I am looking for a dual phase smooth change stepper motor drivers. These drivers can generate two sinusoidal voltages with 90 degrees out of phase. IT IS PERFECT!!!
Thanks a lot!
I think I found a very good IC for driving two coils with any current trace imaginable: DRV8834 from TI
http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products (http://uk.farnell.com/texas-instruments/drv8834pwp/driver-motor-dual-h-bridge-24htssop/dp/2115234?in_merch=New%20Products)
One needs a microprocessor with at least two Digital/Analogue converters (Pins) and 6 I/O Pins.
An other drawback is the package (very small, pins close together, a pain to solder by hand)
See page 20 Fig. 12 in the data sheet (High-Resolution Microstepping Using a Microcontroller to Modulate VREF Signals)
The price is very low, less than 5 Euro.
Drive capability: 11.8 Volt, 1.5 Ampere (logic and D/A 3.6 Volt), very good for the TI LaunchPad MSP430
Of course, the program will be a bit evolved (D/A in combination with 6 pins in coordination), nothing for the faint hearted microprocessor programmer.
If some one knows how to solder such a small IC by hand, any suggestions are appreciated.
Greetings, Conrad
SMD Soldering tutorial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9FC9fAlfQE)
Wie wäre es mit Ultraschalllöten? http://www.sonicsolder.com/ (http://www.sonicsolder.com/)
Wenn Du das mit der Hand löten willst, viel Spaß dabei. Primär gehts wohl darum, dass der Chip nicht durch Hitzeeinwirkung vom Löten beschädigt wird.
Ansonsten würde ich erstmal alle Füßchen von unten mit einer möglichst dünnen Schicht Lötzinn versehen. Anschließend auf die Platine legen ausrichten fixieren und nur noch mal von oben ohne Lötzinn festlöten. Bei allen Lötprozessen für ausreichend Kühlung des Chips sorgen. Hope you are german.
I have found this dual H-Bridge driver:
L298N (http://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)
It will be easy to interface it with Arduino using a protoboard. There are Arduino shields available based in that IC as well, just Google it.
90 degrees phase (or any other angle) can be realized via software, just look for DSS (digital signal synthesis) Arduino code examples.
When I get mine working I will publish the code so stay tuned
I hate to play the clever one. But I have to tell you, that the L298N is not useful. You can only supply one voltage to the coils (full step). It may be possible to implement a different phase shift than 90° (but I doubt even that).
The attached document explains how Mr. Figuera's "infinite energy machine" works.
It is amazing how we keep recycling old concepts over and over again. And then, we even claim that we are the inventors.
Bajac
I NOTICED THAT FIGURE 21 IS IN ERROR. PLEASE, REPLACE PAGE 15 WITH THE ATTACHED ONE!
You do it by PWM Mr. Clever ONE :)
Read about direct digital synthesis!
Here is an example http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/ (http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/)
My argument is price (less than 5.-- Euro for the DRV8834), the avoidance of a lot of soldering and reliability of operation.
There is a thing called a "motor controller shield" that snaps onto an Arduino, that incorporates 2 L293D quad half-H high current motor drivers onboard, plus breakout connectors. This shield interfaces between the Arduino proper and your motors. It will drive 2 RC servos, or 2 standard stepper motors, or 4 regular DC motors by PWM. You can run the motors off the Arduino power bus or from a separate power supply to the H-bridges. The 293s are in the standard 16-pin DIPs and are in sockets, so you don't have to mess with SMDs and hassle a lot when you blow a driver chip.
Conrad,
I do not think the PWM devices work in the manner that you described. The H-Bridge transistors are switching transistors, that is, they turn on and off, only. There is not intermediate steps. The chopping wave that you see is the average value of the PWM pulses. The losses (heat up) would be too large, if the transistors had worked as linear amplifier or with intermediate steps.
Bajac
The third graph is not correct. You are showing two sinusoidal voltages in 90 degrees out of phase. If you applied these two signals to full wave rectifier, then, you get the correct voltage that should be applied to the primary coils. The voltage applied to the primary coils should be half-cycle sine waves. Refer to figure 21 of the document.
Wonju.
/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
* modification by kEhYo77
*
* Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
* http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
*/
#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM
// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM prog_uchar sine256[] = {
127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124
};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator
int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase
double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6; // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;
// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count; // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator; // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m; // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
void setup()
{
pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT); //sets the digital pin as output
pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT); //sets the digital pin as output
Setup_timer2();
//Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0); //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2); //enable Timer2 Interrupt
dfreq=10.0; //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk; //calulate DDS new tuning word
// running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);
}
void loop()
{
apin0=analogRead(0); //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
if(dfreq != apin0){
tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk; //Calulate DDS new tuning word
dfreq=apin0;
}
}
//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM, 16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
// Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);
// Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0); // clear Compare Match
sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
// Mode 1 / Phase Correct PWM
sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20);
cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}
//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24; // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information
OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}
I wonder if the Arduino will turn a 2n7000 mosfet on directly. If so they could be drivers for larger, regular IRF series mosfets rather than logic level ones. Or if it would makes sense to use a bipolar transistor as the driver for a regular mosfet.
Arduinos are so cool, and it's great that they are programmed in c.
I have compared the designs from Clemente Figuera and Thanes Heins and concluded that the 100 years old concept is more efficient. The following are the bases for the conclusion:
Can you see a pattern between the apparatus of Figuera and Heins? Figuera’s design consists in placing a secondary coil between two primary coils. Meanwhile, Heins’ design shows a primary coil between two secondary coils.
As I already explained in my paper about the Figuera’s apparatus, the induced secondary magnetic field is pulled away from the inducing primary coil by the other primary coil. That is, there is no magnetic fields interaction between the inducing primary coil and the induced secondary coil. However, this is no true for the Heins’ apparatus.
First, the Heins’ apparatus found in this link:
http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins# (http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/16180925?hostedIn=slideshare&referer=http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins)
indicates that the magnetic fields of the two secondary coils must interact with the primary in order for the apparatus to work. Moreover, in order for the Heins’ apparatus to have an optimum performance, the load on the secondary coils must be matched.
If you already read my article, you can see that the magnetic field distribution of the Heins’ design and shown in the above link is not correct. Because the magnetic field does not have a beginning or an end, it is not possible to have them flowing within the iron cores, only. Therefore, the secondary magnetic fields must cross the air gap windows of the Heins’ device to reach and interact with the only primary coil. When the loads connected to the secondary coils are the same, the net influence of the induced fields on the primary coil is zero. The effects of the secondary coils onto the primary are null and it can say that the Lenz’s law effect has been mitigated.
Second, if the secondary loads are not properly matched, the resultant of the secondary magnetic fields will react with the primary field in such a way as to oppose the primary magnetic field. As a consequence, the effects of the Lenz’s law are not completely cancelled and the current through the primary coil will increase. And,
Third, because of one secondary coil, the Figuera’s transformer should have lower output impedance than the Hein’s transformer. Having two secondary coils increases the magnetic flux losses and the wire resistance.
The Heins’ transformer should work better if the two secondary coils are connected in series to add their voltages. In this way you will always guarantee that the secondary magnetic fields are properly matched.
Finally, I have finished the construction of the primary and secondary coils. See my progress in the following photos: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/bobinasprimarias.jpg/)
Bajac
Farmhand,
Yes, I was referring to the BiTT unit.
Figuera does not explain how the extra energy is generated or where it comes from. However, his patent does state that the apparatus is for generating electricity without fuel and it also states that the amount of power is sufficient for industrial applications. In one instance, he stated his desire to power the big steam ships with his generator. Hanon has posted a lot of newspaper citations and articles of the time referring to Figuera. Hanon has done an important work rescuing the historical data and putting the pieces together.
Neither Figuera states that the over unity is due to the manipulation of the Lenz’s law effects. That explanation is given in the paper that I posted in the forum. The answer to some of your questions is found in the published paper. I would encourage you to read it and let me know if you have any comments or concerns.
The effects of the Lenz’s law are always present when inducing currents in coils through magnetic fields! The Lenz’s law effect is the mechanism used in physics to prevent having a device with outputs larger than the inputs. In other words, the Lenz’s effect is what prevents the standards transformers and rotating generators from becoming perpetual machines. What Mr. Figuera and others have proven is that there is a way for mitigating the effect and convert these machines in truly fuel-less generators.
Still, the latter does not answer the question where the energy is coming from or what energy is being transformed. The answer to these questions will also require an overhaul of the existing theory and rewriting existing physics and engineering books.
Thanks,
Bajac
Since 1833, when Pixii, in France built the first magneto-electric machine, to the present time, all machines magneto and dynamo-electric science inventors has led the industry reposan the foundation in the law of induction says: "all magnet that moves toward or away from a closed circuit produces in him flows induction "In Gramme ring and the current dynamos, current occurs by induction that is exerted on the armature circuit wire, cutting their reels lines force created by the electromagnets exciters, or to move said armature, quickly, within the atmosphere between the magnetic pole faces of the electromagnets exciters and the soft iron core of the armature. To produce this movement, mechanical force need be employed in large quantity, it is necessary to overcome the magnetic attraction between the drivers and the core electrostatic attraction that opposes the motion, so the current dynamos are true machines transforming mechanical work into electricity.
In the arrangement of excitatory and magnets our generator armature circuit has some analogy with the dynamos, but they are completely different from that, not requiring the use of motive power is not processing apparatus.
not requiring the use of motive powerit means he does not need to turn a generator shaft,
A excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating, Actuates all the electromagnets, que are attached or in series, or in xxxxx?, or as required, and in the induced circuit currents Comprising Will Arise, together, the full generator current. That Allows suppressing the mechanical force, since there is nothing Which needs to be moved.
Invention of an electric generator without using mechanical force, since nothing moves, Which produces the same effects of current dynamo-electric machines thanks to several fixed electromagnets, excited by a discontinuous or Which Creates an alternating current induction in the motionless inducedcircuit, Placed Within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.
The claim indicates to me he invented a type of inverter.
Reference in the New York Herald the 9th of June 1902:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla27_04.jpg)
"...the only extraordinary point about it is that has taken so long to discover a simple scientific fact"....."the whole apparatus being so simple that a child could work it."
As Groucho Marx said after a similar statement: "Bring me here a child of 6 years!" ;)
Farmhand,
If you read the patent from 1908 you will notice that Figuera clearly states that he is claiming a generator which does not use any fuel once started.
“…the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”
…
“From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”
the production of the current in the induced, current that
we can use for any work for the most part, and of which only one small
fraction is derived for the actuation of a small electrical motor which make
rotate the brush, and another fraction goes to the continuous excitation of the
electromagnets, and, therefore, converting the machine in self-exciting, being
able to suppress the external power which was used at first to excite the
electromagnets. Once the machinery is in motion, no new force is required
and the machine will continue in operation indefinitely.”
From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the
brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely”
Farmhand,
From your comments I am afraid that you have not followed the complete story of the Figuera´s gnerator. If you want to expend some time you could read in the forums, because I think you have not read them yet. After that, you could start doing some questions because you simple doubts are out of context at this stage.
By the way, from your ideas I could think that you are a person outside of the free energy researchers but I can see right now that you (or a person with the nickname farmhand) have 3,059 posts into the energeticforum.com forum and you have posted some months ago in that forum about the Figuera Generator so you definitely are not unaware of this device. Sorry but I can not understand by you are asking such simple questions if you know this generator for months.
It would be wellcome if you join us in trying to replicate it, but first you have to teach yourself by reading the previous posts
Regards
hanon
I believe this statement explains all : to the origin means special winding of coils as you can partially see on schematic....actually it is Figuera secret imho End of coils set is connected to the origin whatever it means, it is the tip for us that here lies the secret...
Seven of this electromagnet sets should work fine!
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/clementefigueratransf1.jpg/)
Bajac
I'm short on money so I bought my Arduino clone for 10$ ::) but once I learned how to make it I prefer to build it myself according to needs (it's just a microprocessor with a voltage stabiliser)
Hi all,
I've read this whole thread and find it very interesting. I found out about Clemente from a free eBook. I decided to try the digital timing circuit.
When ever in the past I have asked how an alternator can use potential from a battery to form a field to power the loads and charge the battery which really does seem impossible.I am always told the engine provides motive power to turn the field to induce upon or in the stator the current and voltage to power the loads and charge the battery. Induction on the stator formed by building up and reversing magnetic field direction repeatedly quickly. The speed and strength of the feild regulated to offset each other should one be less then enough to get results. I always wondered why the snake cant eat it's tail other then the pain. I never really went as far as to examine the field strength required to get the effects in a counter form without motive power added to create the strength of field. Or how one would double the field strength in the stator with out needing twice the current which would consume more then the required output to do all that work. So looking for the differences between my imaginationary model and the topic of the thread I see a clever use of colliding two of the same direction poles. Thinking about examples of this effect,collision of two objects.How would that help when the two objects consume (x?) amount of energy to get moving so they can collide.At best resulting in no gain and more likely loss will never be avioded. Well eventually I considered a train motor car pushing two box cars side by side down two tracks side by side.One motor car two box cars. To a portion of tracks that ends in a closed loop. How much energy is there in the collision of two objects that are propelled by a single force and then seperated in direction so they can be smashed agaisnt one another? If the total amount of energy could be taken from the point of impact between the two cars would that equal the amount the of energy used to get the two cars moving? Like wise if two seamingly week electro magnets are put up agaist one another n to n or s to s is the resulting crash 1+1 or something other then?What trickery can be applied to suck out every stitch of power from the point of impact instead of trying to leach off the effects of the moving cars as they pass by from the sides?Tansformers seem to be working off the sides of the fields only. While this thing is using the sides to set up fields (Motion) on the pole faces and smashing them together and pulling off at the point of impact. Is the strength of the feild magnified in the space between pole faces and what likely winding shape would it take to pick off the effect and transform it to current? The shape of field as it grows and compresses against the same would be usefull to determine the type of winding and if it should encompass the individual n or s feilds or all of them together?Or both? Just wondering.
"The inventor holds that his generator will
solve a portion of problems, including those
which are derived from navigation, because
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus."
Egg of Columbus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus)
so looking at you last entry I was only able to veiw a couple photos. As far as thoughts go ,it apears or looks like the inductor/s are placed between the faces of the electro magnets not wrapped around a core piece of iron
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually meen south and north pole. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces
Thanks Alvero and Hanon
Been a long week.
Have you considered how fast the little comutator gizmo will have to spin to output AC at 50 to 60 htz? It does all seem to be sort of backwards or inverse.
@iflewmyown,
After reviewing your setup, I see the following issues with your setup; first, the center iron core should no have voids. It should be a solid uniform piece. Second, you need to make the gaps uniforms. The interior and exterior iron core pieces should be firmly attached. Third, I am not sure about using welding. You may be better off attaching the different parts with screws. Fourth, use rectangular interior iron cores. A round shape makes it more difficult to wind the Induced coil.
You can use laminated sheets to build the iron cores. For example, I have Silicone Steel sheets from an old 45KVA transformer. I can cut enough pieces with scissors to form the exterior and interior cores.
My recommendation to you is to start all over again. I keep saying not to cut corners when replicating the device. If you can afford it, make the drawings with dimensions and bring it to a machine shop for a good finished product.
Bajac
Farmhand,
Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred. The law refers only to the polarity of the coil voltages when induced by magnetic fields.
Bajac
I said " in my opinion" but you state it as fact. I really think you ought to be able to demonstrate an example before stating things as fact.
If Lenz's law has no relation to the amount of energy or power being transferred, then when people say they have negated Lens Law what exactly does that mean ? And what is the indication that has happened ? Makes me wonder why it's such a problem if it has nothing to do with input compared to output.
Not seeing the input power increase when a load is added is not a negation of Lenz's Law. It's easy to do. I can show several examples and they all show that the output is restricted to less than the input.
Cheers
I think we need a scan of ORIGINAL Tesla article "The problem of increasing human energy" from 1900 and especially page 200 and further...
Probably you don't need the original article. You need this (further explanation of the same author):
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-m4PqHpBHo-OHYzNmZBdU91bkk/edit?usp=sharing)
Pic of Teneriffe (Peak of Teneriffe) a peak of a mountain in Teneriffe.
Tenerife with one "f" ? It's interesting because there is Pic a Tenerife in Canada and it is a mountain which I can assume ( a big assumption) was the place of experiment done by Tesla and his friends described in one article available on net. Ok, maybe it's too far but the mistake was indeed interesting
In an effort to find the device which Tesla claims he already figured that out. The closest one I could find was US433702.
QWERT, why are you doing that ? :o Figuera device SURELY worked fine. It is a FACT not our supposition.
Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.
Garry
Quote from: iflewmyown on Today at 03:58:23 AM (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg364514/#msg364514)Back then the patent office required a working model. One patent issued was tested after patented and reported to the patent office as working.
Any reference to this info?
This test was carried out in 1913, 5 years after Figuera´s death, because one his partner, Buforn, was kept on trying to commercialize this generator and filed 5 more patents all of them similar to the one from 1908. This test report is kept in the Patent Office as a proof of practical implementation of the generator, a mandatory step to get the patent granted in those days. This patent was granted. It is a pity that the report of the test doesn´t not include if the machine was self-running apart from producing electricity. What was the reason to follow a dead end after 5 years? For me it is clear. We have collected many proofs. For anyone who has some doubts: please read the webpage deeply before going into questions. This test report was already posted in the forum some weeks ago.
http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf)
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
The patents are complete as possible. I do not believe the operating principle was known to the inventor.
Garry
...There are many proofs, maybe there are much more proofs than in many others OU devices. I am not going to convince you. I have told all this for people who are really interested in Mr. Figuera´s invention. I am moving forward. Bye
hanon
Once again I want to say : THANK YOU for Your GREAT WORK !
And to all who investigated time and resources to re-vive Clemente Figuera history . [...]
I consider the air gaps the most important feature of the Figuera's devices. It is against the common sense used in today's electric machines. For example, the discontinuities of the iron cores represented by the air gaps is to be avoided at all cost in today's standard transformers. Nevertheless, the discontinuity of the air gaps is what makes Figuera's devices work. The air gaps must be minimum, but they must exist. These air gaps create a reluctance circuit that allows the magnetic flux to be manipulated with ease for the purpose of minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law.
The above statement implies that the quality of the iron material is not critical. The reluctance of the small air gaps is thousands of times larger than the reluctance of any low quality iron core. The latter is also the reason why the design criteria of the Figuera's apparatus is based around the air gaps.
No considerable amount of power can be obtained without the air gaps feature. If you don't believe me, ask Thane and the BiTT transformer.
Bajac
Hi RMatt,
The circuit described by Patrick Kelly in his ebook is fine to do the work and easy to be built ( http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/ (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/) )but it has some mistakes in the connections. Please see the scheme I have attached to this post for a correct configuration. I have just built the counters. I am waiting for the darlinton transistors to complete the circuit.
Good luck!!
IMO I do not think coils S,N,Y actually mean south and north pole faces. Studying the layout closely I think the Coils S and N are facing each other with the same sign pole faces.The need for seperate core peices is so the field caused by the pulse "on" travels through the other two coils opposite (y+n)or (s+n)so the direction of induction on the center coil and the off coil are the same. Current is added back in series with the on impulse acting upon the off coil through the power source. So if the on impulse was 12 volts + the field would project through the two other core peices and coils.The reaction on the center coil would act like half a sign wave be it up or down. The outer coil which is off would induce in reverse direction of it's on state at a lower voltage or amperage but would add to the source voltage in series.A clever way to use as much of the field as possible drawing in and using the lesser force on the far side of the induced coil used to power the load. Im not sure if enough current could be produced to remove the starting power source or not. The only way that could work is if there is unequal abillity of inducing a magnetic field in a core piece when comparing voltage to ampere. Meaning if I use 1 volt and 100 amp on a core will it be the same measure of gauss field as compared to 1 amp and 100 volts using identical cores and windings. So that the load could be used in part as a source once it is started even if that ment it has to be stepped up or down to add to the impulse field the strongest magnetic field that it can produce without taking away from the productitvity of operating the load.Boy that was a bitch to explain that thought.
Hi all,
After a discussion with one of the forum members, I realized that an explanation is in order. The legacy of Mr. Figuera is that he showed us two methods in his 1902 and 1908 patents for mitigating the effects of the Lenz's law. The 1902 method teaches that the influence of the induced magnetic field can be minimized if the inducing and induced coils are placed symmetrically at an angle of 90 degrees. The requirement for symmetry is important because it is condition that balances the magnetic field entering and leaving the inducing coil (interior), and therefore, it helps on cancelling any induced voltage in the inducing coil (interior coil) due to the reaction of the induced coil (exterior coil).
The second method of 1908, on the other hand, consists in pulling the induced magnetic field ("y" electromagnets) away from the inducing electromagnets ("N" and "S" electromagnets) by applying two voltages 90 degrees out of phase. Even though the 1902 method is much simpler to implement, it is my belief that the 1908 method is more efficient. The reason for being more efficient is that the 1908 method does not suffer any decrease in performance as the load increases. However, a performance degradation can be expected of the 1902 method due to some symmetry loss whenever the device is loaded. The interaction of the inducing and induced magnetic fields bends and shifts the resultant magnetic field. It is considered a common event for all electrical machines. For instance, the DC motors use "compensating coils" for minimizing it. And, maybe the same compensating coil concept can be used with the 1902 method. The latter is also the reason why the efficiency of the 1902 device should be tested by incrementing the load gradually from zero up to 100%.
I was able to verify that the currents flowing in the N and S electromagnets are not affected by the load connected to the "y" electromagnets. For example, a while ago I published the data of one of my experiments in which I had 1.3A DC flowing in the N and S electromagnets. The 1.3A did not change even when the "y' electromagnet was short circuited. The experiment was also validated by Woopy in one of the videos he posted in Youtube.
Bajac
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:forest this may or may not be what you want but you do know about : translate.google.com ? It auto recognizes the language and translates to whatever other language you want. From google this is their translation: If within a magnetic field is rotated a closed, placed perpendicular to the lines of force in said circuit born induced currents that will last as long as the duration of the movement, and whose sign depends on the direction in which semueva the armature circuit. " I believe semueva is se mueva which means 'move'. Or straight from his patent 'background' : "if within a spinning magnetic field we rotate a closed circuit placed at right angles to the lines of force a current will be induced for as long as there is movement , and whose sign will depend on the direction in which the induced circuit moves." says it more clearly.
"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "
This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !
what is that ? "within a spinning magnetic field " ? is that really in patent in original text ? what means SPINNING ?
Please can you translate into english again this excerpt as exact and close as possible:
"[size=78%]Si dentro de un campo magnético se hace girar un circuito cerrado, colocado [/size]
perpendicularmente a las líneas de fuerza, en dicho circuito nacerán
corrientes inducidas que durarán tanto tiempo como dure el movimiento, y
cuyo signo dependerá del sentido en que semueva el circuito inducido. "
This is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE !
Hi bajac,
Which do you think would work better? Doug1's thoughts about N, S, and Y, or what is in Patrick Kelly's ebook.
(Clemente's work is in chapter 3)
http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKbook.pdf)
TRANSLATION OF KEY PARTS OF BUFORN PATENT No. 57955 (1914) (text extracted from pages 12,13 and 14)
By using a magnetic field, consisting of two series of electromagnets N and S, a resistor and a circumference of contacts isolated from each other .....
...
Note that only the contacts located in the Northern semicircle are in communication with half of the end sides of each resistor, and the contacts in the Southern semicircunference are not in communication with the resistor...
Hanon,Hi,
The rotary switch shown by Figuera in the 1908 patent is correct when using only a contact. The patent that Buforn submitted requires two contact in opposite directions (at 180 degrees.) Otherwise, a single contact needs to rotates 180 degrees before making connection with the resistors and it will make it difficult to have a make-before-break configuration. I do not trust Buforn's work!
Bajac
Bajac, You yourself have in no way replicated the 1908 patent and yet you keep talking. The 1908 patent was for a 20 hp generator and used a mechanical rotating commutator. Your own pictures do not show a rotating commutator or a device anywhere near 20 hp. I await your replication and some test results. The reason people still look for answers is that none of us have solved this puzzle, simple as it may be.
Garry
snip
The above questions are for brainstorming, only. You do not need to reply because I will not waste more time on this issue.
It looks like you did not understand what I was referring to when I said "replicate Figuera's apparatus".
Bajac
i_ron,
Your are 100% correct! A patent is just a concept, an abstract!! You can implement it by trial and error or by using some engineering expertise.
I will post (in about two weeks) some sketches and information of what I am doing with the corrections based on my experience with this device. It might help you and others.
Bajac
Again : is there anything in patent text about box around the connection point from the commutator to power supply , I spotted ?
Maybe there is a better , bigger picture of the method of connection here ?
Why ? You should easily guess.... ::)
The connection box has intiged me since I saw it. I domt know what represents and there is no further explanation in the text. It is only mentioned that the current after doing its task in the electromagnets returns to the origin where it was taken..
Hi Ron,
long no see here. How are you ?
Many things are not clear in this patent/concept:
1) are the N-S-cores one U-shaped core or two cores with an airgap at the bottom
2) how long are the output-coils ? For me this is the most important question because taking into accout the
shape of the primary voltage ( see attachment ) at S and N then my estimation is that at each moment
during on cycle the overall magnetic flux across the long secondary coil does not change...but the magnetic
field-density-distribution along secondary-coil is changing at each step. This then means that - if we assume
a core-material exists in the secondary coil - that the inductivity at each end of the secondary coil is
different ( I know it sounds strange ) ... but with one exeption: if current is equal in both primary coil
( midth of the cycle )
So if I visualize the process during on cycle the magnetic field density at at both ends of the secondary might behave like a standing wave ( reflecitve) ...if one side is decreasing the other side is increasing.
In other words we have a local change of magnetic field-desity without an overall change of the inductivity..
a change without Lenz.
Regards
Kator01
a great power can be carried in a very
small space, stating that the secret of his
invention resembles the egg of Columbus
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.
"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"
Bob
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.
If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.
I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.Hi a.king21,
Hi a.king21,
Could you explain better how can energy be extracted from an oscillating bloch wall? Is there any link or reference to this subject?
What it is true is that Figuera stated that the distance between the two inducer external coils should be very small. And this statement is related with some kind of effect that he was trying to capture. Is it needed to wind each external coil in clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW) directions?
What Figuera appears to have done is to oscillate the Bloch wall with this simple design.
That's why he clearly pictures the y coil as much smaller than the two control coils.
Hello everybody
I am testing the "concept" of the 1908 patent
As the commutator I am using one from an AC motor 10 poles
attached some pics, may be useful for replicators
Cheers
Alvaro
Hi all,Sorry if I didn't do my homework, but I have some questions: the iron core: is it laminated? When you say " 2 times 90 degrees voltage" what exactly you mean? I' m building one oscilator using the patent principle. This device will generate a complete ac sequence.
I have to say that I am very happy to see the enthusiasm and effort shown by the members of this forum about Figuera's devices. Figuera's technology is free and it is here for the taking.
First of all, I apologize for not being able to provide the detailed description in a single document of the device that I am building. I have been really busy with other affairs that do not allow to spend time on this project. However, all information about Figuera's technology has been disclosed in this thread.
The main components are the iron cores and the windings. For example, the key components of the 1908 device are the electromagnets. Once you build the electromagnets, you only need two 90-degree shifted full wave rectified voltages. It does not matter how these input voltages are generated! If you do not know how to build the electronic circuits, you can use the commutated switch and the power resistors shown in the original patent. For the size of the device shown in this thread, it is recommended that the power resistors have a minimum rating of 50W and a maximum of 10 ohms. THESE RESISTORS GET REALLY HOT! That is why Figuera showed wire wound resistor type. When Figuera ran his tests, I can imaging these resistors getting red hot similar to wired heaters. The use of these resistors is the least efficient option. The resistors dissipate relatively high energy.
A better option for generating the input voltages mentioned above is to use a motor-generator. The generator should be able to provide two sinusoidal voltages shifted 90 degrees. Then, each of these generator AC voltages can be applied two a full-wave rectifier diodes.
If the iron core is big enough to house the coils, you can use about any iron core that you feel comfortable working with. The cross section of the iron core that I used is about 1 inch width and 3/4" depth.
I have also recommended to build the 'N' and 'S' electromagnets with no less than 300 turns with a taps, let's say 200T, 300T, and so on. If you can do 400T, it is even better. The minimum gauge size for these primaries coils should be #18 AWG.
I also recommended that the wire of 'y' secondary coils should have a minimum gauge of #14 AWG. Minimum number of turns should be 200T. The use of #14 AWG wire for the secondary will allow for the connections of heavier loads.
The other important design criterion to keep in mind is to minimize the air gaps. If you refer to the photos I posted a while ago, you will notice that the air gaps consist of a paper thin insulator.
The above recommendations are based on my own experience with this device. If you follow them, you will have a device with good power output during testing.
With respect to the 1902 patent, the primary coils should have a lot of turns. For testing purposes, I would use no less than 500 turns of #20 or #22 AWG for each of the primary coils 'a' and 'b'. Because the secondary must travel through the air gaps, the air gaps shown in the 1902 patent are considerably larger than the air gaps of the 1902 patent, and therefore, the magnetic reluctance of the of the iron core is much higher for the 1902 device. The latter implies that to create a considerable magnetic flux in the 1902 device, you will need a very high A-T (Ampere-Turns). And, that is why Mr. Figuera furnished the air gaps of the 1902 device with primary coils ‘a’ and ‘b’ located on both sides of the air gaps.
Thanks again.
Bajac
ariovaldo,
Based on your questions, I have to assumed that you have not read the paper that originated this thread explaining the operations of the 1908 and 1902 devices. For the 1908 device, please, use the latest revision posted on this thread. I highly recommend you to read these papers and whatever was posted in this thread before building your device. There are a lot of usefull information.
My understanding is that oscillators devices are usually used for signal (very low power) applications. The input power for the Figuera's devices is relatively high. For instance, the 1908 device that I built using the power resistors required an input power of about 60 Watts. When I tested it without the resistors, the input power was about 15W. And, I am referring to the device with one set of coils only (not seven as shown in the 1908 patent) for which I posted few photos. Therefore, you need to make sure that whatever oscillator you are using is capable of handling that kind of power.
Thanks,
Bajac
Ariovaldo,My first intention with this device is to do a trial using a 3 phase transformer that I have, using Gruamge schematics. Having the transformer in my hands, I simulated the voltage drop using 12 volts battery and nichcrome 16 gauge wire.
WOW! That is not an oscillator but a heavy duty commutated switch. You got some skills!
I wanted to ask you, how did you get the values shown on the voltage column?
Going back to the iron core application, Mr. Figuera stated in his 1908 patent that it can be of a low quality soft iron type. He also stated that a solid piece (not laminated) of iron can be used. His statement can be justified by the use of air gaps in the device. Because the air gaps have much higher reluctance than any low quality iron core, there is no noticeable difference in performance when using, whether high quality laminated Silicone steel sheets or low cost soft iron bars.
Thanks,
Bajac
My first intention with this device is to do a trial using a 3 phase transformer that I have, using Gruamge schematics. Having the transformer in my hands, I simulated the voltage drop using 12 volts battery and nichcrome 16 gauge wire.
Check out.
hanon:There you go my friend....
thanks, I apologize, my PS is from a wifi modem, rated at 12V-1.2A the figure I posted (200mA) is a measure at the input, loaded.
I also tested with a resistor made with the metallic spiral of a hair dryer, min.3 ohm, and so on.
Bajac is right, is should be the most inefficient atempt as it got very hot, which means loses all over !!
In the other hand, I don´t know how to pulse the inductor not having Mr Lenz at the collapse, as the idea of this patent is based in a variable DC current, not falling anytime to 0 volts.
Anyway the learning process keeps on going !
Ariovaldo if just the commutator is that size, I imagine you want to power your own car factory no ? ;D ;D
regards
Alvaro
Ariovaldo,Thank you Bajac.
I want to congratulate you for the effort you put on the construction details. You do a professional job!
I would not like you to be disappointed and discouraged from building the device, but it takes a lot of effort to work with such a large core, and then, not getting the results that you might expect.
I want to persuade you to get away from dealing with single large set of coils such as the 25KVA one shown in the photo. The success for building Figuera’s devices does not consist in making a single set of large electromagnets but connecting together multiple smaller sets of coils as shown in the 1908 patent. Even though the 1902 patent shows only a single set of coils, I truly believe that to get an operating voltage such as 120Vac, the secondary coils of several sets of the transformers shown in the patent should be cascaded (or connected in series).
I have stated before that the design criteria for building the Figuera’s devices are different from the ones used for building today’s standard transformers. The most important feature of the Figuera’s 1902 and 1908 devices is the use of the air gaps. The definition of air gap is a discontinuity in the iron core path (note that I am not referring to the gaps of the windows occupied by the wire turns around the core). The air gaps are not allowed in the construction of standard transformers and these gaps change the rule of the game for the Figuera’s devices. The air gaps are the key feature to manipulate the induced magnetic fields (field of the secondary coils) in such a way as to make useless the typical current ratio formula of the standard transformers. Because the current of the secondary coils (load current) is not reflected back to the primary coils, the small power supplied to the primary coils is relatively constant even under large load currents. The implication of the above is that the iron core of a standard 1KVA transformer can generate more than 25KVA of power when used in the Figuera’s apparatus. Once the secondary voltage is established in the Figuera’s devices, the main limiting factor of the output power is the amount of current that the secondary wire can handle. That is the reason why the Figuera’s apparatus is known as his INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE.
The above sounds like a heresy but it is true! Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can generate large magnetic flux lines, which can reach magnetic saturation easily. As a matter of fact, the standard transformers are designed to work at the knee of the saturation curve where they are more efficient. That is the reason why an iron core used to build a 1KVA unit cannot be used to construct a 25KVA standard transformer. Because in standard transformers the ampere-turns of the primary coil increases with the power demand of the load, the cross sectional area of the iron core must be increased accordingly for the 25KVA unit. Otherwise, the 1KVA iron core will just saturate beyond the knee of the saturation curve and the increase of the primary ampere-turns will not necessarily translate in an increase of the magnetic flux through said core.
On the contrary, the air gaps present in the Figuera’s devices make them to operate at the very low part of the magnetic saturation curve. It is very unlikely that even a 1KVA iron core used in a standard transformer will saturate even under a 25KVA load. Because the load is not reflected back to the primary coils, the ampere-turns of the primary coils do not substantially increase and stay constant.
The following is my recommendation:
Use an iron core with relatively small cross section, say not larger than 2 inch square and with gap windows large enough to accomodate the coils. The material can be laminated Silicone sheets or solid soft iron. You must be careful interconnecting the core sections when using solid soft iron materials. Do not add extraneous material between the sections such as welding. All the air gaps must be kept to a minimum. For the 1908 device, use a paper thin material to join the core sections. For the 1902 device, the dimension of the air gaps should be just big enough to fit the secondary turns. Because the air gaps of the 1902 device are larger than the gaps of the 1908 one, the primary coils of the 1902 device will require more turns.
Because of the air gaps, you will need a much higher ampere-turn for the primary coils just to create a small magnetic field. You can use wire gages such as #18 or #20 AWG for building the primary coils. Even though I have recommended a minimum of 300 turns, do as many turns as you can for the first set. For example, if you can do 600 turns, incorporate middle taps for 300, 400, and 500 turns. For the secondary use no less than 200 turns of #14 AWG. Recall that you do not want to use a thin wire for the secondary because the power output for this device is limited by the gauge of the secondary coil. For the first set I would recommend to do no less than 350 turns for the secondary with middle taps at 200 and 300 turns. The flexibility of choosing primary and secondary taps when performing the testing will be invaluable.
Build and test one set of coils first! Once you know the coil taps that produces the best performance for the given core, you can proceed for the construction of the remaining sets. For example, if the test of the first set indicates that the best performance corresponds to taps that make the secondary coil generates 20Vac, then; you know that five more sets are needed to make a unit with a rating of 120Vac.
I hope the above description can guide you in the right direction.
Thanks and good luck!
Bajac
Ariovaldo,
I want to congratulate you for the effort...
..... Because standard transformers do not have air gaps, the reluctance of the core magnetic circuit is very low and a relatively low ampere-turn (magneto-motive force) can ......
Hi all,
This is a post to correct some errors in the circuit that I posted in post #106 in the 15th of May. Please see the attached file with the correct circuit to implement two unphased signals as defined in the 1908 Figuera´s patent.
Regards
Ariovaldo,The 25 kva transformer is just to play. My intention is to build 6 small transformers with very smal air gap, to avoid the " normal" transformer function...
I wanted to ask you about the air gaps. Are you providing air gaps to the iron core of the 25KVA transformer? If you do not provide the air gaps, there will be cross talking between the two primary coils. In other words, the magnetic filed of a primary coil will reach the other primary coil moving through the secondary coil completely, and as a result, there will no be induced voltage in the secondary coil.
Thanks,
Bajac
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.
And thanks again for everything!!!
Hi
@Hanon... maybe you interested in using my scheme, I added one more step, and a correction circuit of the peak of the waveform, (R4) when going through step 1 and step 9 giving the space of two steps as in the original patent from 1908 to soften the waveform... disregard the part they are only transistor to generate the waveform for my setup.
And thanks again for everything!!!
It is just amazing!
If you recall, I also published "Reinventing the Wheel Part 2 and Part 3" showing designs with Permanent Magnets. The device shown in figures 4, 5, and 6 of Carlos' patent are almost identical to one of my embodiments that I posted in those documents. In my document I called coil B22 as the secondary and coils B18 to B21 as the control coils. The only difference between Carlos' design and mine is that he uses air gaps. Of course, my device would have not been patentable because they are obvious with respect to the devices shown in Carlos's patent. Again, I did not used air gaps in my design because I thought (as the mainstream science) that air gaps would make my design less efficient. Now that I know the Figuera's devices, I can say that Carlos' apparatus should be more efficient. As Figuera, Carlos found a way for minimizing the effects of the Lenz's law by using air gaps.
No wonder why I called my papers "Re-inventing the Wheel". We just keep recycling the old technology because it is not well known.
Bajac
That makes sense and I do think we have something here. Air gap, very small one. Don't you guys think we can use dc coil instead permanent magnetic?
I put a video showing the electromechanic oscillator operating. To say the true, I did't like it. The brush is the one that is rotating and doing that, the centrifugal forces is holding the brush without touching the commutator, so wave form is more a square than sine as should be.
Solutions for this system
1) increase the spring size
2) modify the the commutator/brush holder, so the commutator will turn
Others solutions:
1) solid state device ( hanon/Shiko)
2) use pure ac 60 HZ
3) modify a small generator and use as VFD to drive it. ( I do have a VFD and I will check generator)
The most important part is the transformer and I do know that. My intentions is modify the transformer in video, creating a small gap...
The transformer connections are based in the Grumage drawings
Cheers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nAeWdqSCTek)
Time ago I saw another patent of a MEG based on air gaps but I can not find it again. If I get to find it I will post it here also. Carlos Subieta Garron literally writes in his patent US3368141: "The assembly will not work as an annular magnet, there should be a small air gap between the core member and the shoe poles" (please note the attached drawing with the air gap !!). Air gaps are used to "re-route" the magnetic field to avoid opposing the inducer coils, thus minimizing the Lenz effect over those coils.
Something very interesting happened !
As you can see in the movie, the light seems to be half way bright and the voltage that I used was 80 VDC.
As I said, the commutator was not OK, and it wasn't generating sine wave. Was a kind of pulse/square.
After the test, I disconnect the system and I connected 110 AC, at the same point, keeping the the 2 out-side coils in serie as was, and I had nothing in the output. I got some ideas for the next test
Schiko,
Please, refer to the post#58 of this thread. In the post, I posted the graphs of the voltages and currents. The waveform should be more triangular like step triangle. But, it is not the same condition when the load is pure resistive than when is an electromagnet. You will need to do a kind of impedance matching between the seven resistors and the coils to get the maximum AC/DC ratio of the input voltages.
Noticed that the air gaps shown in your pictures are too big.
Bajac
I don't have the material to replicate the patent as I would like too, but I do 2 set transformer core 280 mm to 100 mm and I will play with them. I ordered some 14 AWG magnetic wire that will be here next week.
@ Schiko,
I want to congratulate you for your efforts. I think you are in the correct path.
You may ask as many questions as you like. The nice thing about a forum is that you can get different answers and views. That makes it more exciting!!
On the other hand, why do you think the Figuera's device would not work? Did you replicate it? If yes, could you post the device that you did your test?
I cannot say the same. I tested the device and the results were like nothing I had experienced before. I was telling Hanon that the short circuit test soldered the secondary leads together. I had to shutdown the device to cut the leads. I was not able to measure the short circuit current because I did not have an equipment with such a high current range. But amazingly, the primary current did not change, it just measured about 1.3A DC before and after the short circuit condition. During the short circuit condition, the transformer started vibrating and produced a loud Humming sound. I am so disappointed for not following the teachings of that setting. That is why I am rebuilding the tower to match the coil turns of that setting.
Bajac
It looks as though some excellent progress is being made here. You say that standard transformers do not have air-gaps, however normally they are built up of laminations. Although these are primarly to stop eddy currents, do not the small gaps between the laninations, caused by the coating of varnish not add in small air-gap?
Kind regards
John
Hi bajac
Thanks for your words. 8)
See, when I say "doesn't work" I mean "not to produce more output than input" However my current device worked fine but didn't hit more than 100% yield.
Unfortunately I have no photo of the first device that did not work, who wants to show device failed.
You can show some really small device running on autorun, that's all I ask so I can cheer me up. :'(
Your device that you got high current which commutator you used, mechanical or electronic??
I also can get high currents in mine, just depend on the coils that use, but never greater in power output at the imput. :(
Excuse the writing ... that translator I get crazy he insists on changing the words I want to write, but I'm learning heheheeh
Hi
Do you have any link to detailed explanation about laminated core ? I have to understand how it is build, work and how it is produced (the steps involved).
Maybe in Europe it does not work, but in the US when I have a question, first I try to find an answer on internet, usually on google.This time I've just put the two words "laminated core" in the proper box. I guess, the short and appropriate answer could be this, from "wiki-answers": http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_purpose_of_laminating_an_iron_core_in_transformers)
"What is the purpose of laminating an iron core in transformers?
Answer:
The reason we laminate the iron cores in transformers is because we want to limit what are called eddy currents. Transformers are basically two coils of wire wrapped around a core of iron. They work by induction. Induction occurs when current flows in one conductor (or one set of windings in the transformer) and the magnetic field that forms around that conductor (that set of windings) sweeps the other conductor (the other set of windings) and induces a voltage. In order to increase the effectiveness of the transformer, we need to improve the way the magnetic fields are coupled from one set of windings to the other set. Iron conducts magnetic lines of force well, so we use that to help conduct the magnetic lines of force from coil A to coil B. Problem is, iron is also a conductor, and it's being swept by the magnetic field as well. If we didn't use laminations, the iron core would provide a place for the magnetic lines to produce (induce) current, and that current flowing in the core would heat the core up really fast and waste energy. By laminating the cores, we break up the current paths within that core and limit eddy currents."
Also, good source of knowledge is, as always, on WikiPedia.
This is supposed to be a Figuera thread. Can we stay on message please.
If you have other stuff to say then by all means start a separate thread.
Too many threads go off the rails and invite other people to write even more. It would be good to have posts which either proved or disproved Figuera. I am of the opinion that all science is valuable even if it doesn't work.
I tried moving a variable resistor manually and did not see anything. That is a positive contribution - even if it was a fail.
Yes, I meant I did not see overunity. But my experiment was just a casual one to see which way to proceed.If is that, we are talking about to mix 2 frequencies again..Is that right?
I am wondering about something.
AT this time 1900 to 1920 it was common to use an interrupter with a coil. Many schematics did not even show the interrupter as it was understood to be a part of all coils. Maybe that is what is missing.
AN interrupter is of course a Tesla switch.
If is that, we are talking about to mix 2 frequencies again..Is that right?
Is that a million dollars answer? Just kidding. RESONANCE?
::) ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D Yes, in special case. Now I know you are EE, can you answer the simple question ? How we can magnify current but not voltage ?
Resonance? It depends on which definition. EE definition you need a capacitor ie tank circuit.
Tesla definition is longitude wave. ie radiant energy. I don't remember Figuera mentioning resonance or capacitors.
You amplify current by using step down transformer. Of course you lose voltage so power stays the same minus losses in the circuit.
Well... you are starting to sound like the Barbosa-Leal patent from Brazil.
That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?
That is the classical knowledge! The transformer that you can see in the picture that I posted minutes ago, was tested with 4 turns of thick wire in the secondary, and believe me, the current amplification very high.
Thinking out of the box, what can we do speed up the large flow of electrons in this case, without use to much energy?
Well... you are starting to sound like the Barbosa-Leal patent from Brazil.
http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html (http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt3.html)
about 1/3 rd of the way in the document.
There is something else to consider. The original patent resembles an old style motor car distributor cap - except with more contacts. That setup is almost certain to create sparks. Even if the make before break does not create an actual spark the sudden abruptness of the constant switching is bound to create a radiant effect. So we could be looking at a Tesla switch type situation with static mixing on each resistor contact.If you take a look in the youtube video that I posted days ago, using the rotary device in a tranformer, the lights just went on when the rotary device got problem and start to spark...do you think the original patent use HV?
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz. My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process. It could be that by introducing static into the switching process we could emulate the 2008 device.
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each hz has a MHZ oscillation in it.
Whenever I've tried to recreate an old style patent using modern components the only way I could get near was by rapid switching, in the tens of kilohertz. My experience has been that the higher the switching rate the lower the voltage and the cleaner the spike, and the better the transistors could handle the process. However the missing link has always been the static generated by the old style switching process.
The question is how to do it without blowing transistors or limiting the spike with ne2 bulbs.
I know that Carlos Benitez in his 1914 to 1918 patents realized the importance of static mixing and mentions this process in one of his patents. Please understand, I am not criticizing anyone's build here, I am just giving you the benefit of extensive research and experiments into this FE technology.
I almost forgot: A Radiant effect type situation involving a spark - even if quenched- causes oscillations in the MHZ region for each short spark. The oscillations travel through the entire circuit. SO even if your switching rate is 50 hz, each hz has a MHZ oscillation in it.
Here is strange question if you can help me ?... If there is transformer having one secondary and two separate primaries each one connected to the separate AC power source what parameters should have those currents to combine into 2 times power output on secondary ?
The waveform did not have peaks as big as those of this photo here. Now I use an H-bridge
Hi Schiko,
Maybe if you have implemented a H-bridge circuit to genereate both signals you could post the schematic. It will very helpful for other users!
I know, I know ... thread out :-X
Nobody has shown so far in Figueira device self running as I do not like spark-gap still trying to adapt the device "Figueira" to something more modern. ???
Here could be a way... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo) Would anyone agree?
Interesting. He use 400 watts ballast. Now, how can we use this power? Motors....?
The F-machine resembles >>Thane C. Heins bi-toroid transformer<<, http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0 (http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/30/#.UlPhthCE7z0) or just use google for more info.
The other link shows an article of Hartiberlin (Stefan Hartmann), the owner of this forum. It's more than easy to get him for an answer of concerns regarded here.
Would you be so nice to help me and in reality all of us to solve some mystery related to what Figuera knew ? It require simple experiment but with tools I can't afford or borrow :( : good digital scope with power integrating/computing a signal generator and a ferrite core transformer custom made probably (ferrite because it has to have stable inductance), luxmeter.Firstly, for me, the ultimate test for any device "OU" is: energize the lamp and auto running at the same time.
First let me describe context : everybody knows that by placing a bulb in resonant tank circuit (a bulb with stable resistance, preheated for example) will allow to light it to the same light intensity consuming less power from source.
The question is simple : can we do that placing tank circuit on primary of transformer while bulb is connected to secondary ?
YES/NO - has to be experimentally proved !
The 08 pat does not support the idea of flux redirection nor does the design of the device. There would be too much leakage of flux for it to be effective. Sharp turns just don't cut the mustard. If there were any critical effects of sending the flux around the outside frame it would have been round with no edges or corners.A wire core or flat material wrapped in a circle would have been the depiction in that time period.
The key is already been given to us long time ago. Tesla called this Rotating Magnetic Induction Machine=Rotating Transformer/Converter=Electro Dynamic Induction Machine.Tesla had use cleverly the Law of Induction Machine on his Motors/Converters/Transformer.
Tesla called this device on a simple term- Egg of Columbus.
All your confusion will be clear ones you will understand the concept behind this device.I think its time to revive this thread again, I already posted this before but nobody seems to take interest.
I know exactly the TPU, Barbosa and Leal Device, Tariel Kapanadze Lenzless Converter,Stanley Meyer VIC,Don Smith Toroid Devices,Clemente Figuera, works exactly the same with this principles.
The Electro Dynamic Induction Machine is wound with 4 coils groups with as 2 sets. Basically we have two Primaries that each primary is wound diametrically opposite with two Coils= 180deg apart on annular ring.
The power supply could be AC and DC.
On DC Supply we need a reversing polarity controller on each coil. We will use the 4 Terminal of the two set of coils on DC Supply. We will need a 4 sequence flip flop switching on this to simulate and replicate the action of an Alternating Current.
On AC Supply we need a TWO phase Alternating Current Generator.We will use only 3 Terminal of the two set of coils, they share common Ground on the 3rd Terminal/Post.
Operation. Lets say: COIL A and COIL B. Lets device this on a 4 quarter cycle.
1. 1st quarter cycle. COIL A(the LEFT-[Positive] AND RIGHT-[Negative] wound coil) is now on maximum magnetic strength, energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 Degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 12 O'clock.
2. 2nd quarter cycle. COL B(The TOP-[Positive] and Bottom-[Negative] wound coil) is now powered by the 2nd phase/lines of supply=flip flop. Is now on maximum magnetic strength while the COIL A is minimum magnetic field.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will move to point 3 O'Clock.
3. 3rd quarter cycle. COIL A(LEFT-[Negative] and RIGHT-[Positive] is again maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity.Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90 degrees. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 6 O'clock. COIL B on this quarter is minimum strength which means OFF.
4. 4th quarter cycle. COIL B(TOP-[Negative] and BOTTOM-[Positive] is again on its maximum magnetic strength but in reverse polarity. Energizing the annular ring fixing the magnetic force of lines 90Degress. Now the Magnetic Compass(Pointer) inside the annular ring will point 9 O'clock. And lastly repeat the 1st quarter cycle to fully turn or move the magnetic rotation of the Magnetic Compass(Pointer).
I already wanted to reach this to you before. But no one is interested until a man name machinealive had interest on the Rotating Magnetic Field/Rotating Transformer.He is the one you should thank for he encourage me to post this on this thread. I already give you everything which some has keep as secret. But there is no such thing as new on their invention, the new to this people is using their common sense. There is another form of operation this device that I am still looking for I have not perfectly deduce the magnetic field interactions/magnetic field of lines. Post you opinion and suggestion with pictures is much better.
This device when properly understood is somewhat you guys call the LENZLESS Generator. Don't limit yourself with using only 1 coil windings. Imagination is your limit.I think I have now clear all your confusion.
Background of this Concept.
Read all if you wanted to understand it very much.Please focus on Transformer illustration and drawings. Remember it is powered with TWO Phase Alternating Current Generator. The Induction Motor of Nikola Tesla is the same with this Electro Dynamic Induction Machine/Converter. Some times you can see 4 sets of wire powering this Motor or Converter. You can also see 3 wires with common ground of the two phase alternating generator.
Tesla Patent 381,968 - Electro-Magnetic Motor
Tesla Patent 382,280 - Electrical Transmission of Power
Tesla Patent 390,413 - System of Electrical Distribution
Tesla Patent 382,282 - Method of Converting and Distributing Electric Currents
Tesla Patent 381,970 - System of Electrical Distribution
Tesla Patent 390,414 - Dynamo-Electric Machine
Meow ;D ;D ;D :o 8)
Hello Stupify12.
I just want to say 'thank you very much' for sharing your knowledge about Tesla's ideas and inventions.
I read all your posts at OU- and EF- fora[size=78%].[/size] :)
BTW
Maybe you know the answer to the question of Bruce_TPU:
"[size=78%]How do dual rotating magnetic fields help us? WHY is that important? Stop guessing at it and study physics involving said current/magnetic fields and you will find the answer."[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
Any idea?
Regards, Bert
Ps. I share your view about the importance of the capacitor (bifilar testla coil beeing capacitor and lenz-less).
Hi all,
Please check some very interesting posts about Figuera´s generator in the forum at EnergeticForum done in these last days
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-19.html)
Please post your comments about the proposal discussed in that forum.
Regards
hello all
Stupify: I have been working last weeks with this subject, (Figuera), but not about the rotating field.
As I centered in the 1908 patent, in which the mag. fields are alligned, not rotating but rather fluctuacting from one side to the other (flip-floping ??)
I have been readding your posts very attentively, here and in the other forum, as well as the a.king21 ones.
I will give a try to this schematic you posted so will you be kind to help me with it ?
Is the toroid complete, or with 4 air gaps ?
Is it ferromagnetic ?, (I can make one with plastified iron wire,bailing wire)
Are the two primary winded over a secondary? if yes, should be these secondary in series as one coil ?
And lastly, what do think of using a commutator as B in the attached schematic ? I know that the ON will be longer that the OFF, but equal for both primary sets. It is moved by a small printer DC motor, so the rpm will be not so high (frequency)
thanks
cheers
Alvaro
no, but you would not see the difference :-[Hi
Hi
Well, nowhere in the patent I read something about "more power output than in input" quite the contrary ...
So what do you say? You could see?
Part of Tesla patent 390.413 posted on previous page...
"In these systems, as I have described them, two independent conductors were employed for each of the independent circuits connecting the generator with the devices for converting the transmitted currents into mechanical energy or into electric currents of another character; but I have found that this is not always necessary, and that the two or more circuits may have a single return path or wire in common, with a loss, if any, which is so extremely slight that it may be disregarded entirely."
Mas se alguém conseguir auto-execução eu pago a cerveja!!!
But if someone can autorun I pay the beer!!! ;)
I think your one of the people that really dont understand easily the patent of Nikola Tesla. On that quote he was comparing the old Induction system to the New Nikola Tesla Induction System. Well you need more readings and review look for the Twice the revolution on the Induction System.
sorry Schiko, I have give you answer and it is always in experiments. Because I have no way to show you results and prove my point that's all I can say. You would see no difference if you don't follow the experiment which can open your eyes
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics
Nikola Tesla utilized a "Radial" Wound Coils Geometry...where wires travel from one end to other end of the total Armature Diameter. We utilize "Axial" Wound Coils in most of all our Electrodynamic Machines...where Coils are wound in the Outer Periphery of the Armature Structure.
Now that I have a copy of the drum patent :o That type of winding and pole geometry is very much like some home built wind gens. Difference being they spin the magnets on two plates spinning opposite directions on a flat plane with the induced between. Im sure someone must have tried going the other way as well. I think your gonna boil down to a basket weave motor theory used as a gen. Another difference is most examples use perm magnets witch are weeker then electric ones.
Hanon
Answer "no.
Here is the Tesla version as was pointed out to you by another person in this thread.Pat 382282
Disect it ,read between the lines. Examine the images closely,follow the paths.Mark out the fields. Look for the obvious nonsensical portions of the image. Take the time to view the second image until you can come back and tell me what part does not make any sense. When you locate the part you will see how to and how to get a over unity device through the pat office. It really makes no difference who invented first.Everything follows secondary to who first discovered the load stone and the voltiac cell.
Two wave producers super imposed offset by 90 degrees or overlapped. Independently reaching saturation to retard current independently sharing a single source but also controlled independently. I tried to copy paste the image from the telsa patent for two reasons. One it shows how he found a way around the patent examiners which is amusing. Second it shows better detail. If i were more sure of your historical exposure I would have just alluded to the theory of a double acting steam piston engine.
The inducers are pushing the induced by pushing back and forth against each other they only need enough current to maintain their respective feilds.The point between two opposing fields consumes no power but is the same direction of each other (NN) (SS) so direct linking magnetically is impossible between the inducers.
Arc was a type o , ac connection.
examine the generator closer KK K'K' the gen has two field magnets it;s simple ac generator so why the four slip rings and brushes? Trace out the connections to the annular ring.
What will be the hard part is to get the fields centered so that the exact place where they reside in the induced is evenly positioned amongst all the sets so when current is shifted between the inducers it happens at the same time with the same amount. A method to test the field strength of each inducer while in place needs to be established. Any difference of sets will counter the effect in the other sets.every electromagnet of the inducers has to be exactly the same in strength and volume. If you have more volume of iron core or wire in half it wont react evenly on that part of the cycle.
You have to go back to the basics often to keep your thoughts aligned with certain basic rules. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html (http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html)
The device is magnetic without the use of a driving force such as a engine or other brute force mechanism to turn a stationary magnetic field (rotor) inside of a stator.
The explanation of what makes a magnet stronger and how does a lever and leverage function to do work should not have to be defined to people who have the capacity to use a computer.
On the other hand. maybe what makes a magnet stronger is missleading or not entirely complete as it should be. Number of turns of a coil N seams to be often locked up into some notion that the turns have to be from a single conductor. A long single conductor leads to higher Ir resistance and losses from heating. no where in any definition does it state turns or loops have to come from a single conductor. Resistance is measure of the length of a conductor/s, number of turns is not always dependant on a single length of conductor. The basic purpose of dividing cores into thin plates to reduce eddy currents into smaller discrete portions is a form of leveraging forces. No one ever said you cant apply the same thing to your coils to make a stronger magnet from a lesser power source. Even a POS trafo is a leverage, works exactly the same way even from the point of view of isolation.
There is a lot of stuff out there easily found but even more easily over looked. Look hard enough you might even figure out your coils need a perticular angle on a core to get the most out of them.
you might even figure out your coils need a particular angle on a core to get the most out of them.
Hi,
The key is not thinking of phase... nor in creating standing waves...
Bajac: In theory the Figuera device should work. The big question is of course is it ou.
Good luck with your replication. Good science is always worth learning about.
Please post your results.
All the best.
/* CLEMENTE FIGUERAS GENERADOR DRIVER
* modification by kEhYo77
*
* Thanks must be given to Martin Nawrath for the developement of the original code to generate a sine wave using PWM and a LPF.
* http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
*/
#include "avr/pgmspace.h" //Store data in flash (program) memory instead of SRAM
// Look Up table of a single sine period divied up into 256 values. Refer to PWM to sine.xls on how the values was calculated
PROGMEM prog_uchar sine256[] = {
127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,178,181,184,187,190,192,195,198,200,203,205,208,210,212,215,217,219,221,223,225,227,229,231,233,234,236,238,239,240,
242,243,244,245,247,248,249,249,250,251,252,252,253,253,253,254,254,254,254,254,254,254,253,253,253,252,252,251,250,249,249,248,247,245,244,243,242,240,239,238,236,234,233,231,229,227,225,223,
221,219,217,215,212,210,208,205,203,200,198,195,192,190,187,184,181,178,176,173,170,167,164,161,158,155,152,149,146,143,139,136,133,130,127,124,121,118,115,111,108,105,102,99,96,93,90,87,84,81,78,
76,73,70,67,64,62,59,56,54,51,49,46,44,42,39,37,35,33,31,29,27,25,23,21,20,18,16,15,14,12,11,10,9,7,6,5,5,4,3,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,18,20,21,23,25,27,29,31,
33,35,37,39,42,44,46,49,51,54,56,59,62,64,67,70,73,76,78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,115,118,121,124
};
#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit)) //define a bit to have the properties of a clear bit operator
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))//define a bit to have the properties of a set bit operator
int PWM1 = 11; //PWM1 output, phase 1
int PWM2 = 3; //PWM2 ouput, phase 2
int offset = 127; //offset is 180 degrees out of phase with the other phase
double dfreq;
const double refclk=31376.6; // measured output frequency
int apin0 = 10;
// variables used inside interrupt service declared as voilatile
volatile byte current_count; // Keep track of where the current count is in sine 256 array
volatile unsigned long phase_accumulator; // pahse accumulator
volatile unsigned long tword_m; // dds tuning word m, refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
void setup()
{
pinMode(PWM1, OUTPUT); //sets the digital pin as output
pinMode(PWM2, OUTPUT); //sets the digital pin as output
Setup_timer2();
//Disable Timer 1 interrupt to avoid any timing delays
cbi (TIMSK0,TOIE0); //disable Timer0 !!! delay() is now not available
sbi (TIMSK2,TOIE2); //enable Timer2 Interrupt
dfreq=10.0; //initial output frequency = 1000.o Hz
tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk; //calulate DDS new tuning word
// running analog pot input with high speed clock (set prescale to 16)
bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS0);
bitClear(ADCSRA,ADPS1);
bitSet(ADCSRA,ADPS2);
}
void loop()
{
apin0=analogRead(0); //Read voltage on analog 1 to see desired output frequency, 0V = 0Hz, 5V = 1.023kHz
if(dfreq != apin0){
tword_m=pow(2,32)*dfreq/refclk; //Calulate DDS new tuning word
dfreq=apin0;
}
}
//Timer 2 setup
//Set prscaler to 1, PWM mode to phase correct PWM, 16000000/510 = 31372.55 Hz clock
void Setup_timer2()
{
// Timer2 Clock Prescaler to : 1
sbi (TCCR2B, CS20);
cbi (TCCR2B, CS21);
cbi (TCCR2B, CS22);
// Timer2 PWM Mode set to Phase Correct PWM
cbi (TCCR2A, COM2A0); // clear Compare Match
sbi (TCCR2A, COM2A1);
cbi (TCCR2A, COM2B0);
sbi (TCCR2A, COM2B1);
// Mode 1 / Phase Correct PWM
sbi (TCCR2B, WGM20);
cbi (TCCR2B, WGM21);
cbi (TCCR2B, WGM22);
}
//Timer2 Interrupt Service at 31372,550 KHz = 32uSec
//This is the timebase REFCLOCK for the DDS generator
//FOUT = (M (REFCLK)) / (2 exp 32)
//Runtime : 8 microseconds
ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect)
{
phase_accumulator=phase_accumulator+tword_m; //Adds tuning M word to previoud phase accumulator. refer to DDS_calculator (from Martin Nawrath) for explination.
current_count=phase_accumulator >> 24; // use upper 8 bits of phase_accumulator as frequency information
OCR2A = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + current_count); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM
OCR2B = pgm_read_byte_near(sine256 + (uint8_t)(current_count + offset)); // read value fron ROM sine table and send to PWM, 180 Degree out of phase of PWM1
}
The reason why the power output is increased by just adding turns to the secondary is because there is no relation between the input and output currents, that is, there is no effects of the Lenz's law.Noted.
In standards transformers, adding turns to the secondary coil would decrease the output current to maintain the current ratio of these transformers. And, if the secondary current is increased, so will the primary. This is no the case for the Figuera's devices.
Noted.Hi,
Also at the time the fashion was for high turns secondary. It was an accepted fact because the interrupter was a common feature of most coils. Sometimes the interrupter is not even mentioned, and I was wondering about Figuera in that light.
Hi,
Which interrupter? Could you clarify that idea? A picture or link will be nice to see it
Regards
Do not feel disappointed if you do not see huge power gains (KW). This is a device with a technology that we have just started to experiment with. It will take some time to get the feeling for its design and extra its full potential.
According to the news, Mr. Figuera was able to make very powerful MEGs. And, I am confident that we will be able to replicate his apparatus.
Being an engineer and having more than 30 years of experience in the field, this moment is a turning point in my professional life. I would have never expected to see a device that can output more than what is being input. At least, that what is taught at all engineering schools.
I am also searching for a dynamo that can generate two voltages with 90 degrees difference. Does anyone know?
Hi Fellows,
Dr. Harold Aspden's two latest patents [UK Patent # 2,432,463 May 23, 2007 and #2,390,941 January 21, 2004] both relating to "Electrical power generating apparatus."
Here are several related links, not only to the patent information but Aether Electric theory in general.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Harold_Aspden (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Harold_Aspden)
Scroll down to the PATENTS heading.
http://haroldaspden.com/ (http://haroldaspden.com/)
http://haroldaspden.com/reports/index.htm (http://haroldaspden.com/reports/index.htm)
Aspden's "Reports," especially No. 1 and No. 6; you may find provide a fresh prospective (???).
Regards...
RESISTANCE, REACTANCE AND IMPEDANCE
Resistance causes the loss of (i.e. dissipates) power,
reactance does not. Pure (ideal) reactance returns all energy that it stores in its field.
At a frequency of 60 Hz, the 160 millihenrys of inductance gives us 60.319 Ω of inductive reactance. This reactance combines with the 60 Ω of resistance to form a total load impedance of 60 + j60.319 Ω, or 85.078 Ω ∠ 45.152o. If we're not concerned with phase angles (which we're not at this point), we may calculate current in the circuit by taking the polar magnitude of the voltage source (120 volts) and dividing it by the polar magnitude of the impedance (85.078 Ω). With a power supply voltage of 120 volts RMS, our load current is 1.410 amps. This is the figure an RMS ammeter would indicate if connected in series with the resistor and inductor.
We already know that reactive components dissipate zero power, as they equally absorb power from, and return power to, the rest of the circuit. Therefore, any inductive reactance in this load will likewise dissipate zero power. The only thing left to dissipate power here is the resistive portion of the load impedance. If we look at the waveform plot of voltage, current, and total power for this circuit, we see how this combination works in Figure below.
FYI: in practice things are more complicated.
On a regular basis, I have to witness factory tests and I also have to review the test reports for traction power transformers and rectifier equipment. In these reports, you cannot take for granted the DC resistance of the coils. For example, because the DC resistance changes with temperature we have to use formulas to extrapolate between the DC resistance and the actual temperature of the winding.
And the power needed to create this moving magnetic field is very small and it could be derived from the output power of the device, therfore his device is a generator (not a transformer!).
Best regards
NMS (NoMoreSlave)
Some documents of my work
Regards,
NMS
@Farmhand,
Your comment is out of context. NMS was just reciting whatever is written in the Figuera's patents and/or in the news of the time. Why the SARCASM? Up to my knowledge no one has successfully replicated Figuera's devices. But, we are working on it!
I noticed that most of your comments are not constructive but meant to disappoint and sometimes disrupt the effort for replicating this device. Just because we have failed four, five, or ten times do not imply that Figuera's devices did not work. Based on the historical data and the reputation of the persons involved, I am confident that his devices work. Not only that, prior to knowing Figuera's work, I was working on similar devices based on the same principle. That is why it was so easy for me to figure out his work.
It is ok and productive to argue and challenge the work being done but it is not acceptable to make comments with the intention to show off, make people appears like idiots, or even try to discourage them from continuum their research on these devices.
Bajac
Hallo forest,
you have the spirit and the vision!!
I speak Spanish fluently as my mother tong (and other 6 languages) so I did give you my own interpretation of what I read in the original patents.
hanon did an excellent ACADEMIC translation. He was very precise. BUT the translation from one language to another ist not an easy task and should not be made -IMO- so perfectly (1:1 word translation), because of the cultural differences between US.
Best regards
NMS
...
...can you and hanon join to prepare translations with all possible rational interpretations or troublesome sentences ?
...
Hanon,
I have thought a lot about why Figuera's patents look so incomplete. Were these patents tampered with after filing? Patent #30378 reads "...for this generator whose form and arrangements are shown in the attached drawings, ....and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink..." Was there more than one page of drawings? Where is the thick red line representing the secondary coils?
It is very suspicious!!!
Hanon: Many thanks for your brilliant detective work.
I have a couple of questions.
In the UK copies of patents are held in Reference libraries up and down the country.
Is there a chance that there may be better copies in the Spanish reference library system?
In the UK there are also technical journals in the library system.
Is there a chance that there are old Spanish technical journals dealing with Figuerea's inventions?
PRINCIPIO DE LA INVENCIÓN
Puesto que todos sabemos que los efectos que se manifiestan cuando un circuito cerrado se aproxima y se aleja de un centro magnético son los mismos que cuando, estando quieto e inmóvil este circuito, el campo magnético dentro del cual está colocado ganando y perdiendo en intensidad; y puesto que toda variación que por cualquiera causa, se produzca en el flujo que atraviese a un circuito es motivo de producción de corriente eléctrica
inducida, se pensó en la posibilidad de construir una máquina que funcionara,
no según el principio de movimiento, como lo hacen las actuales dinamos, sino según el principio de aumento y disminución, o sea de variación del poder del campo magnético, o de la corriente eléctrica que lo produce..
Creating induced current by changing the flux density using a variable excitation current. as simple as that!, by doing that, you create or destroy the lines of flux making then to move closer or wider from each other's, this movement cut the coil winding!”
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if wanted. From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current, is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.
As seen in the drawing the current, once that has made its function, returns
to the generator where taken; naturally in every revolution of the brush will be
a change of sign in the induced current; but a switch will do it continuous if
wanted. From this current is derived a small part to excite the machine
converting it in self-exciting and to operate the small motor which moves the brush and the switch; the external current supply, this is the feeding current,
is removed and the machine continue working without any help indefinitely.
The driving current, or is
an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign
alternately by any known method, or is a part of the total current of the
generator, as it is done today in the current dynamos.
Hallo,
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?
Please make some +&- operation and share your opinion.
Hi Farmhand,
nice to see your post.
IMO, the switch you mentioned is a commutator (the second one controlled by the motor, witch not appears in the patents, because it was a common method), it has the function of converting the AC to DC.
like the one you find in the DC motors but it is used in reveres mode, the brushes rotate to get DC from the statistic output coil for the self-looping.
Regards,
NMS
is Figuera a Lenz killer by 90 degrees?Do you mean 90 degrees phase difference between voltage and current at the output ?
This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true.
Making the device self sustaining is of no problem really. The output is high voltage and higher amperage. Secondary current will flow in the direction opposing the primary current. When you provide a step down transformer to use the electricity, the output of the step down transformer will flow in a direction oppising the feeding secondary current. So the output of the transformer will be in phase and synchronise with the primary input. Now all you need is a make before break change over switch and change the source of feeding current to the output of the transformer. A part of the transformer output is enough to keep the unit running. Rest of the transformer output is given to load. The original feeding current is removed and the system will continue to work. I have not done this part. But I think given this information any number of posters here can replicate the results.
Without access to atmosphere, no device can produce electricity. If you think about it all generators have access to or open to the atmosphere.
Regarding the silly claim part.. I suggest that you take a small transformer. Place copper sheets and plastic sheets beneath it and cover it on sides with copper sheets and then plastic sheets. Insulate it except for the input and output wires.. See if the transformer works and produces current in the secondary.. Why call me silly when you have done the experiment..
1. I'm not teaching any thing for I have made it clear that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.It is perfectly clear that you are not an Electrical Engineer. It is also perfectly clear that you are trying to impart knowledge that you _believe_ you have, to others who you think don't have that knowledge. Please look up the definition of "Teach".
2. What I have posted are results obtained and that can be verified and can be replicated by any one.
3. I do concede that I have not tested the self sustaining part. There is nothing to hide. The output voltage and amperage is very high and cannot be done without help from a trained Electrical Engineer. Safety first for me.There are plenty of people who can handle high voltage and amperage safely. I am one of them. You cannot provide any proof of any self-sustaining electrical device, and the reason has nothing to do with high voltages or currents.
4. Space ships use only solar arrays and Nuclear materials based thermionic batteries. They can easily carry a powerful alternator..Why don't they do it?Because something has to turn the alternator, or provide the force to drive linear alternators. It's simpler and cheaper at present to use solar arrays, but there are Stirling-cycle driven linear alternators operating in space as well. Do a little research!
Results that I stated are verifiable and replicatable by any one..Do the experiment and then shout me down..if the results are not there.
You mix things up..
I said Transformers covered with copper sheets all around. Then plastic sheets placed on copper sheets.
All transformers are made up of magnetising metals. Without iron transformers would not work.
Also false. Demonstrate the validity of this remarkable claim by showing your experimental work.
When transformers are covered by copper plates in the way I described they do not work.
Your statement is transformers covered with metals. All transformers we see are covered with metals to dissipate heat but they are not copper but magnetisable metals. My statement is non magnetic copper sheet covered by non magnetic non metallic plastic. Please post pictures of transformers fully covered with copper working fine..
In my experiments I have found that if we make the magnet very powerful current simply refuses to go to load. If the magnet is very powerful it simply eats the electricity given to it.
Come on, demonstrate! It is up to YOU to provide demonstrations of your ridiculous claims.
I suggest that you wind a quadfilar coil around plastic tube of 4 inch diameter and wrap on that another plastic sheet and iron rods and then continue the winding in this fashion and after about 18 layers complete the quadfilar winding. Try to send the current through the quadfilar winding to a load and see if the load is able to get any power..
Zero.
Powerful magnet simply eats current given to it. I do not know why it happens. This is a result you can replicate easily.
I do not intend to teach any thing to any one. I'm just sharing the results of my experiments. Nothing more. If I have not done any thing, there is truthful admission that I'm yet to do it..I suggest that you replicate the experiments and then tell me please..
"Power is not energy, voltage is not energy, current is not energy."
This is your statement.. Pray tell me then what is Energy?
Amplidyne devices produced more output than input. It is in the patents. Patents that are granted. Devices that are used in US Navy and UK Navy ships during world war II. They claim that every 1 watt of positive feedback the device produced up to 20000 watts of excess output. This is similar to sound amplification only.
Many thanks for accepting at least one of my statements that I'm not an Electrical Engineer.
I used a ready made 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer to do the experiment. It did not work when covered in the way I indicated.
The other large 18 layer device produced very strong magnetism but the current would not go to the lamps and power them up.
As I said when I time and money are available I do the experiments out of interest. I have tried to replicate the Alfred Hubbard device without success todate. However I do know one thing. The outer 8 coils are wound in this fashion. the first four coils are wound in clockwise direction and the next four coils are wound in ccw direction and only then in all the 8 coils magnetism is produced. Otherwise magnetism is not produced in the last four coils.
I will check your statement on the alternators working in space. My knowledge is limited and I continuously learn.
There is no intention to teach and only intention to share the results.
I strongly suggest that if you can handle high voltages and high amperages, please replicate the experiment of Figuera as described by me. And see the output voltage and amperage. And please be honest with results.
Interesting thing is output is 630 volts and 20 amps at no load. I will need to take an electrical engineer and custom built a transformer to step down the voltage and then see if it can be tested to see if the amperage wattage shown is real. Until then let me keep quiet.
This is actually a punch to me really. Earlier in posts Farmhand has claimed that a device cannot produce more output than input. Now you provide the proof that a device can provide more output than input. Why don't you show a video of your 30000 watts output transformer in youtube video for a 75 watts input..for the benefit of poor souls like me. Since it is your claim you can demonstrate it.There is nothing special about making more Watts at peak output than input, because POWER IS NOT ENERGY. Ask Farmhand, he has devices too that produce more peak power output than they use as input, by far. He knows that these devices are not overunity and cannot "self sustain" or be "self-looped". Naive measurements -- such as are likely to be performed by patent examiners who are not physicists or electrical engineers -- will see the peak power levels and believe that some "energy" amplification is happening, when actually it is nothing of the sort.
Hi NRamaswami,So then, I guess that user "hanon" also believes that transformers need iron cores to work, that they can be prevented from working by wrapping in copper and plastic, that magnets eat electricity, that an Amplidyne is self sustaining.... but instead of providing evidence, he chooses to attack me personally instead !!
Please don't enter in the game initiated by Tinsekoala. This user is the first time that participate into this thread...what a coincidence... You are just sharing your empirical results...if someone don't want to understand this it is not our problem. Just ignore those users...As Don Quixote said :"Dogs are barking, therefore we are getting closer"
Keep on testing and doing a good work, and avoid going into these dirty games
Best regards and good luck!!
... We got 630 volts and 20 amps in the Ammeter at no load. Since this was way too high for us we stopped. We need to build a transformer to step down the voltage to around 200 volts and then give it to the load lamps to check. Secondly I have had
50 Amps Ammeters burning out after showing 50 amps at no load. I would not believe that there was amps at no load if the Ammeters had not burned out..
...
....
Both Primary and secondary had voltmeter and Ammeter connected separately to them. This why we are able to say what is the input voltage and amperage and what is the output voltage and amperage. Input voltage is 220 volts and 7 amps. Output is 630 volts and 20 amps. We need to put a step down transformer to see that the output is not peak output as it happens when we switch on or switch off but sustained output.
....
....
3. We did not short the secondary. It was kept open. Your assumption is wrong here. That is why we say under no load conditions.
....
Hi:
Double the voltage and amperage would be quadrupled is the dictum on secondaries I think.
For 250 volts we had 2 amps of useful power. No doubt on that.
Make the voltage 500 volts and the amps become 16 amps.
Make the voltage 630 volts and the amps become 20.16 amps..So I think we kind of recorded properly. But let me check by testing.
...
...
I'm not able to understand why all of you people ignore the power of magnetic attraction between opposite poles present in this design and in the design of Alfread Hubbard.
...
GERONIMO BOLIBAR
Engineer-Industrial Property Agent
Barcelona
Honorable Sir,
In compliance with Article 100 of the Law of Property May 16, 1902 I have the honor to
transmit to you a certificate signed by engineer D. Jose Ma Bolibar y Pinós crediting to
have conducted measures of practical implementation of the patent No. 47706 issued
on June 6, 1910 in favor of Constantine Buforn by an “Electrical Generator "Universal".
God preserve you many years.
Barcelona June 5, 1913. Signed: Gerónimo Bolibar
To: Illustrious Lord Chief Registrar of Industrial Property
....................................................................
D. Jose Ma Bolibar y Pinós, Industrial Engineer, at the request of D. Constantine
Buforn, patentee of invention No. 47706.
Certify: That I have examined the material consisting of original memory corresponding
to said background patent, issued on June 6, 1910, for "A GENERATOR OF
ELECTRICITY" UNIVERSAL "which consists essentially of a series of inducer
electromagnets combined with a series of electromagnets or induced coils, a switch
and comprising a brush or rotary switch, which makes contact successively on the
series of fixed contacts and get a continuous variation of the current flowing through
the coils of the inducer electromagnets, developing in this manner a current in induced
coils.
I further certify that provided the necessary reports when they had to come to the
knowledge of the conditions under which it is carried out the exploitation of this patent,
that D. Constantine Buforn exploitation of this patent in the street Universidad No. 110
ground floor, of this city, having of all the elements necessary for the construction, in
the proportion rational for its use, of electricity generators which are described and
characterized in the memory of that patent.
For all these reasons, I consider the above patent implementation in accordance with
Article 98 provided in the current Industrial Property Law.
And for the record I issue this in the city of Barcelona on June 5, 1913.
Signed: J.M. Bolibar
..............................................................
On June 6, 1913 Mr. G. Bolibar submitted certification dated June 5, 1913 and signed
by Mr. J.M. Bolibar, Industrial Engineer, to justify the implementation of the invention
patent number 47406.
NOTE
In view of what is stated in the certification referred to in the above extract, presented
for the purposes of Article 100 of the Law, and as the application was filed within the
period set by Article 99 of the Law thereof, the undersigned believes appropriate to
declare as implemented the object of that patent, according to article 34 of the
Regulation.
V.S. resolved
Madrid, July 9, 1913
Signed
Implemented
Number 47706
July 9, 1913
The note
Signed
Simply this is an amplifying transformer. Two step down transformers acting as primary electromagnets set up in such a way that the opposite poles of the two are facing each other and in that place you place another secondary of many turns to step up the voltage. Then what you get is both amperage and voltage increase. In the step down transformers, amperage is increased and in the secondary between the two step down transformers voltage is increased. When all three secondaries are connected in series you get both a voltage and amperage increase. This is as simple as that.
Hi Forest:
All wires are 4 sq mm wires that can carry up to 24 amps.
Both secondary and primary are only 4 sq mm wires.
We bought coils after coils of wires of 4 sq mm only. Then put them all together and wrapped up them to make a quadfilar coil. I do not remember the exact number of layers of primary but it was four layers and both primary sides had the same number of layers and same number of turns. Then the magnetic field strength is approximately equal.
However the resistor effect may be there due to the current circulating four times in the primary P1 first before it went to P2 where it circulated another four times before it returned to mains.
Will it have any effect? I really do not have any theoretical knowledge on this part. Nor do I have equipment to measure these things nor I have knowledge or experience in handling such equipment or even what those equipment are..
Output wires were not connected to each other. They were connected to the load bulbs but because the voltmeter showed very high voltage, we did not switch on the lamps. It is at that point the ammeter showed 20 amps.
Normally the Ammeter does not show any amps when no light is burning or even when two 200 watts lights are burning. Ammeter starts showing amperage only when 3x 200 watts lamps are burning and that is only around 1.5 amps. Although the lights are rated at 200 watts they consume less than 200 watts to light up.
Hi All:
Ammeters are always connected in series. Patrick J Kelly my mentor has advocated low voltage and low amperage to give to devices and those devices did not work. For they were huge the and input voltage and amperage was less to make any effect at low frequency.
We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. So what Newton tells me makes sense.
Even wikipedia says that Lenz law does not apply to charges that are opposite to each other is not included in the textbooks.
...........
... we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses.
hi.. all
NRamaswami stated some where ( i forgot ) that he was helped by some electrical engineer,
so pre-assumed that there was no wrong measurement, maybe only miss communication.
however, any sketch/drawing "how to use ampmeter and voltmeter" from gyulasun or others should be good to posted, i agree with what you said gyulasun about measurement. i have ever seen from webpage someone measure amperage by connecting ampmeter to output directly.
i guess, only with sketch/drawing will reduce miss communication, as Alvaro_CS (thanks for drawing) who have posted "drawing" help us to look it as start point. those all will save much time from reading and arguing everything. and also, English is not my daily language, sorry for that.
...
Hi Gyula:
You see the picture of the Ammeter at the bottom. Up to 5 amps I would not know what is the amperage. I have better ones than this but they are little more costly. I can order what is needed over the phone.
....
I will do a simple wires only set up. Give it a one shot current for a second.. Then remove it. If the device continues to produce electricity afteer the source power is removed, then you have a self sustaining generator..That is fairly simple to do than the expensive method you describe. The output would be lower but it would continuously come. As a proof of concept device. If that is fine, then I can do that. What output would come, I do not know now but I'm not really bothered about it either. Any continuous output should satisfy all including me.
Is that ok..give me four or five days..
................
We have connected ammeters and voltmeters properly. But NewtonII could be correct in his statements for we had many Ammeters burn out and we avoided that problem by having fuzes to the primary input to control the current and I can tell you we have probably lost about 100 fuses. ................
describes in one line for using a secondary under the primary to get industrial scale currents. ...
...Possibly all of you have focused only on the drawings and have not studied the patent description of the original and missed the line.
At no load, an ideal transformer draws virtually no current from the mains, since it is simply a large inductance. The whole principle of operation is based on induced magnetic flux, which not only creates a voltage (and current) in the secondary, but the primary as well! It is this characteristic that allows any inductor to function as expected, and the voltage generated in the primary is called a 'back EMF' (electromotive force). The magnitude of this voltage is such that it almost equals (and is effectively in the same phase as) the applied EMF.
Do you mean to say that we must provide exact wattage consumed by the primary back to the primary for it to self run or in exact voltage:amperage combination apart from exact wattage.. For example if I provide the feedback from a lower voltage and higher amperage but similar wattage as feedback from thick wires, would it become higher voltage lower amperage combination automatically due to the fact that the primary has thinner and so higher resistance wires..Can you clarify on this point please.. I'm obliged..
I fail to understand how two powerful electromagnetic cores with opposite poles can be kept apart. That will require a tremendous effort.
You cannot build a cat and should not say why it does not weigh or behave like a Tiger. To make some thing to become a Tiger, you must build that like a Tiger.
This is not a single rod to be fixed by nuts and bolts. Do you know how many rods are needed to pack a 4 inch dia plastic tube. Try packing it and then you would know the number of iron rods needed and the weight of the soft iron. So you think you would make two massive 4 inch dia soft iron electromagnets of 2 Tesla with opposite poles and they would remain in place with a clamp, nut and bolt.. At least when you think, please properly think..There is a difference between thinkers and performers.