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Froehlich_.281998.29-32)[32] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Drury-33)[33] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Langsdorf_.281955.29-34)[34] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-EAE_.281977.29-35)[35] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Ferraris_.28EBE.29-36)[36] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Biography_of_Galileo_Ferraris-37)[37] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Neidhofer_.282007.29-38)[38] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Pansini_.281989.29-39) In 1888, Tesla presented his paper A New System for Alternating Current Motors and Transformers to the AIEE (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Institute_of_Electrical_Engineers) that described three patented two-phase four-stator-pole motor types: one with a four-pole rotor forming a non-self-starting reluctance motor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctance_motor), another with a wound rotor forming a self-starting induction motor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_motor), and the third a true synchronous motor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_motor) with separately excited DC supply to rotor winding. One of the patents Tesla filed in 1887, however, also described a shorted-winding-rotor induction motor. George Westinghouse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Westinghouse) promptly bought Tesla's patents, employed Tesla to develop them, and assigned C. F. Scott (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_F._Scott_%28engineer%29) to help Tesla; however, Tesla left for other pursuits in 1889.[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Vuckovic-26)[32] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Drury-33)[35] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Ferraris_.28EBE.29-36)[36] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Biography_of_Galileo_Ferraris-37)[37] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Neidhofer_.282007.29-38)[38] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Pansini_.281989.29-39)[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Alger_.281976.29-40)[40] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Klooster_.282009.29-41)[41] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Day_.281996.29-42)[42] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Froehlich_.281992.29-43) [43] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-TEE_.281888.29-44)[44] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Sravastava-45)[45] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Tesla_.281888.29-46)[46] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Harris_.28web.29-47) The constant speed AC induction motor was found not to be suitable for street cars[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Jonnes_.282004.29-27) but Westinghouse engineers successfully adapted it to power a mining operation in Telluride, Colorado in 1891.[47] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Maddox_.282003.29-48)[48] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Hughes_.281993.29-49)[49] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-50) Steadfast in his promotion of three-phase development, Mikhail Dolivo-Dobrovolsky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Dolivo-Dobrovolsky) invented the three-phase cage-rotor induction motor in 1889 and the three-limb transformer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer) in 1890. This type of motor is now used for the vast majority of commercial applications.[50] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-51)[51] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-IEEE_German_Ch._.282012.29-52) However, he claimed that Tesla's motor was not practical because of two-phase pulsations, which prompted him to persist in his three-phase work.[52] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Dolivo-Dobrowolsky_.281891.29-53) Although Westinghouse achieved its first practical induction motor in 1892 and developed a line of polyphase 60 hertz induction motors in 1893, these early Westinghouse motors were two-phase motors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-phase_electric_power) with wound rotors until B. G. Lamme (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_G._Lamme) developed a rotating bar winding rotor.[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Alger_.281976.29-40) The General Electric Company (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_Company) began developing three-phase induction motors in 1891.[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Alger_.281976.29-40) By 1896, General Electric and Westinghouse signed a cross-licensing agreement for the bar-winding-rotor design, later called the squirrel-cage rotor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squirrel-cage_rotor).[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Alger_.281976.29-40) Induction motor improvements flowing from these inventions and innovations were such that a 100 horsepower (HP) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower) induction motor currently has the same mounting dimensions as a 7.5 HP motor in 1897.[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#cite_note-Alger_.281976.29-40)

https://de.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A9mSs2PIGcBXs6sAGF8zCQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByZmVxM3N0BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?p=Self-excited+Magnetic+Field&fr=mcafee (https://de.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A9mSs2PIGcBXs6sAGF8zCQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByZmVxM3N0BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?p=Self-excited+Magnetic+Field&fr=mcafee)
http://circuitglobe.com/types-of-dc-generator-separately-excited-and-self-excited.html (http://circuitglobe.com/types-of-dc-generator-separately-excited-and-self-excited.html)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet)

http://rexresearch.com/mrmagnet/mrmagnet.htm  (http://rexresearch.com/mrmagnet/mrmagnet.htm)
  (enter the PDF)                                                                         
page 18: steady magnetic field/ rotating magnetic field : voltage !

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Eric_Dollard_Document_Collection/Rotating%20Magnetic%20Field.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Ehrenhaft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Ehrenhaft)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 27, 2016, 09:53:03 PM
https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Buforn%20translation%20patent%2057955%20year%201914_djvu.txt (https://archive.org/stream/Clemente_Figuera/Buforn%20translation%20patent%2057955%20year%201914_djvu.txt)


By using a magnetic field, consisting of two series of electromagnets N and S, a resistor and a circumference of contacts isolated from each other. . . Note that only the contacts located in the Northern semicircle are in communication with half of the end sides of each resistor, and the contacts in the South semicircle are not in communication with the resistor, but respectively with the contacts in the semicircle communicated with half of the end sides of each resistor, and inasmuch as the current moves on the magnetic field and returns from it by the input and output sides of the resistor, and as this field is composed of two series of electromagnets N and S , therefore, and as result of the operation of the device when the electromagnets N are full of current, the electromagnets S are empty, and as the current flowing through them is reducing or increasing in intensity according it passes by more or less turns of the resistor, and therefore, in continuous variation;


 since we have done a continuous and organized variation we have achieved a constant change in the current which crosses the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets N and S and whose current, after completing their task in the different electromagnets, returns to the source where it was taken. We have already achieved to produce the continuous and organized change of the intensity of the current which crosses the magnetic field.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip-flop_(electronics)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 28, 2016, 08:53:19 AM
I don't understand this sentence : "of the current which crosses the magnetic field. "[/size]

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 28, 2016, 10:03:15 AM
lancaIV

Sir..with due respect there are 16 contacts and yes only 8 wires going from one side. But the 16 contacts are connected to one another in parallel. Contact 1 and 16 are connected as are contact 2 and 15 and so on.

Therefore current always flows on both sides. The intensity is increased and decreased. 

Forest. .sir ..your question is valid. This is why I feel that primary magnets are permanent magnets and the current made them magnetic amplifiers. 

The Engineering student who works on this project in spare time tells me that while the commutator is difficult to make as it requires specific machine tools and expertise once made it can be very robust and as the current flowing is very low but voltage is increased in the resistors it can work as claimed.  But unfortunately we do not have dc machines and dc commutator manufacturers now. Those who do have specific designs which are different from the one given in the patent.

We can use high voltage Ac to do the same thing but we would need steel that will not be  demagnetised by Ac (no magnetic field collapse to zero) or we would need pulsed dc with Full positive sign wave sent through high resistance wires preferably multifilar coils.

We have built the commutator as described and run it only to see that it produces six inch long sparks. If we put a metal plate to capture the sparks and conect a high voltage low amp transformer to secondary the plate can be hit by continuous sparks. But again this requires the primary to have its own magnetic field.

I do not have high voltage wires and I do not have steel rods. The commutator design is very special and probably it worked at 10 to 25 hz frequency if the patent info s accurate.  I have checked the whole of Siuth India and unfortunately we could not find dc commutator manufacturers who would build the design and costing is also very high. In any case the commutator only created Ac from Dc and would not be required once started. The brushes will definitely wear out in a short period and this is what makes me suspect that it was used to create high voltage sparks from very low dc input. The primary ends also go to earth.

If we use even mild permanent magnets in primary then they will have their magnetism increased and decreased as the current flows through them as described in the patent. A very high voltage input will take care of voltage division as well easily.  But just two large primary cores would be sufficient.  With 220 volts in primary I was able to get up to 350 volts in secondary in the center slone or about 70 volts and good current that can light 10*w
200 watts lamps.  If we put permanent magnets and increase the voltage to 880 which my wires can handle secondary should increase to 280-300 volts and 10-12 amps. Just with a single module.

Putting permanent magnets in primary will also remove the criticism of Doug that a Generator should have a weak magnetic firld left in the cores.  It will also produce  the magnetic amplifier effect.

This is the only way the description that only a small current is needed to excite the primary. 

The patent is so vague and mislwading in many places and cleverly written.  I think the resistor array can also prevent back emf from coming tovthe commutator but not sure on that.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 28, 2016, 11:26:42 AM
What do you really want,Ramaswami ?


How I wrote and think: nobody will ever build a 100% Figuera/Buforn engine/generator but the idea is to enginer a machine based by
the Figuera/Buforn work principle and process result !


                               Magnetic field force amplification and field lines crossing to get amplified electric power !


              You explain good teste results power related,but you do not write about material behaviour/consumption !
                                                                     Material as solid fuel !


                             Do not be afraid: also all other energy converter are not "physically imortal" !
                     Solar cells 30 years periodically use( sun ),but only 3 years permanent use (light box)
                                                    drop-away plastic cells: 1/2 year by periodic use

                                                   Batteries: 90 days(lead) up to several years(redox)


                                                               per KWh-production price :
                                      recycleability and earth rock material mining quantity dependant !

                                       You will have to get your results repeat-and measureable.
With 220 volts in primary I was able to get up to 350 volts in secondary in the center slone or about 70 volts and good current that can light 10*w [/size]200 watts lamps. :[/size]
                                                                               intensity ? power consume/conversion

pulsed power and human eye: http://www.google.com/patents/US5130608 (http://www.google.com/patents/US5130608)
Since the useful energy is expended mainly during the pulse width but not during the resting period between pulses, which is relatively much larger than the pulse width, [/font][/size]yet too short to be perceptible to the human eye, considerable energy can be saved while nevertheless maintaining brightness of illumination.


                                                   less input seems to be higher input : attention paying !

                               Begin with < 1000VA result experiments,let this examine officially ,
                                        later > 1000 VA range experiments (especially for the India power consumer) !   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  As basic teste configuration :                     [/size]
                                                              Which VA input ?[/size]
".... If we put permanent magnets and increase the voltage to 880 which my wires can handle secondary should increase to 280-300 volts and 10-12 amps. ..."[/size]


 With less/more VA input ? remark the results ! heat measurement / curve
                                 material vibration/(thermal)noise ?!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               Think and visualizing tools :      http://www.coolmagnetman.com/magvisual.htm (http://www.coolmagnetman.com/magvisual.htm)


                                        It is classical enginneering using quantum science work range


Thinking about Figuera/Buforn given numbers:
20 horse-power ,continous or peak value ?,electric motor serving
                                                                          gear-ed/-free ?
1902-1914 there has not been an industrial production standart
 (neither national nor international)   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 28, 2016, 01:06:33 PM
Sir..

This is a very expensive project.  Each test required a team work.

I do not understand your comments on material as fuel or material consumption. Material remains intact.

If we provide current to make primary  electromagnets and from there we try to generate electricity from secondary most of the time we are biund to fail unless we reach core saturation.  On the other hand if we use partially magnetised permanent magnet core  in primary then we needcto give high voltage and lower amperage only to get very good output far in excess of input.  This is quite simple and straight forward. Using Ac input multifilar coils and a mild permanent magnetic core in primary we can easily achieve this. But none will accept this.

How we can make this in to a self runner is not clear to me. There are theories but I have not even tried ascthey are said to be very dangerous to conduct. I cannot take risks.

Somehow 15% of soft iron used by s has become permanent magnets.  Very mild but not clear to me how. Professor who lokked at my results wanted me to test each rod for magnetism and we took a long time and got about 75 kgm of soft iron rods of different magnetic strength. 

I cannot say why the same rod is stronger at one end and weaker at another end. Their magnetism is removed only by heating. Somehow magnetic remanance has formed in soft iron rods but not in all and even in the same rod it is varying in places.

I will be working on other principles as time and money permits and subject to availability of team.  Whatever I indicated can be verified easily.

In fact Mr. Cadman accepted that He tested the NS NS NS variation suggested by me and found it to be cop <1.
There is nothing surprising in it as he used single module and used current to make primary electromagnets.  If he has used higher voltage input and permanent magnets he eould have got bettee results.

I find my results and observations to be different from a lot of accepted info stated here and we have replicated again to verify our results. 


You can test yourself as you indicated you have done extensive research. You can increase or decrease the input voltage and verify how the output is affected.  I would also suggest that use multifilar coils in primary alone. In secondary we need to use a single highly insulated thick wire. 

Except for the self runner part I have verified the other results.

Generally speaking Nature generates electricity in two ways. Electrostatic and Electromagnetic.  If we combine both of these methods probably it is possible to build self runners but I do not have the technical expertise to do all these things nor the funds. I am also exhausted. 

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 28, 2016, 02:10:42 PM
Hello Ramaswami, I read and think also under the line !

Tiger and cat , Tami and Tamil Nadu (South India and Ceylon/Sri Lanka), about "old man" and charity and "I am also exhausted".


What you are  doing makes today part of the microphone/loudspeaker/amplifier/tuner/receiver/ex-LP to Cassette to Disc-Floppy to CD-to DVD to stick high fidelity technology : main interests compression and micronization


                             Information technology but also as entertainment tool


Yes,R&D costs much,100000 US$ for the first development stages a real number, industrial pieces using and engineers/Uni labs controlled.


If you have good results go to the TATA Group and/or the Reliance company(wind power) ,they can afford the needed research for industrial standartization and have technical and economical/comercial experience. (investments risc and losts included)


Electrification from the rural area can become accelerated by such  static e-/pm- generator disclosure !


Probably it is not a bad idea to apply an "utility model" of this device ! Before you publicate the concept to possible investors !


                       "federal/estate development agency"programs for rural poverty : existant ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on August 28, 2016, 03:37:28 PM
Sir..You need not read under the lines. That is not necessary.

Regarding the old man appearing before me it was an experience. Many know about it. From the time he appeared my knowledge has increased manifold but finances have come down. If I have the same kind of finances I would have completed this project long back.

Nothing of the sort you mentioned would work here. Things are extremely corrupt here. Only if you have right connections and bribe people to their satisfaction things can be done here. If you donot have that money then you are stuck where you are.

Here Government gives free Electricity to farmers..One of my clients tried to do a generator from wasted water energy and feed it back to the grid. He made an invention which you can see at www.tmptens.com I took it to the Government and ultimately learnt that if there are big profits than very high bribes need to be paid even to be considered.

You are correct in understanding that I have not disclosed much. Majority of JLNaudin site is restricted to be viewed in India. The Gegene generator info which is high frequency and cannot be used to run motors and can only light lamps and heaters was off view to the Indian public in National security interests. This will not sell here.

What Figuera found and what I did is nothing new. It is called simple magnetic amplifier boosting the output. Hundreds of videos are probably out in the interenet. The point is that I made significant improvements.

As an additional note you can get 4 Run capacitors of 220 volts and 200 to 1000 microfarads and put them in series and connect the module of such capacitors in parallel to the primary. You will see that the primary input drops. You can place another such module depending on the output voltage ( voltage of capacitors to be four times the voltage of the output or input) and you will see that the output increases. I do not know why it behaves like this.

Electricity generation is actually quite easy. You can make it any where in the world with four Earth points. I think self runners can be made to work safely but Patrick has warned me that it can attract lightning strikes and one inventor in US was hit by lightening when he did that. Is the info true or not is not known to me but I have avoided taking risks. Standardization and commercialization is difficult. I probably have spent more than $1,000,000 in western labour costs and effort. It is not easy for you people to do it and here no one is bothered.

I was so curious about the Hubbard Generator. Turns out that it is a simple machine. Once started it can continue as there are no moving parts and only one component that can wear out.

Not even Dr. Moray was able to commercialize his invention. What can I do?

Probably things will change..But who knows when they would. We have to wait and see.

Regards,

Ramaswami 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 28, 2016, 04:10:10 PM
http://www.agragamiglobal.com/16.html (http://www.agragamiglobal.com/16.html)
it is a religious sect
but with Technology development http://www.agragamiglobal.com/2.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 28, 2016, 05:08:33 PM
Compare this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdoOBOnntGo to Buforn patent  ;)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 28, 2016, 06:41:55 PM
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20121220&CC=DE&NR=102011111692A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20121220&CC=DE&NR=102011111692A1&KC=A1)


Wind concentration/velocity amplification technology                  related            to coil winding concentration/velocity amplification technology


also:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20140522&CC=DE&NR=102013010837A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20140522&CC=DE&NR=102013010837A1&KC=A1)



[0041]

The result according to the invention the new effect that a plurality of molecular electricity generators 30 includes a current collector 29 forming molecule, which is connected only via the flow opening 34 to the induction pipe 31st In molecular current collector 29 a rotational flow is produced. The molecular stream generators 30 direct the molecule flows 20 under pressure tangentially into the molecular current collector 29 a, so that from the excess pressure in the induction pipe 31 a rotational flow in the direction of outflow 38 is formed, in which the molecule currents 20 place over the flow opening 34 and form a molecule current coil 33rd A large number of molecular flow 20 results in a close-packed molecule current coil 33, so that the molecules are inductively aligned in the induction tube 31 to the outflow opening 38th The acting via the outflow opening 38 pressure of the atmosphere is then in the induction pipe 31 against the induced in all molecules moving force. Since the induction capacity of a molecule current coil 33 increases with decrease in their diameter, counter-currents can be safely ruled out by the induction pipe 31 by cross-sectional changes.


[200]
can be supported by calculation done a reasonably accurate estimate of the extra speed that must have induced a molecular current coil 33 jet flow 35th This accurate calculation methods may be developed in the course of operating experience. It has been found that a drive power of a molecular stream generator of max. 200 W sufficient to form a molecular stream 20 with a circulation Γ = 11.0 m <2> / s. A molecule current coil 33 begins at the end of Durchströmrohrs 32 and ends at the outflow 38th First, the theory induced additional speed is determined in the middle of the molecular current coil 20, after which theoretically induced additional speed at the end. Middle and top speed are added and the sum divided by two. The result is practically occurring average speed of induced jet flow 35th For example, if 45 ° lead angle of the molecule currents 20, 0.40 m diameter, 1.0 m in height and eight molecule flows 20 a molecular current coil 33 given, then there is a drive capacity of 1.6 kW.


[0043]

From the time-related angular momentum concentrations results in the additional velocity vz induced jet flow 35 with 52.44 m / s and a beam power of 11.047 kW. The ratio of drive power of the molecular current generators 30 to the induced beam power 35 is 1: 6.9. The number of molecules navigate through 20 goes straight into the calculation. Doubling the number of 16 molecules navigate through 20 would require only the assembly of 16 molecular stream generators 30 and would be limited only by the diameter of the power module 28th At constant design parameters, the additional velocity vz changes to about 114 m / s and the power of the induced jet flow 35 to about 88.4 kW. The ratio of the drive power of the molecular stream generators 30 to 35 induced beam power is inexpensive. This performance improvement results from the fact that the circulations of the molecule currents 20 spatially produce a higher energy density in the molecule current coil 33 and the induced additional speed vz enters the third power in the power calculation.


all clear : through compression stages ;  question now : acceleration : conventionally second power/potential
but here calculation by ,recitating,     and the induced additional speed vz enters the third power in the power calculation.


analog: calculation  electro-magnetical transformer ,static or rotoric ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on August 28, 2016, 08:09:33 PM
Sir..

This is a very expensive project.  Each test required a team work.

I do not understand your comments on material as fuel or material consumption. Material remains intact.

If we provide current to make primary  electromagnets and from there we try to generate electricity from secondary most of the time we are biund to fail unless we reach core saturation.  On the other hand if we use partially magnetised permanent magnet core  in primary then we needcto give high voltage and lower amperage only to get very good output far in excess of input.  This is quite simple and straight forward. Using Ac input multifilar coils and a mild permanent magnetic core in primary we can easily achieve this. But none will accept this.

How we can make this in to a self runner is not clear to me. There are theories but I have not even tried ascthey are said to be very dangerous to conduct. I cannot take risks.

Somehow 15% of soft iron used by s has become permanent magnets.  Very mild but not clear to me how. Professor who lokked at my results wanted me to test each rod for magnetism and we took a long time and got about 75 kgm of soft iron rods of different magnetic strength. 

I cannot say why the same rod is stronger at one end and weaker at another end. Their magnetism is removed only by heating. Somehow magnetic remanance has formed in soft iron rods but not in all and even in the same rod it is varying in places.

I will be working on other principles as time and money permits and subject to availability of team.  Whatever I indicated can be verified easily.

In fact Mr. Cadman accepted that He tested the NS NS NS variation suggested by me and found it to be cop <1.
There is nothing surprising in it as he used single module and used current to make primary electromagnets.  If he has used higher voltage input and permanent magnets he eould have got bettee results.

I find my results and observations to be different from a lot of accepted info stated here and we have replicated again to verify our results. 


You can test yourself as you indicated you have done extensive research. You can increase or decrease the input voltage and verify how the output is affected.  I would also suggest that use multifilar coils in primary alone. In secondary we need to use a single highly insulated thick wire. 

Except for the self runner part I have verified the other results.

Generally speaking Nature generates electricity in two ways. Electrostatic and Electromagnetic.  If we combine both of these methods probably it is possible to build self runners but I do not have the technical expertise to do all these things nor the funds. I am also exhausted. 

Regards

Ramaswami
I am yet.to.test the NSNS theory but I powered.my multifillar coil with 200VAC and hold a magnet above it and viola there start to be a Vibration of the underneath Electromagnet. I turned to the other.sides, the vibration sprang up too indicaticating that the Polarity is ever instantly reversing from N-S to.S-N on each sides and thus cormirms that N-S to S-N makes a Motionless Motor.

Ramaswami, you need no magnet to reduce the inputs current. All you need is High frequency, High Voltage. And Ferrite Core.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 31, 2016, 11:06:12 PM
I saw this image fifteen years before for the first time :

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=ES&NR=395792A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19721116&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=ES&NR=395792A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19721116&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)


static generator with rotative commutator



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on September 01, 2016, 12:15:52 AM
I am yet.to.test the NSNS theory but I powered.my multifillar coil with 200VAC and hold a magnet above it and viola there start to be a Vibration of the underneath Electromagnet. I turned to the other.sides, the vibration sprang up too indicaticating that the Polarity is ever instantly reversing from N-S to.S-N on each sides and thus cormirms that N-S to S-N makes a Motionless Motor.

Ramaswami, you need no magnet to reduce the inputs current. All you need is High frequency, High Voltage. And Ferrite Core.

Do not get me.wrong, when I said N-S to S-N makes.motionleess Motor , I really mean The motionless  MoGen must be in attraction mode. Because it is only with.that that there can be really accelation of Electrons on the secondary copper wire windings
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on September 01, 2016, 12:15:52 AM
I am yet.to.test the NSNS theory but I powered.my multifillar coil with 200VAC and hold a magnet above it and viola there start to be a Vibration of the underneath Electromagnet. I turned to the other.sides, the vibration sprang up too indicaticating that the Polarity is ever instantly reversing from N-S to.S-N on each sides and thus cormirms that N-S to S-N makes a Motionless Motor.

Ramaswami, you need no magnet to reduce the inputs current. All you need is High frequency, High Voltage. And Ferrite Core.

Do not get me.wrong, when I said N-S to S-N makes.motionleess Motor , I really mean The motionless  MoGen must be in attraction mode. Because it is only with.that that there can be really accelation of Electrons on the secondary copper wire windings
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on September 02, 2016, 11:09:12 AM
static generator with rotative commutator :
I mean the work principle of these electro magnet devices are best explained by the Henri Trilles document :


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3&FT=D&ND=3&date=19940318&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3&FT=D&ND=3&date=19940318&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)


a cascading Volt and Ampére generator ,the commutating=alternating


really surprising the need of going up and partially going down with the physical values for the next stages.


H. Trilles made in his numbers calculations two errors (my view) 88+22= 110 and not 116 Volt as final voltage and to accumulate the five "systems" Voltage and Ampérage is also wrong : 110 V (correct voltage) x 23 Ampére = 2530 VA total (5)systems output


                                                       numerical output     5 systems X   (22V x 23 A) = 5 X ( 506 VA)


                                   The Fifuera/Buforn concept will not have special different working principles.


22V x 23 A output for 1 system by 2,15 VA( 6V x 0,35A bicycle alternator) system input is a start point for the "grid-autonomous household".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 03, 2016, 11:12:55 AM
Dear Sir

In my experience 4 square mm wire with resistance of 4.95 ohms per 1000 meters developed 10 amps at 300 volts AC.

Now which type of wire will develop 23 amps at 22 volts. Is the output dc or pulsed dc or ac.

Since the patent is in a language I d o not understand I am not able to understand it.

Please advise.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on September 03, 2016, 12:49:47 PM

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19940318&CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19940318&CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3)

Here a google translation from the Henri Trilles amplifier description (the patent system own automatic translator works bad ) :

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3&FT=D&ND=3&date=19940318&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=FR&NR=2695768A3&KC=A3&FT=D&ND=3&date=19940318&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
go to Drawings page 1 (9/11) from the original documents ( I calculate 16 couples ! ?)
there is also shown the pole direction from each e-magnet

Drawings page 2 (10/11) from the original document (I calculate 30 couples ! )

a simple 1-2 steps prototype (no need of full concept construction) is enough to approve the functionality

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amplifier Circuit Electric (fixed)


This invention project concerns the possibility of amplifying a primary current (AC) lt origine provided by a small generator (6 volts 0.35 amps) with a series of seats transformers has one after the other linked together until has come to have an electromotive force (voltage and amperage) sufficient to supply the engine of a direct electric motor or via 1 or 2 batteries buffers without being constantly obligee going to charge its batteries.


This circuit is based on the ability of alternating currents to be amplified by transformers.


At present an electric car supplied with power by 8 batteries 12 volts or 96 volts and consumes 2 amperes per km has a range of 80 to 90 km and the weight of these batteries handicap enormously.


So I thought through to provide an electrical current constantly renewed and therefore inexhaustible.


The set consists of 30 coils (wound with nickel silver wire). This metal has 30 resistivity will amplify together voltages and amperages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_silver (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_silver)

All 2 coils form a pair they will be nested on a soft iron bar (annealing) of sufficient length to not only electricity by influence can be felt in one at the other.


3 couples (6 coils) will form a series.


These pairs are connected together by a wire with a capacitor and each series is connected to the next (oriented in the opposite direction to the first by an also wire with capacitor) that will go to the induced coil (the 2nd) of the last pair of series to the field coil of l torque of the new series.


And so on couples, series, systems (2 sets) with the same windings corresponding coils and therefore the same currents will lead us to the end of the circuit with a maximum voltage and amperage.


These systems will number 5 so 10 sets of 6 coils.     
 
1   coil
2   coils = 1 pair/couple
6   coils = 3 couples = 1 set/series
30 coils = 5 sets/series = 1 system                             x 2 = cw/ccw or positive/negative =AC


DESCRIPTION
All or part of 5 'system be used to power the motor or
to charge the buffer battery or to give the current refrigerator
which will be housed in all coils.


We interposerons just outside the 5 'system a rectifier
because the AC obtained at the end circuit should be changed W
DC power to charge the battery.


A small dynamo is connected to the battery it will be used to train
mechanically with pulleys and belts the little generator providing
the starting current of the circuit.


Each pair of lead wire or serial number or system will have
a capacitor to allow current instead of being behind
the tension of being ahead and at least compensate for this delay. We inter
calerons also at the end of the circuit a rheostat for metering the quantities
current required for each new item.


Note: The dimensions of the refrigerator (or freezer) used
will depend on the dimensions of coils.


OPERATION
Introduction
It was observed long ago that when inserting a magnet in a wound coil of copper wire (or other electrically conductive metal) is produced in the coil an electric current. And that when removing the magnet it is born in the coil of another current direction opposite to the previous. And if the fast is introduced and is removed from said coil magnet over this movement to introduce and remove are numerous and faster and the current increases rapidly.


We get the same result in even faster by using an electromagnet instead of the magnet and by sending alternating current.


The current changes direction many times (50 or more) per second will represent more rapid introduction and removal of the magnet and increase the power over it.       
                                                                                                =  50Hz (as example)


A coil induced by the electromagnet will have a power all the more powerful it will be yarn length subjected to the magnetic flux.


All the proposed circuit is based the above.






Operation
As we explained in the description and drawing the circuit is composed of 2 pairs of coils (wound with nickel wire resistivity 30) which will enable us better than copper of lower resistivity barely 1.56 to advance pair of voltages and amperage (all couples are numbered).


The primary current is supplied by a small generator (used at present to provide lighting to barely 6 volts bicycles and Oa, 35 an electromotive force of 2 watts, 15.
http://www.ebay.com/bhp/bicycle-light-generator (http://www.ebay.com/bhp/bicycle-light-generator)     
  http://www.ebay.com/itm/6v-3w-Bicycle-bike-Dynamo-Generator-Charge-Charging-for-Cellphone-GPS-w-Bracket-/130944233480 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/6v-3w-Bicycle-bike-Dynamo-Generator-Charge-Charging-for-Cellphone-GPS-w-Bracket-/130944233480)

Our first task will be to increase the amperage (more powerful therefore the greatest electromotive force) torque n "1
We therefore bear the winding 10 of the coil (inductor) to 9 m on a nickel wire of 2 mm diameter is 6 this thread cross-sectional area of ​​5 mm2 30.


The resistance will be obtained 0.49 (related to the fact that over 15 m long nickel silver 2 mm in diameter so 3 14 mm2 section has a resistance of 1 ohm, 4).


The voltage is 6 volts we will get the amperage divided by 0.49 6 which will be 14 amperes (6 x 14 = 84 Watts) instead of 2.15 watts to the origin.


This coil turning soft iron bar electromagnet it will be much more powerful and provide the 2 "coil induced a stronger induction.


This new amperage (14a) was able to circulate in the winding wire of the coil induced thanks to the its thread section which is 5 mm 3 and allows to pass 14 amps widely (3 amps maximum can circulate per mm2 wire section).


The second coil on the same bar of soft iron (induced coil) will have a winding 6 m instead of 9 which will decrease the voltage and bring to 4 volts the wire section is also reduced from 5 mm 3 to 4 mm 52 we will have a 38 ohm resistor O by dividing the voltage by the resistance, a rating of 12 amps.


It is this current of 4 volts with 12 amps to be forwarded to the first coil (inductor) 20 following couple who will have the dual winding of the previous coil is 12 meters by 6 so a voltage that will be door 8 volts resistance of 0.66 so a rating of 8: 12a = 0.66 that will excite the electromagnet of the new couple.


The induced coil of this new couple with a winding 15 mm for 6.15 of a section of O ohm resistor 71 carry the new DC 10 volts 0.71 = 14 amperes by the wire connecting them will excite electro magnet flowing in the field coil 30 of the last couples of the series and we will finish the series with a current raised to 14 volts and 16 a.


Everything is explained in the attached table.


The current obtained at the end of this series will be transmitted to the next series inverted relative thereto ie the current will go in the opposite direction and the two coils (the latter induced) of the leer and the series ( first induction) in the following series will be placed as close (to avoid any length of wire off the windings).


And thus torque couple of series in series systems systems (a system 2 series 1 series 3 couples, 1 couple 2 coils) in all 5 systems we get to the end of the circuit to the last induced coil there a catch thread fairly large section reccueillera the resulting current.


The lengths of wire, section resistances, voltages, amperages couples will be exactly the same for all five similar systems 10 system.


At the end of each system as at the end of each series last coil induced transmit its power to the first induction coil in the following series reversed from the previous (so that we will no longer need alternator) which therefore used only for the 10 pair of the whole.


At the end of each system a current of 6 volts and 1 ampere maximum will be charged to fuel 1 "field coil of the next system. So at the end of the first 4 systems we have 28 volts 6 volts for the next system will 22 volts and 28 amps to the last system in total 22 x 4 = 88 + 22 = 116 volts and 23 amps 5 times = 115 amps.


At the end of the 50 system we will have 116 volts and 115 amps.


A rheostat allow us to control the amount of current to each of the elements that follow.


A rectifier connected between the end of the circuit and the battery for example, we will transform the alternating current into direct current to charge the battery or batteries to 6 amps hour.


This or these batteries will feed the refrigerator (400 watts 12 wolts one kilowatt per 24 hours) and will turn the dynamo using pulleys and belts will cause the alternator mechanically.


If 96 volts are required to walk from the car engine, we will remain 20 volts for these functions and a lot of amps.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 04, 2016, 09:23:17 AM
Good catch.As you see the same pattern. McFarland Cook,Hubbard,Kunel, Sweet,Steven Mark and so on .... it's just a matter of using simple induction laws.Now we may ask - why those rich bastards talking about climate change do not recognize the importance of such inventions ??? BECAUSE IT IS TOO EASY and everyone could build it , no matter if a worker with good salary or a poorer man in not industrial country yard.
Bill Gates invests millions of dollars to build small nuclear plant, because what ?
Zuckenberg (creator of Facebook) wants to give billion to develop new energy sources ? you are kidding !
Maybe Elon Musk will be installing such devices in his electric Tesla cars ? An electric car whcih do not need to tank fuel? NO WAY!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaF-fq2Zn7I
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on September 04, 2016, 10:03:34 AM
Forest

The secrrt is in the wire used. Where do you get wire made up of copper zinc and Nickel and that too insulated wire. All earth batteries have iron and zinc electrodes placed in carbon and salt and water.
They are not the tiny earth batteries shown in YouTube but large multiple module ones. We have no funding and no knowledge on these things here.

Gettung funds for these projects is the biggest issue. Then the inventor must come forward and share knowledge truthfullt and in a detailed way.  Again those who try to implement must havre funds to do it. The hurdles are many.

Regards

Ramaswami
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on September 04, 2016, 11:29:21 AM
Lanca
Would it be possible to get a contact number or more info on this inventor ? [if he is still on the planet?]

respectfully
Chet K

note
Apology I see you have started a new thread  :-[
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on September 04, 2016, 09:05:58 PM
marathonman,
going to the first page and reading I mean user bajac could critizise me,


related to your ,marathonman,post content :

Thanks for getting your own thread as you post everything but Figuera. your post are nothing but mumbo jumbo ramblings of a person that is high on dope or takes medication to be stable.
you have completely disrespected the Figuera thread and ran it into the ground along with those to stupid idiots darediamond and Rswami.
piss poor research and piss poor intelligence with absolutely no direction.
you three stooges are pathetic researchers with no direction or reasonable intelligence. blind leading the blind and wouldn't know Figuera if he fell into your lap.



I have to say that the disrespect to Figuera -your claimed standpoint-has had begun with the first page.
                          Not the original paper content was the thread object !


The rest of your post reflects only your social degree.


Regard
           OCWL


p.s.: http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059 (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059) 
                                        June,12 2013
       
       El hilo en OU es:[/font][/size]http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inven ... t1-clement (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clement)[/size] e_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/#.UXu9gzcQHqU
 Aquí se centran más en el uso del Arduino.


to the last 3rd of September 2016 post
http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=1410 (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&start=1410)


p.p.s.: https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/history/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/history/)
The company from Berlin which built some of the pieces, got curious about what they would be used for, sent an engineer to the Canary Islands, with the pretext of helping set up and with real purpose to study and sketch the whole device, but has not achieved his objective. Apparently, Mr. Figueras´ apparatus consists essentially of three parts: a collector, a transformer and an accumulator, so that, in short, what it does is to collect atmospheric electricity, transforming it from static to dynamic and store it in a secondary battery for later use in the form and amount required.


This is not written in the official and original Figuera/Buforn documents as working principle.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 04, 2016, 10:08:06 PM
"This is not written in the official and original Figuera/Buforn documents as working principle."


You are wrong.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on September 04, 2016, 10:16:19 PM
"This is not written in the official and original Figuera/Buforn documents as working principle."


You are wrong.


forest,
"Apparently, Mr. Figueras´ apparatus consists essentially of three parts: a collector, a transformer and an accumulator, so that, in short, what it does is to collect atmospheric electricity, transforming it from static to dynamic and store it in a secondary battery for later use in the form and amount required."


Where in the 1902-1914 papers I will find this conceptual process written ?

https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/newspaperchicago1902.gif?w=700 (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/newspaperchicago1902.gif?w=700)
motor +  generator + regulator, 1902 version


and the only existing official patent agent approved description document,1910 Buforn
http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf)

(I am not writing about Teslas magnifying trans/-mitter/-former ::)  Figuera/Buforn thread)
                                      =Time compressor/Quencher
"One watt-second of power is not much. As normally thought of, it is just one watt delivered over a period of one second. Oh what a vast difference however, can be the manifestation of one billion watts delivered for one billionth of a second."

This is a journal text and foreign speculative opinion before the first 1902 patent application,
not a description from the inventor :

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
For example, in the May 1902 edition of the journal The Reading in Science and Arts[/i] is written:
In the English newspapers are extensive references to an important discovery conducted by D. Clemente Figueras, forest engineer in Canary Islands and physics professor at College San Agustin from Las Palmas. Mr. Figueras has been working silently in order to find a method to use directly, ie, without dynamos and chemical agent, the huge amounts of electricity which exist in the atmosphere and are being renewed constantly, constituting an inexhaustible reservoir of this form of energy. Our compatriot (…) has achieved his purpose, having managed to invent a generator which can collect and store the atmospheric electric fluid in a position of being able to use later for pulling trams, trains, etc., or to run machinery in factories to light the houses and streets. Although no one knows the details of the procedure that Mr. Figueras reserves until he will get it completely perfected, he states that his invention will produce a tremendous economic and industrial revolution. The apparatus devised by Mr. Figueras has been built in separate pieces, in accordance with the drawings made by him in different companies in Paris, Berlin and Las Palmas. Received the parts, the engineer has put them together and articulate in his workshop. The company from Berlin which built some of the pieces, got curious about what they would be used for, sent an engineer to the Canary Islands, with the pretext of helping set up and with real purpose to study and sketch the whole device, but has not achieved his objective. Apparently, Mr. Figueras´ apparatus consists essentially of three parts: a collector, a transformer and a accumulator, so that, in short, what it does is to collect atmospheric electricity, transforming it from static to dynamic and store it in a secondary battery for later use in the form and amount required. We have understood that the inventor will soon come to Madrid and, later he will depart to Berlin and London, and then you will be able to know the procedure in detail.[/i]


the essential sentences from the (translated) 1902 Figuera patent application:
 CLEMENTE FIGUERA PATENT (1902) No. 30375 (SPAIN)
a.
We, through an intermittent or alternating electric current achieve a variation in the magnetic state of the cores of the excitatory electromagnets, and also changing, the magnetic state of the cores on which the induced circuit is coiled, where electric currents appear ready to be industrially exploited.

b. ... in our procedure, the same lines of force, which are born and die cross through the coils on the induced.


and the knowledge about piezo/pyro-ceramic related with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transducer
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on September 07, 2016, 07:56:51 AM
"The existence of electricity in the atmospheric layer that surrounds our globe is
absolutely undeniable, and its existence according to ancient theories is
attributed to the evaporation of water vapour and air friction and also may be
attributed almost wholly, according to modern theories, to the great electro-
magnetic currents and numerous emanations components of the mysterious
fluid thrown by the great star over our small planet. A small portion of those
currents and emanations remain condensed or accumulated in our magnetic
surrounding, and the rest is impregnating up to the last atom of our terrestrial
mass."


Read Buforn patent
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on September 07, 2016, 11:03:40 AM
Good morning,forest


this document part does not explain an "atmospheric energy converter"-type like  the speculation in the 1902 journal article !


The earth : a magnet,which works like a capacitor       
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_current (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_current)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitance#Capacitance_and_.27displacement_current.27 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitance#Capacitance_and_.27displacement_current.27)




Reading Buforns last document I think that it is a Back-EMF-less/free transformer:
 https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf)    page 27/51


                                       a monopolar(uni-directional) magnetic machine


the work process: page 28 : 1 Ampére-equivalent charge X coil windings = Ampére-turns(=velocity)
1 Ampere in and by turns velocity amplification 300 Ampere out. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 19, 2016, 10:39:18 PM
WOW!
A lot has been going on. I have been studying and rereading all the posts since the beginning!
Looks like all has been figured out.
I have been collecting items I need to start my build of the Clemente Figuera device. What an
Amazing invention. I have spent a lot of time with the Don Smith and other devices.
The Figuera Device has some advantages over anything using a spark gap plus extreme high voltage.
It looks like to me the Figuera device once properly made should almost maintenance free for long
periods of time. One might want to build two part “G’s” wired up for emergencies.

Marathonman: Does the motor go round and round or back and forth?

Many thanks to Doug1, Marathonman, Hannon, and Cadman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 21, 2016, 01:30:39 PM
The bars are layed out next to each other with only one end of the bars connected to the wires so as the brush rotates it makes contact with them back and forth even though the brush is going round. No need to rotate the entire field magnet ,just make the magnetic field mimic rotation. You'll need a better then text book understanding of a generator that uses an excited field magnet. Hands on experience and practice. Even repairmen may only be following a procedure to diagnose a problem as laid out in a manual without having to actually know the details of how the thing works. There is a need to go a little bit further then that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 21, 2016, 09:48:39 PM
Thank you for the information!
I think you are the only one to succeed in our quest.

Thanks again,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on September 26, 2016, 09:43:16 PM
I recently presented a spreadsheet for calculating the electromagnets used in a Figuera device. I appreciate the comments forum members made concerning it. The gap calculations in it were wrong because I assumed an air gap. Actually, there are joints which do not have nearly as great a loss as an air gap. This is explained in a 1893 book, Dynamo Electric Machinery. I have copied the pertinent part and included it in the revised spreadsheet.

Having reread the Elementary Dynamo Design book by Bennison Hird, I decided to continue to pursue his experience related recommendation to oversize the inducer coils to compensate for the back EMF in the output that occurs when the power factor 0.8. I asked myself the question "What effect would different oversize inducer coils have on the unit?" To get the answer, I plugged in increasing amp-turn values, and voila...an increase in usable output appeared followed by a decline in output as inducer amp-turns increased. I plugged in a value between the max output amp-turns and the decline amp-turns and found a peak. Additionally, the weight of the unit decreased as the amp -turns increased. The same effect presented itself with a smaller size design. These values are shown in the attached spreadsheet.

The magnet pull for a single inducer pole on the 16KW unit was found to be 2004 lb. Although small bolts have adequate clamping force to hold the inducers and outputs together there will be leakage lines that can attract small, nearby objects. I have not determined a way to protect against attracting them or causing harm to people. I would appreciate any suggestions forum members may have to solve this apparent problem.

I hope this will help some of you. If you see errors, I would appreciate you pointing them out, as I have only the desire to get it right.
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 29, 2016, 03:55:30 PM
Sam6, what program should I use to view your spread sheet?

Thanks,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on September 29, 2016, 08:28:33 PM
Shadow
The spreadsheet is Microsoft Excel, but you can also use some of the free office programs to open it. I hope you find it helpful.
Best regards,
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on September 29, 2016, 11:40:49 PM
Sam
  I have to assume you understand why no one builds a generator with a single pole field magnet ,not one with any appreciable output.
   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 30, 2016, 04:21:17 PM
Doug1
In other words, it might be better if I wind the device rather than try to use a Variac that has to go back and forth.

Good luck,

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on September 30, 2016, 04:23:21 PM
Sam6
Thanks,

I got it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on October 01, 2016, 01:53:34 PM
Diss regard that Sam I didnt see the other two pages in the spread sheet. I thought you were trying to design a single set of inducers with a single output coil. Been a little bit under the weather, nice case of bronchitis.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on October 03, 2016, 11:08:59 PM
Doug 1-
No offense taken. I too, suffer from brain farts.....Hope you feel better soon. It occurred to me that the easiest way to restrain the electromagnet inducers may be to clamp them together on each end with the output sections squeezed between the respective N-N and S-S poles. The clamp on one end would consist of a pair of plates long enough to have holes drilled in them above and below the inducer core to accept threaded rods between them, a block of wood on each side between the inducer and plate to provide a huge reluctance in the external magnetic circuit that this contraption creates, and a pair of threaded rods to hold the plates together. It appears that this arrangement may be easier than trying to drill and tap a laminated core for bolts. I don't know if laminations would provide adequate thread holding capacity to restrain the forces. I'm open for better solutions.
Best regards,
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 03, 2016, 11:38:57 PM
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=william+putt&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search


with kindest regards
                                OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 05, 2016, 04:14:59 PM
The magic of the Figuera generator is that makes possible to convert two variable magnetic fields in time in the electromagnets ( emf = dB/dt ) into a variable magnetic field in space (in the induced coils), as happens in all generators ( emf =  v · B )  moving back and forth the magnetic lines producing a relative velocity between the magnetic lines and the wires, and, therefore creating induction by flux cutting the wires.


https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/scalarbm3.gif (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/scalarbm3.gif)

https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/k7jsec.gif (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/k7jsec.gif)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 06, 2016, 02:46:02 AM
hanon,would it not be a sign of respect and honory behaviour like a real gentleman to indicate with whom you reached your actual knowledge level ?
You paid a little but how much did you received for this paid money as technical,by physics experiments and trial-error and success: result experience, value compensation
by Mister " NRamaswami (http://overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/) "

        physics link by me:              http://www.rexresearch.com/hooper/hooper1.htm

Sincerely
              Oliver Christoph Waldhelm Lancza             (cz instead c-cedilhe)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MCKSys on October 06, 2016, 07:58:27 AM
Hanon: He visto tu video e incluso lo he resubido a YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGRzTFe5VCg). Mi pregunta es: has hecho experimentos con lo que has expuesto? Si lo hiciste, qué resultados obtuviste? Pregunto pues tu acercamiento me parece muy lógico.
Gracias.
==================================================
[IN BAD ENGLISH]
Hanon: I've seen your video and even I'd re-uploaded it to YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGRzTFe5VCg). Mi question is: did you make any experiments with your findings? If you did, what results did you get? I ask because your line of though seems very logical to me.
Thanks.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 06, 2016, 11:34:02 AM
If you read the whole forum even some posts I did in 2013 you will see that from that date I defend the poles in repulsion design while the user you mentioned only used north-south polarity in his post and designs. I did not convince him of my point and he did not convince me of his proposal. If you really want to understand the patents you just have to read them tens of times as I did and analyze them in detail.

Less reading of strange and unrelated patents are you post here daily and more reading of Figuera patents, especially the one written in 1908. This is the key.

Good luck and keep on searching for more patents..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 06, 2016, 02:23:22 PM
Hello hanon,
I have no problem with your explanation !


If you read the whole forum even some posts I did in 2013 you will see that from that date I defend the poles in repulsion design while the user you mentioned only used north-south polarity in his post and designs. I did not convince him of my point and he did not convince me of his proposal. If you really want to understand the patents you just have to read them tens of times as I did and analyze them in detail.Less reading of strange and unrelated patents are you post here daily and more reading of Figuera patents, especially the one written in 1908. This is the key.
Good luck and keep on searching for more patents..



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

Imagine this would be the drive from an vtol : how many transmission steps you want to have ?
         
               think 4Dimensional,but begin with a conventional car drive
               then think on land,under sea and on air


you are both right !     The Wheel : cw and ccw ; Audi Quatro transmission ? 4 X wheel-e-drives ?

                                    engine propulsion and transmission probably as automatic (solar-planet-gear)

                                   all terrain and spaces vehicle

Do you really think that I am in search ?


Sincerely
              OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on October 06, 2016, 07:30:19 PM
I regret that my name has been dragged in. To set records straight let me admit that it is Hanon who insisted on my continuing the research and overruling my objections sent me funds. $690 to be precise.

I have informed Hanon of all results and posted them here as well. Hanon has admitted to me that with pulsed DC input the NN poles produced zero output. The samevis the result with AC.

My efforts resulted in some people supporting me. Hanon wanted to know the identity of these friends and I have had no right to disclose identities of people who interact eith me based on trust in me. The others had not authorized me to disclose their identity to any one.  I refused to disclose.  Then Hanon felt offended and asked me to retun the funds. I have fully repaid all $690 received from Hanon in three installments. 

This is not to put Hanon in poor light. He wantedvto others but I had no authorisation and he felt offended and demanded his funds back.  I know his real identity and if others asked me to reveal it I would naturally have refused. I cannot commit a breach of trust.

Hanon has agreed that NN poles produce zero output volts with pulsed dc and they produce cop 0.30 to 0.40 when the rotary device as stated in Figuera patent is used. He has not disclosed to me as to what is the output if NS poles 

The team that did the project has dispersed and I am no longer interested in this.

Unfortunately here people come to abuse real researchers and post info that is at best a guesstimate. 

I have learned that with magnets experimental observation is the key and theories do not work and text books are programmed to limit your search for finding the truth. I did not go by text books. I progressed based on experimental observations and did many experiments.  I have learnt many but I have not shared all.

I have no interest in this any more. I have seen that people are not what they pretend to be.  I am very disappointed. 

Regards

Ramaswami

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 06, 2016, 09:24:36 PM
With NN poles and pulsed DC or AC the induction is 0.0 because there are two fields colliding in the center of the induced coil and final result is null.

To get induction with NN poles you need the commutator as described in the 1908 patent. Period. You need to move the two field, which does not happen with pulsed DC or simple AC.

This is not difficult to understand, but I see people interested in posting that NN does not work. I may guess many interests are present here to confuse people snd tell that the comutator is just to create AC which is untrue. I just say to test both configuration NS and NN with the 1908 commutator and then each one may see the difference and choose the design they prefer. Test and choose for yourselves.

I am just answering the technical statement, nor the others statements that I have other way of seeing those things. "overrulling my objections sent me funds" ??? OMG..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on October 06, 2016, 09:55:05 PM
check this video NN works and it is not 0V :) everything depends from how u do things :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Crq9j-f6Z7g
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 06, 2016, 10:25:35 PM
With NN poles and pulsed DC or AC the induction is 0.0 because there are two fields colliding in the center of the induced coil and final result is null.

To get induction with NN poles you need the commutator as described in the 1908 patent. Period. You need to move the two field, which does not happen with pulsed DC or simple AC.

This is not difficult to understand, but I see people interested in posting that NN does not work. I may guess many interests are present here to confuse people snd tell that the comutator is just to create AC which is untrue. I just say to test both configuration NS and NN with the 1908 commutator and then each one may see the difference and choose the design they prefer. Test and choose for yourselves.

I am just answering the technical statement, nor the others statements that I have other way of seeing those things. "overrulling my objections sent me funds" ??? OMG..


What I wrote here before your post ( time comparison) is also valid for the Figuera deviceRe: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy (http://overunity.com/15395/partnered-output-coils-free-energy/msg493309/#msg493309)
« Reply #7376 on: Today at 07:09:37 PM »


"You need to move the two field, which does not happen with pulsed DC or simple AC."[/size]
Or you have two counteracting coils with a small air gap distance !


Hooper ? Stupid and/ or none related ? Figura and Buforn Jacas wrote about the flexibility to use electro- or permanent-magnets(conventional ferrit or as electret or magnetret) ergo 
Hoopers is related: all electric ,also a permanent magnet inner cycle is : ? !   


hanon, I led now a comment about your next work,but at last the "wink" :
altruistic work principle here on overunity.com and the target is less 0,01 Euro/KWh and for the generator an average price about 150 Euros/KW !


Do not risk with high expectations that your investors will loose their money in one of your investment projects,that will not compete with these financial numbers,all inclusive !


R.O.I.: 100% investment return from the "prototyp and C.A.D.-plan development"
without gain/profit interests,probably with kickstarter and similar finance plat(t)form help .
Up this 100% R.O.I.-"breakeaven"-time-point "open source" !


Less partial-Euro-cent/KWh and Euros/KW prices then by REPRAP-production process !


                      the cash from the wrong speculating investments globally flow away
                                               totes Kapitalinvestment




Sincerely and good bye
                                    OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 06, 2016, 10:50:04 PM
Pardon-me,Mister NRamaswami (http://overunity.com/profile/nramaswami.86127/) shall you feel offended by my defending -not off your financial interests-but how you can read by hanons post before by the use of a person in absence and secondly I did not wrote something against you during this -your-prolongated absence,up to your post !


It will not happen anymore in this thread,it has not more strategical interest   !
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratego (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratego) hanon ,not I but ?: cheque-mate !

I do not love but I like GRAND-ma nature and her "black Joker humor" :
http://www.handelsblatt.com/video/panorama/hurrikan-matthew-gruseliges-satellitenbild-macht-schlagzeilen/14654444.html

Sincerely
              OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 07, 2016, 07:07:20 PM
Sorry lanca but I do not understand your posts. I am here just to share technical info and make this generator well known among people. I am not a great practical researcher/builder but with the right info any time anyone will get good results.

Bye
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on October 07, 2016, 09:37:23 PM
lancaIV (http://overunity.com/profile/lancaiv.1554/)   why u post so much random stuf  which takes so much space? :) u dont want others to see something or your random stuff is some CODE? :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 07, 2016, 10:31:44 PM
gyvulys666 (http://overunity.com/profile/gyvulys666.12439/) how shall we understand - encoded-your forum member "name" ?


Because here a gyvulys * 0-665 667-  members present ?
Are you a bad guy ? Or is this a mental faught and you wished to be a gyvulys999 or gyvulys333 ?


Each letter and each number represents normally -encoded- a sin/ a story / an evolution !
Chinese "image-": a story enclosd in a 1 sign ! up to 30000 signs/stories in 1 "image"-language !
                                       Kalligraphy !
 Encoding probably by Kabbale and patience or asking a real professional and confessional chinese philosoph whose speaks one of our common languages and can transmit the inner sin and values from the "good" old days !
  Kung-tse/Tao/Laotse and other "gurus" in dignity and respectfull meaning !


 We need probably 0,1 seconds to write or speak 1 letter from the A to Z alphabet (or number) and compare this with a chinese pupil how much time he/she/it(transgender) can invest in time in only 1 image,representing up to or more 1000 words !


Time is as worth as money and gold ! Someones nor time,nor money neither gold represents worth !


                              But there is a relationship,unseen,but philosopher knows it !


gyvulys666,you -personally you- are asking me about CODE ,using this in the cristian religion special number( serie) ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1OnVxfy6iM


But we are here in a scientifical interest related forum with several treats,this here the Figuera-Buforn Jacas wheel device with final construction target in mind ,special technical link,magnetic force field amplify array device,Hallbach to Ronbach,with special advice from my side to ask yourselfs about
the angular momentum effect : http://www.google.com/patents/US8514047


Have a fine weekend whereever you live life(real) ;) :)
                                                                          OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 08, 2016, 05:00:43 AM
Hello hanon,
I have no problem with your explanation !


If you read the whole forum even some posts I did in 2013 you will see that from that date I defend the poles in repulsion design while the user you mentioned only used north-south polarity in his post and designs. I did not convince him of my point and he did not convince me of his proposal. If you really want to understand the patents you just have to read them tens of times as I did and analyze them in detail.Less reading of strange and unrelated patents are you post here daily and more reading of Figuera patents, especially the one written in 1908. This is the key.
Good luck and keep on searching for more patents..



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

Imagine this would be the drive from an vtol : how many transmission steps you want to have ?
         
               think 4Dimensional,but begin with a conventional car drive
               then think on land,under sea and on air


you are both right !     The Wheel : cw and ccw ; Audi Quatro transmission ? 4 X wheel-e-drives ?

                                    engine propulsion and transmission probably as automatic (solar-planet-gear)

                                   all terrain and spaces vehicle

Do you really think that I am in search ?


Sincerely
              OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 09, 2016, 11:17:10 PM
The objective of the commutator, also called part G
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on October 10, 2016, 10:51:54 PM
@sequential 9
Quote
The up grade on the new one is the ZEN SPITFIRE MEGA WATT ZERO POINT GENERATOR HAHAHAHAH AND YOU KNOW YOU CAN NEVER BEAT THAT ONE HAHAHHAAHAH LOL XXXX PS I WIN !!!


Uhm... actually no you do not win anything. Most here simply want to power there house off grid and a well made commutator could last 5 years before the brushes would need to be replaced. Now lets do the math, $12 every 5 years for brushes and bearings in a $400 machine and in return we can power our house off grid, I can live with that, not a problem. You see you do not win anything because it was never a contest and when we collectively nail this technology it will be free for all to build and use. Sorry about your luck dipshit.


As well if you had any idea of what we were actually talking about you would know this device does not use magnets hence your last post is pointless. You do know the patent in question was from 1908 predating all the supposed American patents you referred to don't you?. Which is kind of neat in my opinion because once the device and it's operation are proven it supersedes most all other patents and falls squarely withing the public realm of ownership. The gift that just keeps on giving.






AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 11, 2016, 12:57:56 AM
Hello Sequental.9,becoming such exagerated:
you remeber me about inventors like them here https://www.patentauction.com/patent.php?nb=7535 (https://www.patentauction.com/patent.php?nb=7535)                   

patentauction.com has got some of this profiles !


200 (british ?)pounds(453 Gr./0,453 Kg  ?) for 1000 KWp Work force ?
100 Kg device weight and 1 MWp output ?

                               Productionprices,well done organization(!), 50 Euros/net per Kg ?

          I "say" to you in written kind ," YES,really impressive numbers !"


                                       "Caution !" my first though/thinking !


 Possibility through " SUPERPOSITION"-technology cause you are using "superconductive coils",
                                     is it not ?


Sincerely
               OCWL


p.s.: Sequental.9,do you are or know something about Adolf H.Zielinski ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on October 11, 2016, 04:53:19 PM
You can call it a thread hijacking or also a menthal diarrhea
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 11, 2016, 07:30:35 PM
Good call Hannon!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on October 11, 2016, 07:32:00 PM
Oops, sorry Mr. Hanon!

Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 19, 2016, 06:12:24 PM
SORRY FELLAS BUT THIS THREAD IS DEAD THANKS TO LANCA.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on October 20, 2016, 07:09:11 AM
SORRY FELLAS BUT THIS THREAD IS DEAD THANKS TO LANCA.

MM
Oh yeah, he is soooo reallly Deaed,indeed !
Probably to realize easier good ideas by transforming 2D visions into 3D space-volume devices :
http://www.inpama.com/index.php?content=invention&id=1126


You remeber : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3efV2wqEjEY


Bye-Bye
             OCWL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 13, 2016, 05:49:24 PM
An interesting link with many similarities with Figuera's foundation. In that link they talk abouth Bloch Wall disconnection and reconnection as the common denominator in many OU devices. We are talking here with Figuera about moving the Bloch Wall.


http://overunity.com/8227/bloch-wall-disconnect-and-reconnect-the-final-design/ (http://overunity.com/8227/bloch-wall-disconnect-and-reconnect-the-final-design/)









[/size]

[/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 16, 2016, 01:12:11 PM
Hannon

 The term recycle is a lose terminology. Energy is stored in a conductor in the magnetic field. When the electric field or current is changing to lower value in potential the magnetic field also lowers and induction returns some power back to the circuit from the collapsing magnetic field. Example being when a circuit is lighting up a light bulb but first has to charge up a magnet the time before the bulb lights is the time spent on charging up the magnet so the current can pass through the magnet to reach the bulb with enough potential to cause it to light. There is a measure of time for this to happen provided there is enough power to begin with and not so much that the time is so short you dont even notice the delay. Other conditions excluded from the explanation such as additional forms of resistance in the circuit or the condition of parallel or series of those others.
  Once you get over splitting hairs of word meanings you can re-examine G and the few parts it is made up of. As the field from N or S retards power is sent back into G at which time you have to start looking at it from the point of view of an amplifier. Where now you have two sources of input which if combined at the right time increase the output of G to the next increasing inducer. If the core becomes over saturated by ether input its dead. Since the goal is to be self sustained plowing it full of current from ether source from the start is counter productive since as a generator it will produce power over time enough to operate itself and do work. It needs a short period of time to come up to its operating minimum output. How ells will you know if it is producing anything more then the input to start it if you keep it full from the source and never let it start to do it's thing. That is partially why trying to operate it off ac mains for the source makes no sense. Im sure if you want to see how much money you can waste it could be done but why?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 18, 2016, 08:34:57 AM
I have always liked the way you explain things. having an imagination then using the information you have given then applying that to the device always helped in understanding it's operation. of course most on this thread have troubles in this area.
glad your bowl of nuts are empty at this time, nice and quiet.

as always, some people are more occupied with other devices then the device in question and has absolutely nothing in common with each other or it's operations. the preoccupation with association is rather rediculas to say the least and only conferms ones nonunderstanding of the device.

always a pleasure Mr Doug.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 19, 2016, 11:02:54 PM
Just to post in this forum what I already stated in EF forum. I think the toroid part G is an optimization over the method described in the patent and may excite the electromagnets with lower energy consumption. I just post it here to write it into this forum but I wont go into further discussion.


I have two technicals questions about the toroid as an alleged energy recycling device:


1- How can you allegedly recycle the energy in the toroid and electromagnets back (--->) and forth (<---) through the same only wire without reversing the magnetic polarity in the electromagnets which are filling and emptying through just that only wire?


2- Current always flows toward lower potential sites. If energy is going back and forth between the toroid and the electromagnets then if in one way is flowing toward a lower potential site, the reverse way is flowing toward a higher potential site. All this connected always with the battery at the same time. Is the toroid increasing and decreasing in potential in each half cycle? Impossible in my view.


The toroid will work to regulate the two currents but nor it is mandatory neither it will recycle back and forth the energy. Current in this device always flow in the same direction to keep always the same polarity in the poles of the electromagnets.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 20, 2016, 03:39:33 AM
The answer to your question has already been answered but again it is like talking to the wall. face it hanon your not the brightest bulb in the box so explaining is useless.

you don't understand part G and never will. sorry fella part G is the Figuera device and is mandatory and you and your other dim bulb friends will never understand it.

i would suggest you build a device you understand and the Figuera device is not it.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 20, 2016, 03:33:16 PM
Hannon

 I think your arguing for arguments sake. Based on the things you've shown that you have on hand to work with you could easily experiment with those items and answer your own questions.   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 20, 2016, 07:56:56 PM
My interest is not going into any dispute, believe me. I just stated in EF that the toroid was not mandatory because it was not described explicitly in the patent. I just try to keep things as the patent says. Sadly I can not test many things because as I said time ago I do not have a workshop and all the HQ measurement equipment, scope, was borrowed just for a few weeks , in february or march if I remember fine to do a set of different tests which FYI were unsuccessful, and now it is not on my hands, and the variac was borrowed too during a week this last summer.


Thanks for your reply
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 20, 2016, 09:00:51 PM
Then follow the purely resistive method, not sure where your going to find German silver wire. I doubt the patent used modern nicrome wire.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 20, 2016, 09:19:58 PM
Come to think of it if you still have coils and a battery and some wire you could still do a lot of it test wise by ether using the individual battery cells in succession or using light bulbs to control the resistance turning the bulbs into a current controller. Then just use single sheet of a trafo like the "I" section to detect the field and if need be borrow a dimm for a while or ask around for one that is partly broken but still functions to read volts. Or make an antique version to measure change of balance. All the things that made this world possible didnt start out in a poof from radio shack.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 20, 2016, 11:56:42 PM
Doug;

 You already know if it is not written in crayola crayon he won't understand it.

Quote;
"My interest is not going into any dispute, believe me. I just stated in EF that the toroid was not mandatory because it was not described explicitly in the patent."

explicitly means at the comprehension level of a fifth grader and written in crayola crayon. this device is way beyond his level and is a complete waste of your breath. it is written in the patent your just to ignorant to put it together.

we all know hanon can't comprehend long words or any abstract out of the box thinking so why waste your time. it is like trying to teach a turtle to run....... WHY ?

Quote;
 "I think your arguing for arguments sake."

entirely correct as his track record can attest to that.


MM 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 21, 2016, 09:35:44 PM
Doug;

 You already know if it is not written in crayola crayon he won't understand it.

Quote;
"My interest is not going into any dispute, believe me. I just stated in EF that the toroid was not mandatory because it was not described explicitly in the patent."

explicitly means at the comprehension level of a fifth grader and written in crayola crayon. this device is way beyond his level and is a complete waste of your breath. it is written in the patent your just to ignorant to put it together.

we all know hanon can't comprehend long words or any abstract out of the box thinking so why waste your time. it is like trying to teach a turtle to run....... WHY ?

Quote;
 "I think your arguing for arguments sake."

entirely correct as his track record can attest to that.


MM


Each time you insult me I will go to the thread started by you in EF to show some facts.


See you later there!


You should be very grateful to Doug because he taught all you know about Figuera . If not you would be still an ignorant guy. Sadly he can not fix your unbalanced brain. I feel sorry for you. Really.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on November 21, 2016, 11:06:35 PM
Hanon, don't be sad / mad , look forward!  We (all) will soon witness how one of the globe's most expensive and most complicated home-built shortcut circuit from MM will perform. I'm sure you are going to smile again.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20619-figuera-device-part-g-continuum-serious-builders-only-4.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on November 22, 2016, 03:29:50 AM
@Doug1
Quote
you can re-examine G and the few parts it is made up of. As the field from N or S retards power is sent back into G at which time you have to start looking at it from the point of view of an amplifier. Where now you have two sources of input which if combined at the right time increase the output of G to the next increasing inducer. If the core becomes over saturated by ether input its dead. Since the goal is to be self sustained plowing it full of current from ether source from the start is counter productive since as a generator it will produce power over time enough to operate itself and do work.

You seem to believe the inductive discharge from the inducers is sent back to G at which point the input may be added to the energy in translation not unlike many resonant self-oscillating circuits. Fair enough however I fail to see a "mechanism for gain" in this theory as energy is being taken from the system in the induced coils. Not unlike many resonant self-oscillating systems the input can be very small however once a load is applied to the system the load always reflects back to the source. Can you explain why that would not happen in this case?.

I have come to believe one of two things must happen, 1)Energy is not dissipated in the output section as expected for some reason or 2)a mechanism for gain within the system compensates for the energy dissipated in the output for some reason. In either case there should be a valid reason as to why the output does not effect the input as we would normally expect.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 22, 2016, 06:16:07 PM
@Doug1
You seem to believe the inductive discharge from the inducers is sent back to G at which point the input may be added to the energy in translation not unlike many resonant self-oscillating circuits. Fair enough however I fail to see a "mechanism for gain" in this theory as energy is being taken from the system in the induced coils. Not unlike many resonant self-oscillating systems the input can be very small however once a load is applied to the system the load always reflects back to the source. Can you explain why that would not happen in this case?.

I have come to believe one of two things must happen, 1)Energy is not dissipated in the output section as expected for some reason or 2)a mechanism for gain within the system compensates for the energy dissipated in the output for some reason. In either case there should be a valid reason as to why the output does not effect the input as we would normally expect.

AC
  Maybe the two possibilities are co dependent. I can assure you energy is not dissipated from the moving field "through" the static windings of the stator section. Other wise it would be a transformer based off of mutual induction. ps i would not use the word discharge because it has been overly abused and it's meaning is diluted which will lead to further confusion and sideways insanity bring about talk of quantum relations and the speed at which Uranus is traveling compared to the universal expansion which caused a static discharge to fly out a fly's ass as he was southward bound in flight across the equator. Nah it's best to keep it as simple as possible. When you use two big words that can have many different meanings too close together shit goes very wrong.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on November 22, 2016, 09:24:22 PM
@Doug1
Quote
I can assure you energy is not dissipated from the moving field "through" the static windings of the stator section. Other wise it would be a transformer based off of mutual induction

So you have tested the process in reality and found for a fact that almost no or substantially less energy is lost in the inducing circuit when the field moves through the static windings of the stator section which power a load?.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 23, 2016, 03:03:20 AM
AC
Here is your question:
 So you have tested the process in reality and found for a fact that almost no or substantially less energy is lost in the inducing circuit when the field moves through the static windings of the stator section which power a load?.

  Are you pulling my leg?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: allcanadian on November 23, 2016, 03:34:26 AM
@Doug1
Quote
Here is your question:
So you have tested the process in reality and found for a fact that almost no or substantially less energy is lost in the inducing circuit when the field moves through the static windings of the stator section which power a load?.

Are you pulling my leg?

No, some are saying they know exactly how it works and they have it all figures out and you said- "I can assure you energy is not dissipated from the moving field "through" the static windings of the stator section". So I think my question is valid, has anyone tested their theory or is all of this simply speculation?.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on November 23, 2016, 02:22:55 PM
 Yes

  I think your understanding of how generators work might be flawed.There is no way to know why or how. Text book explanation places a dynamic into a static frame of time and then tries think/talk it's way out of a non existing view coming up with a lot of answers that dont apply because it must be something they consider not important enough have to rewrite everything or somethings may be assumed knowledge or something that will be corrected later if needed by occupation. I dont know.  Im sure you can comprehend the statement you cant get more out then you put in because it is the argument against the notion of OU or even cop 1 or being able to produce something by your self for your own use. It's just a bunch of splitting hairs over word meanings and usage. Do you think you can get more flux out of a given material then current supplied to it to produce the flux. Or can you fill a glass with 4 ounces of water and get 6 ounces out of the 4 that reside in the glass. Those are pretty self evident questions the answer is no. But if you turn the water into steam and use it for work and condensate it back into water a thousand times did you magically turn 4 ounces into 4000? no By the same token the output coil and load circuit are closed loop. Is or how are you placing current into an inducer to make a magnetic field to act up another magnet which is a closed system associated with the second magnet and magically getting the current into the second closed system? No current from the input is consumed in the output because the output is a closed system one exception being a small portion to polarize the second or middle magnet which in a normal genny is residual magnetism started by flashing the unit. Your using a moving magnetic field created with current so you can control it to manipulate another magnetic field set up in the closed output system. lenz tells you the current will be resisted by the field it creates it pushes back against itself sort of. The current isnt pushing both ways the reaction of the current produces a constriction to the passage of current. After you have charged up the field magnet how much does the constriction prevent the current? It's full and no more can be stored in the magnetic field so current goes right by as if all that wire were just a straight wire. As that magnet can be made stronger and weaker at will by raising and lowering the current without the overburden of reversal it can then act on another core and coil which will have all the same lenz only in the second you place another controlled magnet on the opposite side to push the middle enough to flip poles on the one in the middle to produce ac. Lenz keeps these two magnets exerting force from combining with the one in the middle being induced. The one in the middle has a lot more drag on it then the two pushing from the sides. The one in the middle is actually as full of flux as it can be with respect to the resistances of it's loads which make up a closed system. If the statement it returns to where it came from rings a bell and two same magnets cant be in the place rings bell why are you having so much trouble?

 Im going to put the question back on you. How can you get more flux out of the field magnet then you put in to it to produce more output?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on November 26, 2016, 08:42:16 PM
Just to inform any reader of this thread that the many times posted design of the toroid part G by marathonman with one continuous winding and the rotary brush rotating around the whole circunference has been proved to be wrong in EF forum.


Some users has proved that in order to regulate the current to each electromagnet the winding need to avoid been continuous, it need to be splitted and connect each side to one electromagnet, as in any variac, and that the brush need to make contact going back and forth between the connection with the electromagnets, not doing  the whole circle. For more details consult EF.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 22, 2016, 08:20:38 PM
Doug1?
Since you us sixty hertz for your DC device, I am assuming that you
you convert the DC to AC for usable electricity.
If that is what happens...how does it happen?
Thank you,
Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 23, 2016, 01:51:27 AM
Shadow is that a trick question? Did you phrase it correctly? Clarify. It's a generator not a transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on December 23, 2016, 04:43:43 PM
From where shall come the energy/power gain ?

Thinking about a magnetic circuit,included a permanent magnet,we will get a magnetic force amplification !
This magnetic force has to become converted to electric force !
But we would only get for 1x time this amplification,because this we have to use the known "Barkhausen effect"(the magnetic force polarisation change) by pulsation,based by using the wave/frequency/pulse generator !

Flip and flop principle,commutation.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 23, 2016, 07:30:55 PM
It is a generator, but I don't see that in the process where it
generates AC electricity. It seams to me the output would
be pulsed DC where the voltage starts at or near zero then
increasing to a maximum then decreasing back to the near
zero state.
AC as I know it starts at zero then increases
above zero then decreases below zero the same amount
it goes above zero returning to zero for the completion
of one wave.
???
Thanks,
Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on December 24, 2016, 01:12:20 AM
Controlling the generation of magnetic force :

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=US&NR=4757419A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19880712&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=US&NR=4757419A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19880712&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#)

The present invention provides an apparatus for generating with a relatively small electricity a pulse line of magnetic force, wherein a diode is connected to a switching device, in other words, a controlled rectifier such as thyristor, in reverse parallel, or to a charge and discharge capacitance in parallel to cancel the negative voltage stored in the capacitance so that the peak charge current is suppressed to 1/3, and also so that the quantity of electricity used to charge the capacitance is reduced to 1/2.5, in comparison with those of conventional apparatus.

Compare Figure 2 with Figure 4
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=US&NR=4757419A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19880712&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#

    More particularly, the present invention relates to an apparatus for generating a pulse line of magnetic force, characterized by connecting a diode in parallel to a capacitance or a controlled rectifier which is used to pass the discharge of the capacitance to a coil member for generating the pulse line of magnetic force so as to absorb the negative voltage produced by the series resonance of the capacitance and coil member.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 24, 2016, 03:52:15 PM
"It is a generator, but I don't see that in the process where it
generates AC electricity. It seams to me the output would
be pulsed DC where the voltage starts at or near zero then
increasing to a maximum then decreasing back to the near
zero state.
AC as I know it starts at zero then increases
above zero then decreases below zero the same amount
it goes above zero returning to zero for the completion
of one wave."

 Then explain a typical IC driven generator and we will see if you can answer your own question. Im not joking.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 25, 2016, 03:46:01 PM
Generators produce output by two methods (without considering resonance):
by positive feedback and by multiple induction.
There is no other way and everybody stating it is conversion of mechanical energy into current are fooled completely by priests of 200 years old ideology.
Think about it ... why Steven Mark was able to produce substantial output from almost zero input. The same are doing all generators today, while Figuera was a second , more controllable kind but also much more costly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 25, 2016, 10:26:06 PM
 To the original question: Gens use a dc field winding and spin the magnet. When the magnet spins the field has direction of flow each time it turns 180 deg the flow is reversed in relation the output coils. With out the spin and making it stationary and wanting to still have a change in the direction of flow without reversing the domains of the core 180 which is very wasteful the options get pretty skinny. Take into account the time constants for a given field to reach the upper limit of saturation. Then add the load circuit for even more slowing down of the field building up. Then look at the no load condition of field magnet on a rotating gen compared to full load what is the difference in power being fed to the field magnet? If it ever drops to zero it no longer works. It has to be re-flashed. A certain amount of field is always present even at rest. It has to have a path for the flux which is primarily a closed path so it does not decay away into nothing. The Remanent single field even a week field will be in both parts but then you pull the cord or push the starter button and one part rotates while one part stays still. Picture this, you have an alinco magnet you break it half and run away with one half which half became empty? Does a gen look any different from a trofo now?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 26, 2016, 03:11:16 PM
Thank you!
That makes sense.
Shadow












Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 26, 2016, 04:58:49 PM
Word is out that you are building a new Professor Figeura system.
If you don't mind, I am of course curious to know what type of Part G you are
planning to use!
Thank you,
Shadow
If you would rather not, I understand.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 26, 2016, 06:59:03 PM
To: Doug1
I am considering making a "barrel" type of commutator.
I believe that the centrifugal outward pressure along
with your suggested anti-spark recommendations would
help keep the brush from sparking. I have a metal lathe
to do the final internal cutting and polishing.
Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 27, 2016, 03:18:42 PM
This type or style.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 27, 2016, 07:09:26 PM
WOW!
Is that the one you ground the flat space on?
The only one I had similar to that was this one.
This one was good to 20 amps but the mechanism
was slow as molasses in winter. I thought I would
be able to speed it up, but gave up on it.
Shadow

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on December 28, 2016, 09:48:51 PM
No that is just a picture of an old style might even be home made. Certainly easier to wind and change out the winding. It would just take a big enough core which is dimension-ally different from a mot or a step transformer. I would venture a guess the core came out of an old mag amp for radio work. Was then converted to this or that. There is what looks to be some type of flat insulator under the windings that is larger then the center leg itself. to help support the wound conductor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on December 29, 2016, 09:37:13 PM
After fooling around with designs for class A amplifiers to power exciter electromagnets for a 16 KW generator, I found them to be  impractical due to excessive heating and heat sink requirements. Attached are block diagram and schematic drawings for a preliminary design which uses a crystal controlled 60 Hz frequency standard that can be synchronized with the incoming power line, an optional 3 phase signal source, a digital 10 stage (20 step) sine wave generator,and a PWM approach to powering the exciter electromagnets. A spreadsheet with applicable calculations is also attached.

I have not yet built this contraption, and would appreciate suggestions for improvements, corrections, and especially those pointing out mistakes.

Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam6
Note:
The drawings show a VCO with a 0/1 KHz sine wave output. The design calculations are for a 360/360000 Hz square wave output from that VCO.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on December 29, 2016, 09:39:56 PM
OOPS, The drawing file did not attach.
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on December 30, 2016, 12:53:48 AM
@ Sam6
Just a question.
 Have you already made a [smaller] working unit producing overunity??  I.E. producing more output energy than input energy consumed and verified that?
 Plus eventually looped it back feeding  itself.
 Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: shadow119g on December 30, 2016, 07:45:14 PM
Good luck Sam6!
Shadow
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 31, 2016, 04:34:03 AM
Sam;
Quote;
"I have not yet built this contraption, and would appreciate suggestions for improvements, corrections, and especially those pointing out mistakes."

I would start from scratch from what you have, following a tad but closer to the patent.

to every one else;

QUOTE;
"I have not yet built this contraption"

Does that answer your question and how did you miss that.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 02, 2017, 10:58:41 PM
Sam;
Quote;
"I have not yet built this contraption, and would appreciate suggestions for improvements, corrections, and especially those pointing out mistakes."

I would start from scratch from what you have, following a tad but closer to the patent.

to every one else;

QUOTE;
"I have not yet built this contraption"

Does that answer your question and how did you miss that.

MM

I could not edit so had to repost.

I also would listen and follow Doug as close as you can, very smart person.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on January 03, 2017, 11:34:31 PM
There are two errors in the original posting last week of my preliminary design drawings. The divide by 20 circuit to produce 1200 HZ from a 4046 was wrong. That has been corrected in the attachment.

The frequency output of the first 4046s in the MOSFET driver circuits was stated as 1/1Khz. That range has not been nailed down, but will be on the order of 100:1 rather than 1000:1 and will probably wind up in the range of 3600Hz to 36000Hz. Stay tuned, this sucker is fluid!!

Best wishes for the new year!!
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 25, 2017, 12:27:04 PM

Figuera device: two electromagnets oppossing forces near balance (in unison) moving along the induced coil length.


This post describes how two electromagnets forces are balanced and how the plane of magnetic lines collision is moved depending on the ratio of max/min currents used and the length ratio of inducer/induced coils. In order to achieve a change in the electromagnet force two factor are needed: current change (I) and air path change (x). If air path (R+x for one inducer or R+1+x for the other inducer) is constant then no movement is achieved because the force is then independent of the air path between the poles of the electromagnets and then no relation exists between the forces and the spatial dimension. Note that the electromagnet force equation just takes into consideration the air path between its poles because the air path is the high reluctance step compared to the low reluctance step along the magnetic steel. In fact both electromagnets forces search for balance and find the spatial point "x" where both forces are equal and then move the collision plane to that point "x" as response of the diference of current intensities applied in each electromagnet. The movement along the induced coil is just the response to search for equal forces: F_1 = F_2




At lines movement reversals the near balance forces are then completely balanced in order to provoke the movement reversal ( F1 = F2 ). Being R the length ratio of inducer/induced  ( R = Length_inducer / Length_induced ) , the equation which relates the currents in the electromagnets with the movement along the induced coil length is:


I_1 / (R+x) = I_2 / (R+1-x)


Which at max/min limits (x=0 or x = 1, the geometrical limits of the induced coil) we get:


I_max / I_min  <=  ( R + 1 ) / R


Under the ideal conditions assumed to get this result if the current ratio is higher than that limit, (R+1)/R, then the magnetic lines are moved outside of the induced coil extremes and then induction is stopped. Therefore, as a guideline, the current max/min ratio must be always below that value to guarantee that magnetic lines are always inside the induced coil limits.


If the lengths in inducer and induced are the same (Length ratio, R = 1) then the limit value for current ratio is (R+1)/R = = (1+1)/1 = 2 . If we take as reference the 1908 patent drawing dimensions where inducers are longer than induced coils and aprox. R = 2, then the limit value is (R+1)/R = (2+1)/2= 3/2 = 1.5
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 15, 2017, 10:38:22 AM
Analyzing the impendance in the whole system with the Ohm´s Law we have that the condition for maximum and minimum current is found when the battery is connected directly to one row of electromagnets and the other path for current has to transverse the regulator and the other row of electromagnets.

Z_regulator : impedance in the regulator ( whether resistance or inductive reactance )

Z_electromagnets: impedance in each row of electromagnets


Maximum current: I_max = Voltage / Z_electromagnet

Minimum current: I_min = Voltage / ( Z_regulator + Z_electromagnets)


Then the achievable ratio of currents is:

I_max / I_min = ( Z_regulator + Z_electromagnets ) / Z_electromagnets


If Z_reg = Z_elec then I_max/I_min = 2

If Z_reg = 2·Z_elec then I_max/I_min = 3

If Z_reg = 4·Z_elec then I_max/I_min = 5

If Z_elec approach to zero then I_max/I_min goes to a very high value. Not good. (Besides when Z_elec tend toward zero then you have very few turns and your electromagnets is very weak)

The impedances in each part should keep a balance. You should match those impedances to the needed value of current ratio that you need according to your geometry (coils length ratio), etc... You may find an spreadsheet attached which is useful to estimates those values.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 17, 2017, 01:04:26 AM
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/node103.html (http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/node103.html)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 17, 2017, 06:00:39 PM
Calculating the inductance of a toroid with the typical sizes that we have seen in the pictures the resulting inductance should be between 0.020 H and 0.040 H (assuming 35 turns in the toroid and relative permeability of 4000). Link to calculator: https://www.easycalculation.com/engineering/electrical/toroid-inductance-calculator.php (https://www.easycalculation.com/engineering/electrical/toroid-inductance-calculator.php)



Being optimistism we can take 0.040 H and an average current to feed the electromagnets around 6 amperes (too optimistic):

E = 1/2·L·I^2 = ....= 0.72 joules

Taking into account that this process is repeated at 50 Hz (50 times each second) then the final energy is 0.72 * 50 = 36 watts !!

Conclusion: the toroid can be great to reduce the heat losses in the resistors, but it can not store big amounts of energy.


Doug: how many turns have your part G or you would like to build? And how many turns and impedance had your coils?. The only way to increse energy stored is with much more turns ( L ~ N^2 ). If you dont have those parts, at least which would be your choice?


Anyhow I do not buy the idea of the energy recycling in the toroid. If the energy were sent back to the toroid then the current would reverse and the system will suffer a polarity reversal, which is a capital sin in this device. Besides, the patents never mention any energy recycling mechanism.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 17, 2017, 07:07:20 PM
Anyhow I do not buy the idea of the energy recycling in the toroid. If the energy were sent back to the toroid then the current would reverse and the system will suffer a polarity reversal, which is a capital sin in this device. Besides, the patents never mention any energy recycling mechanism.

 You dont have to buy it. Regardless of how many ways it's been worded you cant destroy energy.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on February 17, 2017, 07:36:08 PM
I meant in the sense MM explain, recycling kilowatts of energy with those thick wires. If you just mean to recycle those 36 watts in that case I could see it as probable.


I see you dont say a word about bulding details. Maybe I am wrong but I am doubting of all , after watching the recomendations that your prophet is saying in EF
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 17, 2017, 07:36:29 PM
Go to the link and look at 249 and 250. Then read the entire thing and consider there might be conditions that are not going to make everything universal that will only apply to certain set of conditions.

 Follow the directions in the patent with the understanding not all conditions are created equal so not all conditional equations are for use as a universal equations but for a specific set of conditions. As you have yet been able separate part from part or where a particular condition might exist in one part but not in another part by design to perform a function your gonna be lost.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on February 18, 2017, 03:45:25 PM
If you guys are talking about using an electromagnet for your resistance, I'm afraid the only thing you'll be recycling is your time. Figuera's resistance was non inductive. Excess inductive reactance will turn this into a giant transformer, not a generator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Doug1 on February 19, 2017, 05:06:10 PM
Antjon

 I can control anything I want with magnetic fields while maintaining separation from the output. That does not assume you will take the time to learn how it was done before the solid state rectifier was invented. The less you know the less you know what you gave up for a better way that was mostly better from the perspective of the beneficiary of that better way. More for them and less for you, less is more. They spend less and make more from you =the better way. It never defines who it was better for.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: antijon on February 20, 2017, 08:27:10 PM
Doug, if you are referring to Tesla's rectifier, or a type of saturable reactor, then I already know what it is. The idea behind that is so far-fetched I don't even know where to start.

Figuera used a resistance for a reason. If anyone here has ever ran a transformer in series with a capacitor, they would know what happens. The inductive reactance is altered, and a transformer stops being a transformer. Now I'm not saying it becomes a generator, or produces OU, but turns ratios and other transformer rules start to change. The problem with using a capacitor to reduce inductive reactance is that it's frequency dependent. But a resistance will do the same thing at any frequency, which is why Tesla used a resistance to start some of his motors.

What I'm saying is, a normal generator uses D.C. Exciting current. The exciter winding has ZERO inductive reactance. So if I replaced the D.C. With AC, what would I expect? A giant inefficient transformer with an incredibly high reactance.

Reducing the reactance is a good place to start. Adding reactance, or using an AC source will give you a transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 22, 2017, 08:46:19 PM
Antijon;

The real question you should be asking yourself is what type of resistance did Figuera use knowing that the patent is drawn and worded in it's most elementary form for comprehension,  thus you are left with wire resistor or magnetic resistor and which one would be most beneficial in the Figuera device assuming it was being used to self sustain and govern it's self with the ability to store a magnetic field for later use.

I really don't think your options are plentiful.

Hanon;

 Your not storing kilowatts of energy, just enough to power the primaries and what ever you are using in the function of device. that was your miss interpretation of what was said.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 01, 2017, 02:29:51 PM
A table comparing the features of transformers, generators, and Figuera generator and why this has no manifestation of the Lenz effect.

In generators, Lenz is manifested by a dragging in their movement as consecuence of the Lorentz force. In Figuera generator there is no dragging because nothing moves (the induced wires suffer internally the Lorentz force, thus why they must be tightly packed to avoid their movement/vibration). There is no dragging because there is no movement. Lenz exists, but as the only thing that moves are the massless magnetic lines then the work required to move them is almost null compared to move a physical object (armature)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 02, 2017, 10:51:48 PM
Feynman on two different phenomena in induction


https://vimeo.com/197975622 (https://vimeo.com/197975622)


.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DA1 on March 03, 2017, 01:03:22 AM
 Hi  all   

 Free energy   in Thai land  4 kw - 1MKW  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr7yOPmfCCk#t=89.257504
 ไฟฟ้าฟรี   ของ ประเทศไทย


   DA1
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 16, 2017, 01:03:04 AM
Buenas, No hay peor siego, que quien no quiere ver : Disculpa por si no te interesa este tema.
Me imagino que ni se te ocurre pensar que el “generador eléctrico” de Clemente Figuera, pudiera funcionar. ---- Funciona----. Estuve un par de años sin creérmelo y teniéndolo delante, siendo retroalimentado con la propia electricidad generada.
Y funciona como funciona cualquier Generador eléctrico convencional. Las explicaciones cuando lo tengas funcionando.
Yo tengo 4 electroimanes de un generador convencional (más o menos antiguo) estos electroimanes en total 4 ohmios, eran alimentados por corriente continua de 110 voltios, produciendo el generador unos 3500 vatios (cuando funcionaba con el motor)
Alimento 2 electroimanes con la mitad de la onda, por medio de un diodo (50 amperios 800 voltios) y los otros 2 electroimanes, los alimento con la otra media onda, con otro diodo. ¡Pero¡ alimento con 220 voltios, regulando el amperaje (solo 1 amperio dejo pasar) con vaso lleno de agua, colocando dentro dos plaquitas o cables (acercando y separando, se consigue más o menos amperaje) (Si se usa menos diferencia de potencial, que el triple de la corriente usada en continua, no tiene un buen rendimiento o no funciona)
A estos 2 y 2 electroimanes, les coloco 6 bobinas colectoras (según vueltas obtendrás más o menos voltaje)

Saludos y salud
PD: es real no es cachondeo, en el diseño original, ponen un cachivache, siendo este el que produce una onda sinusoidal (digamos, solo con el polo positivo, evitando histéresis de núcleos).
4 electroimanes = 110 v, 1 electroimán = 25 v; al usar juegos de 2 electroimanes en serie, 50 voltios en continua, en corriente alterna 150 voltios, como no tengo transformador de 150 v, pues 220 CA diodos y vasos de agua como regulador amperaje.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on March 16, 2017, 03:16:56 AM
Ignacio,
Thank you. I will try this in the morning. All parts are on my bench.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: fer123 on March 16, 2017, 08:04:33 PM
C
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 18, 2017, 12:20:36 AM
fer123: espero que los videos los publique (iflewmyown) o cualquier otro que lo tenga hecho.
Lo mío es muy rudimental, con muchos cables sueltos (automáticamente se consideraría fake) ya sé que hace años que quieres el video, pero Video en Internet es sinónimo de fake.
Muy contento que sigas en la brecha.
Saludos y salud
PD: no tengo ni idea de ingles y traducciones malas. SORRY
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on March 18, 2017, 03:25:02 AM
Ignacio, after many hours I have no positive results. Once on the scope I had a very strange multiple square wave, very high peaks and very narrow duty cycle in short bursts. I have been unable to duplicate it yet. Like the initial ring from a spark gap only square waves + and - . It might be a reflected wave in the iron or NMR. I will do more checking later.
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 18, 2017, 09:58:39 PM
mmmmmmmmm improbable
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 18, 2017, 11:13:41 PM
Gracias Ignacio por reponder, podrias decirme si las bobinas colectoras son de aire o tienen hierro dentro? los electroimanes estan solamente superpuestos o los unes a las bobinas colectoras con hierro por dentro? realmente vistes una generacion de corriente importante? gracias por todo y hare las bobinas y los electroimanes cuando tenga esas pequenias dudas aclaradas.

PD: no esperes que todos te den la razon ya que en estos sitios no sabemos quien es quien ,entiendes. Saludos. :D
Bobinas colectoras; núcleo de doble T de hierro 10cm, y otras de núcleo de hierro de 3cm.
Los electroimanes separados por un plástico (papel) con las colectoras.
Electroimanes; núcleo de hierro laminado (de generador eléctrico)
Saludos y salud

PD: El foro lo lee mucha gente, me interesan los que no creen (escépticos), a algunos les llamara la atención,  les hará razonar, y alguno lo fabricará.
Quedándose como me quede yo, intentando comprender, que esto era real (consiente y subconsciente, luchando entre Sí) aparentemente iba contra los principios de la “Ciencia” que enseñan, ¿qué es la electricidad? ¿de dónde viene la electricidad? ¿Cómo obtenemos electricidad?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 02, 2017, 10:42:26 PM
Todo esto me recuerda, a la información que hay del “antiguo Egipto”. Que los egipcios eran tontos, que desconocían los diamantes Ja Ja Ja Ja (es verdad no se han encontrado diamante) Los diamantes los usaban como herramientas, eran o son “muy pequeños”, los extraían de la mirra (árbol Commiphora myrrha).
Seguro que los humanos somos tan tontos, que ocultamos nuestra sabiduría para poder vivir, ¿Que solo es sabiduría la de los extraterrestre o las religiones (hoy políticos, banqueros, científicos, etc.)?
Esto es lo que nos están intentando meter en el coco.
Saludos y salud
PD: PATENTES: Creo recordar. Que EEUU hace algunos años, y a cuenta de la vacuna de la gripe aviar, emitió un comunicado, Que muy resumido, decía; Que si no reciben las suficientes vacunas para su población, fabricarían la vacuna ellos mismos, POR MUCHA PATENTES QUE TUBIERAN...
Así que las patentes se dan, para que lo patentado sea utilizado, y si no fuese utilizado, lo podrá fabricar quien quiera, y darle el debido uso…
PD: Traductor google:
 All this reminds me, to the information that exists of the "ancient Egypt". Diamonds used them as tools, were or are "very small", extracted from the myrrh (tree Commiphora myrrha).
Surely we humans are so dumb, that we hide our wisdom to live, that is only the wisdom of aliens or religions (today politicians, bankers, scientists, etc.)?
This is what we are trying to get into the coconut.
Greetings and health
PS: PATENTS: I think I remember. That the US a few years ago, and on account of the bird flu vaccine, issued a statement, which very summarized, he said; That if they did not get enough vaccines for their population, they would make the vaccine themselves, FOR LOTS OF PATENTS THAT TUBED.
So patents are given, so that the patented is used, and if not used, you can manufacture who wants, and give it the proper use ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: charly2 on April 04, 2017, 11:10:11 PM
Hola Ignacio, me parecio buena idea la de separar con diodos asi eliminas las partes moviles, lo puse en practica hice una pequena prueba con un nucleo de flyback y 6 bobinas.
Cada bobina tiene 260 vueltas de alambre calibre 30 y 6.5 ohms cada una. Conecte todo segun tu diagrama, las 4 bobinas colectoras las puse en serie: 2 en los extremos y 2 en el centro como si fuera una pero mas grande que las de los lados.
Lo alimente con un transformador con salida de 14v y use un medidor de watts para rastrear el consumo. Lo conecte sin carga y la lectura fue de 14.7watts, en seguida le conecte un foco de microondas como carga (65ohms), buena sorpresa, el consumo bajo hasta 12.3watts.
Creo que la reaccion Lenz debido a la carga se esta retroalimentando de manera positiva en la bobina primaria o electroiman que se encuentra apagada en ese momento.
Hacen falta mas pruebas y algunos calculos. Algunas preguntas si me lo permites Ignacio, como tienes conectadas tus bobinas colectoras? en serie? Hay alguna confuguracion para maximizar el efecto?

Un saludo.


--------
Hello Ignacio, I thought it was a good idea to separate with diodes so you eliminate the mobile parts, I put it into practice I did a little test with a flyback core and 6 coils.
Each coil has 260 turns of 30 gauge wire and 6.5 ohms each. I connected everything according to your diagram, I connected the 4 collector coils in serie: 2 at the ends and 2 in the center as if one but larger than those at the sides.
I feed it with a transformer with 14v output and use a watt meter to track it. Plug it in without charging and the reading was 14.7watts, then I pluged a microwave bulb as load (65ohms), good surprise, reading went to 12.3watts.
I think that the Lenz reaction due to the load is being positively induced in the primary coil or electromagnet that is currently off.
More tests and some calculations are needed. Some questions if you allow me Ignacio, how you have connected your collector coils? serie? Is there any confuguracion to maximize the effect?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 04, 2017, 11:59:24 PM
charly2: ahora alimenta las inductoras con > 36 voltios 0.4 amperios (mejor 220voltios, 0,06amperios), manteniendo los 14 vatios, de consumo,  ok
Las colectoras:
1º las interiores tienen el doble de electricidad que las exteriores, una interior = 2 exteriores. Una interior 20 voltios, una exterior 10 voltios.
2º si quiero obtener 220 voltios, “” y cada bobina colectora te da 220 voltios, conectas en paralelo, “” y si cada bobina colectora, produce 22 voltios, pues tengo que poner 10 colectoras en serie.
Las respuestas te la darán los ensayos.
Saludos y salud
Traductor google: :-\
Charly2: now powers the inductors with> 36 volts 0.4 amps (better 220 volts, 0.06 amps), keeping the 14 watts, consumption, ok
The collectors:
1º the interiors have the double of electricity that the exteriors, an interior = 2 exteriors. An interior 20 volts, an exterior 10 volts.
2 ° if I want to get 220 volts, and each collector coil gives you 220 volts, connect in parallel, and if each collector coil produces 22 volts, I have to put 10 collectors in series.
The answers will give you the tests.
Greetings and health
PD:
Recuerda, el consumo de los altavoces, si no los quieres quemar, se puede usar la diferencia de potencial (6,  50, 220, voltios) que quieras, pero los amperios están directamente relacionados, con la potencia, y bobinados. Hay que regular el amperaje;
si altavoces 100 vatios y 8 ohmios:
100w <-== 6 voltios * 16,66 amperios == 50 voltios * 2 amperios == 220 voltios * 0,45 amperios
Remember, the consumption of the speakers, if you do not want to burn them, you can use the potential difference (6, 50, 220, volts) you want, but the amps are directly related, with power, and windings. The amperage must be regulated; If speakers 100 watts and 8 ohms:
100w < 6 volts * 16.66 amps = 50 volts * 2 amps 220 volts * 0.45 amps
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: charly2 on April 05, 2017, 05:14:24 PM
Gracias por tu respuesta, este proximo fin de semana le dedicare algo de tiempo en pruebas para tratar de aclarar en mi mente lo que esta pasando.
Sin embargo las bobinas son muy pequeñas y tienen una inductancia muy baja y siento que no me estan ayudando con el consumo en vacio o sin carga, tratare de corregir un poco la impedancia en los 2 electroimanes ya sea con algun capacitor o aumentando las vueltas.
Ademas el nucleo de ferrita que tengo se puede considerar practicamente como una sola pieza sin espacios entre las bobinas, creo que eso tambien debe afectar algo ya que la corriente Lenz inducida por la carga en la salida va en sentido contrario al del electroiman encendido en ese momento y si todo esta acoplado magneticamente por el nucleo claramente hay un choque de polaridades magneticas en el nucleo que resta eficiencia.... eso creo...

Saludos

------

Thanks for your answer, this weekend I will spend some time in tests in order to try to clarify in my mind what is happening.
However the coils are very small and have a very low inductance and I feel that they are not helping me with the consumption without load, I will try to correct a little the impedance in the 2 electromagnets either with some capacitor or increasing the number of turns.
In addition the ferrite core that I have can be considered practically as a single piece without spaces between the coils, I believe that this must also affect something since the Lenz current induced by the load at the output goes in the opposite direction of the electromagnet firing in that moment and if everything is magnetically coupled by the core clearly there is a crash of magnetic polarities that lowers the efficiency .... I guess ...
regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 05, 2017, 11:48:19 PM
charly2: veo que lo tienes bastante claro.
Circuito resonante, condensador bobina, paralelo serie, buena imaginación, idea buena. Condensador en la salida de las colectoras (nivelar carga)  consumo.
Intenta los núcleos de las bobinas colectoras, aislarlos de las bobinas inductoras.
Como  he explicado; yo uso, vaso lleno de agua con dos electrodos dentro, así  regulo el amperaje (mas separado - menos amperios, mas juntos - mas amperios) Dándome además, que no retorne más  electricidad a la entrada de alimentación.
SD:: Cada bobina tiene 260 vueltas de alambre calibre 30 y 6.5 ohms cada una>> “Yo” las inductoras, les daría solo con 40 o 60 vueltas, 1 a 1,5 ohms. Las colectoras correcto, 260 vueltas 30 y 6,5 ohms.
AWG 30 – 0,20 amperios, si tienes “ 4 colectoras” 2 interiores con X voltios y 2 exteriores con 2 ½ X voltios = 3X voltios;;; En serie 3X voltios y 0,20 amperios. En paralelo 1X voltios y 0,60 amperios. ¿OK?
Saludos y salud
Traductor google: :-\
Charly2: I see you have it quite clear.
Resonant circuit, capacitor coil, parallel series, good imagination, good idea. Condenser at the outlet of the collectors (leveling load) consumption.
Try the cores of the collector coils, isolate them from the inductor coils.
As I explained; I use, full glass of water with two electrodes inside, so I regulate the amperage (more separated - less amps, more together - more amps) Also give me no more electricity to return to the power supply.
SD :: Each coil has 260 turns of 30 gauge wire and 6.5 ohms each >> "I" the inductors, I would give them only with 40 or 60 turns, 1 to 1.5 ohms. The correct collectors, 260 turns 30 and 6.5 ohms.
AWG 30 - 0.20 amps, if you have "4 collectors" 2 interiors with X volts and 2 exteriors with 2 ½ X volts = 3X volts; In series 3X volts and 0.20 amps. In parallel 1X volts and 0.60 amps. OKAY?
Greetings and health
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 05, 2017, 02:51:36 PM
Total deviation from the Figuera device thus becomes NOT the Figuera device.
imagine that.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Mem on September 04, 2017, 10:59:33 PM
Yes, it's super darn easy to drift away from the original circuit.  In my case I tried to make this exactly how Mr. Figuera did it but using today's semiconductors [/size]components instead of mechanical switches.   I am convinced would be much better making this full electronic version rather than[/size] using reed switches, but it was my firs try and turn out to be quite in  interesting.  See the short video that I made here.  https://youtu.be/8fdrZoI2E_4?t=172


The circuit looks simple but it's totally mind twister! 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on September 04, 2017, 11:25:49 PM
Hi Mem,

That is an interesting circuit you have designed.  However there is one mistake in the 555 PWM circuit.  One of the 1N4148 diodes needs to be flipped over.  I found the same circuit you are showing with the same mistake.  After you flip one of the diodes then you can get a full range of 5% to 95% motor speed.

I was also wondering if the mosfets get hot with your circuit.  They usually like to be fully on or off.  Running them partly on usually makes them get pretty warm or hot.

Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Mem on September 04, 2017, 11:33:54 PM
Carroll,
Thanks for point out that error.

What I din't say in my above post and the circuit: I didn't really used that circuit myself, I just copied and pasted in the circuit drawing for educational purpose only.  I am sorry I didn't say that earlier. The circuit that I used on the video, was off the shelve PWM from Ebay.  The circuit is quite limited, but it does demonstrate some very interesting effect  which I don't really know  how it works.

"I was also wondering if the mosfets get hot with your circuit.  They usually like to be fully on or off.  Running them partly on usually makes them get pretty warm or hot."

No heat so far at all. But, I did use quite a large heat-sinks or else I am sure mosfets would heat up real quick. 



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on September 04, 2017, 11:40:33 PM
No problem.

 I probably wouldn't have caught the mistake except I have used that circuit and it works very well for a simple PWM as long as you correct that one mistake.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 29, 2017, 04:59:51 PM
knowledge is acquired throughout the journey to seek the truth. saying something isn't so without truth and knowledge is down right ignorant and leads to hostility, suppression and stagnation. seeking the operation of Figuera device will lead you to the truth and the road to salvation leaving behind those of hostile intentions through ignorance and rejection of facts.


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 27, 2018, 05:48:12 PM
That graph alone proves you are no where near the Figuera device and it's principles of operation so how can you say you built the device exactly as Figuera did when you are NO where near it's fundamental principles.
apparently the true principles of each piece was severally overlooked thus the total lack of understanding of the device and it's function as a whole.
good luck in your endeavor just the same but the building of the Figuera device you are not.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 05, 2018, 08:01:52 PM
This video even with some minor mistakes prove the validity of the North>< North pole orientation with out a doubt.
Physic graph taken DIRECTLY from University Physics Department that back up ALL CLAIMS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hikf7z7_HU

Avoid it you can,  Deny it you CAN NOT.

Marathonman
Title: Figuera discussion on another forum
Post by: norman6538 on February 07, 2018, 10:44:01 PM
There is some Figuera discussion here that you should follow.
I hate to jump all around to other forums but its important.

see
http://forum.hyiq.org/thread/clemente-figuera/

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 08, 2018, 06:29:38 PM
Statement from (sparky) Floyd Sweet

" Why the field of a magnet is not the property of the magnet: First the electromagnet – it takes power from a source to initiate and bring to steady state the field of the magnet. Once the field is stabilised and the exciting current is no longer changing, no further power is needed from the source. The only power required is that needed to support the I2R losses due to the ohmic resistance of the conductor comprising the coil of the magnet. This loss appears as heat.

Now we have a magnetic field, a potential source of energy in existence without support of the source of power to the coil. True, the moving charges through the copper conductor are accompanied by a magnetic field, also true this field requires no power from the source. As stated, the only power is that supporting the I2R losses. Then the field due to the moving charges is not a property of the current drawn from the source but a property of incoherent energy quanta in the surrounding space interacting coherently with fields produced by moving charges on the electrons in motion through the coil."

In a standard generator you have the power (DC) to the inducers on at all times in which you would think it uses a lot of power but if you did you would be mistaken. as per the post on Sparky Sweet once the field of the electromagnet is brought up to working conditions the currant to the inducers just passes by as if it were a straight piece of wire. this is because once the field is established, it can not hold any more in the field per the amount of currant so the currant draw on the inducers is reduced to that of just the IR2 losses from the wire to maintain the field needed. since there is residual magnetism in the inducers it does not require flashing of the inducers to get a magnetic field to produce power once rotated. rotating the rotor through the magnetic fields causes a increase and decrease of magnetic flux as per Faraday's laws of induction.

In the Figuers device we have the exact same thing except the flashing has to take place every time it is shut off and restarted.  again once the field of the inducers are brought up to working conditions the power used to create the magnetic field is reduced to the currant used to maintain the magnetic field which is the IR2 losses.

since we do not have a rotating rotor how are we to get motion into the secondary when the secondary and the primaries are stationary. you move the magnetic field presented to the secondaries which causes induction as per Faraday's laws of induction. by manipulating the currant in the primary you cause the magnetic field to increase then decrease in strength which is the exact very thing as a standard generator. the only difference is once the secondary creates a opposing field to the first there is no way to bring it back to the other side once you push the opposing field across the E field. so Figuera put another inducer on the opposite side of the secondary to push that field back across the E field to the opposite side of the secondary. in doing said action one of the primaries has to be reduced and one increased to get full motion across the secondary but in doing so the reducing primaries E field is reversed to match that of the rising electromagnets E field causing the square of the two output.

you only reduce the primary to just clear the secondary then back up to full potential reducing the opposite primary at the same time. by keeping the primaries in complete unison the power from the output will rise very rapidly producing a substantial amount of power from a small device. this operation uses very little power to fluctuate the field back and fourth just like a standard generator except the fact that in the standard geny you are rotating a HUGE mass of iron through the north and south fields with MASSIVE LENZING EFFECT and in the Figuera device you are fluctuating the weightless massless field back and fourth only replacing the power of the reducing electromagnet to full potential which is very minute plus standard losses from wire and heat ie. IR2 losses.

Ain't that right Doug.

so on that note i will leave it to your imagination as to which one produces the most output compared to it's required input.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 21, 2018, 04:33:12 AM
 I can not emphasize the importance of reading and understanding the patent using the tools and know how of that time frame of the turn of the century.

in the patent it specifically says and I Quote, " To fix ideas is convenient to refer to the attached drawing which is no more than a sketch to understand the operation of the machine built using the principals  outline before."

and

" Let be "R" a resistance that is drawn in an elementary manor to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system." end Quote.

so if it is just a drawing for understanding of the system and the resistance is in it's complete elementary form then thinking of that time frame this really reduces the outcome of the possible uses he used and implemented in his device.

IF R has some resistance but is NOT a resistor as stated in the patent of just some resistance then how could someone reduce the currant without using resistors that waste power like no tomorrow through heat then we are left with ONLY ONE LOGICAL OUTCOME and that is magnetic resistance.

very few used this technic to manipulate currant and Tesla was one of them. Figuera on the other hand figured out that by putting winding's on a iron core (Amplifying self Inductance) with a rotating positive brush he could split the feed into two and manipulate each side of the brush keeping them completely separate with north opposing fields and vary their currant in absolute unison. this allowed Figuera to get his primaries a very orderly rise and fall of currant presented to them and maintaining the required pressure for a specific output.

the pressure between the primaries is directly related to the number of field lines thus the intensity of the E field presented to the secondaries. if this pressure is not maintained between the primaries the induction will fall to that of just the rising electromagnet.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 21, 2018, 04:45:37 AM
If your device does not operate with the actions or parameters of the last few posts then i hate to be a bearer of bad new but you are NOT building the Figuera device.
and i really hope your guidance isn't from PJK as that description on youtube is laughable at best.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 06, 2018, 03:57:25 AM
In the Figuera device the primary electromagnets are never taken to zero. the reason is like trying to use AC in the Figuera device is that if you take the electromagnets down to zero it will take to long of time to build up the magnetic fields to proper field strength as it has to plow through the resistance thus loosing coherency between the primary electromagnets which equates to loss of induction from the reducing electromagnet. even in a standard generator the field magnets are on full all the time.  Figuera did NOT reduce the electromagnets down past 1/3 to 1/2 which allowed his electromagnets to remain in coherency of E fields doubling the output.  the time it takes to reduce the electromagnet to 1/3 then to full power and reducing the other at the same time is so small that the Primary electromagnet E fields remain in total coherency as the reducing electromagnets E field is reversed to match that of the rising electromagnet E field.

According to Maxwell and Faraday all that is needed to produce electricity is a rise or fall of magnetic field strength like that of a standard generator but in the Figuera device to keep the two primary opposing fields coherent he only reduce them just enough to clear the secondary then back up to full potential reducing the other side at the same time.

what this did was allow the field magnets to retain 80 to 90% of there field strength and still get the required reduction and rise of magnetic field  strength to induce currant flow just the same as a standard generator but in a stationary scenario.

i posted a graph of the window of currant required to keep the primary electromagnets in coherency. part G allows this to happen when the brush rotates around adding and subtracting winding's that magnetically link or unlink to the system allowing an orderly rise and fall of currant through the primary electromagnets. part G also stores and releases energy into the system which aids the rising electromagnet to counter act the potential drop of the rising side of part G. part G also splits the feed into two and keeps them separate by using two North face magnetic fields allowing them to remain separate but in total unison keeping the primary electromagnets in total coherency. yes there is always some resistance in part G as it never reduces it's fields in the core to zero just like the primaries thus a magnetic field is always present reducing or rising of the currant flow to the primaries.

so as you can see part G CAN NOT be replaced with electronics or at least with no less than a truck load of parts and i find no personal satisfaction in that.

it is quite funny when the truth is right in your face how silent the crowd becomes. the best advice i could give is open your ears and listen to the rotation of the brush and how the currant is being raised and lowered. DUH !

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2018, 04:45:17 PM
So the basic concept of the FIguera device is this.

two primaries facing each other being opposing north face electromagnet one increasing one decreasing. the decreasing electromagnet will catch the back side of the spin as it is retreating causing the E Field to be in the same direction as the increasing electromagnet. either electromagnet is only taken down 1/3 to 1/2 just enough to clear the secondary the back again to the other side as it is increased. in this process the secondary being between them connected to a load, currant will begin to flow producing an opposing field to the currant flow so what we end up having is similar to that of a squirrel cage motor. the primaries cause the initial induction in the secondary but as the currant starts to flow in the secondary and load it created a second field opposite to the first ie... lenz law. is it this field that is shoved from side to side in the secondary from the primaries. what we end up having is  N>N<N with the secondary field in between and is easily moved from side to side with very little effort.  moving the weightless, massless field which is much easier than a massive hunk of iron in regular generators.

 

as the currant flows through part G we have a set of conditions that control the currant flow. since we have a brush rotating around the cylinder the amount of winding's change as the brush is rotated thus we are changing the amount of winding's magnetically linking to the circuit thus changing the opposing magnetic field that opposes the original currant flow through the circuit. since currant is flowing in two direction we have a north north opposing fields at the positive brush that keeps both sides of the inductor separate allowing complete unison as the brush rotates.

 

as the brush rotates to one side the reducing side magnetic field is reducing releasing energy back into the system and at that same time as the low primary is shoved out of the secondary into it's own core a high pressure is built up in that core and is shoved into part G feeding the high primary. this sequence of events happen every half rotation of the brush thus we have an orderly rise and fall of currant through the primaries.

 

you could say that part G is a duel dynamic inductor that is basically a pressure regulator regulating the currant flow through the primaries with two independent sides that act like short term batteries charging and discharging every half rotation all while varying the currant.

the larger the magnetic field the more drag on the original flow of currant. in the regular teaching of an inductor they only teach you that a change in currant causes more or less opposition to currant flow. what they never say is the reverse is also true by changing the conditions of the circuit ie.. winding's and core length (magnetically linking) you can also control the currant flow and this you will never find in ANY University around the world.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 11, 2018, 06:44:17 PM
The picture posted is by a member known as electrocute on Hyiq dot org. what he did was take a stack of button hole magnets and put them in opposition on a brass rod then dropped them through the PVC tube with a coil attached to an Oscilloscope. his first drop was with one magnet set and recorded 4 volts. he then put the opposing stack on the rod and did another drop with not so good results so he moved the magnet stacks closer then dropped again. what he then attained was double the voltage of the single stack hitting 8 volts. this test and the one i have performed as in my video prove the validity of the Figuera device hands down with NO denying the facts.

The experiments performed by myself and electrocute can be performed by anyone who reads this thread. in the case of the magnets or electromagnets opposing fields the field lines are compressed at the collision point doubling the field lines present. when dropped through the coil the first magnet through the coil will act as it is being reduced and the second magnet will act as it is being increased doubling the output of the E field thus the voltage from the coil or secondary. the first magnet's electric field is reversed to match that of the second magnet giving the appearance of the first magnet reducing and the second increasing. this will cause the E fields to be in complete coherency.

in the Figuera device the electromagnets are doing the exact same thing except the primary electromagnets are raised and lowered in complete unison from part G. the reducing electromagnet's are reduced to just clear the secondary the increased to full potential as the other primary electromagnet is reduced thus the field intensity of the electromagnets remain very high.

the opposing fields in part G will cause the inductors to remain completely separate but in complete unison all while raising and lowering the currant supplied to the primary electromagnets.

all the said action of the magnets and the Figuera electromagnets are in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of induction and CAN NOT be denied.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2018, 05:28:28 PM
Inductance is a property of an electrical conductor which opposes a change in current. It does that by storing and releasing energy from a magnetic field surrounding the conductor when current flows, according to Faraday's law of induction. When current rises, energy (as magnetic flux) is stored in the field, reducing the current and causing a drop in potential (i.e, a voltage) across the conductor; when current falls, energy is released from the field supplying current and causing a rise in potential across the conductor.

These effects are derived from two fundamental observations of physics: a steady current creates a steady magnetic field described by Oersted's law and a time-varying magnetic field induces an electromotive force (EMF) in nearby conductors, which is described by Faraday's law of induction.  According to Lenz's law a changing electric current through a circuit that contains inductance induces a proportional voltage, which opposes the change in current (self-inductance).

A current  flowing through a conductor generates a magnetic field around the conductor, which is described by Ampere's circuital law. The total magnetic flux through a circuit  is equal to the product of the magnetic field and the area of the surface spanning the current path. If the current varies, the magnetic flux through the circuit changes. By Faraday's law of induction, any change in flux through a circuit induces an electromotive force (EMF) or voltage  v in the circuit, proportional to the rate of change of flux.  thus the surface area in the circuit path in Figuera part G changes dynamically as the brush rotates varying the currant on both sides of the brush since the north opposing fields keep them separate they will act as two independent inductors but in complete unison.

The negative sign in the equation indicates that the induced voltage is in a direction which opposes the change in current that created it; this is called Lenz's law. The potential is therefore called a back EMF. If the current is increasing, the voltage is positive at the end of the conductor through which the current enters and negative at the end through which it leaves, tending to reduce the current. If the current is decreasing, the voltage is positive at the end through which the current leaves the conductor, tending to maintain the current. Self-inductance, usually just called inductance,  is the ratio between the induced voltage and the rate of change of the current. in the Figuera part G we actually have no pole reversal as the opposing magnetic field keeps them separate but the process is still taking place as currant in an inductor when releasing will always travel in the original direction to maintain currant flow.

So therefore inductance is also proportional to how much energy is stored in the magnetic field for a given current. This energy is stored as long as the current remains constant. If the current decreases, the magnetic field will decrease, inducing a voltage in the conductor in the opposite direction, negative at the end through which current enters and positive at the end through which it leaves. This will return stored magnetic energy to the external circuit in which can be considered as a short term battery feeding the system each half rotation of the brush.

a variable Y (Currant) is said to increase or decrease linearly with another variable X (Magnetic Field)  if every increase or decrease of a fixed amount in X (Windings and Core Material)  results in another fixed increase or decrease in Y. In terms of a graph, the relationship is a straight line of currant increase or decease.

If y tends to increase linearly as x decreases, the variables are linearly correlated.  If y tends to decrease linearly as x increases, the variables are linearly correlated also.

When an inductor operates in continuous mode, as in the Figuera device, the current through the inductor never falls to zero just like the primaries. a certain amount of field is always present as reducing this magnetic field to zero will take to long to build up thus induction in the primaries would loose coherency reducing the output to the rising electromagnet. since the whole objective is an orderly rise and fall of a specific amount of currant the inductor is only reduced to get the reducing electromagnet to clear the secondary then increase as the other side is reduced.

Inductance, L is actually a measure of an inductors “resistance” to the change of the current flowing through the circuit and the larger is its value in Henries, the lower will be the rate of current flow. thus in the Figuera part G we have a constant rise and fall of magnetic resistance which correlates to a steady rise and fall of currant flow in the primaries.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2018, 06:00:58 PM
Confusion, Confusion and more Confusion.

It seams there is some confusion about the patent wording. in the patent it says when one electromagnet is full the other is empty. while this is all fine and dandy in reality it can not happen and here is why.

if the whole objective is to get the highest possible inductance to the secondary from the primaries then why would someone reduce a primary so low that induction is lost. by reducing a primary to zero the pressure is lost between the primaries thus inductance is substantially reduce to just the rising electromagnet. if in the process of reducing the electromagnet to just clear the secondary then back up again to peak potential you will retain 80 to 90% of the magnetic field that is being used to induce the secondary in which will require much less currant to bring the electromagnet back to full potential.

if in the process of reduction the electromagnet is reduced passed half way or to zero the time it takes to bring the magnetic field to full potential is far grater than the time it takes to just reduce it to 80 to 90 %. this is the main reason why AC can not be used as induction is lost from the speed of the rising electromagnet being to slow since it has to overcome the resistance of the wire plus the flipping of the magnetic domains . since the whole objective is induction to the secondary why would you reduce it to zero when you don't have to thus keeping the fields at maximum potential equates to the highest output possible. even in the process of reducing and increasing the electromagnet very little you will still get induction as per Faraday and Maxwell equations but since the electromagnetic fields are at their maximum so will be the induction. thus the output of the Figuera device will be many orders of magnitude higher than that of a standard generator.

since complete unison of the primaries is required in the Figuera device he came up with a solution to not only keep the primaries in unison but to also reuse the power running through it. part G the controller regulator is an inductor being like a cross between a magamp and a variac. when the brush rotates around the core each side of the brush will act as independent inductors adding or subtracting winding's that are magnetically linking to the circuit. as the individual magnetic fields rise and fall, currant will be reduced or increased from the magnetic field opposition. bemf from this field reduces currant flow so as more winding's are added to the circuit more currant reduction takes place thus the reverse is happening on the other side of the brush as less winding's equate to less opposition to currant flow.

in the process of reducing the primaries being pushed out of the secondaries, a EMF is produced and fed into part G thus combining with the reducing inductor EMF will cause an amplification to the rising electromagnet. since the the rising side of the inductor is storing a magnetic field for the next half cycle of reduction there will be a drop in potential across the inductor thus the two previous mentioned sources of potential will cause an increased potential to the rising electromagnet offsetting the drop.

since the part G controls the currant why would anyone wind the primaries to have resistance high enough to control currant when that is the job of part G. by winding the electromagnets specifically as electromagnets will allow them to achieve their intended goal to produce a magnetic field. the added bonus of winding them this way is the response time of the electromagnets are increased substantially from lower resistance and self inductance allowing them to respond to the rise and fall of currant in a timely manor.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2018, 06:22:38 PM
Since a Magnetic Field intensity Changing in Time is a requirement for Electromagnetic Induction according to Faraday's Laws of induction no matter how small we have the Figuera device doing just that, two independent electromagnets decreasing and increasing just enough to clear the secondary both opposing but the E fields acting as one field. these bucking field are the exact thing Chris at Hyiq dot org is working on except the fact that Chris is completely reducing a primary and in the Figuera device we are not.

thus the change in the field no matter how small according to Faraday will produce induction and since we are using two electromagnets in unison we end up with square of the two output.

Figuera had the device working in his house and supposably it was fairly small yet put out a fantastic amount of power near 20 kilowatts and violates not one of Faraday laws of induction.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 19, 2018, 07:06:02 PM
By the time the true direction of electron flow was discovered, the nomenclature of “positive” and “negative” had already been so well established in the scientific community that no effort was made to change it, although calling electrons “positive” would make more sense in referring to “excess” charge. You see, the terms “positive” and “negative” are human inventions, and as such have no absolute meaning beyond our own conventions of language and scientific description. Franklin could have just as easily referred to a surplus of charge as “black” and a deficiency as “white,” in which case scientists would speak of electrons having a “white” charge (assuming the same incorrect conjecture of charge position between wax and wool).

He also discovered that only one of these charges can move while the other is stationary. He didn't know which so he made a guess and said the current flow from + to - which he had a 50/50 chance and got it wrong. Then in 1900, J.J. Thompson discovered an electron and proved electrons are negative and that they flow to a positive charge. In reality, - flow to + Physicists use: - flow to + Engineeers use: + flow to -.

Why engineers use a wrong assumption? Becuase during 1900's they didn't change their textbooks. So we are stuck with a wrong convection current.

However, because we tend to associate the word “positive” with “surplus” and “negative” with “deficiency,” the standard label for electron charge does seem backward. Because of this, many engineers decided to retain the old concept of electricity with “positive” referring to a surplus of charge, and label charge flow (current) accordingly. This became known as conventional flow notation:

yes i do agree that the pressure flow is from - to + but i personally do not believe there is such a thing as positive or negative charged particles anywhere in our universe as i do believe in a few things Ken Wheeler says and that is eather pressure modalities. the so called negative is actual charging to a higher pressure potential (counter space) creating heat and positive is radiative discharging (Space) to less pressure which is radiated to cold in an never ending cycle.

Just something to consider and keep fresh on your mind is the direction the actual currant is flowing, the spin direction of the rotating fields and the pressure between the primaries required for a specific output.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 22, 2018, 06:59:18 PM


 If an inductor is designed so that any one of these factors may be varied at will, its inductance will correspondingly vary. Variable inductors are usually made by providing a way to vary the number of wire turns in use at any given time, or by varying the core material or both.

that is exactly what Figuera did in his part G by varying the amount of winding's magnetically linking and unlinking to the system he added or subtracted core material and winding's as the brush rotated keeping them separate with N><N fields at the brush. by changing these two parameters increased and decreased the size of the inductor this allowed him to vary each inductor on each side of the brush separately while remaining in complete unity and pressure between the primaries is maintained at all times.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 27, 2018, 04:04:27 PM
Stefan Hartmann ( Admin)
When are you going to release the graphs with my last post. the graphs are for the understanding of the description of the Figuera device.
it has been well over a year since i wad moderated and the trolls have since moved on.
Please reevaluate the situation.
this message is for you and not the thread.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 29, 2018, 02:37:52 PM
I see someone is really one his toes.

Continuing on the common sense theme part G will become the power supply of the device after the initial start of the device then the power supply can be taken away.  every half rotation of part G it stores and releases energy into the system each half of part G almost acting independent but feeding each other. when one side is storing energy in the form of a magnetic field the other side is releasing energy into the system from it's magnetic field. in the next cycle the reverse is true, the previous rising side will be releasing energy into the system and the reducing side will be storing into the magnetic field.

as the magnetic field is released into the system from the reducing side of part G the reducing primaries magnetic field is reduced also releasing that part of the reduced magnetic field into part G. both sources of potential are combined causing a forward biasing of part G similar to a mag amp. this amplification off sets the rising side of part G potential drop as any inductor when currant is rising will store into it's magnetic field causing a potential drop on that side of part G.  both sources of potential combines off setting this potential drop causing an amplification to the rising electromagnet boosting it's output. these magnetic fields are also used in the manipulation of the currant. with each half rotation of the brush each side of the brush will act as independent inductors with the length of the inductor changing with the brush movement adding or subtracting winding's that magnetically link or unlink to that half of the inductor causing a linear rise and fall of currant.

once the fields are up to working conditions the currant draw of the device will drop as per Sparky Sweet and the only power needed will be the replacement of the IR2 losses and the rising electromagnet to full potential which is small since the primary is only reduce to just clear the secondary then back to full potential.

just like a standard generator a small portion of the output is fed to it's exciting field to replace the losses which are inherent in all man's devices as nothing is 100%. just like a standard generator once the magnetic fields are up to working conditions the currant draw is reduced to that of just the IR2 losses to maintain the fields.

the inducing side and the induced side are actually separate system and the only power used from the inducing side to the induced is to polarize the secondaries. once the secondaries currant starts flowing they part ways and almost act independent of each other.  when the currant flows in the output according to the Lenz law an opposing field will form opposing the original currant flow and this opposite field is what is pushed side to side from the primaries across the circular Electric field that is formed around the secondaries from the actions of the primaries.

in a standard generator the exciting fields are on all the time and as the rotor rotates through the magnetic fields it encounters different strengths of magnetic field and the closer it gets to the exciters the stronger the field gets thus the farther it gets from the exciters the weaker the field gets. so in the FIguera device since the electromagnets are stationary with no moving parts in order to get the rise and fall of magnetic field strength he had to raise and lower the currant to the primary electromagnets to mimic this process and that is where part G comes into play inducing an orderly rise and fall of currant in a linear fashion.

all said actions of a standard generator and the Figuera stationary generator are the laws of induction set forth by Faraday and violate not one as any and i mean any increase of decrease in magnetic field strength will cause an EMF in the output and the Figuera device does just that.

It is quite obvious no one listened to Mr Doug, imagine that.
 

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 29, 2018, 02:41:45 PM
In my research the reason i brought in William Hooper and associated his work with Figuera was his table top experiment dealing with motional electric fields.

In my research in magnetism i found that two opposing magnetic fields can not occupy the same time space domain at the same time. it has to be one or the other not both. when two opposing magnetic fields are forced together the magnetic field line are highly compressed but still remain separate, if these two fields remain separate then how in the world did Figuera get such an amazing output from such a small crude device.

Two words...... "ELECTRIC FIELD"

The Motional Electric Fields are not like the opposing magnetic fields. they are the same coin but the other side acting differently in respects to time space domain. even though the magnetic fields remain separate the Motional Electric Fields do not and are positive and additive.

Figuera in his amazing research found out that by increasing the currant in one opposing electromagnet and decreasing the other at the same time both electromagnets Motional Electric Fields were both positive and additive as both were in the same direction giving him double the output as one electromagnet alone. all that is required to keep this action at a constant is maintaining the magnetic field pressure between the primary electromagnets when one is reduced and the other increased allowing the Motional Electric Fields to remain in coherency....ie in phase.

the magnet tests that were performed are the exact same actions of the Figuera electromagnets. as the first magnet through the coil it's magnetic field will act as it is being reduced and the second approaching the coil will act as if it were being increased. with the opposing magnetic fields compressed  just like the electromagnets in which is directly correlated to the to the amount of output you will get the magnets create the Motional Electric Fields just the same as the Figuera device. both magnets electric fields are positive and additive as both are in the same direction.

The Figuera device is intriguing, fascinating and has captivated all my attention.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 29, 2018, 02:43:24 PM
I was asked just the other day how in the world can the primaries exert motion into a secondary when both are stationary. ?

the primary electromagnets cause the E fields but it is the relative motion of the primaries being reduced and increased with the opposing secondary field between them that induces currant flow into the secondary and the load. once the polarization takes place and currant begins to flow the primaries and the secondaries part ways and it is the primaries becomes the motive force that exerts motion into the secondary provided the circuit is closed with resistance of it's own. ( ie a load)

So lets stop and think about that for a minute. the compression of the two opposing electromagnetic fields dictate the intensity of the electric field and as one is reduced and the other is increased both E fields are in the same direction as both are positive and additive.

now the only time power from the primaries (inducers) are transferred to the secondaries (induced) is when the secondaries are to be polarized. once this polarization takes place and currant begins to flow in the secondary and the load the Lenz law comes into play and an opposing field to the first is formed in the secondary.

since this opposing field will be in between the opposing field of the primaries it is the relative motion of the primaries being reduced and increased that pushes that opposing secondary field across the Electric field formed by the primaries in the space between the primaries occupied by the secondary. this will cause the secondaries to appear to have the illusion or appearance of motion in them to the Electric field thus currant will flow.

once this process takes place the primaries and the secondaries part ways and it is the relative motion of the primaries that exert motion into the secondaries provided the circuit is closed with resistance of it's own. after they part ways each system is essentially completely separate and no other time is power transferred to the secondary system. the power requirements of the induced (primaries)  is reduced to that of just the IR2 losses and the replacement of the currant in the process of reducing the primaries to get motion into the secondaries then back to full potential.

the power used to sweep the opposing secondary field ( Weightless Massless Field) across the Electric field formed by the primaries is so rediculously small that the unit can power it's self and the load once it is started.

part G in the patent is basically a dynamic inductor that increases or decreases the currant through the primaries that exert the illusion or appearance of motion into the secondaries.

BA-Bang said Figuera, someone actually listened to Mr Doug.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 01, 2018, 05:31:17 PM
A very good point that was posted another site talks about overunity laws.   http://www.overunitybuilder.com/index.html

Overunity law #2 that states Iron acts as a currant amplifier and that is so obvious that i don't think it needs to be touched upon except the 1932 Coutier device uses this concept exclusively as does all generators of any kind.

what i want to talk about is the OU law #3 that states electromagnetic energy can be recycled. to me this is a DUH ! statement since energy can not be destroyed only converted to another form of energy so to me it is quite obvious that it can be transformed from one energy state to another with ease. some are nonrecoverable as in the form of heat.

in an LC circuit we have the magnetic field potential from the inductor as it is being reduced transformed into an electric potential of the capacitor. when the capacitor releases the electric potential it is converted to the magnetic potential of the inductor on a continuous orderly basis.

In part G we have those energy states taking place. when part G which is an inductor it stores and releases magnetic field potential from the system on that same orderly basis to the form of electric potential. each half rotation of part G there is a rise or fall of the inductor potential either converting it to electric potential off setting the potential drop of the rising side of part G or storing the electric potential in the form of a magnetic potential in the rising side of part G.

The primary electromagnets do the same thing as part G. when the primary is rising it is storing a magnetic potential in it's field and the reducing primary electromagnet  field is releasing the magnetic potential into the system in the form of an electric potential. both released magnetic potentials of the reduced primary and the reducing part G inductor are converted to electric potential offsetting the potential drop of the rising electromagnet and part G as they are storing into the magnetic field.

what we have then is a very orderly rise and fall of potential that is constantly converted from a magnetic potential to an electric potential and back again many times a second depending on your country.

Part G becomes the power supply once the initial power supply is removed and it recycles the energy in the inducer side imparting motion into the induced side which is a closed system of it's own.

THIS ACTION CAN NOT BE DONE WITH A RESISTOR THAT WASTE ELECTRIC POTENTIAL AS HEAT. THE ELECTRIC POTENTIAL IS CONVERTED TO HEAT POTENTIAL THAT CAN NOT BE RECOVERED BY THE SYSTEM AND AMOUNTS TO MASSIVE UNRECOVERABLE LOSSES. ON THE OTHER HAND THE ELECTRIC POTENTIAL CAN BE CONVERTED TO A MAGNETIC FIELD AND BACK CONTINUOUSLY WITH VERY LITTLE LOSSES WHICH IS THE IR2 LOSSES.

Part G becomes the power supply once the initial supply is removed but as all systems build by man has inherent losses the secondary output is there to replace those losses occurred through heat, wire (IR2) and core losses.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 03, 2018, 12:58:15 PM
If resistor array is wasting Electric Potential why Prof. Figuera put a resistor array before the current went in to the Magnetic Cores? Why did he do that?

A resistor array makes a low voltage Electricity to high voltage Electricity. But it would reduce current. What is the secret behind application of high voltage to a magnetic field and what happens when voltage is boosted.

Questions Questions No answers
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 03, 2018, 05:51:34 PM
I guess i spoke to soon about the trolls.

The Figuera part G is NOT A RESISTOR ARRAY of any kind, it's an positive brush ROTATING INDUCTOR.
NO resistor array in the world will make low voltage into high voltage. what planet are you on ?????

It is quite obvious that you do not have the intelligence high enough to understand what i have been posting and i do not have the time or inclination to try to to lower the technical aspects so you can understand this device..

I mean no disrespect at all sir but how many times do you have to read the patent that states. and i quote; " R the resistance is drawn in it's elementary manor to facilitate the understanding of the function of the device." end quote.
That means in plain English that what is shown is not the actual device. it is used to just explain the function and that is it. so what are you left with if it is NOT a resistor. think on that. (if possible)

I would surely suggest that you pick a device that you can actually understand it's functions as i really doubt anyone on this site has the time to explain it to you especially since it's been four or five years and you have learned absolutely nothing.
I see nothing has changed since years ago and it is quite obvious you learned absolutely nothing over the years.

stop asking stupid questions and see/understand the intelligent answers right in front of your face.
if you can't .... oh well to bad. some people just do not have what it takes to learn something new or outside the box and i believe you are one of them Sir.
REREAD post 4220, 4223 and 4230. if you still can understand don't come crying to me because i don't want to hear it.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 07, 2018, 06:54:28 PM
What really amazes me is the total non advancement  in the field of magnetic's and electricity in general in the last 118 years. it seams quite obvious in my research that JP Morgan was one of the sole perpetrators in destroying the advancement of these fields guided by good ole Rochefellers and the Rothschilds. he literally took school books from the system and had them changed to rid all traces of free energy. this would be grade schools and colleges and he spent millions in this process.

HOW SICK IS THAT, TOTAL GREED AT IT"S FINEST.

what also amazes me is the simple act of pulling a magnet or reducing an electromagnet from a coil causes the induced currant to reverse direction (reversed Electric field).  how in the world can something so disgustingly simple be so severely overlooked through out the scientific community is totally beyond me.

a simple technic of taking one electromagnet or magnet in or rise of currant and the opposite on the other side to reduce in currant or taken away from the coil causes the doubling of the voltage from the coil. what is amazing is Clemente Figuera did this 110 years ago and was purposely hidden from the people.

we can not sit by idle and let these rich disgusting fools take advantage of us any longer.

the Figuera device is simple, it uses a dynamic rotating inductor that varies the currant to two opposing north face electromagnets that cause the doubling of the electric field from the action of one electromagnet being reduced and the other increased all while keeping both in total unison. as long as the pressure between the primary electromagnets are maintained the Electric field presented to the secondary will remain at it's highest potential with increased output.

what is killing people is the standard way an inductor is used in present day. since people are so hypnotized by present day dogma science that states an inductor is just a passive device that just sits there and curbs currant only for a short time and stores then releases a magnetic field.
when on the other hand if you have a positive rotating brush on an inductor wound on a core with it core and winding's changing as the brush rotates causing both sides to increase or decrease in length will cause an orderly rise and fall of magnetic fields used to curtail currant on an absolutely orderly basis. then using those magnetic fields in a positive advantage manor to offset the potential drop of the rising side and splitting the feed into two separate feeds.

currant in an inductor will change in intensity if the condition of the circuit changes ie.... the amount of core material,  the winding count and the length of the inductor. even if the circuit is presented with say 10 amps the window of the inductor will allow only the amount you need as per the winding count and the radius of the brush.

this very use of an inductor takes it from a passive device to an active device on a dynamic basis as the brush rotates. and this my friends can not be found in NO school books around the world.

welcome to my world and the world of Clemente Figuera and the infinite energy machine.

AND THAT MY FRIENDS YOU CAN TAKE TO THE BANK, LOCK, STOCK AND BARREL.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 08, 2018, 05:52:40 PM

I am assuming everyone knows i am working on the Figuera 1908 patent. even though the part G inductor/regulator/controller rotates,  the Generating part is stationary in opposing fashion. i really think Figuera in his infinite Genius and wisdom knew that his patent would eventually run out and people would find it and build it. so i really believe he gave this device to the world to help humanity. his prototype device he took to the patent office even with defects put out over 550 volts and stated that it powered a 20 HP motor. the 20 HP motor alone requires 15 Kw to power plus he powered his lights in his house and the street lights outside his house. this device had to put out darn near 20 Kw even being small in size. back then you had to have a working device to get a patent and also it was certified by the Barcelona Patent office to actually work.

his 1902 patents which consisted of 4 patents were sold to the bankers for a rather large sum of money to pay back his financial backer Buforn and to finish his grand daddy of them all his 1908 device. the subsequent patent after 1908 were legally nul and void as they were a direct infringement on the 1908 patent and i am quite surprises they were issued to Buforn in the first place.

in the 1908 patent it talks about part G as having some resistance yet NEVER mentions resistors explicitly and states in the patent for the understanding of the function in it's elementary form. so being in it's elementary form just for the understanding of the device is just that, for the understanding and function and is in NO WAY a resistor or a resistor array.

Quote;  "to pass through a rotating brush which, in its rotation movement, is placed in communication with the commutator bars or contacts of a ring distributor or cylinder whose contacts are in communication with a resistance whose value varies  from a maximum to a minimum and vice versa, according with the commutator bars of the cylinder which operates, and for that reason the resistance is connected to the electromagnets N by one of its side, and the electromagnets S at the other side."

and

" a switch and comprising a brush or rotary switch, which makes contact successively on the series of fixed contacts and get a continuous variation of the current flowing through the coils of the inducer electromagnets."

think about this for a second, he is giving you clues as to the way part G is built. since having thick commutator bars embedded into a cylinder then connecting them with thin wires would be total insanity as the thin wires would burn up immediately. but there is more, or contacts of a ring distributor or cylinder,  a ring distributor or cylinder would imply an iron cylinder of some sort.

whose contact are in communication with a resistance whose value varies from a maximum to a minimum and vise versa. this tells me that the contacts are actually the winding's on the cylinder that has some resistance but is not a resistor of any kind and the value varies from a maximum to a minimum as the brush rotates making contact with more than one winding at a time.

The brush as it rotates around the cylinder making contacts with the winding's magnetically linking or unlinking to the system that increases or decreases the size of the inductance with the movement of the brush. if there are no resistors then it has to be controlled by magnetic resistance in which it has to be a dynamic inductor that varies the currant as the brush rotates magnetically linking and unlinking causing an orderly rise and fall of currant. (varying the self inductance dynamically as the brush rotates)

this would also allow part G to split the feed into two by having north opposing fields at the brush keeping them totally separate but remain in complete unison as the currant rise and fall in an orderly fashion.

it would also allow each half to act independent one storing into the magnetic field and the other releasing some of it's magnetic field to offset the rising side of the inducers and part G.

there is no way in hell a resistor can do this as all it would be for in this case is waste power and heat up your house. on the other hand an inductor will not only change the currant level but store and release energy at the right time to counter act any potential drop that may occur in the process of storing the potential in a magnetic field in the rising side part G and the primaries. as the reducing side of part G is releasing potential into the system so is the reducing primary. both magnetic potential when reduced will release that reduced potential into the system off setting the rising side of part G and the rising primary potential drop.

PART G IS A DYNAMIC INDUCTOR and is in NO WAY a resistor of any kind.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 10, 2018, 09:20:23 PM
Part G;

   The illusive part G that has so many confused to no end. as i was on two free energy site before this one and all i heard from people every single day was that i was crazy thinking part G was not resistors, even to this very day.

SIMPLY PUT, BECAUSE HE DIDN'T USE A RESISTOR ARRAY in the first place.

like my previous posts the patent specifically says " in it's elementary form for the understanding of the function" why in the world can't people get past this very factual statement as the picture is just that a picture for the UNDERSTANDING OF THE FUNCTION.  if Figuera had used resistors the device would be so wasteful that it would never be able to be self sustaining if it had to replace the massive losses from heat in which it would of heated his house to an unbearable temperature. i personally think the picture was purposely drawn and  worded to confuse beyond belief as most of the public CAN NOT GET PAST THE PICTURE.

while i was on this other sites i was trying to convey the fact that the core not only was not a resistor but was an inductor that rotated on a closed core. Figuera in his utter genius would have never used heat death resistors in his device if he wanted to use the most efficient way he could to control his device. not only that it was passed to me many years ago that the device was a continuous winding. well a person wound the device then stated that it can not work with a continuous wind and i was publicly labeled as wrong and a fraud. well i finally found out the the person in question only used 20 to 40 winds on part G and this is not nearly enough to get the proper currant reduction as i so found out through my research. if the person would have doubled his winding count the device would have worked just fine and not be almost a dead short. his core was to shallow also as the graph i posted on parameters to control inductance.

think about this for a while. if part G splits the feed into two, forward biases the rising side like a magamp controlling saturation, attenuates the currant on a dynamic basis and stores and releases magnetic potential to offset the rising side of part G and the primaries all while remaining cool then how in the world can someone think a resistor could be used here. it in fact can NEVER be used in this device. the amount of power wasted would be unbelievable compared to an inductor that would be in the range of around 97% to 99% efficient. the only losses ocurred would be a few percent in the worst case scenario.

an inductor is not just a passive device,  it can be used as an active device in a dynamic state of continual rotation. the present day usage of an inductor says that currant changes control the amount of magnetic field opposition (self inductance ie..Lenz Law, reverse EMF)  to the original currant flow and thus eventually evens out to a steady state as does the magnetic field.  the magnetic field is in a steady state until the currant rises or falls then self inductance will raise it's head again.

while this is fine and dandy what they don't say that if the condition or parameters of the circuit changes as in the adding or subtracting of core material and the winding count that the self inductance, reverse EMF to the original currant flow can be changes also on a dynamic basis giving a way to control currant in an orderly rise and fall of currant.

by utilizing a positive brush on a closed core system,  the self inductance (reverse EMF)  of the windings can be amplified fron the iron to control currant flow as the brush rotates increasing or decreasing the size of the inductor as this is directly correlates to the amount of self inductance, reverse EMF to the original currant flow.

welcome to Figuera  part G Dynamic Inductor 101.  resistors 101 has been cancelled indefinitely due to fire damage.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 12, 2018, 05:06:03 AM
Another thing i think people are having a hard time understanding is if part G becomes the power supply when the original supply is removed then how can the current not be reversed in the primaries.

Simple, the currant travels in the same direction at all times.

if you read up on how a an inductor works you will then realize that when the twin part G inductors on either side of the brush are fed DC currant then reduced, the magnetic field releases that potential which travels in the same direction in which it was receiving the currant in the first place. what it does is try to maintain the currant direction in the closed system thus the rising side of part G and primaries are fed from the reducing primaries plus the reducing side of part G to offset the potential drop of the rising side. the currant is never reversed only attenuated from the reverse EMF of the twin inductors. the original currant flow is always in the same direction,

an inductor's self inductance resists the flow of electrons not the direction of the flow itself.

as you can see from the pic's below that the currant direction does not change whether the Inductor is storing or releasing potential. each half of part G's brush acting independent either storing into the magnetic field or releasing from the magnetic field. the increasing side is storing into the magnetic field to feed the reducing side the next half rotation and the reducing side is feeding the rising side only to reverse it's operation the next half cycle.

each time the source of potential is released it acts as a short term battery feeding the system. so if you have two sources of potential back to back, the reducing primaries and the reducing side of part G,  it will act just like two batteries in series offsetting the potential drop to the rising side just like a boost converter.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 12, 2018, 07:53:20 PM
Another thing i would like to bring up is even though the picture in the patent is in it's elementary form for the understanding Figuera did give a few subtle clues as to what the part G device really was.

in the pic below you will see what i mean and judge for your self. the first pic is an Inductor it has been used since the days of Pixii in France as the symbol for either a coil of wire or an inductor.

the second pic is the symbol used for a resistor since the days of Pixii in France and has NEVER changed.

the bottom pic is the elusive part G's so called resistance according to the patent of having some resistance. just look closely at those wavy lines. my oh my how does it look just exactly like the symbol of the Inductor used since darn near Pixii in France.

 Simple clues so highly overlooked, can you say INDUCTOR,  imagine that !

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 12, 2018, 07:54:41 PM
In this graph Below you can see with the North >< North fields at the positive brush are what keeps the inductor sides separate from the currant flow from set N and set S. as the brush rotates adding or subtracting winding's and core on that side of the brush that causes the magnetic fields opposing the original currant flow to rise and fall in an orderly linear fashion from the self inductance being raised and lowered.

on the opposite side of the core from the N><N brush is the perfect place to introduce the secondary output.   if the secondary in being introduced here which will be negative in sign it will be opposing South><South fields at the brush since part G is wound CCW. what this will do is add to the cores magnetic fields if they are are in need of more potential from the losses occurred in it's function. this will allow part G to become the sole power supply once the starting supply is removed.

since a commutator is rotating with the brushes it can be used to always keep the secondary polarity in the opposite half of the core as to not interfere with the positive brush. so this means that the negative sides and the positive sides will always be opposite from one another.

i know this might sound a little confusing but if you study the graph, the rotation of the fields and the interaction of the currant you will begin to realize what i am trying to convey to everyone. the twin inductors will allow the currant to be absorbed into the magnetic field and not be a dead short as you might be thinking. as the negative secondary brush rotates towards the input from the primaries the potential will be at zero as we are infusing AC through the commutator in a DC fashion. this will allow the peak of the AC wave to be exactly in the middle of the two primary inputs fading to zero as it approaches them. thus infusing potential every half rotation.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 13, 2018, 04:08:21 PM
I do apologize for the mistake i made in the previous post, graph in incorrect. the peak of the AC wave from the secondary through the commutator to the opposite brush is in fact at the inputs from set N and set S. this will cause an amplification when combined with the reducing primaries and the reducing side of part G to the rising primaries.
again i do apologize for the brain fart on my part as i was not feeling well at the time. since i can not delete the post or correct it i will post a corrected graph in my next post. since i am moderated it will take days or even a week to correct my mistake.

Here is the corrected post.

In this graph Below you can see with the North >< North fields at the positive brush are what keeps the inductor sides separate from the currant flow from set N and set S. as the brush rotates adding or subtracting winding's and core on that side of the brush that causes the magnetic fields opposing the original currant flow to rise and fall in an orderly linear fashion from the self inductance being raised and lowered.

on the opposite side of the core from the N><N brush is the perfect place to introduce the secondary output.   if the secondary in being introduced here which will be negative in sign it will be opposing South><South fields at the brush since part G is wound CCW . what this will do is add to the cores magnetic fields if they are are in need of more potential from the losses occurred in it's function. this will allow part G to become the sole power supply once the starting supply is removed.

since a commutator is rotating with the brushes it can be used to always keep the secondary negative polarity in the opposite half of the core as to not interfere with the positive brush. so this means that the negative side and the positive side will always be opposite from one another.

i know this might sound a little confusing but if you study the graph, the rotation of the fields and the interaction of the currant you will begin to realize what i am trying to convey to everyone. the twin inductors will allow the currant to be absorbed into the magnetic field and not be a dead short as you might be thinking. as the negative secondary brush rotates towards the input from the primaries the potential will be at it's peak allowing that potential combined with the reducing primaries and the reducing half of part G combined giving an amplification of potential to the rising primaries. the magnetic fields are of course inside the core as this is just for visualization purposes.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 13, 2018, 10:05:25 PM

Please excuse the poor graphics but i am sure the point will still be conveyed.

if you look at the graph you will see that as the secondary output is at it's peak it will be at the input of the low side of part G and primary either set N or set S.  since the reduction of the primaries magnetic field is being released as is the low side of part G's inductor,  the potential from the secondary and the other two will give the amplification to the rising side of part G and the primaries boosting the output to the secondaries. by looping the secondary back to part G through a commutator it will allow the device to be self sustaining as we are basically replacing the losses from the system in the inducing side which is a closed  system. the commutator keeps the negative side of the secondary AC wave turned to DC in the opposite side of the positive brush at all times. the same is true for the positive side of the AC wave as it keeps both positive side together.

and this my friends is how Figuera loped his secondaries back to the system to attain self sustainment.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 17, 2018, 08:52:11 PM
Inductive Reactance
The reduction of current flow in a circuit due to induction is called inductive reactance. By taking a closer look at a coil of wire and applying Lenz's law, it can be seen how inductance reduces the flow of current in the circuit. In the image below, the direction of the primary current is shown in red, and the magnetic field generated by the current is shown in blue. The direction of the magnetic field can be determined by taking your right hand and pointing your thumb in the direction of the current. Your fingers will then point in the direction of the magnetic field. It can be seen that the magnetic field from one loop of the wire will cut across the other loops in the coil and this will induce current flow (shown in green) in the circuit. According to Lenz's law, the induced current must flow in the opposite direction of the primary current. The induced current working against the primary current results in a reduction of current flow in the circuit.

It should be noted that the inductive reactance will increase if the number of winds in the coil is increased since the magnetic field from one coil will have more coils to interact with.
Similarly to resistance, inductive reactance reduces the flow of current in a circuit. However, it is possible to distinguish between resistance and inductive reactance in a circuit by looking at the timing between the sine waves of the voltage and current of the alternating current. In an AC circuit that contains only resistive components, the voltage and the current will be in-phase, meaning that the peaks and valleys of their sine waves will occur at the same time. When there is inductive reactance present in the circuit, the phase of the current will be shifted so that its peaks and valleys do not occur at the same time as those of the voltage. in a DC circuit this is not so.

Self inductance or Inductance
The above scenario is when using AC with DC we have a whole new ball game. in a DC operated device it is called self inductance or inductance. since DC is a semi steady state how are we to get the same reactions of currant reduction simular to that of AC which is alternating currant.
 we have to make some kind of changes to the circuit to cause the magnetic field to change in intensity that causes the field to interact with the windings next to it to produce the reverse EMF to oppose the original currant flow. something has to move to induce a change. there are three ways to achieve this 1. change the currant like AC does. 2. change the magnetic field. 3. change the circuit parameters...ie the length, core and winding count which in turn changes the magnetic field that changes the currant flow.

Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current.

this is what the positive brush does. as it rotates it is magnetically linking or unlinking to the circuit and it is this that causes the magnetic field to change that produces the reverse EMF to the original currant flow. in the AC device the currant up or down causes the reaction,  in the DC circuit the circuit increasing or decreasing  in size is what causes the currant change.

The AC device is static but the alternating currant causes the change.

In the DC device in order to get the changes the device has to be changed from a static device to a dynamic device thus the use of a positive rotating brush allows this device to have currant changes dynamically on the fly.

If the device operation was static the magnetic field would even out over a short time and allow a steady currant to flow so in order to get a constant currant rise and fall the circuit has to be constantly changed in length adding or subtracting winding's and core material dynamically as the brush rotates.

and this my friends is how Figuera's part G operates.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 17, 2018, 08:53:50 PM

If you haven't already noticed Figuera was a sheer Genius of the fact that using the reducing magnetic fields to his advantage aiding the device in a very positive way.

take the primaries for instance, powering up the primaries to full potential will have a  very nice magnetic field projecting out of it's core. since we all know now that once that magnetic field is established the power to maintain said field will be reduced to the IR2 losses of the wire. as per Sparky Sweet that field is essentially separate from the currant which becomes the property of incoherent  energy Quanta . when the primary electromagnet is reduced to induce motion into the secondary it releases that potential amount of reduction from the field in the same direction it was traveling in the first place. since it is traveling in the same direction it will be added into part G.

Now at the same time part G's reducing half is doing the exact same thing releasing it's reduced potential in the same direction it was traveling in the first place. now you have the reducing primaries potential added to the reducing potential of part G's inductor and at that very same time the secondaries potential will be added also. these potentials combined give an amplification to the rising  primaries boosting it's output to the secondaries.

since we all know that when an an inductor is increasing,  storing into it's magnetic field there will be a potential drop across the conductor. this is also true for the increasing primary electromagnet as they are storing into the magnetic field. as there will be a potential drop across both of them the potentials from the reducing magnetic field offsets these potential drop giving an amplification to the rising sides of the device.

this action happens twice in every rotation each reducing side feeding the increasing side in one half then the opposite takes place in the other half.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 17, 2018, 10:20:05 PM
This post is dedicated to the brain dead people that still think part G is resistors.

And i quote from Wikipedia on Inductance;

"Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."
That means larger inductor = less currant flow, smaller inductor = more currant flow and as the brush is constantly rotating so is the size of the inductor on either side of the brush.

Now do you understand Rswami.

now i think that is all i have to say about that. if you still don't get it i guess i am through with you to.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 23, 2018, 10:05:44 AM
So basically what part G does as the brush rotates is change the ratio of magnetic field to the amount of currant. as the brush rotates the amount of winding's change magnetically linking to the circuit increasing the magnetic field. since self inductance is the reverse EMF that opposes currant flow in the first place the more winding's we add the more opposition to the original currant flow we will have. the opposite is also true, the less winding's we have in the inductor the less the magnetic field the less opposition to currant flow. with a currant rise in the increasing side of part G's magnetic field it is gaining in intensity but the overall space occupied storing the increased potential is small with little reverse EMF.

the iron in the core will enhance the reverse EMF aiding the self inductance of the inductor. if it was an air core the currant reduction would not take place so the addition of the core thus amplifies self inductance to the point of  linear currant reduction. since the real currant flow is from negative to positive the currant flowing into part G from both set N and set S will cause an North><North opposing magnetic fields at the brush and it is these fields that keep the two side of the inductor separate at all times. so what we end up having is one huge inductor separated by magnetic fields divided into two at the brush each acting separate but in complete unison.

we have as the brush rotates  two inductors either increasing or decreasing in length,  increasing or decreasing the reverse EMF to the original currant flow that causes a complete orderly rise or fall of currant in a linear fashion. then to top that off as the currant is reduced the reduction in the field will release that reduce part into the system aided by the reducing primary's potential plus the secondary loop back causing an amplification of potential to the rising primary.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 23, 2018, 11:03:09 AM
Every single thing i have said has been verified on the bench. the person that put it in my mind was Doug in the first place in which i do thank you for the wonderful information.

the opposing magnet test can be performed by yourself at your own home that mimics the Figuera device. the self inductance to curtail currant can be performed at your own house. every single thing that has been presented so far can be verified BY YOU AT YOUR OWN HOME.

This device was real and IS REAL thus can be built by ANYONE.

This is a quote from Aubrey Scoons that replicated Royal Rife's work;

"DON’T BE FOOLED!
Complexity does not equal credibility. Just the opposite in fact. Anyone who has genuine insight will be able to explain to you in simple language exactly what they mean and you will then be able to verify it with known scientific fact. If they can’t.....well, what do you think?"

This is why i choose to explain things in detail but at a level everyone can understand. it is usually the troll or the Ney Sayers that try to use words that you can't understand or even dishonest tactics to discredit/belittle you.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 23, 2018, 11:52:03 AM
Keep things adjustable when building the Figuera device.  since the primaries are exact copies of each other plus putting them on bobbins allows you to have adjustment done on the fly.

also on part G once it is wound will not be so adjustable so by using the adjustable post like below will allow you to adjust the balance of the primaries if needed. they are cheap as in a few dollars and save a hell of a lot of time.

taking the screw out and flipping the tab allows you to use it much better than the original way.

now it can be slid very easily, they can take fairly thick wire and a lot of amps to boot. this makes it easier to adjust since part G is one continuous wind.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 23, 2018, 11:43:02 PM
In the Figuera device he used DC to excite his primaries just like a standard generator does to excite it's N&S fields not ac that some people seam to think. if one was to use AC there would be all kinds of phasing issues to deal with and this is unacceptable and a royal pain in the backside. not only would that cause hysteresis and eddy currants in the primaries and this is detrimental to it's magnetic field output. since the time it takes to plow through the resistance of the wire and the flipping of the magnetic domains are far to long to respond in any reasonable manor. thus would be darn near useless in the FIguera device.

by using DC in his device it eliminated all hysteresis and eddy currants but also the phasing issue involved in using AC. the secondary has these effects that is why he split the cores up the way he did. using DC allowed him to get the highest possible magnetic field from his primaries without all the said draw backs. by using DC and winding them specifically as electromagnets he was able to attain the highest magnetic field possible with the fastest rise in magnetic strength.

since he used DC and did not reduce his primaries down below half way this technique allowed the primaries to be reduced and increased to full potential with very short response time keeping a very orderly rise and fall of the primaries to remain in complete unison throughout this action.

just think about that for a while with some common sense. if one was to try to use AC in their primaries,  the time it took to rip through the resistance and to flip all the magnetic domains which would never happen because before the all the domains got flipped the AC is traveling the other way so the resistance and the flipping of the domains starts all over again. so what you would end up with is a rather weak electromagnet that gets hot from eddy currants and hysteresis. the time involved to do this process is crazy slow and coherency between the Electric fields would be lost and induction would fall to that of just the rising electromagnet.

now with that common sense still flowing by using DC that never reverses the Electromagnets do not have to deal with eddy currants or any hysteresis ill effects nor any phasing issues to contend with. when the DC electromagnet is brought up to proper field strength and reduced to just clear the secondary then back to full potential the time frame of that action is so minute that the primary Electric fields are able to remain in complete coherency. thus induction is at it's maximum and the output is the square of the two primary electromagnets compared to two plain bucking fields (NON COHERENT). very little magnetic domains are flipped in this process once it is at full potential because all Figuera did was reduce the currant to just clear the secondary then back to full potential which does not flip the domains like AC would. the electromagnets remain cool and have very fast response time.

in the process of splitting the DC currant both primary electromagnets remain in phase at all times and are just reduced in relation to the secondary and not them selves. since the wall at the collision point of both opposing electromagnets will be quite large the reduction of currant to get the primaries the sweeping action across the secondary will be quite small. not to mention the opposing field of the secondary once currant starts to flow in the secondary and the load will be sandwiched in between those two primary electromagnet. refer to the squirrel cage motor action Doug referred and apply it to this scenario.

the primary electromagnets cause the E fields but it is the relative motion of the primaries being reduced and increased with the opposing secondary fields between them that induces currant flow into the secondary and the load. once the polarization takes place and currant begins to flow the primaries and the secondaries part ways and it is the primaries becomes the motive force that exerts motion into the secondary provided the circuit is closed with resistance of it's own. ( ie a load)

thus in compliance according to Faraday's laws of induction ANY rise or FALL of the magnetic field will cause induction no matter how small.

thanks for everything Doug, to bad nobody else listened to the wisdom brought to the table.

If you still cant understand what i have just laid out in plain English in a logical and descriptive manor i would suggest you chose another device or field to pursue because your failing at this one.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 24, 2018, 11:47:18 AM
Figuera  mainly avoids to use of magnets to creates alternating field. His version however is not fully motionless as he like Nicola Tesla DID NOT HAVE ADVANCED ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS IN HIS TIME AS WE HAVE IN OUR TIME NOW.

So Figuera device a means to convert D.C to Pulsing DC or better still AC which is exactly what Mechanic Alternators produces as the magnets on the rotor is arranged North-South-North South and on and on like that.

The opposite winding  is meant to negate Lenz but you Can aslo {Like I have done} practically negate Lenz with RESONANCE and thus use little copper wire. High frequency application plus resonance will allow anyone to use little materials to generate kilowatts of Power.

Yes the output at low voltage high current will be in high frequency which will then needs High Frequency diodes to rectify and further needs Inverter circuit.

Make it simple brothers and sisters as YOUNG only needs to understand the Figuera Gen basic fundamental working principles for you to know what to add and subtract in view of new era available Electronic components.

Why will I keep to tidious mechanical lane when more Super easy, efficient and effective motionless Route is available!e?

May God bless Donald Lee Smith!!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 24, 2018, 07:09:41 PM
That's really hilarious given the fact that 6 months ago you PM'ed me that i was completely right and you were wrong. maybe i should post that PM as i did save it to let the world know what type of a person you are.

the Figuera device is NOT a DON Smith energy resonant device and even states in the patent. he observed a dynamo and made it stationary that is it. he used two opposing electromagnets to mimic the high intensity field of a regular dynamo then reducing one and raising the other to induce movement into the secondary.
if you think those crasy thoughts why not get your own thread and not ruin or confuse this thread.

good day and good luck, you'll need all you can get.

PS, the opposing primary electromagnet DO NOT negate Lenz effect, sorry you are incorrect again. as a mater of fact Figuera uses it to his advantage and you would of known this if you would of done proper research not fly by week end thing.

Facts are Facts and mine are backed up with real Physics and almost 6 years of bench work.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 24, 2018, 07:38:35 PM
Marathonman, calm down.
You do need not to be insultive.
No one is taking your thread away from you.
Figuera Gen can be upgraded to Pure Motionless Over unity Electromagnetic generator that is my sermon and will always be!
Instead of the mechanical inverter in Figuera Gen, we can apply Motionless Inverter now which encompasses Spider I.C and MOSFETs.
Instead of applying less than 100hz which the motor in the said mechanical inverter is producing, we can now use high frequency.
Instead of ordinary Induction, Resonant Induction can be applied.
Instead of array of Electromagnets, just 1 set can be used and yet get tremendous output and even loop the set-up utilising Zero Voltage Re-back e.m.f lead acid battery charger.

I believe you are Positively dynamic only that you are seeing things differently.






Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 24, 2018, 08:15:56 PM
This is a quote from Aubrey Scoons that replicated Royal Rife's work;

"DON’T BE FOOLED!
Complexity does not equal credibility. Just the opposite in fact. Anyone who has genuine insight will be able to explain to you in simple language exactly what they mean and you will then be able to verify it with known scientific fact. If they can’t.....well, what do you think?"
This is why i choose to explain things in detail but at a level everyone can understand. it is usually the troll or the Ney Sayers that try to use words that you can't understand or even dishonest tactics to discredit/belittle you.

I will leave it to the readers to decide for your selves.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 25, 2018, 09:26:36 PM
Another very highly overlooked FACT.
 in 1908 the patent offices required you "the patentee" to have a small working device to display the working principals of your patent. what this means is the patent office required you to have a working device unlike today you could patent a French fart if it smells different. no offence to the French.

Figuera had a working device (1902) patents that he sold to the bankers. his 1908 patent was more than likely the patent and working device that powered his home in Barcelona Spain at the time of his death. it was recorded that it powered his house lights, a 20 HP motor and the street light around his house.
So i could really care less if anyone says that this device can't work because i know better. if you dig hard enough the truth will eventually come to light.
simple test at your home will set the truth free.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 25, 2018, 09:54:28 PM
So basically what part G does as the brush rotates is change the ratio of magnetic field to the amount of currant.

this fact is the effects of an inductor taken from a static device that opposes the currant for a short time then rising to a steady state. so in order to get the same reaction of the inductor but at a continuous basis we need to take it from a static device to an active device.

 so lets talk about this since a few are still having a little trouble with this statement.

Quote from Wikipedia;
"Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."

now would you not think that as the brush rotates around the core is not an "Alteration" of the circuit. ? and would it not change the magnetic field increasing or decreasing which is the ratio of magnetic field to currant, why sure in hell it is.

this is why the part G inductor changes the currant as the brush rotates around the core. it changes the ratio of magnetic field per the amount of currant increasing and decreasing the size of the inductor on both sides of the brush separated by two North><North magnetic fields allowing them to remain completely separate but in complete unison.

the currant running through the wire causes a magnetic field around the wires and it is this magnetic field that strikes the winding next to it that causes the reverse EMF to form that opposes the original currant flow. the more winding's that magnetically link to the circuit the more opposition to currant flow. thus the reverse is true, the less winding's that magnetically link to the system the less opposition to currant flow.
So as the brush rotates around the core making contact with more than one contact at a time in a make before break scenario, the winding's are magnetically linking or unlinking to each side of the circuit on each side of the positive brush where the North North fields keep them separate. allowing them to increase or decrease in size thus changing the ratio of magnetic field to currant thus changing the currant on a complete orderly basis.

another fact is while the inductor on one side of the brush is increasing in size it is releasing the reduced potential into the system feeding the increasing primary electromagnet while the side of the inductor that is reducing in size is storing into the magnetic field to feed the next rising primary electromagnet.



Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 26, 2018, 05:53:58 PM
   As you can read part G is simplex. it is very simple but has a myriad of functions all happening at the same time. the very use of an inductor has so many confused but hopefully though my posts i have cleared some confusion toward part G.
most have a mind set that an inductor can only be used as a passive device which was handed down from generation after generation from the Dogma taught Government controlled school system that was implemented by good ole J.P. Morgan.

The facts i have presented can be verified by EVERY reader that reads this thread, that proves an inductor can be brought from a passive device to an active device and used in a dynamic state. i have posted the dynamics of how self inductance takes place,  the steps taken to get continuous increase or decrease of currant flow then taking the stored magnetic field of the inductor or electromagnet and using them in a very positive manor.
it behoves everyone that reads this thread to perform the suggested test that not only prove the validity of the  North North primary electromagnets but also the validity of part G. all test performed have been proven on the bench and backed up with Physics and science.

using a core and winding the primaries and the secondaries on the same core is NOT the Figuera device in any way shape or form and is just a transformer. anyone that says any different is a complete fool and does not know the difference between a transformer and a Generator in the first place and needs a reality check.
the Figuera device being a Generator, separates the primaries from the secondaries for certain reasons. if the primaries were to be on the same core it would cause the transfer of Hysteresis and eddy currant to the primaries which would cause the reduction of magnetic field resulting in large heat losses in the primaries. by remaining separate the magnetic fields from the primaries resides in a space outside of it's core which is the space occupied by the secondary.  this allows the primaries to do the intended job of being electromagnets and have no ill effects from the secondary what so ever.

reading and understanding the patent is such a vital step in the replication of this device but researching and testing on the bench proving it's operation of each device opens the door to knowledge and is the gateway to a complete self running device with not only this device but other in the past and future.

i hope these post from me will help the readers in the understanding of this well forgotten device and bring it's long forgotten simple technology to the present day that can do nothing but aide in the advancement of HUMANITY.

Love and peace not war and hatred.

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 27, 2018, 09:14:18 PM
darediamond'
I am being stern and slightly abrasive not insulting. rereading the Websters dictionary will give you a fresh perspective on the word insulting.

You have not even built the original and therefore do not understand all the dynamic involved so how in the world can you make improvements to a device you have personally NEVER built. you and Rswami parade around this website like your the authority on the Figuera device which HAS NEVER been built by either of you. his device is a transformer plain and simple and not remotely associated with the Figuera device and you have never provided any pictures of your so called IMPROVED version let alone provided any bench work proving the validity of it.
neither of you have put any reasonable time to understand this device thus shows in your lack of understanding.
 you are just like Rswami when he tried to build the Thane Heins transformer and spent 4 days on the device and said it will not work. WOW ! 4 whole days and he is the expert in which someone else did the work for him.

I have a good chuckle every time i read the craziness from the both of your post and shake my head at the sheer misunderstanding of the device.
and i would really like to know how you posted three days ago and it just now showed up today. hummm ! the use of trickery maybe or just moderated.
you know squat about the Figuera device plain and simple and it show in your posts.

you might ask yourself why did i spend so much time with this device.? simply i wanted to completely understand this device in detail right down to the last part so i can replicate it then re give it to the world. just like Doug said you cant sit in the back of the class sleeping and expect to pass the test unless you cheat. and in this case you even cheating will get you no where.

try actually reading and understanding what was posted and maybe some day you will actually have a working device. until then it is quite enjoyable watching a couple of puppies chasing their own tail.
Bark, Bark Woof !

PS. this is not my thread, i just post real scientific facts here of the Figuera device not fiction and snow jobs.

have a good day.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on April 28, 2018, 01:09:46 PM
I am not in for mechanical or 'half-baked'  solid state over unity devices. I developex sometimes ago a working Mechanical Resonance Lensless alternator on a small scale. Seeing the effect of resonance even at low rpm or frequency, I choose to stick with motionless version alone.

Figuera Gen working principle is simple to understand. Part-G inverts and yes prevents reversal to 0 and that is practically  achievable too in Solid state.

Bucking coil is applied to mainly negate Lenz but with resonance induction, you can also negate Lenz like I have done. This means single Primary and secondary can be used without the source power being loaded any further.

I do not have to show you things I have done for the sake of you believing me. I do not even need you to believe me.

The mechanical alternating to and fro of magnets is what Figuera mimicked with his half way motionless alternator; Now we can make the alter fully motioless and generate desired output.

You spin no electrons, you get no useful electric power.

Leave been an "authority" alone just be dynamic.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 28, 2018, 06:27:56 PM
Again i can not emphasize the importance when winding your electromagnets specifically as electromagnets. there is no reason to wind them with high resistance to control currant as that is the job of part G. why add more complexity to the system then need be. winding them specifically as electromagnets will allow them to adapt to the changes in currant darn near instantly maintaining the coherency needed between the primaries.

also you have to realize that the peak currant when the electromagnet is high is such a short time frame that the the wire will not burn up. hypothetically if i was to use say 18 awg wire for my primaries. even though the rating for that wire is low and you exceeded that for a fraction of milliseconds it will not have any ill effects. if a steady currant exceeding the rating was applied it of course would heat and burn up.

so even though you might exceed the rating of the wire the time frame it is at peak currant flow will be in the low hundred microsecond range and that is not enough time to harm the wire.

example;  say the brush on part G is traveling at 3600 which is the RPM required to get 60 HZ out of the secondary for the US. since there are 1000 milliseconds  in a second divided by 60 revolutions per second = 16.66 milliseconds per revolution.  now divide 16.66 by the number of winding's that make contact with the brush as it rotates and hypothetically lets say 60 in it's complete rotation. that ends up to be .277 which is 277 microseconds per winding but the ends are on for twice as long as the ones in the middle so it ends up being 554 microseconds.

so you see the primary currant at it's peak is only on for 554 microseconds and this is way to short of a time to heat up a wire let along burn it up.

just a few things to keep in mind when winding your electromagnets SPECIFICALLY AS ELECTROMAGNETS.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on April 30, 2018, 12:02:11 PM
https://vimeo.com/178144785
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: d3x0r on April 30, 2018, 12:19:11 PM
https://vimeo.com/178144785 (https://vimeo.com/178144785)


it's not really a variable resistor; it's a variable inductor


It must be intermitantly making/breaking contact as it changes from one coil position to another....


when the change stops the same current through both sides (mostly, there is a tiny different in resistance), and after a time of the magnetic field buildup...


Although I'm not entirely clear why turning one way lights one and turning the other lights the other... maybe because of the changing indductance, as it reduces, the current is increased while the other is decreased because of increased induction?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 30, 2018, 03:46:15 PM
D3X0R;
Seaad is about the last person in the world you really want lo listen to as he doesn't know his back side to a hole in the ground and is nothing but a running shill and a troll and is part of a group of sad individual that has nothing better that to run their mouth needlessly toward other people. he and that group have no desire to find the truth just disrupt every thread they get on. where do you think the shill got the idea of the inductor in the first place. it certainly wasn't from his own thinking, trust me on that.

I have laid out the information describing what Part G is and it's actions and decsriptions is quite an informative way with no doubt proving everything on the bench so if you decide to listen to this shill of a person it is a complete loss on your part.
if you people would actually read what has been posted you just might understand this device instead of blindly posting assumptions or questions that have already been addressed in previous posts.

Read my posts for the last few weeks and it will be quite obvious as to what part G is and it's action and what causes those action. seaad is relying on wrong data from a so called person that wound part G but did not have near enough winds on part G as so i found out. the original part G replication was wound on an alternator core had around 100 winds and the so called person used only 20 to 40 which was NOT NEAR ENOUGH WINDS to do squat.

D3X0R please read my posts and it will become clear instead of relying on misinformed people. my research has many years of bench work backed by Physics and real science not trickery, snow jobs or riding off the backs of the people that actually did the real research into this device.

if you think my information about the group of people is incorrect just look at the destruction of both of the Figuers threads on Entergetic forum and you will see the truth. trolls and shill begat trolls and shills.

with 1320 posts i know you know what time it is but then again i could be wrong.

Good luck in the Figuera device.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: d3x0r on April 30, 2018, 04:38:36 PM


Good luck in the Figuera device.

Marathonman


Something like that; I first saw their posts over on Pierre's thread....
This has a lot of similarity with that device actually.    I did read your theories, but respectfully disagree, so I didn't say anything...


Wasn't trying to be encouraging, or feeding the troll, but rather, try to express that's not what this thing is... although almost right; it's really not at all right.


The old timey notations on the patent of a looped wire is a heater wire/resistance.  it's not a telephone cord :) or even a coil that is itself made of a coil... but is meant instead to indicate a high resistance heater core type component.







Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 30, 2018, 04:57:18 PM
Telephone cord, who in the heck stated it was telephone core. OMG i can't stop laughing. that is the funniest thing i have heard in months. and even the heater core thing is totally hilarious beyond belief and again i can't stop laughing. stop and listen to the absurdities as the use of a ridiculous heater core would heat his house to 100 degrees plus and waste power like no tomorrow.
if you actually do research into part G you will find that Zeiss is the most logical builder of part G in Germany and it sure in heck wasn't a resistor. Zeiss does not build resistors and you would of known this if the proper research was conducted.

IF this is the reality of your research then you would be quite wrong but it is what it is and your device build.
Like i have stated the bench does not lie thus a resistor is the wrong approach as you will plainly see if you actually pursue this device.

again good luck as you will need all you can get.

PS i would love to see your test on that heater coil and please let me know as i will supply the sticks and hot dogs for the weenie roast and possible S'mores if you like them.


regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 30, 2018, 04:57:45 PM
 It is quite possibly the entire reason trolls and shill disrupt threads is because of the lack of or misunderstanding that our ENTIRE UNIVERSE is a perpetual motion machine and thus living in the wheel work of said machine our perception of it's existence is quite distorted looking from inside out. it is the same as fish, they do not see water as water because they live in it. it is their normal life and breath.

Since the first day i was introduced to the Figuera device or plainly a set of bucking coils i knew i was on to something. using two bucking primers to increase the kinetic energies available to the secondaries with out loading the primers in the first place thus reducing the primers to just that of the IR2 losses.  there is no destruction of energies, just the movement from one form to another thus the universe recycles it's energies from one form to another in an never ending cycle, a constant cyclic motion from one dimension to another with the introduction of currant flow in the cyclic process.

we are literally living in the sea of energies just like the fish that do nothing but eat and breath not knowing the reality of things. those people that know not of it's existence will remain just that,  a fish, unlike like myself and others will continue to evolve and grow and become the pioneers to construct the vessel to explore the vast Universe of energy.

The sea of energy in which our vessel does float.

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on April 30, 2018, 06:54:25 PM
There is an extreme lack of common sense towards part G in the thought of how it's resistance is implemented in the device. if a resistance in the form of a resistor is used which waste potential that is totally unrecoverable then how to you expect this device to self sustain it it has to supply the primaries potential on a continuous basis. sorry to burst your bubble but it can not.
That thought is totally preposterous and will result in one only logical conclusion, a dead device that will not sustain it's self in any way shape or form.
it behooves you to do the research that proves the validity of this statement with out a doubt.   i to at one time thought part G was resistors but i came to the revelation to the reality after months on the bench proved otherwise thus proving the validity of information from Mr Doug was in fact genuine and scientifically correct.

on the other hand if the proper research was conducted by the individual one would have surmised the use of an inductor used in the proper form outside of the present day usage,  would then arrive at the logical conclusion that the inductance used in a dynamic active state can store and release potential thus reducing  the primary potential draw from the system to that of just the IR2 losses allowing the system to be self sustaining. one then would realize the magnetic fields in the process of storing and releasing of said energies can also be used to control currant on a continuous basis with very high coefficients of self induction by using a core of a high permeability and a large number of coil turns.

if the realization of these very factually scientifically accurate statements are not taken into consideration the probabilities of self sustainment will be reduce to the sum of ZERO.

Of course the choice of one's path is entirely guided by realization of the truth acquired in the pursuit of enlightenment. remaining a fish in the ocean of energies is ones prerogative,  inside looking out.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 01, 2018, 12:22:34 PM

it's not really a variable resistor; it's a variable inductor    It must be intermitantly making/breaking contact as it changes from one coil position to another....
when the change stops the same current through both sides (mostly, there is a tiny different in resistance),
and after a time of the magnetic field buildup...

Although I'm not entirely clear why turning one way lights one and turning the other lights the other... maybe because of the changing indductance, as it reduces, the current is increased while the other is decreased because of increased induction?

Hi d3x0r , All
That stay on lit delay effect is a bit puzzling. And I wonder if the voltage across the bulbs goes higer than the battery voltage? I have tried to simulate this circuit with a 20 steps LT Spice Simulation but it gave no such delay effects. I think we have to build a simple test bed with a real variable transformer. But sadly I don't own such. Maybe someone in the audience here is in the possession  of a variable transformer and can replicate that simple test with an osc-scope connected also to verify the effects? A higher voltage across the bulbs and the delay effect.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 01, 2018, 02:23:26 PM
Nice core by the way.

Quote from Wikipedia;
"Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."

Sorry d3x0r but my so called  theory on part G is NOT A THEORY, it is plain FACT backed by Physics, real Science and years of bench work, something you seen to be lacking in.

The device pic shown when used with DC will turn the device into an inductor which can theoretically be called a variable transformer but the fact is, it doesn't transform anything.
The more appropriate description would be an inductance amplifier as the magnetic fields of all devices in the system when reduced releases potential when combined causing an amplification to the rising side offsetting the potential drop of storing into the magnetic field for the next half cycle. thus a variable transformer will not function in this capacity as the sole purpose of the device is to store and release potential at the appropriate time amplifying the signal to the rising side of the device.

part G has many functions and if any one of them are negated the device will not operate properly thus will not self sustain. it will then act as a transformer from the fact that potential is supplied to it all the time and this is to be avoided in the Figuera device.

the video a long time ago from Hanon was suggested by me to show him the validity of part G and inductance. when using DC the variac then turned into a self inductance device with the turn of the knob but when stationary did nothing unlike the real part G that has a rotating brush thus varies the inductance on a continuous basis which changes the ratio of magnetic field to currant, which is the ratio of reverse EMF to the original currant flow.

which is exactly what i have been saying for how may years now and still it falls on deaf ears. fish will remain fish no matter what body of water they swim in.

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 01, 2018, 06:28:30 PM
Another thing i would like to enlighten people on is the fact that the ring part G Doug so used did in fact work abit some balancing issues i have so encountered myself. just because someone didn't use enough winds did not change the fact that it did to quite some success.

so continuing on this line of reasoning as long as part G is a closed core the shape of it is inconsequential as long as the brush can still rotate in an increase decrease fashion. the use of a closed EI core or a closed C core will do the same thing as long as it is closed core system retaining the magnetic flux fields.
I am in fact building a closed C core part G that will alleviate the balancing issues i have encountered with the ring core which will make it not only easy to balance but easier to wind.  as we all know a toroid is a bitch to wind especially if it is a deep core. then on top of that it is a total bitch to balance.
it is not like your standard C core that has the G dimension being the longest dimension. in my core the A and D is the longest dimension giving the C core a very nice flat surface to wind on. i will then used an adhesive then use a surface grinder to precision flatness for a perfect non sparking brush rotation.
i also designed a custom brush holder that can adjust the diameter of the brushes. this will allow me to dial in the exact high and low's of currant presented to the primaries according to the primary secondary core ratio. it also holds the slip rings and the commutator then attaches to the motor. hopefully i will finish in time to present it with the new part G.

I will present the G core in a week or two when it comes in and i wind it. it is around 12 to 1500 va so i can add additional cores in the future to increase the output.
every single function has been retained as the original thus i foresee no further complication to arise from that of the ring core.

in my off time from the forums i was able to clear my head of the forum BS and make some very startling discoveries through my research and bench work. i now reside on a very, very quiet forum that allows me to think quite clearly and rationally. i am also in a working partnership in the design and building of the 1932 Coutier device (pronounced cou-ti-ay) that amplifies currant to the 6th degree and thus foresee a working device by the end of this year. this also will be presented to everyone at the same time of showing proving the validity of self sustainment.

the 150 year perpetual motion lie will come to a screeching halt.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: d3x0r on May 02, 2018, 02:09:57 AM
I will say; I was about to put my foot in my mouth I dunno few days ago about N and S blocks not being N and N.
a N approaching one side of a coil and a N receding from the other side of a coil do generate current in the same direction... which is constructive interference... oscillating increasing current to one side, while decreasing current on the other in the same polarity; so on that point, for this, I do have to concur with bucking coils...


The resistance factor doesn't have to be that great....
10 ohms to 1000 ohms is 1:100
same as 0.1 ohms to 10 ohms... which are not a huge loss... I suppose you could range your resistance from 10k to 1M ... probably wouldn't get much OU from that; but then again maybe it's enough to loop and power itself since it also wouldn't consume much current.  but then again, isn't like every potentiometer (variable resistor) balanced from left to right, so you just have to find a way to twist the swiper back and forth?


This device set were all about moving the field back and forth, not moving a formed field past the coil.... because in that scenario, an approaching north to one side of a coil generates the same current as the south side approaching(not a recession in this case) the other side of the coil... and Since Pierre's is really about having a constant field that you can move, these are quite independant.... unless via 'many arrangments are possible' he(Figuera) really meant a totally different arrangement than the one illustrated for 2d paper.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 02, 2018, 04:20:13 AM
I hate to say it but i really expected more from someone that has 1300 plus posts. i am really disappointed to say the least.
I have proved as so i thought that part G is an inductor but i guess some people just do not have what it takes to pursue a free energy device as others do and to think you would think a Physics professor would use heat death resistor is laughable at best. but then again you don't really care do you as you are here only to disrupt. i sure am glade i don't know where you live because you would be surprised what i can do to a person like you with my military training.

your a pathetic man if you could call yourself one. how much do you get paid to disrupt troll.
what the really funny part is i am here to just help people out and i can always leave but the most funny part is if you come to my home base you will get Ip blocked and banded for life. ha, ha, ha, ha ! and you can't stop me ever, ha, ha, ha, ha!
this web site was and always a home for troll loosers.

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Belfior on May 02, 2018, 11:21:00 AM
You do not want resistors in this circuit (well at least in the G part you don't). You just need variable inductance that will resist changes in current.

This creates changes in flux and changes in flux means induced currEnt in the pickup coils

bucking N - N coils will produce the effect of magnet entering a coil and exiting a coil, if the current raises to MAX and then cuts off. Then current in the second primary starts from MAX and dies off.

This is something I am still trying to figure out. You need to have the current raising to MAX on the first coil, then switch at MAX to the second primary. How do I do this with solid state components? How do I start with MAX current in the second primary and not slowly raising current?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 02, 2018, 04:25:17 PM
MAYBE GO TO THIS SITE AND THAT WILL ENLIGHTEN YOU.http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 02, 2018, 04:38:41 PM
Belfior;
Have you even read a single post in the last few weeks?????
I have laid out in clear precise english how and why the primaries are raised and lowered in currant in unison so what seems to be the problem?????
Generator do not start at MAX as you say, that would cause an immediate frying of the system. generators take a certain time to ramp up to max and this device being a generator is no exception.
there is NO RESISTORS in this system AT ALL and the total lack of understanding of this this system is really killing people.

The primaries are NEVER CUT OFF, they are raised and lowered in currant in an orderly fashion in unison as the brush rotates. they are NEVER taken below half way or to zero for that mater. that will cause induction to fail as the pressure between the primaries are to be maintained at all times and if not the induction will drop to that of the rising electromagnet.
the pressure between the primaries compresses the field lines to match that of a standard generators high intensity field and are raised and lowered in intensity only to induce motion into the secondary.

reviewing the last few weeks of post might help you but then again who knows.

regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 02, 2018, 07:30:38 PM
seychelles;
while being a good example at the same time it is not.
as a mag amp it uses the saturation of the core to control currant flow thus does not use the reduction of field to do any useful work.
on the other hand an inductor used in an active state can control currant with the use of reverse EMF that opposes the original currant flow. but that's not all, it stores and releases potential that can be used in a very positive manor to offset the potential drop of the rising side since it is storing into the field for the next half cycle.
this vary information is what i have been posting for weeks and all one has to do is open ones mind and absorb the information presented which is fact, proven on the bench and back by Physics and science not speculation and theories.

regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 02, 2018, 11:32:09 PM
There is a serious question i have to ask the people that still think part G is resistors.

How do you counteract the potential drop to the primaries as they are increasing in strength to sweep the field across the secondary knowing that any rise in magnetic potential will cause a potential drop across the conductor.????????? please tell me how you can do this with an F-in resistor. please i would love to hear the absurdities come fourth as i sure need a good laugh about now.

any clue as to what the heck i am talking about or are you just going to blab out the first thing that short circuits in that brain of yours.?????

The entire reason Figuera used an INDUCTOR is the fact that an INDUCTOR can store and release potential at the right time counteracting the potential drop to the rising electromagnet and even amplify the signal in the process.
Not only that the stored magnetic field can even reduce the currant flowing through the circuit in an orderly linear fashion.

Now !, try that with your stupid resistor array or resistors or Barbeque heater coil or what ever your broke brain comes up with that causes resistance.
there seams to be a total lack of common sense on this website just like that of the Entergetic forum which is why those threads are in the waste basket.
I would really like to know if there is anyone on this site that has any common sense about them that really truly wants to learn how to build the Figuera device or is this all that i am talking to is brain dead trolls.

If there is any common sense out there please let me know that my time here is not a total waste of time.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Belfior on May 03, 2018, 11:28:29 AM
Well it kinda depends what you consider a waste of time? If you just want to rant with your Rage'O'Matic lever all the way to 11 and vent your frustration, then I guess it is time well spent.

If you actually want to convey some information to people, then I would suggest dropping the lever to lets say 8 and maybe not call everybody a stupid fuck?

I personally do not read any post with more than 3 words in full CAPS. Raving with CAPS just makes you look like you are 2 months away from a permanent mental hospital trip. Also if you are hostile than all you achieve is make people fight back and not take in the information you have. Just look at Joseph Westley Newman's latest videos and that is what they have shrunk this man into. A bitter old man that takes everybody as the enemy and just rages on. What a great way to make stop taking him seriously

So next time somebody says "Now I got my resistors placed in the G part. Took me all night" then just post "there are no resistors in part G" and go scream in thew back yard

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 05:04:04 PM
I did not call anyone that name but if the shoe fits wear it, that's entirely up to you.

I personally don't care if anyone here builds this device at all. this is one of the worst sites on the net for trying to convey information and it seems all people do is post blindly without reading and understanding the material presented or even doing the actual research.
it would seem after five year people would would pull their heads out of their backside but i guess reality just came crashing down as it seems i have been talking to bobble heads with the information bouncing off of the heads like that of a pinball machine.

I have many years of bench work that is backed by real Physics and Science not babbling baby blunder that seems to be the norm on this site. then on top off all the BS there is people that purposely disrupt the flow of information presented whether they are paid or not that have no desire to either learn or help the spread of the information.
if you or anyone on this site do not believe that free energy is possible then what the hell are you doing on this site in the first place other than disrupting the transfer of information.

everything was fine until the brain dead trolls came out of the wood works because to much real information about the Figuera device was presented.
I post on other sites aside from this one and this site is the only one that attracts the flies in which i have no patience for stupidity or blind assumption.
if people don't want to learn that is their prerogative  but why in hell do they have to disrupt threads being completely disrespectful to the people that actually want to learn.
see i can post without caps to your cap sensitive self. that last post i posted the only cap was INDUCTOR so what is your problem as i don't have one and don't need yours.
If someone tells you "YOUR WRONG" and you got angry.. you have an ego problem.. especially if the information presented is backed by Physics and science and can not be disputed.

have a good day.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 03, 2018, 05:21:43 PM
I have experimented with Figuera device and Hubbard device and done a lot of variations.

What appears to me is this.

Notwithstanding the abusive language employed by Mr. Marathonman there is indeed some correctness in what he is saying.

If we look closely at Figuera patent, the drawings are not accurate. They are quite deceptive.

If you look at the drawings of Howard Johnson magnetic motor patent they are very deceptive. The principle is valid and a device made as per Howard Johnson drawings would work.

The principle taught by Figuera is valid. Drawing is deceptive. Even if some one were to steal the data they would not be able to replicate it. This is how these very intelligent people have drawn their drawings.

The Figuera principle is that if you some how oscillate the magnetic field the coils surrounding the oscillated field would get induced electricity. But for this to be done easily we need permanent magnets and not soft iron core.

For this the best thing is not soft iron core that I used but a sort of permanent magnet core. If the permanent magnet is oscillated then the electricity must be induced in the coils surrounding the core.

I have checked the possibility of using NS-NS-NS poles when the output is very high as shown in the drawings of Figuera Patent ( there is always the mystery why there is a space between the primary coils and secondary and how it can be present either in opposite poles facing each other or identical poles facing each other- Gap cannot be present in either case) and identical poles when the output is minimum.

When the core is a common one the identical pole arrangement cancels out the magnetic field. Therefore the output is either nil or we need very large magnetic cores to get a minimum output.  May be about 5 to 8% of input. When opposite poles are used the output is very good but not COP>1 as shown in the Figuera patent drawing.

If we look carefully at Figuera Patent the drawings are very deceptive.

I do not agree that resistor array is not required. The resistor array is present in the coils of the primaries whether there is one added or not.

The primary coils can be easily arranged to make first core to be made up of thickest wire, second somewhat lesser in thickness and so on when a minimum amount of current would flow through the last core. We can put the same type of coils in the reverse order in the other primaries to make the same effect so that the secondary would be exposed to different current on either side always.

You do not need a part G to be present today. We need to oscillate the direct current from a battery for this arrangement to work and this is where the Part G  was used in Figueras times but today with Transistors it is a much easier task and Part G is not required. We would only need to use a 555 transistor to be able to oscillate the DC current going through a Mosfet. 

This arrangement will obviate the need for a resistor array and Part G as shown in drawings. But the variation of current must be present.

Again looking carefully at the drawings we do not find any core in the drawings of BuForn drawings in the Primaries. The core is present only in the secondaries.

I suspect that it is a permanent magnet core and the primaries are Air core. An iron core offers resistance to current and so would draw lesser current than an air core.  Even if there is no iron in the primaries the coils in the air core would make the induction to be present in the secondary permanent magnet core in the center and they have to oscillate the permanent magnet in the center only.  This would enable the gap to be present whether we use the identical pole arrangement or opposite pole arrangement.

If the permanent magnet core is present in the center irrespective of whether the poles used are opposite poles or identical poles the oscillation of the magnetic field would be present. When the coils on the secondary are subjected to time varying magnetic field they must get induced electricity. In my experience higher the voltage of the primary higher is the voltage of the secondary. Greater the number of turns of the secondary higher is the voltage. Higher the voltage of the secondary and greater the magnetic field strength higher is the amperage of secondary.  These are practical hands on observations.

Unfortunately when I started doing this some one in this thread indicated that I would get in to some problems and I'm doing this without realising it. The words turned out to be prophetic and I have avoided doing any thing now.

If other people are feeling distraught and struggling they must have done a lot of experimentation themselves. Somehow this is not a good field for health and finances. They must be actually complimented for their hard work. Unfortunately not all persons are succesful in spite of hard work. Figuera himself passed away after a short time of this device.

I have experimented with multiple versions of Figuera and Hubbard circuits and today I do not understand why some variations which should not work actually produce results.

Unfortunately my health has also come down. So I have no further interest in this field.  I'm a physical wreck today. Probably this is not a good field. So I'm not doing any thing further.  One of my relatives who did experiments with high energy fields died out of Lung cancer many years back. Another friend is diagnosed with early Cancer. I myself have got Asthma and TB and nervous problems and I have gone through a heart problem and a mild stroke problem. All within the last five years. Talking badly about people who are psychologically down after a lot of hard work is very easy. This needs to be avoided.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 03, 2018, 05:47:39 PM
HHMMmm

maybe you could start a topic for this .....health concerns
Not to clog this mans topic

I have often wondered....?

and there are other things we could include from research with Wifi and cell phones etc
etc

?

there is a health topic from Gary Vesperman somewhere [OLD Time OU man with many good contributions.


I Must say I did talk about this many times with researchers
and they always pointed to Tesla and the crazy things he did with his work

?

sorry for off topic [will try and find Gary's topic,  he sent new info and I have been meaning to update

respectfully
Chet K
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 06:05:56 PM
ramst; Lets not go there, your better than that.

Again i rest my case.
Blindly posting erroneous thought as if they were even tested on the bench let alone backed by Physics and science. that post is exactly my point i have stated for many year that Rswami post total BS that has not been proven on the bench nor has he EVER built any device other than the blunder of a transformer he calls the Figuers device that is a transformer not a generator.
He blindly post his twisted thoughts as if he was an accomplished scientist and builder which is a total scam job perpetrated by him to fool people into thinking he is one in which he is not. when has ANYONE actually seen a single picture of his work toward the Figuers device other than the hideously  monstrous device that is a transformer yet struts around like he is the Authority on the Figuers device. i literally laugh in your face.

If any person believes a single word that comes out of his pathological lying mouth is a complete fool and should have his head examined by a shrink.
I post real Physical proof about the Figuera device that has been verified on the bench not some Psycotic ramblings from a pathological liar and you should be barred from this web site for being a complete fraud.

RSWAMI IS A COMPLETE FRAUD.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 03, 2018, 06:15:15 PM
Mr. Marathonman

Please post pictures of your bench device and videos. Thanks for at least recognising I did some work and the device you consider to be transformer and not any thing else. At the least I put up pictures and gave measured readings.

Where is yours?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: d3x0r on May 03, 2018, 06:15:33 PM
The primary coils can be easily arranged to make first core to be made up of thickest wire, second somewhat lesser in thickness and so on when a minimum amount of current would flow through the last core. We can put the same type of coils in the reverse order in the other primaries to make the same effect so that the secondary would be exposed to different current on either side always.

You do not need a part G to be present today. We need to oscillate the direct current from a battery for this arrangement to work and this is where the Part G  was used in Figueras times but today with Transistors it is a much easier task and Part G is not required. We would only need to use a 555 transistor to be able to oscillate the DC current going through a Mosfet. 

This arrangement will obviate the need for a resistor array and Part G as shown in drawings. But the variation of current must be present.
Was alternatively going to propose multi-tap battery/capacitor cells switched for varying current; but that led to lots of work done by the ends and much less in the middle; which would be hard to overcome too...


I suspect that it is a permanent magnet core and the primaries are Air core. An iron core offers resistance to current and so would draw lesser current than an air core.  Even if there is no iron in the primaries the coils in the air core would make the induction to be present in the secondary permanent magnet core in the center and they have to oscillate the permanent magnet in the center only.  This would enable the gap to be present whether we use the identical pole arrangement or opposite pole arrangement.

If the permanent magnet core is present in the center irrespective of whether the poles used are opposite poles or identical poles the oscillation of the magnetic field would be present. When the coils on the secondary are subjected to time varying magnetic field they must get induced electricity. In my experience higher the voltage of the primary higher is the voltage of the secondary. Greater the number of turns of the secondary higher is the voltage. Higher the voltage of the secondary and greater the magnetic field strength higher is the amperage of secondary.  These are practical hands on observations.
Hans Coler device?  Coils wrapped on permanent magnets, I guess in theory mutually interfering with each other to cause generation... https://rimstar.org/sdenergy/coler/index.htm (https://rimstar.org/sdenergy/coler/index.htm)


----
@MM
(yes the following mentioned circuits have nothing to do with Figuera; before you decide to chase that bone)
a mazilla/royer circuit has an inductor to serve exactly that function; I would see that sort of current-drive inductor as needed to be common ( before whatever causes a current variation between N and S ) because any one of the target coils is going to either need to be restricted in flow or boosted in flow as its current changes.
The kacher drive used by akula/ruslan had a similar inductor on the common input; before any of the active parts of the circuit.


If a thing is > 1 COP I'm sure it can be > (1+loss through resistances) by a significant amount.


A coiled coil is more significantly the magnetic field of the smallest winding direction.  If you were able to make a very long, thin coil, and then coil that coil into a coil; the apparent current motion is greatly reduced, and any inductive amount of the resulting coil made from a coil as its filament is barely relevant.  so why wouldn't it just be a straight coil with muitiple taps? that's certainly easier to draw; instead of being drawn as a heater core?  And don't the words associated with the image also specify?


Anyhow this pdf summarizes both of your views.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/Figuera.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/Figuera.pdf) (555, and the uhh variac thing)


http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm)


*shrug* I don't even see anything that says G and not R.


---------
I did just see a educational video about quantum physics and waves... and water has been shown to interfere wave-like through 2 slits... but the motion of the wave isn't the particle itself, but a measureable result of a particle moving.  Consider that under the water is something more viscous and denser than water... call it molassas;  so the LHC slaming particles together at energy level X, can cause lots of ripples in the water, but don't distrub the underlaying molassas layer very much; but with higher energy; or constructive interferance of two other events, you can cause ripples to form in the molassas layer that you can see that sort of result happen... and that things in the universe are like this, but have many many layers like that that...  (probably need better/more words to actually convey that)
https://youtu.be/-4Mz4OGVC_U?t=42m7s (https://youtu.be/-4Mz4OGVC_U?t=42m7s)  (42:07 is near the start of that with some groundwork that leads up to the nessecity of the analogy)

The other thing someone said is that higher entropy is lower energy; so heating something is working in favor of the 2nd law of thermodynamics; although heat does sponteneously move to cold, which is working against entropy. 

And then of course; in a universal coordinate system ohms = per-seconds.  Or what was that other thing Eric Dollard said?  Voltage only happens because of resistance?  Because of current being stopped?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 06:33:13 PM
Yes, i see the intelligence level dropping like mad and wonder when the actual common sense will kick in. can someone page me when that happens.

and i quote; "To fix ideas is convenient to refer to the attached drawing which is no more than a sketch to understand the operation of the machine built using the principle outlined before"
and
" Let be “R” a resistance that is drawn in an elementary manner to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system"

I rest my case.
and how will you negate the potential drop of the rising primaries since in your so called version does not have a part G. i would also like to see the device running by it's self. yep that's what i thought, there is no device built of that nature because it can't and won't. so that paragraph is purely theoretical and has never been proven thus a figment of your imagination .

NN orientation has been proven by me with Science and Physics and can not be disputed by you or any other bobble head on this site.

bobble heads begat bobble heads.

so i guess the real information on the figuera device is over and now it is time for fantasy time and fairy tails. sorry i only deal with Physics and real truth.
maybe someday you Rswami will actually get your hands dirty and do actual research and testing on the bench that proves everything i have stated unlike your psycho babble you call research. and why do i need to show you anything as all you are going to do is run down to the patent office to try to get a patent. sorry you just don't have the intelligence to understand this device let alone build it.

I hope everyone has a good day and don't let that head bobble to much. neck injuries are not fun.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 03, 2018, 07:11:43 PM

it would seem after five year people would would pull their heads out of their backside but i guess reality just came crashing down as it seems i have been talking to bobble heads with the information bouncing off of the heads like that of a pinball machine.

Marathonman

So for  5 years you have been telling everyone how to do it but you still don't have a unit that works.  It appears the person full of horse manure is you.

By the way INDUCTORS DO NOT store a charge.  You have them mixed up with CAPACITORS.  Maybe it is YOU that should be applying REAL science instead of your BS theories.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 07:48:44 PM
"Again" more trolls and Shills come out of the wood work and you are no exception. running your mouth and NEVER building the device or any research to boot.
what is the most funniest part is i have never said inductors store a charge as that would be your stupidity troll. i have repeatedly stated that an inductor stores a magnetic field and when reduced releases that reduction of potential into the system.

ha, ha, ha, ha ! gotcha troll.
so maybe "YOU" need to pull  your head out of your backside troll as EVERYTHING i post has been verified and proven with real Science and Physics unlike you and your troll bobble head friend.
what a looser ! how much do you get paid troll and where is the information that proves i am wrong........ NOTHING that's what i thought.
all you people do is run your mouths with no scientific proof proving i was wrong. yet everything i have posted can be proven and replicated on the bench by anyone that has half a brain.
show me the proof i am wrong or shut the hell up, plain and simple troll. sorry your pathetic attempt to belittle me failed miserably and only succeeded  in proving your a troll that knows nothing about the Figuera device.
Bobble headed troll.
Now is there any thing else i can prove you wrong about and further embarrass your self in front of you bobble head troll friends. i am sure you will come up with something really stupid you being you.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 03, 2018, 09:12:09 PM
The scientific proof is right here on these pages.  After FIVE years you still don't have a device that works.  And all your followers at the Energetic Forum were never able to get it to work either like you said it would.  Anyone that knows anything about inductors knows that the tiny amount of inductance in your GRAND part G is not nearly enough inductance to control the current (SPELLED CORRECTLY!) through the primary coils.

Even UFO who tried very hard to get his device to work and built the part G like you kept insisting found that it worked just exactly like Bistander and I both said it would.  It did NOTHING to control the current through the coils.  Anyone with a little time to waste can easily go over to that forum which you have been banned from and read all about his and others attempts to build what you claimed worked.  They all failed to get the results you claimed they would get.

So where is your device?  We want to see pictures and videos of it working.  You can't produce them because after FIVE years you still don't have one that works like you claimed it would.  You are still full of horse manure just like you were FIVE years ago.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 03, 2018, 09:16:41 PM
@ MM
Watch out!  The history  seems to be repeated again.  Pls follow Belfior:s tip!

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 09:29:45 PM
I hate to tell you this troll but the test by netica was wrong as he only used 20 to 40 winds which was not near enough self inductance to control currant as I so found out. which again proves your are a  troll relying on other to do the research. even UFOP's attempt was a failure as he never had enough either. at least they tried which is more than i can say about you loosers'

see trolls begat trolls and all of my research tells me i am right and you trolls are completely wrong AS ALWAYS and has been for years. Dougs part G has around 100 winds and my new part G has 80 and it works very, very good unlike your pipe dreams.
NONE of you trolls have done the research and only want to argue because you are a trolls and avoid the truth.

PROVE me wrong trolls, wheres the proof i am wrong trolls.

Looser's begat looser's just like the Nati's you troll protect one another even if the information can be verified by yourselves you choose to remain ignorant to the truth.

The funny part about this whole situation is you ignorant trolls don't know what i have and the time will come soon when i will embarrass you fools to no end and i actually can't stop laughing right know at how you pathetic troll act and how ignorant you people really are.
My part G works very nice how about your, ops ! i forgot you don't have one.

LOOSERS !

Ha, ha, ha, ha !

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 09:45:47 PM
Sorry "ANT" i hate to spoil your pathetic attempt at a put down or the fact that history will not repeat it's self because my part G works very well indeed how about yours, OPS again ! you don't have one "ANT"

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 03, 2018, 11:21:20 PM
Link to the great success of MM's followers:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20619-figuera-device-part-g-continuum-serious-builders-only.html

Only read it if you want to learn how NOT to build the Figuera device.  Of course learning from other mistakes can be helpful also.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 03, 2018, 11:47:54 PM
Either that or stay hear and play with the Bi pedo bobble head trolls that couldn't do research if they tried.
Sorry looser like i said is that all you have is past failed attempts at building part G which you weren't apart of in the first place.

YOUR A LOOSER CIFTA get use to it so maybe you should crawl back to your Bi fiend and maybe he will lick your wounds.
or better yet you could cry on that looser Aaron and his fake RPX system that can't even penetrate the skin from being to low of power.
yes,  that is the reason i got booted was i was a direct threat to his cash cow. he then lets idiot like you go from thread to thread doing nothing but disrupt threads.
WHAT A LOOSER YOU HAVE BECOME.
mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the biggest Looser of them all. WELL, said the Mirror, that darn list is so long let me see now. there is Bistander, Cifta, Seehack, Hanon, pastromi, i mean Rswami, dardiamond, and the list goes on and on and on and on.
Trolls that are to unintelligent to do the research them selves but yet scream that cant be done.

YOU CAN'T STOP ME FROM POSTING THE TRUTH TROLL. FACE IT YOUR A LOOSER !
Mine works but you people are to stupid to figure it out. imagine that !
I am laughing in you face troll as you have NOTHING.

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 04, 2018, 02:27:41 AM
marathonman
I received a call a bit ago from a moderator about some of the things you have written lately .

I have to tell you, its not like it use to be here with threats and such.

zero tolerance policy....[a huge liability for Admin if allowed]

i can appreciate your zeal for your work,but I am not certain you will be here much longer ...the way this seems to be going ?
you may be OK with that ...or not ?

that's gonna be your call.

you are after all a guest in Stefan's house and we all need to follow his rules or move on.

respectfully
Chet K





Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2018, 04:28:26 AM
I do understand this and except the consequences of my action and i will defend myself to the last fight with these lousy trolls that are known through out the internet as trolls and shills yet are allowed to do what they do uncontrolled every single day and i an quite sick of it. these low life people run a muck disrespecting threads and people on a daily basis and yet have NO desire to build or even replicate the bench work that was conducted and proven backed by Physics and Science.
I mean no disrespect but where you and stefan at when these trolls came out of the wood works bad mouthing me with the intent to belittle and disgrace which they really failed very miserably. not to mention posting off the wall crap explicitly to disrupt the flow of information to the people that really want to learn
I post scientific FACTS of the Figuera device proven on the bench only to be jumped on by these uncontrollable heathans of men that could not even be considered men by any right.
so i leave the ball in your court Mr ramset and the moderator. do you deny the right of people wanting to learn or do you blindly support the trolls and shills that destroy threads on a daily basis.
so lets hear it am i gone or do you support the trolls and shills raping this web site that is known through out the internet as a troll haven. i have a home base that is quiet and i really don't need this BS if this is all it is about. all i ever wanted was to spread the real truth not lies and deceit like the troll and shill.

I AM MARATHONMAN
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: T-1000 on May 04, 2018, 10:35:38 AM
I've been watching this thread for a while. Lots of disrepect and insults going on. Question - why? This is not a way to communicate with builders here.

And I will also jump onto some things:

I post scientific FACTS of the Figuera device proven on the bench only to be jumped on by these uncontrollable heathans of men that could not even be considered men by any right.
Please show your working replication with self-runner? Then we have a information to share. If you do not have anything to show you are wasting your time with walls of text here.
And insulting forum members which I know myself here will not lead to any constructive discussion...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 04, 2018, 11:22:11 AM
Note
I see T1000 posted while I was plunking this reply
my below reply was already written and in no way reflects on T1000's comments above


marathonman

I have a different perspective I suppose .....  I am grateful for the opportunity to have access to this forum and have no problem following the rules here because I am a guest.... as are you .

Everyday disagreements which happen here all the time are usually settled with evidence of a claim ....

not with threats of doing physical harm to persons here ,or any kind of harm for that matter.
there is only one reason you are still here .

Stefan is unaware of your behavior.

this has nothing to do with your work and everything to do with the liability you bring to his house.
this behavior is against the law ,and such behavior comes under increasing scrutiny  everyday that goes by as laws are passed to enable prosecution in the cyber world and address the concerns of violence and other abuse.

Stefan chooses to forgo the need to hire lawyers ...[yes HE is liable in the eyes of the law ]
and chooses instead to make this a non issue for him [ZERO tolerance].

if this is your path forward [threats of violence and ??
 it is good you have a quiet place to go

Chet K
PS
honestly
you should already know this... it is written in the terms of service agreement you acknowledged and agreed to as part of your membership here.











Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2018, 02:59:22 PM
Have you noticed the troll and shill went scampering into the dark when you posted. imagine that ! starting the fire then running like cowards that they are.

Look, i will very much tone it down if they get the heck off my back, quite posting erroneous information, failed attempts,  total unproven lies and some that doesn't pertain to the subject line.
Every thing i post can be verified by anyone with half a brain so i see no problem on my side. what i do see is the problem with trolls and shills that have NO PROOF i am wrong because they find it easier to run there mouths than doing the actual research.

I call everyone out on this troll web site to prove me wrong on the bench, i mean actual research from them not someone else failed attempt at replication.
again i will tone it way down but i want to see PROVEN bench work from the ney sayers that i am wrong in which i am not and can't wait to see their faces from their failed attempt to prove me wrong.

My bench work tells me i am right, what does yours tell you if you even did it in the first place. so tell me T-1000 have you performed any test that i have done and some i have posted here that can be done by you at your home that prove the actions of the NN facing electromagnet and the actual reason part G does what it does proven with Science and Physics, probably NOT. knowing how the device works is what i am trying to convey to  people but you only seem to be focusing on the final build. get off your butts and learn what i have been posting then and only then will you be ready for what i plan to present. until then try learning or get off my back. PLEASE !

Regards.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 04, 2018, 03:43:33 PM
marathonman
in defense of readers here [and the many builders ]

there are tens of thousands of words written in this thread ....maybe Zillions over the years
 too much to absorb or comprehend as a whole

you suggest
Quote
 can be done by you at your home that prove the actions of the NN facing electromagnet and the actual reason part G does what it does
end quote
the above quote needs perspective....

is there a test/schematic which builders here can do at their home which will show an anomaly heretofore unknown or misunderstood??

can you post this NOW ?

Chet
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2018, 05:27:01 PM
Mr ramset;

  I really have to ask you do you really need a schematic to do the NN magnet test that proves the validity of the Figuera device.??? do you need a schematic to perform self inductance test that prove the validity of part G.??? do you need a schematic to realize when an inductor is reduced it releases that reduced potential into the system.??? do you need a schematic to realize when an electromagnet when reduced it releases that reduced potential into the system.
do you need a schematic to realize all these reduced potential causes an amplification to the rising electromagnets in part G which is an inductor.???

do you need a schematic to realize the magnetic field of an inductor causes a reduction of currant flow and the FACT that any change in the system that changes the ratio of magnetic field to currant will reduce or increase the currant flow.???
do you need a schematic to realize a resistor can not perform not one of these function except reduce the potential in the form of heat.????

Get real,
or do you need a schematic for that also.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 04, 2018, 06:10:39 PM
MM
 Need a schematic to understand the connection between part G and S-N coils. See the orange loop in  pic.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 04, 2018, 06:22:38 PM
Again I plunked while another posted a question [sorry it takes me so long]

marathonman

I did not expect this reply , what may be self evident to you after many years of work
may not be self evident to readers.

if you have no schematic to show any anomalous behavior [gain mechanism] or method ?

I do see how persons would take issue ,[without a goal post or benchmark  to demonstrate your point.

It is quite easy to point to science or physics in a generic fashion while insulting a person for not seeing the "self evident" gain mechanism
it places all the emphasis on the reader to evaluate what you are not saying .

it is entirely different to actually make a claim and bring focus [scrutiny] to your claim thru
request for empirical testing or replication ,  showing the methods you use to achieve this..

it does make a person vulnerable to scrutiny ... however it is really mandatory in science.

With your generic [ "See science /physics "] approach which leaves the onus on the ignorant reader [me in this case] ??

I could see how such an approach to teaching would perpetuate this thread
forever
or until persons just leave it alone .

sorry for the intrusion.

Chet

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2018, 07:15:20 PM
Sead; Actually that which is in the orange ring is actually sliding adjustments as to balance the primaries from peak to peak. minor oversite that is it nothing more nothing less.

ramset i do appreciate the honesty and the calmness in your posts. all i am trying to do is get people to perform the tests themselves so they can understand where i am coming from instead of being lead by a leash or screaming i am wrong. these are suppose to be grown men that should be able to verify exactly what i have been saying from my test bench research. if they can't perform simple tests what are they doing here in the first place, i thought it was to learn no perfect your shouting skills.

you can't learn if you don't do test on the bench plain and simple so if you or anyone else for that matter thinks i am just going to hand over all my hard work to these people, not hardly.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 04, 2018, 08:34:02 PM
OK,

Let's approach this from a purely technical standpoint.  I agree that opposing north changing fields can induce a current into a coil.  That is just perfectly standard transformer action.  Is there an advantage in using opposing fields instead of complementary fields?  It appears that may also be true but has not been proven conclusively.

My real problem with the claims as presented is the idea that a changing inductor can control a DC current.  All scientific tests and formulas show this is a false claim.  The formula for inductive reactance is XL = 2 pi f L which means the inductive reactance is equal to 2 times pi times the frequency times the inductance.  Since the frequency of a DC source is 0 then the inductive reactance is also zero.  No amount of fantasy thinking can change that.

If MM was actually serious about learning instead of only claiming he is the only one who sees this correctly he could do the following tests.  He could measure the actual inductance of his part G every 10 degrees of rotation of the brushes and then using the above formula he could plot a graph of the actual inductive reactance.  Of course that would be a real waste of time because the graph is going to be a straight line on the zero value.  It can't be anything else because of the 0 frequency of the DC source.

Now if he really wants to understand why he may be getting some good results with his part G he could repeat the test but measure the resistance value of each position.  Then using simple ohm's law he could calculate the amount of current going through his part G for each position of the brushes.

As a refresher here is ohm's law.  E=IR  Which means that voltage equals the current times the resistance.  This simple formula can be rearranged to find any value not known if you know the other two.  For instance if you know the voltage and resistance which is probably what MM can find with this simple test then you can calculate the current.  The formula for that is I = E/R.

From this formula you can also see that if you raise the current to a higher level but keep the resistance the same then the voltage drop across the resistance will go higher.  So even a relatively small resistance change can control a large current.  This is what is happening in MM's part G. He has already stated he now has 80 turns of wire on his part G.  It is the resistance of those turns of wire that is controlling his current through his primary coils.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: T-1000 on May 04, 2018, 08:55:29 PM
What is missed out in all those speculations is how we are changing magnetic field in regards to the pickup induction coil.

In transformers we just flip/flop polarities without changing their position in 3D space.
In alternators we physically move magnetic polarities in 3D space. And we have problem right there with kinetic power required to sustain magnetic field of electromagnet and power generated. And as soon there is first power generated by induction the battery can be disconnected.

Why we use kinetic power to do the action in first place? By the Faraday's law of induction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction) - "The induced electromotive force in any closed circuit is equal to the negative of the time rate of change of the magnetic flux (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_flux) enclosed by the circuit." it does not matter which method is chosen to do this action. The position of magnetic field in 3D space can be also altered by having multiple electromagnets with coils arrangement where each coil represents offset position to the pickup coil. And while starting with energising coil X then coil X+coil X2 we already move the center of magnetic poles in 3D space. And this is what Figuera patents are all about. No kinetic force is actually needed to do same type of induction.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 04, 2018, 09:49:02 PM
Cifta;

 I do agree with what you say in the first half of the post but totally disagree with the second half. the resistance is NOT controlling the currant flow. my wire in my part G has very, very low resistance yet works just fine, why, because of self inductance that controls currant flow NOT RESISTANCE.
and i quote again; "Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."
can people understand this statement and what does it implicate.

this is what the positive brush does. as it rotates it is magnetically linking or unlinking to the circuit and it is this that causes the magnetic field to change that produces the reverse EMF to the original currant flow. in the AC device the currant up or down causes the reaction,  in the DC circuit the circuit increasing or decreasing in size is what causes the currant change. so as the brush rotate so does the ratio of magnetic flux to currant which is the reverse EMF to the original currant flow.

I don't see where this can be so complicated. AC currant change causes the resistance to currant flow but when using DC something has to change in order to get currant reduction. this is why the rotating brush is used as it is either adding or subtracting windings to each side of the brush inductor. and this is the alteration to the circuit as stated from above. and this is FACT not fiction.

T-1000;

  Sorry there is no speculation and if someone would of read my posts i explain in detail as to why and how the primaries are not only inducing the secondary into polarization but the relative motion of the sweeping action from the primaries induces motion into the secondaries. similar to that of a squirrel cage motor the secondaries produce an opposing field and it is this field that is shoved side to side across the Electric field.
I am not sure what post it is but i go into more detail then here.
If you have found another way to induce the secondaries well i am happy for you but that would not be in the scope of this thread as we are dealing with the Figuera device alone.

and thanks for the sane posts.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 05, 2018, 10:09:57 AM
Sead; Actually that which is in the orange ring is actually sliding adjustments as to balance the primaries from peak to peak. minor oversite that is it nothing more nothing less.
Marathonman

Why a double twisted? wire to each side of the G-part? How are these connected to the  G and S, N components? And you have both + and - brushes now rotating on the G-part. Not the figuera style, OR?

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 05, 2018, 02:14:25 PM
Seaad;

  I actually do apologize for the blunder as i was getting the point across of the brushes and the magnetic fields associated with them and only added more confusion in my attempt to convey my point and for that i am sorry. those twisted wires are actually not there as that is the continuous wind on part G. those connection shown are actually in the middle of part G as you are winding it and will not be seen.
the adjustable connectors below are advisable to allow the adjustment of the balancing of the primaries. keeping things adjustable will help in the final tweeking process.
flipping the tab allows the connector to be used in a much better way allowing it to be slid on the wire for adjustments. the first pic is the connector stock while the second pic has the tab flipped allowing it to be slid on the wire for adjustment of the primaries balance.

the second brush is the secondary output looped back to part G through a commutator allowing the negative and positive sides to remain their sign. this allows part G to be the power supply once the starting power is removed. in essence part G becomes the amplifier of the signal as all released potential of the reducing side is combined in part G giving an amplification to the rising primary.
all magnetic fields when reduced releases that reduced potential into the system and this is a Physical fact not fiction and can not be disputed by no one.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 06, 2018, 12:45:51 AM
Quote;
"marathonman

"Thank you" seems inadequate. What is missing from most forums is someone who is unselfish enough to share ALL their research and discoveries for the betterment of mankind. On this site there is none of that, only like minded people who want to see man progress.  I have had this patent saved for a lot of years and understood the basics of how it works, but thanks to your work i may someday be able to make it work. Thank you again.

Tony" end quote.

I get messages like this all the time from people that are not only interested in this device but want to learn how to build it. i share all my work freely and hide nothing.
but on this site all there seems to be is people who want to argue and belittle people i guess to make them selves feel better from something that is lacking in their life, i don't know.

all you have to do is read and understand what has been posted then verify that by yourself.

This is a quote from Aubrey Scoons that replicated Royal Rife's work;

"DON’T BE FOOLED!
Complexity does not equal credibility. Just the opposite in fact. Anyone who has genuine insight will be able to explain to you in simple language exactly what they mean and you will then be able to verify it with known scientific fact. If they can’t.....well, what do you think?"

This is why i choose to explain things in detail but at a level everyone can understand. read what that said again  "and you will then be able to verify it with known scientific fact."

THAT MEANS YOU PEOPLE. if you don't take the time to research and conduct test to verify what is been said then what are you doing here in the first place other than causing havoc and disrupting threads.

this as far as i can tell is suppose to be a place to learn not sharpen your battle skills.
we live in a perpetual motion machine but since we are on the inside looking out we can not see this just like the fish in the water inside looking out.

if perpetual motion is not possible then wouldn't it be awkward if the world stop spinning tomorrow. not likely as it will continue billions of years after we are gone.


Marathonman
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 06, 2018, 07:17:07 PM
Studying inductors , Self-Inductance, Inductive Reactance,  how, why they work and the actual reasons for the currant reduction will help in understanding part G. also understanding how boost converters work will also help in your journey. once you learn the currant travels in the same direction it was traveling in the first place you will them be open to the possibilities of an static inductor being used in an active state kept in an active state from the constant brush rotation. all reduced magnetic potentials are combined in part G giving rise to amplification to the rising primary electromagnet and rising side of part G.
these are just the consequences of induction from the laws of induction laid down by Michael Faraday and the rules from Heinrich Lenz.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 06, 2018, 07:57:55 PM
History two years back:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-37.html#post292732

Which one is valid today? 
 1:st pic. CW and CCW , 2:nd pic  All windings CW - OR !- CCW , 3:rd pic (MM:s today)  All windings CW -OR- CCW

Regards  Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 07, 2018, 12:36:23 AM
Seaad;
  It's really time to grow up fella and smell the roses right in front of your face. i mean really,  your total attack to discredit not only looks so bad on your part but also defines you as what kind of a person you really are. your pathetic attempts be shame and belittle me only digs the hole for your coffin even further. as the obvious conclusion to the lack of your intellect is being the graphs were used just in the attempt to get the point across as to the reference i was conveying and even that the first pic was Never used by me ever nor was the winding direction of each thus your sad attempt was a complete failure. you being you,  attempt to belittle in which the lack of intelligence and proper reasoning prevents you from doing so thus drops you beneath me and most other people.

what i would suggest is trying to learn something in an attempt to raise that pea brain you call intelligence to something other than a size of pea and the third grade level of manhood which is lacking profusely there of.

so on that note i would suggest you take your unintelligent self back to school and actually learn something that is actually useful like that of science and Physics other than a professional idiot and pot smoker attempting to belittle or shame a person that is at a level not attainable from the likes of your kind.
you are a disgrace to manhood but you already know this and a total fraud of Science and Physics from the total lack of.
but the most funny part of your total lack of manhood is knowing the real direction of the winding i know as per my research but because  your total lack of understanding of self induction , real Science and Physics you have not a clue just resort to pathetic ramblings like a child in a mans body.
i almost feel sorry for you ......NOT ! you are like water on a ducks back, it always flows to his back side and off it's body. so what does this tell the readers of this thread..... hummm let see...... your a total fraud and a waste of a human being that is trying to prevent a free energy device from being sent to the world for replication. who do YOU work for.

Matathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 07, 2018, 03:42:21 AM
Seaad;
 your a total fraud and a waste of a human being that is trying to prevent a free energy device from being sent to the world for replication. who do YOU work for.
Matathonman

First; I'm not working at all. I'm just retired. Free as a bird.
Second; My inductance meter don't lye. Others,  members have presented math/ formula proof here also.

And I should be very happy if  I ,  We,  could come up with a free energy unit here to liberate the world from 'big oil' among others.

Just answer my question. Which pic is valid above. So we know how to wind the part G  toroid.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 07, 2018, 05:34:19 AM
Quote;
"Second; My inductance meter don't lye. Others,  members have presented math/ formula proof here also."

also complete lie, no person on this or any website has proven me wrong in any way shape or form other than failed attempts at replication in which you were not a part of so there for that is here say.

not one single person took the time to listen to the one person that knew about this device years ago and that is your fault not mine because i did and very well i might add. imagine that !

Seaad please drop the BS as i know you are not a good person and have a track record there of. you are not to be trusted at all by anyone, especially the readers of this thread.

I tell you what, wind a core clock wise and put the positive on the left and negative on the right then record your findings of which pole is on the left then wind it counter clock wise with the same, then record your your findings.
congratulations you just figured out which way to wind part G which will give you NN at the positive brush. if you can't i have a new pretty coloring set i can draw some really nice pictures for you with pop ups for your enjoyment. you remember the ones in kindergarten don't you.

if you truly want to learn drop your bs, read and listen. i have not changed my tune in five years so what does that say about my character and what does that say about yours.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 07, 2018, 02:50:20 PM
Why people are over complicating things is beyond me.
it's rather simple since we are using DC we have to have something changing like AC does to get a currant reduction in the system. since self induction is the ratio of magnetic flux to currant how are we to get the rise and fall of magnetic field. we change the circuit on a continuous basis with a constant moving brush.
as the brush circles around the circuit what it is doing is changing the length of the circuit on either side of the brush. one side is decreasing while the other side is increasing in length so as it rotates it is constantly changing the ratio of magnetic flux to the amount of currant flowing in the system.
the side that is increasing in length obviously is adding winding's that are magnetically linking to the system changing the ratio of magnetic flux to currant so as the magnetic flux to currant increases the amount of currant flow is decreased and thus releases that reduction of currant into the system. since any reduction in currant in an inductor will cause that reduction to be released into the system counteraction the potential drop of the rising side.
since we have multiple potential sources releasing potential into the system at the same time the combine to amplify the potential to the rising side.

thus the opposite is happening in the rising side which is storing into the magnetic field only to release that potential when reduced to feed the rising side again in an never ending cycle every half cycle.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 07, 2018, 04:08:05 PM

I'm not an expert but consider this:- once the current is flowing the self-inductance is not working on it so we have to stop current and restart ?
- the change in inductance required to get low frequency change like 50Hz for DC current is tremendous ?
- resistance of current paths should be in every case similar in each sweep action on G part or we would have simply wasting heat and limiting current by resistance
- why not just use square wave pulses instead ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 07, 2018, 04:52:47 PM
My previous post stated in the most descriptive manor i can conceive yet you still can't understand it.... WOW!

Finally something we can agree on your not an expert or even close.

Totally wrong answer. the self inductance does not stop because of the constant rotation of the brush.  I REPEAT,  the self inductance does not stop because of the constant rotation of the brush.   this changes the ratio of flux to the currant on a continuous basis.
 man do you people know anything about inductance. if the contact was stationary then your assessment would be correct but it isn't. it is dynamically changing as the brush rotates.

Quote from Wikipedia;
"Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."

what part of this statement do you people not understand?????? the brush rotating changing the length of the inductor on both sides of the brush will change the ratio of flux to the amount of currant. this is the alteration to the circuit as the brush rotates changing the ratio of flux to the amount of currant which is the reverse EMF to the original currant flow.

Plain English all day long but if i need to translate to another language for you people to understand i will. good god i have been harping this very thing for five years and still no one gets it. it's like talking to the wall on this web site. and you wonder why Doug quit posting to you people, i was the only one that listened to the wisdom or has sense enough to listen.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 07, 2018, 08:08:01 PM
The entire inception of the Figuera device was a journey of at least 10 plusyears. Figuera being unhappy with the present day !900) Generators that were called dynamos in those days that had massive cogging effects which were the result of the Lenz Law of attraction between the stator and the rotor attractive force when leaving register (alignment).

his 1902 patent was a rotating version  that was sold to the bankers then later he revised his patent to be non moving (1908). in the process of realizing that two opposing electromagnets compresses the magnetic field to that of a standard high intensity field generator. he then devised a way to vary them in an orderly fashion to induce motion into the secondary all while reducing the currant draw on them and using that reduction of magnetic field in a positive way to make the device self sustaining. with the use of a dynamic inductor he was able to use that magnetic fields in the core to reduce the currant in an orderly linear fashion and reuse that reduced magnetic field in the core of part G combined with the other reduced fields to give rise of amplification to the rising primaries.

in this process the currant was able to be split to two feeds allowing both sets of primary array's to be controlled independently but in absolute unison. each side of the brush's inductor either adding or subtracting winding's that magnetically link or unlink to the system which will cause the magnetic field collision point to be swept back and forth over the space occupied by the secondary.

once the secondaries are polarized and currant begins to flow in the secondaries and the load a second field forms in the secondaries that opposes the original currant flow (Lenz Law)  and it is this field that the opposing primary fields push or rather sweep back and forth over the space occupied by the secondary giving the appearance or allusion of motion to the electric field causing currant to flow in the secondary and the load.

if there is more currant draw on the secondary from a larger load the resistance in that part of the external system will drop and more currant will flow thus returning more currant to the beginning where the secondaries are connected to part G which will give rise to more potential to the electromagnets thus boosting the output to the secondaries and the load.
just like a standard generator does only stationary.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2018, 12:06:02 AM
This is a challenge to get people that are not use to a technology up to par and understand it's implications.
Taking a defensive position as always ? It is how you people cope with unknown and unresolved issues in new technology that just happens to be 110 years old.
Just because You don't understand it doesn't mean that it is NOT CORRECT...it just means you lack the brain power, intellect and power of reasoning to think outside the box understanding it's operating conditions. this device operates in accordance with all known applicable laws set forth by the founding fathers of Physics and Science and violates not one.

so my suggestion to all that don't understand it's working conditions and parameters should either learn how this device operates or quit posting on this thread entirely as you are nothing but a waste of this threads time, the readers time and my time.

post somewhere else if you can't understand it or don't take the time to learn. remaining completely ignorant is of course your prerogative just not my cup of tea.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: d3x0r on May 08, 2018, 11:49:28 AM
This is a challenge to get people that are not use to a technology up to par and understand it's implications.
Taking a defensive position as always ? It is how you people cope with unknown and unresolved issues in new technology that just happens to be 110 years old.
Just because You don't understand it doesn't mean that it is NOT CORRECT...it just means you lack the brain power, intellect and power of reasoning to think outside the box understanding it's operating conditions. this device operates in accordance with all known applicable laws set forth by the founding fathers of Physics and Science and violates not one.

so my suggestion to all that don't understand it's working conditions and parameters should either learn how this device operates or quit posting on this thread entirely as you are nothing but a waste of this threads time, the readers time and my time.

post somewhere else if you can't understand it or don't take the time to learn. remaining completely ignorant is of course your prerogative just not my cup of tea.

Marathonman
I hesitate to mention this guy; he certainly doesn't need your attitude...




[/size]
 i have a home base that is quiet and i really don't need this BS if this is all it is about.


I AM MARATHONMAN
[/size]
You're the only one perceiving and being triggered by 'BS'; and although you are trying to trigger everyone else,  that's not a very good excuse to be defamatory and derogatory to everyone else.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zebMvmVZyIA&t=0s
He's even got a span of resistor wire :)


I know; everything I post anywhere is off-topic so nyah.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2018, 03:09:44 PM
Just like i have been saying some just don't have what it takes to do research and conduct test thus have to rely on OTHER people doing the work for you.
I love the heater coil, it would be great in the winter time for heating the whole household up.
noting ones lack of intelligence is not defamatory is is the truth and on this site it seems to be the par for the course. why am i the way i am because most of the people that run their mouths have been the same one's from the start so after so many years it get really old.

so tell me brainiac how is the resistor array going to recycle the reduction of magnetic fields and use them in a positive way to off set the potential drop of the rising side.
Sorry charlie it is NOT and is Physically impossible. try proving it yourself instead of relying on other peoples work which seems to be the norm on this web side.

you people are unbelievable and totally lack what it takes to do research i guess that will prove everything i has stated. of course the easier road is denying it and running of the mouth.
I feel sorry for all of you.... NOT !

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 08, 2018, 04:06:27 PM
Hello MM,

Let's try again to have a technical discussion about your part G.  You are claiming you part G can change the current flow through it by changing the flux through the core.  I am sorry but I have not seen any evidence that that claim is true.  The reason I doubt it is because the flux through your part G doesn't really change.  No matter where the brush is the current is divided between the two primary coils.  You have insisted several times that neither coil is ever really turned all the way off.  So that means there must be current going through both coils all the time.  Sometimes most of the current is going through one coil and sometimes most is going through the other coil.  But either way there is current always flowing through all the turns of your part G.  And those currents will always add up to the same amount of current.  So the flux is NOT changing from the difference in current flow if your claim is correct about always having both coils energized.

Instead of constantly posting bashing posts about others not understanding what you are claiming why not post a short video to prove what you say is true?  All you would need to show is a scope connected across one of your primary coils while part G is rotating.  The scope should clearly show a changing voltage being applied to your primary coil.

It should be clear to you by now that there are apparently no believers of your claims on this forum.  Show us the video and then some, like myself, might actually start to consider your claims as having some validity.  Claims with nothing to back them up are always going to be viewed with suspicion.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2018, 05:17:59 PM
Wow Cifta being civil, now i am impressed.
again your assumption is entirely incorrect as always. even though Netica did not have enough winding's on his part G it still worked and you know this but now you are claiming it doesn't work at all which pegs you as a complete liar and a fraud. all you and your kind do is blow smoke up peoples back side every single day and i laugh at you people because you don't fool me.
your total lack of knowledge in many areas shows quite well but the real fact is you people don't want to learn otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation at all.

it's like if i had a lighter in my pocket and traveled back to the thirteenth century, the first time i struck it i would be pegged as using sourcery  thus would be beheaded. people even got beheaded for thinking the world was round. well you people remind me of these people completely ignorant to the facts but remain so as it is the safest option.

the only thing in your entire statement that is true is the fact that currant is always flowing through both of them but the rest falls flat on the floor.
If you people can't  or refuse to wrap your brain around a simple object and see it's implications then there is no video in the world that will change your completely closed minds.
I'm sorry it is your loss in not understanding this device as there is many out there that think otherwise that are not so closed minded as this group.

i will make a video in the future proving every one of you trolls wrong and i cant wait to see you all choke on your pride and misconceptions. i will rather enjoy destroying all of you in one fell swoop, a big pile of burnt pride and misconception. ha, ha, ha, ha!

PS. I'll start with pretty color pop-ups for your enjoyment and finish with pretty colored lights being changed in intensity in complete unison. i hope you and your troll friends enjoy the show.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: d3x0r on May 08, 2018, 06:51:10 PM
so tell me brainiac how is the resistor array going to recycle the reduction of magnetic fields and use them in a positive way to off set the potential drop of the rising side.

Marathonman

First, if the content of the message was in english it might make cents.

recycle?  In what way is a magnetic field ever recycled?  collapse it back into current and then back into a field?  maybe something to do with resonance?  The Figuera devices use no resonance.

I suppose 'reduction' is 'production' ?

And the last part 'to off set the potential drop of the rising side.' 
E = I * R;  a change in R always changes E and/or I. 
But anyhow the magnetic fields are entirly relative to current and not voltage; so potential variation isn't really the issue anyway.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 08, 2018, 07:19:42 PM
marathonman
in defense of readers here [and the many builders ]

Is there a test/schematic which builders here can do at their home which will show an anomaly heretofore unknown or misunderstood??

Can you post this NOW ?

Chet

I'm sure MM can't make a  Figuera schematic with coil winding instructions and so forth. Which works.
He just want to act as a god, above us all.

We can meet at "energeticforum" without disturbance because MM is banned there (??): http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera.html?highlight=Re-Inventing

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2018, 07:54:01 PM
ANT; See i rest my case. all you lower individuals have is an attempt that did not have enough winds just like i  have admitted in the first place. you are a complete fool ANT and have no business posting on any site from your lack of.
My present part G using the posts i have so stated work just fine no matter what you post or don't agree with, TO BAD.

When i post the video of the perfectly working part G you ANTS will get squashed.  OMG am i laughing at the sheer desperation of you troll in a massive attempt to discredit in which you are failing quite miserably.
I see the complete desperation in your action and i am still laughing at all of you, ha, ha, ha, ha !

Yes go back to the failed EF ANT with all you trolls as you will never get a free energy device running because of the lack of intelligence and proper reasoning skills.

you clowns spend more time crying, kicking and screaming like little children instead of actually doing the test that will prove the validity of my post with Physics and Science.
come one your failed attacks only make me laugh that much harder. i am digging the pit for all your burnt bodies after i prove every one of you trolls wrong. thus i will laugh and spit in your faces.
you people are NOTHING but trash and should be banned for life from ANY web site.

I think it is time to take out the trash don't you think.

Ramset pm me and i will set your mind at ease and prove once and for all this ANT is a complete fool that hides behind everyone else as his lack of manhood dictates he does.

you people are not only disgusting but utter fools dressed in purple and not worth ANY ONES TIME so there for you people are a total waste of time i am through with all you bums. i hope you people rot in hell.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 08, 2018, 08:06:26 PM
MM
Just words no schematic as I predicted!
Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 08, 2018, 08:26:59 PM
Well MM,

Twice now I have tried to engage you in a civil discussion about the technical aspects of your claims.  Both times you have answered with babble that makes no sense.  Then you proceed to attack anyone that dares to question your claims.  Those tactics are very clearly the normal tactics of a bully that actually has nothing to show.

You say you are done here  because no one has the intelligence to appreciate your great wisdom.  Well please hurry and leave.  And don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out.  You have proven your worth here and it amounts to zero.

Bye, bye!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 08, 2018, 09:00:49 PM
marathonman

just for clarity
here we have many many builders
for every one you see posting
probably one hundred clearing a spot on the bench to see how you answer and respond to questions for help...

to say that there are hundreds of thousands of hours of collective build experience
viewing the threads here ??

probably an understatement

look at the views at Stefan's forum and compare to any other FE forum on the Net
look at the reads here in this thread

some topics here can run more reads in a day than some forums get in a year

with that comes the highest percentage of builders too...
waiting ....

and to be clear there are  EE's scientists and all manner of experienced persons looking to build [I believe you threw a few out of here already]

I hope this topic does not go the way of others here that chose your path

even a simple experiment to show  an anomalous [or overlooked] gain mechanism for discussion would be nice?

But I am not one of these builders in this topic [I do know Carroll and
Arne are builders tho ...and probably hundreds of others who chose not to get yelled at here and are waiting for something tangible to try.... to show these overlooked methods.

respectfully
Chet K
Ps
if you are done here please say so...

 as this topic has persons wishing to discuss schematics and build ideas and not wanting fights...









Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 08, 2018, 09:30:48 PM
Not wanting fights, are you kidding me, really now.
Show me the Figuera builders on this site and i'll show you a plastic flamingo that flies and fart fire.
completely misinformed people on this site.

To all the readers of this site. what information has any one of these trolls showed you that was actually real repeatable on the bench, nothing  actually nothing at all and never will be as they are paid trolls to discredit and misinform all working for the big energy companies.

now if you understand what i have plainly posted in detail then you can verify EVERYTHING i have said on the bench. if you want real information and want to follow real builders not loud mouth trolls and shills please come to Hyiq and NEVER have to put up with a troll or Shill again as all pegged troll and Shills will be barred, iP addresses logged, blocked and turned in to the authorities.

free energy awaits,  the next step is up to you not the paid trolls. it's time to take control of your lives not be lead by corporate thugs that want NOTHING to do better than take over your lives.

Good day trolls.

Ramset; i will be in touch with you and will discuss the device in further detail only in a pm as i am through with these fools,  as for the rest i think you know what my opinion is on that.
EE's scientists on this site, now that's really funny.

For i am Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 08, 2018, 09:52:08 PM
------
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: tak22 on May 09, 2018, 04:02:09 AM
At least he's not taking any secrets with him.  :)

For I am the tak
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 09, 2018, 03:10:12 PM
That is only because you people are to stupid to realize it.
DUH !
BY, BY DUMB TROLLS. HA, HA, HA, HA !
MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 09, 2018, 09:03:33 PM

This is only because we people started asking one after another to show your device in operation including your self runner. Not because of any thing else.

Bye Bye Many thanks for leaving. We will now discuss with focus
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 10, 2018, 04:02:05 PM
Of course  as i am leaving the mentally handicapped troll has to chime in that doesn't know the difference between a transformer and a generator. hows that piece of junk of a transformer coming pastromi ? radiated anyone lately.
another third grade intelligent level being in a real mans world that wouldn't know how the Figuera device operates if it fell out of the sky and crushed your face. no harm done as there was no brains to start with.
another ANT troll on this forum.
discuss with focus,  OMG i am laughing so hard right now, the bind leading the handicapped. ha, ha, ha, ha, ha ! now that's funny.
MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 11, 2018, 03:39:15 PM
MARATHONMAN LIFE IS NOT EASY, THE REASON , ETERNAL LIFE IS NOT FOR FREE.
FORGIVE ME FOR BEING WHATEVER, BUT WE NEED TO ENDEAVOR TO PERSEVERE.
NOT ALL OF US ARE TROLLS. AS FOR ME I LEARNT A LOT FROM ONE OF YOUR UTUBE
VIDEO.. SO PLEASE WHEN THE TOUGH SHIT KEEP HAPPENING THE TOUGH LIKE YOU
KEEP ON GOING ON,, A LITTLE NOTHING UTUBE OF MINE, JUST FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_EmpBso3Fw&t=53s
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 11, 2018, 04:09:52 PM
Marathonman  it's only part G which makes confusion for me.  Example of working this part with a simple circuit would explain all.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 11, 2018, 04:40:56 PM
PART G IS SIMULATING THE GRADUAL INCREMENT OF A SINE WAVE.
BUT YOU CAN DO IT DIFFERENTLY AND COME UP WITH THE SAME OR BETTER
RESULT.. REMEMBER WHEN MR FIGUERA DID HIS GREAT WORK HE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS
TO ALL THESE MARVELOUS ELECTRONICS THAT WE HAVE TODAY.. SO JUST TRY TO THINK AT
A DIFFERENT ANGLE THE ANSWER IS WITHIN YOU,,
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 12, 2018, 02:59:14 AM
UTUBE FOR YOUR RESEARCH..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=notgCACOQr4&t=388s
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 12, 2018, 06:50:30 AM
I AM NOT TRYING TO LEAD YOU ASTRAY HERE, BUT THROWING A FEW DIFFERENT IDEAS..NOT TRYING TO
IMPRESS OR BOAST. JUST FOR ALL TO LEARN.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 12, 2018, 02:26:25 PM
seychelles

You got me totally astray with a pic extremely difficult to comprehend. Especially with NIB;s in the Figuera thread. (single pole??) I don't even think NIB;s was invented when Figuera lived.
But  can you make us a tutorial of the function in the contraption please, so we can understand what we see and judge if it is relevat and fits in here or maybe make us grasp something new.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 13, 2018, 01:00:34 AM
And i see another one that can't follow a patent. trying to improve the patent with unproven ideas is a waste of time and should be better spent understanding the real device not pipe dream ideas.
how may years are you people going to spend on the illusion of improving the Figuera device when you don't even understand the original in the first place.
it is like watching a group of dogs all chasing their tails at the same time banging their heads against each other in hope to catch their tail.

when will you people ever learn simplicity.

MM
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 14, 2018, 02:35:56 AM
I have been away from this forum for over a year because of bickering and trolls, but have pursued my interest in the Figuera generator. There are are 3 documents describing my PWM version of this noteworthy device. I hope you find them useful. Because the files are large, they will be posted separately.

I have available one extra main exciter PC board that is tested and functional. I am willing to give it to someone who is interested in pursuing this version of the generator, who has the funds to build the magnetic portion, and is willing to see it through to the end. My version of the magnetic portion will cost several thousand dollars, and a smaller one will not be much less. I would appreciate feedback and full disclosure about your efforts as well.

I also have two unpopulated PC boards for the exciter that need a few modifications to correct a design flaw and implement upgrades. These are available for the asking. I am willing to share the schematic and PC board drawings that are shown in the attachments, but they cannot be uploaded here as the file types are not supported.  If you find the schematic verbiage too small to read well, just expand the schematics by clicking on the upper left corner and dragging them.

A project of this nature will have errors. If you spot any, I would appreciate your bringing them to my attention. Once before, I presented the design spreadsheet and was told that the magnetic design was too big, but was not told why or given a way to correct it. I checked the math and found no errors or design flaws so I stayed with it. I don't mind being corrected, but if you see a flaw or a design error, please provide a solution for the error when replying. I don't need personal evaluations, but I do want to get this right, and will be most appreciative of your guidance and assistance. There are some very smart people on this forum and I ask for your input.

Best regards
Sam6

 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 14, 2018, 02:37:56 AM
Here is the second file.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 14, 2018, 02:39:32 AM
Here i the third file.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: sparkmen on May 14, 2018, 03:05:58 AM
sam, I can only thank you for sharing all the info, quite remarkable thing and so few times seen around ..
how is magnetic circuit intended?

rgds,
mb
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on May 14, 2018, 06:16:18 PM
Sam, have you started the magnetics yet?
Garry
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 14, 2018, 08:47:24 PM
when using an inductor in an AC situation the currant change causes the change in flux thus the change in C emf (lenz Law)(reluctance) to the original currant flow. i hope you know this as this is basic inductor theory.
so if we use DC that is steady currant something has to change to get the magnetic flux to change in intensity in order to get currant reduction. so think how can you get the circuit to change to change the flux intensity??

And i quote; "Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."

so by adding a rotating positive brush the circuit is being altered on a continuous basis. by adding more winding to one side of the brush as it rotates, this alteration is changing the magnetic flux to currant ratio increasing the magnetic flux which is the opposition to the original currant flow, C emf reducing currant flow. while on the other side of the brush the alteration to the circuit is decreasing in size thus the ratio of magnetic field (flux) to currant  is decreasing which will cause an increase in currant flow.

what Figuera did was take a static inductor and used it as an active device which blows everyone's mind all to hell. by doing this it allows the magnetic field in the inductor when reduced, releases the reduced part of the field into the system to off set the potential drop of the rising side of the system.
it is a physics fact that all magnetic fields when raised will cause a potential drop across the conductor so if one was using basically two sets of primaries one increasing and one decreasing, one set will be releasing some potential into the system and one will be storing into the magnetic field causing a potential drop across that conductor. so if you have two sources of potential being released into the system that will off set the potential drop of the rising side through amplification. the secondary is added to the mix to give the added amplification to the rising side and replace the losses occurred through heat, core and wire losses.

i hope you can understand what i has just conveyed to you. read it a few times if you have to, it will eventually sink in, or not. all Physics facts not fiction. just because you may disagree with what is said does NOT change the truth, Physics are Physics and can NOT be disputed only ignored.
argue all you want but facts are facts backed by Physics not pipe dreams and what if's.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 14, 2018, 11:03:24 PM
Sparkmen -  You are welcome. I intend to start the magnetic portion when I have the time and cash on hand to do the entire thing.

Iflewmyown  - See above.

Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 14, 2018, 11:45:30 PM
Marathonman

Thank you for your observations, especially the one that says that in the original Figuera device some regeneration may occur and thus reduce losses. This is different from an electronic exciter where the two exciter circuits are not physically connected, and direct energy transfer back and forth between them is not present. Since the energy is being drawn from the environment and costs nothing, a small loss is unimportant so long as it does not become excessive or cause functional problems.

Since the electronic circuit does not employ resistors or other devices driven by a DC voltage, those losses are not present. So which device has the greater loses? I don't know, and can do nothing about it anyway. Moot point.
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 15, 2018, 12:43:40 AM
Sam6;

 Thank you for being civil by the way.
i hate to be the bearer of bad news but electronic circuitry can not store and release the needed potential of the reducing side to amplify the potential to the rising side. sorry but this will not take place and therefore the device will be no better than a standard transformer if you have to supply the full amount of potential to the primaries every time. it does not matter if the losses are reduced using electronics if you have to supply all the power all the time to them, so what is the point.

part G's inductive qualities are there for a purpose, when reduced,  it releases that reduced potential from part G, the primaries and the added secondary to give amplification to the rising side of the system.

electronics can't do this in any way shape or form so the least you can do is a mix of the two. having a core and electronics to mimic the rotation of the brush otherwise you are stuck with a transformer.
sorry but this is hard fact reality check and can not be avoided.

regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 15, 2018, 05:04:42 PM
The most unfortunate thing about research into free energy devices and unknowns is there is very little information in some areas of this device so it is rather difficult to gather information from the web. the inductor for instance, the only information on inductors has it as a static device and definitely not in an active position. there are no universities around the world that does the research regarding this case scenario so one has to either use what little information there is out there plus do the research and bench work to prove it's usage in the active position of currant reduction and releasing of energies into the system.

the quote; "Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current."

all other information on the web describes the inductor in a static position but this very statement above was the very clue that proves it's validity and possibilities of using the inductor in an active position in the circuit.

any alteration to the circuit that changes the ratio of magnetic field (C-EMF) to currant will in fact change the currant flow which is a Physics fact not fiction or hearsay. so on that very statement i chose to get to work on the bench and verify that currant reduction can take place which to my surprise worked like a charm. simple test with a moving positive brush with 12 volt bulbs have been performed myself on my bench and by hanon,  that i guided him with instruction on what to do and it worked like a charm with both bulbs rising and falling in opposition in complete unison. he used a variac with DC and twisted the knob causing self inductance to rise and fall. this is fact not fiction.

in the very near future i will make a video showing this vary thing i just stated and prove to you people once and for all that everything i have posted on this thread is in fact very true and can be verified by everyone that proves the Physics involved in an active inductor can and will cause currant reduction with the positive brush movement in a complete orderly fashion.

the facts of an inductor storing and releasing potential into the system are all over the net backed by Physics so no one can dispute that in any way shape or form. this is the Physics behind a boost converter thus can not be argued with or disputed.

Part G uses self inductance to control currant flow and not one single person on this tread can prove it otherwise unless you just choose to blatantly ignore the truth and Physics involved which it seems all have taken the later route which is bonkers in my book.

ignoring the truth does not make the truth go away, it just make you ignorant to the facts and Physics involved in this device. if you so choose to ignore the facts that is your problem not mine, i just so happen to choose knowledge over ignorance.

regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 15, 2018, 07:03:47 PM
Marathonman

In post 4334 you said "i hate to be the bearer of bad news but electronic circuitry can not store and release the needed potential of the reducing side to amplify the potential to the rising side. sorry but this will not take place and therefore the device will be no better than a standard transformer if you have to supply the full amount of potential to the primaries every time. it does not matter if the losses are reduced using electronics if you have to supply all the power all the time to them, so what is the point"

You made valid points. I agree that there is no transfer of energy back and forth in an electronic excited circuit with no direct connection, and that power is applied to the exciters all the time, causing continuous losses; but I question the comment about it being no better than a transformer for the reasons shown below.

I'm sure you will agree that complementary, sinusoidal, varying DC voltages applied to the exciter coils create two electromagnets with corresponding, complementary, sinusoidal, varying magnetic fields. When like poles of those electromagnets face each other, their magnetic fields collide at some point between them that is determined by the relative strengths of the two fields, and when their relative strengths are changed, the collision point moves toward the weaker pole. By using sinusoidal excitation, that collision point is made to move back and forth between the two poles as determined by the frequency of the excitation.

In earlier posts, you have correctly pointed out that the combined strength of two like, opposing fields at their collision point is additive. When that collision point moves past a coil of wire placed between the electromagnet poles, a generator is formed due to the relative movement of the collision point and the coil. This involves flux cutting, not flux linking. The output capacity of the generator is determined by the strength of the magnetic field, the frequency of field movement reversals, and the coil properties.

The field strength required for a 23 KW generator can be created with an expenditure of approximately 240 watts per exciter coil. Those calculations are shown in my design spreadsheet which was posted here earlier. The calculations are based on proven generator design principles. You are correct in observing that none of this energy is recovered. But the capacity of the ou tput coil is about 50 times as much as the energy used to drive the exciter electromagnets, which is much better than a transformer which is based on flux linking, not flux cutting.

If you can show where these calculations are wrong, I will appreciate your pointing out the specific errors and how to correct them before I spend several thousand dollars constructing a flop. You shall have done me a huge favor.

Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 15, 2018, 08:12:20 PM
Sam;
  I see you are on your toes more so than others and have done a good amount of homework. you also have clearly understood what i have posted unlike others here but you are forgetting that generators ramp up to their present output with the feed back loop to the exciters over time. if the full power is ramped up instantly more than likely you are going to burn something up in this process through plowing it to full potential. your approach is not feasible as generators ramp up over time and this will be the downfall of your device as the power it takes instantly can only be generated over time not instantly. this is not even considering the fact that standard generators and the Figuera device electromagnets once at full potential the currant is reduced to that of just the IR2 losses to maintain that field once this happens that potential can be used to make more output. understanding the standard generator functions will help you immensely.
i hope you understand this and by the way nice to hear from you Sam, it is good to have you here and as you read i have come along way.

regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 15, 2018, 08:22:30 PM

In earlier posts, you have correctly pointed out that the combined strength of two like, opposing fields at their collision point is additive. When that collision point moves past a coil of wire placed between the electromagnet poles, a generator is formed due to the relative movement of the collision point and the coil. This involves flux cutting, not flux linking. The output capacity of the generator is determined by the strength of the magnetic field, the frequency of field movement reversals, and the coil properties.

The field strength required for a 23 KW generator can be created with an expenditure of approximately 240 watts per exciter coil. Those calculations are shown in my design spreadsheet which was posted here earlier. The calculations are based on proven generator design principles. You are correct in observing that none of this energy is recovered. But the capacity of the ou tput coil is about 50 times as much as the energy used to drive the exciter electromagnets, which is much better than a transformer which is based on flux linking, not flux cutting.

If you can show where these calculations are wrong, I will appreciate your pointing out the specific errors and how to correct them before I spend several thousand dollars constructing a flop. You shall have done me a huge favor.

Sam6

Hi Sam6,

You are saying your design is based on proven generator design.  Yet no generator that I am aware of can produce 23 KW from two 240 watt coils.  Have you actually tested your design on even a small scale?  I am especially interested in any tests that have shown any gain at all when using opposing magnetic fields.  I have been experimenting lately with both opposing and aiding magnetic fields on opposite ends of a secondary coil.  I have not been able to see any gain whatsoever.  I believe another poster on this thread has also verified that he found no gain from that configuration.  If I remember correctly he posted that information on another forum.  I am driving my coils with sinusoidal DC power.  In other words neither coil is ever turned all the way off.  I can get output that way, but it is much lower than my input power.

Almost anything can be proven on paper.  It is in the real world where those proofs get tested.  I am sincerely interested in any testing you have done in this area.  The claims of the followers of Figuera have been floating around on these types of forums for years.  But as far as I know NO ONE has built a successful replication that has actually been verified.  I would like to see some proof from someone that there is some validity to those claims.

As you are new to this forum I will say for your benefit that I do NOT believer MM's claims about part G.  But I do have a pretty open mind about whether or not the Figuera device actually works.

Sincerely and respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 15, 2018, 08:35:22 PM
And that would be entirely correct,  no generator will work like that ever. it does so over time.
as for Part G, you will soon see an eye opener i promise even better than the one hanon or Netica used which by the way WORKED just not enough winding's. again your non-beliefs will not change facts just like i said in 4335.

regards

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 15, 2018, 11:23:02 PM
Citfa and Marathonman

As stated in my earlier posting, the design functions of the main exciter board and power supplies were verified. I also stated that the exciter portion of the project was planned, but not constructed. That is still true. I have the parts on hand, but do not have the backplane for mounting the devices in the enclosure. It is on back order but should be here soon.

Obviously, I have none NO testing yet. The waveforms I will use are complementary, sinusoidal, DC PWM at 25 KHz. That carrier frequency is subject to change. I know that some inverters use about 5 KHz for motor control, and some DC motor controls use about 15 KHz, and others use 100 KHz. I have no idea what frequency will turn out to be most appropriate, or if it makes any difference at all, but one must start somewhere.

As for the small excitation current producing a large output, you must remember that moving a magnetic field where there is no physical movement and no mechanical force on the generator parts due to Lenz's law requires very little power compared to that required by a conventional generator which must overcome the large retarding effect of Lenz's law due to the generator having to drive the conductors through the magnetic field. The static magnetic forces on the cores are proportional to the square of the flux lines times the area, but because there is no movement, no work is done.

Citfa, there is a difference between proven generator design and proven generator design principals. The design equations hold true in conventional generator designs as proven by a gazillion generators pumping out juice on a daily basis. The Figuera device uses the principles in a completely different scenario where no physical motion is involved, thus side-stepping Lenz's law. However, the equations describing how to produce a magnetic field are unaltered, and the equations describing how a magnetic field of a given strength moving across a given coil at a given frequency are unaltered. That is the implication of the statement that proven design principals are used. There is no magic here and no deception was intended.

Citfa, the test results you reported are disappointing because my tests will be similar to yours and the results may prove to be similar. As for gradual startup, the only load is the exciter coils at initial power-up from an external AC source. I don't forsee any problems. I could be wrong, but we'll see.

When I started this project, my goal was to have a functional unit or find why the Figuera device was never widely exploited. I defined success as achieving either result. If my tests have the same result as yours, then that's the end of it unless something else crops up.

So far, I've learned a lot  and enjoyed the experience. I spent about fifty years working on controls; guided missiles in the military and in industry working as a plant electrical engineer, a drives specialist, and doing specialty control work for my own company for over thirty years. Once I went over 15 years without a repeat, and in my career, only had three repeats. Everything I did worked as designed. A couple of times I was given the wrong target to shoot at, but the equipment worked as designed....and I got paid for it too. Along the way I got a good feel for what could work.

I would not have embarked on this project if I didn't have a sound technical reason to do so. That reason is that the collision point of two like but opposing fields passing over a motionless coil produces a generator effect, and the equations I found showed that the energy expended to produce that moving collision point is far less than the output from the motionless coil.

If the equations are wrong, then this project is toast, and I will be sadder but wiser. Until they are proven wrong, or I see that I have misapplied them, I'm going to keep hacking away at it.

Best regards
Sam6

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 15, 2018, 11:33:08 PM
MM
I forgot to mention that the PWM chips can be ramped up if that proves necessary. I did not enable that function in the first iteration of the PC boards.
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 15, 2018, 11:41:17 PM
Hi Sam6,

Thanks for your reply.  I also worked in industry for many years.  Most of that time was troubleshooting CNC machine tools.  Of course that involved from time to time the drive motor circuits also.  I understand what you are saying.  I was fortunate enough to get to spend about 5 years in an R and D department.  That was really a lot of fun.  Designing and working on electrical and electronic test equipment for the Navy was a real neat job.

I sincerely hope that your test results turn out better than mine did.  I would really like to see this device work.  If yours works then maybe I can figure out why mine didn't.  I'll see if I can find the info from the other person that also did not have any success getting any more out than he put in.  Maybe what he did will give you some ideas for trying something different than what he did.

Take care,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 16, 2018, 12:28:11 AM
Do not underestimate the pressures between your primaries. your total is 340.4 lbs per square inch vibrating back and forth and can chop fingers off immediately if not secured.
another thing is the frequency of your core, i am sure you are aware standard material can't handle that high of a frequency so i am curious as to what the material for your primaries and secondary is.???

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 16, 2018, 02:17:37 PM
MM

I am aware that core materials have frequency limitations, but am also aware that non grain oriented electrical steel used in motors has operated successfully with PWM signals in the KHz range. I plan to use M6 grain oriented silicon steel that is .014" thick. For experiments, I'll use something I can get my hands on to prove the principle, as the losses in non grain oriented steel, or even iron, are not nearly as large as the anticipated gain.....assuming this works.

There's a whole lot of stuff I don't know, and look forward to seeing what the experiments will bring.

BTW, I see that I used the wrong form of "principle" a couple of times in my earlier post. :P

Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 16, 2018, 03:18:23 PM
Very true about the electrical steel. we are also in a non existent field that has no information anywhere other that what mr D, i or we have proved on the bench. the inductor of part G has everyone so crossed up like no tomorrow just because it is used outside of present day usage of dogma taught science and Physics that uses it as a static device unlike Figuera that brought it to an active device.
it is quite amazing how closed minded people are but not just that, they are not willing to step out of the box and test it. it is simple, wind a coil on a core and test the inductance with a positive brush, move the contact and test again. guess what the inductance just changed, so if it just changed why would you or any one else not think it can't do it on a continuous basis as the brush rotates is beyond me.

self inductance is the magnetic linking to the circuit, the ratio of Flux (magnetic field)  per the amount of currant. if one was to increase the magnetic field with the same amount of currant guess what, the currant is reduced. so does the opposite if the magnetic field is reduced the ratio of magnetic field is reduced also thus more currant will flow. just like i have stated so many times it is constantly changing the ratio of flux (magnetic field) to the amount of currant which is self inductance,  the reverse emf to the original currant flow. the only thing part G does is change this ratio on a continuous basis and this is what has everyone so crossed up even though it has been proven a few time they still deny it took place.
Part G is no doubt in my mind an inductor that changes the ratio of magnetic field per the amount of currant as the positive brush contact rotates.
whether anyone chooses to believe this or not still does not change the facts and Physics involved.

sounds like you have a good plan Sam, i just hope you have success with those electronics and good to have you here.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 16, 2018, 05:34:31 PM
MM

Please! Can you make a  Figuera schematic with coil winding instructions for the part G with two bruches + and - ( the feed back option) and the N, S coils.
You mentioned that you used 80 turns on a toroid? How big? What ferrite material.  How many mHenrys between N and S? (or similar). How many mHenrys in the N,S coils and core type?

And show me whitch pic (first or second)  I should use when I'm starting to wind my part G.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 16, 2018, 06:39:49 PM
Seaad;

 the top pic i have no clue as to origin, the bottom pic was just used for illustration purposes only to convey a point.
my part G consists of three toroidal core #70 from Bridgeport magnetic's resined together, Doug used a 100 amp alternator core wrapped over to make uniform then wound with as close as i can figure 100 winds.
the adjustable brackets i posted last week or so are used to move the contacts around to get balance of the primaries peak to peak as they have to be the same or induction will fall to that of the rising electromagnet.
i am also experiencing the balancing issue that was reported to me from the same and my core is not on my premises at the moment as i have a friend working on the balancing issue for me so i can not take the readings at this time.
i am also working on another core type that is closed core but have just received it yesterday and have not wound it or finished my custom adjustable brush holder.

as for the specifics on MHenrys of  either cores i do not have final specs on them as that was not my specific goal at the time as i was generally concentrating on getting the proper magnetic field pressures of my primaries and not saturating either. i can post those findings in the future when i get to the point where i have time, i have no problem with that and will share all i have.

as for the winding of part G i am using CW on the ring core started in the middle of the core not the ends where the slider contacts are,  to give me N><N at the brush that keeps both sides of the brush inductor separate. the C core i will be winding it is also CW to get the same N><N at the brush. yes i have two types of Part G cores i am using which one will be most easy to balance then the other. the C core i have started with 80 winds also and will remove some if need be for proper balancing. my core are in fact deeper than that of Mr Doug so therefore i will require less winding's to get the proper currant reduction.

i have spent most of my time benching everything that was presented to me proving the validity of and i am putting the system together as we speak to in the very near future you will have all that i have acquired in my research as i have never held anything back, well em mostly.

when i get the new core wound i plan on making a video with two 100 watt bulbs being raised and lowered in complete unison as the brush rotates completely defusing all doubt of the validity of part G and it's inductive origin.
i will enjoy that immensely.
I have a little  more at Hyiq but fore warned any trouble and it's cut ville for the problem maker as Chris and the crew will not stand for it. i simply love it.
i had no schematic for which to go by only information that was passed to me . life doesn't always give you a schematic in which to go by so just think of what i had to do, the research and bench work to get to where i am now, i am seeing the fruit of my labor finally.

Marathonman




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 16, 2018, 09:59:59 PM
Building to unknown specs.
Another thing i would like to talk about is deciding on the amount of output. once the amount of output has been decided for your project that output can be divided between how ever many core you want. it takes 14.8 lbs pressure PSI for every kilowatt of power at around 33,000 line PSI so that can be divided between how ever many cores or pressure you feel comfortable in dealing with.

hypothetically lets say you want 15 kilowatts output. divide that by how ever many secondary cores you want or the pressures you feel comfortable in dealing with. lets say we want 12 core sets, 15 kilowatts divided by 12 cores is 1250 watts per secondary core.

so the output has been decided at 15 kilowatts. that equals 222 lbs pressure between the primaries. if it was one set then the size of the cores would be very huge plus the pressure is quite high between them and could potentially be dangerous. that pressure can be divided between many other core with a pressure you feel comfortable in dealing with. so we have 12 core sets, that is 222 divided by 12 = 18.5 lbs pressure per core set between the primaries. since each primary is accountable for half of that output each primary needs to have 9.25 lbs of force. that is per square inch.

always remember to start with the secondary and work your way back. the secondary core size must be able to handle the output you are trying to achieve. so from the above scenario each secondary is accountable for 1250 watts. and remember it must be able to handle this with no distortion (saturation)  so leave a little headroom. then you match the primary to the secondary output you need. so as you see from above the primaries in order to achieve a 1250 watt output from the secondary they needs to have 9.25 lbs force from each primary.

also remember the primaries are not controlling the currant flow, that is the job of part G so they are to be would specifically as electromagnets which is NOT according to present day teaching. the secondary on the other hand IS wound according to present day teachings as any standard present day generator output would be.

another thing to remember is the size of the wire in part G. since part G will become the power supply once the starting power is removed, it must be able to handle the power requirements with ease and the less resistance the better as less resistance equates to less losses. with any power supply the sum of all the lower parts add up to the final load plus headroom. part G is no exception and this must be considered when building. please also remember the core of part G must be able to handle the load plus headroom. each half of the system considered separately.

the secondaries can be series or paralleled to attain the desired currant and voltage you are so seeking. also the use of laminated core material is highly recommended. since there will be considerable amount of mathematical calculation when dealing with foreign core material,  it is best to use material that has known output for the amount of material used. manufacture can usually provide these calculation to ease this burden which equates to a specific output per lb of core material. the secondaries can then be calculated from these figures then the primaries from that.

always leave headroom in all core as saturation is the enemy and will kill the device..
these are just general guidelines to go by as each built will be slightly different and final specs will be up to the builder.



Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 16, 2018, 11:10:23 PM
Seaad;

 the top pic i have no clue as to origin, the bottom pic was just used for illustration purposes only to convey a point.
my part G consists of three toroidal core #70 from Bridgeport magnetic's resined together,

when i get the new core wound i plan on making a video with two 100 watt bulbs being raised and lowered in complete unison as the brush rotates completely defusing all doubt of the validity of part G and it's inductive origin.
i will enjoy that immensely.
I have a little  more at Hyiq but fore warned any trouble and it's cut ville for the problem maker as Chris and the crew will not stand for it. i simply love it.
i had no schematic for which to go by only information that was passed to me . life doesn't always give you a schematic in which to go by so just think of what i had to do, the research and bench work to get to where i am now, i am seeing the fruit of my labor finally.

Marathonman

MM you are a master person to avoid a simple question.
 I am asking if the winding of the part G toroid core is continuous  (second pic). Or if the winding in the first half of the toroid is in One Direction and then the rest in the opposite direction. My two pics.

Your answes are;
'' the top pic i have no clue as to origin,
the bottom pic was just used for illustration purposes only to convey a point.''


My understanding of that is ; not a valid pic or winding principle AND not a valid pic or winding principle.

I estimates that your winding principle you are goingng to use is;

 A clockwise (CW) continous winding around the whole toroid untill the start an stop ends of the wire meets. The both ends will then be electrically connected with each other.

You only have to answer; YES, right wiring principle  or NO, not right wiring principle to that.

And the core you are going touse is the same as in the pic.


" I had no schematic for which to go by only information that was passed to me . life doesn't always give you a schematic in which to go by so just think of what i had to do, the research and bench work to get to where i am now "

Where are you now?? Does your unit work today with OU??

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2018, 12:09:39 AM
Don't start pulling your BS on me seaad, as you never asked me if the winding is continuous or i just plain missed it, please next time you ask a question try being a little more descriptive in your question if you are able to do so. otherwise i will turn my back on you and your belittle BS games. start acting like a researcher and you will get a little more respect from people.
as for the next question which is the same yes part G one of them is a continuous wind which is the one mr. Doug built. my new core is not.
yes i am using the same core just rewound with 80 winds CW.
and as for your last question i have not completed the last rewind of one primary as i switches to three winds of two layers each after testing and have not completed. this will give me all connection at the end of the primaries for ease of connection and a stronger magnetic field.
so no my unit is not ou as yet as i am not quite finished.
not everyone on this world has money to burn and must fit within a budget which i am no exception. if i has a few thousand dollars i of course would be finished.
research to prove is cheap but actual build cost very much when living in a city where no scrap parts are around.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2018, 04:00:42 PM
The whole reason i rewound my primaries was two reasons, 1.  the fact that they were shy in the lbs pressure produced even with the Tesla style of winding 2. there was an accident moving the equipment to a larger facility other than my tiny place i have to work. the box with the cores was dropped smashing one core all to hell and mangling my brush holder. on a limited budget this was devastating so it has taken a few months to get back up to par. my income tax return helped a little but i still had bills to pay. as we all know life will be life and can not be avoided.
i was getting fairly good results with part G but the balancing issue of the ring type core was plaguing me and i could not get the exact balance of the peak to peak of the primaries. the balancing is sill being worked on along with a new core design to eliminate this plaguing issue. with the new design i have the brush holder is adjustable to dial in the exact window of highs and lows of currant per the secondary to primary ratio. part G as an inductor works exactly as planned even though many are against it.
fortunately i have Physics on my side and part G works just fine so i need not listen to people that just don't know. that is just the follies in new territory of unproven tech that just so happens to be 110 years old. i stepped into this journey with a completely open mind and man have i learned a lot unlike a select few that choose to remain closed minded.
Figuera was a sheer genius and i wish people would open their minds to a new reality that just very well might change our way of life and at a bare minimum you just might learn something new.
PS. here is a pic of one of my primaries after the box drop. my suggestion to everyone is not let anyone touch your device period especially if they are a klutz. i had to completely rebuild them from the bobbins up. as painful as it was i had no choice but to keep chugging along.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2018, 05:03:58 PM
Part G ring core does in fact work, i repeat, part G ring core does work but the balancing of the primaries are a complete pain in the back side consisting of shutting the system off and moving the adjustable connectors i posted a while back a little at a time tightening everything then turning the system back on and testing. it is a royal pain in the backside so i decided to take another approach along with the ring type core. i now will have two types of part G core for testing purposes.
before mouths and accusation start flying i just want to say that the ring type does work , i just wanted to try to see if i can build part G that is easier to wind and easier to balance for replication purposes.
on that note i ordered a special C core of my own design a month back and just received that has a large flat surface which to wind on. i will be using square magnet wire as to reduce the amount of copper losses associated with a high speed precision ground buffed surface for the brush to rotate on. the core is a closed core which is a must in the Figuera device as there are to much flux losses associated with an open core and thus will not work in the Figuera device.
the C will be much easier to wind and adjust according to my present understanding and experience of part G thus i foresee no additional problems associated with this design. after i have wound the C i can attach the other C to close the core then begin testing.
the only reason i am doing this is i am trying to come up with a way for easier replication of part G and no other reason but that. this will be tested right along with the ring core that has already proven it's self on the bench.

here is a pic of my new core, lets just hope it was money well spent. and of course a good shot of man hands that are good tools to work with. ha, ha, ha, ha!


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2018, 05:27:14 PM
One thing i do not like with the C Core is the edges have no chamfer like i said i wanted so either i have to grind them down or maybe use 1/2 round molding. either way i do need to get rid of those sharp edges as that will pierce the insulation on the wire. i only have to do it to the upper piece on both sides so that will not take that long.

also the Core is around 1500 va so if i add core sets to increase the output i can do so with no ill effects which will still leave head room in part G. if at any time the core saturates it will kill the device so keep that in mind, that goes for the secondary also.

all in all i am very happy how the core turned out but i will be much happier when it is on the bench. the shop almost used the wrong dimensions so just as a precaution i sent them a pic of their own core from their web site with the proper dim's and thank god i did as the dude had a few dim's switched around which i would of went ballistic upon site of. not good considering what i paid for it. when i opened the box i was grinning from ear to ear.

yes the square wire will be awesome for this project which will allow me to grind perfectly flat with very little copper losses. like i said i am using a slow curing epoxy on the core then after winding i will tip it over and put a heavy weight on it then cure over night. then hit with the high speed buffer to precision flatness. i really foresee no complication in these steps.

after that i can set the size of my reduction window in my adjustable brush holder to get the proper width of the primary sweeping action over the secondary. if the reduction is to much but with proper window size all i have to do is take off some winding's on the ends of the core and i will be perfect. this is much easier than what i had to go through with the ring type part G to get balance of the peak of both primaries.

the video i plan on making will be both cores with 100 watt bulbs connected to both sides one increasing and one decreasing in complete unison to completely stifle all those who disbelieve part G is not an inductor.

i sooooo look forward to that.

after almost 6 long years of research, testing and benching i am finally coming to the apex of my labor thus picking the Fruit from the seeds planted by Figuera with the help of Mr. Doug for which i am forever grateful.
some mistakes were made in the past but hey, that is just part of research and the learning process. without mistakes the truth will never be known and all one has to do is take that first step outside of ones box.
 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 17, 2018, 08:07:11 PM
marathonman

you mentioned you need bits and pieces or parts which might be recycled from discarded items?but your city did not have these available [some have rules about touching curbside items]?perhaps you could make a wish list of these parts ?there are plenty of fellows here who would send  items they have no need of ,or even persons reading here who would keep an eye open for such an item to donate?
just a thought

respectfully
Chet
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 17, 2018, 08:53:54 PM
while i do appreciate your though which is genuinely nice gesture, i have been down that road before only to have not so nice people accusing me of misrepresenting myself in which i was definitely not so i unfortunately have to decline that offer.

when you live in the crappy world we live in today where corporate and personal greed is at it's highest where people are reduced to nothing but a dollar sign,  those more misfortunate than i am seem to get to the scraps before i do so i am left with what i can get. i know it sounds crazy but i rely on my self only that way i have no one to put the blame on but me. a hard lesson i just received two months ago was a mechanic said he can fix my truck but 1,ooo dollars and two months later all i have to show for it is a 2500 lb paper weight and loosing my job in the process. try getting back on your feet with a bicycle and tell me how that went. it is a slow process but i am doing it as i was taught not to give up EVER. people in Japan can do it then so can i.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 18, 2018, 12:16:39 AM
I really have to add after reading a few older posts people still don't grasp the concept of a generator. a generator does not produce an unlimited supply of energies to waste as you wish, sorry generators do no operate like that. generator do not generate they bring energy in from the surrounding environment or the dirac sea if you wish (Aether).

Gravity has a three dimensional plain of existence and when exposed to a two dimensional magnetic field it cancels out two of the Gravitational dimensions leaving one Gravitational dimension which causes currant to flow from the Aether (counter space) into the generator system.(space)

now back on track, the inducing side of a generator is a closed system to say. since the residual magnetization in the core is polarized it automatically will start producing electrical energies in the secondary (pulled from the Aether) which is feed back to the exciters from the AVR to produce more energy until it is producing enough to handle the exciters and the external load combined.  once the exciter fields are at maximum the the draw of the exciters are reduced to that of just the IR2 losses to maintain said field.  when the secondary load increases the resistance in the external circuit will drop causing more currant to flow which sends more currant to the AVR then to the exciters to produce more energy until the secondary is producing enough to handle the exciters and the load.

the exciting side of the system is a closed system except for the feed back from the secondaries through the AVR to the exciters. at no time is the power from the exciting system used in the secondary system as that is also a closed system. the secondary and the load is a closed system and once the currant is flowing in the system no other power is drawn from the dirac sea (Aether) because the currant in the system is circulated around the this closed system being pushed around by the interactions of the dirac sea (Aether) from the magnetic fields created from the primaries. if the load is steady the draw on the dirac sea (Aether) is reduced to the losses in the secondary closed system and the pressure to maintain the load.
the currant in both systems is circulated around each system and just the feed back from the secondary system is feed to the primary exciting system to replace the IR2 losses or when the load is increased.

no power is ever used up in any of man's systems, it is only circulated throughout  each but the losses created by heat is non recoverable which has to be replaced.

the cogging effect is then the stator and the rotor's attraction forces (lenz Law) become so strong and the motor boggs down to overcome this effects.

now applying that to your Figuera replication and see what you can come up with in terms of a self runner.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 18, 2018, 04:40:48 AM
I think i seem to have stumbled across the problem everyone is having from reading past posts. in the test performed by myself and electrocute on another forum with magnets we, as in both of us,  attained double the voltage from one magnet alone (post 4206) while another person got diddly squat. why did that person get nothing out of his test??? because of the opposing pressure between the magnets was not high enough for any good type of output. if that person had moved his opposing magnets closer together increasing the pressure and compressing the field lines he would have registered double the output.
this is the very reason why so many on this site are having so much problems attaining an output with electromagnets. This has been posted by me SOOOO many times it is not funny. " if the pressure between the electromagnets are not maintained the inductance will drop and the output will fall to that of the rising electromagnet."
what this means is both primaries are responsible for half the output of the secondary so in order to maintain the output the pressure between the primaries has to be at a certain level and if not there will be no output or very little.
the higher the pressure between the electromagnets the higher the output and this is of course reducing one electromagnet while the other is increasing. this will cause the electric fields to be in coherency which is positive and additive.
for 1 kilowatt of secondary output a pressure of 14.8 lbs per square inch has to be maintained between the primary electromagnets at all times shifted back and forth over the secondary. that means each primary is accountable for 7.4 lbs per square inch of pressure compressing the field lines to 14.8 lbs per square inch.

if you don't have the required pressure you will get squat for output because the Figuera's device uses two primaries to match that of one high intensity field of a standard generator.
what we are dealing with is a duel opposing mono-pole excitation system so pressure is to be maintained at all times. so i suggest you people with no output move those magnets closer together or increase the pressure between your electromagnets and retest and the results will happen. start using the upper region we call a brain and actually read and understand what is posted instead of skimming over. if you so choose to not take above advice then what are you doing here in the first place.

get it, got it, good.

regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 18, 2018, 09:28:10 PM
Here is the 6061 Aluminum plug i receive that will be CNC to the adjustable brush holder. the video is the brush holder with movement.
i guess there is no way to post video's here other than a link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RCKOuyf1s0

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2018, 06:06:30 PM
WOW ! a good 5 mile bike ride this morning has me all fired up but is is already hot out getting into the 90's, YUCK !.

For those that are a little skeptical or hesitant about making your own bobbins for your cores please don't fret because it is easier than you think. i found craft felt from recycled plastic bottles works wonderfully in this department at 24 cents a sheet 12 x 12 inches.
all you have to do is cut the width you need, wrap around your covered core then glue in place with superglue cutting off excess. you can then cover with fiberglass resin and let cure over night. cut out the ring ends leaving room to slid over the core end then place on non stick surface then cover with resin curing over night. you can then attach the ring ends the next day one at a time coating with resin a few times allowing to dry in between coatings. when finished you can sand the bobbins and paint any color you wish.
now you have your bobbins made you can wind to your hearts content. this tutorial goes for square or rectangle core also just be sure to cover your core with a thin layer of something that will not stick to the resin to bad that you can't get it off.

in the end you will be proud of your self for taking the time to not only learn something new but you will be able to repair your device in the case of an accident or even for another project winding your own coils.
bobbins allow for adjustment and easing the burden of directly winding on cores that is a royal pain in the back side without proper equipment.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 19, 2018, 06:23:02 PM
This is an old picture of my primaries when i first wound them before the core was dropped. as you can see the bobbins are strong, work just wonderfully and the winding's are tight.
never underestimate your abilities to accomplish your goals. just because you have not done this before as myself also, doesn't mean you can't step out of your comfort zone which is 3/4 of the battle to accomplishing your task at hand.
the bobbins are snug on the core but can be adjusted if need be which is perfect when building in uncharted territories.

I honestly hope this tutorial can help many people out there that are contemplating or partaking in the building of the Figuera device or AMY device for that matter. ;D
Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 20, 2018, 07:33:00 PM
I would also dwell on the fact of actually winging your own coils.
winding you own coils is a rather easy task if you have the right mind set that you can accomplish anything you set your mind to. i know some have seen my winder i have built but there is also some out there that have not and are probably not sure how to proceed. all of the parts used in building my winder tree was purchased at a local hardware store for maybe 25 to 30 dollars. the pipe in the picture is basic water pipe that is inexpensive that comes threaded and pre cut to certain length that are easy to handle. all the fittings can be purchased at the same place as the pipe. their were many people that ran their mouths and laughed at it thinking it was some kind of a joke but those are usually the ones that have no clue how to build anything by them selves and would rather put someone down as they lack any such skill. i personally like to share my experiences to make things easier for other not so experienced to achieve their goals.

the winder in the picture was purchased off of E-bay for some where around 65 dollars. the black knob on the right side of the winder can be taken off and attach a drill motor with a foot peddle controller to control the speed of the winder. by attaching the drill motor at this location all the torque is applied to that one single shaft and not to all the gears that way they do not strip out. then the gears are used just for the counter which counts the turns.

finding ways to get your task accomplished takes just a little thinking which seems to be lacking now a days. thinking outside of the box you will be able do just about anything you set your mind to.
The coil on the bobbin in the above post was wound with this winder and winding tree,  as you see it works wonderful.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 20, 2018, 11:19:54 PM
The whole idea behind the Figuera device is using two opposing electromagnets that compresses the field lines to match that of a standard generator. that's certainly not all though as just compressing fields line will not get an output because the both E fields are opposing at that point and no output will occur. so think about that for a moment, how will you get those E fields in the same direction to match one another. you take one up in currant and take the other down in currant at the same time allowing the E fields to match being positive and additive in their relation to each other. the difference between increasing one electromagnet is the same aspects as taking a magnet towards a coil and the decreasing electromagnet is the same aspect as taking a magnet away from the coil. the spin direction does not change but since the reducing one is catching the back side of the spin both E fields are in the same direction which is positive and additive.

since Faraday laid down the laws of induction there has to be some kind of movement in order to get induction from the electromagnet either being the coil of wire that moves or the increase or decrease of currant to the Electromagnets. this is still not all as the movement of the magnetic fields will cause the electric field but there still has to be movement of the secondary through the electric field in order to get currant to flow.
now things get tricky, how are you to get the secondary to move in a static non moving system across the electric field to get currant flow into the system. one might say that is impossible to do but Clemente Figuera was not an ordinary person and has figured this all out in his sheer genius mind.
what Figuera figured out was if two opposing fields had a secondary in between them with the primary raised and the other lowered in currant that the primaries will cause the secondary to polarize and currant will begin to flow in the secondary and the load. when this happens the secondary will form a secondary field to the first (lenz law) that opposes this field. the primaries and the secondaries then part ways and become separate systems. this opposing field of the secondary is what sandwiched between the primary opposing magnetic fields thus causing the sweeping action across the Electric field from the raising and lowering of the primaries controlled by the inductor part G.
in the actions of part G and the primaries, one side of part G and the primaries are raised and the other half is lowered in currant but in doing so the reduced magnetic fields release that reduced portion into the system along with the secondary loop back causing an amplification to the rising side of the system off setting the potential drop of the rising side as all rising magnetic fields there will be a potential drop across the conductor thus the three forms of potential will give amplification to the rising side of the system. as long as part G's positive brush continues to move you will get a constant change in the magnetic flux to currant ratio causing a very orderly linear rise and fall in currant in complete unison.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 21, 2018, 05:22:51 PM
I know i have said this before but i am going to say it again.
Part G can NOT be replaced so easily with electronics like everyone seems to think. why would someone want to over complicate something as simple as the Figuera device part G inductor is so way beyond me. sure i was to dazzled at one time by electronics but then i can to the harsh reality of just who was getting rich and who was not.  just stop and look around and seen the take over of your lives from these corporation that have you convinced you need electronics in your lives. all this does is make you LAZY and makes them RICH.

Part G is complicated yet simple at the same time. the main factor of the difficulty in using electronics is the release of potential from the reduced side to offset the potential drop of the rising side thus giving amplification. i am sorry folks but electronics can not ever do this in any way shape or form. at the very least one would have to combine the two having a core with electronic switching but even then the amount of transistors to mimic the brush rotation will be anywhere from 80 to 100 transistors and i am sorry but i refuse to handle over my hard earned cash to these monsters when all i have to do is use the core with a few cheap brushes.

with out a core and winding's to change the ratio of magnetic field per the amount of currant (C-EMF) on a continuous basis the complexity of using electronic just flew straight through the roof and i personally think the average person is not capable of doing this and would seem to be a waste of time.

Part G has many function and i really doubt you can mimic all of them with electronic but if one must go down that path i hope you are prepared to get a dump truck full of parts ready and one hell of a wad of cash.

part G spits the feed into two, forward biases like a mag amp, reduce and raises the currant on a continuous basis through self induction (C-EMF) stores and releases potential to either off set the rising side or stores the potential for the next half cycle along with the storing and released potential of the primary electromagnets then uses the secondary output to replace losses and amplification. all this happens inside of part G which will become the power supply one the starting is removed.
so one that note if you think you can mimic all those function with electronics  all i have to say is GOOD LUCK, you will need it.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: T-1000 on May 21, 2018, 05:26:25 PM
Hi all,

@marathonman
Can I suggest you just make video with experiment showing what you are trying to describe here? It would be much more helpful than walls of text which are just ignored here.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 21, 2018, 05:45:42 PM
IF you so chose to ignore it that is solely your problem not mine. you people were the one's that ignored Doug, sorry I DIDN'T. i so chose to take what he said and proved it on the bench to myself mostly.
I guess i am different as i don't need pretty colored graphs with pop ups to understand the point being conveyed.

i guess that is the real problem with the world today as no one wants to take the time to either use their brain god gave them or think for any length of time.

UNBELIEVABLE. what are you doing on this site if all you people want to do is having your hand held along the way. i though research was performed by the individual not handed to them like a manual.

keeping your head buried in the sand keeps you ignorant to the facts.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: T-1000 on May 21, 2018, 05:50:09 PM
i guess that is the real problem with the world today as no one wants to take the time to either use their brain god gave them or think for any length of time.
Please do not take offensively - people use facts not fantasies for real world applications. Same situation with your posts as you are flooding this thread with them. One video proving you claims would be much better than hundreds of posts. Simple as it could be... "Seeing is believing".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 21, 2018, 08:57:00 PM
Hi T-1000,  all.

Please be patient, give MM some time to build.
Imagine just the time it takes to machine that BIG aluminium plug.
And without a schematic circuit to follow,  furthermore.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 21, 2018, 10:28:53 PM
Again the mentally challenged has to chime in with again NOTHING to add but completely stupid rhetoric, a pimple on ones backside for sure. mr goof dressed in purple.
If you people think you can come up with something better well lets here it if it's more than a pop up from your childhood book.

I post real provable information and if you  unintelligent people have nothing to add what are you doing here in the first place. try posting anything remotely valuable to the readers other than how to act an ass.
my posts are not only informative but are packed full of valuable information that apparently you lemmings can not decipher in any way shape or form. not all readers are as dense as you people and just maybe a little more intelligent to boot.

if you have nothing positive to add i would suggest you clowns get packing because your lack of intelligence is getting very old. third grade responses to research does not work very well so you might need another approach as it seems you have absolutely NOTHING for the Figuera device nor will you ever because ping pong ball brains don't work with the Figuera device. it happen's to take intelligence which seams to be lacking in your area.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 21, 2018, 10:41:52 PM
T-1000;
i am from a different time of understanding but i will take the time for a video if that is what it takes to shut people up like this fool seaad.
i personally think he was dropped on his head as a baby or beat as a child and has some issues as an adult, i just don't know. he never has anything worth while to post other than BS and should be barred from a research site. if you can't control your self just maybe Stephan needs to step in set things straight as i am fed up with it. this is a sharing research site not a three ring circus.
MAKE YOUR MOVE.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 21, 2018, 11:30:23 PM
MM

Perhaps an electronic part G approximation may work. If so, all you need a is a coil with several taps that connect to ground via switches (transistors or FETs) and have the ends of the coil connect to the negative side of the two exciter coils that are fed from the electronically controlled power supplies. The switches are easily synchronized with the sine wave generator as shown in the attached concept drawing. This is adapted from the drawing I posted on page 289. It only shows the changed pages.

I realize that you have posted copious explanations of how part G works and I understand what you are saying, but it seems unnecessary for the following reason. A generator is formed when a conductor cuts the flux lines of a magnetic field. It's the relative motion that matters. If two electromagnets have like poles facing across a coil, their fields collide somewhere between them and add, and if their relative strength is changed by changing their excitation voltages, the collision point moves toward the weaker field. If the electromagnets are excited by complementary waveforms, the collision point moves back and forth across the coil causing flux cutting due to the relative motion....and you have an AC generator with the frequency of the excitation voltages. It seems to me that the part G plays no part in that action and is not necessary. Perhaps my experiments will show me the reason why you say it ain't gonna work.  :(
Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 22, 2018, 05:05:18 PM
Sam;

  I no longer find it necessary or desirable to post on this website as i do not enjoy rhetoric or foolishness posted from non-intelligent people that have no ambition what so ever in building this device and resort to third grade child like tactics to discredit or belittle someone.

as for your thought that part G can be replaced, well all i can say is when you fail at multiple attempts remember the words spoken from me, "I TOLD YOU SO"
you still don't understand the real workings of a generator thus will be your downfall in your replication.

good luck just the same and maybe i will see ya around.

regards,

Marathonman 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 22, 2018, 08:32:40 PM
MM

Perhaps an electronic part G approximation may work. If so, all you need a is a coil with several taps that connect to ground via switches (transistors or FETs) and have the ends of the coil connect to the negative side of the two exciter coils that are fed from the electronically controlled power supplies. The switches are easily synchronized with the sine wave generator as shown in the attached concept drawing. This is adapted from the drawing I posted on page 289. It only shows the changed pages.

I realize that you have posted copious explanations of how part G works and I understand what you are saying, but it seems unnecessary for the following reason. A generator is formed when a conductor cuts the flux lines of a magnetic field. It's the relative motion that matters. If two electromagnets have like poles facing across a coil, their fields collide somewhere between them and add, and if their relative strength is changed by changing their excitation voltages, the collision point moves toward the weaker field. If the electromagnets are excited by complementary waveforms, the collision point moves back and forth across the coil causing flux cutting due to the relative motion....and you have an AC generator with the frequency of the excitation voltages. It seems to me that the part G plays no part in that action and is not necessary. Perhaps my experiments will show me the reason why you say it ain't gonna work.  :(
Sam6


I agree to your explanation. I however do not believe it is the original Figuera concept. What we are discussing here is the evolved concept  developed further by Buforn. The original Figuera concept seems to me the way to move magnetic field (as was shown in other thread here) while keeping the fields  in NS NS NS pattern like in normal generators - by properly switching coils in sequence. If you read patent description it explains some weird parts.
Is your circuit really produce clean sinewaves at 180 degrees out of phase one to another ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 22, 2018, 08:35:21 PM
Imho : for this idea (moving two opposing fields) to generate OU we have to go into high frequency.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 22, 2018, 09:53:53 PM
MY TWO BOBS WORTH, THIS INVENTION WILL NEVER WORK.
REASON BEING TO PUMP EFFER  THE MAGNETIC FIELD HAS TO BE
MOVING, NOT JUST PULSING OR VARYING IN INTENSITY..IT HAS TO BE
MOVING FROM A TO B..OTHERWISE IT IS JUST LIKE A TRANSFORMER..
THAT IS WHY I POSTED THIS IDEA AND I HAVE BEEN JEERED AT.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on May 22, 2018, 09:58:03 PM
AND WHEN TESLA WAS ASKED WHAT WAS HIS GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS
HE SAID IT WAS HIS ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELDS INVENTIONS. FIGURE THIS
OUT..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on May 22, 2018, 11:29:02 PM
THE MAGNETIC FIELD HAS TO BE MOVING,
NOT JUST PULSING OR VARYING IN INTENSITY..
.OTHERWISE IT IS JUST LIKE A TRANSFORMER..
I'm agree fully to that above.


Try to explain the principle to your picture step by step.

NIBs or not or FIGUERA or not I don't care.
If you're principle produces overunity it's just fine to me.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on May 23, 2018, 09:56:02 PM
Forest

The circuit produces a 16 step sine wave. The equations for the resistor values used to produce that waveform are shown on the schematic I posted on page 289. The sine wave is filtered to produce a smoothed waveform which is fed to an inverting op amp and a non inverting op amp to produce two waves 180 degrees out of phase. You can view the scope pictures of the unfiltered 180 degree shifted waveforms in the project description I posted on page 289.

The sinusoidal waveforms are applied to PWM chips which alter the duty cycles of constant amplitude pulses in a sinusoidal fashion at 25 KHz. Those pulses drive MOSFETs which switch constant voltage from a main power supply applied to the exciter coils. So the answer to your question is "yes and No", depending where you look at the waveform. But the effect is complementary sinusoidal power applied to the exciter coils in very short pulses. 8)

Sam6

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on May 24, 2018, 09:06:38 PM
Having already done these experiments at 50 Hz AC using soft iron core I will try to do another experiment in the coming weeks using pretty much smaller table top sized devices and using permanent magnet core and about 840 hz.

I believe that Figuera used NS-NS-NS combination only but the primary and middle cores are permanent magnets and that the resistor array was used to increase the voltage of primary. From experience I know that higher the voltage of primary higher is the voltage of secondary. Higher the secondary voltage higher is the current from secondary. The mistake done by me is to use soft iron core rather than permanent magnet core. It should be essentially a Magnetic amplifier effect combined with a high voltage primary coil to oscillate the primary permanent magnets. The rotary coil was used by Figuera to oscillate DC input.  I think we can try to do a very small device and check if it would work.

This is my personal belief and assumptions only at the moment and I will post results of experiments and our observations after we test. Only very small device will be tested to avoid costs and labour and I will update after we do it. We intend to use MOSFETs to do the oscillation part. We will check if high frequency and high voltage combination can also be used using appropriate transistors. We need to wait and see.

Rather than 7 or 8 modules used by Figuera we will test with only one module and if results are promising we will add more modules.

I think it can work but let us wait and see.

Regards

Ramaswami Natarajan
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 25, 2018, 05:32:12 AM
OMG i can't stop laughing from the stupidity, the blind leading the blind. ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
I believe that Figuera used ...... that is a dead give away people that this FOOL NEVER HAD DONE ANY RESEARCH WHAT SO EVER IN THE FIGUERA DEVICE.
Stupid fools, you deserve one another.
Stupidity at it's finest.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Belfior on May 25, 2018, 09:38:31 AM
"I no longer find it necessary or desirable to post on this website as i do not enjoy rhetoric or foolishness posted from non-intelligent people..."

Finally you noticed your posts are just abusive and non-intelligent.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 25, 2018, 11:48:01 AM
"I no longer find it necessary or desirable to post on this website as i do not enjoy rhetoric or foolishness posted from non-intelligent people..."

Finally you noticed your posts are just abusive and non-intelligent.

Well said Belfior!!!  ;D :)


Bravo!!!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on May 30, 2018, 11:53:45 PM
Trolls always think alike, total unintelligent fools that don't take the simple time to do a simple test that proves everything i have been saying is Physics facts.
all you people do is blow smoke up other peoples Arse and each other that reconfirm my original assessment of you trolls, which is unintelligent,  lazy and worth nothing.
How many more threads can you lousy trolls destroy before people realize your all fake, and paid to disrupt and to unintelligent to perform one or two lousy test that can end all this nonsense. noooo, it's to ease just to run the mouth instead.
EF and OU are nothing but troll central.

I HATE TROLLS THAT IS WHY I ABUSE YOU.

Get off your lazy arse and do the tests or SHUT UP AND GO AWAY.  I mean "really" what the heck are you people doing here because it certainly isn't free energy or ANY research for that matter. if it was none of your mouths would be flapping like they are. NOT ONE SINGLE MOUTHER has done a simple test or two that proves what had been said. I DON'T OWE YOU NOTHING at all and i will be darn if you think i will hand over all my research to foolish people that are TO DARN LAZY  to get off your lazy butts and figure it out. how many clues does a fool need to get the hint.

One final clue i will give to you people, trolls run their mouths, RESEARCHES get busy and research and prove.

WHAT ARE YOU.? YOUR VERY NEXT WORDS DEFINE YOUR TRUE CHARACTER. ARE YOU A TROLL OR A RESEARCHER.????????

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 07, 2018, 02:16:19 AM
I am a researcher so i must chug on.
There has to be someone on this site that understands Physics and the working parameters of an Inductor opposing current, storing and releasing potential.
In this first graph the current in half of the system is increasing, storing into the magnetic field causing a voltage drop in the system.  it is storing into the field from the rising primaries and the rising side of part G only to release some of the potential into the system in the next half cycle. they are additive meaning the voltage drop of both are adding to the total voltage drop. even though the primaries are Electromagnets they will store and release potential into the system just like an Inductor would as both are magnetic fields.

In this second graph the current in half of the system is decreasing releasing stored potential into the system to offset the potential drop of the rising side of the system. when you have two forms of released potential that are not mutually coupled they are additive giving an amplification in potential that is twice that of one potential alone. with the added secondary adding to that doubled potential you will have an offset of the voltage drop of the rising side plus amplification to the peak primaries as an added bonus.

The current in the system is flowing in the same direction at all times thus allowing part G to become the power supply once the starting supply is removed.

come on folks it is really simple, a resistor waste potential and an Inductor stores and releases potential efficiently when properly built.
please do a test or two to prove at least for your selves it can be done.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 07, 2018, 02:57:34 PM
The two graphs posted are each half of the system happening simultaneously, one increasing in current, one decreasing in current. the side that is increasing will be storing into the magnetic field for the next half cycle and the one decreasing in current will be releasing the reduced potential into the system offsetting the voltage drop of the rising side of the system.  these two halves of the system are equal in proportion to each other, one having a voltage drop, the other having a voltage rise to offset the other halves voltage drop. the secondary is there to replace losses occurred and to give rise to an amplification to the rising primary.

it doesn't matter if it is an Inductor or an Electromagnet, if it is a coil of wire and especially if it is wound on an iron core, it will release magnetic stored potential into the system when reduced in current. this is plain Physics all day long, when the magnetic field is reduced in current it releases potential into the system increasing the voltage. both released potentials will act as very short term batteries and it is this very Physics fact of why part G can become the power supply once the starting supply is removed. reduced primaries into part G, secondary into part G combined with reducing half of part G will in fact give amplification to the rising side.

part G with the brush rotating changes the inductor size on each side of the brush that either add windings or subtract windings to that side changing the magnetic linking to the system which is changing the magnetic field to current ratio. when you change this ratio you are changing the magnetic resistance to current flow causing the primaries to either increase or decrease in current flow.

all this happens simultaneously while the primaries are being swept back and fourth over the secondary inducing motion into the secondary and the load.

all the information presented is and always will be Physics facts not fiction and can be replicated on the bench by anyone that proves everything i have presented is of course Physics facts.

just because some people on this forum are to lazy, not smart enough or just to darn stubborn to to do simple test does not change the fact that this info is physics facts. if the above statement is true than please do not ruin it for people out there that either want to learn, have a desire to learn or are trying to replicate this device.

all i am doing is trying to open ones mind to other possibilities that what we have been told or taught in school systems is not exactly true and have spent millions upon millions hiding these very facts.  If i wanted to argue i would of gotten married but instead i chose to study,research, replicate and share what i have learned in this process on this site. what you chose to do with the information presented is of course entirely up to you.

REGARDS,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 09, 2018, 02:28:49 PM
Quote from a researcher;
"Energy In is never ever in a billion years going to magically Create more Energy Out!"

EXACTLY, and well put. people still seem to think that they are to build the Figuera device without part G's inductance adding to the system reusing the potential from the magnetic to the electric.

I'm sorry but this is not ever, ever, ever going to happen if you have to supply all the power to the primaries all the time. standard generators do not operate like this and neither does any device i know of, nature does not operate like this.

in a standard generator the primary exciters once up to working conditions, the power draw is reduced to just the IR2 losses to maintain the field. if the power had to be replace all the time a standard generator would no work the way it does. it brings in energy from outside the system and takes time to acquire the proper pressure needed in the system to maintain the load. it does this over time taking some of the output to feed back to the exciters until there is enough pressure in the system for the exciters and the load.

It is still quite obvious people still do not grasp the way a generator works and if you think you are going to build the Figuera device without part G you are in for a very expensive surprise and should prepare yourselves for an unwanted outcome.
Generators generate over time not instantly, that is why when a load is drawing more than supplied it causes the resistance to drop in the external load causing more current to flow thus return more current to the exciters to produce a more intense field to produce more output then the exciters and the load combined. electricity is a pressure system and it takes time to build up the pressure in mans systems to operate our machinery.
Physics do not tell a lie when it comes to our world we live in only our incorrect assumption of our observations and senses which generally do not coincide with reality.
Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 10, 2018, 05:19:27 PM
Try this analogy and apply it to your energy devices. try blowing up a balloon instantly and tell me what happens. yes, the balloon will indeed pop. now blow it up slower and see how large the balloon gets as it stretches to accommodate the increasing pressure.

try hitting mans electric devices with instant power and stand back watching the sparks fly because that is what will happen. since electricity is a form of pressure it takes time to build up the pressure in an electric system. no generator in the world can instantly provide you with a massive amount of pressure sorry this will never happen.
in a standard generator it takes time for the pressure to equalize in the system. when the load increases the resistance falls on the external part of the system causing more currant to flow which intern sends more currant to the AVR then to the exciters to produce a more intense field to equalize the pressure of the external load and the exciters combined. it does this over a period of time even though it may seem to you it is instant in reality it is not.

the primary exciters are increased as the electric pressures in the system fluctuate due to the load. if the load requires more pressure the intensity of the exciters will be increase to the point of system equalization as the pressure in the system can handle the load and the exciters combined. all this pressure equalizations happen over time and never instantly.
part of the output pressure is fed back to the exciters to produce a more intense field to produce more pressure in the output and the load. it keeps doing this until the the pressure is equalized according to the resistance of the system. of course there is a limit to the systems we build.
larger generators can handle higher pressures in it's system but then again it does so over time not instantly. if the system primaries would instantly produce an extreme amount of pressure something is going to blow and blow very hard it will.
the opposite is also quite true, disconnecting a system under high electric pressures is probably one of the most dangerous thing one could possibly do as Tesla and Steinmetz were quite aware of the dangers involved.

The Figuera device is not so different than a standard generator other than the obvious which one is rotating and the other is stationary eliminating the nasty cogging effects of the rotating rotor which takes massive amounts of power to overcome the attractive forces.
Figuera in his sheer genius used a rotating Inductor to not only change the currant intensity but used the storing and releasing of potentials to offset each other in the switching process. this basic technique reuses the potential in the system just like a standard generator does  thus acts just like the above description to the tee.
the exciting system and the external system are basically two separate systems and once up to running condition the power draw on the exciting system is reduced to that of the IR2 losses just like a standard generator.

Marathonman


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Dbowling on June 12, 2018, 05:24:54 AM
Just checking in to see how progress is going here. From what I understand, Marathonman is in contact with someone who has a working device and has been helping him to disclose info? Is that true, or did someone feed me a line? Anyway, since MM's first post in [size=0px]February of 2014, it has been a few years, and I was wondering how far along folks are? Have any of the claims that this would make all other devices look silly proven out, or is the research to get a working device still ongoing?[/size]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 13, 2018, 04:13:08 AM
Progress on this site, now that's an overstatement if i have ever heard one.  all everyone on this site and EF do is argue instead of doing tests and or bench work.  as for "The Someone" i have not talked to him in a while. i do hope he and his family are well if he is listening.

no, no body fed you a line of bs as i am from my research and bench work a witness to his accomplishment which i might say was top notch work. yes he did share a lot but it took some years for me to understand just what he was talking about in a few areas.
i have learned and built enough to say that the device works as he predicted but no one even bothers to learn just how the device works or even seems to care. people in hell want ice but that doesn't mean they are going to get it when not knowing how to freeze water.

a lot of info has been posted and actually should be read for a change understanding it's implication but that is not my concern. my only concern i have right now is looping the secondary back to part G and i will leave you with that.

I am much farther along than what all of them together seem to know which is nothing.

Stay tuned the fun is just about to get started and trolls will be silenced once and for all.

Regards,

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 16, 2018, 01:32:42 AM
The whole reason myself and others from EF at that time were attaining such low output is the reduction of the magnetic fields of the primary electromagnets in relation to the secondary. if the winding's on part G are to little then the current reduction will be small then so is the E field presented to the secondary. the graph below is where the mistake was made by most.
the top one is where to little of winding's on part G causes a small variation in magnetic field thus causing a very small E field to the secondary.
the bottom graph is the actual area the magnetic fields of the primaries are being swept across the entire secondary. if the proper amount of winding were to be wound on part G the sweeping action will be the entire length of the secondary.

this is of course having the proper pressure between the primaries in the first place. it takes 14.8 lbs pressure being swept across the secondary to attain 1 kilowatt of output power so if your pressure is to low you will not get an output or very little. :'(

for every kilowatt of output the primaries split the pressure between them so each primary electromagnet is is accountable for 7.4 lbs pressure one increasing, one decreasing causing the Electric fields of each electromagnet to be coherent which is the same direction of currant flow. and again i will throw out the Physics fact of what i just said. ;D

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 21, 2018, 03:18:26 PM
According to my research conducted on inductance any change in the area of the inductor changes the current flow when using DC but when the brush motion ceases so does the current reduction. when in motion the constant changing of the circuit (with current being a steady flow) will add or subtract winding's that magnetically link to the circuit that opposes the change in current flow. this self inductance is the ratio of magnetic field to current and when you change this ratio (increasing or deceasing the Magnetic field) you change the current flow it self .

Quote from Wikipedia;
 "Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current"

this is Directly from Faraday's mouth himself in his LAWS of Induction stating any change in the circuit causes induction to occur that opposes the change in the first place. the larger the magnetic field the larger the ratio of magnetic field to current thus any change in the circuit it self will in fact change this ratio.

the graph below is the very thing that is stated above according to Faraday himself that (ANY) change in a circuit will change the inductance. just like a standard adjustable inductor part G operates on these very same principals except part G has a constant moving brush contact.
why is it so hard for people to realize part G is the very thing Faraday's laws discus and is quoted in Wikipedia which is not made up by me. when the brush rotates it adds or subtracts winding to each side of the circuit which is changing the magnetic field to current ratio which is the opposition to the original current flow (Self Induction). the larger the magnetic field the more opposition to current flow and the less the magnetic field the less opposition to current flow and that is plain and simple. the Cemf produced is self induction which is the magnetic linking to the circuit producing a reverse potential that opposes the original current flow.

part G is a prime example of Faraday's LAWS OF INDUCTION but because this very facts have not been taught in our lousy Government Controlled School systems so people are having a hard time realizing these facts. people are taught that an Inductor is solely a passive device when in fact it can and does operate just fine in an active position using self inductance to control current flow which is in absolute compliance with Faraday's LAWS OF INDUCTION and thus further investigated by Heinrich Friedrich Emil Lenz and known as the Lenz law.
Quote; "Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion."

then on top of these very facts stated above the inductor stores and releases it's magnetic field at the right time to be combined with the reducing primaries magnetic fields to off set the voltage drop of the rising side of the system. the release of potential into the system from (ANY) magnetic field is in fact the laws of Induction set fourth by Faraday himself and can not be denied or disputed by NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON.


Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: darediamond on June 23, 2018, 10:29:21 PM
Years ago, Computer was as big as  standard room size. But now you have them on your palms and in your pockets.
The early inventors werew not the ones who largely brings about the reduction in size applying *High Frequency*!

Part G as I always say can be replaced with Motionless version or Solid state Part G.
Remember the Original Tesla Switch is made with mechanical Switch but now successful replications have Semiconductors replacing the wear and tear prone commutator.

So one one needs to stick to 50% when 1000% efficiency can now be easily achieved.

If you even wanna make the Figuera Gen more Powerful, use a C-Core Ferrite Core which like me anyone can make at home using Iron Powder and Resin and Hardner or Catalyst. You simply make a mould with Cardboard and or 5mm thick Particle board. It is easy to make.

To get more high power, simply use 1:4 winding. That is if your Serially connected Bucking Primary is 10g in weight then, you Secondary should weigh 40g. That way, like me, you will achieve auto-resonance without padding of the coils with Capacitor.

Your secondary wire thickness must be high enough to withstand the stepdown "CURRANT" but it must pave way for auto resonance by applying 1:4 wire weight.

BE DYNAMIC BECAUSE NO MORTAL MAN IS PERFECT.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 24, 2018, 05:08:24 PM
CEMF which is Counter-electromotive force is the current produced that opposes the original current flow by magnetically linking to the loop next to it (This can also be defined as magnetic flux linkage). it is known as the Lenz Law.

  Inductors are devices that can store their energy in the form of a magnetic field and then release their potential increasing the voltage in the circuit. Inductors are made from individual loops of wire combined to produce a coil and if the number of loops within the coil are increased, then for the same amount of current flowing through the coil, the magnetic flux will also increase.

So by increasing the number of loops or turns within a coil, increases the coils inductance which increases the CEMF product to counter act the original current flow.  so when you rotate a positive brush contact you are adding or subtracting loops within the coil on part G that magnetically link to the circuit which changes the CEMF which is the magnetic field to current ratio which is the opposition to the original current flow.

therefore as the brush rotates the current through the twin opposing primary electromagnets will in Physics fact change in an orderly fashion one increasing while the other decreases causing the sweeping action across the secondary that induces motion in to the secondary.
This is exactly why Figuera used an Inductor taking it from a static device to an active device as the vital piece of his device to control the current flow through his primary electromagnets with the added bonus of storing and releasing the potential at the exact time needed. i would like to see just how you can achieve all that without the use of part G or by the use of heat death resistors in the system......     yeah right !.

Part G in the patent is in fact an INDUCTOR and can no way in hell be a resistor network.

Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 25, 2018, 04:28:36 AM
Here lies the major problem.
 Basics of self induction.  When there is a time varying change in current, you induce voltage.  The higher the rate of changing current the higher the value of CEMF.
what people don't understand is that if the circuit changes it is in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of Induction. when i say the circuit changes i mean as the brush rotates so does the circuit change in size on each side of the brush being separated by two north opposing magnetic fields. any movement of the circuit (with currant being steady)  produces CEMF in the circuit and this is not fiction it is Faraday's Law's of induction which is Physics fact.
when you change a circuit adding loops to the system you change the magnetic field to current ratio which is the CEMF that opposes the original current flow. what this means is the more loops you add to the system (current being steady) the more the magnetic field opposes the original current flow so by rotating the brush in the Figuera system you are changing the opposition to current flow on a steady basis.
all while in complete compliance with Faraday's Law's of induction.
IMAGINE THAT ! proving trolls wrong with PHYSICS FACTS.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 26, 2018, 12:09:38 AM
These very facts are totally impossible to attain with a resistor network and or electronics. if you so choose this path all i can say is be prepared to open the wallet very wide.
do the tests yourself and find out that what i have been saying for many years that self inductance can and will control current flow when the loops change on a continuous basis as the brush rotates on part G the elusive and misunderstood Inductor. :o :-* ;D

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: iflewmyown on June 26, 2018, 05:17:53 PM
How long would you estimate till your part G is up and running and you are making lots of power??
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 28, 2018, 01:04:30 AM
I already have the original replication part G but i have a balancing issue that plagued the replicator that shared with me. my new design is ready to be wound and will eliminate this issue but unfortunately the only CNC in my area is bogged down with work so they cant get to my new brush holder and this really pisses me off. i am trying to have it complete by the end of July as a B day present to myself. money is tight as a Filipino virgin right now but i am hopping i will meet my dead line.

hows your research into the Figuera device coming along or does it exist at all or are you just waiting for someone else to do the work for you like all the rest on this site. just curious as to your intentions as "i" actually know how the device works through my research and bench work.
everything i have described in my posts is "Physics facts" and can be replicated by everyone. ;D :-* :o

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on June 29, 2018, 04:52:27 AM
If you people only new the significance of the below equation. it is the reason why the Figuera device Inductor controller part G can operate as it does changing the magnetic field to current ratio on a steady basis. in lamen terms it means if you change in any way the loops in the circuit with the same amount of current you change the self inductance which is the opposition to current flow.
 a lot of people still think the Figuera device is Lenzless in which you would be entirely incorrect. in fact Figuera used it to his advantage and knowing any, and i mean any reduction in magnetic field will release that potential into the system which is totally foreign to even electric engineers.(imagine that)
using the reduced potential to Figuera's advantage was and is as i say "SHEAR GENIUS" to say the least when especially when people can't even get past it as a stationary object that has been to a so called college. (i am so impressed)

studying inductance would be to ones advantage to say the least and thinking outside the box for a change instead of being so closed minded. self inductance can and will change the magnetic field to current ratio if the positive brush rotates on a continuous basis. the Lenz law is the magnetic linking to the loop next to it so if you add or subtract loops you are changing this ratio which changes the opposition to current flow so as the brush rotates so does the opposition to the original current flow.
OMG ! did i state a Physics fact, imagine THAT !
Self Inductance can and will change the current flow whether you like it or not so why not use the CEMF to one's advantage. sorry uninformed,  resistors can never in your life time do that.

Marathonman.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 04, 2018, 12:01:50 AM
FARADAYS FIRST LAW:
Whenever the magnetic flux linked with a closed circuit changes, an e.m.f. is induced in the circuit. The induced e.m.f. last long as the change in magnetic flux continues.
notice Faraday's law did NOT say anything about current it just said if the magnetic flux changes and the induced EMF that opposes the original current flow will last as long as the flux changes.

FARADAYS SECOND LAW:
The magnitude of induced e.m.f. is directly proportional to time rate of change of magnetic flux linked with the circuit.
again he never said anything about current change just the time rate of magnetic flux change so by adding more loops that magnetically link to the circuit you are changing the magnetic flux in a time rate of change which is 3600 times a second for the US and 3000 times a second for everyone else.

so any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current as per Faraday's laws of induction.

add all these up and what do you get.???  you get an Inductor with a rotating brush that constantly changes the loop count that magnetically link to that side of the circuit that produces an opposition to the original current flow. as the brush rotates so does the change in magnetic field to current ratio witch is the amount of opposing EMF to the original current flow.

imagine that ! Figuara's inductor controller backed up by Faraday himself. now is that enough Physics fact for ya. Figuera used an Inductor as his controller plain and simple backed by the Grandfather of Physics himself.
Now if that is not "IN YOUR FACE" Physics i don't know what is and have no clue what to do with ya.
Regards

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 05, 2018, 03:08:37 PM
The 3600 for the US and 3000 for all the rest is the brush rotation speed (RPM) in the above post which will equal 60 hz for the US and 50 hz for all the rest.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 08, 2018, 06:57:19 PM
Self inductance is the ratio of magnetic field per the amount of current in a circuit so if you add loops that magnetically link to the circuit you are changing this ratio. if you have say 1 amp of current flowing trough a circuit and add another loop to that side of the circuit it changes the ratio and you will experience a current drop in the system on that side of the circuit.

since self inductance (self induced within the circuit) is the magnetic linking that opposes the original current flow so by adding or subtracting loops to that side of the circuit you are changing the magnetic flux to current ratio.

this is how Figuera changed the current in his primaries one up and the other down in complete unison changing the magnetic flux to current ratio as the brush rotates. if the brush stopped so would the self inductance thus the current to the primaries would become a steady flow since it is DC.

Figuera on the other hand figured out that if you have a rotating positive brush contact he could change the magnetic field to current ratio on a steady basis and use the storing and releasing of potential to his advantage. with the rising side of part G and the rising primaries you will indeed have a voltage drop (Physics Fact)  because they are storing into the magnetic field but at the same time the reducing side is releasing the reduced potential into the system (Physics Fact) to off set this voltage drop which is exactly proportional to each other minus some losses and that is where the secondary feed back comes into play to replace those losses and to give an amplification to the rising primaries.

L (Self Inductance) increases if you add another loop to the circuit which increases the magnetic flux to current ratio thus the opposition to the original current flow. the more loops you add to that side of the circuit increases this ratio which decreases the current flow and the opposite is also true as you decrease the amount of loops that magnetically link to the circuit the current will in fact increase in that side of the circuit. putting them together and separating them with North opposing fields will allow you to control the current flow in to different sets of primaries in complete unison. so as the brush rotates you are adding loops to one side of the circuit and subtracting loops from the other side of the circuit at the positive rotating brush in complete unison.

I sure hope you can understand what i am trying to convey to you as this is very important in the self sustaining process.

I am not seeking any recognition or 15 minutes of fame what so ever just trying to change Humanity as the currant path leads us to extinction as Corporate and Government greed is killing us off one by one.

 

 

Regards,

 

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 09, 2018, 01:26:17 AM
L (Self Inductance) increases if you add another loop to the circuit which increases the magnetic flux to current ratio thus the opposition to the original current flow. the more loops you add to that side of the circuit increases this ratio which decreases the current flow and the opposite is also true as you decrease the amount of loops that magnetically link to the circuit the current will in fact increase in that side of the circuit. putting them together and separating them with North opposing fields will allow you to control the current flow in to different sets of primaries in complete unison. so as the brush rotates you are adding loops to one side of the circuit and subtracting loops from the other side of the circuit at the positive rotating brush in complete unison.

if the loop is located next to another loop it will magnetically link to that circuit causing a current drop and when a iron core is added it magnifies that reverse magnetic field by many many time then on top of that using a closed loop controller it will have very little flux leakage.
so by the below graph the more loops you add to the circuit the more opposition to current flow and the less loops the less opposition to current flow as the brush rotates.

These are in fact (Physics facts) and can NOT be denied or disputed by ANYONE.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 09, 2018, 07:33:04 PM
But inductance Control change od current not current
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 10, 2018, 12:55:29 AM
With lots of respect Mr Forest, that would be your and everyone else misconception not mine.
it is a Physics fact with a steady DC current is applied to a coil over a core and the magnetic field is increased the current will in fact be reduced. this is the magnetic flux to current ratio and when the loops increase so does the resistance to current increase causing a current reduction.

this is something that is not taught in no college anywhere as all they teach is that an Inductor is a static device when in fact it can be brought to an active position in a circuit to control current flow. i have posted so much info on this part G it is ridiculous as to why everyone is still scratching their heads when all it takes is a simple test to prove it to your self.

when a moving positive brush contact moves across a coil the ratio of magnetic flux to current will in fact change according to the laws of induction set forth by Faraday and Lenz that state any change in a circuit whether it is the current or the circuit it's self an EMF will be produced and the EMF product will be opposing the original current flow.

with all those posts you have you should know this Mr Forest. I myself choose to not leave any stone unturned. maybe some time should be set aside to actually read and understand my posts instead of just disagreeing. I myself love to learn new things.
It would be nice if one of these days someone actually reads the posts or information presented.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AlienGrey on July 10, 2018, 03:41:24 PM
But inductance Control change od current not current
really ? try adding another winding to it and passing DC trough it and see what happens !

AG
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 11, 2018, 01:08:52 AM
   Exactly my point the inductance will in fact have changed because a loop was added which changes the magnetic field to current ratio lowering the original current flow.
With a moving brush the inductance changes with each side of the brush either adding or subtracting winding's that are magnetically linking to the circuit which changes the magnetic flux to current ratio.
with a steady current applied to a circuit with changing loops count that magnetically link to the circuit you will in fact change the current flow from the increase or decrease in magnetic flux to current ratio.
I have even had a Physics major and an electrical engineer Pm me and tell me i was spot on so i can care less who disagrees with me.
my own bench does not lie and yours wouldn't either if you did some tests.

regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pmgr on July 11, 2018, 02:38:37 AM
MarathonMan is spot on.

EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).

Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used. And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.

The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.

PmgR
=====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org)

* Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 11, 2018, 03:12:51 AM
Massive thanks PMGR ;D 8)
even though i knew i was right all along and they were in fact the one's that were wrong.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 12, 2018, 10:12:17 AM
Exactly and well put pmgr, the amount of power used to turn the motor for the brush rotation is quite small plus the losses from the switching of the magnetic field to the electric is quite obvious very efficient so all that is required from the secondary is the replacements of the losses which is small, the motor operation and the amplification to the rising primaries.
the power draw of the primaries is reduced to that of the IR2 losses when to full potential and the reducing side offsets the rising side voltage drop so the secondary is there to replace losses and to give amplification to the rising primaries.

Thanks for being here, one with a brain that uses it i might add.
regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 12, 2018, 05:22:06 PM
That is basically the initial problem that everyone has been taught that in order for self Inductance to take place there has to be a current change which changes the intensity of the magnetic field induced within the circuit it's self that opposes the original current flow.

in order for self induction to take place withing the circuit something has to cause the magnetic field to change in intensity either up or down. with AC it is the steady current rise and fall that produces this change in magnetic field that opposes the original current flow. it is this and only this that is taught in every school and university around the world.

In a DC circuit it will still be the same, something has to change in order to change the magnetic field intensity. since the current is steadily applied to the circuit how are you to get the magnetic field to change on a continuous basis. ????

This is what is NOT taught in any schools;
you change the circuit it's self,  by adding loops to the circuit you are in fact changing the magnetic field intensity from the magnetic linkage of the added loops to the circuit. with the added linkage you are in fact changing the intensity of the magnetic field which is the magnetic flux to current ratio.
when you change the magnetic flux to current ratio you are in fact changing the opposition of current flow it's self which is produced within the circuit known as the Lenz Law. any EMF generated in the circuit under these circumstances  will be induced in a direction that opposes the original current flow.
this exactly follows the induction Laws set forth by Faraday himself and Lens thus does not violate not one Law.

L=(L*I)/dt self induction changing over time.

Welcome to Figuera inductance 101.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 14, 2018, 01:51:37 AM
What no barrage of self attacks trying to demean or belittle me. what is the matter trolls you finally got out smarted at your own game.
I have never ever played games with anyone ever. i have spoke the truth all these years and would not dare lie to anyone as it is not in my nature.
I truly want humanity to take a different path as the one we are one controlled by Corporate world will destroy us all. all i want is for the average person in this world to stop being taken advantage from these crooks that manipulate us at any chance they get. the Figuera device and the 1932 Coutier device can change the balance of things. stop spending your hard earned money on fuel when this device can change the balance in our favor.
Read, study and build is all i can say. your very life could be at stake.

Regards and most respect,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on July 14, 2018, 02:25:46 AM
Thanks Marathonman for your comments but I never heard of
  "the 1932 Coutier device"  do you have a reference to that.

I understand what the flux change does without motion but the trick
is how do you embody that? I've read and tried but simple setups
have not been successful and no one to date has done that either.

Norman

What no barrage of self attacks trying to demean or belittle me. what is the matter trolls you finally got out smarted at your own game.
I have never ever played games with anyone ever. i have spoke the truth all these years and would not dare lie to anyone as it is not in my nature.
I truly want humanity to take a different path as the one we are one controlled by Corporate world will destroy us all. all i want is for the average person in this world to stop being taken advantage from these crooks that manipulate us at any chance they get. the Figuera device and the 1932 Coutier device can change the balance of things. stop spending your hard earned money on fuel when this device can change the balance in our favor.
Read, study and build is all i can say. your very life could be at stake.

Regards and most respect,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 14, 2018, 05:01:22 AM
Really, I HAVE !
Wow ! that's to bad NORM, it seems a lot slips between you and others fingers or rather the grasp of your mind wrapping around a simple concept for which i am sorry for you. the lack of knowledge of inductance seems to be the norm on this site and i do have a growing lack of patients. learn it or get a real job is all i can say because i have been there for years and has just yet been verified by a PHD electrical Engineer and a 4 year major in Physics. that is ok if you want to play ignorant with me as i really do not care what you do as all i do is laugh at you all. well at least the one's that don't want to learn.
the 1932 Coutier device can be googled if you can do that your self. i already figured that device out years ago but i was just to busy with the Figuera device.
If you are serious about learning Norm just PM me and we will go from there as i will answer all of your questions but until then i have already covered every question you ever want to ask on the forum in much detail and so has Doug but no one cared to listen but me. you people should be very grateful to him not wiping your runny nose like a snot nose brats crying in a grocery store.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 15, 2018, 03:06:03 AM
Norman that was not called for from me and i do apologize. had a few rotten few days and just wanted to tell you that you are a good person.
the link to the 1932 Coutier device is http://freenrg.info/Patents/FR739458_COUTIER/FR739458_COUTIER_TRANS.html

what the device does is the six surrounding satellite cores pick up the 1 amp and 120 volts from the central core which are series to attain 6 amp at 120 volts. then the next set of cores are presented with 6 amp so each of the six satellite cores have six amp each times six equal 36 amp at 120 volts. the next will output 212 amps or what ever your desired output is. it can we wired back to it's self to power the original 1 amp at 120 volts.

after i finish with the Figuera device this device is next on the agenda.
again i am sorry for the snap as i should be grateful to share my knowledge. i tried to delete but was to late.
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on July 15, 2018, 01:58:27 PM
Marathonman I accept your apology  and I thank you for the url.
I will read up on that today.  I did not have any luck with google.

I do appreciate all that you have contributed and wish you the best of luck.
We all need another source of energy to survive long term.


Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 15, 2018, 04:49:30 PM
*Correction the 1932 Coutier device is paralleled to get the 6 amp not series, sorry for this mistake.* to much hard work.

This is absolutely true as ALL Corporations and our Own Governments are controlled by by rich disgusting bankers that want nothing better to do than control everything and kill the opposition to their agenda. Corporations like Monsanto and the like need to disappear as what people don't understand is the Zika Virus has been around for a long time, but it was when the Japanese subsidiary of Monsanto that introduced Larvaside that caused the Zika virus to transform and cause Microcephaly birth defects. MONSANTO cause this to happen not Zika.
Monsanto's Glyphosate is another killer. they use it as a standard in the industry for killing weeds and as a drying agent for things like wheat and other products. what people don't know is 1 part per Billion can cause ill effects to the human body yet Cheerios and many, many products have up to 1,100 parts per billion yet we are feeding it to our children.
the sad thing is Fluoride is 550 times more toxic than Glyphosate, 5 times more toxic than Mercury, 9 times more toxic than arsenic and 27 times more toxic than lead yet they still put it in our water supply under the disgusting guise it helps our F-in teeth.(Total Lie) Fluoride on contact to the human brain causes an iQ drop of up to 10 points and diminished skills plus a lethargic side effect making people lazy. GMO's are the most dangerous thing you can put into your body and can cause so many medical problems it is not funny. it is a seed that has had it's DNA fused with poison and will kill everything in it's path given enough time including the human race.

Yes i am a firm believer we need to balance out this power and these two device will aide in our quest. of the two devices the 1932 Coutier device will be the easiest to replicate. the Figuera device will be good for the home but in a bumpy environment could destroy the brushes so the Coutier device would be good for Golf carts, cars, plains ect.
Just my two cents worth.
Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 18, 2018, 05:38:30 AM
This graph depicts the the exact thing that is happening in the Figuera part G device.

as the brush is rotating the winding count changes per that side of the brush separated by two north opposing fields. as the magnetic field to current ratio is either increased or decreased per side it changes the opposition to current flow. the more the magnetic field linking loops the less current flow, the less magnetic field linking loops the more current will flow.

each loop added to that side of the brush will add to the magnetic field to current ratio so according to Faraday's Laws any change in magnetic field induces EMF which according to Faraday's Laws of induction to occur a magnetic field change has to take place in which it just did.  according to the Lenz Law it will be opposite to the original current flow which will reduce the original current flow as more loops are added and increase the current flow the more loops are subtracted.

each time the side that adds magnetic linking loops and current is reduced,  it will release the reduced current potential from the magnetic field into the system combined with the reducing primary's reduced potential will off set the rising side potential drop.

each time the side that subtracts magnetic linking loops and current is increased,  it will store into the magnetic field for the next half cycle of reduction causing a voltage drop on that half of the system.

each side of the system will off set each other so the added secondary loop back will cause the losses to be replaced and amplification within part G to the rising side of the system.


Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Acca on July 18, 2018, 07:32:38 PM
Great posts Marathonman  ....


Just read all your posts, will posts them in to  a "Explanation file"  for all my friends in Poland .. your great efforts are noted as I know it takes lots of time to compose such great explanations.


Poland is suffering from power as Russians  have a gas deal with Germans again... Poland is out...!! That is natural gas.. that is...


Acca..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 19, 2018, 02:12:53 AM
Holly crap thank you as i truly do thank the kind words.
As i have been telling people for years i have not one greedy bone in my body thus have no reason for lying in the first place. it was just everyone is so misguided from present day dogma taught schools system that they can't think for them selves any longer thus thinking out side the box eludes them to the tenth degree.
Yes i was shared information but it was not complete so it took some years and lots of bench work to verify what was said. i am so glad i am here to witness this and i truly hope you and your friends have or can come up with the resources to build this wonderful device.

I also suggest you investigate the 1932 Coutier device as it is simple to build and is self sustaining. i have posted the patent link on that device and i truly hope all my efforts help you and your friends in their blight. i am sick and tired of Corporate world beating people down.
Good luck my friend may God bless you with a blessed future.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Acca on July 19, 2018, 02:22:39 PM
Thanks for the response I now keep low as I have been wounded on this forums.. I am working on the way they move the international space station in to higher orbit with out the Third law of Newton.. It's a reaction-less method and it pushes against the vacuum of empty space.. "Eather space it's all invisible and yet solid"... sort of ...

Acca.. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I67n95-nT0A (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I67n95-nT0A)[/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 19, 2018, 02:38:42 PM
Acca;
Thomas Townsend Brown Electro-Gravity Device system could quite be in use but that is beyond the scope of this thread.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 19, 2018, 06:56:45 PM
It is quite amazing once you realize with the change of inductance the current flow will be reduced just how smart Figuera actually was in using an active not static inductor in his system. running current through one loop of wire over an Iron core will not change the current much at all but adding multiple loops to the core then you will have much more self inductance as the loops magnetically link to each other increasing the opposing magnetic field to current ratio. then using a closed core controller you will achieve an even higher efficiency with very little flux loss.

since the magnetic field is basically the brakes to current flow the larger the magnetic field the lower will be the current flow. as Faraday's states for any induction to take place all that is needed is for the magnetic flux to change within the circuit and never states anything about current. since we are using DC in the system the circuit has to be changing at a constant rate or self induction will cease.
so Figuera used an Inductor that has a positive moving contact that constantly changes the amount of loops that magnetically link to the circuit and in doing so constantly changes the intensity of both magnetic fields on either side of the brush that cause self induction within each independent sides of the circuit to take place.  this is in exact accordance with Faraday's Laws of induction.

If you have two negative sides to an Inductor with a moving positive brush contact,  you will in fact have two opposing magnetic fields at the positive contact that will keep those two sides of the circuit completely separate but in complete unison.

thus the end result that Figuera achieved was two electromagnets that increase and decrease in absolute unison which is required in order to maintain the required pressure between them and on going induction to take place. the magnetic fields will never combine yet the Electric fields are positive and additive.
then on top of all that, when one side is reduced that portion of the reduced magnetic field is released into the system combined with the reduced primary potential to off set the rising side voltage drop as any increase in magnetic field storage will cause a voltage drop in potential. he then looped back a portion of the output just like a standard generator, to replace the losses occurred and give rise to amplification to the rising primary.

Sheer Genius!

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 22, 2018, 03:17:25 PM
When the primaries polarize the secondaries it would seem that the South end of the secondaries are attracted to the north face of the opposing primaries but as current starts to flow in the secondaries and the load the Lenz Law comes into play developing a North Opposing field inside of the secondary. it is this field that is pushed from side to side across the secondary through the Electric field formed by the primaries.

the sweeping action of the primaries being raised and lowered with the North opposing field of the secondary being sandwiched in between them gives the secondary the illusion of motion to the Electric field. this is exactly like a standard generator as it to has to have motion through the Electric field in order for EMF to occur. the Electric field in a standard generator is stationary so the rotation of the rotor is used to induce EMF thus just like a standard generator the Figuera device uses the sweeping motion of the primaries with the opposing field of the secondary between them to induce EMF.

according to Faraday's Laws of induction to occur there has to be motion of either the field or the wire and that is what is taking place in a standard generator with the rotation of the rotor. in the Figuera device the sweeping action of the primaries from side to side with the opposing field of the secondary is this the very motion needed for EMF to occur. even though it is more like virtual motion it is still motion needed for EMF to take place.
thus in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of Induction.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AlienGrey on July 24, 2018, 08:28:37 PM
Thanks Marathonman for your comments but I never heard of
  "the 1932 Coutier device"  do you have a reference to that.

I understand what the flux change does without motion but the trick
is how do you embody that? I've read and tried but simple setups
have not been successful and no one to date has done that either.

Norman
do you mean Tesla's Unipolar Dynamo by any chance ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 25, 2018, 12:14:26 AM
No ! i mean the 1932 Coutier device. pronounced Cou-Ti- ay

I posted the link in post 4413 to Norman.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 26, 2018, 01:48:39 PM
At first i to was taken by the drawing many years ago and even made a small device with resistance wire but it got very hot in 5 minutes of usage.

upon further research i noticed the patent said, and i Quote; "R" the resistance is drawn in it's elementary manor to facilitate the Comprehension of the entire system."  I then noticed the wire in the R section was wavy like wire loops with this and it being in it's elementary manor it was quite evident it was not a resistor network. given the fact of this and resistance creates a lot of heat and losses there was no doubt it was an inductor as there is no way a Physics Professor would use a heat death part in his device..

from some good guidance i  began researching Inductors, Self Inductance and the Lenz Law and low and behold i came across this years ago in Wikipedia,   "Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current"

and

"The inductance of a coil can be increased by placing a magnetic core of ferromagnetic material in the hole in the center. The magnetic field of the coil magnetizes the material of the core, aligning its magnetic domains, and the magnetic field of the core adds to that of the coil, increasing the flux through the coil. This is called a ferromagnetic core inductor. A magnetic core can increase the inductance of a coil by thousands of times..

There are many other examples i can post but i am sure you get the drift as i am sure i already posted them.

I then began to do bench tests to verify this very Phenomenon and Bingo ! I found that a moving positive brush will in fact change the current on regular basis if and only if the brush contact stays in motion.

this is called magnetic flux linking that changes with the brush movement  that add or subtracts winding's to that side of the brush. with each magnetic link it changes the intensity of the magnetic field thus in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of Induction to occur as all it stated is a change in magnetic field.

in this case it will oppose the original current flow and amplified by the magnetic iron core. using thick wire you will achieve a very lossless near perfect Inductor that store and releases potential exactly when needed.

With AC the current change causes induction to occur with DC the change in the circuit causes the Induction to occur.

I rest my case.

as soon as my new brush holder is done and built it, i will release a video that shows the world just what an active Inductor can do. with lights replacing the Primaries for a good visual representation in complete Unison.
I have an appointment this afternoon with a CNC shop that said they can do my brush holder. i also will be introducing a new part G core at that time that is much easier to wind and balance.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 28, 2018, 01:01:43 PM
According to Faraday's Laws of induction all that is needed is for the flux to change in intensity either up or down. as long as the intensity changes you will have EMF in your system.

with AC the current up and down causes the flux change and this is the only thing that is taught in every school. what is not taught in school is if you use DC and change the circuit it self, it will cause a flux change producing EMF.
FLUX always has to change in order for EMF to occur.

if you constantly add or subtract winding's you are constantly changing the flux intensity the produces EMF that opposes the original current flow.
so in the Figuera device he used an Inductor with a moving positive brush that constantly changes the magnetic field to current ratio adding or subtracting loops to that side of the system. both halves of the system are either being raised or lowered at all times in complete unison. as it is being raised that half of the system is storing into the magnetic field for the next reduction cycle and the reducing side is releasing the stored magnetic potential into the system off setting the voltage drop of the rising side that is storing into the magnetic field.

The perfect inductor is in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of Induction that simply states there has to be a flux change in order for EMF to take place. so as the brush rotates the flux just changed and EMF is produced.
Imagine that !

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 30, 2018, 06:20:23 AM
It is really simple folks.
if you have X amount of loops on an iron core the self induction will be X amount that opposes the current flow. if the contact is stationary the current flow will equalize to a steady state.
if you add winding's to the coil the self Inductance will in fact have changed as adding loops changed the magnetic flux to current ratio causing an even larger current reduction then it to will equalize to a steady state.

if you move the contact on a continuous basis adding or subtracting loops, the self Induction will in fact change on a steady basis which will be opposing to the original current flow. so in doing so an EMF is produced in the circuit that opposes the original DC current flow because the magnetic flux has changed and this change according to Faraday's Laws of Induction will cause an EMF to occur.

static self induction taken to an active self induction with the rotation of a positive brush will in fact control current flow by changing the magnetic flux to current ratio which is in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of Induction.

anyone stating otherwise is just fooling themselves and others.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on July 30, 2018, 04:29:44 PM
IF THERE IS NO ALTERNATING CURRENT THEN THERE IS NO INDUCTIVE REACTANCE TO CHANGE.  INDUCTIVE REACTANCE IS DIRECTLY A FUNCTION OF A CHANGING CURRENT.  IF THERE IS ONLY A DIRECT CURRENT THEN THERE IS NO INDUCTIVE REACTANCE TO CHANGE.  A CHANGE IN INDUCTANCE HAS NO EFFECT AT ALL ON A DIRECT CURRENT.  Please read and understand the following information taken directly from an online electronic tutorial class:



Inductors and chokes are basically coils or loops of wire that are either wound around a hollow tube former (air cored) or wound around some ferromagnetic material (iron cored) to increase their inductive value called inductance.


Inductors store their energy in the form of a magnetic field that is created when a voltage is applied across the terminals of an inductor. The growth of the current flowing through the inductor is not instant but is determined by the inductors own self-induced or back emf value. Then for an inductor coil, this back emf voltage VL is proportional to the rate of change of the current flowing through it.


This current will continue to rise until it reaches its maximum steady state condition which is around five time constants when this self-induced back emf has decayed to zero. At this point a steady state current is flowing through the coil, no more back emf is induced to oppose the current flow and therefore, the coil acts more like a short circuit allowing maximum current to flow through it.


However, in an alternating current circuit which contains an AC Inductance, the flow of current through an inductor behaves very differently to that of a steady state DC voltage. Now in an AC circuit, the opposition to the current flowing through the coils windings not only depends upon the inductance of the coil but also the frequency of the applied voltage waveform as it varies from its positive to negative values.


The actual opposition to the current flowing through a coil in an AC circuit is determined by the AC Resistance of the coil with this AC resistance being represented by a complex number. But to distinguish a DC resistance value from an AC resistance value, which is also known as Impedance, the term Reactance is used.


Like resistance, reactance is measured in Ohm’s but is given the symbol “X” to distinguish it from a purely resistive “R” value and as the component in question is an inductor, the reactance of an inductor is called Inductive Reactance, ( XL ) and is measured in Ohms. Its value can be found from the formula.


 Inductive Reactance XL = 2 pi fL

 Where: XL is the Inductive Reactance in Ohms, ƒ is the frequency in Hertz and L is the inductance of the coil in Henries.


Now you can plainly see that for inductance to have any effect on the current the current has to be changing to produce the reactance necessary to change the current.  All the name calling and other put downs won't change that.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 30, 2018, 10:50:50 PM
"A CHANGE IN INDUCTANCE HAS NO EFFECT AT ALL ON A DIRECT CURRENT." what planet are you on Forrest.???
For someone that is suppose to be educated you sure can be rather Ignorant at times, well all the time really and beginning to be a royal pain in the ass. i sure wish you would pull your head out of your backside. why is explaining to you like taking to a wall or a brick.
Have you not read a single post and actually understood it.
inductive reactance for the 1,000th time is involved with AC.
with DC it is self inductance, you do know what self inductance is don't you.??? I am sure you were taught about self inductance in what ever school you went to.  self inductance is the magnetic linking to the loop next to it that produces EMF within the circuit to oppose the original current flow.
got it so far?????

Since using DC, because all electromagnets use DC even a standard generator, there has to be some kind of a change in order for the self inductance to be on going. so Figuera used a moving brush contact to change the magnetic field to current ratio that added loops to that side of the circuit that opposes the original current flow. if you continue to add loops to the circuit the magnetic field will in fact change in intensity increasing the magnetic field to current ratio.

we are no longer using a static Inductor as in AC circuits. we are using an active Inductor that has to have a moving contact that changes the magnetic flux on that side of the circuit. according to Faraday's Laws of Induction all that if needed for EMF to occur is a change in the magnetic field.

It can't be any more simple than that. if you can't understand this after 6 years maybe you need to either find another device to pursue or stop posting. i don't even think crayola crayon graph can help you if after 6 years you are still just as confused. Hanon finally bowed out from his lack of understanding maybe you should follow in his steps Cifta.

I am not trying to be mean but your total lack of knowledge about self inductance is really becoming bothersome to say the least.

Maybe the video i will be posting soon will fix your lack of self inductance knowledge and ease the massive confusion on your part. i only need one more part for my new part G and soon after the video will be release showing just how self inductance can and will control current flow through the primaries on a continuous basis.
you have been TOTALLY WRONG for 6 years and i will look forward to embarrassing you in front of GOD and everybody. after you watch my video you should be on your knees Apologising for the BS torment you and your lousy followers caused me. even a person with a PHD in electrical Engineering said i was spot on.

your utter lack of knowledge makes me laugh quite frequently.


Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pmgr on July 31, 2018, 07:46:01 PM
Cifta,

I am reposting an older post from myself here down below. Flux can be changed by either changing L or I (they only teach you the "I"-variation version in school, and in your case online). So current can certainly be changed by changing inductance.

Here is the old post:

MarathonMan is spot on.

EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used.

And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.

The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.

PmgR
=====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net/) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org/)*
Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on July 31, 2018, 09:10:53 PM
Cifta,

I am reposting an older post from myself here down below. Flux can be changed by either changing L or I (they only teach you the "I"-variation version in school, and in your case online). So current can certainly be changed by changing inductance.

Here is the old post:

MarathonMan is spot on.

EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used.

And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.

The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.

PmgR
=====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net/) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org/)*
Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org/)
                   There is a special expression which plays an important rule :                 
                                                     Wattless current             
      Reference : Timor Kemeny rexresearch                                       and Dr. Pavel Imris             

       To understand this kind of technology there is the need to study                   the Lord Kelvin spring-condensator analogon  related RT- superconductor

                  and to accept that our conventional calculators are not "New Physics"-World normated :                 
                       the use from a divisor 0 gives normally an " syntax error " answer but in a           
             ART and SRT world the 0 is the xyz-geometric body tensor center, origami-arithmetics

              How release an arithmetical impossibility when it is physically possible and usefull       
           This EE-formula, used daybyday by myriads of engineers and technicians,
 over the time        by the several systematic changes wrong interpreted or only not conditionized as shown :                                                                 constant or variant                       
                                 EMF under scalar and vector rule applying, honoring cosinus,sinus and tangente
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 31, 2018, 10:25:59 PM
Cifta is NOT ME !
Anyway I believe it will work based on self inductance of coil but in fact the self-inductance is contrary to the amount of flux switched because the larger self-inductance the larger the amount of turns required which makes a coil with too many ohms. To solve that Tesla used high voltage but hv is rather not usable if you start to catch the OU. Of course if you make a coil with very long wire an very thick one it will work both for current flow and for controlling self-inductance. For relatively low voltages we have to stick to very high frequencies to see the result of tiny change in inductance when you jump one turn of coil... imho
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on July 31, 2018, 11:13:24 PM
Mr Forest,
I certainly was not referring to you and i do apologize  as you took it that way.
I was referring Cifta to Forest Gump in the movie.

as for the ohms, the original replicator used 3x5 millimeter wire for his alternator core at around 80 to 100 winds so still very little ohms. with low resistance that equates to a very efficient Inductor as what Figuera did.
as for the frequencies, Figuera was in Barcelona Spain so i am guessing 50 HZ which is 3,000 RPM brush.

Thanks PMGR, they just don't get it do they, changing Inductance over time causing current reduction.(continuously)

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on July 31, 2018, 11:36:05 PM
Cifta,

I am reposting an older post from myself here down below. Flux can be changed by either changing L or I (they only teach you the "I"-variation version in school, and in your case online). So current can certainly be changed by changing inductance.

Here is the old post:

MarathonMan is spot on.

EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used.

And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.

The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.

PmgR
=====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net/) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org/)*
Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org/)
PMGR,

I think you missed the whole point of my post.  Of course you can change flux by changing the number of turns of a coil.  I never said you couldn't.  What I see as foolishness is believing that changing the flux will have any effect on a DIRECT CURRENT.  If you know of a way to control DC current by changing the flux then please feel free to explain that.  Once the voltage stabilizes the only thing that will change the DC current is a change in the resistance of the circuit NOT the inductance as inductive reactance can't even be calculated if the current is DC.

Respectfully,Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 01, 2018, 04:10:11 AM
 THAT'S BECAUSE IT IS NOT INDUCTIVE REACTANCE. it's just Inductance or rather SELF INDUCTANCE.

Quote "Once the voltage stabilizes"

OMG ! can you NOT read, it doesn't ever stabilize as the brush is constantly moving changing the magnetic flux to current ratio. this is what happens when you take a static Inductor to an active position in the circuit.
If the Inductor was a static device yes it would but it is NOT and is constantly changing it's contact that adds or subtracts winding's to that side of the circuit.
a static Inductor when hit with DC will curb the current for a short time, WHY ? because of self inductance then it will equalize if not other change in the circuit. so how do you get constant current control ????
by changing the contact as the brush rotates so the current never stabilizes. it constantly changes the magnetic flux to current ratio which is in complete compliance with Faraday's Laws of induction that states all that is needed for induction to take place is a change in magnetic field.
GUESS WHAT ? it just did as the brush rotates and it will oppose the original current flow, store and release magnetic potential from the field into the system to off set the potential of the rising side of the system.

I know you won't believe me but will you believe a PHD in Electrical Engineering.??? probably Not
your loss if not.

hell half of my quotes i got off of Wikipedia and other Physics sites so i guess they are wrong also. go tell them they are wrong and see the reaction you get. i need a good laugh right now.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: pmgr on August 01, 2018, 06:18:30 AM
PMGR,

I think you missed the whole point of my post.  Of course you can change flux by changing the number of turns of a coil.  I never said you couldn't.  What I see as foolishness is believing that changing the flux will have any effect on a DIRECT CURRENT.  If you know of a way to control DC current by changing the flux then please feel free to explain that.  Once the voltage stabilizes the only thing that will change the DC current is a change in the resistance of the circuit NOT the inductance as inductive reactance can't even be calculated if the current is DC.

Respectfully,Carroll
Dear Carroll,

I did not miss the point of your post. The issue is that you already assume a DC current from the start (t=0) while driving the circuit with a DC voltage source. The circuit will start up with a transient current and that transient will never converge to a DC value because the inductance is being changed continuously as a function of t (time). This is because there will be a voltage generated over the coil that is equal to d(flux)/dt=d(L*I)/dt.


So you have a DC voltage driving the circuit and a time varying voltage over the coil. As such the current will not be constant, but vary as well (and keep varying) over time as long as the inductance keeps varying.

These things can be very easily proven mathematically, or with a simulation.

PmgR
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 01, 2018, 09:18:20 AM
Dear Carroll,

I did not miss the point of your post. The issue is that you already assume a DC current from the start (t=0) while driving the circuit with a DC voltage source. The circuit will start up with a transient current and that transient will never converge to a DC value because the inductance is being changed continuously as a function of t (time). This is because there will be a voltage generated over the coil that is equal to d(flux)/dt=d(L*I)/dt.


So you have a DC voltage driving the circuit and a time varying voltage over the coil. As such the current will not be constant, but vary as well (and keep varying) over time as long as the inductance keeps varying.

These things can be very easily proven mathematically, or with a simulation.

PmgR
Or by physical experiment and results publication : go to espacenet
applicant: EdF which means Electricite de France 
superconductive circuit related and relatively "endless" electricity/plasma storage


a world without Ohms law and Kirchhoffs rules application possibility/need : 
no or low resistivity         Hypersonic velocity and with Teslas "dielectric"properties
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 01, 2018, 12:35:11 PM
Very well put PMGR.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 01, 2018, 01:07:35 PM
Yep well put , but again in theory. You would need like below micro-second switching time between one turn to another for real change in inductance
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: endlessoceans on August 01, 2018, 04:28:35 PM
Yep well put , but again in theory. You would need like below micro-second switching time between one turn to another for real change in inductance

Hilarious.   all these people pretending to be other people pretending that they know such a great deal about free energy

You talk like you know how it works Tito/Forest/whatever.  What is the point of these thousands posts?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 01, 2018, 08:27:09 PM
Give me example of one single of my post which would be as useless as yours and stop this silly game. I'm not Tito
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 01, 2018, 11:22:55 PM
endlessoceans;
  I have been researching this device for 6 Years (EXCLUSIVELY) with many, many hours on the bench proving what was shown to me by the original replicator. i think i do know what i am talking about, with full build almost finished.
the posts are for people to learn but i guess on this site people just shut their free thinking totally OFF along with logic and let the mouth take over. i just don't know any more.

Forest;
Do you not think an 80 wind 3600 RPM rotating brush is NOT in the low to sub millisecond range. please do the math Sir.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 01, 2018, 11:38:00 PM
By my calculation that comes out to be .208 milliseconds per winding so YES IT IS in the micro second range.
imagine that !
just maybe somebody will actually learn some thing on this site instead of blindingly posting. understand what is posted and if not, study until you do understand it instead of crying foul.
Life is good on my end, how about everyone else.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: jhewitt03041976@gmail.com on August 02, 2018, 12:40:52 AM
what was the gauge of the wire ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: endlessoceans on August 02, 2018, 01:28:57 AM
endlessoceans;
  I have been researching this device for 6 Years (EXCLUSIVELY) with many, many hours on the bench proving what was shown to me by the original replicator. i think i do know what i am talking about, with full build almost finished.
the posts are for people to learn but i guess on this site people just shut their free thinking totally OFF along with logic and let the mouth take over. i just don't know any more.

Forest;
Do you not think an 80 wind 3600 RPM rotating brush is NOT in the low to sub millisecond range. please do the math Sir.
Regards,
Marathonman


Marathon man

Well said.  Too much thoughtless talk indeed.  Like yourself I am on the bench constantly and that's where the truth lies....whether it be good or bad.

Some of these threads are just farsical and thousands of pages long talking in circles.  Theory is fine but once people have postulated that theory they should go test it on the bench...THAT is what is termed scientific method.  If the theory fails you now know one more way in which not to go.

Otherwse talking theory endlessly is like wondering why your imaginary Unicorn won't gallop faster when whipping it.  LOL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: endlessoceans on August 02, 2018, 01:33:11 AM
Give me example of one single of my post which would be as useless as yours and stop this silly game. I'm not Tito

I didn't have long to wait.....I give you your example
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: endlessoceans on August 02, 2018, 01:40:20 AM
You would need like below micro-second switching time between one turn to another for real change in inductance

Wrong!!!

One of the biggest fallacies perpetuated is that Microwave switching is required
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 02, 2018, 11:14:44 AM
Switching or commutation( cum mutere or cum mutare ?) can also depend how many bi-/dipolar electro- or Permanent magnets constitute the rotation  per minute cycle/circuit.

How many turns do you need for 1 kVA(r) ? : strictly  differing between " coil turns " and " Ampere turns" !!!
            Emf= "coil turns /Ampere turns" ratio dependend =
          angewandte kinematische Relativistik/Quantenmechanismus                 
         "ratio" in applied physics=RELATIVITY in german Relativitaet/Verhaeltnis

In radio-and television engineering the fm and am : frequency and amplitude modulation

how to refind this in rectenna devices ( emissor + receptor + antenna) like developed  by Tesla,Plausson and Figuera !?
Sincerely

p.s.: the "New Physics -Relativitaetstheorie" developed and defined by Prof. Herman Minkowski and his student Albert Einstein ( differing as ART and SRT) became actually one time more approved.
ART zu ALTT Allgemeine Lorentz Transformation (nicht-euklidisch/euklidische Relativitaet)s Theorie

SRT  zu SLTT Spezifische Lorentz Transformation ( nichteuklidisch/ euklidische Realtivitaet)s Theorie

Wo befindet sich der 0-punkt wo sich die menschlische Welt der geometrischen Dimensionen zu algebraische Dimensionen hinuebertransformiert,digitalisiert !?
Die digitale algebraische/psychische  Gedankenwelt sich in die geometrische reale/physische Welt uebersetzt ?
                                              META-(morphose/physica)Engineering
0-XYZ Koordination numerischer Festlegung, Computer Numeric Controle, zu programmierter artefizieller Welt, 4d computerisierter und integrierter visueller Simulator, zu3d part(icel)smassprint machines               
       Synthese von Mensch und max./min. Potential-Weltbild und Maschine zu "Mensch"-integrierter Maschine                   
                                  C.N. C.N.C.     C.N- C.A.D.  C.N.-C.I.M. C.N.-C.A.M.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 02, 2018, 01:51:41 PM
And you MR endlessoceans would be entirely correct. i just posted the times to give someone heads up how fast the switching is done but in reality it can happen at much, much slower frequencies.
years ago i told a member Hanon that he could hook a Variac up with DC then attach two lights to the output then twist the knob and watch the lights do the same thing as the Figuera device. when he twisted the knob both lights raised and lowered opposite of each other in complete unison which was acting as an active Inductor with the twist of the knob.
the frequency couldn't have been more than a few hertz at best and yet the bulbs raised and lowered perfectly in unison. here lies the problem with most self appointed authorities on this web site " Their brain gets in the way" of proper reasoning and post negative comments because it is outside of their understanding so it must be wrong.  mind you I am not pointing fingers as they expose themselves.
this video is something people like Cifta, Bistander, Seaad, elcheapo, Ranswami, darediamond and the "like" refuse to acknowledge the facts that Inductance can and will control current flow but i won't mention no names. Ha, Ha, Ha !

the reality of the matter in question is the Figuera device used an active Inductor to control the current flow through the primaries at the same time as storing and releasing potential thus all the DOGMA TAUGHT schooling in the world can not change this fact or complete ignorance for that matter.

another person with a brain....... this is a good thing.
regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: endlessoceans on August 02, 2018, 03:03:51 PM
And you MR endlessoceans would be entirely correct. i just posted the times to give someone heads up how fast the switching is done but in reality it can happen at much, much slower frequencies.
years ago i told a member Hanon that he could hook a Variac up with DC then attach two lights to the output then twist the knob and watch the lights do the same thing as the Figuera device. when he twisted the knob both lights raised and lowered opposite of each other in complete unison which was acting as an active Inductor with the twist of the knob.
the frequency couldn't have been more than a few hertz at best and yet the bulbs raised and lowered perfectly in unison. here lies the problem with most self appointed authorities on this web site " Their brain gets in the way" of proper reasoning and post negative comments because it is outside of their understanding so it must be wrong.  mind you I am not pointing fingers as they expose themselves.
this video is something people like Cifta, Bistander, Seaad, elcheapo, Ranswami, darediamond and the "like" refuse to acknowledge the facts that Inductance can and will control current flow but i won't mention no names. Ha, Ha, Ha !

the reality of the matter in question is the Figuera device used an active Inductor to control the current flow through the primaries at the same time as storing and releasing potential thus all the DOGMA TAUGHT schooling in the world can not change this fact or complete ignorance for that matter.

another person with a brain....... this is a good thing.
regards,
Marathonman

Dogma.....ahh statement so true.   well said!    98% thread content contain Logical fallacies regurgitated and lapped up like its a Michelin star meal.

Your assessment of the Figuera device spot on. 

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 02, 2018, 03:43:30 PM
I have the original replicator to thank for setting me on this path of enlightenment.


jhewitt03041976@gmail.com;
sorry missed your post.

Wire size is irrelevant but the thicker wire will last longer (can be reworked) and have less resistance which equates to less losses....ie. the most efficient Inductor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 02, 2018, 08:19:53 PM
https://vimeo.com/178144785

Hi d3x0r , All
That stay on lit delay effect is a bit puzzling. And I wonder if the voltage across the bulbs goes higer than the battery voltage? I have tried to simulate this circuit with a 20 steps LT Spice Simulation but it gave no such delay effects. I think we have to build a simple test bed with a real variable transformer. But sadly I don't own such. Maybe someone in the audience here is in the possession  of a variable transformer and can replicate that simple test with an osc-scope connected also to verify the effects? A higher voltage across the bulbs and the delay effect.

MM Quote above: " this video is something people like Cifta, Bistander, Seaad, elcheapo, Ranswami, darediamond and the "like" refuse to acknowledge the facts that Inductance can and will control current flow but i won't mention no names. Ha, Ha, Ha ! "

False!

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on August 02, 2018, 08:49:14 PM
Hi Arne,

I agree.  Anyone with the least bit of electrical knowledge can easily see if you turn the variac control wiper to the far left end, the path of least RESISTANCE is through the left bulb.  And when you turn it all the way to right end of the variac, the path of least RESISTANCE is through the bulb on the right.  Inductance has absolutely nothing to do with changing the bulb brightness.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 02, 2018, 08:59:34 PM
seaad;
It's is good you have come to this realization.

Cifta;
you are wrong as always,  all the wire together has very little resistance otherwise it would get to hot and when using DC through a variac the twist of the knob stopped so did the self inductance and the bulbs grew bright together but when moved induction is taking place that opposes the original current flow.  it really doesn't matter as the Figuera device uses an inductor and i can care less what you or anyone else thinks.
I just so happen to be right and every one else is starting to realize this. their are still a select few that can not grasp changing Inductance over time changes current flow but that is YOUR demon not mine.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 02, 2018, 09:22:58 PM
MM I understood about that far way back when Hanon where "on line ". Thats why I sent that Video again in April 2018. And I'm still interested to see a measured  test with a real Variac.

citfta: I'm agree to your first and second sentence but not the last. [if you stop moving the knob only resistace is involved]
Inductance and some transformer effect is certainly involved. Just look at the video and see when Hannon is moving the knob partsly off a full rash.
See my second quote about the delay and my question of making an "amplification" test.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on August 02, 2018, 09:44:07 PM
Here's just a quick digital version. A switch is turned on sequentially(non-contiguous) to simulate the brush moving.
Quote
$ 1 0.000005 5.459815003314424 50 5 50
l 384 160 464 160 0 0.1 -0.4334366751837754
l 464 160 544 160 0 0.1 -0.43343622777604196
l 544 160 624 160 0 0.1 0.119634638944217
l 624 160 704 160 0 0.1 0.11963587722670607
l 704 160 784 160 0 0.1 0.11963735683521352
l 784 160 864 160 0 0.1 0.11963853663744134
r 384 160 320 160 0 1
r 864 160 928 160 0 1
g 320 160 304 160 0
g 928 160 944 160 0
159 432 208 464 208 0 20 10000000000
159 512 240 544 240 0 20 10000000000
159 592 272 624 272 0 20 10000000000
159 672 304 704 304 0 20 10000000000
159 752 336 784 336 0 20 10000000000
159 832 368 864 368 0 20 10000000000
w 464 160 464 208 0
w 544 160 544 240 0
w 624 160 624 272 0
w 704 160 704 304 0
w 784 160 784 336 0
w 864 160 864 368 0
R 256 208 208 208 0 0 40 12 0 0 0.5
w 256 208 432 208 0
w 432 208 432 240 0
w 432 240 512 240 0
w 512 240 512 272 0
w 512 272 592 272 0
w 592 272 592 304 0
w 592 304 672 304 0
w 672 304 672 336 0
w 672 336 752 336 0
w 752 336 752 368 0
w 752 368 832 368 0
163 416 512 432 496 0 10 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w 448 224 448 480 0
R 416 544 368 544 1 2 1000 2.5 2.5 0 0.5
w 480 480 480 336 0
w 480 336 528 336 0
w 528 336 528 256 0
w 608 288 608 368 0
w 608 368 512 368 0
w 512 368 512 480 0
w 544 480 544 400 0
w 544 400 688 400 0
w 688 400 688 320 0
w 576 480 576 432 0
w 576 432 768 432 0
w 768 432 768 352 0
w 608 480 608 448 0
w 608 448 848 448 0
w 848 448 848 384 0
w 640 480 640 464 0
w 640 464 816 464 0
I 816 464 816 576 0 0.5 5
w 816 576 736 576 0
o 6 8 0 4099 2.5 0.8 0 2 6 3
o 7 8 0 4099 2.5 0.8 1 2 7 3
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 02, 2018, 09:44:12 PM
[if you stop moving the knob only resistance is involved]
Absolutely correct and the fact that Induction will cease just like a standard Inductor and full current flow will resume. so to avoid this and have on going Induction there has to be a moving contact that is adding and subtracting loops that magnetically link to that side of the circuit.
so in doing this the magnetic field is either getting stronger or weaker all the time causing Induction to take place that opposes the original current flow.
Thus changing the magnetic flux to current ratio on a steady basis.
it's just that simple folks.

DreamThinkBuild; I don't see that circuit working with the Figuera device. at each transition Inductance will cease as the pressure between the primaries can not be maintained nor can the potential be stored or released properly. good luck just the same.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 04, 2018, 11:39:48 AM
A standard Generator;

As the requirements for larger scale power generation increased, a new limitation rose: the magnetic fields available from permanent magnets. Diverting a small amount of the power generated by the generator to an electromagnetic field coil allowed the generator to produce substantially more power. This concept was dubbed self-excitation.

The field coils are connected in series or parallel with the armature winding. When the generator first starts to turn, the small amount of remanent magnetism present in the iron core provides a magnetic field to get it started, generating a small current in the armature. This flows through the field coils, creating a larger magnetic field which generates a larger armature current. This "bootstrap" process continues until the magnetic field in the core levels off due to saturation and the generator reaches a steady state power output.

as you can see the residual magnetization left in the field coils is already polarized ie. a North Field and a South Field thus can immediately start producing power and as it says a SMALL amount of it's output is used to further excite the field coils until the Generator is producing more power than the field coils and the load combined. this power used to excite the field coils is RIDICULOUSLY small compared to it's output and once the field is up to running conditions the power used to maintain the fields is the I2R losses according to Sparky Sweet.
In the Figuera device we have the EXACT same thing happening except the fact that the Flashing (polarization) has to take place every time it is started. once the field coils and part G's fields are up to running conditions the power to maintain the field magnets are reduced to that of just the I2R losses just like a standard generator.

since a standard generator uses two fields (N & S) and rotates through them from low high low of the North then low high low of the South in the Figuera device we need some way to get the same conditions in the field coils and that is where part G comes into play.
by using self inductance of the coils on the core of part G we get reverse induced voltage to counter act the incoming currant thus reducing the currant flow through the field coils allowing us to shift the fields of the field coils back and fourth. with the North North opposing fields in part G at the positive brush Figuera was able to keep both side or the inductor independent while keeping each side in complete unison. as the brush rotated winding loops were added or subtracted magnetically linking or unlinking to the circuit which allowed each side of the brush to increase or decrease the currant flow through the primary field coils thus sweeping the fields back and fourth over the secondary.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 04, 2018, 12:44:08 PM
Hello Marathonman,your generator electro-magnetical self-excitating arrangement (feedback) is the reazon why for the machine with electricity producing effect an EE pioneer named Mister Siemens baptizised this machine  also as "dynamo" and " fiat lux: Lichtmaschine" !
for example often used for bicycle  light/electricity generating machines
The "part G" what you explain is for me exactly the function what a " time or pulse or function"-generator
 today does as energy field controler or physical " Laplace Operator" of modern motors or generator                        often called  as electric machine "soft driver"( f .e. also  N.A.S.A., Engineer Nola invention)

Literature about electro-magnet power consume per mmf- force unit (Newton as unit term,  ancient Gauss and Oersted)DE19706659 Electromagnet with an embeded battery and coil.
 Inventor: Hans-Joachim Gromm

COUPLING with periodically on/off switch/generator device possible

Question :
Total real c.o.p. efficiencies from electric motors and generators in the twenties from the last century ?Not physics theoretical, not somewhere(EE laboratory, hobby engineer) finded optimized prototypes 
but the real used - today as artefact to find in museums-
on or off grid working conventional electric machine !!! ?
60% or 50% or 40% or 30% or 20% or which input/output relativity number in per-centage ?
Which  is today the real c.o.p. efficiency from an conventional electro-magnetical sub-1kVA or 1kW range electric Alternating Current generator or Alternating Current motor away from their nominal peak efficiency ?
             Fixed kinetical 3000 RPM/potential 50Hz-cycles grid parity
 100% full nominal load: 50 % up to 75% c.o.p. ( WEG/EFACEC catalog numbers)
Then 75% potential capacity used to nominal load
 to 50%/ half load to 100% nominal load
to 25%/ quarter load to nominal 100% nominal load efficiency ?
The actual worldwide on grid electric machine c.o.p. can be estimated to have a 20% efficiency performancecaused by over-powered fixed RPM( grid Hz parity) machine combination related to the physical comercial/ industrial/ private household function and work process energy needs
Solution: variable speed drive
Accomplished the electric net system resistance losts and the power plant transformation efficiency the energetic system is totally a sub-10% performer = 90% potential energy destroyer not user
EE performance calculation fiasko

Since the Eigthees there is a scientifical and ecological "Faktor 10" movement and associated a "2KWH per capita/ day" organisation
"Future vision" : "Re-Engineering" work in progress : per capita consume monitoring and personal oeco-Audit                            Actual  7,6 Billion habitants each one his personal  "Energiepass"             

               you consume .....          you shall consume .....       Counteract penal warning/ compensation
shall : have to, must
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 05, 2018, 03:08:41 PM
 When the brush is in motion there will be North><North fields at the brush keeping each side of the Inductor separate. when the brush moves, 3,600 RPM US 3,000 RPM all others, adding one link to that side of the system it is adding to the intensity of the magnetic field , increasing magnetic flux to current ratio, as the current is the same in that loop. when you increase the magnetic field you will in fact cause an EMF to occur which is in exact accordance with Faraday's Laws of Induction. this EMF Induced will be in the opposite direction of the original current flow thus reducing the original current flow as each subsequent loops are added.
as each subsequent loop is added or subtracted to that side of the brush causes an increase or decrease in the magnetic field that induces an EMF to oppose the original current flow. the more loops that are added the less the original current flow, the less loops the more current will flow.
this method used by Figuera is changing the magnetic flux to current ratio which in in exact accordance with Faraday's Laws of induction that simply states there has to be a change in the magnetic field for Induction to take place. so as the brush moves so does the change in the intensity of the magnetic field on either side of the brush causing the reverse EMF to oppose the original current flow.

each time a loop is added to that side of the system the magnetic field will increase and the current flow through that side of the system will decrease and since the current is decreasing it will release that reduced portion of the magnetic field in the form of a potential into the system to off set the rising side of the system.

each time a loop is subtracted from the other side of the system the magnetic field will decrease and the current flow through that side of the system will increase and since the current is increasing it will be storing into the magnetic field for the next half cycle. each time it stores into the magnetic field there will be a potential drop on that side of the system which is off set by the reducing side of the system.

the secondary feed back being just like a standard generator is there to replace the losses occurred and to give rise to amplification to the rising primaries.

in the event of the reduction of current flow through the primaries the intensity of the magnetic field will be reduced thus just like part G Inductor, will release that reduced portion of it's magnetic field in the form of potential combined with part G's reduced potential that off set the rising side of the system. the potential within the exciting system is never depleted and is recycled just like a standard generator system.
each part of the system being the exciting system or the Induced system are separate systems and once the polarization takes place in the Figuera system they part ways and it is just the relative motion of the primaries that impart motion into the secondaries through the coherent Electric fields from both the primaries combined.


Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 05, 2018, 04:38:14 PM
Self induction within the circuit in the Figuera part G Inductor that opposes the original current flow.
EMF=d(L*I)/dt. any change in the circuit either increasing or decreasing will change the magnetic field thus in compliance with Faraday's Laws of Induction.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2018, 12:57:57 AM
If "L" increases "I" decreases, if "L" decreases "I" increases.
EMF=d(L*I)/dt.
plain and simple.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on August 06, 2018, 09:43:26 AM
If "L" increases "I" decreases, if "L" decreases "I" increases.
EMF=d(L*I)/dt.
plain and simple.
Regards,
Marathonman
              the electromagnetic force written                  =d(L*I)/dt
              the electromagnetic force  written                 = BLI
 ergo                                                              d(L*I)/dt= BLI

                            One formula for the physician and one formula for the engineer/technician             
                            Volt ? Ampere ? virtual Ampere-turns ? physical coil- turns ? Ohm/Kirchhoff ?

                                                yes,plain=clear for the mind and simple= not complex
but this for a constant force definition
 how to calculate an increased force or decreased force variance as kinetic or potential velocity.

Is the variance relativity(=relationship) arithmetical linear or progressive or dynamical.

And least: is there a physical limit  for example a.by material specific values limitation
b. ambiental condition c. ..... et cetera
                         
we as educated humans have in "conventional" maths( in german "Grund-Rechnen-Arten" ) law-limit: 
 In relations ( maths " division : divident/ divisor) the divisor has "ever" to be greater zero   
 In physics( multidimensional zero point coordination system with cos,sin,tan) the divisor can be   = 0 analog the car engines " Leerlauf" , RUHEPOSITION(but in motion, consuming)


Nobody,  wo is not "MENGENLEHRE" ( goto search-machine and listen what it is) ducated, understand Plancks Quanten-Paar-Physik(Quantumphysics) cause here you enter the " possibilities"-world from   
"myriad= uncalculable many=VOLLE MENGE" to {0} Finally to less than  physical O the emptyness stage { } = LEERE MENGENRESULTAT
comparative with 0°KELVIN stage = absolute Ruhepol

Natuerliche,reale,reelle,rationale,irrationale ,positive,negative numbers-world~
                                         brain/cyber/fantasia/dream-land               
                                         peace or war - visionary
                           
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on August 06, 2018, 12:28:25 PM
Marathonman,

I sincerely apologize for all the times I said you were wrong.  I believe I finally understand what you are saying.  I watched the video several times and you are correct that the brightness does change a lot when the wiper is moving but settles down when the wiper stops moving.  I have spent several hours trying to figure that out.

I have come to this conclusion.  Yes there is a steady state of current and flux when a DC current is applied to an inductor.  And along with that steady state there is of course a steady magnetic field around the inductor.  When you change the number of turns of the inductor you are causing a disruption or change to that magnetic field and as you have said several hundred times that change in magnetic field translates into a change in the current while that change is taking place.  So as you have said if you keep the brush moving and continually change the number of turns then the current can be controlled by the changing inductor.

Do I finally have that correct?

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2018, 12:41:25 PM
YES ! FINALLY and Congratulations. welcome to MY world. now reread all my previous posts and visualize what is taking place.
Part G changes the magnetic flux to current ratio, increase, decrease, opposing EMF produced.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 06, 2018, 09:01:03 PM
But creates the part-G the entire OU Effect itself ?

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2018, 10:56:10 PM
That design will be very inefficient. not only is the wire hanging in free air loosing induction also the core HAS to be a closed core. no unnecessary losses.
Part G it's self does not and can not be OU. it reuses the potential in the exciting system to act up on another closed system. it is all about maintaining the pressure in the system and both are a sort of closed systems. 

News about the toroid, while i know the toroid core does work as the original replicator used, it was very finicky and a pain in the back side to balance. so myself and another builder have been discussing the problems about the toroid and both of us came to the same conclusion. the  toroid is peaky due to the parallel inductance on the non active side of the toroid. what this does is give interference to the active side causing it to be very peaky and a bitch to balance.
so i took it upon myself to have a special C core made that will eliminate the the problems and be much easier to balance. after running sims on the core  it seams the C core was very much more smooth in this area and will be much easier to wind and balance. a wide center E I core will work also avoiding the previous issues. as long as it is a closed core.

it will be presented shortly.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 06, 2018, 11:10:24 PM
.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2018, 11:30:28 PM
Here is a pic of my new core i had made. it is a C-Core that is a closed core that will not only be mush easier to balance but much, much easier to wind compared to the toroid.
the second pic is a picture of my adjustable brush holder that is being CNC milled.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 06, 2018, 11:59:18 PM
Just received the rest of my Brush holder parts from Eurton electric. Finally getting some where.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 07, 2018, 11:29:20 PM
The bearing in the picture will be press fit on the widest part of the lower shaft to relieve the pressure from the motor coupling that way each part can do it's intended job with no undue pressure. it looks like i will be able to wind my C core Thursday, on my day off. i purchased some golf club epoxy that has a three hour window and cures in 24. this should give me enough time to wind the core. then i will tip up side down with some weight and let cure overnight.
shop will do the high speed precision polishing of the surface for perfect flatness that avoids sparking.
regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 08, 2018, 01:51:30 AM
The pic below will give you the general idea of what i am shooting for. as i said the toroid did work but was buggy and had balancing issues and the tests so far says the C core is a total go.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 08, 2018, 01:26:55 PM
 
4 x H

Regards A
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on August 08, 2018, 10:08:36 PM
I have tried several times to post some information to this forum about an alternative way to make the part G.  For some reason I have not been able to post that.  When I click on the post button nothing happens.  So here is a link to the post I made on the Energetic Forum about that idea.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-91.html?posted=1#post312285 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-91.html?posted=1#post312285)

Look for post 2721.  If you have any questions please ask.

Regards,
Carroll

PS:  I don't know why it let me post this but not the full message.  Very strange.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on August 08, 2018, 10:20:05 PM
Hi Carroll,
This is the direct link to your  #2721 post:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-91.html#post312259 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-91.html#post312259) 
Have you tried copy and paste the text to your above post for instance? or you mean you did but then you found nothing happened?  Maybe Stefan restricted the maximum number of characters recently...  it would not be good.
Gyula
EDIT  perhaps try to split the text into two or three parts and bring the pictures too.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on August 08, 2018, 10:26:03 PM

 Okay,


 
My testing shows this may be a possible way to make a much simpler part G.  And it should be very easy to scale this up.  I modified a universal motor to give me the opposing sine waves that do NOT go below zero.  The following pictures and description should allow anyone to do this without a lot of machining or other expense.


 
As most of you know a universal motor will run on DC or AC because it has field windings that change polarity in time with the armature windings.  Be disconnecting the field windings we now have an armature and two brushes.  To modify the motor you need to mark where on the output shaft the bearing is sitting.  Now take the motor apart and grind a flat side on the shaft the extends beyond the area where the bearing was.  How deep you need to grind the flat spot will depend on what gauge wire you are going to use.  We are going to run a wire from one of the commutator tabs through one of the slots in the armature and then down to the output shaft and into the flat area you ground on the output shaft.  The wire needs to extend well past the bearing area.


 
After you put some glue similar to Goop or rubber cement on the wire in the flat area then you slide the front of the motor back onto the shaft and bolt the motor back together.  The glue is to keep the wire from moving around and rubbing the insulation off the wire in the area of the bearing.  You can see how I did this in the picture number 4 if you look closely.


 
Next you need to make a slip ring of some kind.  I used a wooden dowel and my lathe to drill a hole dead center in the dowel that was slightly smaller than the motor shaft.  I then turned the outside of the dowel until it was a very snug fit inside a short piece of copper fitting. I put glue on the dowel and then pressed the copper fitting onto the dowel.  I then put glue on the motor shaft and inside the dowel and pressed the dowel onto the motor shaft.


 
After that glue has dried then you need to solder the wire to the side of the copper fitting.  I believe you can also see that in one of the pictures.  Now you need to make some kind of brush holder to hold a brush that will contact the slip ring you have made.  You can see I just took an old broken brush holder from a junk motor and some hot glue and a couple of pieces of wood to make a quick brush holder.  Of course something much better made would be necessary for a real part G.  This was just a quick and dirty method to test my idea.


 
To connect this as a part G you would connect you supply lead to the brush holder for the brush going to the slip ring.  Then from each of the original brushes you would connect to the two primary coils of your device.  I should mention that the original brushes are not connected to anything else once you disconnect them from the original field coils.


 
Now you just need a way to power your new part G the same as you had to do to the original part G.  For my simple tests I just use my portable electric drill.  I tightened my chuck up on the end of the motor shaft and then powered it that way.


 
I have included some pictures of both ends of the motor and also a scope shot of the signals going to each coil.  The slower part G turns the less effect it has on the DC voltage.  And of course the faster it turns the
 more effect it has to the point you can actually see the signal go almost to zero just from the inductance effect.


 
The signal on the scope looks pretty rough with lots of spikes. Obviously the commutator and brushes are not working real well.  But this was only a quick and dirty test of my idea.  But you can see that you do have two opposing sine waves.  Also this was a very cheap little universal motor.


 
I believe you could scale this up easily by getting something like a treadmill motor.  I am pretty sure almost all of them are DC permanent magnet motors.  You would have to remove the magnets of course.  We don't want a generator. LOL  But you would then have a well built part G with precision brushes and commutator.  You would only need to be careful building your slip ring and brush holder.


 
Maybe this simple idea will help some of you that want to work on the Figuera device but were scared off because to the difficulty of building a part G from scratch.


 
Carroll

Well, it will let me post the text as long as I don't try to attach the pictures.  But the pictures are only fairly small jpg pictures.  I will try to attach them one at a time to some posts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on August 08, 2018, 10:50:12 PM
Another try at getting the pictures to load.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on August 08, 2018, 10:55:33 PM
Thanks Gyula for the help and suggestions.  My program that was supposed to resize the pictures didn't work the first time so they were too big.  After I realized that, I was able to resize them again and get them to work.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 08, 2018, 11:17:47 PM
Seaad;
my C core is only wire wound around 1 half of the C core that is wrapped around the top and bottom of 1 C. the other half is just to close the core. wrapping wire all around the core is a waste of money, wire and time. not only that the fields in each half will be opposing thus cancels each other out so no current control at all.
Cifta;
those spikes are huge and will mess with the pressure between the primaries. if that is not fixed you will not be able to maintain the required pressure between the primaries. you also need to realize that the primaries are taken down just enough to clear the secondary the back to full potential. if it is reduce to much induction will fail and the output will be reduced to just the rising electromagnet.

I just use Paint in windows to resize all my pics, works well.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 09, 2018, 01:07:20 AM
Seaad;
 not only that the fields in each half will be opposing thus cancels each other out so no current control at all.

Marathonman

Sorry, you are wrong there no cancellation occurs.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 09, 2018, 02:16:54 AM
And i am sure you have done tests on this core design. i can tell from the magnetic field circulation that the fields in the core will cancel out. in one half the magnetic field will travel in one direction and the other it will be opposing to the first.
Reassess your situation and visualize the magnetic field before you post as fact. i can see it plain as day.
and please don't hack my graphs and claim it as your design as it is very, very poor taste but then again you have always been at that level of research. i think it's time to make a change.
good luck all the same,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 09, 2018, 11:12:15 AM
Hi MM

I'm always making tests before I put out my nose. I don't always rely on Old scientists names.
Instead  I let the nature tell me the truth so I can sleep well afterwards.  ;)

 Sorry for borrowing your pic as a starting point.

Quote: "and claim it as your design as it is very, very poor"
 -I didn't!   I was claiming 4 x H !!    Reply #4468 on: August 08, 2018, 01:26:55 PM
Only as a suggestion to utilize the full capacity of the core if you want more Henrys from it of course.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 09, 2018, 03:00:04 PM
I am just trying to get you to realize the wire hanging in mid air will do nothing for the induction and is a waste of wire and money that can be spent on other areas. iron amplifies Inductance up to 50,000 times wire hanging in mid air almost nothing.
Yes i would need to see a scope shot of that set up before i can believe it will work as all i see is two opposing magnetic fields in that set up as the two are in two different directions colliding mid way.
I did not mean to be so snappy as we were hit with 18 pallets of groceries and i had to play Superman for two days. at 55 i still got it but quite sore. use the graph all you want.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 09, 2018, 04:23:25 PM
MM

Its a bit similar to a current measuring "toroid" with the measured wire hanging in mid air in the origo.
And as you know that arrangement doesn't work!!  Lol  ;D ;D
It's a matter of how many wires passing through the core hole (turns).

To make a test of the principle take two small C-cores some feet of wire and an inductancemeter.
The problem with this comes with all the crossings in the middle not the electrical part, if you have tight (thick) wires running paralell both on top "plate" and bottom "plate" from end to end.
To solve that make two levels of crossing lines. (this is NOT tested at all!)

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 10, 2018, 07:04:01 AM
(If you have tight (thick) wires running parallel both on top "plate" and bottom "plate" from end to end.)  (I'm always making tests before I put out my nose )
(this is NOT tested at all!)
Quite obvious and typical of you. sorry won't happen as the magnetic fields are opposing. open your darn mind and see the magnetic fields are opposing. it is like talking to Hanon or a brick wall with you some times and very aggravating knowing i am right and you are wrong. why can't you see the magnetic fields are opposing is beyond me and i really can't see justifying our conversation any longer as your intelligence is lacking in this area and is total BS as always.
Me, i tested everything i post on the bench.
good day and good luck as you will definitely need it.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 10, 2018, 09:49:08 AM
Quote:
" The problem with this comes with all the crossings in the middle not the electrical part, if you have tight (thick) wires running paralell both on top "plate" and bottom "plate" from end to end.
To solve that make two levels of crossing lines. (this is NOT tested at all!) " It's obvious I can't test this because I don't have the MM  flat C core.

I have tested the "cross winding principle" there are no opposing fields at all on the contrary.

A
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 10, 2018, 11:46:58 PM
I realized  after studying your wiring directions that is was a misrepresentation that is why it threw me off. this is the corrected one and showing the magnetic field directions. connections will be on opposite side of each other. red on both sides is impossible when winding like that.
it is still a waste of a lot of wire but yes it will work and possibly use a smaller core..

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 11, 2018, 01:07:41 AM
MM Quote:
" it is still a waste of  a lot of wire but yes it will work and possibly use a smaller core."

A lot is not so much! The inside diagonal part of the winding A-B is slightly longer, Yes, than A-C for each turn compared with your original "one plate" winding.
But to get 4 x Henry if you wish that you need two times more turns. To have room for them on one "plate" you need to shrink the wire diameter!
The benefit with my suggestion is that the wire size still can be Thick by splitting the tuns.
The negative electrical behavior maybe is that the bruch only touches every second  turn. And is much harder to wind on two C-cores.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 11, 2018, 01:48:38 AM
  The winding pattern just seems to be a waste to me but hey it's your thing not mine.
received my epoxy today in the mail. it is 3,300 PSI sheer strength epoxy with a three hour window tack time with 24 hour cure. should hold the winding's quite nicely in place.
Here is the link....  https://www.monarkgolf.com/golf-components/tools-supplies/24-hour-shafting-epoxy-total-8-oz..html

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 12, 2018, 03:08:08 PM
That is the whole reason for using thicker wire on part G is not only is it going to be the power supply once the starting is removed but that it will equate to less ohmic losses. it makes sense once you realize that the reverse magnetic field controls the current flow in the system NOT resistance like other electrical systems. thicker wire equates to the most efficient Inductor possible thus allowing the transfer from the magnetic stored field to the electric flow with the least losses as possible.

sense part G's reverse magnetic field controls the current flow why would one wind the primaries with lots of ohms .???  sounds counter productive to me and adds up to more losses. winding the primaries with as little resistance as possible will allow the primaries to react darn near instantly to the current change in part G thus maintaining the needed pressure between the primaries with precision. this is not according to present day teaching that says resistance controls current flow. the reverse magnetic field controls the current flow throughout the system so wind your electromagnets specifically as electromagnets.

the secondary on the other hand IS wound according to present day teachings just like a standard generator output is so wind them accordingly.
always remember part G controls the current flow NOT the primaries.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 14, 2018, 11:23:55 PM
Inductance is the key factor in this device and not resistance so concentrate on INDUCTANCE alone and the ratio of inductance between the primaries and Part G, each half separately.
Another thing i would like to bring up again is there has to be a load on the output for the device to work. here is the reason why. when a load is attached to the device and current begins to flow an opposing field to the first in the secondary is formed and it is this field that is pushed from side to side across the electric field formed by the primaries. if no load is present then current will not flow and the opposing field in the secondary will be absent thus no output. the opposing field in the secondaries is what the primaries push from side to side giving the appearance or the illusion of motion in the secondary to the electric field.
no load, no opposing field, no output, it's just that simple.
a load has to be present even when taking readings.
i hope you can understand what was just said.

NO LOAD NO OUTPUT.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 15, 2018, 04:33:12 AM
Quote from another forun;
"Glad to see someone using their brain for a change.
Yes, if you want maximum field strength, then the 2 inductors should be pulsed in unison with both at the same amperage levels.
Of course the poles should be set to N-S .
That way, one side of induced coil will be induced with a positive voltage while the other side gets induced with a negative voltage just like in a regular generator."

Absolutely WRONG ! i have already proved with Physics why the primaries are NN in configuration and have a video on youtube as why it is so.
When a magnet is brought into a coil it's current will be in one direction but when you retract the magnet it will reverse current. so do the math folks and not have your head stuck in the sand for six long years.
when two opposing electromagnets are switched like Figuera did one up and the other down, the electric fields will be in the same direction which are additive to match that of a high intensity field of the N S of a standard generator .
I see reality took a side check on EF like crazy thus the blind leading the blind
UFOP still seams to have some sense about him.
the rest, stupid is stupid does. do not listen but to your own bench work as i do. if you do not have the proper pressure between your electromagnet or a load is not present you will get  crap for output.  the thought of you thinking the electromagnets are N S is laughable at best and will result in you wasting your money and time thus resulting in failure.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2018, 12:31:18 AM
The main reason for people thinking they can take side steps in using electronics to power the Figuera device is the fact we have been hypnotized by Corporate world into thinking we really need their BS when in fact we can be without.
using present day electronics in the Figuera device is the reason why most are failing to get an output and blaming it on the NN fields when in fact it is their own stupidity and misunderstanding of the device and events that are taking place in the device.
each side of the device is  or has to be in complete unison one rising the other falling in current. blame the NN fields all you want but it is your IGNORANCE that is blocking you from an output plain and simple.
also the use of electronic is blocking the recycling of the energies in the system and i am sorry your ignorance is stopping you from seeing this.
The Figuera device uses INDUCTANCE device to curtail the current on an orderly fashion and uses the storing and releasing of that energies to it's advantage.
thus the point of this post, you are destin for failure until you realize the very factual statements i have just made and i an sorry to be the barer of bad news but you uninformed on EF or any where for that matter are the ones loosing out from the lack of knowledge of the Figuera device.
The lack of bench work is your demise not mine.
The Figuera device is in FACT NN fields and proven by PHYSICS in my youtube video.
Edit;
I stand corrected, UFOP seems to think the Figuera device is NS and maybe in the land of OZZ but sorry to be the bearer of bad news but you are also INCORRECT in the FIGUERA device.
Blind leading the blind.

regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2018, 02:52:54 PM
  When i an referring to the secondary second field i am referring to the reactive field (The Lenz Law) that opposes the first. when the primaries polarize the secondaries and current begins to flow (With a load) the lenz law kicks in and creates an opposing field to the original polarization. it is this reactive field that is pushed from side to side in a sweeping action across the Electric fields created by the primaries. if there is no load attached to the secondary output there will be no reactive field to push from side to side thus no output will occur.
it is this very action that gives the secondaries the appearance or the illusion of motion to the electric field.

The higher the pressure between the primaries the higher the output from the secondary which is why most are failing to get an output. not enough pressure between the primaries or not switching in unison will cause the lack of output. part G as an active INDUCTOR does just that, raises and lowers the current to the primaries in complete unison.
this is why part G the INDUCTOR is so important in the system as the primaries will ALWAYS remain in complete unison as one loop is subtracted from one side it is added to the other side as the brush rotates. N><N opposing fields at the brush keep each side of the inductor completely separate but always in complete unison.

as i have proved and posted a you tube video that the primaries are in fact NN NOT NS. when using NS and switching like Figuera does with the INDUCTOR the electric field created by the primaries will be opposing thus reducing the output to a bare minimum.  with the primaries in NN with one reducing and the other increasing the Electric fields created will be in the same direction thus being positive and additive.
facts are fact and backed by Physics all day long.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 16, 2018, 06:13:19 PM
I have so mush to do on my one day off but i did manage to get some work done on my new Primary bobbins and my new part G.
I have posted editorials on bobbin making that make very strong bobbins to wind on that can be made square by the way.
as for the pic of my party G here is a pic of the half round i glued to the edge to ease the winding procedure. no more square corners making a nice smooth bend. this is of course 1 half of the C core i will be using for part G winding's, the other half is to just to close the core.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 16, 2018, 07:51:46 PM
MM
With each half C-core you only have one try if you glues the wires direct to the core. You can't hardly change the wire size afterwards. Or do you have a plan B?
The big day comes closer when you can liberate the world.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 17, 2018, 12:50:48 PM
All simulations say my C core is spot on. previous test say the core is spot on with no balancing issues.
Part of plan B is i have an adjustable brush holder to adjust the window of current rise and fall.
"The big day comes closer when you can liberate the world"
That has been my plan all along.
regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 18, 2018, 12:12:26 AM
The cloth i use for the bobbins is Eco-Fi brand made from recycled plastic bottles them hit with Fiberglass resin that makes it rock hard. the cloth is 23 cents per 9 x 12 sheet so you can't beat the price.
here is the sanded edge of my new part G ready to wind and the bobbins almost ready to sand and paint.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 19, 2018, 12:18:28 PM
In part G we have what we call a storing energy phase and decaying energy phase that are happening at the same time. in the storing phase the winding count on the Inductor is getting smaller as the brush rotates thus the current is getting stronger. even though the area of the magnetic field is shrinking in width it is getting stronger projecting outward and storing energy in the form of a magnetic field only to be released in the decaying phase. when it is in the storing phase there will be a voltage potential drop across the inductor as it is storing into the magnetic field.

in the other half of part G we have the decaying energy phase that is increasing in Inductance with the winding count increasing thus reducing the current flow and releasing that reduced potential of stored energy from the previous stored stage into the system. when it releases this potential it will cause a potential increase in the system that is used to off set the potential drop of the storing phase side of part G. even though the current has been reduced the magnetic flux to current ratio has increased considerably causing the current to be reduced thus releasing that part of the stored potential onto the system.

at the same time part G is in either the decaying phase or the storing phase so is the primary electromagnets. when their magnetic fields are reduced they to will release that reduced potential into the system combined with part G's reduced potential to off set the energy storing phase potential drop.

so as the brush rotates each side of the system will alternate between a storing phase and decaying phase that causes the primary electromagnets to either increase or decrease in current at the same time causing the electric fields created to be in the same direction thus positive and additive.

as the brush rotates each side of the Inductor remaining completely separated by the north north opposing magnetic fields either increasing or decreasing current to the primaries in unison will cause the opposing fields of the primaries to sweep across the secondary.  after polarization from the primaries and current begins to flow a secondary field is formed in the secondaries known as the Lenz Law that opposes the original polarization. it is this reactive field that the primaries in their sweeping action pushes from side to side across the electric field formed by the primary electromagnets. in doing so this give the secondaries the appearance or the illusion of motion to the electric field thus inducing EMF.

it is just the relative sweeping motion of the primaries that induces motion into the secondaries with the reactive field in between them. if there is no reactive field there will be no movement of the secondaries thus no output will occur.
the secondary loop back is used to replace the losses occurred and to give the increasing primary electromagnet an added boost to maintain the pressure between the electromagnets when the other electromagnet is reduced to get the sweeping action across the secondary.

Figuera was a sheer genius of a man using Inductance to control current flow and building a stationary generator.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 20, 2018, 11:00:51 PM
I finally figured out how to precision grind my part G to perfect flatness. i will be purchasing a table top Drill at either 2800 or 3100 RPM then attach a 7 inch sanding disc. this will buff it to perfectly flatness for the brushes to glide on eliminating all imperfections. ;D ;D ;D
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 21, 2018, 12:45:02 PM
Fished bobbin ready for some light sanding and painting. these bobbins are rock hard and slide right over the core plus are cheap and easy to make. they can be made square or rectangle for your core really making it easy to wind your primaries and secondaries.
i will say this though, do not use plastic below when attaching the end pieces as it cause it to ripple from the heat or the chemicals. the ripples made it hard to get a smooth flat end cap. the other time i made these i soaked a 2x4 with light oil before i made the end pieces.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 21, 2018, 11:40:37 PM
I see the guys on Entergetic are ripping each other a part. to bad none of them actually know how this device works. :o
one bloody mess if you ask me. ;D
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 22, 2018, 11:18:53 PM
I would also like to add more information on that 1 kilowatt output, 14.8 lbs per square inch 7.4 per primary.

in order to induce movement into the secondary Figuera had to reduce one primary and raise the other to get the sweeping of the secondary across the electric field. in doing so the reducing primary is reduced hypothetically 30 percent while the other is increased to get full sweeping action of the secondary.
so if you reduce one primary 30 percent that means from 7.4 lbs per square inch to 5.2 lbs per square inch while the other primary is peaked at 9.6 lbs per square inch. the rise in the primary is from the amplification factor of the two reducing potentials and the secondary feed back combined giving the needed amplification to the rising primary electromagnet. from this action both primaries will always maintain the 14.8 lbs per square inch across the entire length of the secondary needed for the 1 kilowatt secondary output. these numbers are not exact but at least you get the idea of what needs to be done in order to maintain the output and how it is done.
the primaries must be built with these parameters in mind yet still avoid saturation.

both primaries at any time will add up to the total output of your secondary. one increasing in pressure the other decreasing in pressure but both pressures equal the needed secondary output pressure at all times.
now try that without part G inductor using electronics..... NOT !

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 23, 2018, 09:00:34 PM
I have no days off this week except Sunday so i will be winding the rework primary then and hopefully post so pics of the finished primary.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 24, 2018, 10:39:22 PM
Remember the Inverse Square Law when building your primaries.
through my many tests i have performed the magnetic field can only be detected out the same length of the core with the coil wound the whole length of the core. in the Figuera 1908 and all the other Buforn patent even though it specifically says it is just a drawing for understanding the patent pic of the primaries being larger than the secondary has substantial merit when considering the square of the distance.
the Inverse square Law tells me the primaries should be at least 1/3 longer than the secondaries thus the secondaries should be calculated to handle your load then half that for each primary.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 26, 2018, 06:45:30 PM
Really bad day in Paradise.

bought an off brand Dremel tool to make four cuts in the end of the bobbins to begin winding and the lousy shaft of the cutting tool sheered off after three cuts flying hitting me in the stomach cutting me.

the tool below is the most lousy Corporate piece of SH#T i have ever bought. DO NOT BY THIS BRAND as you will have nothing but trouble. so now my whole day is wasted because of this BS.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 26, 2018, 08:42:24 PM
TO STEFAN HARTMANN;

The member lancaIV is some how posting in the past posts,  posting total Gibberish that has NOTHING to do with this thread. how is this complete nut case breaking in this thread and posting in the past after weeks or months have passed by. this member is a known nut case and a total disruptor of threads and should be barred for life from this forum.
people are trying to learn on this thread and use it as references to build their device only to be hyjacked by this complete fool. how is this possible Stefan that this person is cracking into this and other threads from in the past posts.
I review my past posts and came across this hack job and those posts were NOT there weeks ago so what gives.

this action from this forum member is totally uncalled for, is totally gutless, ruthless and should be barred for hacking into your forum.
Please tell me how is this possible Stefan?????
Or do you even care someone is hacking into your forum. i would like to know how this unethical behavior is taking place and how long has it been going on.????
Regards,
Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 28, 2018, 01:09:17 AM
Well, i got the Dremel situation under control and here is the first layer of the rebuilt primaries. the next pic will be the finished primary.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on August 29, 2018, 12:03:42 AM
isnt there a blacklist button to block ?

truth is these type of forums really are tin foil hat get togethers and religious freaks , the  alternative is engineering forums then it swings the other way and theres no give there .

Honestly I dont know why the hell I bother checking out this forum ...... Im ready to grab my tin hat ,bible and leave   (thats a joke cultists!)

so how is this guy editing etc is he a moderator ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 29, 2018, 06:08:00 AM
 :o
The Figuera device is real and i wear no tin foil hat nor do i live in a fantasy land. i have researched this device for quite some time now and trust what i say, it does what it says it does. as for the rest, i care not what fools do. 
i personally believe he has permission to trash threads. the fool even pmed me talking stupid gibberish.
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: massive on August 29, 2018, 09:32:11 PM
...yea I wasnt talkin about you . 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 29, 2018, 10:42:01 PM
Thank you kindly.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 29, 2018, 11:27:25 PM
First pic is the paper between layers of double layer up and back.
second pic is completed primary.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on August 31, 2018, 09:37:07 AM
There is more than one way to skin a cat. forgot i had the perfect flat top for making the end caps for the bobbins in the closet. scrubbed it clean then wiped it down with cooking oil. perfectly flat end caps for my new bobbins. another protective layer of resin on the finished primary, oh how beautiful can they be.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 01, 2018, 09:44:13 PM
  For all that is dabbling with the Figuera device of thinking of dabbling. please remember the device has to be hooked up to a load in order for the device to work. when the primaries polarize the secondaries and current begins to flow a second field will form in the secondary to oppose the original polarization (Lenz Law). it is this opposing field that is pushed from side to side by the increasing electromagnet. with out this opposing field the Figuera device will NOT put out anything what so ever as the opposing field will not be present with no load.
this is how Figuera induces motion into the secondary which gives the illusion of motion to the electric field.
just like a standard generator there has to be motion through the electric field as it is stationary so either the field has to move or the secondary has to move.
in the standard generator the secondary is what is moving as in the Figuera device except with the Figuera device it is moving the opposing field across the electric field giving the appearance or the illusion of motion to the electric field thus inducing EMF.
Moving the massless, weightless field is much easier that a huge hunk of rotating iron with many lbs of copper wire attached to it. ;D
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 01, 2018, 10:00:26 PM
Quote from another forum,"It has occurred to me that you have actually deciphered Clemente's design!" :o ??? ::)
i haven't stop laughing for over an hour now as it took him 6 long years just to grasp part G let alone the whole device. ;D
the info presented on this side is well documented and backed by Physics plus more bench work and tests than you realize. one realization of one part of the device 6 years later is NOT a decipher of the design. :o
I am not being mean or judgemental  but he who cry's foul for 6 years did NOT decipher the Figuera device over night plain and simple.
it was already their in plain site by the original replicator deciphered by me to the public.
they would still be scratching their heads if not for the original replicator and myself. ;D ;D ;D
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 03, 2018, 04:08:55 PM
Working on another primary bobbin today as it is raining where i live. the end pieces are as flat as they can be. it is actually enjoyable making the bobbins.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 04, 2018, 03:11:50 AM
Here is a drawing of what my part G is going to look like when i am finished with it.  the center section is for the bearing support to take all the pressure off of the motor shaft coupling. maybe at a later date i will change to the aluminum rod for looks.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on September 04, 2018, 12:44:36 PM
What does the wire going to the slip ring connect to?  And why do you have a commutator for the top brushes?  Since your inductor is stationary you should only need two slip rings.  One for each of the rotating brushes.

You keep making personal attacks against me even though I have already publicly apologized for not understanding what you have been trying to say about the part G.  But it appears I may still understand it better than you do.  I have already shown how to make a simple part G and it only has taken me a few hours to make it instead of 6 years.

Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 04, 2018, 03:18:20 PM
That is yet to be seen as you are counting your eggs before they are hatched.
the commutator is the secondary feed back to the system. the double slip ring is because i couldn't find a single at the diameter i needed.
and no i have not attacked anyone just stating facts. one person saying you deciphered the Figuera device is laughable at best when it took you 6 years just to grasp part G so i really doubt your claim you know more than me. i personally don't care.
the person that deciphered the Figuera device was on this thread but everyone ignored his information and advice but me.

Oh, i am very happy you finally pulled your head out your back side and i really hope you get that thing working but don't think for one second you deciphered the Figuera device as that was already laid out in COMPLETE DETAIL.

if i wasn't attacked so much in the past i probably would have finished by now but because of it i had to get away from everyone for quite some time to clear my head and regroup. money is the next obstacle in my path as it has been very tight thus spending a month or so just to save up to buy a part i needed. this tends to slow a build down quite a bit. not only that my triplet cores were dropped destroying the primaries so a complete rebuild was at hand adding more time to completion. i then realized that even though the toroid part G worked it was very buggy from the paralleled Inductance on the non active side causing the balancing issues which i shared with UFOP. i then through research found out that a closed core C would work just the same with a little more losses thus was ran in a sim and it was spot on with no paralleled Inductance. this is where i am right now rebuilding part G with a C core.

just because i don't have a lot of money to build with does NOT give you or your cohorts the right to slander, belittle me or anyone else for that matter. do you honestly think your 2 minute apology makes up for 6 F-in years of abuse from you and your low life friends. i think not and my guard is still up.
Good luck with your build just the same.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 04, 2018, 05:37:48 PM
Pretty much self explanatory.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: creasysee on September 04, 2018, 09:46:44 PM
First pic is the paper between layers of double layer up and back.
second pic is completed primary.

Regards,
Marathonman
Hi Marathonman!

A few months ago I did not believe in Part G. Now, with your help, I believe. Thanks!
Can you clarify, please, why your primary coil has more than 2 leads? Why are they wound in several (4?) layers?
Thanks!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 05, 2018, 06:14:41 PM
As you can plainly see from the above graph and my video on youtube of why the primaries have to be NN. with N S the electric fields will be opposing as will the current flow thus having a transformer effect as the N and S fields will combine. this will NOT maintain the needed pressure between the primaries.
Below is a shot of the perfect tool for the job allowing me to get into the tight spots. this Octo from Skill came with 8 or 10 attachments and this one is perfect for bobbin making. i just wish i had a third arm and hand some times.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 05, 2018, 06:58:41 PM
one more sanding then a final coat she will be ready for winding. very nice flat ends i might add.
I will post a build of a square bobbin just to show the readers any size or shape can be made using the materials i use for the bobbins.
the bottom pic is all the materials i need to make my own bobbins aside for a marker and some scissors.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 06, 2018, 07:42:41 PM
Finished Primary bobbin ready to wind.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 07, 2018, 03:50:23 PM
creasysee;

  I am sorry for the late post i honestly did not see that post. it seems there is a laps in time when some show up. ?
congrats on the understanding of part G. it does take a leap of faith at first until one realizes what was taught in school about an Inductor is not entirely true. when used in an active position in a circuit with a moving positive contact the magnetic flux to current ratio is changing thus the increase and decrease of current flow plus the storing and releasing of potential in the system.
a lot of people thought i was wrong but my bench told me otherwise. a circuit has a certain amount of self induction so if you increase the self induction as per the amount of current, the opposing potential produced within the circuit, you get a current reduction in a linear fashion. Figuera used an active Inductor plain and simple.

my primaries were wound that way for the least amount of resistance as resistance leads to heat thus increased losses. they are wound up and back four times for a total of 8 layers with paper in between each set to ease the winding procedure. people still need to realize that part G controls the current NOT the primaries so they need to take advantage of this scenario and be wound specifically as electromagnets to get the biggest bang for your buck as to say. i used 14 awg wire for the primaries to take advantage of the low resistance yet handle the peak current at the height of the full on current. other wire sizes can be used i just happen to chose 14 awg.
Welcome aboard and i am glad part G made sense to you.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 07, 2018, 04:33:28 PM
One must remember that the pressure between your primaries need to be maintained at all times. say i wanted to attain 1 kilowatt output that equates to 14.8 lbs pressure between the primaries at all times which is 7.4 lbs per primary.  now to induce movement into the secondary you have to reduce one primary and increase the other to get the sweeping action across the full length of the secondary. so let say i needed to reduce one primary 30% to get the sweeping action, that will reduce the 7.4 lbs to 5.18 lbs in the reducing primary. that means that the peeking primary must make up the difference to maintain the 14.8 lbs and that will be 9.62 lbs for the peeking primary.

the 14.8 has to be maintained at all times or the output will drop considerably. what most people do not realize is that in order to get that peek at the end of the rising primary the secondary feed back has to be in place. with out this feed back from the secondary there will be no peek at the height of the rising primary thus the output will never attain the 1 kilowatt output or what ever your desired output is.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on September 07, 2018, 05:58:23 PM
MM
How about the current through the part-G (coil)  when the brushes passes the question mark positions? in my proposed circuits (pic).

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 07, 2018, 06:07:20 PM
Since the current in the primaries are equal the output will be zero at that mark on both sides of part G peaking at set N or set S output.
see graph below.
the negative sign gets connected to the primaries and the positive side to part G. the negative sign i have on my part G is the secondary feed back to part G through a commutator that way both positive and negative stay their sign always. if Mr D has another way please feel free to pipe up.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on September 07, 2018, 07:05:58 PM
See corr above.

Dead short thru 1/4 turn of G-coil !

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 07, 2018, 07:27:43 PM
At that position of the brush the commutated secondary is at ZERO so there is no dead short. plus i am using a 16 pole commutator with one pole not connected at that point on each side of part G. and that is every 1/2 turn by the way not 1/4 turn.

The way i see it there is only two ways to get the loop back function. the way i an trying or using the Tesla AC to DC one side connected to the positive brush and the negative connected to the negative side of the primaries. that way it allows current to circulate around the system remembering part G becomes the supply once the starting is removed. the secondary loop back can then be commutated and the positive connected to the positive brush and the negative side connected to the negative of the primaries. this will give the added boost to the rising primaries. i see no other scenario but these two cases.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on September 07, 2018, 08:08:54 PM
Not a 1/4 of a brush rotation on top of the G-coil.

But a short cut thru a 1/4 of a coil turn. From + to - via the coil cupper wire.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 07, 2018, 09:26:07 PM
Tell me WHAT you see as a short. the secondary will add to the magnetic field of part G through moving contacts which will add to the potential being circulated in the system. the secondary at that time will be ZERO.

any power running through part G will have magnetic resistance and will not be a dead short but add to the system potential in the form of a magnetic field.
IF i find it to be incorrect i can very easily change to the only other option with the Tesla AC to DC patent addition and removing the second brush. until then it stays in my build.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on September 07, 2018, 10:07:50 PM
Tell me WHAT you see as a short.

Marathonman

Pls see pic.
Between the brush with +voltage and the brush with - voltage is it a piece of a wire, a (1/4) part of a turn in the G- coil at that time and actual ?-? position.
 When puttting a short piece of wire beetween battery poles what happens?.  Spark= short cut.
But a wire diagram as I asked for long ago maybe could help missunderstandings.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 07, 2018, 10:51:26 PM
The reason i did not post a wiring diagram is because of the two scenarios and i will not find out which one is correct until i build it.
the plus sign is connected to the brush and the negative is connected to the negative of the primaries, follow me so far. i then ran the secondary loop back through a commutator  to the positive brush which being commutated will always stay positive and the other to a negative brush on the opposite side of the positive brush. when it rotates and comes to the position you are referring the secondary will have no power in it as it will be at the zero volt line. plus as i have said the commutator has a non connected pole at those position as a safety precaution. there will be no direct short of any kind because the secondary IS AT ZERO....Got it. NO POWER NO SHORT. if you still do not understand me that i can't help you with just like when Cifta did not understand part G for 5 or 6 long years.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on September 08, 2018, 12:25:01 AM
The reason i did not post a wiring diagram is because of the two scenarios and i will not find out which one is correct until i build it.
the plus sign is connected to the brush and the negative is connected to the negative of the primaries, follow me so far. i then ran the secondary loop back through a commutator  to the positive brush which being commutated will always stay positive and the other to a negative brush on the opposite side of the positive brush. when it rotates and comes to the position you are referring the secondary will have no power in it as it will be at the zero volt line.

Marathonman

Not easy :
the plus sign (at/From)  is connected to the brush (you have five) and the negative (brush? at) is connected to the negative of the primaries

See pic of my interpretation

How about short cut at start up (with ext. battery?)

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 08, 2018, 05:12:23 AM
OMG your F-in stupid. sorry it is like talking to an 85 iQ dumb ass.
 please don't worry about what i do as you must be so unintelligent to understand simple directions or explination. i have to ask you what grade did you complete, just curious as you are acting just like Cifta did for so many years. really stupid as usual.
Imagine that ! the norm for Seaad. what is the matter not getting enough attention boy to your crazy ideas.
How pathetic you are as i have explained in FULL DETAIL.
Typical seaad just like Hanon, Cifta,  Bistander and the list goes on and on and on and on and i am wondering when will your BS ever end. please go away, like forever. you can disrupt but you can NEVER STOP ME FOOL ie TROLL.
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on September 08, 2018, 01:49:42 PM
If you are going to be such a lowlife pathetic person that you will continue to attack me after I have publicly apologized to you, would you please learn how to properly spell my user name.  Even a 5 year old can copy how to spell something.


My user name is CITFTA


And seaad is correct.  Your new design for part G sucks.  It has too many problems with it to ever work like you think it will.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 08, 2018, 04:23:56 PM
It's to bad your to ignorant to realize the C has already been tested in sim and on the bench and verified by another builder and it worked like a charm so G-T-H fools. your less intelligent than i first imagined.
here we go again you idiots thinking i was wrong when i was right the whole time and it only took 5 or 6 years to pull your head out of your back side. so who is the non intelligent one.
Please from now on don't run your mouth when you know absolutely nothing about the C core part G or how it performs because that is all you are doing is running your mouths. (TYPICAL)
try acting like researchers instead of TROLLS.
it could be SHITFA for all i care.
so go back to E and work on that piece of junk you call part G and maybe, just maybe someday it will work as good as my C core.

also your foolish attempts to get a good output have failed and will continue to fail as is UFOP's output also which if you would have read post 4527 you wouldn't be in that situation.
you knowing more than me, yah right. iv'e heard all the BS before.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 09, 2018, 05:28:34 PM
Now i see Seaad ran off to entergetic and started running his mouth as usual. what a pathetic excuse for a man hiding behind the internet like a coward that he is and has been since he logged on at entergetic. these people are as rotten as they come putting everyone down on many, many threads. when is it ever going to end.
I share all my work and if you don't like it G T H.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on September 09, 2018, 11:28:48 PM



Hi Marathman,
                      If I might ask you a question regarding where you get your big toroids from.


Thank you


Ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 10, 2018, 02:25:07 PM
I don't have a big toroid and never did but i do get my core supplies from Bridgeport Magnetics.
http://www.bridgeportmagnetics.com/contents/en-us/d44_Toroidal_Standard_and_O-Cores.html
their stocked items can be had for a good price but fore warned their custom items are through the roof.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on September 10, 2018, 06:44:55 PM
Hello MM,

Although I haven't posted in a while I still keep an eye on your progress. I see some people still don't get part G even though they supposedly followed the build thread at Energetic long ago.

Part G works on the exact same principle as an autotransformer or a variac. The rotating brushes changes the number of turns in the coil wrapped around the core. As the brushes sweep toward the ends of the coil the number of turns increase. As the brushes sweep back toward the center of the coil the number of turns between the two brushes decreases. Continuous change.
It's just that simple.

Doug1 posted pictures of that ages ago.

Keep on keepin' on, MM.

Regards
Cadman
 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 10, 2018, 07:35:38 PM
Thank you most kindly Mr. Cadman. i was wondering just the other day where you were.
i have had a few mishaps along the way but i am getting there.

Yes i know it's just that simple and i even posted very descriptive posts on the very subject yet some still don't get it. a continuous change of magnetic flux to current ratio,  magnetic linking and unlinking to the circuit on each side of the brush.

PS. the toroid i had worked which was similar to Dougs' but the parallel inductance on the non active side caused a lot of balancing issues so i redesigned it with a duel C but not finished with it yet.

and yes i plan on keepin' on.
Thanks and regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 17, 2018, 04:20:27 PM
The closer we get to the truth the more the rodents come out of the wood works. NOW the lousy BroMikey is attacking Entergetic and even my you tube channel running his mouth. it seams the truth has many, many paid misinformants running  scared scrambling to discredit and disrupt the threads on Figuera.

there is no way one can discredit the truth and i deplore every reader to do small tests at your own home to verify EVERYTHING i have posted is exactly TRUE and always has been.

the world will have the Figuera device no matter what they do. then after that i will cram the 1932 Coutier device up their ARSE and laugh while i am doing it.

we are the ones in control NOT THEM, only we can decide our destiny NOT THEM.

good day people and happy building.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 24, 2018, 03:39:49 PM
Three ways to increase your electromagnet strength and speed of the reaction of the primaries.

1. Reduce resistance. Self explanatory.

2. Another way of increasing the current is to use a higher electromotive force, or voltage. The relevant formula is V=IR, the definition of resistance. If V is the drop in electric potential over the entire circuit, and R is the resistance over the entire circuit, the current (I) through any point of the circuit can be increased by an increase in the applied voltage. this is why Figuera used 100 volts and the fact that the secondary feed back to part G with the other added potentials equates to the amplification factor adding to the peak of the rising primaries.

3. using DC instead of AC. (Self explanatory) the main reason all generators use DC to excite it's electromagnets. AC has to flip all the magnetic domains thus takes a considerable time to do so and will loose induction in the process. thus the reason DC is much more superior in every way and why Figuera used DC in his device.
4. wind the coil the entire length of the core.

Just because someone doesn't have a lot of money for their build does not give anyone the right to belittle or attack them. all it mean is the money is tight and has absolutely nothing to do with the their knowledge of the device. usually it is the attacker that is the total ignorant one knowing nothing of the device . that and the fact that some are paid to disrupt threads and these type of people are the lowest form of human beings there is that would probably sell out their own mother for a buck.
if the human race is to survive we have to stick together bringing these devices forward if we are to survive the destruction of our earth and it's resources from our government and corporate world.

this device works whether the opposition likes it or not and all it takes to prove it is a few tests on your bench.

Regards,
Marathonman



Regards.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 26, 2018, 05:57:41 PM
My brush holder is finished finally but as of this moment i so not have the cash to pay for it. as soon as i get it i will post a pic of it and as i progress in the remainder of my build.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 26, 2018, 08:42:09 PM
I find it funny and some what convenient  that through out all the years of my research not one university anywhere has information on an active inductor. all they describe is a static inductor with changing current and not one single one states that if L changes so does (I) current. they are mutual as either of them changes so does the other.
if I changes so does L but the flip side of the coin that is not published anywhere is that if L changes so does I.  this is the magnetic flux to current ratio and at any given time that the magnetic flux increases or decreases (I) the current flow decreases or increases respectively. as each loop is added or subtracted to either side of the rotating positive brush in part G of Figuera's controller the magnetic flux to current ratio is changing constantly. as each loop is added to that side of the brush the magnetic field around that loop interacts with the loop next to it and it is this interaction that produces an EMF which is in exact accordance with Faraday's LAWS OF INDUCTION and according to the Lenz law this EMF produced within the circuit it's self will oppose the original current flow.

if Figuera had used a standard resistance wire the system would have so much losses through heat that i really doubt the device would ever self sustain. but since he did not use wire resistance  he did not have a heat death device.
 Figuera chose an active inductor for many reasons and one of the main reasons by using a magnetic field to control current flow allowed him to attain efficiencies well beyond that capabilities of resistance wire. using thicker wire on his active inductor Figuera was able to achieve efficiencies in the high 90's with very little core and ohmic losses.
the act of using magnetic flux to control current flow was down right genius on Figuera's part that not only allowed him to store and release potential within the system at specific times but to split the feed into two active circuits controlling current flow of two separate feeds in complete unison.

I salute the sheer genius of Figuera as his device has completely captivated me beyond belief.
even after all this time i still stand in total Awe of Clemente Figuera.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on September 30, 2018, 10:38:35 PM
It seems i am finally getting through to people. many more are PMing me on multiple site stating they finally get "IT" what i have been posting for so many years and to me that is totally awesome.
keep on reading people and study what has been said until the light bulb lights. NO ONE can stop the transfer on information nor can they stop you from building the Figuera device.
screw our Governments and the corrupt Corporations that control us bind us into human slaves.

read, understand, build and be free.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: creasysee on October 07, 2018, 04:04:29 PM
Hi Marathonman!

I plan to use an electronic commutator instead of a mechanical one. The main reason is that I'm not able to make units for a mechanical commutator. I do not have the equipment and experience in this.

1. I studied the thread on the energeticforum and noticed that you planned to make n-channel MOSFETs of the high side. Using the low side is a simpler option and I would like to know your opinion on inverting the polarity of the DC. What do you think, is the device operation possible if a negative voltage is applied to the brush and a positive voltage is applied to the primaries? I provide a picture for a better understanding of the issue. Of course, a polarity of primaries must be inverted for NN.

2. I assume that the number of keys must be equal to the number of turns on part G. Otherwise, in order to keep a continuous current (Figuera recommends cutting at least 1.5-2 contacts) we will get the closure of part of the winding, and I think this is not good. Now I plan to use 123 keys (1 key per 2 turns). Part G has 246 turns. What do you think about it? Can I use fewer keys? For example, 62? Then, to keep current continuity, 4 turns will be shorted by brush (by keys) on part G.

This is my Part G. 246 turns 18 AWG. L=2.4 Henries. Height is 4.5 inches, OD 5.7, ID 2.2 inches. It was a variac 250 Volts, 9 Amp. 246 leads are tinned.



Thanks and good figuering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on October 07, 2018, 04:44:47 PM
This is my Part G. 246 turns 18 AWG. L=2.4 Henries. Height is 4.5 inches, OD 5.7, ID 2.2 inches. It was a variac 250 Volts, 9 Amp. 246 leads are tinned.

Thanks and good figuering!

Try this
See pic ,film
creasysee can you make  your Variac working??

https://vimeo.com/178144785
Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: creasysee on October 07, 2018, 05:07:55 PM
creasysee can you make  your Variac working??
https://vimeo.com/178144785

Hi seaad, sorry, the mechanical part of my variac is broken, so I cannot try it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on October 07, 2018, 05:41:36 PM
creasysee
Don't you have any commutator coal  at hand [residual] or similar so you can push that  back an forth manually. Or eventually later on by help from some electric motor with some crankshaft. Because you have a variac core with intact?? windings you now have the opportunity to measure some very interesting electical data.
The commutator coal has to be connected to two windings at a time when moving from one loop-turn to another (shifting turns).

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: creasysee on October 08, 2018, 06:32:56 PM
Hi Marathonman,
I'm really sorry about what happened to all your goods, and hopefully, you can recover soon or get back your stuff.

Hi all,
I want to say about some things which can help get a Figuera device working. We need to know (Marathonman told about it indirectly) that the value of load for the device is very specific. Look at the attached image. It was painted by Marathonman. I've added two blue squares and blue texts. There we can see a very narrow area (red box) where the device operates in.

Really, the device will work in an even narrower strip between two blue squares. The upper blue square limits the operation of the device due to the saturation of cores (G and Primaries).

The lower blue square limits the operation by three factors:
 - Low level of magnetic fields: secondaries cannot produce current; Part G cannot store current from primaries.
 - The operating mode must be in a non-linear part of the graph.
 - The current must be positive only.

So we cannot connect any load to the device.
So, the load must be adjusted when the device starts very accurate.

Do you remember the lanterns around the Figuera house? They are not for beauty! They are for balancing. Any electrical appliances in your home load the grid differently. You are turning on and off the light. Washing and dishwashers are turning motors and heaters on and off all the time!

Therefore, to maintain the operation of the device, you need a ballast. Figuera had lanterns. They were lit when he did not need energy and did not lit when all energy was used for its intended purpose.

Thanks and good figuering!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 08, 2018, 09:02:21 PM
 creasysee;

  I would not even consider swapping the poles on the Figuera device as it works fine the way it is. of course i have not tried it or even considered it as i was trying to build as close to the original as i can. the C core part G was just to eliminate the parallel inductance on the none active side and ease the winding as we all know winding a toroid is a total bitch.
I gave up  the electronic version because the amount of transistors required to mimic the brush rotation and that was money i can spend elsewhere.
yes i fiqured the loop back to part G and has been tested with no sparking what so ever.
the theft was a terrible blow that my ex room mate will bear the burden as i am suing him for the very pants he is wearing and then some.
I will be back in the saddle very soon but until then my partner in crime is Aetherholic on Hyiq as he now knows what i know and is almost finished with his build. together we will change the world.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 10, 2018, 05:13:14 PM
 creasysee;

  I really don't think Figuera had a split phase device and certainly did not have a ballast connected to it to balance the device as the patent does not even remotely mention the use of.
of course to day we could attach one to it but that is NOT the requirement of the device to operate.
Quote;
"So we cannot connect any load to the device."
completely false, there has to be a load connected to the device at all times in order for proper function. when a load is connected and current is flowing a second field forms opposing the first and it is known as the Lenz Law. it is this field this field  that the primaries push from side to side across the entire length of the secondary.
Yes keep things adjustable at all times as one misalignment could change the operation of the device and hamper it's output.

No load, no opposing field, no output, it's that simple.
and yes the device works in that range specified. no flipping of the domains like in ac.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: creasysee on October 10, 2018, 06:34:29 PM
Hi Marathonman!

"So we cannot connect any load to the device."
completely false, there has to be a load connected to the device at all times in order for proper function. when a load is connected and current is flowing a second field forms opposing the first and it is known as the Lenz Law. it is this field this field  that the primaries push from side to side across the entire length of the secondary.
Yes keep things adjustable at all times as one misalignment could change the operation of the device and hamper it's output.

No load, no opposing field, no output, it's that simple.
and yes the device works in that range specified. no flipping of the domains like in ac.

Full agree!
And sorry for my English. "So we cannot connect any load to the device." - I mean that the device will not work when the load takes very low power or takes very high power.

For example, we got the device working for 1kW. If the load 1kW is connected then a current produced from primaries can be stored in part G. If the load is 500W only then the current produced by primaries may not be enough for part G. Conversely, if the load is 1.5 kW, then part G can become saturated.

Thanks a lot,
creasysee
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 11, 2018, 04:07:30 PM
Very much agreed, the Figuera device is to be designed specifically for the load intended with some headroom of say 500 va or there of.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 14, 2018, 10:37:57 PM
When there is a load increase the resistance on the output is reduced which allows more current to flow which in turn sends more current from the secondary feed back to part G. this will forward bias the core sending more current to the primaries which will produce more current in the secondary and the load. this is of course a slight generalization of the events that are taking place in the device. voltage is one of the aspects that is increased also when this scenario takes place.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 17, 2018, 09:02:35 PM
Self Induction, Faraday's Induction Law and the Lenz's Law

Self-inductance basics;.

When current passes along a wire, and especially when it passes through a coil or inductor, a magnetic field is induced. This extends outwards from the wire or inductor and could couple with other circuits. However it also couples with the circuit from which it is set up.

The magnetic field can be envisaged as concentric loops of magnetic flux that surround the wire, and larger ones that join up with others from other loops of the coil enabling self-coupling within the coil, flux linking as you will.

When the current in the coil changes or the magnetic field associated with it changes, this causes a voltage to be induced in the different loops of the coil - the result of self-inductance.

Faraday's Induction Law;

Any change in the magnetic environment of a coil of wire will cause a voltage (emf) to be "induced" in the coil. No matter how the change is produced, the voltage will be generated. The change could be produced by changing the magnetic field strength, moving a magnet toward or away from the coil, moving the coil into or out of the magnetic field, rotating the coil relative to the magnet, etc


Lenz's Law;
   
Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.
Lenz’s Law applies to self inductance because an induced current has a direction such that its magnetic field opposes the change in magnetic field that induced the current.

So now put these together with the Inductor controller used in the Figuera device and what do you get. you have an active Inductor with a moving positive brush that changes the loop count dynamically on either side of the brush as it rotates that changes the magnetic flux to current ratio. what this means is the magnetic field on either side of the brush is constantly changing either up or down in intensity which according to Faraday's Laws of Induction will produce an EMF. since it is created within the circuit according to the Lenz's Law it will oppose the original current flow thus reducing the current flow to what ever level you so choose according to your build requirements.
so according to Faraday's Laws of Induction all that is needed is a change in the magnetic field.  so when the brush rotates the loops added to the circuit is increasing the magnetic field and it is this field that creates EMF the opposes the original current flow.

all movement of the controlling Inductor produces an Opposing Emf on either side of the brush that reacts with that side of the circuit which allows either side to be in complete Unison with each other but remain completely separate at all times thus allowing set N and set S Electromagnets to increase and decrease in intensity 180 degrees out from one another.
this action allows the Electric fields associated with the Electromagnets to be in the same direction being positive and additive. this is accomplished by using two opposing North face Electromagnets. sorry folks this action can NOT happen with a North and a South Electromagnet.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Dave1148 on October 25, 2018, 05:11:41 PM
According to the above post  i cannot understand how it produces a positive and negative wave to complete a cycle of sine wave !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 26, 2018, 12:25:59 AM
With the secondary opposing field in between the primaries as they sweep from side to side.  this action causes the poles to flip every time they sweep from side to side.

I have posted much information about this in many posts in the past.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on October 29, 2018, 08:29:36 PM
 Dave1148;

  Reading some of the past posts will help in the understanding. any questions just ask.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 05, 2018, 03:28:40 PM
After one gets over the fact that Inductance can and will control current flow the system really makes sense. storing and releasing the potential on the exciting side of the system then using a portion of the output to replace the losses and to give rise to amplification to the primaries was sheer genius on Figuera's part. after the initial polarization of the secondaries no power is used there after from the primaries and the potential is to say, "recycled" through out the exciting system. from the inherent ohmic losses the secondary is used to replace these losses with an added boost at the peak of the rising primaries to maintain the needed pressure between the primaries to sustain the output.

Regards,
Marathonman


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 05, 2018, 04:54:24 PM
I see no way how this overcomes the Lenz law, can you explain how? To any excitation there is an immediate Lenz effect against. A single rational explanation how this overcomes the Lenz law. That is what overcomes the Lenz law.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Belfior on November 05, 2018, 08:19:18 PM
Maybe you cannot get rid of Lenz, but there are ways to get around it and even get it to help you

In the video RPM increases when you apply a load

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCFak6CYzIQ
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 06, 2018, 03:24:18 PM
The first problem is the understanding of the device and the second is the device does not sidestep the Lenz Law at all. actually Figuera counted on it, that is the opposing field in the secondary is what is pushed from side to side. the Lenz field is the field that is sandwiched between the primaries which gives the illusion of motion to the Electric field.
understanding the device will help in this situation.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 06, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
Ok, this is again an explanation that doesn't explain anything.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on November 06, 2018, 07:10:28 PM
@ ayeaye
You HAVE TO believe in it
"actually Figuera counted on it"
 8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 08, 2018, 03:18:03 PM
I see you're stupidity is leaking out again seaad. if you actually study the device in depth you will realize everything i post is facts backed by Physics. i do not have to lower myself to really stupid childish remarks such as you have.
If you have nothing to add but BS then please either shut your smart A$$ mouth or stay away as either will suffice.

the Figuera device does NOT sidestep the Lenz Law in any way shape or form.

ayeaye;
What is your question and what don't you understand.??? i have posted a lot of information in the past posts that were really informative. please let me know.

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 08, 2018, 03:45:38 PM
What is your question and what don't you understand.??? i have posted a lot of information in the past posts that were really informative. please let me know.

I don't know, all i see about the device, is a pdf file, where i cannot see horns or tails. So also no way can i see how this supposed to overcome the Lenz law. I didn't say eliminate the Lenz law, but overcome the implications of it, that cause unity. There could be some better diagrams of the device and better explanation, so it can be seen what it actually is. I'm of course not into it at all, so there are sure things that i don't know by now, but so are many others i think.

I wonder how it can be done, the symmetry of induction is so overwhelming, just whatever you do, the symmetry remains.

Can it be simulated somehow, with spice or whatever?

Ok, it is something like on the figure below, i guess. Now what it looks like, moving the potentiometer in whatever direction, the Lenz effects on both primary coils are in the same direction, which induces current in the secondary coil in one direction. At that, the Lenz effect of one of the primaries is caused by increasing current, thus the power is positive, and the Lenz effect of the other primary is caused by decreasing current, thus the power is negative (generated by the coil). Now the question is, is the power generated by the second primary greater than the power consumed by the first primary, or not. In that case the Lenz effect is still against the current in the first primary, while it is in the same direction in the second primary. Of course coils generate power when the current decreases, but consume power when it increases, and both are there, i don't see that the Lenz effect is anyhow overcome in that circuit. That's just as i see, i don't say it's one way or other way. But i don't see any reason for overunity in that circuit, or i overlooked something.

Ok, unless the Lenz effect in the first primary may somehow additionally delay the current reaching zero in the second primary. I don't know, didn't think about it, but things like that i think cannot be found out by simulation.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on November 10, 2018, 05:27:10 PM
ayeaye
 Example sim. and tests not the best.

https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg526148/#msg526148

Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 10, 2018, 06:09:46 PM
This? Measure the input and output power of it too, the same way as i did there  https://overunity.com/17861/bifilar-pancake-coil-overunity-experiment/ . Without it, such experiments make no sense whatsoever. Measure it on real circuit that is, not in the simulator, for very theoretical reason the simulator there cannot model overunity.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 11, 2018, 03:30:47 PM
The magnetic fields of the primaries will always be opposing as the Lenz effect will always keep them opposing whether they are increasing or decreasing to maintain the pressure between them. by raising one primary and lowering the other the Electric fields are alligned  as such to be positive and additive  thus presenting the secondary a magnetic field with the same intensity as a north south field of a standard generator.

As i have stated when half of the device is reduced it will release that reduced  potential into the system to offset the potential drop of the rising side of the devi e. The reducing side will always counteract the increasing sides potential drop minus losses ocurred  withe the secondary feed back to replace the losses and give rise to amplification to the rising primaries to maintain the needed pressure for your output.

When i get to a computer i can explain further as i am on my phone and can barely  see the screen..

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 11, 2018, 04:19:43 PM
The magnetic fields of the primaries will always be opposing as the Lenz effect will always keep them opposing whether they are increasing or decreasing to maintain the pressure between them. by raising one primary and lowering the other the Electric fields are alligned  as such to be positive and additive  thus presenting the secondary a magnetic field with the same intensity as a north south field of a standard generator.

Yes, the question is whether more current is induced by induction than provided by the Faraday's law. Which i think is always the question about overunity devices based on induction, and the only reason why they might have overunity. When more current is induced, then it has to go somewhere, like to capacitor or other coil.

Only an experiment can show that, simulator cannot, as simulators are strictly based on the Faraday's law. Whether there is overunity or not, no one knows, because no one can possibly know what exactly is going on there.

Thus i think we can create a general theoretical basis for solid state overunity research, this is all based on the same phenomenon.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 12, 2018, 04:23:40 PM
In the Figuera device there has to be load attached to the secondary in order for the device to work.  When the load increases the resistance drops on the secondary and the load allowing more current to flow which in turn sends more current to excite the primaries to produce more potential in the external  circuit then things equalize.  If there is more potential in the exciting side then the induced side is drawing then the secondary feedback to the exciting side will be suppressed  until thing equalize again.
the system only draws what it needs at that time.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 13, 2018, 12:12:33 AM
In the Figuera device there has to be load attached to the secondary in order for the device to work.

Ahah, so that on the figure below?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 13, 2018, 08:44:29 PM
Almost, the Figuera device is DC driven each output being raised and lowered in complete unison but 180 out from another. also the cores were separated as to stop eddies and hysteresis from degrading the primaries. the secondaries are the only part of the core that will experience eddies and hysteresis.
Ac will not match the high intensity field of a DC electromagnet, that is why your standard generators use DC electromagnets NOT AC.

by using and active inductor Figuera realized he could control the rise and fall of current by raising and lowering the magnetic flux to current ratio which in the circuit is self inductance, the EMF created within the circuit that opposes the original current flow. this is exactly in accordance with Faraday's Laws of Induction that states all that is needed for EMF to occur is a rise or fall of the magnetic field. and in accordance to the Lenz Law it will be in such a direction to oppose the original current flow.

no load on the secondary means no lenz law field generation withing the secondary thus no output will occur.
with a load attached and current starts to flow according to the Lenz a secondary field will form in the secondary and it is this field that is pushed from side to side by the opposing primaries that gives the illusion of motion to the electric field thus inducing motion into the secondary. the primaries sweep this field across the entire length of the secondary which will cross the electric fields created by the primaries which both are in the same direction being positive and additive.......meaning both electric field intensities will equal the high intensity field of a standard generator.
from the sweeping actions of the primaries it induces and AC output in the secondaries flipping it's poles every half rotation.

regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 13, 2018, 09:11:13 PM
this is exactly in accordance with Faraday's Laws of Induction that states all that is needed for EMF to occur is a rise or fall of the magnetic field.

No, i think for this or any other such overunity devices to work, the induced current must be more than that provided by the Faraday's law. That it is only generated by the rise and fall of the magnetic field, and that it is opposite to the current that caused it, remains true, however.

The diagram above is so that it can be made using a voltage source, and a signal generator, which is easy to do, provided that one has these, and that the input and output powers can be measured with oscilloscope the way i explained in my other thread. In that case it may be necessary to measure separately both the primaries and their resistors, and the load, maybe a bit more to measure, but still doable. More similar to Figuera would be using a pair of transistors, but this would be a bit more difficult to implement, though nothing special, either.

Without such measuring input and output powers, and without any such measurement really showing overunity, all that said about that device will be useless. I'm primarily interested in a unified approach for researching any of such solid state overunity devices.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 14, 2018, 01:48:58 AM
That quote is concerning the controller which is part G in the patent. assuming things work a different  way because that is the way you think it is suppose to work doesn't  always align with what i have experienced on the bench which is what i post from not what i think it should be done.
Assuming  will get you no where fast, benching gets to the point the correct way.
Good luck just the same.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ayeaye on November 14, 2018, 01:57:25 AM
Did you measure input and output power when benching?

If you did measure overunity and have hard evidence what it was caused by, then i cannot say it's any different. But if you didn't, then no matter how much work you did or how well you did it, all we have is words.

But ok, do you argue that the induced current doesn't have to be greater than provided by the Faraday's law, then how can there be overunity, can you explain it?

I'm sorry, i'm not against you, but it is the task of all of us, to understand. How i see it, and i would like to see it it's wrong, and want to see why, so i and not only me can understand more.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 14, 2018, 09:34:28 PM
I personally think that producing more than what was put in is not possible but if one reuses or does not spend the potential in the exciting side of the system to act on another field in the process which is what Figuera device does then yes perpetual motion is possible.

the potential is not used up, it is recycled through out the inducing side of the system that acts on the induced side which both are closed systems of their own. the only time the inducing potential is used is to polarize the secondaries then they part ways and it is just the relative motion of the primaries that induce motion into the secondaries. that is the lenz law field from the secondaries being swept across the electric fields created by the primaries. after they part ways no other potential from the inducing side is used in the secondaries thus the potential is reused or recycled through out the primaries and part G the controller with a little feed back from the secondaries to replace the losses occurred and give rise to amplification to the rising primaries.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 18, 2018, 04:37:49 PM
This is a good visualization of self Induction
 the more loops are added in the controller part G the more the opposition to the original current flow.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 23, 2018, 04:20:25 PM
So with the above post and pic as the brush rotates the amount of windings changes on each side of the brush kept separated by north opposing fields. When one winding is subtracted from one side it is added to the other side thus changing the magnetic flux to current ratio on either side.  when you  change this ratio you change the original current flow as per Faradays laws of induction any change in the magnetic field causes EMF and according  to the Lenz law it will produce an EMF that will oppose the original current flow.

So therefore by using a rotating positive contact Figuera was able to efficiently change the current flow through both primary sets opposite from one another by utilising  an Inductor in an active position in the circuit that changes the magnetic flux to current ratio which allowed him to control the current flow in a very,  very efficient manor then using the storing and releasing of potential to off set the potential drop of the rising side of the system. as we all know any increase in a coil there will be a potential drop across the conductor as it is storing into the magnetic field.

Regards

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on November 30, 2018, 05:35:48 PM
This replicator has proven many things i have been saying for quite a long time and is almost there. he credits me for the theory but it fact it is Figuera and the original replicator that shared to me many years ago.
screen shot is a purposely overshot to show the actions of the secondary when the rising primary was taken over to far and brought back on the coil giving the double peak. this is NOT possible with Transformer action.
the Figuera device is strictly a stationary Generator with NO transformer action taking place.
Hyiq is changing the world.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 07, 2018, 04:37:32 PM
Look at the Graph belown it shows a magnet increasing the magnetic flux (inward) and one decreasing it's magnetic field (outward). the current is in the oposite direction each time it is pushed in and pulled out just the same as if it were an electromagnet being increased and decreased.

now take the reducing electromagnet to the oposite side of the increasing electromagnet with the core (secondary) in the middle (THE FIGUERA DEVCE). you will notice that the fields are now in the same direction which is what i have been saying for quite a many years. when you reduce the electromagnet on the oposite side of the increasing electromagnet the electric fields are in the same direction being positive and additive. the magnetic fields will never combine and the Lenz law will always keep them separate at all times but AS I HAVE STATED FOR YEARS THE ELECTRIC FIELDS ARE ALIGNED AS SUCH WILL COMBINE TO FORM ONE FIELD BEING POSITIVE AND ADDITIVE.

as long as the magnetic field pressure is maintained it will act just like a standard generator high intensity field. the primaries are reduced to get the sweeping action of the secondary lenz field across the electric fields formed by the primaries. this is the realitive motion of the primaries inducing motion into the secondaries.

when the primaries polarize the secondaries with a load attached (mandatory) and current begins to flow a second field will form in the secondary (Lenz's Law) that will oppose the first field. it is this opposing field that is sandwiched between the primaries that is swept from side to side across the secondaries sweeping the electric field giving the illution of motion of the secondary to the electric field.

as long as the pressure is maintained between the primary North face electromagnets the output will be a constant AC output flipping the poles every rotation of part G from the sweeping action of the primaries, one reducing while the other is increasing. if for any reasom the magnetic fields of the primaries are reduced to low induction will fail and the output will be reduce to just that of the rising electromagnet.
this is the very reason why the reducing primaries are reduce to just clear the secondary then back to full potential.

Regards,
Marathonman

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 07, 2018, 06:41:35 PM
Part G being an active Inductor changes the Magnetic flux to current ratio on a continuous basis therefore creating ongoing increase or decrease in current flow.

as the brush rotates around the Inductor windings on either side of the brush are constantly changing either adding or subtracting which according to Faradays laws of induction causes an EMF to form in the circuit and according to the Lenz Law it will oppose the original current flow.
in the graph below it shows coil A with a few winding and if we have a given amount of current flowing through the coils it will produce a given amount of self induction that opposes the original current flow.
now in coil B we have an increase in the loop count with the same given current flow. what just happened is the amount of inductance just changed and according to Faraday's laws of induction all that is needed for EMF to be produced is a change in magnetic flux which just happened. now if we do this on a continuous basis we have an orderly rise and fall of magnetic flux which is an orderly rise and fall of current flow because any increase or decrease in the magnetic flux will in fact according to Faradays Laws of induction create an EMF and according to the Lenz Law it will oppose the orighinal current flow.

so precisely as Figuera intended as the brush rotates we have the most efficient way to control current flow in the primaries  increase and decrease in the magnetic flux to current ratio that controlls the current flow to each set of primaries in complete unison. when one is increasing in winding count the other is decreasing in winding count at the positive brush.

Self Induction can and will control current flow plus using the stored and released potential in a positive manor.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on December 10, 2018, 04:06:15 PM
The Figuera device uses an active Inductor for part G that changes the magnetic flux to current ratio which according to Faraday any change in flux produces EMF and according to Lenz it will oppose the original current flow. along with that it stores and releases potential at a specific time to add the rising primaries to maintain the pressure between the primaries to sustain ongoing Induction.

the primaries are reduced and increased to induce motion into the secondary and once current begins to flow in the secondary and the load a second field will form according to the lenz law that will oppose the original current flow. once this happens the primaries and the secondaries part ways and it is just the realitive motion of the primaries that induce motion into the secondaries. after this polarization no other time is the potential circulating in the inducing system is tranfered to the induced system. they are essentially two separate systems from then on just like a standard generator system.

as the brush rotates the current through the primaries are reduced and increased 180 degrees out from each other causing the Electric fields to be in the same direction being positive and additive. the primary and the secondary cores are separated to stop eddy currents and hysteresis from interferrring from the action of the AC in the secondaries to the primaries.

with the lenz field from the secondary sandwiched between the primary fields the primaries are raised and lowered in intensity just to clear the secondary coil then back to full potential while the other is reduced.  in this action of reducing and increasing  the magnetic fields stay opposing while the Electric fields joiin as one. in this set up the peaking of the primaries need to be symetyrical, meaning the peak of the primaries needs to be the same or induction will be lost thus reduced to just the rising primaries.

there are two primariy facing each other being north face opposing electromagnets with the secondary located between them with an active inductor used as the controller controlling the current flow through the primaries.

if you do not have your setup like this or your coil core arangement is different then congratulations you are NOT working on the Figuera device 1908 patent. anything other is just that something other than the 1908 patent and i wish you luck in your pursuit.

this thread is according to my knowledge following the 1908 patent of Clemente Figuera patent in Barcelona Spain in 1908 that powered his house lights, a 20 HP motor and all the street lights around his house.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on January 07, 2019, 07:03:53 PM
The reason no one is getting an output from their cores isfrom the inverse square law that states the intensity will be reduced at the square  of the distance.
Also through my own tests on the bench it showed that a magnetic field will only project out the core the same length as the core it self. a 3 inch electromagnet will only project a field out three inches.even when saturated it only hit 3.2 to 3.3 inches which is not near enough pressure for an output if the secondary is the same length.
Make your primaries twice as long at no less than a 2 to 1 ratio and watch your oyster open up.

Regards,

Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on February 26, 2019, 02:13:54 AM



Hello marathonman,
                              In response to your comment about the length of core pieces for the Figueras device. If I were to invert the process, that is use the "y" coils as the excitors, would the increase is size not be as critical? I can see your argument for the size ration to the present configuration, "y" coils x 2 = max output, but cannot quite see it if I want to experiment with different configuations. Your proposal implies any change in configuration would require recalculating the total coil arrangements.


By the way, thanks for continuing to update your information on this tricky system. Perhaps I should build two systems to get the comparisons?

Edit. Would this imply that the larger core would require an equivalent sized coil? thanks

Thanks ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 26, 2019, 03:10:17 AM
If you were to use the Y coil as the exciter then how do you propose to compress the magnetic field lines to match that of a standard generators high intensity field...... you can't !
that is why Figuera used two mono poles to compress the magnetic field lines then reduce one and increase the other to get movement into the secondary while causing the electric fields to be in the same direction being positive and additive.

but if you so choose this route the use a larger center core so the intensity at the end of the smaller outer cores is high.

PS. i have new cores coming as well as a new C core controller compliments of Bridgeport Magnetic's. 6 inch primaries and 3 inch secondaries compliments of Temple Transformer. ;D old ones walked off from old address >:(
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 26, 2019, 03:37:57 AM
Figuera Device.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on February 26, 2019, 05:07:49 AM



Hi marathonman,
                         Thanks for the reply. I have just edited my previous post without reading yours. Anyway I think the answer is as you have suggested. Large core= large coil. Small core=small coil.


I have just bought 3 meters of 25mm rod and am off to the engineer's workshop to use his metal saw. I want to get all the cores exactly the same length. Net build some bobbins. While i muck about with understanding  what is going on i am going to use a modified steeping sequence with overlapping pulses so as to maintain the current flow.


There was one other opportunity that i do not recall reading about and that is bifilar wound coils and for the G circuitry.


Once again thanks for your reply


Regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 27, 2019, 02:10:32 AM
Hummm, so if you agree why are you making them all the same length.?  that seems counter productive to sound scientific reasoning that agrees with the Inverse square law.  WOW !
Yes the approach you are taking with the switching to mimic the brush rotation is sound.
Part G is single layer Inductor with an active moving brush.

good luck,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on February 27, 2019, 04:48:03 AM
Hi marathonman,
                         I am having cut 16 at 3" and 8 at 6". Using the notional balance for 3:1 ratio for length and diameter from the book The electromagnet by Silvanus Thompson and your advice for flux between y and NS coils. Great little book to help focus on what you are trying to do! Although some of the terms are quite archaic, but, it is helpful channelling one's thoughts.


Regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on February 27, 2019, 09:11:51 PM
Hi,
    What I have not been able to reconcile yet is the comment that for 100w in 20kw out! Something else must be going on which is not in the patent.


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on February 27, 2019, 11:02:46 PM
Hi,
    sorry to go on about this, but a 200 fold increase from 100w to 20Kw is an unbelievable increase. Especially as some of the outcomes from tests so  far have been underwhelming. Even if the unit was resonantly tuned, I doubt Figueras would get that much increase. I can only see two realistic options for this output.


1) He painted his coils or cores with Radium. Perhaps that is why he was sick and died. Not knowing its contagious dangers.


2) He was familiar with Tesla's British Patent 11293 for the Magnifier Transmitter ( lodged 1901), and worked out how to utilise this information.


I shall still proceed to build the unit, but, I must admit, I am feeling a bit skeptical. Still if as one of the builders on the Energetic forum has indicated a 3 fold output - COP >3, that should work! Let's not be greedy!!


Regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 28, 2019, 04:05:39 AM
Figuera did NOT use Radium like other cheaters, he used common sense as a Physicist.

What people fail to realize is the power in the exciters is recirculated through out the inducing system which includes the Primaries and Part G, the controlling Inductor that stores and releases energy at the proper time unlike a resistor that waste potential in the form of heat unrecoverable.
the 100 volt, 1 amp or so per your system is used to excite all the inducers not just one so the reducing side releases potential into the system to off set the potential drop of the rising side. the added secondary loop back is there to replace losses and to give rise to amplification as all potentials released are combined  causing a voltage increase that will allow more current to flow in the rising primary. it is called forward biasing in laymen terms.

each side is either reducing or increasing in potential which is either releasing potential into the system or storing into the magnetic field to off set the next half cycle of reduction.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on February 28, 2019, 04:22:59 AM
IF no one can understand this Graph then there is no hope for the person trying to understand it. don't worry about the wording just concentrate on the direction of the fields as per the increase and decrease. this is the reason we have overunity because the Motional Electric field does not conform to the laws of conservation of energy and the fact that the exciting system potential is reused not destroyed.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on February 28, 2019, 08:52:48 AM



Hi marathonman,
                         Thank you for your reply. I have also been asking myself questions regarding the interpretation of the G rotor. On the patent - 1908 - all the connections are in pairs. I do not recall seeing where the exciters are numbered, so I take the connections as the default numbering. That said, When 1 is first cab off the rank so too is 16. As we move around number 2 is coupled with 15 and so it goes. I would read this as a progressive DC coupling simulating the  passing of two external magnetic fields. By so doing this sequence will produce a series of pulses as the output, leaning toward a DC complement. To get AC, the sequence has to be dramatically changed, and this is a later alteration to the patent. I do not see this coupling or it mentioned in the patent. Although I seem to remember, either Hanon or UFO stating that the later patent was 30 or so pages long. I do not speak Spanish, so I could easily have missed this point.


The reason I have gone over this part of the patent is because I think I am missing something somewhere. You are correct when you state it all depends upon the G continuum. It is just that in my naivety, that I might not have learned enough yet. And, that I see the role of the G continuum as being different to the proposal you are offering. Herein lies the issue. Having learned something, we wish to change it!


I mention radium as this was an element used for its usefulness until it was realised that people were dying from exposure. A short cut so to speak. The Tesla reference, for myself, is a better solution. And the Patent reference fits into the time frame. It would require re configuring  the G continuum rotor and its application and connections and adding other components. I hesitate to do that because I would not like to interfere with contributors such as yourself by inferring that you are wrong. When in fact I might easily be missing the point.  Yourself and many other on another forum have made massive and unselfish contributions to the Figueras knowledge base. My knowledge base especially, to the extent that I think I might be wrong! And, I do not wish to make any inferences against anyone, when it is clear the level of expertise that comes through in many of the posts.


My previous post was just my expression of looking for a solution to what I see as a problem.


Once again, thank you for your contributions, were it not for those, I might not be here!


Regards


Dwane

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 28, 2019, 12:25:48 PM
Yeah,looks like the answers are on this page . While I don't  accept the [size=0px]marathonman [/size]notion of using part G I agree energy is reused in somehow similar manner. What is hidden is quite easily to be found in Figuera patents covered by some cryptic sentences .
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on February 28, 2019, 12:26:58 PM
I'm quite sure any lab with sufficient amount of donation and clever stuff experienced in magnetism would sove this mystery very quickly.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on February 28, 2019, 02:19:13 PM
IF no one can understand this Graph then there is no hope for the person trying to understand it. don't worry about the wording just concentrate on the direction of the fields as per the increase and decrease. this is the reason we have overunity because the Motional Electric field does not conform to the laws of conservation of energy and the fact that the exciting system potential is reused not destroyed.
Regards,
Marathonman

                                                      F(Coulomb)/F(Lorentz)
https://www.didaktik.physik.uni-muenchen.de/elektronenbahnen/b-feld/anwendung/geschwindigkeitsfilter.phptranslated (https://www.didaktik.physik.uni-muenchen.de/elektronenbahnen/b-feld/anwendung/geschwindigkeitsfilter.phptranslated),
caution by this automatic translation : not Vienna but Wien https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Wien (https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Wien)https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.didaktik.physik.uni-muenchen.de%2Felektronenbahnen%2Fb-feld%2Fanwendung%2Fgeschwindigkeitsfilter.php (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.didaktik.physik.uni-muenchen.de%2Felektronenbahnen%2Fb-feld%2Fanwendung%2Fgeschwindigkeitsfilter.php)

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=ES&NR=2265253A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=ES&NR=2265253A1&KC=A1#)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 01, 2019, 02:20:00 AM
It would be very much appreciated if the scumbag LankaIV would stay OFF THIS THREAD. go bother some other sorry thread and leave this one alone. your dog dew and contribute NOTHING so GO AWAY !.

and contrary to some the answers are on these pages just some are not bright enough to see what is right in front of them or from the classical training of corporate controlled college system. but that is just my opinion.

ourbobby;
The potential is not pulsed it is just raised and lowered in each primary set 180 out from one another. as part G spins it is constantly changing the magnetic flux to current ratio and when this happens you will get an increase and decrease in current flow at a constant rate. at no time is the current interrupted. the goal is to sweep the magnetic fields just enough to clear the secondary then back to full potential.

the reason no one is getting nothing out is the inverse square law is biting them square in the arse which i have explained. please don't be side tracked by fools,  do the tests and verify for yourself what has been shared. remember your swimming in a fools pond on this site that are desperate for for some quick bait.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 01, 2019, 03:49:37 AM
Hi marathonman,
                         I get what has been explained over the past several years. I think I understand the notion of the AC sweep through the magnetic cores, be they external or internal. This is all very clever electronics manipulation, which I do not think Figuera had as his guiding principle. I think I have seen the 20kv mentioned three times on the other forum. Which might actually only be 15Kw or 20 HP. A figure mentioned by Buforn. The only way I can clearly see that output figure being replicated is with the addition of some special circuitry. Now! Did Figuera have this knowledge? In Tesla's opinion YES, although this opinion was based upon information that he had not seen, only relayed to him regarding the outcome of Figuera's running.and commentary. There is the 1902 newspaper article which I am sure you are familiar with. Also, I cannot find when the statement by Tesla was made regarding the suitability of the Canaries. Therefore, to my mind, again we are back at seeking to relate Figuera to the Aetheric electricity, and not amplification without this input. Did the continuum G include some variation on the popular Influence Machine of the day? Personally, I am thinking Figuera has merged two sequences into one. Using the system you are working with and with the addition of a method that assists with the amplification of the output. Part of my argument for this is the double whammy pulse at the terminals of the continuum G rotation. The straight direct connection serves another node not shown in the patent or its description.


I m going to leave it there. Until I have the working model all bets are off! I shall decarbonise my cores this weekend. Have to dig the kiln out from the back of the garage behind a lot of building materials. The actual process only takes a few hours. Heat up, cool down!


Regards


Dwane
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 03, 2019, 03:32:18 AM
 "I get what has been explained over the past several years. I think I understand the notion of the AC sweep through the magnetic cores, be they external or internal."

NOPE, ! it is DC with Frequency because of the moving brush which will then be inductive reactance initiated by inductance not current change.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 04, 2019, 09:02:52 AM



Hi there marathonman,
                                  I think that is what I meant, a modulated DC voltage and current.


Am looking at the turns ratio issue. Ampere turns! I have seen many answers to this question, but, nothing definitive regarding "Saturation" and actually calculating the flux gradient for ampere turns. From my perspective V/R is the first item on the agenda. I don't ever seem to see this. the ampere turns can only be considered once the current and voltage are defined. Maybe this is hidden in the H force. For the Figuera generator, we are talking multiple coils, therefore do we calculate for one N set of coils and then copy this calculation for the S set of coils? And, of course, if one wants to set up say just a couple of coils to test certain parameters, being smaller coils in the overall scheme of things demands a set of indivieual coils that have no relation to the big pictur. Lots of work here!


Regards


ourbobbby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 04, 2019, 09:14:59 PM


Hi marathonman,
                         Looks like my previous post was accepted. Could not connect properly yesterday1

               I suppose what I should have said is what you stated. Modulated DC. Just didn't put my finger on it!


Trying to get a handle on the ampere turns calculation. It seems to me that before any coil calculations can start, three things must be known. Voltage , current and coil dimension. In Figuera's case, a fourth pops up, number of series parallel coils. This would ultimately affect the G continuum. Adjusting R will automatically adjust the current!! Increasing V will increase I and either saturate the coils or turn the device into a radiant heater. All in all, a slightly complex issue that requires fixed parameters for stable operation. The outcome of which is this. All changes to voltage or current movements must occur within the G continuum, and not at the exciter coils!


Thus while I study B H curves I find all too often generic information. However, for Soft Iron there are a couple of established parameters. 3000 ampere turns per meter of core will give a saturation point at a permability of 600. Beyond 600, current is wasted for further flux development. Steel will go to 1.5T, however, I think the downside for steel is one of remanence. Ok for permannet magnet.


Lots of thinking going on. Is it leading me in the correct direction?


regards


ourbobby

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 05, 2019, 01:54:21 AM
I am curious as to where or rather why you keep bringing up G continuum. the continuum was my thread on that sorry site i really don't want to talk about. the part you are referring in the patent is part G which is an active Inductor.
Leave R out of the equation as much as possible because R waste power in the form of heat NON Recoverable.   wind the electromagnets to respond as fast as they can to the current change as part G controls the current flow through a change in inductance. the change of magnetic flux to current ratio with the rotation of the brush giving it frequency which will then be inductive reactance.
it can then be calculated by 2 x Pi x hertz x henries,  then divide that ohms plus your primaries ohms added into your voltage which will then give you your amperage through your sets.
remember part G controls the current flow NOT the primaries. and yes all the parameters you discussed need to be accounted for while minimizing R.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 05, 2019, 06:26:25 AM



Hi marathonman,
                          My apologies! I read too much sometimes trying to catch up or cover the ground or look for clues. You are correct to correct me. Part G is what it will be. I have come across a good youtube video by UFO on the part G. It would seem my analysis of getting that going is the first option of the build is the correct decision.


The interest in the ampere turns is to avoid saturation of the coils and get the generator running efficiently! Thanks for the heads up on the calculation.


regards


ourbobby

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 05, 2019, 12:50:48 PM
Hi marathonman,
                         Last comment before I go to bed. i am unable to get the big powdered iron toroid that you can. However, i can get Hollow Bar in various sizez and thicknesses. I have the cores, but, this sie is not related to Part G. What would be a good size? Something like 160mmOD - 100mmID nd height say 100 mm.
I have to order and get it cut and delivered. So i have lots of flexibility. Also, Hollow bar can be decarbonised!


Regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 06, 2019, 01:53:55 AM
Hi marathonman,
                          Proving more difficult than I thought to get small piece of hollow bar! Anyway, I have found a small piece locally in the scrap heap at an engineers shop. It is 160 diameter, 87 Inside diameter and 55 high. As we are talking inductance, might this be a bit small? Although i could use a smaller guage of wire perhaps?


Regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 06, 2019, 07:58:12 PM
I have the feeling Figuera was in the same situation as we today and he just found a way to modify the existing motor or generator
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 06, 2019, 09:04:59 PM
I have the feeling Figuera was in the same situation as we today and he just found a way to modify the existing motor or generator


Hi Forest,
              I think he did more than that. Anyway, I am a bit weak on some of the calculations for inductance and various phase changes. Some people see these more easily than others. Thanks for the comment.


regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 07, 2019, 02:50:20 AM
I completely disagree. Figuera was a Physics professor that taught at a college then became a forestry ranger. he knew exactly what he was doing at all times and NOTHING was by chance.
his 1902 patent was yes, a modified version of a motor/ generator but his 1908 patent was an Unbelievable achievement making a generator static.  do you people realize what was involved in the process in 1900.
Get real and see the implications.
modified motor my ass, try motional electric field at it's finest hour.
Ourboddy;

  You realize a hollow core will give you almost nothing in regards to a magnetic field.?

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 07, 2019, 11:30:51 AM



In the UFO youtube demonstration of the Part G, what type of core is the Bridgeport Green coated one that is being used?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: F6FLT on March 07, 2019, 05:56:59 PM
I completely disagree. Figuera was a Physics professor that taught at a college then became a forestry ranger. he knew exactly what he was doing at all times
...

It's not proof, your argument cannot be accepted, it is an argument of authority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority).
See the story of this other professor, a physicist who thought he had discovered the N rays (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_ray)  ???. It was an illusion.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 07, 2019, 09:06:41 PM



Hi marathonman,
                          You are quite right. I need to get back to some fundamental principles of magnetic circuitry.

Regards


ourbobby
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 07, 2019, 09:24:18 PM
It's not proof, your argument cannot be accepted, it is an argument of authority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority).
See the story of this other professor, a physicist who thought he had discovered the N rays (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_ray)  ??? . It was an illusion.


Hi,
    I like the the irony of your argument of Authority! Used all too often by all sorts of people that have no real solution to their arguments. I have suggested on another forum that it would have been incredible for Clemente Figueras to have understood in great detail what was going on. Today we have all sorts of expertise at out disposal. Back then in 1902 going forward, test results were likely the rudimentary source of the measure of any output for Figueras. There is no doubt as to his ingenuity or intellect. I suppose at a fundamental level, it was possible to see if a magnet was working rather than the presupposing the N rays existed without difinitive proofs by Blondlot.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 09, 2019, 04:06:37 AM
Agreed, what a fools fool. never in his life pursued the Figuera device yet an F-in authority . sounds like it is bought and payed for lock, stock and barrel. typical sad loud mouth drive by.
Wow ! does that sound familiar.
Oh my F-in knees are shaking at the authority.
Stupid is stupid does!
marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on March 09, 2019, 11:53:02 AM
ALL SAID AND DONE , BUT WHERE IS THE GRAVY!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYC4LdbLz7Q
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 09, 2019, 11:37:12 PM
ALL SAID AND DONE wheres your proof i am wrong..... OPS ! there is NONE ! you just ran your mouth because your getting paid to do so. if you were a real researcher you would of benched what i have said then been totally hushed from your mouth.  all the other ney sayers did the same until they started doing the actual research then were silenced beyond belief.
the real researchers know i am recovering from a devastating blow that sent me back to zero but unlike you i can bounce back to prove myself which i am in the process of.
Trolls are a dime a dozen dude so your uneducated mouth is also a dime a dozen just like the other trolls i silenced.
Good day troll, i see you are into cartoons, wow how intelligent are you.
Please do the folks that want to learn something a favor and leave this thread and please stop the uneducated drive by BS.
Regards,
Marathonman ALWAYS ! till the day I die.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 12, 2019, 04:43:30 PM
http://www.energeticforum.com/316580-post10.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 13, 2019, 02:56:33 AM
Well that is the blind leading the blind. taking Seaad's word is like believing a 5 year old sworn statement in a courtroom that a hooker paid him to investigate the Figuera device.
Good god what a fool you have been. after all these years your still just as stupid as ever.  can you please connect with Citfta to get the jist of things as i really doubt you will.
Your a fools Fool. please try doing some real investigating of the Figuera device instead of faking it this time or letting your brain get in the way.
Regards,
marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 13, 2019, 09:45:49 AM
If you guys have ability to contruct real generator from scratch or at least heavily modify existing ones I suggest to fist follow Figuera path and modify existing generator like Figuera did in 1902. You cannot fly if you didn't learned how to stand up.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 14, 2019, 03:06:13 AM
Good God this thread is following the 1908 patent if you can follow that. do you people smoke something on a daily basis or what.?
Follow the 1908 patent and you just might get some where.....maybe !
you people are as bad as EF.  what do you get when you increase a magnetic field of the left electromagnet while decreasing the one on the right.... it is called coherence of the Electric fields meaning they are in the same direction.
This is Crayola Physics people and if you can not follow that just maybe you need to pick another device.

regards.
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 16, 2019, 07:57:13 AM
Hi marathonman,
                          I have taken the attached - very profound - quote from another forum where you posted. My question is, are you talking about an electromagnet or a fixed domain magnet?


Regards ourbobby


Quote" even though a magnetic field is created around[/font][/size] a conductor when currant is flowing it is at right angles to the currant flow but the electric field is parallel  to the currant flow at all times.  when a magnet is brought close to a coil of wire we were told by our forefather in Physics that the change in a magnetic field causes currant to flow. what people do not understand is a magnet is an electrified object with domains locked into place causing a constant currant flow around the magnet it's self. [/font][/size]the currant flowing in the magnet is what is causing the electric field of varying degrees of intensity so when you bring that so called magnet into a coil of wire what you are really doing is changing the intensity of the electric field intensity around the wire which causes currant to flow. the magnetic field has nothing to do with the generation of currant what so ever and is just the resistance to the electric field."[/font][/size]
[/color][/font]


Edit: I do not think that I will ever forget that explanation!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 17, 2019, 03:18:26 AM
Yes i am referring to a magnet but according to D.B. Larsen which makes a whole lot of sense to me says " gravitation has a three dimensional aspect ie in three opposite directions that cancel out each other. when a two dimensional magnetism is introduced it cancels out two of the dimensions of gravitation leaving one dimension of gravitation 90 degrees from magnetism which flows from counter space into space. magnetism is the controlling mechanism to current flow and when you exceed this you have wires burn.

a magnet is an electrified dielectric object which has current permanently looping around it's perimeter with it's domains locked into place.
I hope this makes sense to you as it does to me.

Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 17, 2019, 05:07:27 AM



Hi marathonman,
                         Further to my post above, and regards to flux cutting and flux linking. And, from the comments on another site and the Ferranti generator. I can see where, as you pointed out previously about Walter Russell Coils, that Russell advocated the alternate direction of motor/generator direction to that generally in use in today's motors/generators. In a Patent, Ferranti ideally shows a form of Homopolar mechanism cutting through peripheral coils, not unlike one proposed by Russell, who incidentally suggested that he could get up to 300 fold output. Understanding this phenomena is proving to be intriguing. As it is said, the devil is in the detail. The similarities of many devices.


Thanks for your comments.


Edit, well I uploaded the optical generator of Russell's, which looks like a copy of a Ferranti Generator. but, it loaded as massive. Not sure how to manage that.Anyway it was more for other interested members as I suspect you might be familiar with it.


Dwane
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 19, 2019, 12:59:07 AM
Yes i sure am. it is quite amazing when in your journey into the truth just how wide one's eyes can be opened and to the realization of just how much we have been lied to.
my new cores and C core came in to day which can be viewed on Hyiq. how sweet it is to be back in the saddle again.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ourbobby on March 19, 2019, 07:27:11 AM



Hi marathonman,
                         I have on order the components for the arduino circuit  to digitally drive the Figueras device. they are coming form all sorts of places! So I too am waiting.


Where I though initially Figueras might have been using an electrostatic impulse to bolster his primary coils, I was completely off track. My mind ticking over pushed the Russell generator into my mind. Where I was looking at the modulated drive as the similarity, it was in fact Ferranti that gave me the answer. All in a days work. I have found that little exercise quite rewarding.


Regards


Dwane
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 23, 2019, 10:31:22 PM
Here is a shot of my primaries and secondaries before epoxy. second pic is my C core controller Part G with brush holder and motor. as i say, you can't keep a good man down for long. i lost over 5 grand of belonging's, test equipment and cores and i am still bouncing back.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seychelles on March 24, 2019, 05:03:06 AM
GOOD ON YOU MARATHONMAN KEEP UP THIS GREAT WORK..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2019, 08:14:04 PM
Cores are 2/1 ratio so the magnetic field of the primaries will project out 6 inches and when reduced to get the sweeping action across the secondary it can maintain the field line pressure and not loose induction as will cores of the same length. remember we are dealing with a duel mono pole excitation system and as such the Inverse Square Law is directly applicable.

I have some simple jigs being made at work for free that will help me assemble the cores one for each core size. it has a slide plate attached to the base plate to accept a C clamp compressing the lamination's until the epoxy is dry. the sliding plate is attached to the bottom plate with a notch cut in it for a spacer to slide in and a small plate on the bottom side so the slide plate doesn't fall off. it only slides back and fourth.
simple but useful.
i will post a pic as soon as it is completed.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 24, 2019, 11:16:54 PM
This graph pretty much say it all. like it or not this is physics facts at it's finest.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 25, 2019, 11:20:56 AM
@ marathonman, all
I have some questions for you:

History from various forums:

Figuera Input 100 Volt --> 100 W Input / Output: 10 kW - 20 kW ( a motor and some bulbs)

Is it DC Watts input??

If so the summary load (Z) resistance in all primarys + G is 100 Ohm
 and the  mean input current is 1 Ampere    ( P= U x I )


Quote from http://www.aboveunity.com/thread:
 "Please remember folks, the primaries are ONLY reduced to clear the secondary then back to full potential as the other primary is reduced. at NO time is the primaries reduced past 50% or to zero. if you do this induction will fail as the compression of field lines is or was not maintained thus induction will fail and the output will plummet to almost nothing."

" the primaries reduced to 50% "
What?? : Power, Voltage, Current, B

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 26, 2019, 12:42:55 AM
I am really curious if you read the posts or even understand them. i have posted at least 50 times that the current is reduced by part G's inductance, what part of this do you not understand.
" the primaries reduced to 50% " Good god that is not what i said, i said "NOT REDUCED PAST 50% AND NEVER TO ZERO:
NOW ! can you understand that.
For the last time the primaries are only reduced to clear the secondary then back to full potential. if you can not understand that i will never respond to any questions from you again Mr thick as a brick. pay attention, take notes or bow out of Figuera.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 26, 2019, 01:00:12 PM
@ marathonman

Thank you for your clarification.

History from various forums:  Figuera Input 100 Volt --> 100 W Input / Output: 10 kW - 20 kW ( a motor and some bulbs)


I have calculated an output  value of about 12.5 Watts see below pic.
According to my simulations it's possible to reach about 70% (70W)

With straight cores according to pic. 2
 I got n=70%
And in the same test, with DC added so the bottom input signals tops reached well above the zero line. (0 Volt) exactly the same (AC) N=70% was produced.
But if I add the DC power to that result, only some  % was reached.


Please explain to me , us      HOW? the extra 10 kW - 20 kW arises.

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: marathonman on March 27, 2019, 03:01:41 AM
I have enough money to fly to your country and eliminate you so i would suggest you F-in delete my name at once you fucking prick. i am a expert in rifle and pistol and can take you out at over a mile a way so if you value your freedom i would suggest you delete my name fool.
next time i will not be so Nice ass hole Arne.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 27, 2019, 10:51:34 AM
Sorry MM my fault.

Regards Arne


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on March 27, 2019, 01:57:55 PM
I have enough money to fly to your country and eliminate you so i would suggest you F-in delete my name at once you fucking prick. i am a expert in rifle and pistol and can take you out at over a mile a way so if you value your freedom i would suggest you delete my name fool.
next time i will not be so Nice ass hole Arne.
Regards,
Marathonman

You should take carefull about how you talk to persons .
I will assure personally that your answer is not made clear to the moderators of this forum.
Your threats, in addition to violating any code of ethics, also violates the rules of this forum. I suggest you publicly apologize, so that this matter will be healed here otherwise I will make a point to suggest that you be banned by your conduct.
THX
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on March 27, 2019, 02:45:31 PM
 This is a terrible thing to write for many reasons  , these types of writings bring immediate attention to the author.


 This is not grandpa’s world anymore red flags such as this are no longer ignored and taken quite seriously given recent violent  events .


 This behavior can put your whole world under a microscope.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nelsonrochaa on March 27, 2019, 02:56:07 PM
This is a terrible thing to write for many reasons  , these types of writings bring immediate attention to the author.


 This is not grandpa’s world anymore red flags such as this are no longer ignored and taken quite seriously given recent violent  events .


 This behavior can put your whole world under a microscope.
I'm horrified!
I do not remember ever since I attended this forum have seen direct threats to the physical integrity of people inc. Something has to be done, this kind of fundamentalist behavior must be cut off at the root. really
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on March 27, 2019, 03:05:26 PM
Sorry MM my fault.

Regards Arne
Hi Arne,
No, it is NOT your fault at all! You did ask the correct and relevant questions and marathonman's "answer" is unacceptable.
He should be put under moderation as a minimum. This is not the Wild West...
Gyula
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hartiberlin on March 27, 2019, 09:42:37 PM
User marathonman
is moderated until he will not continue to start flame wars and do death threats...
That is not accepted over here.

Please post an appology and I will unmoderate you again. Please try to be more "professional" and do a
factual discussion and not shouting at each other. PLEEEAASE..
Many thanks for understanding.

Regards, Stefan.P.S: I also removed his first name over here from the posting, if his last name was also posted, let me know and I will remove it too...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on March 27, 2019, 10:17:16 PM
@ hartiberlin
Thanks for your help!

  Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on April 02, 2019, 11:52:23 AM
 The development of the Figuera principles and some testings can be followed here also:

http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/clemente-figuera/?order=all#comment-113491cc-bb60-469a-9725-a88f0122b9ec

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipP4nEyQHK1jTTNgpmOkkh5Oche8_8l7dvCAsBxWJQnPEx5QtSjdBVqdaFxbmOLz1w?key=YnZuaGFWekI2TlIyaURpSUpmZ25GTk1EWFQ4VHJ3
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 12, 2019, 04:34:12 AM
Hi guys!
Nice to see that you have not given up on building a successful FE prototype. I have been away for a really long time but I have always hoped to come back to do more research in this field.

During my time off I got sick for some time but I have also been building prototypes for other devices. The exercise has given me some self-taught training in the art of manufacturing. I am attaching photos of an LED lighting device that I built to test a concept. It was a success and I am hoping to make some money out of it.

Coming back to the subject of this thread, my experience with these devices taught me that the air gap is a huge challenge when trying to replicate these devices. Once an air gap is made to a closed magnetic path of an iron core, the intensity of the magnetic field can drop by a factor of one over a million. In my opinion, this drop in the magnetic field is what makes the duplication of these devices so difficult. In my last trial, I used a primary coil with about 1,800 turns, but when tested, it was inducing no more than 20 volts. For my second trial, I am thinking of building primary coils using a very thin wire for the primary coil and many more turns as possible, I would say more than 5,000 turns.

I wish you good luck with your experiments!

Sincerely,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on April 20, 2019, 12:05:24 AM
Bajac -

It's good to see you back in action. I always appreciated your insights.

So far everyone I have read about complains about low output. If they are not using the original Figuera configuration or one that gives a low reluctance flux path, they can't get an adequate output. Those with facing like pole electromagnets on either side of an output coil cannot get an adequate output because the flux path between the output core and the opposite pole of the exciter core is in air. Rowland's law states "flux = magneto motive force / reluctance".  As you stated, reluctance of air is huge compared to that of iron, so the flux path's total reluctance is too large for that configuration to have a significant output.

I have also been absent on the forum for several months, but have pursued the Figuera generator principle using a slightly different configuration. Instead of using two magnetic circuits in which the output is a common member, I elected to use a rectangular flux circuit with two exciters (inducers) on opposite legs of the rectangle with like poles facing each other, separated with an output coil between each exciter on the other legs. That way both poles of each magnet were used so the output could be doubled. The amp-turns of one exciter coil are adequate to drive the required flux through the entire flux path, including mitered joint air gaps, if the other exciter is at a minimum of zero output at that point in the waveform.

At this point I have the electronics that excite the inducers working correctly. That portion consists of a main power supply that feeds two PWM power supplies that power the inducers. These adjustable PWM supplies respond to an electronic board that provides two 50 or 60 Hz 16 bit digital sine waves 180 degrees out of phase. The board also provides other signals that permit using other boards to create 3 phase devices. Those boards are designed, but will not be built until the first unit is functional.

Proof of principal experiments demonstrate that this approach allows 3 small coils to produce a sine output using PWM excitation on 2 of them when the unit is in run mode, and that the resultant field from the opposing pole coils can be statically controlled to 8 different positions as it is stepped manually across the length of the output coil when it is in step mode. Max and min adjustments are provided to control the excursion of the resultant field.

My approach does not have the "Part G", but calculations show a 23 KW unit can produce a COP around 100. They are based on the principles outlined in the book, Elementary Dynamo Design written by Benison Hurd in 1908, and the properties of M4 grain oriented electrical steel product literature by AK Steel and Allegeheney Ludlum Steel.

At this point, I am ready to make a 23 KW unit. This device will be about 22x35x8.5 inches, and have a 6.5 inch square core with forces on the order of 6000 pounds at each joint. It will weigh about 1150 pounds - not including the support frame, control and breaker cabinets, or protective screen / housing. Unfortunately, making a smaller unit does not cost appreciably less.

I have previously posted documents describing this device. They appeared on page 289. Since then, I have improved the spreadsheet and corrected minor errors. The original spreadsheet did not warn when entered parameters allowed the output coil to be too large. This allowed the core to be too small, and the back amp-turns to be above the acceptable limit.

If anyone finds errors in these documents,  would appreciate hearing from you.

Thanks,
sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Sam6 on April 20, 2019, 11:33:58 PM
After posting the spreadsheet yesterday, I discovered that I had omitted the excitation VA/lb from the losses. Including them lowered the calculated COP to 98.43. :(

The newly posted spreadsheet has that corrected, and some of the cell comments have been clarified. The project description dated 4/20/19 has the updated dimensions, output  KW, and excitation voltage for the generator.

Please accept my apology for the error.

Sam6
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 25, 2019, 01:43:57 PM
Sam6,
I think you are right on the size of the electromagnets. For a while, I have been convinced that the Figuera's device was huge, not the 8-inch long core that I built. I agree that a large iron core should definitely be a plus. Though, I am not sure about departing from Figuera's teachings for providing small air gaps. In my opinion, the air gaps are needed. But I would welcome you to try your large size coils since it should be a huge learning experience. I would suggest to build it in such a way that it would easily allow you to test both, with and without air gaps.


Has anyone found any record about the size of the Figuera's electromagnets? I think it is time for us to put together a list of all the clues we can find about the Figuera's device. Seeing all the clues in one place may help us to brainstorm and to look at his device in new and different ways.


Thank you,
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on April 25, 2019, 04:13:09 PM
bajac
You don/t have to put together a list.
 Just sit still in the boat and watch what Aetherholic and Marathonman are doing and watch their equipment in this thread: http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/clemente-figuera/?order=all#comment-113491cc-bb60-469a-9725-a88f0122b9ec

Aetherholic sayed he was burning about1800 Watts into something, ??? the primarys ??? for 20 minutes but didn't mentioned how great the output power was. Something must have become hotter than 1800 Watts because he talks about amplification.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 25, 2019, 09:43:44 PM
I beg to differ from many members here.
I believe that how these devices operate is known to many members who don't want to say anything out of fear.

Our good friend Marathonman is on record on this point

Please look carefully at Figuera device patent drawing. The output from the switching component part G is send through a resistor array. What will happen?

Voltage will increase and current will be diminished. This array is almost an oudin coil.

In Tesla coil the primary and secondary are wounding opposite directions. Current enters the beginning of primary and the end of the primary and beginning of secondary are earthed and current rotates I opposite directions. Therefore there is virtually no current I Tesla coil. In oudin coil the voltage is boosted in a similar way but the primary and secondary of oudin coil are coiled and current rotated in the same direction. But there's a very significant voltage increase.

Let us say that inputs a 13 volt 8 amps battery. The switching unit part G or MOSFET makes and breaks current. The one that comes outgrows through the oudin coil. Voltage is boosted 100 times. Current is similarly reduced by 100 times.

In Figureas arrangements the voltage keeps increasing and current keeps diminishing.

So how can you get output?

The primary cores are all permanent magnets already. They have their own magnetic field. This field is static. It is oscillated by high voltage. Over this you wind the output coils.

Output = strength of the oscillating magnetic field X voltage X frequency

The poles are nsnsns only. Te gap is to cool down the permanent magnet core. Nothing else.

If you look at Figuera device arrangements one pole has relatively higher current and the opposite one relatively higher voltage.

If you use a single iron bar only frequency from 500-1000 Hz should work.

If any one tells you to avoid high voltage and use only soft iron rods try are deceiving you. Permanent magnet core and multiple rods and NSNSNS arrangements.

Where is the feedback coil?

The central coil is the feedback coil. Use permanent magnet core and it will produce induced output and step it down rectified it and supply DC to the input.

How man

As many as needed to match the initial feeding battery.

You will need a MOSFET and Arduino to gate the MOSFET. For a single piece ordinary iron we found that response cooked up to 1000 Hz.

What is the possible output?


It depends on the number of primary output coils, voltage on them, frequency applied, magnetic field strength of primary magnets.

You can test them yourself. I am not well. I the last five to six years I have gone through one problem after another problem after another problem. Heart attacks,, stroke, asthma, diabetes mellitus, epilepsy and TB.

To a person like me who is struggling what is the use of threats? Nothing.

This is the secret of Figuera device. Not part G .not Air gap this and that.

You don't have to believe me. Check it out yourself. But very careful. High voltage at low frequencies is very lethal. Not just the voltage by also the magnetic field. You must put very high safety precautions before doing this and I am not  asking you to test this. Any experiments you do would be at your own responsibility.

One friend from Romania asked me many years ago to disclose the secret if I come to know of it as their country is very poor very cold and is struggling with oil bills. I hope by disclosure made here I have served humanity.

Thanks to all

I will not check my messages nor will I respond minor do I intend to post. The persons or teams that brought out this hidden patent must get the credit.

Regards

Ramaswami Natarajan





 


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 25, 2019, 10:24:37 PM
Why do you insist in replicating this device ? it is complete waste of time. You cannot do it. It's like saying you can become a master of kung fu just by reading a lot of books about it.You must start to think like Figuera and start from what Figuera started before 1902.
The best way would be to gather all information about Figuera from places where he lived. Maybe you can find a picture of his generator prototype  - even a single one would be tremendous move forward.A little toy can be constructed by using strong magnets and a closed magnetic path but the output would be barely OU just enough to keep us interested - I will leave it to somebody else I have no mechanical skills or time or money. Just think - it is very easy device, I'm sure it can be build but nobody seriously is interested in it because it breaks the current status quo....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bajac on April 25, 2019, 11:54:28 PM
I noticed some disappointment and frustration going on with some members. It can happen, but we should not give up our dreams and hopes. Last night I was watching an interesting YouTube video about SpaceX that is inspirational. The video is about of how Elon Musk was able to pull it off even though most of the people were not supportive and many failed experiments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbzegGHkk8c&t=15s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbzegGHkk8c&t=15s)

A very important rule to working as a team is to show respect to others who are also spending time and resources toward a common goal. If someone thinks he has an idea and wants to build it his way, we should welcome this effort and avoid stupid arguments and hard feelings that will only get us nothing.

I will make one more push, but this time I am going the whole nine yards. Instead of building a single set of electromagnets, I will construct the seven sets as shown in Figuera's patent. In addition, I will do it with larger iron cores. My budget is tight so I started planning.

Thanks and happy experiments!
Bajac
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on April 26, 2019, 01:03:01 PM
N Ramaswami 
 I salute you sir
 while I cannot tell from your post if you have actually succeeded , your intent is clear and your purpose received .
 We need more such awakenings if we are to ultimately succeed .
Respectfully
Chet

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 27, 2019, 07:30:32 PM
Hi Chet


Let's avoid the saluting business. No need for it. We are all doing what we are destined to do.

Let me put it this way. There are many knowledgeable people in a particular place. Most are afraid to even say they are knowledgeable about truth.

One such person X is struggling for money. I said hey.. I am also a beggar and I can try to share something in my pocket with you. Then X said if you send any money I will get into trouble. and Begger Y is trying to get some help for me but I will not take any thing from you. Reality is all are beggers who depend on God for our day today survival, health, knowledge, money, ability to work and mind to share with others. No saluting business please. Incidentally you know both beggers X and Y.

On November 8, 2018 I was on fasting for a religious ceremony, suffered a stroke or epilepsy attack and became unconscious and had to be admitted to hospital. I did not know how long I will survive. I then decided to make it public.

In the Figuera patent you would find that there's no mention of defeating Lenz. Pray tell me where he is talking about it.

What's Lenz law..

The secondary coil tries to oppose the rotating magnetic field and it needs to be overcome for electricity to be produced.

So in turbines they use water or steam to rotate the core itself and it is called conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy. This conversion results in loss and so more mechanical energy is needed to produce less electrical energy. Same with cycle dynamos.

On the other hand by using Tesla coil or Oudin coil in series you can create a lot of voltage. Voltage is powerful driving force. There's no water weight to give current. Ok. Only potential.

Wind this high voltage coil on a large permanent magnet core, you make the static field into a rotating field. We have 10 watts units producing 50000 volts at high frequency. We can have any frequency we need by modifying capacitor resistor values. You know it.

A normal low cost permanent magnet core material is soft steel. You have to make it a permanent magnet first.
You know how to do it.

Then wind high voltage wires on it and keep increasing the voltage and send the wire in series on several permanent magnet cores.

Take output coil from each core separately and use it. One of these cores can easily produce between 2-3 kilowatts on load. A normal induction coil using soft iron rods which have no permanent magnetism can produce 91-98% on load as tested by us many years back. Input was 220 volts,50 Hz and 15 amps. Output lit up 17*200 watts lamps but output was only 300 volts and 10 amps. We could have increased the voltage to 350 volts and 11 amps also but we used to disbelieve that as metre errors. This result depends on input voltage and we have voltage fluctuations here.

Ok..now you take that 300 volts after powering the output and use it provide power to primary of a Tesla coil to increase the voltage to 3000 volts in Tesla secondary and wind it on a permanent magnet core. You know in Tesla coil the current is destroyed in secondary and voltage alone is increased. Same frequency. Now what will happen if you wind high voltage Tesla output coil over the permanent magnet core? Look there is no current there. The magnetic field is no.longrr static. It is oscillated. If you wind a step down coil over this permanent magnet core you get output.

Here Lenz law is not violated. There's no violation of law of conservation of energy.

Output= voltage applied in primary coil+ thickness and number of turns of secondary coil +induced voltage in secondary coil+  size of the permanent magnetic core and magnetic field strength + frequency. Ordinary permanent magnet core material works upto 500-1000 Hz. Not all materials are same but it is a safe range for most.

Very cheap material only. We can oscillate the output to desired Hertz by suitable means.

Actually the Figuera patent is misleading. The magnetic field strength on both the  N and S magnets should be equal for the central coil to provide the best output. You make one strong and another weak the output in central coil comes down.

There's no mention of need to wind output coils on primary cores and need to provide high voltage or that the primary cores must be permanent magnet cores. But a person skilled in the art can identify that easily with a little experimentation.

He has hidden as far as possible. But with suitable coiling every thing he has claimed could be done. In his time what was required was demonstration before patent office if working device. Not enablement of competent third parties as required today.

He has also shown the feedback coil as output coils connected in series. He has fooled every body with this. The central coils are feedback coil and they must be connected in parallel to provide DC input to the + point of part G. Today we can replace part G with a MOSFET and use suitable gating means on MOSFET.

It took me a lot of time, money and efforts to understand all this.

I have disbanded my team. Poor health, lack of money to pay them all and hope that at least some one else or more continue with what we have learnt.

As Forest says it is a simple device but he will not do it for he has no money.

I think there are many people who can do simulation here and let them say it is all fraudulent and cannot work. You can also do it and find out if it would work. I rarely find experimenters willing to put their money where their mouth is.

Regards

Ramaswami Natarajan
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 27, 2019, 08:31:22 PM
You misunderstood. Yes, I have no money less then enough to build it but I have also no tools and skills. But the main reason I posted is the fact you all avoided Figuera path. That is the road to false theories. Don't build the final device from 1908, build one from 1902 and find Figuera road!He took ordinary generator and modified , rewound and found all problems which  still today make generators inefficient. Then step by step he fixed them , however without going this step by step you cannot make any progress. The first step is the most important one I think.
Lenz law....well let me ask : what is the reason of winding coils tightly and closely to the generator rotor core ? 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: NRamaswami on April 28, 2019, 01:45:23 AM
Forest..

Please understand that I have neither any interest nor health nor any money nor motivation to do anything further.. I have not done anything in motors and so have no knowledge. Without doing something and experimentation how can I either ask or answer questions? I honestly can't.

I have no interest nor any intention to post nor any further information to share here.

Thanks..bye

Ramaswami Natarajan
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on April 28, 2019, 03:38:50 AM
Ramaswami
I am helping a friend down in the New York City area these next few days
 I know you have done much experimenting and research in the past ,  your experience  would be valuable ...we should talk
 The open source community needs all the resources we can get .
Kind regards
Chet
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Jeg on May 24, 2019, 02:34:12 PM
Attached is one of our preliminary circuits we devised. Its actually based on the study of Joseph Henry. We figured that Figuera lived in the era of Faraday and Henry. So logic would dictate that the answer would be found in one of there works.


Hi guys.
Is there any chance of having the said circuit? For some reason it vanished.

Tnks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on July 18, 2019, 09:49:25 PM
http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/clemente-figuera/?order=all#comment-113491cc-bb60-469a-9725-a88f0122b9ec

""Chris posted this 21 hours ago - Last edited 18 hours ago
My Friends,

Information I have received, Marathonman is going else where.

It appears the rules here are intolerable.

I wish him Luck in his endeavors. All his followers, I also wish Luck.

I am locking this thread, for the likes of Aetherholic and others that have greater understanding and working machines, I ask please create new threads on your machines when you are ready.

Chris ""

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Aetherholic posted this 08 October 2018
So trolls and "debunkers" have a use after all!!!!.

One thing I would like to report at this stage is that my part G core as built is overunity without any feedback. The COP is between 1.2 and 2.33 depending upon load conditions. If anyone wants to debunk that then build one for yourself. It took great effort to build it so the same effort is required to debunk it. In operation its characteristics are a rectifier+magamp+battery+AC modulator+amplifier.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Regards Arne
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: MoFo on July 19, 2019, 10:54:29 AM
seaad, I too have been following. Amazing things happening over there, Men on a mission.

The mission statement: Be part of something Better

How true!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: AlienGrey on July 19, 2019, 11:15:17 AM
seaad, I too have been following. Amazing things happening over there, Men on a mission.

The mission statement: Be part of something Better

How true!
yeah!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on July 19, 2019, 06:10:48 PM
True Figuera replication should easily reach COP 10 and above. Anything below is misunderstanding
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on August 25, 2019, 07:38:03 PM
http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/clemente-figuera/?order=all#comment-113491cc-bb60-469a-9725-a88f0122b9ec

""Chris posted this 21 hours ago - Last edited 18 hours ago
My Friends,

Information I have received, Marathonman is going else where.


Marathonman is going to:

http://figueramarathonman.boards.net
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on September 21, 2019, 01:34:23 AM
Saludos y salud
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ARMCORTEX on September 21, 2019, 07:01:39 AM
This is not showing anything special?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_dq-kFU290
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on November 09, 2019, 09:22:17 PM
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/21104-solid-state-electrical-generation.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/21104-solid-state-electrical-generation.html)
I see member seaad shared info at above link
and Marathonmans website http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/2/figuera-1908-mechanical-builder-status?page=4 (http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/2/figuera-1908-mechanical-builder-status?page=4)
 Marathonman (http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/user/2)
 Builders Group

    22 hours ago     Quote (http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/post/550/quote/7)   Post by Marathonman on 22 hours ago I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Unfortunate circumstances transpired this week is forcing me to bow out of my pursuit of the Figuera device. the new owners of the property where i live are refusing to work with Veteran programs to help in my financial blight even though i have the funding lined up, i was informed today i must move. the only place i have available to me has storage for clothing only and little else other than personal items.
i am literally being forced to sell everything i own as i have no other choice in the matter or other avenues to pursue as in short term storage. this has literally been my dream come true to pursue this device and i have put every ounce of energy, time, money i have to advance this into reality. apparently the powers that be have decided to take yet another of my dreams away from me which is literally destroying me, ripping my entire sole to the core. even as i write this being a man, i can not hold back the tears from the one thing in my life that gave me hope and passion is being ripped from my possession yet again.

i will hold off on making definite decisions as i know things and miracles do happen when you least expect it. as of right now if things do not change i will be forced to abandon my pursuit of the Figuera device which will force me to close down this website as there will literally be no reason for it to exist. i have given my heart and sole to this device in my pursuit in the last 6 years of not only a dream come true but a chance of a lifetime to show people of this world there is still people that care and want to make a difference.

with much regret, sorrow and pain.
Regards,
Marathonman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on November 14, 2019, 06:42:03 PM
I'm so sorry to hear this about marathonman. Does anyone know where he lives or his bio or background? I'd be curious about that. For example we knew a guy that was quite alternative energy creative and full of ideas but had lots of family problems because he had asburgers.

And it behooves me that no one has commented on this.


Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on November 14, 2019, 10:44:42 PM
MM is back today:

 He "present FACTS to the Figuera device to all those BONEHEADS on EF and OU that still think this device will not work."

http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/7/figuera-mechanical-general-discussion?page=3

 I've asked him several times how the OU-amplification occurs in the Figuera system but I got no answer from him then. He only expressed a desire last time to shoot me.

Another guy Pierre Cotnoir should by now be showing here his better version "II" of the rotating magn.field OU-generator as he promised.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100014694489248

( Pierre's 170W in 1600W out Looped Very impressive Build continued & moderated )
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fritzman on November 16, 2019, 06:18:56 PM
I am new to free energy posting yet have studied all forums back to about 2010. it seems to me that through my research that many opposers do not want this or any device for that matter to come forward.

i am simply amazed at the opposition to Marathonman's posting, which in my research have been almost spot on so far as i am concerned. also the poster Doug1 seems to be the most intelligent yet cryptic researcher on this site and others. apparently he knows so much more then he is willing to admit or post freely in fear of retaliation. i have read some of the most intelligent observations from him that according to my research have been also spot on. it then makes me wonder if Marathonman had at least at one time some kind of connection to Doug1 as his work just happens to coincide almost precisely.

i have also observed the above member Seaad to twist the words from Marathonman to try to some how deceive the public that somehow Marathonman is trying to avoid answering questions or to imply he is lying which is completely unethical on many levels on Seaad's part. from what i gather from all the years of Marathonman's postings that he has gone through some extremely turbulent times and has lost his property and Figuera device through these unfortunate ruff times.

what amazes me even further is the member Seaad and others on this site continue to bash Marathonman for no apparent reason other than to just bash him behind his back to attempt to belittle or discredit him is some pathetic way. he has in my opinion, posted or open sourced all his work freely i might add in hope to bring this device to the public eye for others to replicate.
if you do not have the intelligence to study what Marathonman has posted or actually bench test his findings then just maybe you should find another device to attempt to replicate. bashing another human being because he has an extreme passion and belief that this device will actually do what it says it can do, does not give you the right to stoop to extremely low levels in what i call totally pathetic attempts to belittle and discredit.
all this behavior does is show your true intelligence and character for which i commend Marathonman for remaining in his conviction for so many years of gang style bashing.
i am certainly not trying to tell anyone what to do by no means but if you people would spend a little more time in an attempt to bench test what has been posted instead of directing all your time and energy to the bashing and attempted belittling of Marathonman, you just might actually make the status of a bonafied researcher.

i actually thought these forums were for the advancement of free energy where like minded researchers got together but it seems i was completely wrong as all i see is gang style lynching with soap opera commentary at the grade school level.
how sad.

Fritz

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: sm0ky2 on November 17, 2019, 09:42:33 AM
MM’s “facts” contain at least 6 falsehoods, and a few others that are questionable
or at least only applicable in discrete situations.


I’m not sure how that helps his argument after 220yrs of no working device to show....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on November 17, 2019, 11:16:23 AM
MM history:
http://www.energeticforum.com/292324-post926.html

OUOTE:  09-07-2016 "Turion;

My demo device i built as prof of concept put out 300 watts with 100 in. it was switched with commutators and made with resistance wire that got hot with prolonged used and was not self sustaining.
i sold it to someone on O.U.
 since that time i figured out part G's functions, then bought some pure iron cores. being so expensive, i could not justify the cost to buy any more. i then was going to get funding by third party but third party backed out suddenly and that leaves me in the position now, struggling.
i am still seeking funding but have had no luck so far. so for now i will just pass on the info i gathered and was passed to me.

my cores are wound and my part G is half completed but the rest will wait until the money situation changes.

MM "

https://overunity.com/16374/keshe-update/msg472789/#msg472789

QUOTE:   February 01, 2016 " I did a lot of research on Keshe and found he was a scam artist. their is thousands that are pissed because they were ignorant enough to send money to this fool and if you did you deserve it for not doing your research.
who needs this fool when their are working Figuera devices out there. i have a two section unit that has produced OU and am in the midst of building a full working unit.
 Keshe is a scam artist Figuera was not.....good day! "
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on November 18, 2019, 09:48:39 AM
It's only about induction laws.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fritzman on November 19, 2019, 03:33:53 AM
sm0ky2;
 my point exactly, you like others, post no facts to the contrary what so ever. just because "YOU" said it isn't so does not make it not so.
try getting on the bench and prove something for a change in stead of waving 3000 plus posts around like some kind of authority. you can not prove a thing unless you get on the bench. Figuera already proved this device worked with two patents with working models to the patent office "verified".
just because replicators can not get it going is their failure not Figuera's.
Seaad;
man i do not even have words for people like you. first of all, what is your problem with people. it seems you have an inferior complex. you spend so much time trying to discredit that you have lost complete sight of why you are here in the first place. you remind me of the Democrats against Trump. they have been proven wrong plenty of times yet continue their charade for three years now.
i am just wondering if you have time for experiments on the Figuera device which is really what all of us are here for, i hope.
i have been in the wood works for years yet never came forward until i have seen this warped obsession of attempting to bash someone that is not even on this sight. makes a person wonder of the sanity of people here.

Forest;
You are exactly right, it is ALL about induction laws and the Figuera device violates not one of them. if people here would actually take the time to research this device like a few others have you will see it is just like that of a standard generator.
all i see on this site is hatred, blindness and the total lack of bench testing and research.

Regards,
Fritz
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on December 03, 2019, 05:52:59 PM
An interesting question again!
 Se link below.

Have we heard this question before?
Yes from me here:  https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg525518/#msg525518
And some post later. . .


Link: http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/7/figuera-mechanical-general-discussion?page=4

creasysee
quote: "Hey Marathonman, I have a question about part G with two brushes. I remember, you had a long thread on another forum about this, but I don't understand this moment also. I'm building part G now and doing two brushes here and I need to know it urgent.

The question is: Will the brushes close when they are in the position shown in the picture? I think the surface of the commutator can burn out here and there will be strong sparking at this point because the current will reach tens of amps at this point.

Can you explain this moment, please?"
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on December 04, 2019, 05:16:45 PM
It's only about induction laws.


Excerpt from article which apparently lately was hidden for EU citizens to view


About Daniel McFarland Cook
He quoted Cook as saying, “I have found the principle that I have been hunting for so long. I can now start a dynamo to going and it will never stop, except by the wearing away of its own parts. Not only will it run itself by its own current, but also produce power enough, according to the size of the engine, to run any machine in the world.”[/size][/font]
“Perpetual motion,” I suggested.[/size][/font]
“More than that,” he replied. “it is perpetual motion with only 10 percent of the force used, leaving 90 percent for power to be utilized as desired … to produce light and heat your house.”[/size][/font]
“What will be the cost to run it?”[/size][/font]
“Nothing. As I said, start it and it will go; heat, power and light produced by one machine for absolutely nothing.”[/size][/font]
“I looked at him to see if he was mad, in earnest, or joking. He laughed at my astonishment and said, “I am now making a model and when far enough along, I will show it to you.”[/size][/font]
That's the principle - very powerful electromagnet with very little energy spent to switch it[/size][/font]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Fritzman on December 06, 2019, 06:18:18 PM
forest:
Very well put and it seems you are finally coming to the reality of the Figuera device inlike Mr seaad who spends every waking moment bashing other people.
How sad.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: seaad on December 09, 2019, 09:44:42 AM
http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/3/figuera-1908-mechanical-tech-info?page=3
Oct 9, 2019 at 9:56pm

Secondary feed back;
"  - - the wiring of the testing phase and the wiring of the running phase are different and must be accounted for. the reason i have not ever introduced this information is no one has ever approached this level yet so i withheld it to minimize confusion. as soon as people start getting reasonable outputs i will post the last of the puzzle. - - "



http://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/2/figuera-1908-mechanical-builder-status?page=5
Builders Group
Posts: 237
5 hours ago

" - - There has been may people over the last 6 years who thought how this generator works and unfortunately all of them were wrong with failed attempts. - - "

Good luck and we will see just how your understanding plays out.


Smart MM You can go on forever

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on March 03, 2020, 12:06:53 AM
Recordando, hace algún tiempo un compañero “muy inteligente” denunciaba a un profesor de un colegio porque uno de sus hijos le dijo que los aviones estaban hechos de hierro, que se lo habían explicado en clase, en la asignatura de ciencias.
Bueno el caso es que sigo comprobando que en todos lados definen o explican que los generadores eléctricos::: transforman la energía mecánica en energía eléctrica ESO ES FALSO Y nadie protesta, es como si explicaran que la harina se transforma por la acción de la energía mecánica en pan, o que el pan es generado por la energía mecánica
Aunque parezca que no, la diferencia es abismal… Aunque los humanos no tengan la capacidad de entenderlo, eso es otra cosa.
LA ENERGIA ELECTRICA  SE PRODUCE POR LA VARIACION DEL CAMPO MAGNETICO EN EL TIEMPO SOBRE LOS CONDUCTORES, O CON LA VARIACION EN EL TIEMPO DEL CAMPO MAGNETICO SOBRE LOS CONDUCTORES SE RECOGE EN LOS CONDUCTORES CORRIENTE ELECTRICA, CON UNA DIFERENCIA DE POTENCIAL O UNA FUERZA ELECTROMOTRIS.

La electricidad se recoge, no se genera, creo que va siendo hora de que pasemos a la siguiente fase de cultura en este planeta… LA VARIACION EN EL TIEMPO DEL CAMPO MAGNETICO SOBRE LOS CONDUCTORES SE RECOGE EN LOS CONDUCTORES CORRIENTE ELECTRICA, CON UNA DIFERENCIA DE POTENCIAL O UNA FUERZA ELECTROMOTRIS.

::: transform mechanical energy into electrical energy THAT IS FALSE And nobody protests, it is as if they explain that flour is transformed by the action of mechanical energy into bread, or that bread is generated by mechanical energy
saludos y salud
Electricity is collected, it is not generated, I think it is time that we move on to the next phase of culture on this planet ... THE VARIATION IN THE TIME OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD ON DRIVERS IS COLLECTED IN THE ELECTRIC CURRENT DRIVERS, WITH A DIFFERENCE OF POTENTIAL OR AN ELECTROMOTRIS FORCE.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 03, 2020, 08:34:47 AM
Yes, magnetic field is the source of energy, the supposed conversion of mechanical energy is the FALSE ASSUMPTION by the wrong method of generating electricity.like two strongman pulling the same rope but doing it in opposite direction.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: lancaIV on March 03, 2020, 01:16:29 PM
https://patents.google.com/patent/WO1995012886A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/WO1995012886A1/en)


pulling ? opposite ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on August 02, 2020, 07:37:49 AM
Yes, magnetic field is the source of energy, the supposed conversion of mechanical energy is the FALSE ASSUMPTION by the wrong method of generating electricity.like two strongman pulling the same rope but doing it in opposite direction.

true
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on August 13, 2020, 10:55:08 AM
Hi,


 You would find some amazing coincidences between these patents and the Figuera configuration:


 US4904926 https://patents.google.com/patent/US4904926A/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US4904926A/en)   especially figure 5


 WO2009065219  https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2009065219A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2009065219A1/en)   especially figures 1 and 2 and paragraphs 27 and 28 where polarity is defined
 


Regards
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Skyrob on September 24, 2020, 01:27:41 PM
Hi guys:

is this tread alive?  if yes Please indicate with thumbs up sign

thank you for your response
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on November 18, 2020, 09:34:48 PM
¿se entiende así?https://fotos.miarroba.com/ignato/107-c-figuera-4/ (https://fotos.miarroba.com/ignato/107-c-figuera-4/)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ignacio on April 21, 2022, 12:24:48 AM
Es esto pero usando para crear corriente alterna un montón de condensadores y cachivaches, en el minuto 10 más o menos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDp2VJkT76E
https://www.youtube.com/user/pmgriphone/videos
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bigeasy on September 12, 2022, 08:20:38 AM
Hello
I read the main messages of several forums published over the last ten years about Clement FIGUERA's 1908 patent. I would like to build a device of about 5 Kw, I ask: are there any people who have built and managed to operate the Figuera generator if so is it possible to obtain complete information for rebuild it?
In particular the plans and diagrams for the manufacture of the primary and secondary coils, and the "G" induction control.
There is a lot of scattered information, trials, experience but no conclusive result!!!!!!!!!!
I speak French but translated by GOOGLE thank you for your understanding.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on January 19, 2023, 04:06:10 PM
Very important post and attachment (Egg.pdf) by user "Fernandez" in another thread


Read it deeply. It agrees totally with Figuera´s design:


https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846 (https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846)


I attach here his document (Egg.pdf)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on January 20, 2023, 08:12:01 PM
hanon
This time it will be discussed and attempts at understanding the claim towards modeling a replication .
 Member Grumage has agreed to host a discussion towards replication ( he is moderator here and at Overunity Research forum)


Will hopefully happen soon !


There is also some very simple Plasma experiment on the table !
Thanks for rebooting topic


Respectfully
Chet
pS
As an aside …my personal favorite ”water fuel “ too !
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 13, 2023, 11:17:05 PM
You don't know me and I don't know you but from years of studying and researching Clemente Figuera behind the scene it seems the egg of Columbus was Figuera's 1902 patent not the 1908 patent. My observation is your getting the two mixed up continuously.

Another problem is the Figuera device does not use AC to power it's electromagnets. NO generating devices on this planet uses AC to power it's electromagnets because of the time it take to build up enough current through the coil to any usable level. Flipping the domains is way, way to time consuming not to mention the  power it takes to achieve that from hysteresis and inductive reactance.

Every single generating device on this planet uses DC to excite it's electromagnets so why on earth is someone trying to use Ac. If you think not one single electrical engineer or physicist is using ac for electromagnet generation do you not think it would be a bad idea.

After reading this entire thread and every single thread on the entire net it seems there is only two or three people that actually get the Figuera device, two of which are no longer on this site.  With all the bashing and child like behavior I am not surprises a single device has been built.

In order to achieve anything substantial people have to learn how to work with each other not against. All bashing and arguing does is separate the masses and that is exactly what the ruling power elite want.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bboj on March 14, 2023, 06:04:42 PM
So how does 1902 egg of Columbus work?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 14, 2023, 07:48:41 PM
So how does 1902 egg of Columbus work?

https://youtu.be/Ec4u4BfS4tE

Rotating magnetic field, RMF
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on March 14, 2023, 09:27:27 PM
Hanon quote
Post 4690
Here https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/4680/ (https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/4680/)

QUOTE
Very important post and attachment (Egg.pdf) by user "Fernandez" in another thread
Read it deeply.
It agrees totally with Figuera´s design:https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846 (https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846)
I attach here his document (Egg.pdf)
END QUOTE

  @ Bistander
The above quote/post and referenced topic (Fernandez)  have been getting poked and prodded
For quite some time ?
And honestly most I had asked for an opinion pointed to soft “old timey “ iron wire or components
As were used  in Daniel McFarland Cooks claims ( his device)
And most felt the Fernandez claim has legs in Cook’s patent?


Bistander
Do you like cheeseburgers?


This needs poking and prodding now ( yes the AC part is ….?


Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
It is Fernandez claim I would love input on
Specifically
How to start a bench setup for a beginning towards understanding
The claim ?
Even throw out all I have written here ( even PDF ??)


“Your thoughts on Fernandez writings”
How to investigate….?
BTW
Still awaiting feedback on Mr.Corbin’s claims
EDIT
PPS
Since almost day one Fernandez has written strong opinions and referenced
Experiments ,
His posts below


https://overunity.com/profile/fernandez.101771/area/showposts/ (https://overunity.com/profile/fernandez.101771/area/showposts/)








Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 14, 2023, 09:49:04 PM
The 1902 patent had stationary inner and outer primary electromagnets and what rotated was a drum type setup with the secondary windings on that. He improved it throughout the series of 1902 patents then sold them to the Bankers to pay his financial backer Buforn off and have money for his crown jewel, his 1908 stationary generator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 14, 2023, 11:13:24 PM
Hanon quote
Post 4690
Here https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/4680/ (https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/4680/)

QUOTE
Very important post and attachment (Egg.pdf) by user "Fernandez" in another thread
Read it deeply.
It agrees totally with Figuera´s design:https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846 (https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846)
I attach here his document (Egg.pdf)
END QUOTE

  @ Bistander
The above quote/post and referenced topic (Fernandez)  have been getting poked and prodded
For quite some time ?
And honestly most I had asked for an opinion pointed to soft “old timey “ iron wire or components
As were used  in Daniel McFarland Cooks claims ( his device)
And most felt the Fernandez claim has legs in Cook’s patent?


Bistander
Do you like cheeseburgers?


This needs poking and prodding now ( yes the AC part is ….?


Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
It is Fernandez claim I would love input on
Specifically
How to start a bench setup for a beginning towards understanding
The claim ?
Even throw out all I have written here ( even PDF ??)


“Your thoughts on Fernandez writings”
How to investigate….?
BTW
Still awaiting feedback on Mr.Corbin’s claims
EDIT
PPS
Since almost day one Fernandez has written strong opinions and referenced
Experiments ,
His posts below


https://overunity.com/profile/fernandez.101771/area/showposts/ (https://overunity.com/profile/fernandez.101771/area/showposts/)

Hi Ramset,
I reply to question from bboj, his first post in 8 years. I think mine was correct answer.

That referenced egg.pdf has nothing to do with Egg of Columbus except its title.

Is there a problem?
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on March 15, 2023, 12:57:35 AM
Sorry I thought he was asking hanon …
Screenshot below Fernandez Columbus egg


And then I asked you ( for your opinion
And ?
A cheeseburger for your troubles…
Respectfully
Chet K
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 15, 2023, 01:22:45 AM
Sorry I thought he was asking hanon …
Screenshot below Fernandez Columbus egg


And then I asked you ( for your opinion
And ?
A cheeseburger for your troubles…
Respectfully
Chet K

Cheers,
No cheeseburger for me. Never had one. Can't by law of doctor. I do like chicken eggs.

I offer no opinion on Figuera. Tried to help years ago but too many forum experts forced me out of discussions because I asked pertinent questions about what they claimed to know. I help where I can, but can't help those who know everything.
Carry on.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Dog-One on March 15, 2023, 02:43:51 AM
Sorry I thought he was asking hanon …
Screenshot below Fernandez Columbus egg

What is skirted around in that Egg description is the fact that
Coil A also knocks the crap out of Coil C--it doesn't just magically
drive Coil B.  I tried the experiment on the bench with both AC
and DC.  The scope tells me enough to save your money for
a cheeseburger or in this case, hold the cheeseburger and just
get two beers.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on March 15, 2023, 04:27:17 AM
DogOne
Years back.. before Fernandez posted this egg
He was posting about other experiments ( for years)
I had asked around for opinions


Most felt he was working off McFarland Cook idea
and thought of some interesting experiments
ION ( vortex 1 here) had some interesting thoughts
I do miss that man ;(


However…
I do appreciate your being thrifty with my cheeseburgers
And you certainly have more “on point” experience with coil abuse than
Most mortals…
Appreciate your taking the time !
BTW
I do like Atti’s  efforts ( noticed you shared a vid in mr T’s Meg)…atti is a really cool guy !


With gratitude
Chet

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 15, 2023, 05:15:44 AM
Very true, the Figuera device has nothing to do with the egg of Columbus other than it's shape. My opinion is he transitioned from the difficult design of the 1902 patent to the much easier layout of the 1908 patent with two rows of inducers and one row of outputs between them. One rotated (1902) the other did not (1908) except the controller which took a small motor.

The motor was there to rotate the brush or group of brushes and the commutator in the 1908 patent. The 1902 patent had no core for the secondary just some kind of drum. I honesty have not studied the 1902 as much as the 1908.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bboj on March 15, 2023, 02:11:30 PM
I get it that egg of c. is just an analogy.I just wanted to ask what is the underlying principle of operation?Any ideas?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 15, 2023, 03:49:17 PM
I get it that egg of c. is just an analogy.I just wanted to ask what is the underlying principle of operation?Any ideas?

Faraday's Law. Moving magnetic field inducing voltage in a circuit and resulting current causing a reaction.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 15, 2023, 04:05:21 PM
Hello IMIGHTKNOW,

The 1902 patent had stationary inner and outer primary electromagnets and what rotated was a drum type setup with the secondary windings on that. He improved it throughout the series of 1902 patents then sold them to the Bankers to pay his financial backer Buforn off and have money for his crown jewel, his 1908 stationary generator.
Very true, the Figuera device has nothing to do with the egg of Columbus other than it's shape. My opinion is he transitioned from the difficult design of the 1902 patent to the much easier layout of the 1908 patent with two rows of inducers and one row of outputs between them. One rotated (1902) the other did not (1908) except the controller which took a small motor.
The motor was there to rotate the brush or group of brushes and the commutator in the 1908 patent. The 1902 patent had no core for the secondary just some kind of drum. I honesty have not studied the 1902 as much as the 1908.

Since you have years of studying and researching Clemente Figuera, could you explain why you keep claiming a rotating member is in the 1902 patent?

From PATENT CLEMENTE FIGUERA (1902) No. 30378 (SPAIN)
The invention for which a patent is applied consists in following note.
Note
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing
moves
, which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines
thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.
Barcelona, the 5th of September of 1902
Signed: Clemente Figuera and Pedro Blasberg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on March 15, 2023, 05:40:25 PM
Imightknow
Quote
Very true, the Figuera device has nothing to do with the egg of Columbus other than it's shape.

The egg of Columbus analogy was not in reference to a shape or device but a concept.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus
Quote
An egg of Columbus or Columbus's egg refers to a brilliant idea or discovery that seems simple or easy after the fact.
Christopher Columbus, having been told that finding a new trade route was inevitable and no great accomplishment, challenges his critics to make an egg stand on its tip. After his challengers give up, Columbus does it himself by tapping the egg on the table to flatten its tip.

Another analogy is that everyone can find a problem impossible(trying to balance an egg on it's tip) but still have a very simple and obvious solution(simply flatten the tip). Implying that others did not understand the nature of the problem or read too much into it.

As such Figuera, like many other FE inventors, was claiming the technology was very simple and obvious but only after the fact. The solution only becomes obvious after a person becomes an expert on the subject or gains experience and insight into the nature of the problem.

Ironically, the egg of Columbus concept may apply here. Many assumed the egg of Columbus reference by Figuera may apply to complex shapes, coils or cores. Others assumed the reference may apply to Tesla's egg of Columbus device in 1893 demonstrating the complex interaction of induction and rotating magnetic fields. Everyone always tends to assume the most complex solutions but seldom the most obvious ones...

https://fs.blog/complexity-bias/
Complexity Bias: Why We Prefer Complicated to Simple

Quote
“Most geniuses—especially those who lead others—prosper not by deconstructing intricate complexities but by exploiting unrecognized simplicities.”... Andy Benoit

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bboj on March 15, 2023, 05:45:23 PM
Exactly

Hello IMIGHTKNOW,

Since you have years of studying and researching Clemente Figuera, could you explain why you keep claiming a rotating member is in the 1902 patent?

From PATENT CLEMENTE FIGUERA (1902) No. 30378 (SPAIN)
The invention for which a patent is applied consists in following note.
Note
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing
moves
, which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines
thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.
Barcelona, the 5th of September of 1902
Signed: Clemente Figuera and Pedro Blasberg
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on March 15, 2023, 06:33:01 PM
Exactly


and the Egg of Columbus is the way Figuera generator behave the same as generators but with the patent claims
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bboj on March 15, 2023, 07:12:10 PM
Excitation is the key than. Any ideas?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 16, 2023, 03:15:58 AM
Quote from Patent 1902 30376 Spain

"In summary: in the machine that it is requested to have a privilege, the excitatory
magnets are constructed as those in the current machines, and in the number,
size and desired arrangement. The core consists of a group of as many
electromagnets as those of the excitatory side, and the wires in the excitatory
electromagnets and core electromagnets disposed in series or parallel or as
required for the excitatory current, whose aim is to convert them in powerful
magnets and to create the magnetic fields which are formed between the poles
of each excitatory electromagnet and its corresponding electromagnet in the
core. Both, exciter electromagnets as those in the core, which are also exciters,
are terminated by expansions of iron or steel, placing face to face these
expansions and disposing them in such a way that in front of a pole of a name
there is placed a pole of opposite name. The core is composed of motionless
electromagnets around shaft, and nor those magnets neither the exciter ones
rotate. The induced circuit formed by wires coiled in a drum type configuration
rotates around its axis, inside the magnetic fields, accompanied by a collector
and a pulley, so that any motor may put them into movement.

As copper is diamagnetic, the force required to rotate the induced coils will be
very small, even taking into account the friction of brushes, air resistance,
bearings, and higher or lower attracting electric currents, so that, a relatively
weak electric motor, powered by either an independent current, or by a portion
of the total current produced by the machine can be used to put the induced
circuit into quick rotation movement.

As you were saying Mr Cadman.

So yes the device looked like the egg of Columbus apparently. And as you can read the secondary wires rotated not the magnetic fields as stated from someone.

The earlier 1908 patent did rotate but he might have transitioned to stationary not sure, that lead to the 1908 patent with the inducing and generating coils completely stationary with just his controller rotating. This housed the brush or group of brushes and the commutator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 16, 2023, 01:55:55 PM
Ah, I see.

You are talking about the patents 30376 & 77 for his rotating generator. Completely different machine. Everyone else is discussing the patents for the non-rotating generator, which if I recall correctly was the only one that was attested by an independent engineer with an actual working device. But maybe I have that backwards in my mind.

It’s been a long time but I think member Bajac was the only one who seriously tried to duplicate the rotating generator. I can’t say whether he ever had any success with it or not.

BTW, do you know which patent was sold to the bankers?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on March 16, 2023, 02:21:15 PM
http://rakarskiy.narod.ru/_ld/0/44_Entrevista_Clem.pdf
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 16, 2023, 03:06:54 PM
I said I'll take the engine apart, so I'll take it apart.
The rotor windings are flat and do not have an iron yoke.
And six very powerful (cobalt-samarium?) magnets on the top cover.
Collector and brushes placed under the rotor windings .
The rotor is a couple of millimeters thick!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 16, 2023, 04:57:20 PM
Quote; "Completely different machine"

  I don't think so and I think everyone has it wrong. Why would Figuera build a non moving generator then switch to a rotating for two patents then switch back to non- moving again. He did not and the entire series was a drum secondary that rotated but the two groups of patents were worded slightly different to appear as different.

The only non-moving patent is the 1908 patent with opposing electromagnets which in my mind of years of combing these threads on line that everyone has them misunderstood but just a few which are no loner on this forum.

Why would you ask such a silly question as it was quite obvious as to the sale of his 1902 series of patents to the banker. Any other silly questions as i do need a good chuckle now and then lol!
 
Please excuse my openness  kolbacict but what do you plan on doing with that motor?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 16, 2023, 05:45:45 PM


 
Please excuse my openness  kolbacict but what do you plan on doing with that motor?
It just surprised me with very low revs and good torque.
I wanted to see what it had inside. :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 16, 2023, 06:16:58 PM
Quote; "Completely different machine"

  I don't think so and I think everyone has it wrong. Why would Figuera build a non moving generator then switch to a rotating for two patents then switch back to non- moving again. He did not and the entire series was a drum secondary that rotated but the two groups of patents were worded slightly different to appear as different.

The only non-moving patent is the 1908 patent with opposing electromagnets which in my mind of years of combing these threads on line that everyone has them misunderstood but just a few which are no loner on this forum.

Why would you ask such a silly question as it was quite obvious as to the sale of his 1902 series of patents to the banker. Any other silly questions as i do need a good chuckle now and then lol!
 
...

Academic Curiosity.

I can only go by what the original researcher discovered about these patents. There were patents for both versions in 1902, all 4 granted within a few days of each other so I have doubts the numbers have any significance other than the order the patent clerks handled them.

https://alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258
This is the original place I read about the invention and the sale notice. It doesn’t provide any indication other than the translated word, patent, is singular. I’ve never seen any evidence that the bankers bought all of 4 of the 1902 patents, although they may have as you say. Is there any actual evidence one way or the other? If they only bought the rotating version it might explain why all future patents for Buforn were for the motionless generators and lend credence to the 1902 rotating version.

Lacking any real evidence it’s all supposition for sure.

BTW, glad you were amused.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 16, 2023, 06:42:18 PM
For me, the only thing that remains incomprehensible is the purpose of a thick wire wound with a snake around permanent magnets.  Shown with a red arrow.
The ends are brought out, but not connected anywhere (not used).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 16, 2023, 06:58:07 PM
I have a similar motor with such a wire. I believe it is a series field coil used to strengthen the field during current inrush preventing armature reaction demagnetization of permanent magnets.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 16, 2023, 09:46:29 PM
It makes no sense to keep a patent when you sell it to another meaning they have all rights to that patent and any such slight variant of said patent. So that leads me to believe the 1802 patents were sold to the bankers which they all rotated. But unbeknownst to the bankers he had already figured out how to make it stationary instilling the same attributes of a standard rotating generator in a nonmoving scenario.

I am just curious, what does that motor have to do with the Figuera device? Is it part of a build?.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stivep on March 17, 2023, 01:31:11 AM
For me, the only thing that remains incomprehensible is the purpose of a thick wire wound with a snake around permanent magnets.  Shown with a red arrow.
The ends are brought out, but not connected anywhere (not used).
speed measurement or speed/torque control with DC, like in magnetic amplifier.

Quote
The Magnetic Amplifier. The purpose of the magnetic amplifier is to amplify a.c. signals in order to make them suitable to drive a motor (servo motors, etc.) or to actuate a relay
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/magnetic-amplifier
Wesley
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 17, 2023, 04:39:58 AM
The link you posted has a mistake in the first paragraph
Quote; "As the DC level in the control coil is increased, the average value of magnetic flux within the core increases towards the saturation level thus limiting the variation of the magnetic field and reducing the AC output."

This is incorrect. Without the DC winding the AC running through the transformer has high inductive reactance (Impedance) so the current through the winding is very low. As DC is applied to the control winding it slowly saturate the core nullifying a portion of the AC reactance thus allowing more current to flow. At full on DC control winding the AC winding will have almost zero Inductive reactance (Impedance) thus full AC current is able to pass. I studied old school stage lighting and military controls that's why I know.

This inductive reactance is the same as the controller in the Figuera device by the way.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bboj on March 17, 2023, 06:40:40 AM
This inductive reactance is the same as the controller in the Figuera device by the way.
Would you mind explaining in detail?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 17, 2023, 04:03:26 PM
Certain people that are no longer on this site had it right. Clemente Figuera used inductive reactance to control the current through both sets of electromagnets.
If you want real in depth details i cam PM you.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 18, 2023, 02:45:08 AM
I think his Patent 44267 (year 1908) is very much what the PDF Egg of Columbus explains.  Not the tesla physical spinning egg- but the PDF attached.

He uses 2 driver coils and 1 pickup per set.   The pickup is between the 2 drivers. It is wired in a way where he is adjusting the power of the electromagnetic fields so they are varying and not the same.  One driver is always stronger than the other. Or one electromagnet is filling while the other is emptying.

"it can be said that electrodes N and S works simultaneously and in opposite way because while the first ones are filling up with current, the seconds are emptying and while repeating this effect continuously and orderly a constant variation of the magnetic fields within which is placed the induced circuit can be maintained, without any more complications than the turning of a brush or group of brushes that move circularly around the cylinder “G” powered by the action of a small electrical motor."

https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patent-44267-year-1908/

Edit-  I re-did the graphic with a proposed commutator design.

It seems from the patent the coils always pulse the same polarity from a DC source.  It would be possible to use alternating DC but the commutator would be much more complicated. I Bolded the part above where it is suggestive Alternating DC can be (and probably should be) used.

 I am pretty sure it could be done electronically with mosfets instead of a commutator. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 18, 2023, 05:45:28 AM
1908 patent can in no way be the egg of Columbus as they were referring to the 1902 series of patents. The very structure of the two rows of opposing electromagnets with a secondary in between and the inductive controller with a motor, rotating brush or brushes and commutator would make it impossible to look like the egg of Columbus. But that is just my opinion. ;D

I just happen to agree with some people in the past that they are opposing as it is impossible to vary a north and a south electromagnet as they will always form one field. Raising one north and lowering a south nets you a week magnet at best through tests that can be conducted by anyone. I did and they never achieved a high forced between them even with DC let alone AC which this device is not.

If you were to have opposing electromagnets it would allow you to compress the field lines substantially then raise one and lower the other which according to physics align the electric field. Of course the magnetic field stay opposing at all times. I honestly believe no one has compressed the field lines enough yet to get something substantial. On a physics standpoint is is entirely viable.

I think the reason he named then set N and set S is because of reference to his controller which he mentions a northern hemisphere and a southern hemisphere or upper and lower hemisphere. So logically I assumed at first it meant that set n and set s were north and south electromagnets but after much study he just named them after his controller halves while in reality they are opposing electromagnets.

Just my two cents worth lol!  ;D

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 18, 2023, 06:31:07 AM
1908 patent can in no way be the egg of Columbus as they were referring to the 1902 series of patents. The very structure of the two rows of opposing electromagnets with a secondary in between and the inductive controller with a motor, rotating brush or brushes and commutator would make it impossible to look like the egg of Columbus. But that is just my opinion. ;D


Perhaps you're thinking of the wrong Egg. Lol.    ATTACHED CLIP..  It shows exactly how the induction works.  Middle coil is the induced one, first and last coils are varying strength..  The author of the document even specifically claimed this is how Figuera device works.

I am not saying the author is completely right, but I think some people are mixing up the eggs.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 18, 2023, 07:10:11 AM
speed measurement or speed/torque control with DC, like in magnetic amplifier.
Wesley
Eh! and I was hoping that these were the conclusions for transferring the motor to the OU mode. :)
If seriously, it was still used as a signal source for some kind of automation.
Below is the signal at this output.


I am just curious, what does that motor have to do with the Figuera device? Is it part of a build?.
Has no relation. Excuse me. I've just dreamed to break it apart for a long years.  :D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stivep on March 18, 2023, 11:33:52 AM
The link you posted has a mistake //
Quote; "As the DC level in the control coil//
Thank you for your comment.
what you think about it is not important  as we are  pointing
at particular winding of kolbacitst and its function. :) and that is what that link is talking about.

If I say that  Hitler was totally all wrong.
- the true history fact is that :
Hitler made German  economy and technology shining.
His scientists  after WW2 were working in USA atomic, rockets and aviation  industry. He was about to make Nuke, but he  didn't.

One more example:
I was about to present working energy conversion FE  based  on Energy transfer  from A to B 
 mechanism of Dr James Corum. but I didn't.
 The true history fact is that :
A to B is scientifically and practically applied  in today's  technology but for you  claim  about FE there may not be certain.

question:
Will you  negate ( energy for free) coming from extra cash  too?
-and that happens all the time, especially if you are young and supported by parents  or when they left forever.

I hope it helps.

Wesley
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Dog-One on March 18, 2023, 11:59:56 AM
He was about to make Nuke, but he  didn't.

As I recall, we found his submarine full of uranium on the way to Japan,
so we made the nuke and gave it to Japan in a nice, loud, hot package.
Funny how things work out sometimes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 18, 2023, 04:12:13 PM
I guess people do not study physics on this site or OU apparently. There is no way to vary a north and a south magnets or electromagnet as they inherently join as one magnetic field. Reducing one and increasing the other with the type of switching in the Figuera device is darn near useless. I tried it for months with an outcome of very little every time. There is even an uninformed person on OU that is trying to use AC in this device and that is completely useless also. Not one physics professor or electrical engineer uses an AC electromagnet because they are inherent slow to react. The inductive reactance and flipping of all the magnetic domains is very, very time consuming taking a lot of power to do so. Plus when it just starts to get to a point of usable magnetic field strength it reverses and starts the flipping all over again. Not to mention the hysteresis which is another major blow attempting to use ac.

This is insanity to think ac can be used in this situation and the reason why every exciting field coil in the world of every standard generator is DC driven. So the facts remain that it can not be a north and a south electromagnet or ac driven. It has to be opposing being swept from side to side over the secondary using DC.

Why people do not follow the patent is beyond me. It also stated the patent is just a drawing for the understanding purposes OLNY so why do people still think resistor or resistor network are used in this device. IF it says that R is just for comprehension then what other viable solution can there be to control current flow in the most efficient manor possible.

An inductor and inductive reactance is the only viable solution according to physics.

Apparently you are forgetting the person said it LOOKS like the egg of Columbus not that is was which is your fallacy not mine. ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 18, 2023, 04:29:54 PM
Hers is a video I found on Youtube that shows two lights being switched high and low just like the Figuera device patent states 180 degrees out from each other. Just so happens it is an inductor using inductive reactance to control current flow. ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu5u4wVgiw8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu5u4wVgiw8)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 18, 2023, 06:47:38 PM
...
An inductor and inductive reactance is the only viable solution according to physics...

I thought we settled that issue back in 2016, 'round about here, thanks to hints from Doug1.
http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/10712-re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera?p=403949#post403949
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 18, 2023, 08:27:09 PM
Couldn't help myself and had to attempt to build it...

5x H-bridges
4 resistance coils
1x triple layer transfo
Arduino

Firing 1-2-3-4-5-5-4-3-2-1 repeating.  One polarity pulses.

I recorded what the scope looks like. Both repel and attract modes.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCRyBpUy0jA

I will continue to poke at it.  Considering winding more tranfo's .. 
Planning to test alternating DC, different frequencies, and whatever else I can muster.

EDIT-  here is a video of the firing order- which I blew all my LED's out.  lol..  The working model is operating on a much faster frequency.  This was slow so we can see the circuit firing correctly   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2Fv3xQslso
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 18, 2023, 11:02:39 PM
OK figured out my problem.  H-bridges needed diodes on each hot leg output ..  H-bridge changes then to "LOW" when not used and becomes a ground..

Installed a diode on each H-bridge and now it looks a lot better.  Can clearly see where it goes 5/5 and 1/1 for the reverse.  And the steps are coming into view..  The patents say output is "Alternate" current..  Using N/N I do not get alternating..  But with N/S arrangement I do..

Now shorting the output does raise the input.  So Lenz is not bypassed here. 

I think I need lower resistance coils..  Impedance is too high with these coils that the "steps" are in the dungeon..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: stivep on March 19, 2023, 12:26:35 AM
I guess people do not study physics on this site or OU apparently.
https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg575094/#msg575094
Wesley
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 19, 2023, 01:33:32 AM
Yes Mr Cadman I thought so also and that Doug posts were quite impressive to say the least. I highly enjoyed all his posts and think he is one of the true ones that know just how this device operates.

I was told by my friend he has cancer so I hope he made it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 19, 2023, 05:39:30 PM
SO Mr. Cadman,  if that is the case then why are people straying so far from the patent. Trying to build a rocket before understanding propulsion is basically what I have seen so far on this thread from the beginning. Every single build posted here from the start ended in failure.

All I see is individuals throwing in their own interpretations into the mix which nets nothing halting advancement. Unless the original is understood completely then how on earth can a variant be built. Humanity can't and never will benefit from this unless the collective agrees on specifics then moves forward as a group.

Randomly building with electronics or throwing in items that might be beneficial is a complete waste of time and will inevitably lead to failure.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Ufopolitics on March 19, 2023, 05:47:05 PM
I thought we settled that issue back in 2016, 'round about here, thanks to hints from Doug1.
http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/10712-re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera?p=403949#post403949 (http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/10712-re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera?p=403949#post403949)

Shhhh Cadman...please let Mr. Know It All...to Enlighten ALL of Us here...

He will very soon make a huge disclosure here, showing exactly how the Figuera works...maybe with another "rebuilt attempt" of the "Part G"??...remember?
Cause previous one was a FULLY Short circuit...

Regards

Ufopolitics
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 19, 2023, 06:00:49 PM
Please do tell us exactly how old you are.? You are acting like a psychotic kid on Prozac not a researcher.

I have never stated I know everything nor did I insinuate. I simpley stated facts as I see them. With this type of behavior I can see why this threads is in complete shambles.
Your a disgusting human being.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Ufopolitics on March 19, 2023, 06:05:27 PM
LOL...after all, I must admit you are very funny!!
tRump is also very funny...LOL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on March 19, 2023, 06:08:43 PM
Marathonman
Had a “situation “ here several years back
 He has his own forum now ( yes most were aware
However Solarlab posted this link again recently)
https://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/7/1908-mechanical-general-discussion?page=24 (https://figueramarathonman.boards.net/thread/7/1908-mechanical-general-discussion?page=24)M


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 20, 2023, 03:26:43 AM

All I see is individuals throwing in their own interpretations into the mix which nets nothing halting advancement. Unless the original is understood completely then how on earth can a variant be built. Humanity can't and never will benefit from this unless the collective agrees on specifics then moves forward as a group.

Randomly building with electronics or throwing in items that might be beneficial is a complete waste of time and will inevitably lead to failure.

Show us your replication.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 20, 2023, 06:29:02 AM
I can possibly see why Ramset, not the most friendliest neighborhood. I guess I need to watch for puffed up egos and daggers in the back lol! ;D
Flood;
It is in the process and happily awaiting supplies. ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: hanon on March 24, 2023, 12:52:30 AM
All,


Maybe you can take some good ideas from the link below:


https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/


Note that in common moving generators the field electromagnets do not suffer any lenz effect (back emf) when rotating coils get in front of them. They do not increase its current consumption. The effect in generators is that moving parts suffer from dragging or cogging, but field electromagnets do not vary in consumption. This is the effect under Flux Cutting Induction.


 Transformers on the other hand do suffer from back emf because they work with Flux Linking Induction.


If you may get a motionless generator, then the dragging effect should be avoided, because  if you only move the exciter fields, they are massless
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 24, 2023, 03:58:16 AM
A little self promotion right  ;D

As I have read from postings from Sparky Sweet he claims once the generator is at running conditions the exciting side of the generator drops to just the ohmic losses of the exciting coils with pressure circulating enough to maintain the load. Very interesting read to say the least.

It is not dragging or cogging  a slang word as to say but an attraction and repulsion from the stator to rotor as it spins because of the inherent properties of the secondary being induced.. ie the Lenz Law. Most people do not know a generator feed back to the exciting side at the rate of 10 to 15 % which is quite amazing considering the output in the high multi-kilowatts.

The Lenz Law can never be entirely nullified but yes it seems Figuera side stepped it on this one  ;D

Are you building?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 24, 2023, 08:07:41 AM
tell me remind me please ,here in forum was somehow member,who posted his project in which was the same device.  I can't do find it at all.  I had to draw myself.
And what did this person mean by this device of his?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 24, 2023, 01:58:37 PM
Questions-   How important are the big spring-like coils for resistance?  What are the specs?

I assume reactance is in play here and standard resistors are a no-go?  What's the working principle?

Would those high wattage standard wire wound resistors work?  Or should they be like slinky springs?

What resistance value is the right range between connection points?

All the info I read skips over technicalities on the resistors..

Thanks in advanced
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 24, 2023, 04:45:47 PM
I generally suggested for a long time to remove the limiters, and rotate the usual variable resistor in a circle. Rotate with a motor. It's stupid to use a separate set of resistors and a separate mechanical switch. Maybe at that time there were no other options ...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 24, 2023, 10:45:36 PM
Perhaps an important piece of info that many overlook..

"We will add also a rotating brush which is always touching more than one contact."
~~~  buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf

I believe this means we can never let the field collapse.  Moreover, if we follow it word for word, it is "always touching more than one contact"..

On my electronic model, I was collapsing the field, causing induction steps..  Obviously this defeats the purpose.

These small details are probably very important
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on March 25, 2023, 05:30:27 PM
Hanon
Quote
Maybe you can take some good ideas from the link below:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/

Well done and your research goes well beyond that of any person I have ever seen. It's a mind boggling amount of the most relevant information presented in a professional manner. Your site is required reading in my opinion.

It's also interesting that after presenting your wonderful work the resident paid shills have nothing to say other than to distract from it. I suspect there scared to death someone might read it and actually learn something, lol.

In my opinion, as an Engineer, your interpretation was brilliant because it touches on all the associated problems.
1)The ambiguous nature of what Figuera said as it relates to what we know.
2)What we know relating to magnetic fields and flux cutting/linking.
3)Prior art, Hooper, Weber, Faraday and Feynman.

On flux linking versus cutting I tend to agree with Feynman that it's basically a perceptual problem not a technical one.

For example, in a supposed flux linking transformer the magnetic field source translates by inducing the magnetic domains next to it sequentially like flipping dominoes. Domain A induces B, B induces C, C induces D and so on following the rules of magnetic induction. Once the field moves towards and enters the core of the secondary it starts flipping those domains in effect cutting the conductors of the secondary. Here we need to recognize the difference between "magnetic induction" and "electro-magnetic induction", they are not the same.

The perceptual problem is that most are using severely flawed lumped sum models or averaging the effects and forces. They ignore the fact that nothing just happens instantly and everything must work through a translation of forces like a line of dominoes flipping sequentially from one to the other. For this reason I reject lumped sum/average modelling as inferior and flawed and only accept infinite element analysis as a true representation of any phenomena. In reality we are dealing with billions of individual elements each having discrete qualities and energy states where each has an effect on the other.

So in any proper model we would see a wave like disturbance of domains flipping as they move away from the source. Likewise the destination would see a wave like disturbance of domains flipping towards itself. This must always be true because forces must propagate sequentially through a space and it's never all or nothing.

We need to be careful of others lumping things together, averaging and making vague generalizations. The devil is always in the details...

AC

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 25, 2023, 07:40:25 PM


I believe this means we can never let the field collapse.  Moreover, if we follow it word for word, it is "always touching more than one contact"..


To ensure that the current is not completely interrupted, it is enough to connect the moving contact to one of the terminals of the resistor. How it is done in potentiometers connected according to the variable resistor circuit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 26, 2023, 01:35:29 AM
There are no resistors in the Figera device. :-\
Make before break causing an orderly rise and fall of current flow to the primaries by making contact with more than one at a time. Following the patent drawing is insane as it specifically says " Just a drawing for the understanding of the device only"

Inductive reactance of an inductor with a moving positive brush is how Figuera controlled current flow NOT resistance. Do you think an ex Physicist, Teacher and Engineer would use heat death resistors in a so called overunity device, I think not!.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 26, 2023, 03:14:50 AM
Hanon
Well done and your research goes well beyond that of any person I have ever seen.
AC

I have seen and read more in depth on another site. He whom has his own site goes much farther explaining detail. A lot of people don't care for him but I found him very informative and open.

One of the people that followed his advice built an active inductor controller using electronics and posted it. It seems he was a moderator on that site for a while. He called it his SSPG https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu5u4wVgiw8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu5u4wVgiw8)
Seems someone might know a little more if that was made from his advice with all due respect of course.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 26, 2023, 05:21:22 AM
There are no resistors in the Figera device. :-\
Make before break causing an orderly rise and fall of current flow to the primaries by making contact with more than one at a time. Following the patent drawing is insane as it specifically says " Just a drawing for the understanding of the device only"

Inductive reactance of an inductor with a moving positive brush is how Figuera controlled current flow NOT resistance. Do you think an ex Physicist, Teacher and Engineer would use heat death resistors in a so called overunity device, I think not!.

I think I agree with you..  The whole resistor thing is counter productive. And I think you are correct in that the main concept can be accomplished without resistors and use the reactance / self-induction of the coils themselves as the impedance. And there is probably a reason all the drawings in the patent had 8 sets of coils (matching the 8 contact wires).

I drew out one such way which it is absolutely possible to eliminate the resistors and achieve a changing flux pattern without burning through resistors.

Not to mention the action might be better without resistors..  Instead of having the whole top string equal flux strength, the individual coils in the string could all change with each contact and be arranged in a more harmonious way
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 26, 2023, 06:20:03 AM
The Figuera device is not a violation of the laws of physics, it is just more efficient at converting and manipulating  energy in a much more efficient manner.
Resistance converts energy into heat which is very, very lossy and also nonrecoverable as much as we know. The use of an inductor would control the current flow and yet store and release energy. I have not tested yet but I would be hard pressed to find a more efficient way to control energy then with inductive reactance and an inductor. The losses associated with storing and releasing said energies have to be almost zero.

Hence the reason why Figuera chose it in the first place.  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 26, 2023, 07:57:33 AM
Over the years of collecting information on this device I have found that most of the people doing the screaming that it violates the conservation of energy have absolutely no clue how this device works. If you have no clue on how this device works then how on earth do you know it violates any such laws.
"YOU DON'T" or "THEY DON'T"
I would also even ponder the notion that they don't even know how a standard generator works. A generator produces it's own energy to feed the excitors. From the start of the turning to full on running conditions the generator powers it self. The secondary is looped back through the AVR at the tune of 10 to 15 % which is really small compared to the massive output.

The Lenz Law is the only obstacle I see as the deterrent to reaching self sustainment. If not for the repulsion and attraction of the rotor to the stator it would be self sustaining. The massive reverse torque placed on the rotor makes it a necessity to have a large motor to over come this Lenz Law force.

Removing the attractive and repulsive forces and you would have a generator that self sustains. This is exactly what Figuera did with his device and even went a step farther using an inductor to control the current flow with the added benefit of storing and releasing energy into the system. I think this made his device that much more efficient with the use of an inductor which in turn allowed a much smaller portion of the output to be fed back into the energizing system.

I think he is preserving the exciting potential with the inductor as well as using it to control current.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on March 27, 2023, 06:16:57 AM
All,


Maybe you can take some good ideas from the link below:


https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/)


Note that in common moving generators the field electromagnets do not suffer any lenz effect (back emf) when rotating coils get in front of them. They do not increase its current consumption. The effect in generators is that moving parts suffer from dragging or cogging, but field electromagnets do not vary in consumption. This is the effect under Flux Cutting Induction.


 Transformers on the other hand do suffer from back emf because they work with Flux Linking Induction.


If you may get a motionless generator, then the dragging effect should be avoided, because  if you only move the exciter fields, they are massless


Thanks Hanon - some excellent information. Considerable work and effort spent on it. 

The link was in the middle of my to-read list so it took a while to get to it and read through in detail.

Figuera shares a lot of similar "stuff" with the Holcomb HES LinGen I'm working on.

Appreciate all the research you've done over the years regarding this extremely interesting subject.

Have a good one!

SL


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: BorisKrabow on March 27, 2023, 08:25:15 AM
I can't stop my desire to turn Mike Corbin's device into a solid state generator   :) .

                               Coming soon somewhere in this section.......   



               Boris
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on March 27, 2023, 09:32:47 AM
I can't stop my desire to turn Mike Corbin's device into a solid state generator   :) .

                               Coming soon somewhere in this section.......   



               Boris


Hey Boris, That's the spririt - we're all behind you - if you need any help, don't hesitate!

Iligitimi Non Carborundum... 

SL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 27, 2023, 01:13:27 PM
Next question:

Notice how all the electromagnet drawings either show no core /  or partial core?  No drawings show cores going fully through the electromagnets.  Seems like the depicted cores only interface with 1 pole of the electromagnet.

Can we assume we do NOT want the 2 unused poles of the electromagnets to have a good magnetic path between them? 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 27, 2023, 03:14:03 PM
Floodrod, assume nothing. Figuera and Buforn patents show both ways.

Regarding Hanon’s research,
If you pay attention to what Hanon presents at his web site, he is correct about the same polarity opposing. What is not correct is the depiction of the exciters fluctuating from minimum to maximum. We all fell for this, even though the patent warned us the drawing was only an example for the principle.

Think about it. Hanon’s drawings show the two fields moving left to right alternating from Max to Min and backs it up with the video showing the better results with opposing magnets.
But the video uses movement of the coil which negates the patent claims.

In the video the strength of the magnets at each end never varies. That’s the important take away, the exciter fields must not diminish in strength. Reducing one field will not keep the magnetic compression between the exciter fields. You have to keep the strength and compression while moving the exciter fields relative to the induced to duplicate the results in Hanon’s video.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 27, 2023, 06:57:37 PM
This is what I mean
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 27, 2023, 10:19:12 PM
Floodrod, assume nothing. Figuera and Buforn patents show both ways.

Regarding Hanon’s research,
If you pay attention to what Hanon presents at his web site, he is correct about the same polarity opposing. What is not correct is the depiction of the exciters fluctuating from minimum to maximum. We all fell for this, even though the patent warned us the drawing was only an example for the principle.

Think about it. Hanon’s drawings show the two fields moving left to right alternating from Max to Min and backs it up with the video showing the better results with opposing magnets.
But the video uses movement of the coil which negates the patent claims.

In the video the strength of the magnets at each end never varies. That’s the important take away, the exciter fields must not diminish in strength. Reducing one field will not keep the magnetic compression between the exciter fields. You have to keep the strength and compression while moving the exciter fields relative to the induced to duplicate the results in Hanon’s video.

You have a contradiction from one sentence to another.  "What is not correct is the depiction of the exciters fluctuating from minimum to maximum" then you go on to say "the two fields moving left to right alternating from Max to Min."

It is the same thing, two electromagnets are compressing the magnetic field lines then sweeping back and forth. This is done by raising and lowering both at the same time which is still a minimum to maximum of each electromagnet opposite yet in unison.

PS. The bar in the middle looks like some kind of reinforcement of some kind as it looks to be on top of the cores. The core will have a lot of force on them during the switching which mean they will need to be secured in some way.
Any thoughts?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on March 27, 2023, 10:59:31 PM
This is what I mean

Hi all.
Nice idea Cadman, did you try it out yet? Maybe compare hanon's version vs yours...
Finally a path forward, THX.

Dann
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 27, 2023, 11:59:19 PM
Hi all.
Nice idea Cadman, did you try it out yet? Maybe compare hanon's version vs yours...
Finally a path forward, THX.

Dann

I confess I haven’t tried it as I’m not yet convinced this is how Figuera did it or that it could result in a gain. It's high on the list of possibilities. I was referring to Hanon’s video example, which did show that opposing poles were better, but doing it without physical movement.

When I shelved that build years ago I resolved to not try another Figuera build until I was convinced about the proper method forward. I have been searching ever since and I still believe in it. That build did teach me a few things though. It’s still sitting on the top shelf in the garage where it’s been for about 6 years now, waiting to be resurrected.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 28, 2023, 01:37:12 AM
This is what I mean

Thanks Cadman..  I too think this Clemente Generator is one of the few that may be legit..  Lots of testing to do..


PS. The bar in the middle looks like some kind of reinforcement of some kind as it looks to be on top of the cores. The core will have a lot of force on them during the switching which mean they will need to be secured in some way.
Any thoughts?

It does appear that way.. But why draw in a support bar?  And if it was a support bar, it's the most ridiculously designed support bar I ever seen.  I think it's the core only going 1/2 way into each electromagnet so the induced core has 2 clear polarities exactly divided at the middle of the induced coil.

I am not convinced tho that 2 same polarity electromagnets poles is the correct way.  Not saying it is not correct- just saying I am not convinced yet.

I have theories, but even more important I have the willingness and supplies to test the theories. What I do know for certain is if we place an electromagnet on an induction coil, Turning the amperage UP makes the induced current go 1 way.  And turning the supply current DOWN makes the induced current go the other way.  So it appears that using 2 same polarities will indeed create the most induction  (as the coil has 2 poles)..  But are we after ultimate induction, or bypassing Lenz?

My theory is as follows:

North coming in to top of induced turns Top of induced North.  induced EMF in driving coil travels same direction as input when magnetic fields are going against the way they want to go. (trying to bring 2 repelling fields together is against the way magnets want to go).

North traveling away from bottom of induced turns bottom of coil South.  Also resulting in 2 magnetic fields against the way they want to go.  (South want to attract North, but we are pulling them apart)..

Both actions result in GREAT induction as the referenced video shows.  But both have Full Lenz passing all produced power to the input because induced EMF in the driving circuit all travels same way as input like a transformer.

But if they were opposite polarities, induction would be weaker, but one side would send induced EMF with input, and other side against input- thus cancelling Lenz..

I know the rebuttal will be "We are not moving coils"...  But it matters not..  I already tested..  Power an electromagnet and bring it into an induction coil and watch the current direction on the scope.  Now place electromagnet against induction coil and turn up amperage.  Whether the electromagnet is moving closer, or just the flux field growing, growing is growing and the induction current direction goes the same in both circumstances.

Finally one might say- sure we cancel lenz, but we lose all induction in the process.  And I agree- my model appears to show that.  But those half cores that only touch one side of the coil may be answer how we can cancel lenz but work the magnetization of the core to induct the induced coil with no lenz.

Anyway- My theories are just my beliefs and not proven fact. They are subject to change as new info comes in and as I test..  Or until someone else makes a self-runner.. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 28, 2023, 03:05:33 AM
Interesting. The rod is very puzzling to say the least. I have done a few test but more now that my stuff is arriving. ;D

"(trying to bring 2 repelling fields together is against the way magnets want to go)."

But isn't that compressing the field lines?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 28, 2023, 03:18:23 AM
I will share this someone sent me..

North coming in turns coil NORTH.  North going out turns coil SOUTH.  Same facing coils produces standard induction..  YES Hanna's test shows this way inducing great...  But you get 100% Lenz effect.

Now North IN, South OUT Cancels Lenz..  But output sucks..  This is all standard stuff most have us have experimented with bucking generator coils.

UNLESS...  Unless the 1/2 cores do something special..  Perhaps the setup cancels Lenz but the way the core maintains magnetism, the induced can still induct some..  So Clemente needed like 8 of these coil rigs to induct enough to self run.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 28, 2023, 04:01:34 AM

"(trying to bring 2 repelling fields together is against the way magnets want to go)."

But isn't that compressing the field lines?

The Clemente generator empty's one coil as it fills another like a teeter totter..  There is no "Compression"..  The input is varying to the 2 coils in equal amounts.  We aren't jamming full current to both coils to "compress" fields.. 

Furthermore-  evaluate "One is filling while the other is emptying"...  If they were the same polarity, they would both be filling at the same time, just at different rates. 

My whole statement is rudimentary.   Take an induction coil and a strong magnet..  Power the coil with a DC supply at a locked voltage..   Now push the strong magnet into the coil so it is repelling (against what way it wants to go), and watch the Supply Amperage..

Understanding what direction current travels when different magnetic fields are interfaced with each other in different directions is pivotal to understanding how energy machines are really working. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 28, 2023, 05:02:11 AM
Maybe That's what Cadman was talking about, I think you misunderstand that graph you posted. Look at the induced, I take it as raising one while the other is reduced all while compressing the field lines.


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

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

Compression then shift from side to side which is what Cadman was suggesting right?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on March 28, 2023, 09:57:53 AM
 :) https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2022/12/1902.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 28, 2023, 01:11:22 PM
I think you misunderstand that graph you posted. Look at the induced, I take it as raising one while the other is reduced all while compressing the field lines.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONFESSION TIME--- >  I do NOT have a self-runner...  So my views mean VERY LITTLE-   just like everyone else who does not have a Self-Runner..  So take it as you will..  Someone would be foolish to believe my words when I can not produce OU..  You are free to believe "Compression" is the key, or whatever else you want.  And I have no right to say others are wrong UNLESS I can prove I am right by producing a self-runner.. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on March 28, 2023, 09:13:27 PM
Bucking coil tests.


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


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


Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 29, 2023, 01:25:09 AM
Bucking coil tests.

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


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

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

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 29, 2023, 04:07:52 AM
The pic you sent me (attached) shows standard induction.  If you are proposing the Clemente device is configured like the image- then you have a standard transformer which is subject to Lenz.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What bothers me is it seems the compression electromagnets are not being compressed properly. If no one is getting a thing from the opposing and switching like in that graph just maybe it is the pressure or lack of. I have seen some advice from another person on another forum that someone built the electronic part G and it worked beautifully. So in my mind part G as an inductor was spot on but now dealing with the primary issue. I would think compensating the long reluctance path back to south has to be accounted for plus the gap between the primaries and secondary. I personally think subtle things are being inadvertently overlooked and they must be found then brought out.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 29, 2023, 12:59:50 PM
This is not standard transformer action by no means what so ever. I am still scratching my head on some of your assumptions but it is what it is .

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

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

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

Now look at the image closely... 

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

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

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

~~~~~~~

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



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


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


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 29, 2023, 03:03:00 PM
Guys, I don’t mean to throw a monkey wrench into your discussion but I would like to elaborate on the drawing I posted. This applies more to Figuera’s last patent and Buforn’s patents.

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

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

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

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

But of course, these are just my untested thoughts.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 29, 2023, 10:49:52 PM
Construct the inducer coils using very narrow ‘pie’ coils like the old guys did for induction coils, but not connected in series to make 1 long coil. Not only that but energizing the pies in the sequences shown in my drawing.

Yo Cadman..  Trying to visualize it..  Came up with this attached..  8 triggers.  Is this in the ballpark of what you describe?  Intensive build if so, but interesting.. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 30, 2023, 06:44:06 AM
There is only two people I have downloaded from this site That I thought has some real insight and Doug was one of them. I remember reading about the multiple winding per primary and the results were as said. One single winding is just way to slow to react to fast current changes, way to much self inductance. Plus the fact about the two primaries being sent 120 volts with 60 volts each was really intriguing.

Again I read from Doug that they are opposing then shifted back and fourth over the secondary. More current is shifted to one then the other vice verse as the brush rotates. The physics I have studied tells me the electric fields are then lined up in the same direction. If this device is to match the high intensity field of a north and south field then  absolutely has to be compressed in my mind.
I just see no other way.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 30, 2023, 06:53:33 AM

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

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

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

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

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

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

 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on March 30, 2023, 02:44:17 PM
floodrod, yes that’s the way the individual coils would be constructed but the wiring between those two groups is anybody’s guess.

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

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

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

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

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on March 30, 2023, 03:54:27 PM
Interesting-  but yes, hard build..

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

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


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


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


Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 30, 2023, 05:16:06 PM
floodrod, yes that’s the way the individual coils would be constructed but the wiring between those two groups is anybody’s guess.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 30, 2023, 06:53:08 PM
... Secondaries in the other hand NO!. Way to much eddies and Hysteresis. The problem with that is soft Iron is crazy expensive so that is definitely out.
...

Magnetic materials are mainly classified (based on the magnitude of coercive force) into hard magnetic materials or soft magnetic materials. The soft magnetic materials are often referred to as soft iron. The hard magnetic materials are often referred to as permanent magnet (PM).

Also, eddy current loss is virtually irrelevant with regards to choice of soft iron.
Look it up.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 30, 2023, 07:09:29 PM
Well Clemente Figuera used it so go figure. ;D  and yes I am very aware of the classifications of magnetic materials. The Hysteresis graph on pure iron is darn near a small sliver vertical column which I would equate with low losses. Very little pinning sites in pure Iron.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 30, 2023, 07:59:22 PM
Well Clemente Figuera used it so go figure. ;D  and yes I am very aware of the classifications of magnetic materials. The Hysteresis graph on pure iron is darn near a small sliver vertical column which I would equate with low losses. Very little pinning sites in pure Iron.

So now you speak of "pure iron" whereas before it was soft iron. Do you know the difference? And show a relationship of eddy current loss to hysteresis loop shape or pinning.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on March 31, 2023, 03:10:11 AM
For me, the only thing that remains incomprehensible is the purpose of a thick wire wound with a snake around permanent magnets.  Shown with a red arrow.
The ends are brought out, but not connected anywhere (not used).

Hi kolbacict,
I finally made it into the shop. I took a few pics of my motor where I found a heavy insulated wire wrapped around the magnets. This wire was unconnected at ends, which were tucked away in the casting with adhesive. Looked to be the same on other half of stator under the rotor. Rotor is called printed circuit although it is made using copper punchings welded on the inside and outside ends. Low moment of inertia. Application was old computer tape reel memory machine. Function of serpentine wire is unknown. Perhaps used to magnetize PMs and then left in place.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 31, 2023, 05:15:34 AM
Nice Figuera device!, Do you know the difference?  that will keep the thread going. ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on March 31, 2023, 07:47:45 AM
Nice Figuera device!, Do you know the difference?  that will keep the thread going. ;D
Come on. Good for general development. Did you know that such motors exist?
I didn't know until recently. I didn't know until recently. Probably your eight-pole rotates
 even more slowly than mine.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on March 31, 2023, 11:26:29 PM
General development of a motor that has absolutely nothing to do with the Figuera device warrants it's own thread. The disrespect shown on this forum is unbelievable right in line with that Ranswami character that hijacked this thread years ago polluting it with his garbage RF transmitter core :o basically driving researchers and viewers away from this thread.

Yes I am new here but does that really matter or give you or anyone else the right to disrespect a thread or the researchers in such thread. This is the very reason why OU has such a bad rep on the net is this very thing. Posting a comment in a thread occasionally is not hijacking nor is commenting or giving an attaboy.

Posting of completely irrelevant material for your own personal gratification or distraction not the group as a whole is down right disrespectful and immoral on many levels.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on April 01, 2023, 12:41:38 AM
Imightknow
Quote
Yes I am new here but does that really matter or give you or anyone else the right to disrespect a thread or the researchers in such thread. This is the very reason why OU has such a bad rep on the net is this very thing. Posting a comment in a thread occasionally is not hijacking nor is commenting or giving an attaboy.

Agreed and I also noticed there are some people who consistently spam post random unrelated pictures or links the moment there is some movement towards a working principal of a free energy device. There should be no surprise here and it's common knowledge most big corporations and some governments hire paid shills to spread misinformation and distract on all forms of media.

I even ran some social experiments where I would move the conversation towards some more relevant facts, ergo bait them, and note which people made obvious attempts to distract and how they did it. The mistake I think most make is confusing ignorance with intent. To suppose some fool just spam posts every thread with nonsense where progress is being made but not recognizing the consistent pattern of behavior. You see the same people always do exactly the same things in the same way as if on cue.

My favorite is the "I'm one of you and look at all my builds shtick". Let's just build random shit which has no chance of ever working then criticize those who actually want to understand how they could work. Of course working principals could lead to a working device rather than countless nonsensical builds which never will. We naturally want to believe those who appear to have made an effort, a build, and that's the whole point. Anyone could build any number of nonsensical devices to mislead and distract a majority of people. Look, look at all the work they did, they would never mislead us or is the whole point to distract?.

Quote
Posting of completely irrelevant material for your own personal gratification or distraction not the group as a whole is down right disrespectful and immoral on many levels.

Well said and it's really hard to know who is who but I found there is one way that works and seems obvious.

When someone offers something which makes us actually think or has some tangible value it's more likely to be sincere. Thinking independently and producing something of value is why were here. Look for the value in it, if there is no value or we have not learned anything then we have our answer...

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on April 01, 2023, 01:38:53 AM
Over 300 pages, 4700+ replies and no closer to a functioning replica or reasonable process theory than 10 years ago, so I don't see an off-topic motor Q&A post/reply being a huge detriment. And of course you know for a fact that the serpentine wire with hidden function is not somehow related, and could never lead to a realization of a related idea.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 01, 2023, 02:37:56 AM
I do realize the thread was side tracked a few times and also a lot of people just gave up or left. The fact still remains does not give you the right just because you have been on this forum for a while. You should know better but considering it's source and the constant belittling and sarcastic remarks you throw at people I would say something is lacking in your life and the BS you throw at people has underlining issues.
Your underestimation of people just shows your superiority complex is blown out of proportion. The fact that you can hide behind a veil on the internet makes things even worse given you the opportunity to foster your bad behavior.

And you wonder why this forum has such a bad rep on the net, just look in the mirror fella! Truth be told, OUCH!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on April 01, 2023, 02:12:57 PM
...
Truth be told, ...
IMIGHTKNOW,
More than one member here thinks you are the person a.k.a. marathonman. Are you?
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 01, 2023, 06:09:54 PM
I think I made some Big Progress..  I went over the patent line by line looking for clues and came across these 2 statements:

"Let be "R" a resistance that is drawn in an elementary manner to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system"

and--   "whose current, after completing their task in the different electromagnets, returns to the source where it was taken."

First observation is that the resistor coils are an "elementary drawing" for understanding.  But obviously his were something else. or doing something else.

Second-  Why was it so important to specifically say " current returns to the source where it was taken" in Clemente's and Buforns patents?? ..  Seems a little weird to keep saying that..  And we all assume it means goes from positive to negative..

Then it hit me- the resistors need to be able to collect energy and return that energy to the positive terminal where the current was taken.  Then any Lenz from pulling power from the induced coil will transfer back to the transformer resistors where it will all be recovered back to the positive terminal by means of the transformer secondaries..

So there is "No Lenz"  because we are recovering lenz from the transformer resistors!  As the input goes UP from Lenz- the recovery from the transformers go UP as the same rate..

So I rigged it up..  8 make-b4-break terminals on 7 step-up transformers..  I got alternating AC output on the induced, and when I short the induced, the amperage output on the resistor electromagnets goes up...

Basically I summarize there is "No Lenz" because we are collecting it on the resistor transformers..  The waxing / waning action in the transformer string sets up a situation where the Lenz can be recovered.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of_ZXdU2DLU

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 01, 2023, 06:16:08 PM
Consider "egg of Columbus" as a very valuable tip Figuera gave us. Two kinds of induction, each having own problems, each being COP < 1 Figuera found how to solve problems,  he just eliminated cause of problems like
break the egg shell
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 01, 2023, 07:40:25 PM
----



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 01, 2023, 08:07:09 PM
I think I made some Big Progress..  I went over the patent line by line looking for clues and came across these 2 statements:

"Let be "R" a resistance that is drawn in an elementary manner to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system"

and--   "whose current, after completing their task in the different electromagnets, returns to the source where it was taken."

First observation is that the resistor coils are an "elementary drawing" for understanding.  But obviously his were something else. or doing something else.

Second-  Why was it so important to specifically say " current returns to the source where it was taken" in Clemente's and Buforns patents?? ..  Seems a little weird to keep saying that..  And we all assume it means goes from positive to negative..

Then it hit me- the resistors need to be able to collect energy and return that energy to the positive terminal where the current was taken.  Then any Lenz from pulling power from the induced coil will transfer back to the transformer resistors where it will all be recovered back to the positive terminal by means of the transformer secondaries..

So there is "No Lenz"  because we are recovering lenz from the transformer resistors!  As the input goes UP from Lenz- the recovery from the transformers go UP as the same rate..

So I rigged it up..  8 make-b4-break terminals on 7 step-up transformers..  I got alternating AC output on the induced, and when I short the induced, the amperage output on the resistor electromagnets goes up...

Basically I summarize there is "No Lenz" because we are collecting it on the resistor transformers..  The waxing / waning action in the transformer string sets up a situation where the Lenz can be recovered.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of_ZXdU2DLU

Floodrod; Considering resistor waste potential in the form of heat what other forms of resistance can there be?. When I was clued into mag amps from a person on another site I realized flux can control current flow. This also can be verified through Tesla's patent turning AC into DC using flux.
An inductor has large amounts of flux available to control current flow yet can be made variable through the use of a rotating brush. This allows the energy to be taken and returned from the system is a near lossless manor.
Lenz is always present no matter what you do yet how to work with lenz effects is the real question??? ;D

"Consider "egg of Columbus" as a very valuable tip Figuera gave us"  Very doubtful because that was made concerning the 1902 patent in an interview.

Oh by the way, Nice work, and the fact going line by line! ;DI

I know MM, I have one of his electronic boards he designed to electronically switch part G. Simply flawless design to nanosecond frequency switching with only 38 lines of code. Can you do better bi?


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: kolbacict on April 01, 2023, 09:00:45 PM
It is interesting.You all build your devices using Breadboards and terminals and clamps.
Am I the only one so far soldering the old fashioned way? :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on April 01, 2023, 10:21:01 PM
IMIGHTKNOW,
More than one member here thinks you are the person a.k.a. marathonman. Are you?
bi

...
I know MM, I have one of his electronic boards he designed to electronically switch part G. Simply flawless design to nanosecond frequency switching with only 38 lines of code. Can you do better bi?

Can you answer my question first? Or just pat your own back?

I do find it interesting that some are obsessed with a few watts used for excitation control of a free energy production process. So what? Don't you get replacement watts for free?
Set priority. Solve main issue first. Demonstrate grasp of energy production. Then details like thermal management and cost.
By definition it is impossible to obtain OU by increasing efficiency. A different approach is needed. So a few watts loss is just a distraction.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 02, 2023, 12:41:44 AM
You have no clue as to the Figuera device and probably never will. Keep on tainting threads your good at it. I was warned about your mouth prior to coming here. Good day discussion over with your kind.

Cadman;

 I think I understand what you are saying now, please correct if wrong. Your proposing to switch coil count as the brush rotates having more coils active on the high side and less on the low side then vise verse.? If that is the case then where does the resistance come into play knowing that resistors burn off potential as heat yet inductance stores and release from magnetic field.?
From just reading Doug1 and the patents the primaries are wound specifically as electromagnets so current control has to come from somewhere.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on April 02, 2023, 01:23:44 AM

Are you the person who called himself marathonman?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on April 02, 2023, 01:48:13 AM
You have no clue as to the Figuera device and probably never will. Keep on tainting threads your good at it. I was warned about your mouth prior to coming here. Good day discussion over with your kind.

Cadman;

 I think I understand what you are saying now, please correct if wrong. Your proposing to switch coil count as the brush rotates having more coils active on the high side and less on the low side then vise verse.? If that is the case then where does the resistance come into play knowing that resistors burn off potential as heat yet inductance stores and release from magnetic field.?
From just reading Doug1 and the patents the primaries are wound specifically as electromagnets so current control has to come from somewhere.

Let me try to make my thinking on that particular idea clear to you. You know what device I built years ago, it convinced me that was the wrong path because it really didn’t maintain a constant strength magnetic field or provide any movement in the field. It acted kind of like PWM.

I ask myself, how did the old dynamos work? They created constant strength magnetic fields (ignoring load regulation for now) and then moved a specific number of wires or bars across and through those fields at a specific rate. That’s as simple as I can state it. Just placing stationary wires in a fluctuating magnetic field is not the same thing. I have been looking for a way to add real movement to the field ever since.

Even though I don’t think the following is the way to go, Hanon’s video did show better output with like fields facing but he still had physical movement. Physical movement could be simulated with an exciter coil made of pie segments, of for instance 10 segments, 5 consecutive magnetized at all times. While one end segment is being added the opposite end segment being dropped, adding and dropping until the 5 arrive at an end. When the 5 magnetized segments arrive at one end of the coil a segment is added at the other end of the 5 while the last added is dropped and the 5 ‘move’ toward the opposite end of that 10 segment exciter. Back and forth. That’s one exciter. The opposite exciter is being operated in the same manner so both their fields are moving left then both moving right in unison. The consequent middle pole would be constant strength and it’s location would be moving left and right through the excited windings core.

That would be one way to provide a constant strength ‘moving’ field at the intersection of the opposing exciters.

Resistors? What resistors? Those were just drawn to help demonstrate the concept. One of the patents even says so. The exciter coils themselves are resistors for that matter. Each ‘pie’ in the above example could be considered a separate resistor. Saying one exciter becomes full while the opposite becomes empty could also describe one the above exciters. One pie becomes full while the pie at the other end empties. Point being, don't get hung up on those patent drawings as being the actual device.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 02, 2023, 05:49:06 AM
Ha,ha a misinterpretation of what I was trying to convey. I wasn't saying I thought it was resistors as I have known from the time I picked up the patent and a little discussion from you know who not on this site that resistors are no where to be found. I was referring to inductance or inductor as I wrote.

I do like your proposal, not completely convinced but intrigued for sure. I am convinced that the reduced inductances from the reducing side off set the rising side and just wonder if it can be done as you say without an inductor controller.

At first I thought it had a relation to J L Naudin's work with the delayed Lenz effect. After some careful observations I concluded not because the delay factor resided at the edge of the projected field capabilities of the coil/core. The inverse square law popped into mind so I measured the core and I was right, the delayed effect is right at the abilities of the magnetic field to project.

This of course was ruled out because the Figuera primaries are twice as big as the secondary projecting a field far past the secondary to account for the reduction of the field to get the sweeping action across the secondary while maintaining compression.

I am not to sure what vid you are taking about where Hanon show physical movement. The one on his site and the graph that was posted are one and the same reactions. It is just the graph has a lot more information to present.

PS. OUR forum has a lot if great info.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 03, 2023, 01:26:34 PM
An inductor has large amounts of flux available to control current flow yet can be made variable through the use of a rotating brush.

Inductors also cause the current to lag voltage.  Will 1 electromagnet fire off out-of-phase than the other if we use inductors as resistors? Tonight I will test if using inductors as the resistance causes the 2 electromagnets to project their magnetic field out-of-phase  or not..

What became clear to me is Clemente and Telsa alike were both basically simulating a sinewave to cause a change in direction without changing the direction of incoming current.  If we change the direction of a magnetic field without changing incoming current direction, then we get the induced coil to produce a magnetic field that assist us instead of opposes us.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 04, 2023, 01:57:57 AM
Ok so I compared 2 setups..  One with resistors as the resistance..  And one with Inductors as the resistance..  And from what I see, I am leaning towards the resistors..

The inductors cause reactance, which have high impedance when the current first enters, then the impedance diminishes, causing your output wave to be spikey and non-uniform.  It barely resembles a sine-wave.  I don't like it.. The resistors (on the other hand) are steady and form a much cleaner wave where you can actually see one side growing as the other shrinking in the wave. 

So to clarify what we are seeing--  We are creating 2 sinewaves which are 180 degree out of phase from each other.  But the astounding part is, this method allows you to create these waves with positive only and without ever changing the direction the input current is entering the coils.  This statement is the gist of the whole concept and why now I believe this method is real.

Attached is a pic of the output from my mechanical 16 pole commutator and using 7 standard 8 ohm resistors. I think 8 ohms each resistor is too high of a value.  I need to tweak the resistor values and work the sinewave a little nicer. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 04, 2023, 04:57:37 AM
 :o Brain storm, There is no resistors in the figuera device and I guess the rotating brush is not needed either so forget about that also. Maybe we could use plastic for a core also. ;D ;) I bet it would look pretty though. ;D

Well that's enough for me, I thought I could get more insight here but looks were deceiving. Our group of five in our neighborhood formed to build this and basically came for what we needed which was Doug1 posts. Of course we vid chat with mm, nice guy shared everything and his electronic board is perfect.

Good day!
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on April 04, 2023, 12:51:37 PM
to IMIGHTNKNOW,  you are correct there were NO resistors in the Figuera device.  What untrained people don't understand is that any time you are dealing with inductors you are dealing with a circuit that has resonance.   If you try to drive that circuit without using the right frequency then you will get distortion and low efficiency.  Most of us older guys have quit commenting on this forum because there are several younger guys on here that already know everything because they have watched some YouTube videos.  i was even told that my comments weren't welcome.  So be it.  They will someday understand (maybe) that they didn't really know as much as they thought.


Respectfully,
Carroll


PS:  My own tests have shown that inductors can be used to control current flow.  Magnetic amplifiers do it all the time.  And my work on the Figuera device also convinced me that he very likely had a working device that used inductors.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Thaelin on April 04, 2023, 06:03:13 PM
If you want to add some resistance to the circuit, just run it a bit under or over the resonant frequency of the total inductance. I learned it the hard way until I figured out that I was fighting 760 ohms in my coils. Then it got easier. Up or down a hertz or two can make or break it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on April 04, 2023, 06:10:59 PM
From the real inventor who built working technology, Figuera. He clearly calls for a resistance to be used in the circuit...

Quote
Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current
which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance,
through which circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets,

Quote
One of the ends of the resistance is connected with electromagnets N, and the
other with electromagnets S, half of the terminals of the resistance pieces go
to the half of the commutator bars of the cylinder and the other half of these
commutator bars are directly connected to the firsts.

Floodrod
Quote
So to clarify what we are seeing--  We are creating 2 sinewaves which are 180 degree out of phase from each other.  But the astounding part is, this method allows you to create these waves with positive only and without ever changing the direction the input current is entering the coils.  This statement is the gist of the whole concept and why now I believe this method is real.

Keep up the good work. To my knowledge your one of very few people who has actually made an effort to build and test the patent as the inventor claimed.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 04, 2023, 06:37:41 PM
Floodrod
Keep up the good work. To my knowledge your one of very few people who has actually made an effort to build and test the patent as the inventor claimed.

AC
.

Thank you AC.  Apparently ego's get insulted easily when they come across a person who wants to think for themselves.

Until someone demonstrates a working over unity machine, I will continue to go my own way and formulate my own ideas.

Like it or not, I care not. I am a self-declared Bohemian who goes against the grain. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on April 04, 2023, 07:35:14 PM
From the real inventor who built working technology, Figuera. He clearly calls for a resistance to be used in the circuit...

Floodrod
Keep up the good work. To my knowledge your one of very few people who has actually made an effort to build and test the patent as the inventor claimed.

AC

Whether actual resistors or inductances were used is open to debate. I have used hand wound nichrome wire resistors and an auto-transformer based design. Both worked, and used a commutator to produce the stepped wave form output to the exciter coils.
Neither one is a ‘special secret’ to a working Figuera generator.

Yes Floodrod, keep up the good work and follow the path your experiments lead you.

PS.
Another thing. A dynamo capable of running a 20HP motor would be big. Hundreds of pounds of iron and dozens of pounds of copper.
All we’re trying to make are toys as a proof of concept.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 04, 2023, 08:58:59 PM
Whether actual resistors or inductances were used is open to debate. I have used hand wound nichrome wire resistors and an auto-transformer based design. Both worked, and used a commutator to produce the stepped wave form output to the exciter coils.
Neither one is a ‘special secret’ to a working Figuera generator.

Yes Floodrod, keep up the good work and follow the path your experiments lead you.

PS.
Another thing. A dynamo capable of running a 20HP motor would be big. Hundreds of pounds of iron and dozens of pounds of copper.
All we’re trying to make are toys as a proof of concept.

Crazy you mentioned the resistor wire. I just ordered 100 ft of resistance wire last night so I can make a resistance board. It will allow me to slide alligator clips and fine-tune the sine wave to exactly how I want it.

Personally, I don't even want to experiment with extracting power from coils until I perfect the sine wave.  The idea is to create two near perfect sine waves that bottom out on the zero line. So basically we are simulating two sine waves with a positive bias.

And as I said earlier, we can actually do this without switching direction of current going into the coils. If you start drawing it out and thinking how back EMF and induction work, you may see the advantage that I'm seeing.   

The magic occurs from the decreasing current. Or when the sine wave is going down. And every time one side is going up, the other side is going down.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 05, 2023, 07:05:14 AM

Personally, I don't even want to experiment with extracting power from coils until I perfect the sine wave.  The idea is to create two near perfect sine waves that bottom out on the zero line. So basically we are simulating two sine waves with a positive bias.

And as I said earlier, we can actually do this without switching direction of current going into the coils. If you start drawing it out and thinking how back EMF and induction work, you may see the advantage that I'm seeing.   

The magic occurs from the decreasing current. Or when the sine wave is going down. And every time one side is going up, the other side is going down.

PS There is no BEMF in this device or induction is lost I hope you realize this.

If you have the wave form bottom out on the zero line as you just said induction will cease and all compression between the opposing electromagnets will drop. According to Doug1 and MM this is not the correct thing to do nor does the patent say zero. Reason be is the primary electromagnets are reduced to just get the sweeping action, no more no less.

Doug1 quietly built this device right under everyone's nose because they were just to busy scrambling to realize it. Doug1 mapped out a plan, gathered all associated information then executed his plan.

All I see here is building to unknown specs.

The one thing I know for sure you got right is the Figuera device generates on the reducing electromagnets so soft coupling doesn't matter to the device or lenz law. One is pushing the other is pulling which does the generating while both electric fields are lines up with this special switching. Being opposing means the Lenz law is not an issue like in a standard rotating generator with magnetic drag as Doug1 and MM had said.  My ex MIT neighbor is having a field day with this patent grinning from ear to ear.
Good Day!  ;D
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on April 05, 2023, 08:28:13 PM
@ IMIGHTKNOW
"All I see here is building to unknown specs."
Not for nothing, but what "SPECS" are you referring to?
Other than the description of operation by the author (which is vague in parts),the only clearly defined item in this devices patent is the brush wheel.  The other part of the diagram is a crappy electrical diagram.
You keep sprouting off like you know the exact SPECS or contruction methods of Figuera. Wouldn't have an issue w that except  you'd  have to be over 100 YEARS OLD and have spoken to him personally.  The only other rational explanation would be that you are the kid from that Bruce Willis movie "The sixth sense" all grown up, and have been having fireside chats discussing this device w the spirit of Figuera. 

If the latter is the case, then why did u call yourself "IMIGHTKNOW" marathonman, when you should have clearly called yourself "ISEEDEADPEOPLE" ??




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 05, 2023, 09:14:19 PM
Go to Las Palmas of Great Canaria and find Figuera device photos in museum that would be more productive then bla bla talk here
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on April 06, 2023, 02:44:22 AM
Go to Las Palmas of Great Canaria and find Figuera device photos in museum that would be more productive then bla bla talk here
You're correct about the blah blah
I've attached a couple of animated gifs of field simualtions, and a rendered layout from a part of a CAD model I worked up on this device. 
This is all armchair but maybe it'll help someone building.This design should induce as the inducers don't share a common core.
The gradient arrows denote the induced current direction from start to low/peak current.The Logos on the inducer cores (all ferrites) just indicate whether they are low starting or high starting current. 
This configuration would put out AC as its destructive interference.
Speculative: What's more interesting to try would be to flip one of the inducer cores so that they match the patent orientation of N S as that would be constructive interference and possibly put out DC?


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: IMIGHTKNOW on April 06, 2023, 06:13:03 AM
Sorry It doesn't bother me that your gay. ;D I just don't care and the fact that MM does have his own site not me . We have a full lab and I am thankful for that. Good things on the horizon.

Specs like what loads are you building to as in just like a standard generator. You do know to build a gen you do have to have a load in mind.

Then you have to figure our how many secondaries you are willing to deal with or are willing to split the load to. Then your primaries have to be built on that assumption being split each being accountable for 1/2 the secondary load. Since resistance is detrimental to all devices It is likely they need to be wound specifically as electromagnets to react to specific current changes immediately. One long winding will not do, to much self inductance, capacitance and resistance. But I imagine your actually smart enough for all that.

Another thing the inductive resistance has to take the reducing electromagnet just far enough to get the sweeping action across the secondary then back to full potential as the other is reduced otherwise induction will fall. But again I am sure you knew that Right !  ::)

Not to mention a slew of other things you probably didn't account for or surely didn't think of.  ;D

But then to think of it your lovely ability to work with others just might get you there, Doubt it!

What you could start out by doing is apologize for being a dick and learn how to work and talk to people. Your chances might be a little more successful. ;D but then again I am on the worst rated forum Doh figure!

We will see if you can piece the puzzle together without the aid of popups like the rest!

Have a wonderful day there fella!
PS, Lovely sim, to bad your cores are wrong!




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 06, 2023, 08:03:28 AM

F.Y.I.

Having done a bit of simulation over time it appears the FEM preliminary analysis presented is
for the most part correct and shows the concept quite well. Of course you can interpret them as
you wish.

Some may not see the implications -  but that's not uncommon - as we move forward.

SL

Sorry It doesn't bother me that your gay. ;D I just don't care and the fact that MM does have his own site not me . We have a full lab and I am thankful for that. Good things on the horizon.

Specs like what loads are you building to as in just like a standard generator. You do know to build a gen you do have to have a load in mind.

Then you have to figure our how many secondaries you are willing to deal with or are willing to split the load to. Then your primaries have to be built on that assumption being split each being accountable for 1/2 the secondary load. Since resistance is detrimental to all devices It is likely they need to be wound specifically as electromagnets to react to specific current changes immediately. One long winding will not do, to much self inductance, capacitance and resistance. But I imagine your actually smart enough for all that.

Another thing the inductive resistance has to take the reducing electromagnet just far enough to get the sweeping action across the secondary then back to full potential as the other is reduced otherwise induction will fall. But again I am sure you knew that Right !  ::)

Not to mention a slew of other things you probably didn't account for or surely didn't think of.  ;D

But then to think of it your lovely ability to work with others just might get you there, Doubt it!

What you could start out by doing is apologize for being a dick and learn how to work and talk to people. Your chances might be a little more successful. ;D but then again I am on the worst rated forum Doh figure!

We will see if you can piece the puzzle together without the aid of popups like the rest!

Have a wonderful day there fella!
PS, Lovely sim, to bad your cores are wrong!



Quite harsh don't you think? And your comments are really STUPID! Re-read them and appologize.
Thanks in advance... [if not - you know the concequences]  :)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 06, 2023, 09:00:44 AM
IMIGHTKNOW,

Before we engauge - please set up a link to:

http://radio.garden/listen/power-smooth-jazz/UpXKkkbb (http://radio.garden/listen/power-smooth-jazz/UpXKkkbb)

Use your over-the-ear headphones and crank them up...
 
It will help in our exchange. Looking forward to it!

Thanks and regards, 

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 06, 2023, 07:39:12 PM
Now I know why Figuera said the resistor drawing was just "Elementary" to demonstrate the principle..  Phew... 

And the resistor is only half done!  Now I got to make the other sinewave...

Pic=  Near perfect AC wave without switching polarities! 

This is only half the battle..  But now that I got the math down- the next half will be easier.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on April 12, 2023, 02:44:44 PM
Hi Floodrod,

How's it going, any progress?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 12, 2023, 05:51:34 PM
Hi Floodrod,

How's it going, any progress?

Yo Bro...

Yes, been working on it still.. Made lots of progress -  should have info to present soon.. 

Here-s a glimpse.. Get the sinewaves equal and perfect and the coils no longer displays reactance. You get moving flux from an ohmic load.   I have no care of burning a few watts of heat with resistors. The ends justify the means.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 12, 2023, 10:41:19 PM
Request to Math Wizards...

Can someone help me calculate the resistor values to achieve the wave in the image as designed?  I have spent dozens and dozens of hours calculating different values over and over and can not get the pattern right for the life of me..  Maybe it's not possible??

Goal-  2 sinewaves exactly 180 degrees out of phase perfectly equal..  Crossing at the exact middle..

I am currently getting the waves equal by using 2 separate resistor rigs..  But I want to see if it is possible to form 2 exact waves that cross in the exact middle as the patent is drawn..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on April 13, 2023, 10:22:30 AM
I worked with such controllers, but my controller turned out to be the most optimal for a single coil. In this case, the power of the resistors after the midpoint is very large.

The second voltage is not an indicator: the first indicator is the current strength, and the second is the magnetic induction in the core. It is on the creation of the linearity of magnetic induction that you need to focus. The calculation will be very COMPLEX.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 14, 2023, 05:02:34 PM
Did the guy with the red pen who corrected the water-damaged drawing mess everyone up?

Check Buforn's patent..  He is feeding the electromagnets negative return back to the positive brush.
No patents have any mention of a "battery" input source.  There is no way Buforn's drawings will work Unless the output coil is also the input to get it going..

Is it possible-  AC is fed to the pickup coil at first to induce the 2 outer electromagnets to flow current.  Then the commutator is taking the induced electromagnet currents and manipulating it so the 2 outer electromagnets become self-excited.  Then the power source can be removed and the input coil now becomes the output coil?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on April 14, 2023, 08:07:47 PM
floodrod
Quote
Check Buforn's patent..  He is feeding the electromagnets negative return back to the positive brush.
No patents have any mention of a "battery" input source.  There is no way Buforn's drawings will work Unless the output coil is also the input to get it going..

Good work, you seem to be the only one paying attention.

In the Figuera patent you posted he claims the source battery can be removed once the device is in operation. That is, the (-) and (+) terminals are not required as a constant input. At which point what we see in the picture is what we get as a self-operating stand alone circuit. This is common and many FE devices only require a small input which is later removed. It's crazy isn't it?, it's in plain sight in the patent but many can only see what they want to see.

Figuera
Quote
From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.

There is another aspect of the patent almost everyone missed.

Quote
and “+” and “-” the excitatory current which is taken from an external and foreigner generator.


In fact, this is a common theme among most past FE inventors who called what we know as man made AC/DC as false or foreign currents. It would take forever to explain all the details but we could think of it this way. We never see large AC/DC currents in nature unless a threshold has been exceeded and something discharges like lightning. Large man made currents (battery, AC, DC generators) were called false or foreign currents not generally found in nature and considered un-natural because they are.

Many FE inventors considered most of what mankind does as un-natural or foreign. They thought most men were brainwashed by society to all think and act the same following the often misguided laws of man instead of nature. This is why most men find this technology impossible and they don't have the capacity to think for themselves. So these inventors had a completely different mindset and a different way of looking at things.

For example, we could plant a single seed and decades later a large forest could be there. It is not man made, we had little or no part in it, we do not have the capacity to do such things only nature can. How can one tiny seed start a chain reaction causing massive amounts of material and energy to be concentrated in one area?. This concept is similar to how FE devices work, we cannot overpower nature only plant the seed (a small input) and let nature do the rest.

AC




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 14, 2023, 11:14:52 PM
Another ominous clue may be the square with the circle on the parallel connection..  No other parallel connections on the patent have that symbol..

Back in that time, Tesla drew the square with 2 circles to represent AC.    Being that this is a parallel connection with one circle, Good possibility this is the point where the Electromagnet current was converted to DC (via The Switch) before it went to the brush.

" From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 15, 2023, 12:22:36 AM
Here is a basic rudimentary video of how Buforn's drawings "MAY" be working..  I think it makes more sense than the common logic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aqv9GG1kaEc

AC starts the process by going into the center coil.  The 2 outer coils start producing alternate current.  We arrange the outside electromagnets so when we parallel the leads, you have AC current between the parallel leads.

Now we hookup a diode to one side to change the parallel AC to get direct.  We lose half the amperage, as only 1 electromagnet is sending at a time now.  That direct + is fed into the commutator / resistor rig which creates the growing / shrinking fields into 2 leads..

Now we untie the electromagnet leads that do not have the diode and we feed the 2 sides of the resistor rig into each coil's return lead.   We now have 1 complete circuit that is self-exciting.

The foreign generator can now be removed and the center coil that jumpstarted the process now becomes the output coil.

No claims being made as usual..  But based on Buforn's drawings, makes sense in my mind.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2023, 04:53:30 AM
To experiment with this thought, I don't think I can use electronic switching.  I can not bond the logic voltage ground to the machine because the machine will basically be a 1 wire loop.

So I got to work making a new commutator to play with..  22 teeth commutator from a vacuum motor.  And a revolving brush..  What a PITA soldering 22 wires to that small commutator...  My original 16 pole commutator still works, but it's a little bumpy and I am not thrilled about the triple-small brush setup I had.  I'm hoping this new one will be smoother and last longer..

Still have to counter-balance it and make a mount, but the brush glides over the commutator smooth now, and the single beefy brush touches multiple contacts.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on April 19, 2023, 05:00:33 PM
Request to Math Wizards...

Can someone help me calculate the resistor values to achieve the wave in the image as designed?  I have spent dozens and dozens of hours calculating different values over and over and can not get the pattern right for the life of me..  Maybe it's not possible??

Goal-  2 sinewaves exactly 180 degrees out of phase perfectly equal..  Crossing at the exact middle..

I am currently getting the waves equal by using 2 separate resistor rigs..  But I want to see if it is possible to form 2 exact waves that cross in the exact middle as the patent is drawn..
 

Nice work. 
Try the same value for all resistors, voltage dividing is linear. 
You could try a sliding potmeter, then you can vary the ohms manually by hand, total resistance is always the same.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 27, 2023, 02:13:34 AM
 

Nice work. 
Try the same value for all resistors, voltage dividing is linear. 
You could try a sliding potmeter, then you can vary the ohms manually by hand, total resistance is always the same.

Hi Alan,

Thank You..  I have tried all same values.  The output is always like the pic below.  But I have found several ways to get the wave correct.

I have now tried the setups close to 100 different ways, and the results are almost always the same..  The coils become practically non-reactive.  No back-emf passes back to the source and power I take does not pass to the input either.  The coils basically pull their ohmic current steady..  So I got moving magnetic fields with no reactance..  Interesting!

I am now moving to the pickup coil arrangement.  Obviously Figuera is not using standard transformers and is doing something special.  Since the electromagnets are now non-reactive, it stands to reason the flux field can be used again and again and strengthened with each pickup coil added.  I think this is why he needs to use a big string of coils, because he needed to keep building the flux stronger and stronger.  But the best arrangement is still a mystery..

I am in the process of winding some higher ohm coils so I can experiment with building up the flux field.  I did some experiments with my real low ohm coils and indeed I can make the flux field grow by adding more pickups.

We will see...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 27, 2023, 07:30:55 AM
Request to Math Wizards...

Can someone help me calculate the resistor values to achieve the wave in the image as designed?  I have spent dozens and dozens of hours calculating different values over and over and can not get the pattern right for the life of me..  Maybe it's not possible??

Goal-  2 sinewaves exactly 180 degrees out of phase perfectly equal..  Crossing at the exact middle..

I am currently getting the waves equal by using 2 separate resistor rigs..  But I want to see if it is possible to form 2 exact waves that cross in the exact middle as the patent is drawn..


Hi Floodrod,

Sorry, I haven't been following your detailed design much; but hopefully this may provide some further
insight to your sine wave generation development:

https://www.circuitbread.com/tutorials/sine-wave-generator-part-17-microcontroller-basics-pic10f200 (https://www.circuitbread.com/tutorials/sine-wave-generator-part-17-microcontroller-basics-pic10f200)

A few screen shoots below to show the concept found in the link above.
 
If not, appologies for the interuption... Your work on Figuera is quite interesting - good luck!

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 28, 2023, 05:51:19 AM
Thanks SL.. 

The issue is making the 2nd wave exactly equal to the first, just exactly opposite, crossing at dead center.  The 2nd wave must also connect to the other end of the resistor for the current to return.

".and further more as the current passes to the magnetic field and returns of the
same by the two ends of input and output resistor". 


I found the formula to make the resistor / waves exactly perfect by "always touching more than 2 contacts"..  Problem is, the resistor values are dependent on the load / electromagnet resistance.  I get them both dead-on with a 10 ohm resistor load, but when I change the resistor for a 16 ohm, the waves no longer work right.  To get this perfect, I must build the coil rig first and pick a specific frequency.  And build the resistor rig around those values. 

I said in the past that my setups make both electromagnets appear to be non-reactive.  But I need the waves to be right so the emptying electromagnet does become reactive..  The emptying electromagnet needs to induct so when it's emptying, it pushes the current past the zero line from the induction of the induced coil.  I don't think this can happen until we have a lot of pickup coils / electromagnets (the patent shows 24 coils ~~  8 groups) and the 2 sinewaves need to be optimal.

I am building out the coils..  I have another FE project I have been working on and off with for the last few months. It has a lot in common with this but easier to dial in. The coils should work to test both setups.  So it may take me some time till an update is made.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 28, 2023, 07:29:42 AM
Imightknow
Agreed and I also noticed there are some people who consistently spam post random unrelated pictures or links the moment there is some movement towards a working principal of a free energy device. There should be no surprise here and it's common knowledge most big corporations and some governments hire paid shills to spread misinformation and distract on all forms of media.

I even ran some social experiments where I would move the conversation towards some more relevant facts, ergo bait them, and note which people made obvious attempts to distract and how they did it. The mistake I think most make is confusing ignorance with intent. To suppose some fool just spam posts every thread with nonsense where progress is being made but not recognizing the consistent pattern of behavior. You see the same people always do exactly the same things in the same way as if on cue.

My favorite is the "I'm one of you and look at all my builds shtick". Let's just build random shit which has no chance of ever working then criticize those who actually want to understand how they could work. Of course working principals could lead to a working device rather than countless nonsensical builds which never will. We naturally want to believe those who appear to have made an effort, a build, and that's the whole point. Anyone could build any number of nonsensical devices to mislead and distract a majority of people. Look, look at all the work they did, they would never mislead us or is the whole point to distract?.

Well said and it's really hard to know who is who but I found there is one way that works and seems obvious.

When someone offers something which makes us actually think or has some tangible value it's more likely to be sincere. Thinking independently and producing something of value is why were here. Look for the value in it, if there is no value or we have not learned anything then we have our answer...

AC


O.T.

Hi Onepower,

I went back a few pages to become more familiar with the work being done here regarding the Figuera device and ran accross your post.

Was glad to see I'm not the only one to notice this Shill trend on the threads that show progress. It's the same guys, for the most part.

But I still haven't exactly figured out whether they are actually paid Shill Trolls or just disruptive, very jealous children, that are afraid of
being left out. Maybe just the "center of attention" thing - IDK?  BTW - ran some similar analysis (experiments) on a few threads, as you
did, research for a lecture series on Shills, Trolls, and LARPS. The results were sad, but unfortunately, not suprising. No matter - we'll Win!
 
Oh well, it is what it is! Lets just leave it at that for now - maybe worthy of discussion and finding a solution - but in another thread...

Anyway - I'd like to see where this Figuera thread goes - appears to be on the right track so far and seems viable! 

Floodrod, et al, are doing some excellent work here. Please forgive me for the OT.

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 28, 2023, 08:11:44 AM

Hi Floodrod,

Quick question:

Would a Dual Channel synchronized Sine Wave Generator (30MHz 50 ohm adj->20V output) work for driving your coils?

If so - let me know...

Something like the JDS2900 (pdf manual attached)
Features Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzRBYPXVMQs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzRBYPXVMQs)

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 28, 2023, 09:51:21 AM
Hi Floodrod,

Quick question:

Would a Dual Channel synchronized Sine Wave Generator (30MHz 50 ohm adj->20V output) work for driving your coils?

If so - let me know...

Something like the JDS2900 (pdf manual attached)
Features Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzRBYPXVMQs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzRBYPXVMQs)

SL

Thank You SL,  but I don't think it will help.  With this setup, there can be no flipping of polarities in the primaries.  I don't think anyone really sees the operation like I do (not that I am right).

So to explain, lets take a coil..  We can induct it to go NORTH in 2 ways.. 

1 way would be to bring a north magnetic field into it.  Growing north will cause the coil to try to repel the motion and make the coil go North.

2nd way would be to pull a SOUTH field away.  Again, the coil tries to stop the motion and as South is leaving, the coil turns NORTH.

The Figuera setup mimics the second way.  It causes the induction coil to react to a field by pulling away the field ** Without flipping polarity on the primary***..   

Now if we hit the induction coil from both sides, one field growing and the other pulling away, the coils are acting like a North and South even though current direction and winding direction are the same in both!  We get real AC from the induction coil between them. But the best part is how the electromagnets should react in this setup with respect to induction back to the primaries..  The magic happens in the electromagnet with the shrinking field.

Just think of how a transformer works. The normal way we get the secondary to go North is by making the primary grow North. But with this method, we can get the secondary to go NORTH with the opposite current direction in the primary by retreating south..

1. The electromagnets driving current must never switch polarities.
2. The electromagnets must simulate 2 sinewaves 180 degrees out of phase. And evenly.
3. We can not collapse the fields, 100% duty cycle  is needed.

I appreciate you looking out..


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 28, 2023, 10:23:52 AM
Thank You SL,  but I don't think it will help.  With this setup, there can be no flipping of polarities in the primaries.  I don't think anyone really sees the operation like I do (not that I am right).

So to explain, lets take a coil..  We can induct it to go NORTH in 2 ways.. 

1 way would be to bring a north magnetic field into it.  Growing north will cause the coil to try to repel the motion and make the coil go North.

2nd way would be to pull a SOUTH field away.  Again, the coil tries to stop the motion and as South is leaving, the coil turns NORTH.

The Figuera setup mimics the second way.  It causes the induction coil to react to a field by pulling away the field ** Without flipping polarity on the primary***..   

Now if we hit the induction coil from both sides, one field growing and the other pulling away, the coils are acting like a North and South even though current direction and winding direction are the same in both!  We get real AC from the induction coil between them. But the best part is how the electromagnets should react in this setup with respect to induction back to the primaries..  The magic happens in the electromagnet with the shrinking field.

Just think of how a transformer works. The normal way we get the secondary to go North is by making the primary grow North. But with this method, we can get the secondary to go NORTH with the opposite current direction in the primary by retreating south..

1. The electromagnets driving current must never switch polarities.
2. The electromagnets must simulate 2 sinewaves 180 degrees out of phase. And evenly.
3. We can not collapse the fields, 100% duty cycle  is needed.

I appreciate you looking out..


Just pulled one of the JDS2900s out of the "obsolete storage cabinet" and played with it.

It will do 2 synchronized sinewaves (CH1 & CH2) with CH2 set at 180 degree phase offset which gives you what you need;
if I understand correctly. CH1 & CH2 can be set to track in both frequency and phase with the CH2 phase offset to
1800 - so far so good (?). Both channels are exact replicas but can be phase shifted by 0.10 increments between 0 and 359.9.

Now, both channels can also be amplitude offset by +/- 10VDC (PPmax is 20V) so at say 5Vpp they would not cross zero but remain positive
for the full cycle [+10V to 0V].

Setting them up from the front panel soft keys is tricky but doable however the PC software makes this easy - all on one screen.

Anyway, so far it appears this Sig Gen might be versatile enough to do your required waveforms. Might be worth a try and maybe make
things a little easier to do. Although you might need a power amplifier for driving a few coils.

Hey, check the "obsolute storage cabinet" comment above for a hint! Still setting up the new Lab but will try and find time to do a screen
shot of the waveform and post it. I just don't want you to "dead end" because of a waveform that might be easy to do!  :)

Regards,

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 28, 2023, 03:49:17 PM

Now, both channels can also be amplitude offset by +/- 10VDC (PPmax is 20V) so at say 5Vpp they would not cross zero but remain positive
for the full cycle [+10V to 0V].


This statement may change everything.  If they can create the 2 waves with a full positive bias, it makes it interesting..

When we induce a coil between the 2 waves, the retreating wave will go past the zero line..  The source will not switch polarities, but the induction coil will push it past the zero line from it's magnetic coupling. Thus sending power back to the signal generator on the positive retreating lead.

Figuera didn't have reliable diodes back in 1908, so he needed to use both sides of the same resistor to return the energy..  Since both coils always flow power one way at 100% duty cycle, Shouldn't be much of a problem to route the counter EMF around the signal generator with diodes.

If you do test it, can you run each output through separate diodes and test?  We probably do not want to route real power backwards through the signal generator. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 28, 2023, 04:33:31 PM
LoL- my cheap function generator makes both waves with a positive bias just fine..  No problem with diodes.

Any recommendations on 2 channel amplification?  I think regular lower frequency is what we need here.  Figuera ran his off a motor with 16 contacts which make 1 sinewave per rotation.  So he certainly wasn't running 100's of hertz..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 28, 2023, 06:20:13 PM
No luck amplifying it..  I grabbed a stereo amplifier and hooked the signal generator into the amplifier.  The signal generator can output the wave nicely, but the stereo amplifier converts is back to AC.  It's no longer positive biased.

I assume most (if not all) amplifiers use an induction coil..  As soon as we induct this positive biased sinewave, it turns right back to AC passing the zero line. 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on April 28, 2023, 06:49:38 PM
You need a class A amplifier which never turns off or goes below the zero line.


https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/amplifier/amplifier-classes.html



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 28, 2023, 07:30:38 PM
You need a class A amplifier which never turns off or goes below the zero line.


https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/amplifier/amplifier-classes.html

Thank You...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 29, 2023, 05:40:22 AM
LoL- my cheap function generator makes both waves with a positive bias just fine..  No problem with diodes.

Any recommendations on 2 channel amplification?  I think regular lower frequency is what we need here.  Figuera ran his off a motor with 16 contacts which make 1 sinewave per rotation.  So he certainly wasn't running 100's of hertz..

Hi Floodrod,

Good to see the Sinewave waveforms can be generated (too easy - right!). Note that your generator can probably drive
a short circuit for about 60 seconds (check specs) so it does have some decent drive capability.

Citfa's Class A Amplifier is a good way to drive the coils and likely the simplest to implement.

Another option is to use a Voltage Follower Op Amp (a single supply rail or, if you have it, dual rail). Attached a few pdf
files that show the idea, but there's probably a lot better information available as well. More complex (?) but more options
and controls.

SL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: skybiker63 on April 29, 2023, 02:47:01 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlcMhb7GYIo


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 29, 2023, 03:19:53 PM

Citfa's Class A Amplifier is a good way to drive the coils and likely the simplest to implement.

Another option is to use a Voltage Follower Op Amp (a single supply rail or, if you have it, dual rail).


Thanks guys..  I ordered 2 Class A 1969 amplifier boards coming from China.  So it will be a few weeks.  I may order some amazon parts and tinker to make one while I wait.  But circuitry isn't my strong suit.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on April 29, 2023, 03:36:29 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlcMhb7GYIo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlcMhb7GYIo)


Thanks for the video!  That guy really makes good sense.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 29, 2023, 08:50:56 PM
I think a regular more efficient amplifier may work..  Those Class A's are hot inefficient beasts.. 

Signal generator set to Triangle- then run the Stereo amplifier output through a bridge rectifier.  It flips the negative side to positive and evens out nicely.

Or if you want to mimic figuera's steps, you can use Post or Neg Ladder through a rectifier.  Again it flips the negative side to positive in an equal manner. Now it look like the resistor rig.

Then just use 2 channels and set the phase to 180.  <--  WRONG

EDIT-  With FWBR's, you need to use 90 degrees phase shift to get 180 degrees output..

(using regular sine is close, but it V's at the bottom a little too much, unless your signal generator can make a half-circle sinewave. )  But that triangle looks pretty dead-on to me..

Now I don't have to wait weeks..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 29, 2023, 09:28:14 PM
Op Amp Evaluation Boards and ICs

Mouser Electronics - Engineering tools - evaluation board op amp (some populated - some bare boards
you populate with you're choice of op amp - bare board $6.65, etc.); good selection lattice and
documentation:
https://www.mouser.com/c/?q=evaluation%20board%20op%20amp

Digi-Key - Evaluation boards Op Amps (some populated and some bare boards $5.90 etc - you pick the
op amp); good selection lattice and documentation:
https://www.digikey.com/en/products/filter/evaluation-boards-op-amps/788?s=N4IgTCBcDaIPYAcAEBDAtsgRnFAnAJiALoC%2BQA

Both are reliable sources, fast delivery and, I believe, still offer Technical Support (phone or email). Check them out.

SL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 29, 2023, 09:47:45 PM
I think a regular more efficient amplifier may work..  Those Class A's are hot inefficient beasts.. 

Signal generator set to Triangle- then run the Stereo amplifier output through a bridge rectifier.  It flips the negative side to positive and evens out nicely.

Or if you want to mimic figuera's steps, you can use Post or Neg Ladder through a rectifier.  Again it flips the negative side to positive in an equal manner. Now it look like the resistor rig.

Then just use 2 channels and set the phase to 180. 

(using regular sine is close, but it V's at the bottom a little too much, unless your signal generator can make a half-circle sinewave. )  But that triangle looks pretty dead-on to me..

Now I don't have to wait weeks..


FWIW
- Your FG has AWG (store arbitrary signals) so you should be able to store an "Up Ladder" + "Down Ladder" sequence
(and vice-versa for your other input) and replay them in a loop.    I haven't tried it so just guessing? But might be worth a look.

However, you might have to "build the waveform" using the software supplied with the generator [another option].

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 29, 2023, 10:23:51 PM
Analog-Digital Circuit Simulators

Before buying any Op Amps - an option is to use an Analog Circuit Simulator like LTspice.

My favourite is Spectrumsoft's Micro-Cap but it appears it has become obsolete (ceased
updates a while back and the web page is gone  :'( ).

But there are a few others out there that are free. LTspice is still available and seems popular.

Might be worth the time to learn and use plus there seems to be lots of help available.

A good tool and skill to have IMHO... (check if your design will work before spending any $ ).
Also helps with documentation and presentations.

LTspice
https://www.analog.com/en/design-center/design-tools-and-calculators/ltspice-simulator.html (https://www.analog.com/en/design-center/design-tools-and-calculators/ltspice-simulator.html)

TINA-TI (demo or paid version ?)
https://www.ti.com/tool/TINA-TI

NI - Multisim (not familiar with the newer versions)
https://www.ni.com/en-us/shop/electronic-test-instrumentation/application-software-for-electronic-test-and-instrumentation-category/what-is-multisim/spice-simulation-fundamentals/spice-simulation-overview.html
 
Good Luck with the build!
 
SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 29, 2023, 10:46:42 PM


FWIW
- Your FG has AWG (store arbitrary signals) so you should be able to store an "Up Ladder" + "Down Ladder" sequence
(and vice-versa for your other input) and replay them in a loop.    I haven't tried it so just guessing? But might be worth a look.

However, you might have to "build the waveform" using the software supplied with the generator [another option].

SL


The image I posted is using a regular stereo amplifier.  I got the wave full positive bias after the amplifier...

Scope is hooked up to the DC side of bridge rectifiers on the output of the stereo.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyulasun on April 30, 2023, 12:43:55 AM


My favourite is Spectrumsoft's Micro-Cap but it appears it has become obsolete (ceased
updates a while back and the web page is gone  :'( ).


Hi SolarLab,
Wayback machine can retrive all versions of Micro-Cap from the original site.   Spectrumsoft made the software free in 2019, you may have heard it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjn-252Oo7A (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjn-252Oo7A) 

And see this link to download the different versions, up to v. 12.2.0.4 :   https://web.archive.org/web/20201107223859/http://www.spectrum-soft.com/download/download.shtm (https://web.archive.org/web/20201107223859/http://www.spectrum-soft.com/download/download.shtm) 

Gyula 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on April 30, 2023, 01:01:14 AM
The image I posted is using a regular stereo amplifier.  I got the wave full positive bias after the amplifier...

Scope is hooked up to the DC side of bridge rectifiers on the output of the stereo.


Floodrod - Quite inventive I must say - looks good!
{{ Maybe I should remove my last few posts - good info but they clutter the thread? (unless ur a mod and can do it) }}

Gyuasun - Thanks - I have the latest (but looks like the last update we'll see; unfortunately).

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 30, 2023, 04:37:34 AM
Thanks SL,   I'd say leave your comments..  Your comments had good info...

Update..  After pulling my hair out for a few hours, I finally got that part figured out (I think)..  With the bridge rectifier, the waves are in-phase when we use 180 degrees..  And also in phase at 0 degrees.... 

Turns out because I am rectifying both sides, Positive is Positive, and Negative is Positive.  So 180 degrees are both positive... 
So with the bridge rectifier method, I need to use 90 degrees phase shift to get them 180 degrees. 

I am afraid to hook both channels of my scope as I have no bonded ground here.  So I checked both sides individually.  Each side is positive biased wave.  Then hooked up 2 identical transformers for isolation, and now I feel safe scoping it..  And Yeppers- we are 180 degrees out of phase.. And may I say, they look superb!..

Remember, the scope shows real AC because I am looking at the isolated pickup coil that absolutely will induct real AC from a positive biased sine..

1. Signal generator, 2 triangle waves 90 degrees out of phase.
2. Amplify with ordinary stereo amplifier
3. Full wave bridge rectifiers on each output. DC sides to electromagnets.

Now we have 2 positive biased sinewaves 180 degrees out of phase without switching input polarities or winding directions.. And these waves induce real AC in a pickup coil..

Thanks again SolarLab.  I am super happy you suggested this..   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on April 30, 2023, 01:40:30 PM
Great progress, you could also try out a rheostat, the swiping arm you slide back and forth manually hereby emulating movement of the G component, but current flows continually and isn't interrupted which may or maymnot be desirable. 
imho the fields don't oppose, the purpose is to make one N pole grow and the other S shrink, inducing variation and a flux flow WHILE net change of flux remains zero. Or creating a magnetic current, the analog is displacement current which is an electric field that varies, magnetic current is considered hypothetical, a mathematical construct, but the same is said about displacement current. 
Purely hypothetical: Since the time rate of change of each coil is equal and opposite, the mutual induction cancels the self-induced emf, resulting in a non-inductive coil (V1=L1.di1/dt + M.di2/dt, say for a single period during rise of 1 sec, i1(t) = 5t and i2(t)=-5t+5, then di1/dt=5 and di2/dt=-5, and V=0 if L=M).

Figuera: 
PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION - Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns, while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.
Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased and reduced in intensity; since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical induced current .It was considered the possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the electrical current which produces it.
The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine. Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on April 30, 2023, 03:28:01 PM

imho the fields don't oppose, the purpose is to make one N pole grow and the other S shrink,


I'm pretty sure growing north and shrinking south will not induct into a pickup. It would have to be growing north and shrinking north. Which simulates a magnet passing a coil.

Growing north and growing south = induction
Growing north and shrinking north = induction
Growing north and shrinking south = no induction

This configuration is growing north and shrinking north. Which is what I'm aiming for.

My 2 cents
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on April 30, 2023, 03:36:17 PM
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one."
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 01, 2023, 02:31:19 AM
Related - Comparing the Fuguera and LinGen Devices

Fuguera's 1908 Patent 44267 appears to be very much the same as the so called "LinGen"
found in-part in Holcomb's WO2018134233A2 Patent.

Figuera uses 7 "poles" (in the diagram) whereas the LinGen employs 8 "poles"
(in the diagram - initial analysis) and Figuera excites his device with a mechanical
commutator driven by a small motor.  The induced coils (Y) are placed between
two inducer coils.

Whereas the LinGen is excited (coils are driven) with a microprocessor and MOSFET
switches to create signal pulses and a BEMF recovery scheme. The induced coil is a
single Lap winding near the inducer windings.

Both schemes take advantage of the increase in magnetic flux density offered by the
soft magnetic material (metal or soft magnetic compound [SMC]) B-H Curves and
employ a "moving magnetic field" with no component physical movement.

It should be viable to incorporate the best characteristics of both schemes into one,
including the timing and sequencing methods. {In process}

Insight into the LinGen development, including CAE generated animated gif's, proof
of concept, etc. can be found in this thread starting here:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509 (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509) 

SL 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 01, 2023, 05:14:43 AM
...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 01, 2023, 06:35:56 PM
...


Hi Floodrod,

Saw the video, good stuff!   Anyway, I've got a "deal" for you (?), if you're interested:

- Take a "C Clamp" around your coils [inducer | inducee | inducer] if you can find one
that big - with insulators {paper} between the cores {"|"} and record any differences.
Curious what changes might occur, if any, when the "magnetic circuit" is completed.

- In return - I will attemp a 3D CAE analysis of the coils {time permitting} if you
can provide the Core dimensions (X-Y-Z), wire guage; # of turns and Coil
dimensions (L-W-H); and drive waveform. Curious if the CAE comes anywhere near
"real life measurements." 

Will build it up one pole at a time in an attemp to see where the "break even" and "OU"
points start to appear {seemed like around 6/7 poles is where the LinGen showed promise}.

Regards,

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 01, 2023, 07:35:45 PM
Figuera's various patents show a variety of configurations but I don't
see where any specific or prefered combination is given. Hanon has
some good ideas so I'll look at those as well.

Typical patent where all things are considered  :) ! So we'll use CAE...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 01, 2023, 08:12:48 PM
SL,

I will check my clamps tonight and try to get you some of those numbers.

I deleted the video because The setup is not optimal. Don't want to add too much confusion and misinformation.  I think I could do this much more efficiently and eliminate some of the unneeded diodes in the rectifiers. I now also know how to tie the negatives of the electromagnets together, and it will be safe to use the scope with a common ground.

Reading all the patents, he goes on to talk about how if you use the Earth's magnetic field and cut the flux with a loop of wire, you can double triple quadruple or even 100 fold the output depending on how many loops you use. The only thing holding us back is Lenz Law. But the same magnetic field can be used again and again and again.

I will be trying to accurately chart reactiveness tonight. I have a hunch that this setup makes the electromagnets practically reactiveless regardless what frequency you put into them.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 01, 2023, 11:50:29 PM
No luck on the clamp that big.

Bobbin is 35mm x 35mm.  44mm long.  Wrapped with 24 gauge. 500 turns. Ohms out at 6.8 ohms.

First test results:

Measuring amperage of the supply with various frequencies. Core and no core..  1 coil from amp channel to power supply ground. Positive biased triangle wave. Power supply locked at 12V.  DC reading after rectifier to supply ground.  Not returning through rectifier negative.  Voltage is 5.6V from rectifier positive to supply ground. (under 1/2 for various reasons)..  Just testing reactance from positive biased wave 1 coil.

25 Hz-  W/core= .578 Amp.  No/Core= .647 amp
50 Hz-  W/core= .487 Amp  No/core= .607 amp
100 Hz-  W/core= .434 amp  No/core= .532 amp
500 Hz-  W/core= .416 Amp  No/Core= .426 Amp
1000 Hz- W/core= .417 Amp  No/Core= .419 Amp
5000 Hz- W/Core= .422 Amp  No Core= .422 Amp
10000 Hz- W/Core= .431 Amp  No/Core= .431 amp
20,000 Hz- W/core= .495 Amp  No/Core= .495 Amp

25000 Hz and above-  Can't measure.  Scope shows solid 12.5 Khz and will not increase.  Guessing end of limit for the amplifier.  Somewhere about 5Khz, the trend starts reversing and the core makes no difference.

Attached single wave and also full dual waves all on positive bias 180 shifted.

I will repeat with 2 coils / cores attached.  See how they interact with the opposite wave next.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 02, 2023, 01:19:46 AM
2nd test Results:

Both coils, 180 degrees out of phase.  With cores touching each other.  Can't measure under 100 Hz without changing Supply voltage, so starting at 100 Hz.

North to South-  (The way that should not induct good).

100 Hz-  .831 Amp
500 Hz-  .783 Amp
1000 Hz- .780 Amp
5000 hz- .784 Amp
10,000 hz- .790 amp
20,000 hz- .861 amp

North to North (The way they should induct).

100 hz-  .780 amp
500 hz-  .766 amp
1000 hz- .766 amp
5000 hz- .771 amp
10000 hz-  .780 amp
20,000 hz-  .850 amp

No sign of Back-EMF making it back to the positive in any configuration yet.

Next 2 tests-  Check a choke response with a closed core.  And test all this with a pickup coil between.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 03, 2023, 03:02:34 PM
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one."
Exactly, and the diagram of a regular dynamo shows N and S to indicate the poles.
Also: "since any variation occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical induced current "

N-N would be a moving monopole field which may have desirable effects too.   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls) 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0) 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU)

 https://www.eeweb.com/a-flash-from-the-past-figueras-generator/
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 03, 2023, 04:45:44 PM
"N-N would be a moving monopole field which may have desirable effects too. " but it's completly different story.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 04, 2023, 08:12:22 AM
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one"  <---  he was describing how a regular dynamo works..

With 1 way current, growing and shrinking 180 degrees out of phase, the only way it will induct is Like Polarities.. 

Shrinking North acts as South..
Shrinking South acts as North..

Growing North acts as North..
Growing South acts as South..

demonstrating this on a live bench. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on May 04, 2023, 10:28:44 AM

HI
I dont know if it will be of any use but here is interesting info how to increase magnet/electromagnet strength without rewinding ( if i understood well). Attached picture from pdf document which attached to this message.


 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 04, 2023, 03:51:59 PM
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one"  <---  he was describing how a regular dynamo works..

With 1 way current, growing and shrinking 180 degrees out of phase, the only way it will induct is Like Polarities.. 

Shrinking North acts as South..
Shrinking South acts as North..

Growing North acts as North..
Growing South acts as South..

demonstrating this on a live bench. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ)
 
Thanks for testing, looks good. Attraction mode seems to buck voltage in the induced instead of being additive. Last thing to test is the behavior of back-mmf created by the induced when a current is allowed, and how all voltages interact (scope on the input coils, both at the same time if possible. It's VxI that determines power and consumed energy, and if V is eliminated through mutual bucking, then who knows, just an idea). Pls also test attraction mode in the loaded state. 

The emf in the center  coil seems to be induced by flux cutting though the coil sides like a dynamo (Lorentz force flux cutting), and not by variation through the center aka flux-linking, guess you may be right. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 04, 2023, 04:51:41 PM
Exactly, and the diagram of a regular dynamo shows N and S to indicate the poles.
Also: "since any variation occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical induced current "

N-N would be a moving monopole field which may have desirable effects too.   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls) 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0) 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU)

 https://www.eeweb.com/a-flash-from-the-past-figueras-generator/ (https://www.eeweb.com/a-flash-from-the-past-figueras-generator/)


Alan
Here all the longtime researchers from your YouTube links
Are now open sourcing
And sharing the many reasons why they started a new forum
https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/ (https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/)

Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Alan
You have been dropping crumbs for years here ,
Do you have an experiment ( actual gain mechanism?) to support your assertions ?


Open source is the only path forward…
Too many years of …..
?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 04, 2023, 05:38:37 PM
 
Thanks for testing, looks good. Attraction mode seems to buck voltage in the induced instead of being additive. Last thing to test is the behavior of back-mmf created by the induced when a current is allowed, and how all voltages interact (scope on the input coils, both at the same time if possible. It's VxI that determines power and consumed energy, and if V is eliminated through mutual bucking, then who knows, just an idea). Pls also test attraction mode in the loaded state. 

The emf in the center  coil seems to be induced by flux cutting though the coil sides like a dynamo (Lorentz force flux cutting), and not by variation through the center aka flux-linking, guess you may be right.

I have since succeeded in causing the Back-EMF to be high enough to flow back to the Positive input lead and flow current back to the source using 2 coil positive biased 180 shifted waves. Theoretically it should now be possible (with the right coil setup and frequency parameters) to transfer inducted power that we pull into Back-EMF and send it back to the input to feed the circuit.

I don't know about all the cutting / linking / compression, etc.  This setup is simulating reciprocation of 2 magnets of the same polarity (repelling) on each side of a coil. If both magnets move at the exact same time and speed, induction only occurs if 1 is approaching and 1 is going away.   Otherwise it bucks and no induction.

My goal is to use the pickup coil's field to push the emptying coil past the zero line into the full other polarity. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 05, 2023, 04:13:56 AM
Floodrod,

Very interesting stuff - not what I would call that intuitive at all, at least for me.

Hope to get some CAE CPU time this weekend (schedule says so anyway).
SL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 05, 2023, 05:52:08 PM

Alan
Here all the longtime researchers from your YouTube links
Are now open sourcing
And sharing the many reasons why they started a new forum
https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/ (https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/)

Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Alan
You have been dropping crumbs for years here ,
Do you have an experiment ( actual gain mechanism?) to support your assertions ?


Open source is the only path forward…
Too many years of …..
?
 
Do you believe OU is possible? 

I trust Chris despite the negativity.    https://youtu.be/J9pjQOSkEuk (https://youtu.be/J9pjQOSkEuk)
His POC closely resembles Figuera.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 05, 2023, 07:19:25 PM
I have since succeeded in causing the Back-EMF to be high enough to flow back to the Positive input lead and flow current back to the source using 2 coil positive biased 180 shifted waves. Theoretically it should now be possible (with the right coil setup and frequency parameters) to transfer inducted power that we pull into Back-EMF and send it back to the input to feed the circuit.

I don't know about all the cutting / linking / compression, etc.  This setup is simulating reciprocation of 2 magnets of the same polarity (repelling) on each side of a coil. If both magnets move at the exact same time and speed, induction only occurs if 1 is approaching and 1 is going away.   Otherwise it bucks and no induction.

My goal is to use the pickup coil's field to push the emptying coil past the zero line into the full other polarity.

Hi Floodrod,

If you don't mind saying, what are your cores made of?

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: ramset on May 05, 2023, 07:37:52 PM
Repost from alan’s post above

Quote from: ramset on May 04, 2023, 04:51:41 PM (https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg577315/#msg577315)
Alan
Here all the longtime researchers from your YouTube links
Are now open sourcing
And sharing the many reasons why they started a new forum
https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/ (https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/)

Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Alan
You have been dropping crumbs for years here ,
Do you have an experiment ( actual gain mechanism?) to support your assertions ?


Open source is the only path forward…
Too many years of …..
?

—-////—-///////
  Alan reply,


Quote “Do you believe OU is possible? 
I trust Chris despite the negativity.    https://youtu.be/J9pjQOSkEuk (https://youtu.be/J9pjQOSkEuk)
His POC closely resembles Figuera.”
End quote


Chet Response to allan ,

“Alan
I believe we swim in a sea of energy
At an atomic level


I also believe in Open source and the transparency
That goes hand in hand .
Claims need this to advance !


Is this an open source claim ?( 35 watts more out than in ?)
Are persons allowed to share for replication?


Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
Apologies to Floodrod for interrupting ( although it does seem that many contributions from alan have been specifically addressed to Floodrod recently…


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 05, 2023, 08:28:33 PM
Thanks SL..  Any data is always appreciated.

Cadman-  Cores are salvaged laminated iron from old chokes.

Ramset- No worries, ain't my thread.  300+ pages in this thread from many years.  I have no right to hijack it.  I will continue my updates in the other thread I started.  Leave this thread as a place where everyone can discuss. 

Any theories I come up with and post will be bench tested and results shared.  (good or bad)..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 08, 2023, 09:34:14 AM
Floodrod,

Ran a couple of schemes this weekend but did not see anything outstanding.
Just a first pass analysis however, so we shall see. Won't try to post any data.

Much more to be done; so there are a lot more scenerios to look at.

SL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 08, 2023, 09:36:35 PM
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one"  <---  he was describing how a regular dynamo works..

With 1 way current, growing and shrinking 180 degrees out of phase, the only way it will induct is Like Polarities.. 

Shrinking North acts as South..
Shrinking South acts as North..

Growing North acts as North..
Growing South acts as South..

demonstrating this on a live bench. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ)
You're right, I wasn't aware of this: 
https://www.youtube.com/embed/8FXPmYGIOs4
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 09, 2023, 02:53:00 AM
Thanks Solar Lab,  If I may suggest, please reference the Buforn patents to see the coil / core arrangements.  It seems they used a full core in the pickup coil with the ends extending and intruding into the driver coil's hollows.  But the iron through the driver coils appears to go under 1/2 way and does not make contact with the other pole.

I have been experimenting and am seeing pretty big differences in % of power that gets passed to the source with different arrangements.  Both frequency and core arrangements swing the results.

Alan- thanks for posting that.  Now if you can, think how a transformer flux works when the secondary passes it's magnetic field back through the primary which raises input.  With positive biased waves, we get real AC from the induced, but now we never flip polarity on the primary input.  Try to picture how the downward cycle will affect the primary under these circumstances. 

And if you see what I am saying, now if we use 2 coils out of phase, we can start to see why the resistor rig is of upmost importance.  It has a direct connection between both coils.  Electronic versions will be useless unless we can establish a way for the emptying electromagnet to allow current flow to the filling,  but never the filling to the emptying.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 09, 2023, 05:21:51 PM
Transformer logic is confusing. When a secondary is loaded, emf and current add to the primary circuit which are caused by the flux created by the secondary current, and the power source has to deliver the extra current that is demanded. 
I'll look into it.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 09, 2023, 05:58:32 PM
      Transformer logic doesn't need to be complicated or confusing.  All you need to understand is what impedance is.  Power transformers are designed to operate at a certain frequency.  At the designed frequency an unloaded transformer has a very high impedance because as the current and voltage increase the flux density also increases rapidly and thus limits the amount of current going through the primary of the transformer.  When a load is applied to the secondary the secondary windings draw current from the increasing flux and this allows the primary current to go higher than in an unloaded condition.  The current being draw by the secondary reduces the flux and this lowers the impedance of the primary and thus the primary current goes up.


If you operate a power transformer at a frequency it is not designed for it will have a higher input current even when the secondary is not loaded.  It will also run hotter because of the higher input current.  60 Hz transformers do not do well at 400 Hz.


Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 09, 2023, 06:38:50 PM
Yeah, but (from my understanding, how I see it) the current isn't (directly) drawn from the flux, but the flux creates an output emf which causes a current to flow and when the current flows through the  secondary coil, it in turn generates an mmf and its flux that has the polarity to oppose the flux that caused the voltage in the secondary, causing magnetic induction in the primary that adds to the self-induction (right-hand rule applied to i1 and flux2)  if the secondary coil is used as a negative power source. And the secondary becomes the primary and the primary the secondary, similar to what is said about generators that simultaneously functions as a motor with a back-torque. 

Split the positive, or break the symmetry with (bread crumbs) multiple coils that buck, and the back-reaction adds to the output  and counter-reaction has a flux in the same direction as the  input coil instead. 
Something like this (again): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmJr4_gHygo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmJr4_gHygo)


Respectfully.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 10, 2023, 01:06:09 AM
Thanks Solar Lab,  If I may suggest, please reference the Buforn patents to see the coil / core arrangements.  It seems they used a full core in the pickup coil with the ends extending and intruding into the driver coil's hollows.  But the iron through the driver coils appears to go under 1/2 way and does not make contact with the other pole.

I have been experimenting and am seeing pretty big differences in % of power that gets passed to the source with different arrangements.  Both frequency and core arrangements swing the results.

Alan- thanks for posting that.  Now if you can, think how a transformer flux works when the secondary passes it's magnetic field back through the primary which raises input.  With positive biased waves, we get real AC from the induced, but now we never flip polarity on the primary input.  Try to picture how the downward cycle will affect the primary under these circumstances. 

And if you see what I am saying, now if we use 2 coils out of phase, we can start to see why the resistor rig is of upmost importance.  It has a direct connection between both coils.  Electronic versions will be useless unless we can establish a way for the emptying electromagnet to allow current flow to the filling,  but never the filling to the emptying.
I have had a good read and would like to make the following comments.
My comments are with good intentions and I am trying to help.

Floodrod.
I have been looking at the Figuera device for at least a decade, and have come to the following conclusions.
The Figuera patent cannot work as described.
You are magnetizing 2 electromagnets N and S and causing an induced current in y.
How on earth can THAT produce more out than in?
IT CAN'T!! You know it and I know it and every OU researcher knows it.
(If you can prove me wrong I will be highly delighted.)
However, there is one thing you are all missing.
In my opinion, Figuera can only work if it generates plasma in the rotating contact device (or if we use a better modern frame of reference): the distributor cap.
Take a look at a working distributor cap and look at the electricity carefully.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0u9qsvPEcE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCBw11fymiQ
My advice is to get hold of an 8-cylinder distributor cap from a scrap yard (16-cylinder would be better), modify the rotor to make more contacts, and generate plasma.
You can probably 3d print a modified rotor. (or maybe 3d print the distributor cap also)
Then you are in the same ballpark as Carlos Benitez, and the Alexander patent.
Then you can possibly get newly magnetized electrons in and around the distributor cap to enter your device.
Remember the initial descriptions said that Figuera was getting electricity from the air. I suspect he dumbed down his patent to protect his invention.
Now, at least,  we have a logical working principle of operation.
At that time it was also common for coils to come complete with interrupters. Interrupters were often not even referred to in patents as everyone knew that a transformer would only work with an interrupter in those days.
In my opinion, it is a huge mistake to look at very old patents and try to modernize them using MOSFETs and solid-state switching devices. Very often the stuff we remove is the stuff that made these old devices work.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on May 10, 2023, 01:41:27 AM
Alan
Quote
Yeah, but (from my understanding, how I see it) the current isn't (directly) drawn from the flux, but the flux creates an output emf which causes a current to flow and when the current flows through the  secondary coil, it in turn generates an mmf and its flux that has the polarity to oppose the flux that caused the voltage in the secondary, causing magnetic induction in the primary that adds to the self-induction (right-hand rule applied to i1 and flux2)  if the secondary coil is used as a negative power source. And the secondary becomes the primary and the primary the secondary, similar to what is said about generators that simultaneously functions as a motor with a back-torque. 

I think you get it and many other people give answers which only raise more questions not less.

Quote
And the secondary becomes the primary and the primary the secondary, similar to what is said about generators that simultaneously functions as a motor with a back-torque.

When dealing with AC induction the lead/lag phase relationship gives us an indication of where the energy in the system is and what it's doing. Imagine two wheels (driver/load) connected by a belt which alternates as a push/pull in direction. The voltage/current lead/lag equates to the belt tension versus it's direction. The energy relates to the belt tension/direction and the distance it traveled in a given time period. We can make simple analogies so this stuff is easier to understand and we can find better answers. 

On a note of interest, in belt connected motor/generator systems rapid load changes causes the belt tension to change which does in fact effect the phase relationship between the two. The mechanical system does effect the electrical system.

First we should look at the actual cause and effect of a load on an inductance. When we apply a current to an inductor the current rises and the magnetic field expands until the current reaches a steady state as seen in the picture below. Once the inductor reaches a steady state it loses it's self inductance, doesn't act like an inductor but more so a resistance heater dissipating energy as heat.

Our inductor could induce a second coil like a transformer but there's a catch. It can only induce another coil while the current/magnetic field is changing but not when the current or magnetic field reaches steady state and is not changing. Now if we added a load to our second coil it's current would produce a second magnetic field which opposes the first which induced it. This second magnetic field increases the total magnetic field density(first plus second field) faster than expected. The effect is that the total magnetic field density around the inductor is now greater than the current flowing through it. The total magnetic field present gives the appearance of a steady state and now the inductor current has to rise to catch up. This is why as the second coil load current rises the first coils current must also rise.

I think it makes much more sense once we understand there are two currents and two magnetic fields present in a transformer. I use infinite element analysis which is like looking at every measurement and how it relates to one another in one slice of time. Then we start adding slices together in groups to see how a change in one place effects all the other places. This lumping things together and averaging never works in my opinion.

AC 



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on May 10, 2023, 02:07:16 AM
aking21
Quote
I have been looking at the Figuera device for at least a decade, and have come to the following conclusions.
The Figuera patent cannot work as described.
You are magnetizing 2 electromagnets N and S and causing an induced current in y.
How on earth can THAT produce more out than in?

Apparent simplicity can be deceiving, did you know wind power follows the cube rule?.

When the wind speed doubles the power available is now 8 times larger ie 2x2x2=8. At first it seemed very non-intuitive to me. Until we understand that twice the mass of air moved through a given plane at twice the velocity. It's not only the velocity but the mass-velocity or total change in momentum which determines the power.

So we need to be careful about looking at things in a superficial sense. What peaked my curiosity is that Figuera often spoke of the total amount of change within the system. Implying that like the power in wind there's more energy available than meets the eye. Something simple already present but so non-intuitive almost everyone overlooked it.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 10, 2023, 02:15:18 AM
I have had a good read and would like to make the following comments.
My comments are with good intentions and I am trying to help.

Floodrod.
I have been looking at the Figuera device for at least a decade, and have come to the following conclusions.

The Figuera patent cannot work as described.
You are magnetizing 2 electromagnets N and S and causing an induced current in y.
How on earth can THAT produce more out than in?
IT CAN'T!! You know it and I know it and every OU researcher knows it.
(If you can prove me wrong I will be highly delighted.)

However, there is one thing you are all missing.
In my opinion, Figuera can only work if it generates plasma in the rotating contact device (or if we use a better modern frame of reference): the distributor cap.
Take a look at a working distributor cap and look at the electricity carefully.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0u9qsvPEcE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0u9qsvPEcE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCBw11fymiQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCBw11fymiQ)
My advice is to get hold of an 8-cylinder distributor cap from a scrap yard (16-cylinder would be better), modify the rotor to make more contacts, and generate plasma.
You can probably 3d print a modified rotor. (or maybe 3d print the distributor cap also)
Then you are in the same ballpark as Carlos Benitez, and the Alexander patent.
Then you can possibly get newly magnetized electrons in and around the distributor cap to enter your device.
Remember the initial descriptions said that Figuera was getting electricity from the air. I suspect he dumbed down his patent to protect his invention.
Now, at least,  we have a logical working principle of operation.
At that time it was also common for coils to come complete with interrupters. Interrupters were often not even referred to in patents as everyone knew that a transformer would only work with an interrupter in those days.
In my opinion, it is a huge mistake to look at very old patents and try to modernize them using MOSFETs and solid-state switching devices. Very often the stuff we remove is the stuff that made these old devices work.


a.king21,

It appears some of Figuera's patents work in a similar fashion as the Holcomb devices (LinGen analysis - see the OUR Holcomb thread). Also,
there is some good technical information on the Holcomb web site and HES facebook page.

One of the primary gain mechanisms is found by examining the material B-H Curve. Another is the concept of only moving the Magnetic Field.

Also, in the above post, AC makes the point of increasing the "frequency of operation" - only having to move the magnetic field makes this viable.
Therefore, any small gains can add up quickly. Don Smith used this in his scheme. Combining only these might do it! Some interesting stuff IMHO.

FWIW... Holcomb patent analysis starts about here - a.k.a. "LinGen;" and includes patent review, support material, and animated CAE cartoons:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509 (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509)


SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 10, 2023, 06:38:15 AM
IMO, there are 2 main parts that interest me.

First, if we can make two north magnets attract instead of repel- we would have free energy.  But the nature of magnets make them want to repel.  Usually if we want an induction coil to turn South, we need to interface the coil with a growing South pole. Then the pickup coil will attempt to stop the change and turn South. But Figuera accomplishes this with a whole new technique.  He makes that coil go South by "Pulling away" a North Field. 

He is obviously not inducting "Y" with standard AC through 2 electromagnets.  He is inducting "Y" with a positive biased wave and never flips polarity of the input.  This in itself opens a whole new can of worms.

Second-  I don't think part 1 alone is enough.  It may be the main mechanism of gain, but more is needed to fully make use of it.  Notice his coil setup is also NOT a standard transformer.  One would think the adding more groups of coils would not increase efficiency because each added group will require more input.  But I do not think this is the case.

Lenz is the effect of an increased magnetic field working against us.  I see no reason why there could not be a configuration where that "increased field" could be harvested to dampen or even completely counter the ill-effects of Lenz.

I also think it is completely unjust to compare this setup to standard known transformer induction as we know it. Not only is the driving current method / polarities altered, but so is the the coil arrangement.

I did not take offense- and we all have our own opinions. I may be wasting my time- but I am OK with that. 

PS.  I have all the magnet wire I need to build a big coil rig. I just don't want to build that part yet till I see exactly how they need to be configured and designed.  And I am still struggling with electronic version in establishing the transfer connection between the shrinking and growing sides.

Some say the electronic version can not work.  They may be right.  But the patents clearly say it can be accomplished in many ways..

"we have to create a magnetic field that can be formed by electro-magnets with cores of
iron or steel and arrange that the field current flows through a constant and
ordered series of variations in intensity. That can easily be achieved in various
ways
."

I believe if we uncover the exact dynamics behind it, they can be reproduced with todays electronics.

Edit- Responding to this quote..  "You are magnetizing 2 electromagnets N and S and causing an induced current in y."

Not exactly precise.  We are magnetizing 2 electromagnets Growing North and Shrinking North and causing an induced current in y.  But we are not using "South" at all.  I can show the electromagnets WILL turn South from the interaction between the coils, even though we never send incoming current in the direction that makes it go South.  And I believe this is the whole gain mechanism.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 10, 2023, 09:42:04 PM


a.king21,

It appears some of Figuera's patents work in a similar fashion as the Holcomb devices (LinGen analysis - see the OUR Holcomb thread). Also,
there is some good technical information on the Holcomb web site and HES facebook page.

One of the primary gain mechanisms is found by examining the material B-H Curve. Another is the concept of only moving the Magnetic Field.

Also, in the above post, AC makes the point of increasing the "frequency of operation" - only having to move the magnetic field makes this viable.
Therefore, any small gains can add up quickly. Don Smith used this in his scheme. Combining only these might do it! Some interesting stuff IMHO.

FWIW... Holcomb patent analysis starts about here - a.k.a. "LinGen;" and includes patent review, support material, and animated CAE cartoons:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509 (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509)


SL
Thanks for that. I was not aware of this patent and it will require some study time.
He essentially repeats Figuera's claim in a different embodiment so it is very interesting.
The billion dollar question is: has anyone purchased a device with this technology in it?
Or..... is this another  Nikola type method of screwing investors according to this article:
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/14/1129248846/nikola-founder-electric-trucks-guilty-fraud

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 10, 2023, 11:37:27 PM
Thanks for that. I was not aware of this patent and it will require some study time.
He essentially repeats Figuera's claim in a different embodiment so it is very interesting.
The billion dollar question is: has anyone purchased a device with this technology in it?
Or..... is this another  Nikola type method of screwing investors according to this article:
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/14/1129248846/nikola-founder-electric-trucks-guilty-fraud (https://www.npr.org/2022/10/14/1129248846/nikola-founder-electric-trucks-guilty-fraud)


Nearly every "disruptive technology" carries the "billion dollar questions - are they real;
can they be viably implemented; will they hit the market in a timely manner, etc.

It's a paradox - the developer needs money to "polish" his invention, this takes time, there can
be hidden problems and obsticles (technical, regulatory, public acceptance, etc.), lots of
Beta and Insitu testing/evaluations, possible modifications, re-tests, and so forth. The risk of
burning a customers factory down or disrupting his production can be catastrophic to any new 
technology - better to take your time and do it right, rather than "rush to market." 

Many investors only see the extremely large ROI available but do not do proper due diligence,
they don't appreciate the "high risk" part of "high reward," nor understand "concept-to-store-shelf"
cycle with all the "I's" dotted and "T's" crossed properly, takes time and a lot of hard work.

Milton is only one of many who got ahead of himself and the investors are only one of many
who didn't understand the arena they were entering and didn't perform any due diligence.

As far as HES (Holcomb) goes - who knows - but I did do some CAE analysis to varify the claims
and a bit of detailed checking so I remain convinced (based on my due diligence) the
technology is viable. It's still a "work-in-progress" however. We'll wait for Dr. Holcomb's lead.

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: a.king21 on May 11, 2023, 03:51:29 AM
aking21
Apparent simplicity can be deceiving, did you know wind power follows the cube rule?.

When the wind speed doubles the power available is now 8 times larger ie 2x2x2=8. At first it seemed very non-intuitive to me. Until we understand that twice the mass of air moved through a given plane at twice the velocity. It's not only the velocity but the mass-velocity or total change in momentum which determines the power.

So we need to be careful about looking at things in a superficial sense. What peaked my curiosity is that Figuera often spoke of the total amount of change within the system. Implying that like the power in wind there's more energy available than meets the eye. Something simple already present but so non-intuitive almost everyone overlooked it.

AC
I am only quoting Figuera, who states that this can work with one triple coil system.  ie N.S, and y.  just vary the resistance.
Where Figuera scores is that it appears that he has found a cheap way to convert DC to AC. So any toy motor at 3000 rpm gives you 50hz AC. THAT is a good invention. (However, it does not destroy Lenz.)
Cheap AC is also very mesmerising to those not skilled in the art. ie Bankers.
Funny that he should "die suddenly".
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 11, 2023, 04:16:39 AM
F.Y.I.

Modern Inverters are pretty good, and cheap, as well - plus they provide some
great regulation and other features like tracking.

FWIW - Here's a little paper I did on them a while back:

https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4154.msg96062#msg96062
SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 11, 2023, 06:41:55 PM
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 11, 2023, 07:38:53 PM
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.

these variations in the intensity of the current flowing through a
magnetic field, cause the production of induced electrical current that can be
used for all kinds of purposes, and which produced current will be alternate,
but a simple commutator will make it continuous
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 11, 2023, 07:41:04 PM
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.


Hi Forest,

Just curious - what's your thinking based on, or from? (The output is pulsing DC)

Regards,

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on May 11, 2023, 08:26:54 PM
Well, maybe the secret was in converting output using commutator to DC then return back to the input creating each loop more magnetic field more output current up to the point when all core material was saturated .... just my blind guess
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 11, 2023, 09:25:25 PM
Well, maybe the secret was in converting output using commutator to DC then return back to the input creating each loop more magnetic field more output current up to the point when all core material was saturated .... just my blind guess


Thanks for sharing your info (thinking) - it's appreciated.

SL


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 17, 2023, 01:54:02 AM
Hey Cadman,

I am going to try your strategy next.  The Pie-Coils..  I am printing out several bobbins around the size of a common Teflon Tape spool that fit over plastic conduit which I can slide a core into. And experiment with moving the field as you suggested.

In case this forum goes read-only-  I will be posting updates also on my Youtube -  https://www.youtube.com/@floodrod/videos

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 17, 2023, 03:13:45 PM
Hey floodrod,

A tip: Your bobbin ends or separators should be as thin as possible, you want all of the pies to act as a single coil. Too thick and they act like separated coils.

These here are 1.6mm thick and all 4 coils are on one bobbin

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on May 17, 2023, 05:11:40 PM
floodrod
I seem to have lost all my cad former files so I built the example below. I setup my 3D printer for thin wall printing down to 1mm walls. The former picture below can be stacked one on top of the other and glued to make a form with multiple wire areas like cadman posted. I also glue them together front to front with the seam in the center to make standard bobbins. It works well because they can be printed flat on the bed with no overhangs. I would suggest a small one to two mm fillet on the print where the round area meets the tube if your wire winding tension is high.

I also included another picture of a 3D printed former you may recognize from figuera's patents. I packed the former with iron filings and a binder then glued a lid on. It works well and the core is comparable to transformer cores in it's response. Winding coils on the former was fun but no more difficult than a toroid.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 18, 2023, 12:22:44 AM
Hmm, thanks.  It's a shame because I have almost all the thicker bobbins printed.  I got in the habit of printer thicker because too often the thin coil spacers break on me, ruining the coil.

If this device has a metal core, and we connect the next before we break the previous, will the 4mm spacing matter?  Aren't we basically moving the magnetic field of the bar (core)? 

I was planning on using 11 of these flux-moving coils, and 2 larger pickup coils on the ends (like a dumbell).  Then using my Figuera-style 22 pole commutator (11 contacts on each side)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 18, 2023, 01:32:15 PM

All else equal the thick bobbin ends will result in fewer At/m and less magnetic field strength.
Thin or no dividers with short section length will give more At/m, greater field strength and a smoother field movement.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 18, 2023, 03:48:55 PM
All else equal the thick bobbin ends will result in fewer At/m and less magnetic field strength.
Thin or no dividers with short section length will give more At/m, greater field strength and a smoother field movement.

You are most likely correct in all you said. I plan to test with the bobbins I already made, and if the results are suggestive of a positive outcome- I will remake with the specs you suggest.

These bobbins offer the advantage of being sturdy and able to be separated, which will allow me to re-use them for other experiments in the future.  Not to mention the 15+ hours already spent printing them and the ability to use my mechanical winder.

But I agree without doubt, your suggested method would be better. 




Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 18, 2023, 09:58:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk

Output sucks as expected.  But first glance at what it does..
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 19, 2023, 03:59:28 AM
I also included another picture of a 3D printed former you may recognize from figuera's patents. I packed the former with iron filings and a binder then glued a lid on. It works well and the core is comparable to transformer cores in it's response. Winding coils on the former was fun but no more difficult than a toroid.

AC

Hi AC,

Please expand on this.  This patent basically appears to describe electromagnets powered by alternating currents placed real close together.  Then between them is placed something like pancake pickup coils.  I say pancake because they must be thin to fit in the close gaps.

What were your results? 

Am I correct to assume this differs from a standard transformer because of the 2nd electromagnet of opposite sign on each side?  I know from lots of tests that if I clamp two opposite sign electromagnets together, the driving current goes WAY down (depending on frequency).  Can you explain the dynamics of this build to us?

Thanks
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 19, 2023, 01:39:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk

Output sucks as expected.  But first glance at what it does..

Hi floodrod,

I don’t want you to waste your time but that setup is backwards from the way Hanon’s experiment was set up. There should be two reciprocating coils, one at each end with a single induced in between. Your commutator is make before break, isn't it?

https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg575785/#msg575785

Also to duplicate the Buforn setup takes at least 3 cores as shown in his patent drawings. And with just 3 coils and straight cores in a row like Buforn’s, one complete coil is not effective (the outer halves of the end coils).

But again, don't spend your time on it just for my account.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 19, 2023, 03:16:19 PM
Hi floodrod,

I don’t want you to waste your time but that setup is backwards from the way Hanon’s experiment was set up. There should be two reciprocating coils, one at each end with a single induced in between. Your commutator is make before break, isn't it?

https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg575785/#msg575785

Also to duplicate the Buforn setup takes at least 3 cores as shown in his patent drawings. And with just 3 coils and straight cores in a row like Buforn’s, one complete coil is not effective (the outer halves of the end coils).

But again, don't spend your time on it just for my account.

The brush is definitely larger than 1 contact.  But 11 contacts per half revolution is a lot of coils.  And I can't double them up as it is an uneven number.

I will be doing more experimenting tho. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 19, 2023, 04:01:52 PM
One thing is constant on all my builds.  Output always SUCKS..  There is a reason he used 7 or 8 sets of the triple-coils..  I don't think 1 coil set will do it...  But I continue to search for the configuration where adding several coil sets would be fruitful.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on May 19, 2023, 11:07:19 PM
floodrod
Quote
Please expand on this.  This patent basically appears to describe electromagnets powered by alternating currents placed real close together.  Then between them is placed something like pancake pickup coils.  I say pancake because they must be thin to fit in the close gaps.

Here we need to be careful because all the Figuera patents claim, "which is achieved by making the excitatory current intermittent
or alternating in sign". So AC or pulsed/chopped AC or DC, ergo almost anything. Strangely, we never see the induced coils only boxes or spaces where there supposed to be placed. This should tell us it's important and they were probably doing something different than what most assume.

Quote
Am I correct to assume this differs from a standard transformer because of the 2nd electromagnet of opposite sign on each side?  I know from lots of tests that if I clamp two opposite sign electromagnets together, the driving current goes WAY down (depending on frequency).  Can you explain the dynamics of this build to us?

I looked at and tested the partnered or opposing coil setup but to be honest I'm not buying into it. Not to imply anything towards you but too many people I don't trust are trying to push this concept, my intuition say's no and it doesn't fit with the descriptions most FE inventors used. So it's a hard pass on that setup for me and there's too many red flags.

When you read the Figuera patents do you get the feeling something doesn't add up?, I do. Figuera's language sounds similar to McFarland Cook when he described eight distinct "currents" operating in his device. Like Cook he uses the term "current" in different context's which most around the early 1900's did as well. So when any inventor around the 1900's say's "current" it seldom means what most think it does.

Nikola Tesla used similar language but most didn't catch it and made too many false assumptions. For example, Tesla said one hair pin based device is operating at a frequency of 100 kHz but then claims the output has a wavelength around 2cm. A 2cm wavelength works out to a frequency around 15 MHz not 100 kHz. Tesla was referring to the primary spark gap frequency not the secondary circuit. Then Tesla speaks of small "time periods" people confuse with frequency when there not the same. The time period refers to the rise/fall time not the number of cycles per second like the frequency, ie. how frequent a cycle occurs.

So trying to decipher the diagrams and language of any FE inventor becomes a minefield of assumptions. Any wrong move in any direction and it just doesn't work. Which is really cool because we never know what were going to get. One circuit does nothing and then we make a small change and everything changes... that's cool.

AC


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 20, 2023, 12:26:19 AM
I looked at and tested the partnered or opposing coil setup but to be honest I'm not buying into it. Not to imply anything towards you but too many people I don't trust are trying to push this concept, my intuition say's no and it doesn't fit with the descriptions most FE inventors used. So it's a hard pass on that setup for me and there's too many red flags.

Perhaps our communication got mixed.  I see "Opposite Signs" as "Opposite" From "Opposing fields"..  I didn't mean bucking coils.  I meant attracting (1 north, 1 south)..  Either way tho, I get what you are saying.


When you read the Figuera patents do you get the feeling something doesn't add up?, I do.

Yeah..  Something seems missing..

 
So trying to decipher the diagrams and language of any FE inventor becomes a minefield of assumptions. Any wrong move in any direction and it just doesn't work. Which is really cool because we never know what were going to get. One circuit does nothing and then we make a small change and everything changes... that's cool.


I can attest to this statement.  I use H-bridges and a square wave I can produce crazy effects.  I use square waves into an amplifier and I can't get it to do it..  All parameters seem the same, but something obviously is different.

As I said many times, regarding Figuera, my hunch remains the same.  I think the secret lies in the positive biased emptying cycle.  You are able to make the induction coil fully switch polarities without switching input polarities.  So if a growing field's reciprocal magnetic field usually induces towards the negative side, we can cause the same effect and get the reciprocal field to send back to the positive. 

And I also know from my experiments, not everything can be reproduced in smaller scale.  I can make things happen using larger currents that can not be done if scaled down to small currents.  There is a good chance Figuera's secrets can't be revealed in the small desktop replications we do.  It is very possible the gain mechanism can't manifest unless we use hundreds of watts and build large-scale.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 20, 2023, 03:02:48 PM
The rotating brush is just only one embodiment of the principle with the purpose of getting AC. It does look like ordinary flux linking, but free energy is explicitly stated in the patent. But it isn' transformer action, because each pole is controlled individually. 
I'd suggest to take a step back and use single (hand switched) DC pulses and analyze the effects and waveforms under load. Imho it is a transient effect of a magnetic wavefront and not a moving bucking N-N field,  unidirectional N-S is still an option in my book.

"naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted."   
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: madddann on May 21, 2023, 03:18:53 AM
Hello everyone.

First I want to thank you all (especially floodrod that is always experimenting and sharing), for pushing this subject forward.
Second, I would like to suggest to floodrod (or anyone interested) a patent aplication replication that is from the year 2001, so there should be no confusion about what the inventor meant with certain words. The idea in this aplication is clearly written and has a lot in common with the first Figuera - Blasberg solid state patent (30378) from year 1902 mentioned by AC. The whole setup looks even simpler than any Figuera or other similar patent.
This is the patent application by Johnson Bud T. J. CA2357550A1:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/004170045/publication/CA2357550A1?q=pn%3DCA2357550A1

I see that floodrod already has the coils adequate for this build - here:
https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg577066/#msg577066

I plan to get at it myself one day, but my time for this kind of projects is limited.
If anyone of you gets something out of it first, then so be it :)   ...for the common good...

I hope my post is usefull to anyone, good luck with the experiments and thanks for all.

Dann
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 21, 2023, 09:28:26 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk)

Output sucks as expected.  But first glance at what it does..


Hi Floodrod,

Just a quick idea/observation - have a look at your "Magnetic Circuit" - if appears to be open.

What I mean is the Magnetic Path, well, doesn't exist looking at your circuits. Sometimes
(quite often actually) this is overlooked when designing magnetics.

The original Figuera patents (1902) didn't address this, that I can see, however the later
1905, and so on, seemed to provide a bit more insight - the cross design (magnetic circuit
is closed in these ones).  Magnetic "stuff"doesn't know what to do in air - ??? -so it has to be
directed like an Electrical Circuit. [try a clamp or whatever to "complete the magnetic circuit].

A while back I posted links to a couple of books that go through the "Magnetic Circuit"
requirements, and what not - analogous to electronic circuit stuff. Can't find links right now.

Almost there from what I see!  But have a close look at the overall Magnetic requirements,
IMHO. Great work.

Regards,

SL

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 21, 2023, 11:54:57 AM
An idea for Floodrod:   
Take a big squarely wound coil, and two exciter coils, position these 2 vertically, put the square coil on top with a side on each face of an exciter coil, now excite the left with N and the right one with S (and any combination you want to try out).  Or try to excite from the sides like Floyd Sweet did. 

To give you an idea  (repost): 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0) 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU) 

The counter reaction of flux linking is back-mmf and -emf, which satisfies conservation of energy. With a dynamo or alternator motional induction is used, which is completely different from flux linking, and it is back-torque to fulfills the energy balance. 
These inventions create motional induction of perpendicular action VxB with zero flux-linking, and zero movement, the action is perpendicular according to Lorentz law qVxB, the movement is emulated, and the counter reaction of back-torque doesn't enforce the energy balance because it doesn't move.
Don't look for efficiency, engineers are doing that in the last 1% but they will never exceed 99.9%, look for the effect.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 21, 2023, 12:59:56 PM
Thanks Maddmann-  I viewed the patent but can't clearly make out the coil arrangements.  I don't mind trying things, and yes I have many dozens of coil styles to play with. But I would need a clearer diagram of the coil arrangement to duplicate.

SL- Can you show which Figuera image has a completed path?  They all look incomplete to me, even the 1908. I agree tho that we probably didn't receive the correct complete coil arrangement.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: gyvulys666 on May 21, 2023, 02:04:29 PM
It seems output coils are perpendecular to input coils.Looks like that each output coil has inside electromagnet which windings are perpendecular and each output coil surounded by perpendecular electromagnets. And all this 7 input electromagnet switched on/off at the same time
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 21, 2023, 02:37:40 PM
Floodrod,


You have done an amazing amount of work and research.  Your system for getting both phases above zero is great.  However I think you have missed a couple of things that you need to get your output up.


Your coil arrangement needs to be as follows:  Input phase A, output, input phase B, output, input phase A, output , input phase B and so on for as many coils as you want.  But you need an input coil on each end of your assembly.  In other words each output coil needs an input on both sides of it.  And as SL said if you put a clamp or some other way to complete the magnetic circuit that would also help.


And the other thing you need to do is test with your output coils loaded.  As you have correctly posted several times you want the reducing phase to be pushed back by the increasing phase.  Since the phases are separated by the input coil the only way for this to happen is for the output coil to have current flowing through it.  In one of your videos you actually showed the input go down slightly when the output is shorted.  So load the output and then adjust the frequency and any other adjustments and see what you get.


Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on May 21, 2023, 02:38:09 PM
It seems output coils are perpendecular to input coils.Looks like that each output coil has inside electromagnet which windings are perpendecular and each output coil surounded by perpendecular electromagnets. And all this 7 input electromagnet switched on/off at the same time
 
Yeah, exactly. The flux is going through the wire wraps inducing current by the Lorentz force of motion, perpendicularly, it's not going through the inside of the coil parallel to the axis
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 21, 2023, 07:07:59 PM
Thanks Maddmann-  I viewed the patent but can't clearly make out the coil arrangements.  I don't mind trying things, and yes I have many dozens of coil styles to play with. But I would need a clearer diagram of the coil arrangement to duplicate.

SL- Can you show which Figuera image has a completed path?  They all look incomplete to me, even the 1908. I agree tho that we probably didn't receive the correct complete coil arrangement.


It was from #30378 (attached) - the picture attached to the patent (source ?) - is found in Hanon's collection.

Not a big deal - just that when doing magnetic stuff, I've found that the "Magnetic Circuit" - when considered as
part of the overall design - can (and in most cases does) make a real difference.

In the attached pictiure from the patent, the "octagon ring" around the outside "completes the magnetic circuit."
[bottom drawing - side view]


SL


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 21, 2023, 07:36:31 PM
The books I referenced re: "Magnetic Circuits" are:

Practical Transformer Handbook by Irving Gottlieb
(magnetic circuit referenced throught - search)

Introduction To AC Machine Design by Thomas A. Lipo
(magnetic circuit referenced throught - search)

[try pdfdrive]


Also, for a quick look try:

https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-0-7503-2084-9/chapter/bk978-0-7503-2084-9ch1 (https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-0-7503-2084-9/chapter/bk978-0-7503-2084-9ch1)

[table 1.1 - Analogy of an Electric Circuit and a Magnetic Circuit]
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 22, 2023, 01:17:08 AM
SL,

The coil arrangements are probably a big part.  But I am not sold on connecting the path closed yet.  Even the diagram you posted, only the negatives are closed. And Electromagnets "A" are totally separate from Electromagnets "B".  On neither side is there a magnetic path provided for the flux to travel from North to South of any electromagnet.  And on the 1908 patent, (including Buforn's) it appears there is only a center core in the center induced, which extends under 1/2 way into the primary electromagnets. But neither end electromagnet have a full core, nevermind a complete enclosed core.

And trust me, I have tried with a fully closed path, 3 coil transformer, 4 coil transformer, open path, half core, and every other way you can probably imagine.  But the secret recipe remains elusive to me.

Actually I recently posted a pic where I used 3 groups Figura style coils that have 2 outside inducers with 1 induced in the center. The core goes through the middle and extends 1/2 way into each outside electromagnet.  I will attach it again below.

Seems Cifta caught the gist of the device as I see it..  The waves are obviously positive biased.  And N and N face each other.  But when the machine is in action and working, the electromagnets no longer are N and N.  They become N and S to match Figuera's labels...  The growing North actually pushes the Shrinking North past the zero line, thus Making it South..

The gain mechanism is that part exactly.  We get Full South induction power on one side while the electromagnet is hooked up in the direction where it should be North!  So Lorentz reciprocal action occurs as normal, but the primaries input wires are reversed!

As I stated many times, I think the missing ingredient is the electrical connection link between the weakening and growing coils, which the original resistor rig provided.  The weakening electromagnet must allow current to flow to the growing electromagnet, but we should NEVER allow the growing electromagnets current to connect to the shrinking.  So the Lorentz reciprocation that the shrinking magnet absorbs can flow to the growing electromagnet.

What I am saying is that the original resistor rig may be necessary.  Unless we find a way to switch diodes on both sides every 1/2 wave. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: SolarLab on May 22, 2023, 05:53:08 AM
Hi Floodrod,

For clarification, when refering to "Magnetic Circuit" it might be more descriptive to
refer to this as "the Flux Path."

Anyway, if you have a chance, take a look at Lipo's book, in particular starting at
1.26 thru 1.30 to get a feel for the needed flux path, including a return flux path.

This all considers how the "Iron" and "Air Gaps" integrate within a "Flux Path," including
the "Flux Return Path" to complete the "Magnetic Circuit."  Hard to explain in a brief
paragraph or two - that's why I referenced the books. [See 1.28 in Lipo.]

Magnetic Fields don't do well traveling through any length of air and will likely not do well
trying to find a magnetic circuit flux path in a split longitudinal setup (end to end in a
straight line), the "air gap" is too long and the flux isn't directed in any way.

Whatever... I could be totally wrong, so take it FWIW. But in your picture I only see "3 coils"
sitting in free space, along side several more "3 coil" sets, - if you were a flux looking for
some direction, or path, including a return path, where would you go?

Regards,

SL
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 22, 2023, 10:27:12 AM
https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg578180/#msg578180

Hello!

You stepped on the same rake as the previous researcher (https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipP4nEyQHK1jTTNgpmOkkh5Oche8_8l7dvCAsBxWJQnPEx5QtSjdBVqdaFxbmOLz1w?key=YnZuaGFWekI2TlIyaURpSUpmZ25GTk1EWFQ4VHJ3), in terms of the magnetic circuit of the Figuera generator.



My little analysis (https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2022/12/1902.html) of Figuera's patents and what and where intersects with systems, including missing patents. If the buyer buys a patent and rights, then obviously he wants to be the sole owner.



In the drawing patent No. 30378 Figuera (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf), there are two planes transverse and longitudinal.
 

Sincerely, I wish you success.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 22, 2023, 12:26:29 PM
For clarification, I am appreciative of your sharing's. That image was in attempts to replicate the attached arrangement (in the patent) as it appears to me.

Attached are 2 other completely closed ones I have tried. As I said, I tried full cores, half cores, partial cores, no cores, etc.

I also plan to build one where the center induced coil is actually wrapped around the 2 connected halves of the electromagnets.

As was pointed out before by another member, there is a good chance Figuera's design does not capitalize on "Mutual Inductance" like the transformers of today.  Perhaps it is non-advantageous to allow the flux to pass through both poles of both electromagnets.

But in all honesty, I am not sure of any of it.  I am stumbling around in the dark like all who attempted before me.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 22, 2023, 01:55:07 PM
floodrod,

See how the generator works. You have assembled a transformer, but you need a generator. What you have done is a simplification.

For example, you draw a transformer with windings separated (FIGURE (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWVYyuo182mh6QRB-Mx21lBobxiFVAenKDgXXmARfsCm0WThRDfh-GAyDdaUxaEudIolSMa4_wYh7AvaimoBDpETaSED9wgnnZ3LWeDodv7kJsF4ogCVOO_zWazptpo8GZP99oFdQRZDuLbHPGL4KX2d7nOEy-sNUJSABT7aZjJ5hFdWxzrSJ8eKXI/s889/2023-05-01_095113.jpg)) in the opposite direction. In your case and in this design, the magnetic flux will be equal to the excitation magnetic flux. This is a transformer, the secondary circuit can no longer be removed. A generator is when the magnetic flux of the primary excitation is starting, and the main one is from the output phase. That is, in the generator, the main flux of the magnetic field forms a phase, and the excitation and phase fluxes are added. I also struggled with this, which is why current limitation in the primary excitation circuit is required. The complexity of this particular design is to catch the current from the phase and keep it in the presence of an appropriate load. On demand with load changes, this is not possible. Breakdowns happen even in synchronous mechanical generators. In low power generators with self-excitation, permanent magnets are built into the rotor housing.
For now, I have adopted a different concept for the impulse flyback convector. For a solid state generator, it's more efficient to build a machine like Holcomb or Sun.


Try to connect a large load to the phase. through a transformer.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Ufopolitics on May 22, 2023, 03:03:10 PM
Hello to All,

I have been reading all your progress on this thread plus in all your individual ones (I am basically referring to Cadman and Floodrod, real builders here)
As some of you know I have also played with Figuera Patent(s) in the past...I did see some huge anomalies, however, did not reach Overunity.
However, the main reason I decided to add this post, relates to the way I see Floodrod is making the coils CORES (All).

And this is just my opinion guys:
By using a typical, not "modified" Transformer Core like shown in the pictures, or the Two E-Frame facing each others...
Aren't you shunting each coils magnetic field?
According to my knowledge about steel cores and magnetic fields, you would be able to "project" a longer and stronger field if there is only a CENTER Core within coil(s). However, if you have another steel frame (on both sides like Dual E-Frames structures do) will definitively "short out" field POLES...then this field will have its own return (from N to S) within its own Steel Core...then the projection to seconday and even to primary on the other side at 180 degrees would be very weak.

Note on the Figuera Patent image, shown on Floodrod's previous post, where it shows the array of N-S with the "Y" member (output) sandwhiched between...please note a "rectangle shaped" component which travels between all three parts exactly in their center [[N]-[y]-[S]]
Wouldn't this rectangle indicates to have a single core between all three coils parts?

On the other hand, I wanted to say that I highly agree with your observations related to a shrinking North will become a South, while an expanding North will keep being a North...that is very, extremely correct!!
When we weaken an electromagnet, by reducing its input current, (not fully collapsing it!!) the magnetic spin takes the opposite direction, exactly the same way when you pull a permanent magnet away...

Just like Minkowsky wrote on his Spacetime book about the "corkscrew effect" of the magnetic field.

@Cadman: You are making a heck of a build my friend!!...plus I love the way you are using the own exciters (primaries) as the reducers of the field, by setting multiple flat coils which turn on and off at a sequential order...instead of using resistors!!
This way no energy will be wasted on resistors heat, and the reduction will take place within the inner exciting system.
Excellent idea there friend!!

Regards to all

Ufopolitics
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 22, 2023, 04:05:22 PM
Note on the Figuera Patent image, shown on Floodrod's previous post, where it shows the array of N-S with the "Y" member (output) sandwhiched between...please note a "rectangle shaped" component which travels between all three parts exactly in their center [[N]-[y]-[S]]
Wouldn't this rectangle indicates to have a single core between all three coils parts?

Good time!

Description from FIEGUER Patent No. 30378 (1902) (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf)
Quote
The undersigned inventors compose their generator as follows: Several electromagnets are placed one in front of the other, the poles of opposite names being separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they quickly magnetize and demagnetize and do not retain residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes one by one, or several, or many. The excitatory current, intermittent or alternating, drives all the electromagnets, which are connected either in series or in parallel, or as necessary, and currents will arise in the inductive circuit, which together constitute the total current of the generator. This allows the mechanical force to be suppressed as there is nothing to be moved.

Note
Invention of an electrical generator without the application of mechanical force, since nothing moves, which produces the same effects of operating dynamo-electric machines thanks to several stationary electromagnets excited by intermittent or alternating current, which creates induction in a stationary inductive circuit placed within the magnetic fields of the exciting electromagnets.

It is technically impossible to fulfill such a condition. I tried to do this many times. If a groove is used, then there will be no magnetic lines of force in the groove that will cross the inductor wire. In the cavity of the groove, the magnetic induction will be several times less, which will not allow the formation of conditions for the fulfillment of the formula: E=Bmlv
I trust the drawing more than the actual description, which could have been changed. In reality, only the drawing is authentic.

Note from the 1908 patent (after Figer's death). I am convinced that there is no essence of a magnetic circuit in it, and "y" between pairs of north-south poles is nothing more than a metaphor.

PS. Do not take for trolling, this is a sober look. The gap is needed to organize the linearity of the change in the magnetic flux, plus the ease of remagnetization (in a closed magnetic circuit, this is very costly to do, plus the linearity of the magnetic flux cannot be achieved). Resistive controller for limiting the current in the excitation circuit. The main magnetic flux must be from the current strength of the phase with the load. Everything is like in the operation of a synchronous mechanical generator.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 22, 2023, 04:08:24 PM
Excellent reply UFO. Thank you..  I am pleased that others are discussing this, especially how the shrinking side crosses the zero line from the growing side.

Now to see the next step.  Once the shrinking side passes the zero line, the current is reversed. It starts flowing from negative to positive while inducing.

Problem is I am using bridge rectifiers which do not allow current to flow from negative to positive. So the only current I could get to pass the zero line is the reverse diode leakage that can get through.

I believe the original resistor rig worked to direct the current that passed the zero line from the shrinking electromagnet back to the growing electromagnet.

The discussions about the coil cores are interesting, but I think premature because we do not have the entire system mapped out yet to even test it.

The coils could be correct and perfect, but we would never know because we do not have a path for the current that passes the zero line to return anywhere.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on May 22, 2023, 04:55:39 PM
...
It is technically impossible to fulfill such a condition. I tried to do this many times. If a groove is used, then there will be no magnetic lines of force in the groove that will cross the inductor wire. In the cavity of the groove, the magnetic induction will be several times less, which will not allow the formation of conditions for the fulfillment of the formula: E=Bmlv
...
Hello Mr. Rakarskiy,
Yet all these (millions) of motors and generators work extremely well using wires in grooves. Perhaps you need to adjust your understanding of the process. This may be helpful. In the video, he explains how energy is "carried" not in the wire, but rather in field around the wire. The steel of the core surrounding the groove facilitate these fields. Force results from field interaction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI_X2cMHNe0

A side note. Often claimed in these field motion generator schemes is that there is no force (or torque). This is untrue. There is force resulting per Lorentz. However there is the machine structure providing a counter force not allowing any motion. Since no motion, no displacement, there is no energy associated with said force. But the force is still present.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 22, 2023, 05:46:24 PM
Hello Mr. Rakarskiy,
Yet all these (millions) of motors and generators work extremely well using wires in grooves. Perhaps you need to adjust your understanding of the process. This may be helpful. In the video, he explains how energy is "carried" not in the wire, but rather in field around the wire. The steel of the core surrounding the groove facilitate these fields. Force results from field interaction.

Hello!

I'm just not denying that it works, the question is how it works and the whole process for half a degree of a whole period. . I gave a slide of the EMF generator in the thread about Holcomb.
The figure in the patent also lacks elements. I submit that the patents have been redacted. He outlined his version in his book in some detail.
Can you tell how a transformer works? but as a generator, what is their parity and what is the difference.
I have too many rakes on the official version of the processes.
I will again disappear for a while, otherwise I had a difficult period, unfinished business accumulated, including on the issue of interest.

Sincerely.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on May 23, 2023, 03:41:47 PM
The missing patent page?

This is a page from the Buforn patent 57955.
Download the attached .png and zoom in and out on the blank area just above the signatures and look around. Do you see it?
It looks like an electrical diagram and it could possibly be ink transferred from a page pressing against this drawing page, like would happen with the pages stored in a file folder for a long time. It's all over the drawing.

 :o
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 24, 2023, 01:14:25 PM
A fine builder I speak to from Spain who does not post anywhere shared some fascinating build videos with me.

Although we are going through translators, he thinks the Figuera Coils are built similar to Thane Hanes bi-torroid.  Which explains Buforn's drawings and anomalies..

You can see for some reason he draws the core on top of the coils. That "Know-it-all" user thought it was clamps holding the coils down, I thought it was partial cores, but what this builder from span says makes sense.. 

The analysis he puts forth says that Buforn's drawing is the Top-View..  If viewed from the side, it would look like Thane Heinz transformer with the 3 coils inside a closed core. (possible with air gaps)   He shows a video to me of his setup lowering input current when shorting the pickup coil..

Something to consider..  And it makes sense with Buforn's drawing.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Ufopolitics on May 24, 2023, 01:58:20 PM
[...]
Note on the Figuera Patent image, shown on Floodrod's previous post, where it shows the array of N-S with the "Y" member (output) sandwhiched between...please note a "rectangle shaped" component which travels between all three parts exactly in their center [[N]-[y]-[S]]
Wouldn't this rectangle indicates to have a single core between all three coils parts?

Ufopolitics

Hello Floodrod,
Yes, and that was exactly what I have pointed out on my previous post yesterday, quoted above.
Now, the question is...Why does that rectangle does not runs all the way from end to end to both primaries?
IMHO, Figuera wanted to concentrate the field mostly on the "y" output coil(s), not all the way back of primaries, where the field will travel too far away from secondary part "y".
Also, IMO, I do not think it had air gaps between primaries and y part, just one solid piece of laminated steel right inside the coils.
Now, I know that according to CAD drawing conventions, if this rectangle was supposed to be inside coils it should have been done with dotted lines.
So, maybe it was done intentionally to bring it up to attention, or it was just an error from whoever did the drawings...it happens.
Not disregarding the possibility to be an E- Frame like a typical transformer have...but then again the question: why not draw it all the way to the end of each primary if it was so?

Regards

Ufopolitics
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 24, 2023, 03:08:27 PM
Once again, I want to draw attention to Figuere's patent. I don’t know where the autistic text comes from here, there is only a drawing for a patent. The second is to do what is described in the patent, which is not shown in the figure. Highlighted in the quote with "reddish ink", in reality there is a drawing (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXhZVhFgbecFdgJL41_62R9Jfue3_O7EFzBFCqZMS_2l7pGaU4wWyQHIpoRPRNORdDYnqpqw-ijlreeFOFRoHWPqCn8O3SvGtZ28FOLAfn4SQzTvbYfVB8fYnjxOV3VJu3Yf8NTD2UYowtKqE1ZK3fzFCrkOWIon307q2cibNzirF7cFE2c6ztpLka/s843/2020-07-09_135157.jpg) in detail, this selection is missing.

Patent No. 30378 September 5, 1902   (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf)

Quote:

The undersigned inventors compose their generator as follows: Several electromagnets are placed one in front of the other, the poles of opposite names being separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they quickly magnetize and demagnetize and do not retain residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes one by one, or several, or many. The excitatory current, intermittent or alternating, drives all the electromagnets, which are connected either in series or in parallel, or as necessary, and currents will arise in the inductive circuit, which together constitute the total current of the generator. This allows the mechanical force to be suppressed as there is nothing to be moved.

Based on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro Blasberg, on behalf of and on behalf of the Figuera-Blasberg Society, respectfully request the grant of a definitive invention patent for this generator, the form and arrangement of which is shown in the appendix. drawings, warning that only eight electromagnets or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets each are sketched on them, and for clarity, and the inductive circuit is marked with a thick line reddish ink , since this is a general device device, but in the sense that it is possible put more or less electromagnets in a different form or grouping.


Repeatedly studying the devices of dynamos and modern synchronous generators. I concluded that the drawing was corrected, or there should also be a drawing with an electrical circuit for excitation and an output phase, which is missing.
Now the question is: if the buyer buys the rights and a working prototype for 60 million pessetes (320 kg in gold at the time of sale), will he leak information to devalue his purchase.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: sm0ky2 on May 24, 2023, 04:19:04 PM
It is important to understand, that in 1902 electronic were held by specific standards:
The “inductive circuit”, being standard, meant that its’ inductance is chosen based on
the resistance and capacitance of the other part of the circuit. (electromagnets etc)


This should be selected to satisfy the RLC equations.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 24, 2023, 05:24:46 PM
An inductor is a part of an electrical machine responsible for creating a working magnetic flux in it. Both the rotor and the stator can act as an inductor.
Home Power plants The principle of operation of alternators.
power plants
The principle of operation of alternators.
Principles of operation of the generator.
Content show
Alternators, often referred to as alternators, are electromechanical devices designed to convert mechanical energy into electrical energy. The principle of operation of many of them is based on the rotation of the magnetic field. Modern generators have a fairly simple design and are capable of producing high voltage electricity.

Electromechanical generators of a rotating type began to be in great demand in modern energy.

The principle of their operation is based on the occurrence of an electromotive force in a conductor, which is under the influence of an alternating magnetic field. All generators consist of two main parts: an inductor in which a magnetic field is created, and an armature that creates an electromotive force. The stationary element of the generator is called the stator, and the rotating element is called the rotor.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 24, 2023, 05:59:33 PM
Once again, I want to draw attention to Figuere's patent. I don’t know where the autistic text comes from here, there is only a drawing for a patent. The second is to do what is described in the patent, which is not shown in the figure. Highlighted in the quote with "reddish ink", in reality there is a drawing (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXhZVhFgbecFdgJL41_62R9Jfue3_O7EFzBFCqZMS_2l7pGaU4wWyQHIpoRPRNORdDYnqpqw-ijlreeFOFRoHWPqCn8O3SvGtZ28FOLAfn4SQzTvbYfVB8fYnjxOV3VJu3Yf8NTD2UYowtKqE1ZK3fzFCrkOWIon307q2cibNzirF7cFE2c6ztpLka/s843/2020-07-09_135157.jpg) in detail, this selection is missing.

Patent No. 30378 September 5, 1902   (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf)

Quote:

The undersigned inventors compose their generator as follows: Several electromagnets are placed one in front of the other, the poles of opposite names being separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they quickly magnetize and demagnetize and do not retain residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes one by one, or several, or many. The excitatory current, intermittent or alternating, drives all the electromagnets, which are connected either in series or in parallel, or as necessary, and currents will arise in the inductive circuit, which together constitute the total current of the generator. This allows the mechanical force to be suppressed as there is nothing to be moved.

Based on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro Blasberg, on behalf of and on behalf of the Figuera-Blasberg Society, respectfully request the grant of a definitive invention patent for this generator, the form and arrangement of which is shown in the appendix. drawings, warning that only eight electromagnets or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets each are sketched on them, and for clarity, and the inductive circuit is marked with a thick line reddish ink , since this is a general device device, but in the sense that it is possible put more or less electromagnets in a different form or grouping.


Repeatedly studying the devices of dynamos and modern synchronous generators. I concluded that the drawing was corrected, or there should also be a drawing with an electrical circuit for excitation and an output phase, which is missing.
Now the question is: if the buyer buys the rights and a working prototype for 60 million pessetes (320 kg in gold at the time of sale), will he leak information to devalue his purchase.

I I'm not working on the 1902 patent. I am referencing the 1908 and Patents thereafter by his partner after his death.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 24, 2023, 08:54:24 PM
floodrod,I'm trying to convey the whole essence of the available materials on Figuera. I came to Figuere's patent only after working out my concept, and my "stepping on a rake". In addition to Figuer, there is more than one engineering solution of the full principle.
After many options, I simply decomposed everything into components, left only the essence and received abrupt, unrelated materials. All we have is what we have decided to provide. In any case, the description of the operation of an electromagnetic machine is very correct.

Buron did not provide a generator, but a system of resistive excitation current controller. Perhaps the nested combination of the magnetic circuit is deliberately incorrect. Anyway, I came to this conclusion. Since for both EMF formulas it is absurd.

My advice, take it apart "by the bones" how a synchronous electromechanical generator works with a slotted one or with coils on rods with half-ends. As soon as you know this question, everything else will open.

Do not take it for trolling, but this advice will not hurt further.

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: worldcup on May 25, 2023, 09:25:34 AM
1910 AntiGravity News » A Letter From Nicola Tesla
Good Read - http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm

generador Fiquera approach 1

from woopyjump - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlOGEnKpO-w
Is this our forum members @woopy
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 25, 2023, 03:10:32 PM
Hello Floodrod,
why not draw it all the way to the end of each primary if it was so?

Ufopolitics

Maybe the original patents had several angles but only the top angle made it through the time portal.

Attached is what Buforn's series array might have looked like from the side.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on May 25, 2023, 03:37:21 PM
Maybe the original patents had several angles but only the top angle made it through the time portal.

Attached is what Buforn's series array might have looked like from the side.

Interesting angle, but then the N and S designations don't correspond correctly, do they?
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 25, 2023, 03:46:30 PM
Interesting angle, but then the N and S designations don't correspond correctly, do they?
bi

They certainly don't correspond with traditional theory and design of today.  But if the device really worked and provided OU, then the device itself lies outside the scope of "Traditional Theory and Design".

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on May 25, 2023, 04:21:50 PM
Another patent!

https://patents.google.com/patent/CA2357550A1/en
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/f1/73/db/bddc31a19a8100/CA2357550A1.pdf

I switched to an impulse system, the principle of reverse. Unfortunately, there is no Over Unity yet. But the reverse impulse already has "weight".
The next stage is the parametric system of excitation and retraction, and then the MEG.
Circuit voltage 12V. From source / to source 12V. The current was taken on a 0.1 ohm resistor in the circuit to the (-) source.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on May 25, 2023, 08:29:08 PM
Maybe the original patents had several angles but only the top angle made it through the time portal.

Attached is what Buforn's series array might have looked like from the side.
Floodrod, If you close the flux path of the inducers with the current varying from high to low (opposite) on each side then you'll end up with a relatively constant flux and get no induction as there will be little to no change.
This is an image of a pdf output from a rhino drawing I posted back in April, https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg576245/#msg576245, this is just my take on it but I can't see how it would work any other way.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: citfta on May 25, 2023, 09:04:13 PM
I believe this drawing posted by Floodrod is probably the closest to the actual device of any configurations I have seen.  I have marked the flux paths though the output coils to make it easier to understand.  When A phase is fully on and B phase fully off then the flux would follow the red path.  When the opposite B phase is fully on and A phase fully off then the flux would follow the blue path.  The big advantage to this configuration is that there is a completed flux path for both phases and both phases get equal power applied to the output coil.


Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: bistander on May 25, 2023, 09:40:31 PM
I believe this drawing posted by Floodrod is probably the closest to the actual device of any configurations I have seen.  I have marked the flux paths though the output coils to make it easier to understand.  When A phase is fully on and B phase fully off then the flux would follow the red path.  When the opposite B phase is fully on and A phase fully off then the flux would follow the blue path.  The big advantage to this configuration is that there is a completed flux path for both phases and both phases get equal power applied to the output coil.


Respectfully,
Carroll

Hi citfta,
Sounds good when y coils have no load, but doesn't hold true if load currents cause opposing mmf in y coils.
Hopefully bench tests can shed some light.
bi
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 25, 2023, 10:22:41 PM
I believe this drawing posted by Floodrod is probably the closest to the actual device of any configurations I have seen.  I have marked the flux paths though the output coils to make it easier to understand.  When A phase is fully on and B phase fully off then the flux would follow the red path.  When the opposite B phase is fully on and A phase fully off then the flux would follow the blue path.  The big advantage to this configuration is that there is a completed flux path for both phases and both phases get equal power applied to the output coil.


Respectfully,
Carroll

Thanks...

We need to also ask why Clement and Buforn only label one side of each coil (N)  when coils have 2 poles.   Perhaps because it was a top view and only 1 pole was showing in the schematic.  This may also answer the weird core questions, why the cores go on top of the electromagnets and not all the way through.

If you need help visualizing it in 3d, I made a 3d mock-up and flip it around in this video comparing it to the patent drawing  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPOGBEpwIN0
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 25, 2023, 10:32:36 PM
Hi citfta,
Sounds good when y coils have no load, but doesn't hold true if load currents cause opposing mmf in y coils.
Hopefully bench tests can shed some light.
bi

It might be interesting..  Regarding Cifta's drawing-  Say the first coil is growing North.  The induction coil will go North as the first one grows North.  That reciprocal magnetism would probably prefer going through the reducing coil rather than the more difficult path of the growing one.  And North going into South reciprocates current in the same direction as the input.

It's a head-scratcher for sure.  But I am building it to find out
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on May 27, 2023, 04:44:05 PM
....
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on May 29, 2023, 04:54:57 PM
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.
 
I would say a varying DC because Induction only comes from flux change and the PMs enhance that flux output.
And he prevents Lenz counter to motion forces by not moving anything. So it seems the losses would only be resistance to flux change and the enhancement comes from the PM flux. The auto radiator and blower motors all have 2 ceramic half magnets that supply some of the flux and so does the motor in my elec bicycle. lots of noeos in there.

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on June 14, 2023, 01:20:02 PM
On every single patent, it shows the 2nd series electromagnet array entering the first coil on the opposite side of the first electromagnet.  But only on 1 side..  The other side enters and exits each electromagnet on the same side.

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

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

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

Is there a simple explanation I am missing?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 14, 2023, 04:22:11 PM
No generator or transformer including Figuera produces pulsating DC. Only way to produce DC would be to increase flux continuously to infinity (or decrease it from infinitely large flux toward 0). That is of course impossible.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on June 14, 2023, 06:28:51 PM
On every single patent, it shows the 2nd series electromagnet array entering the first coil on the opposite side of the first electromagnet.  But only on 1 side..  The other side enters and exits each electromagnet on the same side.

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

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

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

Is there a simple explanation I am missing?
use a relay between voltage generator and coil to pass short impulses.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 14, 2023, 07:32:07 PM
On every single patent, it shows the 2nd series electromagnet array entering the first coil on the opposite side of the first electromagnet.  But only on 1 side..  The other side enters and exits each electromagnet on the same side.

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

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

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

Is there a simple explanation I am missing?
pulsed dc output
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 14, 2023, 07:43:15 PM
As i said no generator or transformer including Figuera produces pulsating DC. Only way to produce DC would be to increase flux continuously to infinity (or decrease it from infinitely large flux toward 0). That is of course impossible.

We are obviously not talking diodes or some other method of rectifying the output. Induction itself is always AC. Unless we get into scalar waves and higher energy forms, Schwartz for example says his ERR box is producing DC with small AC component), but that is totally different pair of shoes.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 14, 2023, 07:50:39 PM
As i said no generator or transformer including Figuera produces pulsating DC. Only way to produce DC would be to increase flux continuously to infinity (or decrease it from infinitely large flux toward 0). That is of course impossible.

We are obviously not talking diodes or some other method of rectifying the output. Induction itself is always AC. Unless we get into scalar waves and higher energy forms, Schwartz for example says his ERR box is producing DC with small AC component), but that is totally different pair of shoes.
be that as it may, the above produces a good pulsed dc output.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 14, 2023, 08:19:42 PM
be that as it may, the above produces a good pulsed dc output.

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

ALL induction configurations produce AC.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Feeding transformer a pulsed DC results in AC, etc.

You may get almost pure pulsed DC by shoving magnet into the coil very fast and then pulling it back very slowly so opposite polarity voltage would be very small. But that is still AC.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 14, 2023, 09:00:03 PM
It does not. It is unclear what exactly have you imagined in the diagram, it seems flawed polarity wise, i have seen many similar Figuera suggestions over the years. But it does not really matter.

ALL induction configurations produce AC.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Feeding transformer a pulsed DC results in AC, etc.

You may get almost pure pulsed DC by shoving magnet into the coil very fast and then pulling it back very slowly so opposite polarity voltage would be very small. But that is still AC.
I understand what your saying in general and you are correct, however,  the diagram shows a pulsed dc input on each side of the induced coil.   This results in a single polarity output - no reversal - simply a rise and fall of flux through the coil. 

Another example of this would be a long solenoid coil with lots of wire, with one pole of a magnet you start at one end of the coil and move the magnet toward the other end, you'll see a continuous current of one polarity until you reach the end.   Simply repeat this sequence over and  over to produce a pulsed output of a certain polarity.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 14, 2023, 09:17:34 PM
I understand what you are trying to say but there is no induction in such case.

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

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

There is no induction in such case.

There is a video demonstration of this on youtube. I may link it. Guy is surprized how closed coil provides no more resistance to fall of magnet than an open. Well, for given reason.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 14, 2023, 09:26:56 PM
I understand what you are trying to say but there is no induction in such case.

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

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

There is no induction in such case.

There is a video demonstration of this on youtube. I may link it. Guy is surprized how closed coil provides no more resistance to fall of magnet than an open. Well, for given reason.
This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.
https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 14, 2023, 10:35:46 PM
This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.
https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkrwy1KjcBQ
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 15, 2023, 04:43:25 AM
I understand you envision it like that, it has been envisioned in similar manner for many years here.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'm not sure what you were referring to in the energetic forum link, the google search only brings up and error.   Good conversation !! We can learn a lot comparing notes...
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on June 15, 2023, 12:45:44 PM
This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.
https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html (https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html)
Bingo! You have no idea what you just have done, you shared the most basic proof of concept for free energy. 
That's a Flux-capacitor heh. 
thanks for sharing. 
edit 
do you have a schematic? maybe I had something else in mind.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 15, 2023, 01:58:41 PM
Sounds like you had some awesome projects regardless the outcome.   Would have liked to be there looking over your shoulder... sounds fun!  I've also worked with a double north opposing in a similar manor.  It seems to me that a closed toroid wouldn't function as a generator like that but an open magnetic circuit would.   A closed circuit would need at least 2 poles and commutator to extract the dc - similar to how Gramme built his originally in the 1800's.   They used a toroid and NN SS configuration to move the flux through the rotor and commutator to maintain a dc output.   Brush build quite a few similar before he moved on to other designs again in the 1800's.  ( US189997)

Yea, fun, not so fun in the end when it did not work but it's like a said a good learning experience. As for "closed toroid wouldn't function as a generator like that but an open magnetic circuit would" toroid would and does function as a generator, poles are exactly what you want to avoid, there is always lenz at the poles. When dc is induced in the toroid which obviously has no poles, no need for brushes, for toroid is stationary, and in my generator all poles were N, so no need for rectification. Well, technically there are S and i realized that back then and the issue is not rectification but reduction of voltage, fact is you can't have all N as between the magnets south poles are obviously formed where flux returns, they are somewhat weaker obviously for returning flux spreads out, but they are still strong and all that counterflux is ceounteracting the induction in such configurations. You got N and S flux cutting the turns of the same coil in the same direction at the same time, they cancel out, and this weakens the induction, probably the reason it generated so little voltage. If this is not perfectly clear i'll elaborate, if you got one big toroid, lets say it's aircore as mine was for sake of reducing all possible drag, and you got 12 N magnets facing inward spaced equally around the toroid, it should be clear to everyone there are also 12 S poles in between all those magnets, you can test it by placing magnets in those mid points, they will stick just as if there is a south pole magnet there - for there is. This returning flux is the biggest issue with this idea, it simply kills the induction. That is what happens when you got one continuous toroid - my first design. In second design for this very reason i made 12 250 turn coils and spaced them apart equally, still forming a "toroid" altho not continuous one, idea was the same that induced flux will join (altho it would obviously bulge somewhat in the gaps) and idea was that induced flux being at 90° to flux of the magnets there should be no lenz. But induced voltage was again very low, never tested it at high speed but anyway, and those second rectangular magnets were much weaker. In any case i don't think lenz is reduced in this latter design to any significant degree. First design has much bigger chance for lenz reduction but, as i said, suffers the issue of returning flux reducing the induction.

Quote
Regarding the magnet down the coil, the dynamics are different using a magnet with both poles or sliding down a solenoid with a single pole.

Obviously so, that is why i wrote "As for your video, you are sliding face of the magnet across one side of the coil, so that is a very different story".

Quote
The latter would be more like a generator where the coil wires are cutting through the magnetic flux field as the magnet moves along the coil.   The voltage would be dictated by the amount of turns within the area of the magnetic field and current by the resistance of the entire coil.   The part within the flux field would be generating an output where the balance of the coil would basically be distribution.

You could say that latter would be in a sense more like a generator cause there is no generator in which like in the first case magnet falls through the coil, but they are really both like a generator, in both you got both flux cutting and flux linking, just the first one as you suggested only generates at the poles and is not lenzless. BTW i was considering variations of side induction designs in various configurations, lubed tube with toroid coil outside it and two opposing magnets inside facing outward/sideways sliding through it, obviously the same idea from my "Another failed project" just magnets are placed inside except outside. Never tried that one cause it is harder to make, magnets inside might be made to spin by compressed air or with another set of magnets on the outside.

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

Good, as i wrote above, DC is to be expected from such design, i expected DC from my noted designs too.

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

Link works normally, you can see in the thread they proposed using toroid coil might be lenzless and one of them tried it and there was normal drag, but he used an iron core. So question remains if there is lenz reduction in such design. Good conversation indeed, it's always useful to compare notes.

As for Alan's post, let's not forget i shared this exact same principle 3 years ago in linked thread "Another failed project", induction on the side and there is nothing new about that, guys at energeticforum spoke about it in 2010., JNaudin shared it almost 30 years ago and it was not his idea, he was as usual replicating, and others surely before. No one can be credited for free energy cause no matter how far back one goes there is always someone who did it before.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 15, 2023, 04:39:32 PM
nix85 your definitely  right about there being nothing new, at this point it's more about rediscovery than actually discovering something new - although the opportunity still exists in many forms.   

I've spent an enormous amount of time researching the beginning of all this, it seems discovery boomed from late 1700's to late 1800's then by the early 1900's all that was learned was scrubbed and hidden.   Those are the secrets we are trying to re-discover.   One patent that vaguely spills the beans is from gramme 1882 ( US 269281 ) (beginning at line 37 pg2) which pertains to a "problem" being solved in this patent as is explained in the text.   Stating " the reaction of the current upon itself is more energetic than the original which produced it".    This "problem" is, I believe, a small peek into re-discovery.  Reproduceable by sending 2 signals down a line.   As they cross each other on the line they become additive... a combination of both energies at the same moment - a rogue wave as it were.   They all new about it back then ( tesla, cook, stubblefield, figuera, hendershot, etc ).   

I'll leave it there as this subject can divert you down many many rabbit holes which may not be on topic of this thread. 

Alan, your right about the flux capacitor in a sense... I believe cook had the closest version of such a device if there was one.   I read once that all that is needed is 2 wires of different sizes to reproduce this phenomenon - I believe it was hendershot that made the statement, don't ask me to find it again... hidden in the massive amount of research files only to be remembered as significant. 

Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things. 

Ok, busy day ahead - I'll try to get back later ....  happy researching !!! 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on June 15, 2023, 05:16:24 PM
why remove lenz forces ? why not just balance them to zero ?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 15, 2023, 05:29:01 PM
why remove lenz forces ? why not just balance them to zero ?
That would be wonderful Forest... any ideas on how to accomplish it?
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: nix85 on June 15, 2023, 08:42:38 PM
znel Yes, as i said nothing new about any of this.

I've spent an enormous amount of time researching the beginning of all this too and correlating it with occult principles. I have opened the patent you mention and full paragraph reads

https://patents.google.com/patent/US269281A/en

"In the generator materials which retain but a feeble magnetism such as wrought-iron, soft steel, malleable iron, cobalt, and the like-are used for the cores of the field-magnets, for the pole pieces, and even in certain cases for the bed and cross frames, while in the motor the same parts are made of materials having large residual magnetism, such as cast-iron, hard steel,tempered steel, and the like. \Vhen an electric motor, for any cause, is left free to revolve without work, the generator continuing to operate, the velocity tends to accelerate, and unless this tendency to acceleration is checked the velocity is liable to become dangerous; but almost immediately the reaction of the motor makes itself felt at the generator and the current becomes very feeble. This current, feeble though it be, is apt to impart an exaggerated velocity, unless, as above indicated, the residual magnetism of the generator is small and of the motor sufticiently large. Under these circumstances the speed slackens and the motor assumes a regular velocity of rotation, which is sometimes inferior to what it had originally. The action takes places automatically without it being necessary to touch the generator or the motor, and the energy imparted to the generator from the initial source of power is in proportion to the new effect produced. The phenomenon is the more remarkable in that the motor, having more residual magnetism, has a greater effect than the generator; or, in other words, if the expression may be used, the reaction of the current upon itself is more energetic than the original which produced it."

So, he is basically speaking about the self-braking effect of a DC motor (backEMF). And how if remnant flux is large "the reaction of the current upon itself is more energetic than the original which produced it.".

God knows what exactly he means by "reaction of the current upon itself" and how exactly that relates to remnant flux. By itself, remnant flux is no overunity.

The wave addition you mention was clearly elaborated by Janos Vajda already spoken about here. Fact is formula for energy of the wave is amplitude squared. This means joining two same waves doubles the energy. Vajda has reported about 140% efficiency by superposition of radiowaves. And principle of wave addition in resonance is widespread in overunity and i have shared already examples that large resonant reactive power can be harnessed for overunity, so no need to send two signals down a wire, resonance is enough.

As for your claim that tesla, cook, stubblefield, figuera, hendershot, etc "all new about it", one needs to be careful when making such general claims. While they all knew the principles of resonance, wave addition and overunity, their methods were widely different.

And don't worry about this subject diverting me down rabbit holes, i have already been down all the rabbit holes on this and all other key subjects to infinity and back. At danger of diverting you down many many rabbit holes.... https://vril12.wordpress.com/

Daniel McFarland Cook's Electromagnetic Battery.
https://leedskalnin.com/CookElectroMagneticBattery.html
https://www.overunity.com/2630/the-brnbrade-coiloverunity/dlattach/attach/10318/
In his paper Cook says he was experimenting with magnetism for 35 years before he stumbled upon overunity and antigravity. His antigravity "chicken-coop" below :) He allegedly invented the incandescent lightbulb too.

As for removing lenz, not remove, but bypass, and of this i know that it can be done, Heins has done it on small scale, others on larger.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: phoneboy on June 15, 2023, 08:54:57 PM
@ znel & alan
Alan, your right about the flux capacitor in a sense... I believe cook had the closest version of such a device if there was one.   I read once that all that is needed is 2 wires of different sizes to reproduce this phenomenon - I believe it was hendershot that made the statement, don't ask me to find it again... hidden in the massive amount of research files only to be remembered as significant. 

Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things. 

It's kind of funny, but you're actually talking about what you would use to do just that, or at least mitigate them somewhat. But that's off topic for Figuera's device (entropy).
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on June 16, 2023, 12:07:29 AM
Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things. "

I believe all "Forces" that are exerted upon something else, Including "Lenz Force" should be harvestable.

In a standard generator, Lenz acts to impede the rotor's motion and that force is directly transferred the bolts or braces that hold the "stator" stationary.   If the stator was not braced, the stator itself would be in motion from the Lenz drag. So the question becomes, how best to harvest the torque applied to the stator brace without sacrificing the generated power.

This is what Figuera accomplished with a non-moving generator. He devised a way to re-route the reciprocal magnetic field back into the device.

Just my opinion

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: alan on June 16, 2023, 01:47:49 PM
nix85 your definitely  right about there being nothing new, at this point it's more about rediscovery than actually discovering something new - although the opportunity still exists in many forms.   

I've spent an enormous amount of time researching the beginning of all this, it seems discovery boomed from late 1700's to late 1800's then by the early 1900's all that was learned was scrubbed and hidden.   Those are the secrets we are trying to re-discover.   One patent that vaguely spills the beans is from gramme 1882 ( US 269281 ) (beginning at line 37 pg2) which pertains to a "problem" being solved in this patent as is explained in the text.   Stating " the reaction of the current upon itself is more energetic than the original which produced it".    This "problem" is, I believe, a small peek into re-discovery.  Reproduceable by sending 2 signals down a line.   As they cross each other on the line they become additive... a combination of both energies at the same moment - a rogue wave as it were.   They all new about it back then ( tesla, cook, stubblefield, figuera, hendershot, etc ).   

I'll leave it there as this subject can divert you down many many rabbit holes which may not be on topic of this thread. 

Alan, your right about the flux capacitor in a sense... I believe cook had the closest version of such a device if there was one.   I read once that all that is needed is 2 wires of different sizes to reproduce this phenomenon - I believe it was hendershot that made the statement, don't ask me to find it again... hidden in the massive amount of research files only to be remembered as significant. 

Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things. 

Ok, busy day ahead - I'll try to get back later ....  happy researching !!!
Do you have an image of the circuit that is shown in the video? 

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 16, 2023, 03:12:25 PM
Do you have an image of the circuit that is shown in the video?
Hi alan, do you mean the one with the solenoid, magnets and LED? or the picture of the fig device with a dc output?
The video is just a simple solenoid coil with an LED connected.   I'm moving the magnet ( a single pole ) from one end of the solenoid to the other then repeating the process.   Basic example of a DC output.   

The picture of the fig device above ( bulb lit, scope shot ) is part of the above diagram representing a dc flow through the circuit with a return to the source.     

Going back to the solenoid demonstration, any solenoid with a large amount of wire and a moving magnetic flux cutting through the turns of wire will produce similar results ( basic generator theory).   Maintaining a single direction will create a magnetic rise and fall in the core without reversal.  Repeating the process  ( same pole same original starting point ) will maintain a dc output with small fluctuations.   

I can draw something up if you'd like - I'm also a more visual learner - a clear picture will tell a better story than an entire book.  let me know and I'll do what I can to clarify it.


Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: znel on June 16, 2023, 04:52:08 PM
I believe all "Forces" that are exerted upon something else, Including "Lenz Force" should be harvestable.

In a standard generator, Lenz acts to impede the rotor's motion and that force is directly transferred the bolts or braces that hold the "stator" stationary.   If the stator was not braced, the stator itself would be in motion from the Lenz drag. So the question becomes, how best to harvest the torque applied to the stator brace without sacrificing the generated power.

This is what Figuera accomplished with a non-moving generator. He devised a way to re-route the reciprocal magnetic field back into the device.

Just my opinion
I believe your on the right path to discovery.   Many of these devices all had something in common that has been covered up over the years.   Cooks special "insulation", stubblefields  in ground coils and heating plates, morays radiant receiver, teslas radiant receiver, hendershots reciever.... on and on we go,  the details being scrubbed from existence over the years.  Something is always left out so it cannot be reproduced.   

Now, back in that time frame radium was readily available and used quite extensively in a lot of products.    The government quickly created a massive fear campaign against it and started controlling every aspect of its use until it was no longer easily available to the public anywhere.    They literally didn't want anyone to know the benefits.   

So add to the system a way of "attracting" a charge - an external source of energy then you'll have a free energy system. 
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: onepower on June 16, 2023, 05:10:07 PM
floodrod
Quote
I believe all "Forces" that are exerted upon something else, Including "Lenz Force" should be harvestable.
In a standard generator, Lenz acts to impede the rotor's motion and that force is directly transferred the bolts or braces that hold the "stator" stationary.   If the stator was not braced, the stator itself would be in motion from the Lenz drag. So the question becomes, how best to harvest the torque applied to the stator brace without sacrificing the generated power.

I built and tested the concept your talking about, I build everything.

I used 2 brushless RC motors back to back to build a motor/generator. In this system the "total torque" is conserved and if we take torque from the stator we lose the same amount on the rotor. I also measured the same thing using a different setup similar to a pony brake/centrifugal clutch when experimenting with AC induction motor/generators.

Like many motional or relative motion concepts it's our mind playing tricks on us.

Here is a good analogy, if we pushed a heavy cart with a spring the work is Force x Distance. Now imagine we put the spring in between two carts pushing one cart forward and the other backwards, can we do more work?. Well no, the energy in the system is dependent on the spring Force-Distance not the direction of the carts.

This relative motion problem is similar to the "Directly Down Wind Faster Than The Wind" problem which almost everyone including most experts got wrong. They were fooled by the relative frames of motion of the propeller pushing air backwards against the air of wind. Simply put relative motion and things acting in three dimensional spaces tends to confuse us.

On the Figuera device, a better analogy would be a spring being compressed, changing it's tensile strength and then expanding. This is called a parametric effect or change in parameters. "Para"- from beside, two positions and "Metric"- to measure. In effect the spring would produce more force thus work on expansion than it took to contract it because the properties changed.

AC
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Cadman on June 16, 2023, 06:04:02 PM
On the Figuera device, a better analogy would be a spring being compressed, changing it's tensile strength and then expanding.... In effect the spring would produce more force thus work on expansion than it took to contract it because the properties changed.

That is an interesting analogy AC, very interesting.

Thanks

Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on July 12, 2023, 05:33:59 AM
I was sent a similar French Patent that may shed some light.  I used Google Photo translate but can not understand the full gist of it yet.  It is apparently an energy amplifier that claims to avoid "counter-induction".  The drawings and lingo are similar to Figuera's work. 

Hoping someone could possibly understand more from this one and possibly find Figuera's missing pieces.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: floodrod on July 12, 2023, 05:56:45 AM
Since the patent actually labels polarity on both the electromagnet and the armature windings, I sketched a possibility.

Wondering if the point is that the primary in the middle creates flux which is forced through part of the armature winding, but the secondary is positioned in a way which it's flux has no interest in travelling back through the primary to complete it's path.

Note- the patent also specific's the amount of turns.



Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: norman6538 on August 14, 2023, 03:06:53 PM
Its good to see some new activity on Figuera. I watched Marathonman here and have some comments.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hikf7z7_HU  17 mins

What he says is solid but he indicates that motion is required to make this happen with the arrows.

Would there be a way to do that by varying the flux instead of moving the magnets.

Norman
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: forest on August 14, 2023, 03:35:13 PM
No, the solution is static flux....like in generators ;-)
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on November 08, 2023, 12:03:34 PM
I have been thinking that a possible configuration for Mr. Figuera 1902 motionless generator http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) is based on exciting the coils with a two-phase AC current in order to create a rotating magnetic field in the generator (as Tesla´s egg of Columbus). In this case the 1902 generator would be also composed by two unphased signals delayed 90º as Mr. Figuera did it in his 1908 generator.

I would like you guys have a look to D'Angelo patent www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf (http://www.overunity.com/www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf). In figure 15 (XV in romans numbers) it is represented a generator very similar to Figuera´s 1902 generator. D'Angelo excited his generator with the unphased signals represented in figures 5b and 5c  (V-b  and V-c in romans)

More info about D'Angelo: http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm)

Please comment your opinion about this patent. Do you see any paralellism between Figuera´s patent and D'Angelo´s patent?

Turned out to be an interesting patent and an interesting solution:
https://tesla3.com/antonio-d-angelo/   
http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm   
https://patents.google.com/patent/US2021177?oq=US2021177

I didn't follow the description in the patent, I followed logic and my latest discoveries in EMF induction (or rather not my discoveries, but those points that official physics doesn't want to recognize). My short analysis of how it can work is at the end of the post:

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2019/11/blog-post.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp


Quote
Using his recent knowledge of the operation of synchronous generators and the EMF pointing system in the phase wire, having studied the design of Antonio D'Angelo's motor-generator, he hypothesized how this system actually works. We have four rotor magnetic poles excited by an electromagnet from a DC source (the diagram shows a battery, which is also the current source for the driven stator electromagnets). We have eight stator pole rods, with one rotor pole overlapping two stator pole rods. Each rod has an excitation solenoid winding, controlled through a commutator brush assembly on the rotor shaft. The device has two generator phases, which are placed between the stator rods so that active zones are formed to inject charge into the focus of the varying magnetic flux. What this means can be found in my publications: "The Invention of an Electromagnetic Generator" and "A Transformer with a Mystery", in which I talk about a system for inducing EMF in a conductor that does not cross (cut) magnetic lines of force.
In the figure I have shown the moment of maximum formation of magnetic ring fluxes (Φ1, Φ2, Φ3, Φ4) in the rotor/stator of the system, focusing on the figure in the patent. The rotor rotates clockwise due to the corresponding excitation of four electromagnets (highlighted in yellow in the figure). The other four electromagnets are switched off, which, by design, is to provide for the retraction of the rotor pole into the zone of the active electromagnet switched on in the mode of the corresponding active stator pole. To accomplish this action, the clearance zones of the rotor poles must not be equal. In the zone of attraction - the minimum clearance, in the zone of switching off of the rod electromagnet - the maximum permissible clearance. Or in the body of the plane of the rotor pole. In this case, a small selection of core material is made. Otherwise, this position is ideal for magnetic locking. Turning the second electromagnet on repulsion will cause the magnetic circuit ( Φ1 - 1 window, Φ2 - 3 octo, Φ3 - 5 window, Φ4 - 7 window) to collapse, which should form the EMF in the generator phases. If we consider the stacking of the phase wires, it is under this condition that the function allows to induce EMF in the phase wire (for this position the active phase is highlighted in red color) and the rotor rotation proper. When the rotor rotates and the pole tip reaches the center zones of the stator active electromagnet and the rotor pole, the active electromagnet is switched off and the inactive electromagnet is switched on, the pole being activated to attract the rotor plus. Thus, when the rotor rotates, the next closed magnetic fluxes will already be formed to establish the second phase.   
Thus, we get two independent generator phases and a rotor rotation and excitation system.
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: Ufopolitics on November 08, 2023, 02:33:36 PM
Hello,

The 1902 Figuera Patent was NEVER as the Novel 1908 Linear Magnetic Pump...to the point that He was killed over this one...just before doing any Investment treaty with Banks.

And related to that 1908 Patent, I have been working on it lately with excellent results, which would be posted here (My own Moderated Thread inside Virtual Moving Fields) very soon...so, get ready!!

We have been developing this patent very wrong for the past 115 years....up to now... ;)

Regards

Ufopolitics
Title: Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
Post by: rakarskiy on November 08, 2023, 08:44:45 PM
Interesting patents on electromagnetic generators without a rotating magnetic rotor. This is such a simple solution that it is very difficult to translate it into a working design.

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2022/12/1902.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2022/06/blog-post.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp