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.
Hi All:
I saw Farmhand's posts about a book..I don't go by books.. I go by my experimental results. I have not seen any book that says you need a particular voltage:amperage ratio for the secondary to start functioning effectively. We found out from experience. What we share are the experimental results. Not abcd is stated in xyz book..I'm not an Electrical Engineer and I do not understand the page long calculations and so I ignore them all and trust my experimental results and then move on from there to do other experiments.
I agreed with newton II and also informed that we lost nearly 100 fuzes..So you well know that we have done a lot of work.
We will present the experimental results.. If they are not greater output than input also we will put it here..When I have the honesty to say all this what is my problem? I have no problem.. Really not worried if One member will not give me an ear..I am least bothered really if one member will not listen to me.. Experimental results that any one can replicate will be posted..
And I have asked how many of you have converted an iron to a permanent magnet and I have not received an answer. That is kept a secret.
So I do not care about much of other books. I do not care about what abcd theory says or xyz says.. All I care to see is what is the experimental results. Does it makes common sense? Can we go further without taking risks..
I will devise a safe method to test the high voltage output step down by a transformer and then giving it to a load by putting about 100 x 200 watts bulbs in parallel and keeping all of them on. give power to the primary to induce the secondary and then the step down transformer. Let us wait and see what the voltmeter and Ammeter show on the load. We will then know what happens.. What is the output wattage and what is the input wattage.. We will then see.. Do I have any thing to lose if I say look what we have got is less than the input..Nothing..
Do I have any thing to gain by saying look what I have got is more than the input. Again nothing..
I share the results with the community.. Nothing more and Nothing less. Will it change the world. I do not know and I do not think so..For I have got only two people indicating that they would attempt to replicate the experiments. And NewtonII who appears to be very experienced felt that the flux would be additive in the central core which is what should happen as that portion uses the forces of magnetic attraction.
The problem is all of you have studied theories and machines that use only forces of magnetic repulsion.
Figuera advocated a totally more efficient concept of using forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction combined to get a greater outpt than the input. If one module does not produce the results, we need to give the output of first module to the second and so on. All this increases the input voltage:amperage ratio. This is why I clearly mentioned at fixed low frequency of 50 hz, if you want to get better results increased the input voltage:amperage ratio but the amperage should be reasonbly ok, in the 5 to 10 amps range for magnetism to be effective. I have given all information..And I have said that larger the core size, longer the core and longer the number of wires and higher the number of turns all these things work..
Check Magnetic field strength in any book.. It would say Magnetic field strength = Number of Amperes x Number of turns.. Is there any mention of the need for higher voltage there..
Look at the inductor capacitor theory: As the magnetic field collapses, the electric field increases..As the electric field collapses the magnetic field increses..What does that mean.. A low magnetic field that can create high induced emf will result in a high electric field..This is borne out by our experiments. But if you give milliamps and 100,000 volts you would not see any results.. Input amps must be adequate to create a reasonable amount of magnetism, a low level magnetism to produce electric field.
Have you bought and open a bottle dynamo used in bicycles.. See that the magnet that rotates in dynamos is of very low magnetic strength. That is desired to produced current..
Any way I think we can build a self sustaining generator and give it a one shot electric current and make it continuously produce electric current. Then I will provide the full construction methods and why it works and how it works..That is if It works as I anticipate now. Many of my anticipations have been knocked out by experimental results and so I go only by experimental results..
...
could you please make any comment on the theoretical aspect of what I posted I the last picture?
I will very appreciated.
Thanks!
...
I have to notice that in a conventional transformator the coils are also fixed and the magnetic flux density also changes as the input AC current alternates. So I wonder what makes the Figuera setup to produce more input with respect to its input power? Could you expand your understanding on it?
When core is through (ie.,single) the fluxes produced by primary and secondary repel each other because both fluxes are produced within 'one system'. When air gap is introduced between primary and secondary cores, it becomes 'action at a distance' hence fluxes produced by primary and secondary attract each other. If you compare between working principle of a transformer and a generator you can easily make out the difference.
But I am afraid when you make fluxes additive in a transformer you may not get output from secondary at all. Because it becomes like a transformer on no-load where fluxes produced by primary is neutralised by fluxes produced by the core hence transformer on no-load doesnot consume any power (other than losses) eventhough it is connected to mains and current will be flowing through it. To take power out of transformer, the flux produced by primary has to be repelled by the flux produced by secondary which happens only when you apply load on secondary. (without air gap between primary and secondary).
This is only my view of the situation. Others may have different thoughts.
Anyway you may come out with something else while conducting experiments. Wish everyone good luck.
I have to notice that in a conventional transformator the coils are also fixed and the magnetic flux density also changes as the input AC current alternates. So I wonder what makes the Figuera setup to produce more input with respect to its input power? Could you expand your understanding on it?
I read some friend posting action at a distance..What is that? If fire cracker is suddely burst some where close to you unseen by you and unexpected by you, your body gets a shock due to sudden sound.you are rattled...that is action at a distance..
- Convert 2xAC (coming from an extra coils, and only shown in the later Buforn Patents) to 2xDC!! (@90 deg out of the phase)
.....
about 2 phased currents: they are obtainable using a capacitor
see this one at 2:54 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8)
....puesto que la que NO VA A EXCITAR unos electroimanes EXCITA a los otros y así sucesivamente;
pudiendo decirse que los electrodos N y S obran simultáneamente y en opuesto sentido pues mientras los primeros van llenándose de corriente se
van vaciando los segundos y repitiéndose este efecto seguida y ordenadamente se mantiene una alteración constante en los campos magnéticos dentro los cuales se halla colocado el circuito inducido, sin más complicaciones que el giro de una escobilla o grupo de escobillas que se mueven circularmente alrededor del cilindro “G” por la acción de un pequeño motor eléctrico.
Como se ve en el dibujo la corriente una vez ha hecho su oficio en los diferentes electroimanes vuelve al generador de donde se ha tomado;
naturalmente que en cada revolución de la escobilla habrá un cambio de signo en la corriente inducida; pero un conmutador la hará continua si así se desea.
De esta corriente se deriva una pequeña parte y con ella se excita la máquina convirtiéndola en auto excitadora y se acciona el pequeño motor que hace
girar la escobilla y el conmutador; se retira la corriente extraña o de cebo y la máquina continua su misión sin necesidad de que le presten ayuda ninguna
para suministrarla indefinidamente.
Why do these images of patent drawings look touched up? If they are, is there any chance to post them without the touch ups?
Sorry about that image garbage at the top of the post.It's not letting me in to edit it out.
I will keep trying.
Just out of curiosity and since I have an old, 2phase 3 motors steppermotor control card (smc 800) here, did anyone in here actually manage to get this thing working?
Position A = If you slid the coil between the north and south magnets you would not cut any more or less lines of force. If you strengthened the or weakened the magnets the coil would not cut any more or less lines of force.The lines still thread through the coil just stronger or weaker.Best you could get is a piss poor transformer. The coil when rotated changes the amount of flux it cuts and the number of lines.Till it reaches position C and is now facing the other way and continues to turn and the effect is reversed. A and C are simply a way to get rotation to reach B and D. Get rid of A and C.
Treat the N and S magnets as the motor. If you face the magnets N,N or S,S you have obviated another rotation.That is the magnets do not have to swap poles N,S/S,N because that takes more work.The point where the two fields meet will have a shear line seperating them like two window fans blowing at each other.The air will circulate around the fan like discrete bubbles circling each fan. The center point of collision of the air has two opposite direction of flow. If your hand is more close to one fan it feels the air flow and direction from that fan and if closer to other it feels the opposite. If the fans are alternately slowed down and sped up the collision/wall will move side to side. There will exist a positive pressure between the two fans all the time.
N-S< (induced) >S-N. The induced is AC the poles in the induced alternate. The induced is not consuming of the inducers. The only consumption is the initial power used to establish the fields in the inducer magnets. After they start shifting they sustain themselves the same way any ordinary generator does with movement,you do not input current into a generator from a outside source while using a gas engine as a prime mover to generate electric do you? You just pull the cord start the engine and poof out comes the juice. Long as there is rotation or movement it will expand to it's effective limit and pour out the good stuff till you do something stupid or neglectful to stop it.The real question,the right question is how does a generator work in the first place.Because it does in fact get more magnetic field out then it started with even though no one added any current or greater field strength from an outside source. If something is not true today then it was not true yesterday and wont be true tomorrow.
Ok, I was reading the patent again and then I realized: the inductors are not eighter SNNS or SNSN, they are both, alternating! There is no other possible interpretation. Carefully watch the following diagram and be aware of the flux always tries to flow in a circle using the easiest path:
Dieter i don't think they are the same. yours has two positive peaks and two negative peaks from two different coils and i have one coil producing only a positive peak up and down and one coil producing only a negative peak up and down with o voltage line being shifted every 180*.Although I believe I remember it was said (by who?) the polarity of the inductors is alternating, your concept may as well be interesting. If the device is once built, all these modes can be tested with a few editing of drivers and wiring.
...The only reason why I would use caps is to go out of phase as described, as substitute for the commutator or driver cirquit. This cap would have to be strictly nonaffective on the coil cirquit.
that deal with the Caps are not a good idea as Clemente NEVER stated a word about caps besides the whole idea was to get magnetic swing with a split core (two).
....I absolutely agree! They closed the books of wisdom and locked them with many seals. . They cannot control the world when there is free energy. Their system would collapse and they would lose everything. From standard oil to the m.i. complex, in the dawn of 20th century it was decided to suppress any independence from oil, coal, uranium. But they can't hide it any longer. It's just a matter of glimpse in time until mankind will proceed, leaving those ticks behind... :o
if my theory is correct their will be no lenz even produced....my advantage is i am self taught and my mind is not corrupted by present day Academic or Scientific DOGMA that hovers over our Societies keeping us in the dark (dumming down) not allowing the real truth about magnetism and electricity being two sides of the same coin and that it can be pulled from the Environment at your house just like the utility companies do... i am out side the box looking in not the other way around.........i have one board at 500-800 HZ and one at 60 hz i will be testing
Hi Dieter,
Thanks for sharing your results. I have checked some electric theory and it seems that a cap unphase 90° the voltage. I think we must try to get the current to be unphased too
If you substract the resistor consumption, which is not really due to the device it self, then which is you balance.
I am lately thinking that Figuera really used coil in a row, not closing the magnetic circle. I arrived to this concluion after studing the last Buforn patent. There he cascades many group of three coils in a row saying that "this way you could use both poles of the electromagnet at the same time". He also placed all them in a row, not closing a torus, which apparently had being a better configuration.
This Buforn patent is opposing to the use of closed magnetic cores but it advocates a kind of linear configuration, longitudinal magnets. For some reason he needed to have open magnetic path at both sides of this row of magnets. Please download the pdf with the Buforn patents and check the last drawing. What is your oppinion?
Regards
From Buforn patent No. 57955
Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet."
From Buforn patent No. 57955
Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet."
hola hanon
I´m intrigued by this "around", as he says electromagnet, not coil.
may u post the original text in spanish please ?
(I revised all your posts and could not find the spanish version)
thanks
Alvaro
naturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current;
...
What is the number of turns for a 4 sq mm wire to be wound on a 4 inch dia iron core. soft iron core with greater induction ability. I'm able to hold the electromagnet study at 240 turns by limiting the supply of current to 5 amps in a 2.5 inch dia core. But with 4 inch core, I'm not able to do it. If we use trifilar coil the 32 amps office tripper trips out. If use bifilar coil it takes 18 amps. If we use a single wire I may be able to maintain the electromagnet stable. 4 sq mm wire has 4.91 ohms per 1000 meteres.
...
Marathonman
When you pump a pure dc pulse into a coil, the collapsing field between the pulses will cause a polarity change in the back emf, you will always have to deal with ac. If you block it with a diode, it will get hot and waste energy. Where did you read Figueras had AC Generators?
In your drawng there the coils are facing two diffrent poles, neutralizing eachother. When you vary the voltages, you may rescue some of the energy, but not much.
In a generator there is indeed a similar setup, the inductor coil ends face the inducted coil ends and the inducted ones will move along continously. So sometimes they are facing s to n completely, or n to n, this is the peak in the output. Any constellation in between, like your 50:50 overlapping does reduce the inductive coupling significantly. In your setup, the energy output will be higher if you disconnect every 2nd primary.
Then the cores don't face eachother, but get close only at the edges, this is not how induction works.
Seriously guys, you seem to love to theorize and completely ignore the fact that there's an existing, working prototype that was presented to you including all data. You tell me my practical device is wrong and your theory is right. Is that openminded? No it's absurd.
IotaYodi:
Im going to add this.
This is an excerpt from an article about Stubblefield written by one of his grandchildren:
Grandpa was now once again blamed by his wife of 36 years for accidently poisoning three of their nine children through inadvertencies. Neither, at the time of their experimenting with various mixtures of Pitchblende and salt crystals within their 85 farmland soil, knew it was contaminating Teleph-on-delgreen. From 1881 to 1906, the soil-coil RF antenna "hotspots" -- that made it possible for Grandpa Nathan Stubblefield to develop and patent the 1898 induction earth batteries and 1908 Wireless Telephoneâ„¢ -- did contaminate their foodstuffs and water.
It wasn't until 1906 when their son Tesla died teething on a potato from one of the RF antenna "hotspots," -- that they realized that it could have been the RF antenna "hotspots," mixtures of Pitchblende, salt crystals and other active metals that created the healthy looking but tainted vegetable gardens. The watermelons, tobacco and other vegetation they had commenced growing and selling since their courtship in 1880, when he was 20 and Ada Mae, 16 years of age became an invitation for both invention and the destruction of a family.
They couldn't shake the sense of dread, so Ada Mae on their 36th anniversary, 1917, left Grandpa Nat stranded. He moved his gear to a one room hut and became a stranger than fiction recluse. On summer nights, he would shock his neighbors by lighting up hill sides from his hut, with his buried RF induction transmitting coils.
One wonders what he did to the ground, the batteries as patented could not do this.
Hans von Lieven
http://keelytech.com/stubblefield.html
Hi Gyula: Pleaes help.
I'm not able to understand the comments of Farmhand that this device used or might have used radioactive materials. I'm a Patent Attorney and I have studied a little bit of science history. Let me now state my views. I'm not competent to write on equations etc.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Lenz law is a basic principle of Electromagnetism. Lenz law as far as I understand states that the current produced in the induced or secondary circuit tends to oppose the current of the inducing circuit or inductor. Therefore when the magnet rotates the current produced in the coils surrounding the magnet createt an equal and opposite force against the rotation of the magnet. So greater mechanical force needs to be given to the inductor. Similarly in transformers the primary input that creates the rotating magnetic field has to be higher than the output secondary current for the secondary current has to be overcome. In transformers there is no mechanical motion and so transformers are the most efficient electrical devices we have today. Over a period of time, this principle has not been clearly stated in science books. They now teach that it is the mechanical energy applied to generators that is converted to electrical energy and energy can be transformed from one form to another and energy is lost in the transformation process so we cannot get more than 100% efficiency.
I hope now the radioactive materials will disappear..and common sense will prevail.
3. How a Transformer Works
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.
Although a simple calculation can be made to determine the internally generated voltage, doing so is pointless since it can't be changed. As described in Part 1 of this series, for a sinusoidal waveform, the current through an inductor lags the voltage by 90 degrees. Since the induced current is lagging by 90 degrees, the internally generated voltage is shifted back again by 90° so is in phase with the input voltage. For the sake of simplicity, imagine an inductor or transformer (no load) with an applied voltage of 230V. For the effective back EMF to resist the full applied AC voltage (as it must), the actual magnitude of the induced voltage (back EMF) is just under 230V. The output voltage of a transformer is always in phase with the applied voltage (within a few thousandths of a degree).
For example ... a transformer primary operating at 230V input draws 150mA from the mains at idle and has a DC resistance of 2 ohms. The back EMF must be sufficient to limit the current through the 2 ohm resistance to 150mA, so will be close enough to 229.7V (0.3V at 2 ohms is 150mA). In real transformers there are additional complications (iron loss in particular), but the principle isn't changed much.
If this is all to confusing, don't worry about it. Unless you intend to devote your career to transformer design, the information is actually of little use to you, since you are restrained by the 'real world' characteristics of the components you buy - the internals are of little consequence. Even if you do devote your life to the design of transformers, this info is still merely a curiosity for the most part, since there is little you can do about it.
When you apply a load to the output (secondary) winding, a current is drawn by the load, and this is reflected through the transformer to the primary. As a result, the primary must now draw more current from the mains. Somewhat intriguingly perhaps, the more current that is drawn from the secondary, the original 90 degree phase shift becomes less and less as the transformer approaches full power. The power factor of an unloaded transformer is very low, meaning that although there are volts and amps, there is relatively little power. The power factor improves as loading increases, and at full load will be close to unity (the ideal).
I didn't make any radioactive materials appear I merely mentioned the possibility based on the time frame and the practices at the time.
Now you didn't want to read the book where this is explained, but you want Gyula to explain it to you.
http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm)
1) Without a annular core there is no rotating magnetic field.
2) The output from the secondary is not the back emf that restricts the primary input, applying a load to the secondary causes the primary back emf to lower and this allows the primary to feed the secondary.
I can quote the words from Tesla that explains that his rotating magnetic field motors and generators acted exactly like a normal motor or generator or transformer when the load is applied to the secondary then the counter emf in the primary is reduced and more input can flow.
It's in this book. https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf (https://ia700302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf)
Now things change when we have gapped cores and windings separated and this device is one such case. Still there is absolutly no reason this device should output more energy than is input. Outputting more power than is input is easy, transferring more energy to the load than is input is more difficult or impossible so far for an apparently closed system such as the Figuera device.
VxA = Apparent power, not real power, and power is not energy.
Feel free to show your OU results when you get them.
If Gyula doesn't answer feel free to ask him again.
Cheers
In many respects these motors are
similar to the continuous current motors. If load is put on, the
speed, and also the resistance of the motor, is diminished and
more current is made to pass through the energizing coils, thus
POLYPHASE CURRENTS. 21
increasing the effort. Upon the load being taken off, the
counter-electromotive force increases and less current passes
through the primary or energizing coils. Without any load the
speed is very nearly equal to that of the shifting poles of the
field magnet.
Wings,in the book see this Farmhand post:
Very interesting old news snippet. Where did you find that?
Regards
Hi Gyula:
By the way I have no bobbins. I use plastic tubes which are 2.5 inch or 4 inch dia and 30 cm to 50 cm in length for winding the wires. Each one of them is packed with softiron rods. 2.5 inch takes about 60 of 6mm dia soft iron rods while 4 inches one take a lot more. Soft iron rods are about 43 cm long. or 30 cm long. All cores are either soft iron or made up of iron powder which is packed in to the tubes with plastic caps on both sides. 99% of the time we do not use iron powder. All winding is by hand so far. No machine winding and no enamelled wire so far.
...
Here is an online coil calculator that allows input of insulation thickness and type, coil pitch etc.
https://www.rac.ca/tca/RF_Coil_Design.html (https://www.rac.ca/tca/RF_Coil_Design.html)
...
Impedance equation: Calculated from resistance (R) and reactance (XL - XC) )
...
my question is: in theory will the resulting wave in the two primary be 90 or 180 out of phase ? . . .or
will it be any out of phase at all ?
...
Monster Ferrite Rods http://www.stormwise.com/page26.htm (http://www.stormwise.com/page26.htm)
Paper towel cardboard centers and toilet paper centers covered in resin are good bobbins to.
Marathonman, that's looking good, I wonder how the impact of such a concentration would be.
Farmhand - I was wrong about 180° being no good. I made some further tests and it turned out, 180°, or when AC is used just to exchange the poles on one primary, performs even slightly better than 90°. So I dropped the phaseshifting cap and simply connected one primary in reverse, but both from 12 Vac (actually about 2 Vac, because there is a 27 ohm resistor to limit the max dissipation).
But I got some really exciting news, I may have cracked the secret (I know I said that already twice, but this time it is really something huge). It is very simple, gives 5x more energy, could well be the secret of the Figuera Generator and may have something to do with the Coil set that I have made, because it works only under certain wiring conditions. Using other connections , even although the coils did some transforming, the effect was not seen.
All those who insist on a commutator are on the right track! I found this so exciting that I made a video. It explains it all. Watch this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s&feature=youtu.be)
Regards
@ Hanon,
Thank you very much for the information you posted about the sequence of patents published by Buforn.
I would like to ask you, when were those patents made available in the internet? About three years ago, I remember searching the internet for any information about Clemente Figuera and I was only able to get one sketch (in bad shape) from one of Figuera’s patent. The sketch is the one I showed in the paper that I posted in this thread.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I STARTED READING BUFORN'S PATENTS (124 PAGES DOCUMENT) AND I WAS REALLY AMAZED TO SEE THE SAME STATEMENTS THAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG. I HAVE READ THE FIRST FIVE PAGES (IN SPANISH) AND THERE WAS A PARAGRAPH THAT CALLED MY ATTENTION VERY DEEPLY. THE PARAGRAPH IS THE SECOND FOUND ON PAGE 6 OF THE PDF (PAGE 5 OF THE DOCUMENT) AND IT READS SOMETHING LIKE:
“IT IS THEREFORE DEMONSTRATED THAT A DYNAMO (ACTION) IS NOT A CONVERSION OF MECHANICAL WORK INTO ELECTRICITY: THEN, WHERE IS THE ELECTRIC CURRENT COMING FROM? THE CURRENT OF THESE GENERATORS MIGHT BE PRODUCED BY AN UNKNOWN PARTICULAR MOVEMENT OF THE MOLECULES WITHIN THE MASS.”
THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS A SCIENTIFIC HERESY THAT I HAVE SUPPORTED FOR SOME TIME. I WILL GIVE YOU THE FOLLOWING TWO CONDITIONS TO THINK ABOUT:
1. AS I STATED IN THE PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS, THE STANDARD TRANSFORMERS MAINTAIN A CONSTANT Φm AT NO LOAD AND AT 100% LOAD DUE TO THE AUTO REGULATION MECHANISM OF THESE CLOSED IRON CORE TRANSFORMERS. THE CONSTANT Φm IS ACKNOWLEDGE BY THE MAINSTREAM ENGINEERING BOOKS AND CAN BE VERIFIED BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE TRANSFORMER’S OUTPUT VOLTAGE REMAINS ABOUT THE SAME DURING THE LOADING PROCESS. THEN, IF THE ENERGY OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD DOES NOT CHANGE NOTABLY AT ZERO AND FULL LOAD, WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE ENERGY IS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED THROUGH THE MAGNETIC FIELD. IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INDUCES A VOLTAGE IN THE SECONDARY COIL BUT NOT THE ENERGY AND/OR POWER BEING DELIVERED TO A LOAD. THE INEFFICIENCY RELATIONSHIP OF THE INPUT/OUTPUT POWER IN STANDARD TRANSFORMERS IS DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF CLOSED CORES, BUT IT IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE. AND,
2. YET, I HAVE NOT FOUND A MATHEMATICAL MODEL DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ENERGY OF A GIVEN MAGNETIC FIELD AND THE POWER PRODUCED BY A COIL DUE TO A VOLTAGE INDUCED BY SAID FIELD.
SUCH STATEMENT IN THE PATENT IS VERY PROFOUND! AND IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!
BAJAC.
Preface
One thing that obviously confuses many people is the idea of flux density within the transformer core. While this is covered in more detail in Section 2, it is important that this section's information is remembered at every stage of your reading through this article. For any power transformer, the maximum flux density in the core is obtained when the transformer is idle. I will reiterate this, as it is very important ...
For any power transformer, the maximum flux density is obtained when the transformer is idle.
The idea is counter-intuitive, it even verges on not making sense. Be that as it may, it's a fact, and missing it will ruin your understanding of transformers. At idle, the transformer back-EMF almost exactly cancels out the applied voltage. The small current that flows maintains the flux density at the maximum allowed value, and represents iron loss (see Section 2). As current is drawn from the secondary, the flux falls slightly, and allows more primary current to flow to provide the output current.
It is not important that you understand the reasons for this right from the beginning, but it is important that you remember that for any power transformer, the maximum flux density is obtained when the transformer is idle. Please don't forget this .
Elsewhere on the Net you will find claims that the maximum power available from a transformer is limited by saturation of the core - this is unmitigated drivel, is completely false and must be ignored or you will never understand transformers properly!
The information provided here is accurate and correct, and anyone who claims different is wrong! That might sound harsh, but it's true nonetheless.
When you apply a load to the output (secondary) winding, a current is drawn by the load, and this is reflected through the transformer to the primary. As a result, the primary must now draw more current from the mains. Somewhat intriguingly perhaps, the more current that is drawn from the secondary, the original 90 degree phase shift becomes less and less as the transformer approaches full power. The power factor of an unloaded transformer is very low, meaning that although there are volts and amps, there is relatively little power. The power factor improves as loading increases, and at full load will be close to unity (the ideal).
....
Some questions to be answered:
the 2 caps are not connected, they were used in the 90 deg. setup, two electrolyticsls in AC, +--+ connected, each one 470uF. The resistor is a 27 Ohm power resistor, just to make sure total power dissipation is not too high for the supply. Instead of this resistor I could as well use 12 additional coils instead. The cap after the rectifier has 1 uF only.
....
Bajac, as explained in this document about Power Transformers and applies to power transformers "mainly" not flybacks and so forth. - http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm)Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the article do not answer the question for the cases I refer to.
....
I am not sure if I measure the Amperes right. Of course the voltage drops almost to zero when the Amps are measured, because this will practicly short cirquit them. Am I doing this wrong?
....
Gyulasun
Thanks very much for your help! Unfort. my analogue meter can measure only DCmA, limited to 250 mA, so I was stuck at point 2.
But it was a good idea to use a resistor as the load. I measured the voltage across the resistor and used the formula (V*V)/R=W. And that was really disappointing. I tried several resistors, 5,10,15,27 and 1800 Ohm, the results were under 100mW, although inconsistent, so this formula doesn't seem to be precise or reliable. Eighter the formula is crap, or my device is. Yeah, the ups and downs in life... actually downs could be used with a dynamo attached ???
I have to test this under better conditions. But thanks a lot.
Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the article do not answer the question for the cases I refer to.
Hi Marathonman:what the heck was this all about other than you running the mouth about God knows what i dont know. it sure wasn't about any thing i was talking about. i don't want to sound mean but r u on crack or what. skip the speeches next time please. i was born 50 years ago not yesterday, thank you
It is most unlikely that any information about a self sustaining generator will be made available. Even if it is available, it may not be manufactured by any one and sold.
1. Science today teaches us that there can not be a device that has greater output than input. Scientists are very conservative like relgious minded people and would not say or accept any thing that is sacrilageous. If they do accept such new concepts, historically scientists were persecuted and no one would dare say any thing against what would be against the policy of the institution.
2. Businesses will not manufacture such devices even if they have the technology. Reason is common sense. Every business wants to make people buy from them again, again and again. Or set up a unit and keep charging their customers say for example cell phone companies. Electricity generation is similar.
This product is a one time sale and businesses after some time would have to close. Investment made in Electricity generation would suffer. So no bank would finance such industries either.
This is the practical reality.
@ Anyone working with the 1908 Buforn patents.Cadman i just spent all day on the energetic forum reading most of the post and watching Eric Dollard Videos......good god that man is smart!. i was very intrigued with your design and the striking resemblance to Figueras design but mostly at your results from a very unoptimized set up. the Dwell is very interesting in your observations and they are sound. i have two set ups i am working on and i think i will be incorporation your style in one of them.. i will be following your progress and will advise on output. is this the set up you are talking about as i cant see the post pics as i am not a member of energetic.
Last summer I built a successful proof of concept of this device. The details were posted to this same topic over at energetic forum, starting around page 16 for those interested. It produced 9.2 vac, 13.0 volt peak, not rectified, with 12vdc input from a 500ma wall transformer. It only had 3 very small coils. The coils were identical, taken from small 12 volt DPDT relays. Input was controlled through an Arduino and transistor circuit, only because I did not have the means to build the commutator / resistor combination shown in the patent.
One of the most important things I learned from this build was the core/coil relation. It is exactly as the Buforn patent drawing shows. One center core, with each end inserted about 45% into each outer coil. There is a small gap between the three coils due to the coil bobbin ends in my build. The inducer coils were N-S N-S and the center coil was S-N.
Another very important point. Plotting the voltage/time curve of the Buforn commutator design shows an increase in brush dwell time every 180 degrees of rotation. This was confirmed in my build as it increased the output by approximately 84% when I added 40ms of dwell at these points. I suspect this allowed the one inducer coil time to build up it's magnetic field as the applied voltage reached it's peak. Also, the brush maintains contact with two tabs of the commutator at all times. Hitting the coils with a square wave gave very poor results, even with the added dwell.
Considering the inducer coils, they are no different than a solenoid coil in construction. The maximum gauss is at the center of those coils. In my opinion that is used to manipulate the flux of the centered core to create the output current, and that is why the center core is partly inside the outer coils. After a lot of study I am 100% certain the Buforn device uses a DC supply that steps the inducer coil current up and down in a percentage of the total current, split between the N-S inducers. This applies an almost constant total gauss to the center coil, unlike ordinary generators where the armature coils move through a magnetic field of less and more gauss.
Other advantages of this setup are:
No mechanical input other than the tiny motor to turn the commutator.
No hysteresis loss, normally caused by the core pole reversals, as there are none.
Keep in mind that the Buforn device is an improved generator / dynamo that is essentially like an old fashioned automobile generator, which has two outer field coils and an armature with many induced coils wound on it. One set of coils in Buforn's device, two inducers with one induced, is not going to develop significant output. That would be like removing all of the armature windings, except one, in the old car generator and expecting it to still work properly.
There is no mystery to the Buforn device and nothing significant is hidden in the patent. That's my opinion, based on my results and study. It is an improved generator, and correctly constructed (coil size / wire gauge, quantity of coils, and connection wiring) it will sustain itself and produce usable power.
All this being said, I hope it does not discourage research into the different devices currently being investigated here.
Regards
I noticed, Figuera must have hidden some essential information in the patent, something must be carefully disguised. Otherwise he wouldn't been able to sell himself to the bankers because everybody could have built it. So the key may not be in the patent per se, but it may help to understand parts of the setup
Bajac, Farmhand:
I saw the interesting discussion.. I have one doubt. Please note that I'm not a trained person and do not know theory.
1. When a permanent magnet is stagnent it has no current.
2. When a permanent magnet rotats let me state my understanding as per books. Let Farmhand say if I'm right or wrong.
current theory as I understand it..Let Farmhand say if I my understanding of the theory is a mistake..
Dynamos or Alternators or Large turbines in Nuclear, Thermal or Hydro-electric plants, wind turbines all work on the same principle. The principle is simple. When a magnet surrounded by coils is rotated it creates a rotating magnetic field. The coils cut the rotating magnetic field and current is induced in the coils. The current produced in the coils due to this Electromagnetic Induction opposes the rotation of the magnet. Therefore to continue to rotate the magnet, mechanical energy needs to be applied. The applied mechanical energy must not only be used to rotate the magnet but also overcome the opposing force of the induced current. For this reason, the input of the generators in the form of mechanical energy is always higher than the output of the generator or dynamos or alternators. More energy is spent in the transformation of mechanical energy in to electrical energy and this energy loss is the cause of the poIr crisis all over the world. These principles of Electromagnetic Induction Ire invented by Micheal Faraday and they remain valid to this date.
This principle is used in induction motors by using the repulsive forces of the similar poles of magnets by supplying current to coils to the stator of an induction motor. HoIver the rotor of an induction motor rotates at a speed lesser than the rotating magnetic field created by the coils. Therefore current needs to be continuously supplied to rotate the rotor.
Similarly to generator electricity large turbines first provide current to an induction motor and then apply mechanical force to the rotor which then starts rotating faster than the rotating magnetic field of the stator current. When the revolutions per minute of the rotor due to applied mechanical energy exceeds the rotating speed of the rotating magnetic field, the induction motor starts working as a generator. Again mechanical energy is needed to be supplied to the generator to a level which can overcome the opposing current now induced.
The opposing current is produced due to a Lenz law. These laws are regularly measured and are considered a part of the natural laws now. There is no machine that has overcome the forces of the lenz law which are in commercial use today.
Transformers also suffer from lenz law. The current supplied to the primary of the transformer is opposed by the current induced in the secondary of the transformer. Therefore though there is no mechanical motion, the input current to primary is always higher than the output current produced in the secondary.
In both transformers and Dynamo Electric machines the greater the poIr of the magnet, or the greater the magnetic field strength, greater would be the poIr produced. Therefore large cores of magnets are needed to produce currents. This is the reason for building dams, Nuclear plants, steam turbines etc.
Is my above understanding is right or wrong as per theory taught in books. Please answer this Farmhand.
Where is the formula and/or mathematical model telling you that B=XX (Gauss) with an energy density of E=YY (Jules/CM3) can induce a power ZZ (Watts) in a secondary coil having a connected load?
Books teach you only the Faraday's induction law, that is, B=XX (Gauss) induces a voltage V in a secondary coil with N turns. And, the engineering books describe only the power in and power out in a transformer (bypassing any energy/power flow due to the magnetic field.)
I consider this omission to be intentional. If you start digging into this area, you will soon conclude (like me) that the power and/or work between two coils are not the result of the magnetic field energy flowing into the coils. Again, refer to the transformers; the power output can increase order of magnitudes while the magnetic flux/density stays about the same. In other words, the energy density of the magnetic field stays constant and unaffected by whatever is connected to the secondary coils. Of course, there are interactions between these magnetic fields because of the core construction, but still the intensity of the net magnetic field is about constant.
I am not trying to convince anyone and I respect your conviction. However, I disagree with it. On my part, I will not discuss this issue any further.
To put it more specifically my doubt is this..
If you make a coil of wire is made to jump, it does nothing.
If you make a permanent magnet move up and down it does nothing,
If you rotate the magnet in empty space do we see any rotating magnteic field. No so the magnetic rays are invisible.
Now when these invisible rays cut the coils made up of conducting materials current is produced in the conducting materials. The argument is that mechanical energy is converted to electrical energy. if that be so if we just make the coil jump and down in the absence of a magnetic field or rotating or time varying magnetic field, current is not produced. We need the combination of rotating permanent magnet and the coil of conducter to generate electricity.
Since in the absence of magnet the mechanical energy is not converted to electrical energy, there ought to be some thing that is present int the magnetic field.. That some thing is certainly not mechanical energy. So a rotating magnet or rotating magnetic field does some thing else to generate current in the coils of wire.
I agree that the current generated in the coils tends to repel the movement of the rotating magnetic field. I also agree that therefore we normally need to give more energy to the rotating of magnet to continue or mainfest the rotating magnetic field. So excess energy is needed to rotate the magnetic field ( not to produce current but to sustain the rotating magnetic field overcoming the force of opposition from the induced current)/
The question is where is this induced current coming from? It certainly is not from the rotating magnetic field as the rotating magnet does not create electricity unless the conductor is placed near it and coiled. Then what happens to the conductor and why the conductor creates electricity.. This is a fundamental doubt..That is not answered in boooks.
I request Farmhand to answer this queston to enable this dummy to understand the situation.. Pleae do not quote from a book but please do give an insightful answer like Gyula gives. I remain very grateful and obliged.
And soon after he died... strange. Why isn't a Buforn Generator at every corner today? How and when died Buforn? It could be that Figuera decided to break his Bankster deal, or maybe it was time limited. Maybe Figuera thought the world should have access to the generator.
I have some new clues but after my 3 "I solved it!... not."'s I'd rather try it first.
Marathonman, actually only the question about the core was directed to you. But even if the Figuera and Buforn patents are not transformers in a conventional sense, I'd reccommend that article nevertheless strongly as it contains real essential information eg. about core saturation and much more, that is useful in any setup with coils.
Regards
@Farmhand
I apologize if I misunderstood your statement. I do not have the time to read all posts, and the few ones that I read, I just glance at them. I have to say that I do not agree with most of the comments posted, but I respect their opinions because it could also happen that I might be the wrong one.
Never mind i found what i needed.
The banks after purchasing the patent, did not file any thing. They simply abandoned all of them.[/font]
At that time the requirement was not to give full and particular description so that another person skilled in the art is enabled to replicate the patent without undue experimentation. The requirement was a reasonable description and then a working prototype which is similar to the description.
The last of the Buforn patent contains a lot of information that in general view can be considered nonsense. It may well be the most important patent.I disagree with that but I know this patent will make a lot of people happy who believe that the 1908 patent is incomplete and requires capacitors, grounded electrodes, oscillation systems, etc.
All of Figueras patents patent and devices are based on one single principle...Not theory..Understanding is different implementation is different..I totally disagree with this statement. The 1902 and 1908 patents work on different methods (that you call principles). I already described these two methods in a previous post.
An induction motor works because the RPM of rotor is less the RPM of Rotating magnetic field created by the current supplied to it. It then has Torque. If the rotor were to be rotated faster than the RPM of the rotating magnetic field of current supplied, induction motor becomes induction generator. This requires application of additional mechanical energy not only to rotate the rotor but also to overcome the opposing forces due to Lenz Law..I agree with this statement, which is just the classical explanation. But, recall that these motors and generators are built according to specific and approved standards. For example, in United States these machines are specified and built using IEEE and NEMA standards. The benefits of using the standards is that their simplified mathematical models can be used to design and built these electrical machines. If you deviate from these standards you will need to use an analytic process based on electromagnetic waves and electric power theories. However, using these standards is what makes these machines (transformers, motors, generators) inefficient by forcing the output power to be lower than the input power. And then, because the engineering books are written around these standards, they make you believe that the overunity phenomena is an impossible event. This is the reason why these standards do not apply to machines such as Figuera's.
Similarly if the secondary of a transformer is made to have a higher speed for the rotating magnetic field that of the primary inductor rotating magnetic field, the transformer would become a generator. It is an extremeply simple principle ... This is what he has done in this device..That is the problem to be solved here..So he kept it as secret by wording things without disclosing how the devices are arranged and what is the pole orientation. Even more Amazingly the drawings show that the only 50% of the primary had the iron core and secondary which had iron core all over it had a gap between the primary and secondary where the iron core was exposed to air..What is the arrangment of Poles. It is certainly North - x secondary- South of the core or South -x secondary-North of the core..Just see the drawing. Is it possible to make the secondary to be wound ccw while the primary is CW.. Then why half of primary is empty.. why so much core was exposed to air..That is what we are all not able to agree and understand.This is a very confusing paragraph. There are not rotating magnetic fields in transformers. You do get a rotating magnetic field in the 3-phase stators of motors and generators due to a specific configuration of the stator winding. In transformers, the transformation is due to a changing or alternating magnetic field. To my knowledge alternating and rotating magnetic fields are not the same.
Amazingly Bankers control every thing.. In India it is usury if one individual were to give a loan to another person at any thing above 18%. But this is not applicable to banks. Banks charge on the credit cards 47% per year..and they try to keep the person indebted all the time..A banker would not pay a single penny, paisa to another person unless they get value for their money. It is in their blood. I think I have a fair idea now..I am really surprised. I do not understand how India can afford any economic growth with such a high interest rate. I am sorry to hear it because I have a lot of friends from India.
... and Howard Johnson says that the Magnetic flux created by like poles facing each other is three times greater than the opposite poles facing each other...This phenomena is usually explained graphically in the books. For example, look at the figures for like and unlike poles in this webpage: http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html (http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/electromagnetism/magnetism.html)
Imagine a horeshoe magnet (U shape) that has a steelbar attached to its end, so it builds a closed magnetic loop. Imagine around the steel bar there's a coil. Now when I connect the coils ends, aka short-circuit it, it will create an inductive load. Assuming this is a permanent horseshoe magnet, does adding the load reduce the permeability of the steel bar?
does an inductive load alter the permeability of the core material?
l googled without success, so I repeat my question: does an inductive load alter the permeability of the core material?
I am not talking about heat that may be caused by induction and then has an impact on the permeability. I also don't mean the influence of voltage drop by a load. What I mean is, is there something like a reverse lorentz force that is a counterforce against the elementary magnet particles as the cost of induction.
I tried to test it with a magnet loop that had a core with a coil as the botton side, hanging in the air. The core was attracted only slightly, as little as possible. Short circuit of the coil did not make it fall off, a little pulse from a 1.5V battery did (only in one polarity of the battery). But I'm not sure if that means much.
What is magnetic flux cancellation.. I'm not able to understand it.. Please clarifiy..And what is addition of magnetic fluxes and how do these both are done and please give me examples.
NRamaswami
I completely agree with you on that topic. Someone need a fresh look of what is happening to realize that rotation of Earth cannot be a passive action due to some starting point in very ancient times. Energy must be supplied continously to rotate such a mass and there is a big chance it is not gravity source. Interactions between planets should very fast stop or disturb that constant rotation if it is passive. Somebody should compute the total energy required for Earth to rotate as today, but that require detailed knowledge of internal structure of Earrth. Very rough computation shows incredible billions of joules per single man on Earth. Drop it to like 1MW per man and I think we could be in safe margin. Except who need 1MW ? :o
To summarise : constant rotation prove active character of force, small disturbances may indicate reaction to other planets disturbances; also if somebody could find an space object (planet, start etc) which do not rotate and yet has strong gravitation that would be another proof.
Marathonman, I was reading this patent, 27D. I am not sure if I understand this "Lenz-less" thing right. The counterforce to induction is the Lorentz force, is this what the patent is about? If so, why is there no Lorentz force?Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux or to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.
...
to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.
...
MarathonmanI already did on post #947 as per John Reardon patent 6,946,767
Take the second image and draw the magnetic path over the image that will take place.
We can make an electromagnet stronger by doing these things:I'm not disputing what was said but Sorry i'm not good at cat n mouse games. can you at least cough up a hair ball for me ( ie.. a clue)
wrapping the coil around an iron core adding more turns to the coil > Reduces current by resistance due to length
increasing the current flowing through the coil. > Requires thicker wire and results in fewer turns and succesive layers decline in the additional strength to the field with distance from the core.
What is not said is what you need. Everything that is said is true.
There is nothing to stop the flux path from following all the way around if it alternates it will still go all the around and fluctuate back and forth. There is nothing to stop it from doing so.The air gap doesn't stop it. It just blow out really wide and becomes weak in the air gap. Like a bar magnet ,the flux runs from one end the other but widens out and becomes weakest in the middle where the flux is furthest from either pole. If it runs round in a complete path it works same as a transformer with one of it's ends cut off.
I think the first coil on the core is a split coil center tap making up the two opposing primaries and the outer one is the pick up or induced coil. Which would need a thicker wire to handle voltage and current.Not sure if all that activity could work well on a single core.The source would have to be kept very low. One could hope that what applies to dc resistance heating compared to ac would also apply in a core. Then having the fields push back and forth against each other would sort of be like a rotating or alternating field even though the electromagnets are facing same poles to each other. Power is transferred as a alternating event with very short distances of movement in ac ,the potential becomes a rigid connection between the source of movement and the end use in a mains line.Maybe the same thought can work with magnetic fields. I haven't read the pdf yet. I have some time now that the electric company drove a bush hog all over the exposed water line I was back filling.Doug;
Gonna be one of those days.
Hi Fellows,Oh man i can't thank you enough. playing with that magnet allowed me to visualize what was going on in Figueras core. i took the magnet and put the Bloch wall in the middle of the core then hit the flip button reversing the polarity and the whole page lit up from the light bulb, pegging the meter to the max..... well actually slamming it from peak to peak every time, so this is what the core is suppose to do.
This only takes a few minutes and you may find it instructional.
Go to this web page, start the application and perform the following.
http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/faradays-law
- select "Run Now!" [should open a new browser tab];
Try this: (use the pernament magnet to simulate electromagnet)
{select: 1 Coil; Show field lines; Flip magnet to "N" faces left - consider this our Reference Point}
{Note: if the Java Script stops responding - just reload the page}
- move the magnet to a point where the magnet face touches the second Left most coil winding;
(the vertical legs of the "N" are obstructed by the second right and final right coil windings)
- use "Flip magnet" a few times and observe the meter (just to get feel for the orientation);
- set to the Reference Point (N pole inside the coil);
- move the magnet Right (about 1 coil winding distance) and observe the meter movement (should peg "-" negative)
{amplitude depends on how rapid [dV/dt} the magnet was moved};
- continue to move the magnet to the Left in 1 coil winding increments (simulating commutator steps), observe meter;
- when the magnet is over the voltage meter "Flip magnet" This we will call the Terminal Point;
- now step the magnet Left towards the coil in 1 coil winding increments (observe the meter);
- when the magent reaches the Reference Point - "Flip magnet";
- repeat this motion while flipping the magnet at the Reference and Terminal Points.
Interesting, at worst! I may have screwed up in my sequencing but you'll get the idea.
Other demo's that may be useful:
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/index.html
- review the "interactive java tutorials for:
- magnetic field lines
- Faraday's 2nd Experiment {note that E = -(DF/Dt)
- Lenz's Law [this is a very good one]
- Attraction and Repulsion By Magnetic Poles
Actually most of the interactive java applets are instructive (some are in development and don't work well yet).
Solarlab
Thanks, just saved, will enjoy it later.
BTW. i "revisited" Figueras design and I think I finally understood it. The keely drawings are partially wrong.
The point is, both primaries never ever alter their polarity, they are practicly free running, only their amplitude varies (but should never be zero!). By doing that, they have no back emp to deal with. Nonetheless the polarity of Y is alternating.
The back electromotive force of Y on the other hand is not forced to go back to the originating primary, but two paths are offered to it, so it may choose the easier one, thus making the originating inductor (the hard path) "lenz-less". I've seen similar patents and it was said that the COP can be very high, like 1400%.
Marathonman
I cant get the E core to model up at all to work with the idea of having the same inducer fields pushing the induced to behave like a rotating magnetic field. The collapse time on the inducer fields would have to go completely off and allow the field to dissipate to zero.That would not work with the idea of having the the magnet going up in field strength pushing the collapse magnet back emf around to add to the one increasing. It also doesn't even allow for the notion of keeping the cores partially on to maintain a pressure between the fields even after correcting the pole orientations of the inducers. If you get an LED to run of it you should consider yourself doing well. The flux will want to travel around the outside of the core if you orient it nsnsns and totally avoid the center leg of the core and if put it in nnnsss there wont be any difference in flux in the middle as each side turns off or on. If it was a square then maybe if it is not too leaky. Use bobbins just in case it turns out Im right. So your dont risking wasting your wire.
Here's some more thoughts about the figuera design. I am refering to the classic double C design: (|).
The airgaps, demystified! Imagine a pulse on a primary 1. With no airgaps it may just go trough primary 2, bypassing the Y core, at least partiallly. But with gaps... the pulse would have to go over two gaps to do that, but only over 1 gap to go trough the Y coil!
Then, when current is drawn by a load at the Y coil, as we know the flowing current in Y self-induces the back mmf. Up to this point we did not use any energy from the source. But as the back mmf would normally flow back to the primary, it would force the primary to start dissipating real energy. But in the figuera design, the back mmf will face two airgaps and see the reluctance of the C cores behind them. One will be opposing, the other one, due to figueras commutator, near zero and most likely in the same polarity as the back mmf, just like a friendly invitation.
So theoreticly there would be zero energy consumption. As if a transformer were running without a load.
Great care must be taken in the construction of the air gaps, 0.01mm more or less is like a double size core. Adjustable gaps may be useful, with brass screws. They need to be small , eg. 0.1mm and exactly the same.
So theoreticly there would be zero energy consumption. As if a transformer were running without a load.
Hi Cadman:
And what is your interpretation of this sentence in the patent..
"the other half of these commutator bars are directly connected to the firsts."
What is the meaning of firsts here.. I'm not able to figure out. Please help..Thanks.
Marathonman,
Personally I hope to confirm the validity of the original patent design, on a small scale. I think it's great that there are so many different builds going on. Something for everyone.
Anxiously awaiting everyone's results :)
the only concern i have with that is to not saturate the secondaries as this will mangle the output. i will be doing test in the next week to see just how much flux the primaries will put out and then calculate the ball park figure as to the saturation level of the Secondaries and adjust accordingly. this is one thing i haven't heard any one talk about.
This jogged my memory. While experimenting with the Arduino setup last summer, capturing the field collapse of the primaries, I inadvertently left the DC power disconnected from the board so it was only running on the output from the controller (2.5 vdc). After leaving the rig running for a while the volts from the field collapse suddenly increased from a few volts to over 20 volts rectified DC and remained there.
This makes me wonder, if we saturate the induced core and then lower the excitation current to a fraction of the starting current, and then oscillate it to keep the core fluctuating right at or just below the core's magnetic saturation point, would we get good output from the induced coils vs the input current?
Hmmm.. reminds me of something Tesla once said, about keeping the tension right at the breaking point..
Marathonman,Bob,
On Dec. 24, 2013, I posted in Reply #454, a link to a 555 circuit that produces a wave similar to a sinewave. In one circuit, the wave form is above 0v (ground), the other circuits wave form goes positive to negative. It may or may not be of interest to you.
http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/50%20-%20555%20Circuits/images/555-Osc-1.gif
Best of luck to all,
Bob
Ok, everybody,
I want you to try, just for a moment, to think out of the box. I know you are openminded, otherwise you would not believe in Free Energy.
So what I got is success, but I had to stretch the term "Figuera" pretty much. Nonetheless, save the image and revisit it later, just don't ignore it please, cause from my POV this is the real deal and it means something to me that I present this here and not on youtube.
As so often in Life, I discovered a feature by accident. And this feature is yet to be exploited, as right now certain ratios are coincedental. Ok, in simple terms...
I connected the middle coil to the 2 halfwave pulses, virtually reunited them to AC. So this was now the primary. Then I connected a rectifier, a LED and the voltmeter to the right coil.
I measured 2.18 vdc at 8.3 mA, the LED was dimmly lit.
Then out of boredom I short circuited the left coil, and beng! 2.67 vdc at 49.3 mA !!!
The Led was blindingly bright and the device became more silent.
Now, by mistake the left and right coil are not identical, the right one has more turns and 7.4 Ohm, compared to 6.4 Ohm that the left one has. So I made a test, swapped them : left out and right short circuited. Interesting result, efficiency dropped to
2.36vdc at 39mA. So the efficiency is higher when the shortened has fewer turns than the output coil (which is yet to be exploited in further optimizing).
Anyway, long story short: I did this measurement with greatest care and honesty and I measured all with the same meter, which appeared to work properly:
In: 0.021 Watt
Out: 0.131 Watt
Efficiency: 614%
I calculated roughly, a device of the size 1.5*1.5*0.9 meter would produce 3500 Watt, at 500 Watt Input. However, I run the test with a very small current, although the ferrite core seems to be saturated quickly in this mode.
Ok, here's the pic:
It is incredibly simple, but here you go. The resistance in AC is complex, so the primary does not simply run on 0.75v at 200 mA, but in fact on 0.188 v at 114 mA.Can you draw, there you put voltmeter and ampermeter in input coil?
It is incredibly simple, but here you go. The resistance in AC is complex, so the primary does not simply run on 0.75v at 200 mA, but in fact on 0.188 v at 114 mA.dont forget, ac is not dc, so calculation differs too, this is not overunity .
dont forget, ac is not dc, so calculation differs too, this is not overunity .If he meashure in AC mode with multimeter, then measurements can be correct.
I connected the middle coil to the 2 halfwave pulses, virtually reunited them to AC. So this was now the primary. Then I connected a rectifier, a LED and the voltmeter to the right coil.That means that the input waveform was PDC, not pure DC.
Then out of boredom I short circuited the left coil, and bang! 2.67VDC at 49.3mA !!!Your output power calculation is wrong because for a PDC waveform, the calculation 2.67V * 49.3mA = 0.131W is invalid.
...
Out: 0.131 Watt
Madddann,
The sketch that you provided in post 1072 achieve a 180º unphase between the two signals.
Here we need a system which will provide 90º unphased signals, as the attached imagen shows:
EDIT: As your schematic shows always a positive signal maybe it is possible to be valid. While one intensity is increasing the other intensity is decreasing.OK. 90º unphase was defined for a rectified AC which is not the case for this circuit. I will think it again.
You just said it, half of the flux... so why the 8 vs 49 mA discrepancy with 20% voltage gain? Like 1+1=7? O-k...Because magnetic flux is not electric current. The relationship between them is square.
Speaking of pulses, input and output have the same pulses, so the relation persists. And: the multimeter has an internal capacitor, otherwise the values would jump around.I am not going to leave you misleading other people, that average Volts * average Amps = average Watts, for non-DC waveforms.
At this point I leave it up to you to check it out, I will not go trough a trial of theoretical naysaying defense. Take it or leave it, AS IS.
I'd rather talk about the mechanisms, beyond institutional dogmata.Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
NRamaswami;
when i stated my cores were 1 1/2 inch i was referring to core thickness not length. i miss posted earlier as my Primary cores being 8" but their not their 5" long x 1 1/2 " thick x 1 1/2" wide and Secondaries are 3/4"x 1 1/2"x 5" this makes my Primary cores Twice as big as Secondaries. with my cores being 1 1/2" wide this leaves me a window of two inches to play with in Primary coil length. i'm starting at 1 inch but can expand to 2" if i want or need to.
oh i almost forgot my cores are I cores so they can be stacked together like Lego building blocks.(III) easy to add extra power if needed. end core will be C cores but inner cores are all I cores for easy expansion. Remember it's so easy a kid can build it.
I was brought up to believe every sunday we drank the blood of Jesus and ate his flesh. That's also dogma. Science is often proven wrong. I think that was the point Dieter was making. Dogma = closed mind.
Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
I was brought up to believe every sunday we drank the blood of Jesus and ate his flesh. That's also dogma. Science is often proven wrong. I think that was the point Dieter was making. Dogma = closed mind."Closed mind" is a different concept, albeit related.
Science is often proven wrongThen let him prove my science wrong with the scientific method - not with name calling.
Maybe you have to multiply your calculation by sqrt(2)/2 = 0.707 to convert maximun voltage and current to rms values ,That would work for full sinewaves only...and average power could be calculated out of these two RMS values only if the phase relationship was known between the sine voltage and the sine current. This is one of the shortcuts that I had mentioned previously.
Dieter,Exactly.
Have u COP over 2? Make it self runner and prove u are right :)
Marathonman:So basically your telling me the program i am using is wrong and the results i posted on post #1071 is wrong. well you better email the guy that coded the program and tell him he is wrong to while your at it.
Then your Tesla calculations are also wrong. They would come only about .6 Tesla for a 307 turns and 12.5 cm I core No core saturation and you may get good results. All the best.
"Closed mind" is a different concept, albeit related.Didn't realise he called you names.
If that is what he meant than he should choose his words more carefully.
If your interpretation is correct than it becomes apparent that he did not read any of my more unconventional posts, yet is quick to judge me as "close minded" just because I quoted some well known power measuring principles.
Just because there is a lot of authoritarian dogma taught in physics departments does not mean that all of it is wrong. Electric engineering, power measuring principles, Ohm's law, etc.. are on of the areas where the mainstream has it correct ...and it can be verified experimentally any time.
Then let him prove my science wrong with the scientific method - not with name calling.
Dieter better focus on criticizing my ideas and logic, rather than my state of mind.
Hi Maddann,
I have re-think it and your proposal is perfect. It is what Figuera said: "while one current is increasing the other is decreasing". I have just one doubt: Can we mix an AC source with a DC source in the same circuit?
Also there is a page where a 3-phase AC current is transformed into a 2-phase AC current with 90º unphase using a "Scott Connection". I do not know what is that, but I put here the link in order that anyone may use it:
http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html (http://blog.aulamoisan.com/2013/05/conexion-scott-de-red-trifasica-red.html)
Latter the 2-phase AC current may be rectified to get the required final signals.
I hope it helps
Regards
Exactly.
O/I Power measurements become superfluous if long self-running condition is achieved, without external energy delivery. Nature is the ultimate verifier of O/I>1 claims.
So basically your telling me the program i am using is wrong and the results i posted on post #1071 is wrong. well you better email the guy that coded the program and tell him he is wrong to while your at it.
Hello Hanon!
Well I'm sure we can mix the AC and DC, it just should be done right.
Please use my previous schematic just for simulation, because in real life conditions I think there would be unwanted currents (as high as 3,2A) runing through the batteries and the transformer...not so good...
So now I made a better schematic with 2 separate transformers.
......
Schematic:
http://s26.postimg.org/u8deqo5kp/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg (http://s26.postimg.org/u8deqo5kp/Double_offset_ac_generator_for_Figuera_with_2_tr.jpg)
Dann
The circuit I posted is a self runner circuit.Does it function longer than 1200h at 10W load for each 1kg of the battery?
The program is not wrong. Your input was wrong. You have earlier said the lenght of the coil is 1 inch and then you corrected it. I entered the corrected figure for the 5 inch length and 307 turns and you get the results. Please go through the program and what it asks you to insert and insert the .125 meters or 12.5 cm for the 5 inch coil and you get the result.Dude its like talking to the wall with you. the F-in core is 5 inches the F-in coil is 1 inch are you blind or what. NEVER MIND i would rather speak to my 10 year old Grandson at least he understands me.
Does it function longer than 1200h at 10W load for each 1kg of the battery?Dieter made a claim of cop 6.
...or more than 12h for 1kW load... ?
The Li-Air battery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium%E2%80%93air_battery) has a theoretical energy density limit of 12kWh/kg, so any device containing batteries is conventional below this limit.
How long does your device function with a 1F capacitor in place of the electrochemical battery?
Hi Dann,
Thank you very much !!
I see that you have simulation skills. I would like you to try to simulate your previous circuit but instead of using 2 DC sources maybe you can sustitute them by 2 diode briges and 2 capacitor (using a kind of scheme similar to the one included in post #1064) in order to convert AC current into the DC (where required). This way we could skip mixing AC and DC sources and we will just need AC. Also we will save the 2 transformers. Do you think it is possible?
It will be nice to have all your circuit based just on one standard AC source. I think there will be more wires and diodes but the final result will be easier to implement. Don´t you think so?
Thanks in advance!!
I do not know whether this is so far been reported, but this device works!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39hVwNIRbNU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39hVwNIRbNU)
MenofFather,I build about many of this versions, about 3-4 on 50 herc and and about 4 on 15 volts and hight frenquency. On 50 herc all have without load big curent consumptiot, but tthis guy have small curent consumption. I now build something like Hane transformer, because thay wery similar.
So did you build a device, do you have details, pictures?
Correct me if i am wrong, but the picture shows the Secondary core twice as big as the Primary. won't this Dilute the flux coming from the Primary to the Secondary by 1/2 intensity. will it not spread out in the larger core and have a negative impact on output.Yes, secondaries I make bigger, somthing like in Hein transformer. To magnetic flux go from primary to secondaries, but not go from secendaries to primary.
things that make you go Hmmmm ?
I think the turns ratio mainly defines the voltage ratio, but rhe very diffrent right and left coil seems pretty unlike anything between Thane Heins and Clemente Figuera. But that doesn't neccessarily mean there's a problem. Heins even stated somewhere the 2 secondaries should be slightly diffrent.
MenofFather, make sure the core parts (double ferrite E ??) are pressed together strongly! Nice pictures tho.
And it should be said: In a 3 coil setup things are not so simple like in a standard 2 coil transformer. In a Figuera Mode you have to achieve a redirection of the back mmf to the inactive side, but before it is inactive it may perform a field collapse that has the same polarity as the other (active) primary, which is not helpful, so the waveform may be rather crucial, in order to decrease softly. In theory one could use a diode to prevent the collapsing field to manifest at all, but Figuera didn't have diodes.
Regards
Yes, secondaries I make bigger, somthing like in Hein transformer. To magnetic flux go from primary to secondaries, but not go from secendaries to primary.
Actually, I did use diodes when I used the two separated halfwaves, but it didn't seem to neutralize the back mmf/emf ...
So I got a question: When a B field collapses, it induces a current of reverse polarity. but if this current can't flow (due to diodes), will the B field persist?
Isn't there a contradiction, whether the collapsing B field induces the back EMF, or the Back EMF causes a Back MMF that looks like a "collapsing field"?
Basicly, is there a diffrence in the effect of the collapsing B field depending on whether a current may flow in the coil or not?
Regards
PS. marathonman, good point about the 50% takeover...
Shadow119g,
This sounds great. The wire seems a little thick and the n-of turns a little low. With a 1 mm wire I would expect a coil at least 1" x 4", also as a rule of thumb the dc resistance should not be too low, eg. (12v x 12v)/ 14 ohm = 10 watts dissipation, which is a lot for a 12 v battery. Of course, just reactive, but nonetheless.
The contact of the commutators, is it sparky? That may give you lots of voltage peaks, but not a very long real contact time, resulting in less total current, which may lead to extensive dropping of voltage in the primary.
Maybe try to use a high voltage low capacitance cap accross the commutator outputs to catch and integrate the spark voltage peaks. Note, due to the nature of sparks, they may reach a thousand volt or so, so if your rectifier diodes (and you probably should rectify these peaks, since they contain back emf sparks) are fried, use 5 diodes in series as one HV diode substitute.
The voltage ratio seems to tend to the extreme in figuera designs. I had a turn ratio p vs s of about 1 to 2, input voltage dropped to 2.5 v (iirc), but output was 25 v (after rectifier with cap),
Would be nice to see some pics. Keep up the good work!
PS. maybe this contradicts what others said, but I tend to use rather less turns on the primary and more turns on the secondary. This causes more current flow in the primary, stronger magnetism and finally better coupling. Just make sure tbe primary won't get hot when unloaded. The higher number of turns of the secondary keeps the voltage high, but should not be too high, otherwise there is no more current in the output.
Where in 2 coil transformers the voltage ratio is the same as the turns ratio, in the Figuera setup the ratio seems to be exponentional.
Marathonman:
This is in response to your last reply to Dieter.
What you are saying is contradictory to the Figuera patent which clearly specifies that current should go up and come down regularly for the system to work.
Welcome MenofFatherI not wery good understand. But maybe need add more turns on secondary or put in highter voltage to primary?
Shadow update
I think my transformers are working properly but at a low voltage.
I also think it is because of the commutators I built. I am getting
about the same results from both the 32 and 16 contact versions.
I really don't know why the voltage is low.
The only encouraging thing is that for each transformer group of
three, the voltage increases as I measure voltage from the first
group through the fourth group.
The following is the voltages for each group of three transformers:
Group 1 = .4 analog meter .2 digital meter
Group 2 = .95 .6
Group 3 = 1.55 1.1
Group 4 = 1.95 1.6
I have changed the air gap from about .035 to .008 and .002
the last I had to leave the clear office type tape in the gap.
The readings did not change between the .008 and .002
I am using a lawn mower 12 volt lead acid battery sometimes
with a trickle charger.
I machined the mild or hot rolled steel to within a .001 tolerance.
the three pieces of steel are through bolted at the top.
The primary legs are two times the length of the bar the coil
mounts on.
Any ideas why my voltage is so low?
Oh, I have a little over 100 turns of #18 = 1.023mm wire
the same length and turns on all coils.
Shadow
Shadow,
Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?
If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system (I_north + I_south = constant)
Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way to make easier its understanding"
Regards
Shadow,
Very smart design in the resistor. I guess you have to use two resistors in parallel, one for each row of electromagnets, N and S, in order to achieve two sinusoidal waves, one in each row. Am I right?
If you use two parallel resistors you could better test with a sawteeth shape instead of the sinusoidal shape. With a sawteeth pattern in each row you are always keeping the same total current in the system (I_north + I_south = constant)
Although in the patent is only drawn one resistor, I tend to think that Figuera maybe used 2 resistors in parallel in order to have a simetrical wave along one whole revolution of the commutator. Remenber that in the patent is written: "the resistor system is sketched in a simple way to make easier its understanding"
Regards
Dieter,
An other amplifer would be this:
http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm (http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm)
Hannon"backfeeding"? Pls explain.
you will still need resisters to provide a small forward voltage to the inducer coils/magnets to prevent the field from the one which is "on" from totally backfeeding
the one which is off.Once one magnets field swallows up the other two and all three coils become oriented the same,I have to throw in my veto here. This happens only when they are arranged with like poles. So with like poles you have to provide energy to prim 2 only to force prim 1 not to go trough prim 2, but trough sec only. Wasteful IMHO. Additionally, with like poles, how is the polarity supposed to chanche in the sec? Which is required for at least some efficiency.
the time involved to switch back all three and the amount of current will be excessive as well. The collapsing magnetic field will have a high spike short duration ...As far as my observation goes, a sine signal causes a soft back emf, less spikey, more like a mirror image.
I have also made tests with like poles and a pancake in between, it was very dissapointing, no voltage or any microamps.
Marathonman
MWS Wire Industries
31200 Cedar Valley Drive
Westlake Village Cal.
818 991 8553
Catalog= TechBook 082011 Pdf.
If you can find the catalog online there is information in there you didn't even know you wanted to know. They make stuff you haven't even dreamed of yet. I will try to upload the catalog as an attachment but I dont have very good luck with it. If it is there good if not it didn't work.
Hi Doug:
I have to admit that I have not used a resistor in between the coils in my tests while using low voltage and high amperage currents. If it works it is fine as it can cut down on the amount of wire and can reduce the cost significantly.
What is the kind of resistance that you would advise to be used for a 12 volts and 16 amps current source. It is a pretty decent 192 watts and the amperage is also significant.
12 watts or 12v one amp.
Assume we have two inductors and one induced.
Should we use the resistors between the transformer output wires and the inductors if the inductors are in parallel.
Should we use the 3 resistors if the inductors are in series. one from transformer to primary 1 beginning, one between primary 1 end to primary 2 beginneing and one between primary 2 end to transformer.
Now what is the kind of resistance that you would advise to be used in these places for the current source of 16 amps and 12 volts. Please advise and let me test. I will post results after testing.
Hi,
This is what I meant: Using two parallel resistors in a simetrical way will get two complete simetrical waves.
With just one resistor the shape of one wave is conditioned to the remaining resistance in the resistor and, therefore, both waves won´t be never simetrical.
I think that maybe Figuera used two resistors for achieving a constant overall current all the time. Maybe for that reason he wrote in the patent that the resistor system was sketched is a simple way just to make easier its understanding.
Regards
Hanon
with the diagram posted their is no way to swap poles with the Figueras style of circuit.
TO ALL,
I am wondering if any one else has ordered from FUTURLEC Electronics and have had trouble receiving order. it's been well over a week and nothing, no reply no shipping, no nothing. have almost 40 $ in parts and haven't a clue what is going on. emails has gone unanswered and i would like to know if any one else has had a problem with them. of course my money has been deducted from my card. also i would like to know if anyone has a contact number for complaint. DO NOT BUY FROM THESE SCAMMERS.
Hanon,
while I wil read the patent in your prev. link, could you please explain a little bit what's going on here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpZJfIIY7GE)
Regards
Hanon,
I'm curious as to why you didn't use a cap after the bridge? and have you tried the quad electromagnet set up in your earlier post? and if you did what were your readings?
It's been a while since I've been here but I have not been idle.
To recap, the Figuera and Buforn patents are the same thing. The patent drawings are intentionally misleading, in particular, the hinted at coil construction and the missing magnetic circuit. The working principle is the variation of the excitation current in the field coils or the inducing coils as they are called in the patent, in a dynamo. That is all it is, period, the end.
In other words, if you want to be successful then stop building transformers and build a dynamo instead.
The actual DC generator or dynamo is constructed according to the known design principles of the time, those in use around 1900. That means it has an outer steel looped frame with the field coils attached to the inside of it in pairs of north and south, with a minimum of two coils. The induced or armature coils are inside of the frame and the magnetic flux from the field coils passes directly through the induced wires.
The armature coils are not round, they have two straight sides with one side adjacent to a positive field coil pole shoe and the other side adjacent to a negative pole shoe.
The magnetic circuit must direct the flux in a loop from a N coil pole shoe through the induced wire of the armature, through the armature, out through the opposite induced wire of the same coil loop, through a S coil pole shoe and back through the outer frame to the first N coil. The flux path must be of sufficient cross section at all points of the circuit to carry the number of flux lines used.
A dynamo design is based on the number of lines of magnetic flux cut by the armature coils per second as it rotates. The number of flux lines is determined by the area of the field coil pole shoe and the strength of the field coil magnetic properties; type of iron and ampere turns and current. Since ours will not rotate you must calculate based on the flux lines intersecting the copper wire diameter and the number and length of induced wires that will fit adjacent to the pole shoe.
If you want to succeed you must build a dynamo of sufficient size to produce more than enough voltage and current to run the little commutator motor, or your solid state circuit. The current from the dynamo will provide the current for the field coils, just as it does in the old designs. You will need a temporary separate power source sufficient to provide the full startup volts and current needed by your particular dynamo, whatever that may be.
One more tip. By varying the field excitation current according to the patent, you will need to use a commutator and wire sized for additional current since the variation will produce an average current. In other words if your field coils require 2 amps then size the commutator, brush, and wire for 4 amps. The same goes for a solid state circuit.
Here is my parting gift to you. A book written by W. Benison Hird, B.A., M.I.E.E. who was a lecturer on dynamo design at the Glasgow and West of Scotland Technical College. Published in 1908. It contains everything you need to know. Want a dynamo that produces a continuous 500 volt, 200 amp DC, and only requires 19.8 amps of excitation current? It's in there.
Elementary Dynamo Design https://archive.org/details/elementarydynamo00hirdrich (https://archive.org/details/elementarydynamo00hirdrich)
Best Regards to all
Thanks for your kind help. I have a couple of questions:
1- How can we get the wires cut by the magnetic flux? Dynamos are based on that principle but for that the wire must be moved laterally to the magnetic lines. We need to emulate some kind of relative movement to induce the wires!!
2- What the difference between building a transformer and a dynamo? I understand that in transformers the magnetic flux do not hit the wires, just pass across the coil (flux linking). In dynamos the flux must cut the wires (flux cutting), this take us to the first question again: how can we get the flux cutting laterally the wires?
Hello everyone,
I get the whole idea of Tesla devise but what i don't get is why did Figueras use the Toroid. i have been studying the pics and i don't see the magnetic flux encircling the toroid just the Bemf taking alternate route aka.... the non powered half.
i have altered the toroid as to my understanding and is pictured below. can someone please show me a pic of the purpose of the toroid as i don't see the flux encircling the toroid only the powered halves ??????
Ps. NMS nice board. what is the purpose of the caps....are they for 90% phase shift or for over lap.
Sine+Cosine=Rotation
is what Figuera was doing?
CADMAN,Yes, very close.
Is this what you were talking about???? it would seem to me that their would be plenty of flux cutting in this diagram. this is worth investigating in my book and after my initial Figueras test. thanks
Sine+Cosine=Rotation
is what Figuera was doing?
Everyone,
Please comment this great idea from NoMoreSlave:
- Two 90º unphased signals are as a Sine wave and a Cosine wave. Sine (alfa + 90º) = Cosine (alfa)
- If you place both electromagnets at right angle (perpendiculary) then the vector sum of both magnetic field vectors is a ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD !!!
Please see this gif animation:
http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif (http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif)
NoMoreSlave, Please comment this idea a bit deeper. I think this idea has a lot of merit. People will be grateful for a further explanation of your idea in order to grasp it fine.
18 May 13 / 21:32:05
Hello All
A few months back ( before the Xmas Holidays ) I built the Figuera's circuit that was on Patrick's website...I got the 555 to fire 16 LEDs then switched down to 4 diodes and power transistor and got the circuit to fire into a radio shack transformer ( I switched the transformer connections ) instead of using the transformer as a step down I reversed the connections and used it as a step up transformer... I was powering the 555 with a Best9 volt battery and got 1 Volt AC from the transformer... I was satisfied with the circuit and was going to finish up a previous planned house project before coming back to the circuit...upon completion of the house project I noticed an update on the Patrick website stating... "It is essential to construct each of the cores of the electromagnets from iron and only iron. While a laminated core does minimise eddy currents, in this application, a laminated core has a major negative magnetic effect (something which is not generally known)."
Could someone elaborate on this...
All the Best
RandyFL
Usually I operated quarter phase; that is, I generated
currents of 90° displacement
I employed currents of different phase. I had in my laboratory ,permanently, a two-phase dynamo(Generator) and could get phases between; that is, from two phases , 90deg apart
Hi all,
Do you think that Figuera tried to achieve a rotating magnetic field as NoMoreSlave proposed by placing the electromagnets at right angles (perpendicularly) and excited by a Sine and a Cosine Waves (90º unphased as Figuera explained) ? (Sine + Cosine = Rotation , see NoMoreSlave´s post #1261 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400937/#msg400937))
Please comment.
See these gif animations (I do not know why these gif files are static when pasted into this forum):
http://www2.seminolestate.edu/lvosbury/images/SinCosAnim4.gif (http://www2.seminolestate.edu/lvosbury/images/SinCosAnim4.gif)
http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~ttyrrell/152_spring_14/SineCosine_animated.gif (http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~ttyrrell/152_spring_14/SineCosine_animated.gif)
http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif (http://www.cbe.buffalo.edu/images/people/full_time/furlani/Image_XXZ_2.gif)
Hi all,
Do you think that Figuera tried to achieve a rotating magnetic field as NoMoreSlave proposed by placing the electromagnets at right angles (perpendicularly) and excited by a Sine and a Cosine Waves (90º unphased as Figuera explained) ? (Sine + Cosine = Rotation , see NoMoreSlave´s post #1261 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg400937/#msg400937))
Please comment.
See these gif animations (I do not know why these gif files are static when pasted into this forum):
Hanon;
Your Gif's worked fine and i agree that the key to Figueras device was the rotation or the mimicking of rotation and it seams to me that the only way to accomplish this is through Sine-Cosine as NMS and your self have proposed. i think the transformer proposed by patrick rotates in a sense but it does not have the fluidity as does the 1902 patent shape. this is something i am investigating and will post findings soon but the darn Iron is so expensive and i will have to wait a few more paychecks for this.
Figueras was a well educated individual and i'm sure he was well aware of Tesla's accomplishments as most Professor's would be. if one would look around and observe nature here on earth and the cosmos, rotation seams to be the significant factor in the working of this universe. water traveling down hill picks up a significant amount of energy through spinning vortex's, all the physical galaxy we are in is a gigantic spiral vortex.......ask your self why? hmmmmm. spinning vortex-magnetics-electricity all are related and all we need to do is put the pieces in the correct order.
Randy;
i forgot to add that i also have a Owan oscilloscope that showed me my 555 was working and to set correct timing and the LED was used to make sure the 4017's were functioning properly.
Be Free Act Free and don't forget to get your Figueras grove on.
Hanon, The rotating magnetic field which Tesla showed us is rotating inside and circling around the toroid core.Hi Stupify, Can you post the reference to the Tesla´s article where he stated that? I would like to read the whole text. Thanks again for your help!! Regards
Tesla quote: "Usually I operated quarter phase; that is, I generated currents of 90° displacement" (Tesla)
Tesla quote: "I employed currents of different phase. I had in my laboratory ,permanently, a two-phase dynamo(Generator) and could get phases between; that is, from two phases , 90deg apart" (Tesla)
The correct rotating magnetic field is the XXZ gif you have shown, 4 wound coils, divided into two primary for the 2 phase.
Hi Stupify, Can you post the reference to the Tesla´s article where he stated that? I would like to read the whole text. Thanks again for your help!! Regards
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Aether%20Mage/Nikola%20Tesla%20-%20On%20His%20Work%20With%20Alternating%20Currents%20and%20Their%20Application%20to%20Wireless%20Telgraphy,%20Telephony,%20and%20Transmission%20of%20Power%20%28Leland%20I.%20Anderson%29.pdf (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Aether%20Mage/Nikola%20Tesla%20-%20On%20His%20Work%20With%20Alternating%20Currents%20and%20Their%20Application%20to%20Wireless%20Telgraphy,%20Telephony,%20and%20Transmission%20of%20Power%20%28Leland%20I.%20Anderson%29.pdf)
;D
Nobody has figured out the letter 'y' in the patent drawings. Figuera never speaks of it, for all the right reasons. Many have guessed it is simply the secondary coil. Nothing could be further from the truth. The 'y' is important perhaps much more important then the primary. You see, it is the 'y' that completes the iron magnetic circuit.
There are two circuits, one being an electrical circuit (the input power) the other being the magnetic circuit (this is where the energy has collected, runs and is released).
The 'y' in his patents is a 'yoke'. Electrically it is always abbreviated as a lower case 'y'. Ed Leedskalnin, in his Magnetic Current book, speaks of one to create 'more' light. However Ed does not use the term 'yoke' BUT you can see its effects.
This should shed some new light on this device.
Nobody has figured out the letter 'y' in the patent drawings. Figuera never speaks of it, for all the right reasons. ...
Between their poles is located the induced circuit represented by the line “y”
what is different ? I thought that drum winding can go in one way only ... Cadman armature from the previous post with non-movable rotor and a drum with windings and a pulley connected with a ball bearing to the non-movable shaft and a tube connected to that pulley and to the drum . On the second side tube connected to another ball-bearings mounted on shaft, on that tube two sliprings are mounted where cables from drum coil are placed. In simpler prototype bearings could be ommitted.
"The inducer or exciter circuit is formed by two series of multiple electromagnets,
motionless them all, and conveniently placed so that each pole of a series will be
at short distance in front of a pole of opposite name in the other series. In the
small separation between the expansions of these electromagnets the induced coils
rotate, dragging, in its turn, the collectors and transmission pulleys."
Waiting for more iron to build cores so i can begin testing and boy is it expensive. solid iron core are going to be very, very expensive so right now i am using Iron Electrode Strips.I am not following this thread closely so I may have this wrong -
Thanks RandyFL... After seeing you guys talking about 90 degree phases, I think I was wrong about the phase lagging in the coils, but why 90 degrees? I thought the two primary coils were in antiphase.. fill me in?
Hey everyone.
@hanon, thanks for the info. I have since been using capacitors in series with coils to produce a phase difference.
This is what I've been working with. Two E core transformers, sandwiched together, giving me a dual-primary transformer. I don't think this is the proper arrangement for the Figuera generator.
@stupify12, if you could please explain more as to what you think is the proper coil configuration, I might try to produce it, but as you can see, if the two primaries and secondary share the same flux path, like a transformer, I think the results will be the same as what I have achieved.
Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed
circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as
when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased
and reduced in intensity; since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing
a circuit is producing electrical induced current.
It was considered the
possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of
movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase
and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the
electrical current which produces it.
magnetize one or more
electromagnets and, while the current is higher or lower the magnetization of
the electromagnets is decreasing or increasing and varying, therefore, the
intensity of the magnetic field , this is, the flow which crosses the induced
circuit.
@hanon, that's the circuit I tried... I'll try it again with more input power and see what I get. Thanks, I'll try also on a single inductor shaft.
I think you're right about the linear coils, but the statement that makes me wonder is, "The machine is essentially characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, between whose poles the reels of the induced are properly placed." Taken from http://www.rexresearch.com/figuera/figuera.htm#patents Spanish Patent # 4426, Notes section. The "induced circuit" is the only location he refers to as a "reel" coil... strange, because he refers to the primaries as electromagnets. What exactly is a reel coil? He also says, "properly placed," which makes me think there's more to this than just the way the primaries are powered.
Any thoughts?
hanon
Can you post link to www page where you posted all Figuera and Buforn patents with translations ?
I think it is now quite clear how they worked, in theory. ;)
Hey Cadman. I don't think that modification would be necessary, and here's why. If you look at the photo that Marathonman posted, you see the fields "breaking out" at the center of the output coil. Now if the action that produces output is based on that "breaking out" point sweeping through the coil, then the amp-turns aren't as critical.
My initial thoughts about the Figuera generator was some special phase/transformer action, something that produced some special output. But like you said, under normal conditions and effects, it won't produce good output. So I've been trying to wrap my head around the actual action, the method that produces the effect. If you watched Gotoluc's videos, you'll see what it is. Like Marathonman's photo, it's the sweeping field that produces current.
To simplify the action, you need two like poles "breaking-out" at the center of the output coil. Then you move it back and forth. I've attached the circuit that I tried last night on my dual-primary transformer. The two primaries are arranged with like-poles facing each other. The purpose of the resistor is to provide a constant current to both coils. As the center-tapped transformer goes through 180 degrees, it produces the sweeping effect. As it is shown, this did produce more output than if the two primaries were simply wired in series and fed AC from the transformer..
In my opinion, the action is incredibly simple. It can be produced in many ways. Say, with two permanent magnets, like poles facing, and two primaries being fed AC. Or with two DC coils and two AC coils.
Is there a cure for the post and pic's that are oversized? ??? I hope that I am not the only one that has to scroll right then left then down then right....... to read every post. It is quite annoying. Does anyone else have the same problem?
Is there a cure for the post and pic's that are oversized? ??? I hope that I am not the only one that has to scroll right then left then down then right....... to read every post. It is quite annoying. Does anyone else have the same problem?
Hey Cadman. I don't think that modification would be necessary, and here's why. If you look at the photo that Marathonman posted, you see the fields "breaking out" at the center of the output coil. Now if the action that produces output is based on that "breaking out" point sweeping through the coil, then the amp-turns aren't as critical.
My initial thoughts about the Figuera generator was some special phase/transformer action, something that produced some special output. But like you said, under normal conditions and effects, it won't produce good output. So I've been trying to wrap my head around the actual action, the method that produces the effect. If you watched Gotoluc's videos, you'll see what it is. Like Marathonman's photo, it's the sweeping field that produces current.
To simplify the action, you need two like poles "breaking-out" at the center of the output coil. Then you move it back and forth. I've attached the circuit that I tried last night on my dual-primary transformer. The two primaries are arranged with like-poles facing each other. The purpose of the resistor is to provide a constant current to both coils. As the center-tapped transformer goes through 180 degrees, it produces the sweeping effect. As it is shown, this did produce more output than if the two primaries were simply wired in series and fed AC from the transformer..
In my opinion, the action is incredibly simple. It can be produced in many ways. Say, with two permanent magnets, like poles facing, and two primaries being fed AC. Or with two DC coils and two AC coils.
Hannon,
I thought Figueras devise put out 550 volts.? if you say less than 10 volts per coil then that is one hell of a loss coming from 100 volt @ 1 amp stimulating. to me this does not seem correct at all. at 550 % 7 coils is 78.5 volts. where do you get your figures. please explain!
Hannon,
I thought Figueras devise put out 550 volts.? if you say less than 10 volts per coil then that is one hell of a loss coming from 100 volt @ 1 amp stimulating. to me this does not seem correct at all. at 550 % 7 coils is 78.5 volts. where do you get your figures. please explain!
One must understand how a DC Dynamo works to produce current
Bajac,
Just some thoughts...
Have you taken into account the dramatic increase in reluctance and therefore the field coil ampere turns required for your designs?
For instance by my calculations, a field pole with a face surface of 44.61 cm^2 and an air gap in the magnetic circuit of 0.0254 cm (0.010”) will require about 176 ampere turns for a gap flux density of 7900 lines per cm^2 in my generator. The same surface with a gap in the magnetic circuit of 1.27 cm (0.50”) will require more than 8800 ampere turns on the field coil to produce the same flux density in the gap.
The reduced flux density cut by the induced may be part of the reason for the decrease in power consumed to rotate the induced, but since the E.M.F. generated in one conductor moving through a magnetic field is equal to the total number of lines cut per second, divided by 10^8, it seems like a poor trade.
I'm not trying to discredit your work, just curious about how you dealt with this. Or perhaps you already said in your paper and I am too dense to see it? :)
Regards
Valid points..though...can you answer how much of this 7900 lines of flux density is "consumed" to do work to break the magnetic dipole of two inducer cores many times per second ?
Hmmm... my guess would be, none.
Cheers
Edit: That's a trick question, right?
What kind of calculator can be used to calculate an unknown coil? Im not saying you dont know what your coils design is.Im saying you dont know what figuera's coil design is. If you did know you would know more important features of the design which would be the focus like how and where to close the loop so the power in from source is balanced with the power out from the induced coil so it would be able to run without the source after it starts up. Closing the loop is the only important part but the term closing the loop is a poor substitute that will have to suffice. The drawings are abstract to explain the process only.
Hi,
I agree that current theory is flawed. We are not going to obtain overunity devices using current equations and models. In some moment in history we chose an incorrect , or limited, theory.
An interesting read: https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html (https://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html)
... The question that I am trying to answer is, does the insertion of an air gap in an iron core substantially decrease the magnetic flux lines? Or, is this apparent reduction of the net field caused by a negative self-inductancion?
Please, let me know your thoughts. Thanks.
Bajac
As Figuera stated (and I will paraphrase) "The primary is an exciter coil and excites the secondary, and THIS is also a exciting coil"
Figuera was working with magnetic fields of the 3rd order, this phrase has been written out of history because its discovery contradicted some of Faraday's experiments.
I also wanted to ask, why do you call the full load condition the same as the short circuit condition? The short circuit is a fault condition and the currents produced under it can be tenth or hundredth of times higher than the full load operation. The full load condition is the ampere value that keeps the temperature of the coils within rated values. Under a short circuit condition you can in fact experience great breaking forces. But it does not necessarily mean that over unity under full load cannot be achieved.
I also want to clarify that is not possible to avoid the Lenz's effect. We can only mitigate
Fernandez,
When you tie the secondary of coil A to the primary of coil B this will CLOSE the magnetic circuit. That's simple to understand, think of a closed iron ring. It creates a closed magnetic circuit.
yes yes
I can do that,
I can feed the dc motor (prime mover) at different power levels (Volts & amps) not only amps.
Will do it with an inductive load (dc motor at output side) in which I can check the RPM, or with a resistor across the output leads.
Fernandez,
Clearly you are writting about the patent from Daniel Mcfarland Cook (see image attached). I think that that design worked fine but till now none have been able to replicate it, but i do not see new information disclosed by you apart from suggesting us to test it. Maybe you are right, but I am not sure if Figuera 30378 is based on this design. I remember that user NRamaswani used a similar design.
This design includes a battery not shown in the design. Once again, this circuit needs a "Violent Field Collapse" to trigger the oscillation!
TinselKoala,
I had never seen a motor like that one. It looks very interesting.
Could you do a close up into the rotor? I cannot figure out the stator.
It looks to me that the rotor turns are short circuited and the stator is very closed to the rotor. Then, it should definitely have good torque. Because short circuit is a fault condition, I am guessing that the rotor turns shold be connected in series with some kind of resistor embedded in the rotor as a way to bring the current within acceptable margings. The rotor current is still expected to be high. Is that right?No, as far as I can tell there is no resistor in the rotor, the "windings" are just all connected together pairwise at the inner and outer edges, and the brushes run along the flat central portion of the "winding" layer. Yes, the thing is very flat, the rotor disk is very close to the stator magnet when the case is assembled. No, the rotor current is normal for a brushed DC motor of similar torque with an iron armature and heavy cogging. The "stall" current is high of course, just as with any brushed DC motor.
Thanks,You're welcome, I wish I had the motors here to play with. I used them on a big Bonetti machine and the lack of resistance, non-powered, is important to show the "motoring" effect of the charged-up Bonetti machine, something that is underappreciated and not well reported.
Bajac
Attached is one of our preliminary circuits we devised. Its actually based on the study of Joseph Henry. We figured that Figuera lived in the era of Faraday and Henry. So logic would dictate that the answer would be found in one of there works.
This is a simple circuit that's EZ to build. Do what you want we are just presenting a starting point. Because we ALL know that STARTING is the hardest part. To understand the circuit (some of you will already know whats going on here) research the works of Joseph Henry. Add to the circuit as you wish. The goal is to reduce the input current to achieve the greatest magnetic force possible (just as Henry did, its all documented over 100 years ago).
Criticize all you want, clearly theirs something we all all overlooked because its been over 100 years since Figuera. For starting, try winding 1:1 ratio's on the transformers (air core). The output transformer requires Iron. I have already disclosed a cheap usable source, do not waste your money on high end iron its simply retarded.
We believe the Georgian fellow uses the same technique as Figuera. We also believe that Henry stumbled upon an interesting magnetic effect. However Faraday published his works first and Henrys work got buried by history thus falling by the waste side.
A starting circuit:
Fernandez
Your pdf is a simplified version of patent 3815030 Square wave driven power amplifier Dated June 1874 owned by Westinghouse Electric company.
Without the details of how to feed the output back into the inducers with the advantage of gain or leverage to increase the output while using less current and not burning up the inducers when loads are varied there is little chance of getting any design to self run. Even the patent mentioned does not go into or even mention the ability to do so in detail or concept. Only figurea gives mention to it being equal and suppressing the source which could then be removed. If that was known then it alone could dictate how to hack any device to operate off it self.
I think there is only one method regardless of the device and a lot of ways to conceal the concept in order to claim it is different. No one inventor is willing to spill the beans because it will become obvious they all work from the same basic method.
An endless list of devices and an endless amount of effort to make different looking devices with different smoke and mirrors to explain the way it works without explaining anything of importance.
yes yes@Alvaro,
I can do that,
I can feed the dc motor (prime mover) at different power levels (Volts & amps) not only amps.
Will do it with an inductive load (dc motor at output side) in which I can check the RPM, or with a resistor across the output leads.
"if the magnetic fields cut both sides of a coil simultaneously, the induced voltages will subtract decreasing the net induced voltage."Quote
not sure of that, because the magnets are in atraction between the two rotors, so the coil is traversed by a manetic "buble" ?
Bajac, i have constructed circuits for both types of Drive for the Flynn type set up. one is by 555 timing and the other is by slotted disc.
Marathonman,
I do not see a need for a signal generator to test the device I am trying to build. Once constructed, I would only need a small motor to turn the permanent magnets, and test equipment to measure the output vs. input power. It is better to keep it simple when testing the concept. Does that make sense?
I think the Flynn's apparatus is way too complicated because of all the switches, transistors, and synchronism required to make it work.
Thanks,
Bajac
i just feel like i am beating my head on the desk every day with Figueras.You are not alone, my friend! We are all scratching our heads with Mr. Figuera. Because of the poor drafting of the patents, I tend to think that these patents were tampered with.
I am not as versed as you are in the mainstream viewpoint. Nor am I familiar with the Figuera patent. The reason for my posting is to say that I agree with your present finding, using two poles instead of one. This is something that I have been advocating for some time now, unfortunately my ranting has been falling on deaf, or better closed ears. One of the things that I have found is that in the gap we have a unidirectional flow. How we interact is paramount! The text book offers no direct suggestions, however, an open minded view of Faraday and Lenz's law reveals that a possible solution is in what we are discussing right now, namely, use both sides of the magnet, or use two poles when one both sides of the magnet aren't practicable. It can also be suggested that we pay attention to the coils reaction to the magnet, for it tells us everything we need to know!
I built a motor/generator which capitalizes on one way flux. The device operates as a reduced to drag free generator, or when operated as a motor, depending on the direction of rotation, the induced aids the supply. If indeed we are talking about the same thing, and of this I have no doubt, Figuera and many others, had it right
Thanks for confirming what I feel I have demonstrated to be true. The only thing you have to do now is build it, verifying your theory! I am looking forward to seeing what you come up with!
Doug, I was not referring to you when I made the question. I was thinking about other articles that I read from which I got that impression.
Doug,
If you are directing that question toward me
Hanon, I do not understand when you refer to "one pole." To this date, it is impossible to isolate a single magnetic pole. Could you clarify?
My interpretation is not that the key is the coreless coil but the use of TWO POLES: the dragging produced by one pole (repulsion) is compensated by the acceleration due to other pole (attraction).
Cadman,
That is an interesting design. I performed an internet search but I was not able to find any information on this device. Do you have more information on the device?
Thanks,
Bajac
Dynamo-electric Machinery by Silvanus Phillips Thompson. Published in 1893.
The Ferranti alternator starts at page 613 of the book, 226 pages into the volume 2 pdf.
Volume 1
https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm17thomgoog (https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm17thomgoog)
Volume 2
https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm15thomgoog (https://archive.org/details/dynamoelectricm15thomgoog)
They are free to download using the PDF link at the left side of the web page.
Enjoy. It's a good book :)
From what I read the Ferranti alternator was able to run the rotor at much higher peripheral speeds due to the reduced mass of the ironless coils and this was a key to the high output.Cadman,
... However, I have not been able to locate the Thomson and Ferranti's patents related to this device.
Thanks,
Bajac
Madddann,
I will build your circuit with 12 V outlet from the transformer. I already have the transformers, resistor and the diode bridge. I just need to know which condenser value I need to buy for 12 V. The problem is that I do not have and scope,I am doing it in the Figuera's way at the beginning of the XX century :)
Your coils have a huge resistance , 36 ohms.. My last inducer coils are around 300 turns and 3 ohms. I guess that 12 V is fine to fire them.
Antijon, in your schematic, could you make a rough calculation of R and C for a value of L and 12 V?. It is just to grasp the equations
If I corectly understood that would mean Ferranti patented device with rotating ironless coils before Figuera ?That is correct. The earlier core-less generator that I have been able to find is described in the patent from William Thomson.
... The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.
Cadman,
I don't think I understand your comment completely.
bajac
Afaik it was simply due to ECONOMIC reasons !!!! American electrical engineers were able to standarise production, lower costs and so won by price advantage !
http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false (http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false)
OK, but if you ever build one of these just give some thought about my last post. The Ferranti effect was the least of it. The point was to built-in capacitance and how it might be used to advantage.
Cheers
Bajac,
Firstly, english is not my language and sorry for any miscommunication. This is my first post here :D
My intention here is to tell you Bajac that I think you're on the right track. I cannot agree more with you about the ironless core..
I hypothesized months ago when you were off of the forum that the only secret about Figuera generator is the coreless armature or output coil, but I had no time to prove it because I was completing my engineering degree. Now I am graduated and have a lot of free time (and still jobless lol)..
I have built an extremely simple device the components of which I believe all of you guys already have them. If my measurement with a cheap multimeter is sufficiently accurate, then I can say that the hypothesis is valid. Before building it, I simulated the device in FEMM 4.2 and the result of my experiment agreed with the simulation.
I am sure that I don't fully understand it, but this is the concept I use to describe the mechanism:
We have to refresh our old lesson
-------------
Properties Electric Magnetic
Force V (volt) NI (ampere turn)
Flow I (ampere) Flux (weber)
Impedance Z (ohm) S (AT/wb)
-------------
Flux linking: V = d(flux)/dt ----> I tried to replicate 1908 patent so no flux cutting
-------------
A coil with a higher permeability core means that with the same magneto motive force/MMF (and with relatively the same power if hysteresis and eddy losses kept minimum) more flux will be created (more flow). Doesn't it sound that we get "free flux"? This is what contributes to overunity when it is coupled with an output coil with low permeability core or coreless.
In a conventional transformer while operating, both the primary coil and the secondary one have the same MMF, more turns less current, less turns more current. Since they are wound in the same core material and in a closed magnetic circuit, they will also have the same amount of flux. In other words, the primary is "armed" with high permeability core to induce a voltage in the secondary and unfortunately the secondary is also "armed" so that it can fight back. The counter attack from the secondary will reduce the self inductance of the primary (lower inductance L), therefore more current will flow in the primary which means more power dissipated to heat. That event is (in my opinion) mistakenly explained that the power of the secondary is coming from the primary.
Back to Figuera's generator 1908. It very similarly appears like a transformer. But here, we "arm" only the primary with a high permeability core and we keep the secondary "unarmed". With that arrangement, the primary is still able to induce a voltage in the secondary (although lower because of high reluctance and less flux) and the secondary with its induced voltage cannot fight back the flux applied to it, it needs a lot of current to fight the primary flux back. Therefore, the self inductance of the primary will be relatively constant and no more power will be drawn and we can say that the only factor which limits the output power is the resistance and strength of the conductor to carry the current. Less resistance will help to release more power.
Here are some results of my experiment (all in rms):
Vin = 220 V 50 hz (sinusoidal from line)
R primary coil = 6 ohms
D primary = ??
R secondary coil = 0.2 ohms
D secondary = 0.8 mm
Open-secondary:
Vout = 5 V
Iin = 1.52 A (magnetizing current)
Closed:
(I)
R secondary coil + load = 1.2 ohms (I used connector wire as a load lol)
Iout = 3.8 A
Iin = 1.53 A (insignificant increase)
(II)
R secondary coil + load = 0.6 ohms (more connector wire)
Iout = 7.9 A
Iin = 1.54 A (still insignificant increase)
I did the Closed I & II test no more than 10 s because the connector wire got really hot. You can calculate the COP by yourselves. I plan to do a self loop test but many things need to be calculated. I'll get a job first lol.
Good luck
Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
Could you provide the specific page numbers showing the information?
Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm (http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm)
You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.
You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.
Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.
Bajac
I still do not know what capacitance are you referring to and/or I do not see how said capacitance could help on the power performance of the generator. If your are proposing an idea or concept, please, take the time to develop and elaborate your idea. For example, it took me several weeks to prepare my concept for diminishing torque when using ironless induced coil in generators. It is not fair for others when a person proposes something that only he/she understands and then let others the work to figure it out. Otherwise, we will be killing the purpose and goal of the forum, which is to contribute and provide understanding.
poorpluto,
Please try this arrangement of secondary coils.
.....
Get a AA battery, a long nail 4 to 5 inch, and about 10 feet of 20 to 24 gauge magnet wire and two piles of paper clips. Wind 100 turns around the nail, connect the ends to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the first pile.
Now take two magnet wires side by side and wind 50 turns around the nail. Connect the inside wire at each end together to make it a Telsa coil. Connect the two outside wires to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the second pile.
Same battery volts and current, same amount of wire, same iron, much higher capacitance, roughly twice the magnetic flux.
Twice the flux linking with the induced = twice the emf.
The great increase in flux isn't even mentioned in the patent, and this experiment has nothing to do with the self induction of those coils, nor the resonant rise in output the ironless versions are capable of at the right frequency.
....
Cadman
Good job sparky. You get a cookie. Now can you pick up a basket ball without touching it using noting more then two drinking glasses? Its uncanny how much the two subjects have in common.
I am referring to the capacitance of the coils in the generator, as I said earlier.
According to the Tesla patent 512340 Coil for Electromagnets, the capacitance of this type of coil can greatly reduce and even neutralize its self induction.
Yeah I know Tesla this, Tesla that, eyes glaze over.
Want an experiment that proves something?
Get a AA battery, a long nail 4 to 5 inch, and about 10 feet of 20 to 24 gauge magnet wire and two piles of paper clips. Wind 100 turns around the nail, connect the ends to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the first pile.Here you have a tight wound coil with low leakage and high self inductance or high linkage flux. Most of the magnetic flux of each wire flows through the iron nail. The nail should pick up a lot of paper clips.
Now take two magnet wires side by side and wind 50 turns around the nail. Connect the inside wire at each end together to make it a Telsa coil. Connect the two outside wires to the battery and see how many paper clips the nail will pick up from the second pile.Here you have a loose inductor with high leakage and low self inductance or low linkage flux. The flux of the most outer wires may not even reach the inner turns because of the geometry (disk or pancake shape). The magnetic field in the iron nail should be weaker and should pick up a lower number of paper clips.
Same battery volts and current, same amount of wire, same iron, much higher capacitance, roughly twice the magnetic flux.Have you measured the capacitance in these coils? It should be in the order of magnitude of nano Farads (10^-9 Farads or small microfarads). At 100Hz, these capacitance are not even worth of taking them into account because they result in very small time constants. Any transformer should have higher parasitic capacitance between turns, between coils, and between coils and the iron core. The capacitance of the coils that Tesla refers to becomes important at high frequencies, which correspond to the operating frequencies of the Tesla coils. I can tell you parasitic capacitance of the coils of the Ferranti alternators has no effect on its performance at such low frequencies.
Twice the flux linking with the induced = twice the emf.Because of the operating frequency of the Ferranti alternators, there is no possibility of having a resonant circuit.
The great increase in flux isn't even mentioned in the patent, and this experiment has nothing to do with the self induction of those coils, nor the resonant rise in output the ironless versions are capable of at the right frequency.
You have been marveling at the output of the Ferranti generator so earlier I was trying to point out some general ideas and similarities that occurred to me while reading up on it.It was not my intent to upset you. Maybe I got a little frustrated because I was not able to understand your point even though I was trying hard. I really apologize for any inconvenience.
I thought the purpose of the forum was also to discuss and learn but if you only want proofs and don't wish to hear undeveloped thoughts and ideas then OK. It's your thread.
Poorpluto, thanks for replying.
You confirmed my experience with that setup although I was curious what result you would have with 220v input and large coil vs my 24v input and small coil. I came to a different conclusion though. I figured the flux linking with the wire did produce emf but it was so minuscule the meter wouldn't read it. If you calculate based on the flux area equal to the diameter of the wire x the length of the iron it crosses you will see what I mean...
Hi poorpluto,
Reading your posts on the tests, it seems to me that you consider the small change in the input power comsumption only when you load the secondary and then you seem to compare this small change to the secondary output power to get a certain efficiency or COP figure ...
...
Here you have a loose inductor with high leakage and low self inductance or low linkage flux. The flux of the most outer wires may not even reach the inner turns because of the geometry (disk or pancake shape). The magnetic field in the iron nail should be weaker and should pick up a lower number of paper clips.
...
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,920-operating-arc-lamps?pq=YXJjIGxpZ2h0, read it if you want to see the similarities of both machines(Tesla and Ferranti). I have read all High Speed Generators of Nikola Tesla, and understand it very well that you discussed about Ferranti is not new to me. Tesla has almost the same design of that High Speed Alternators either the armature are revolving or the Inducing Electromagnets are revolving.
Thank you for clarifying it. Now I know what you were trying to say. I do not understand why you did not explain it like that from the beginning.
I always make an effort to reply to the posts even though I do not have too much spare time. I am getting behind on some of my other work because I have dedicated a lot of time to this forum for the last two months. I do not regret it at all, it has been too much fun learning about Ferranti and all others that had an starring role in the second half of the 19th century.
I really appreciate your posts. I always look forward to hearing from you. Your participation has been very helpful indeed! Thanks to you, today I know about Ferranti.
Best regards,
Bajac
bajac,
i think here is miscommunication, cadman refers to cylindrical shape bifi coil and not disk or pancake shape.
Hello bajac.
I think we come up with the same ideas about this High Speed Alternators/ High Frequency Alternator(Tesla). Tesla mention on his diary(CS Notes) about his design with this kind of High Speed Alternators which is exactly the same with those of Ferranti you have posted.
Tesla mention on his diary that the Induced wound coils is exactly 3Feet in length wound in each inserted PIN. I was referring to this patent, read it if you want to see the similarities of both machines(Tesla and Ferranti). I have read all High Speed Generators of Nikola Tesla, and understand it very well that you discussed about Ferranti is not new to me. Tesla has almost the same design of that High Speed Alternators either the armature are revolving or the Inducing Electromagnets are revolving.
I could say that Tesla also found that the Exciter/Inducing Electromagnet stationary(steady) on the outer ring is best design. The larger the radius or diameter of the High Speed Generators the more Zig Zag Exciter Electromagnet Tesla could put on the Outer ring.
There are two more patent which is exactly the same machine with those of Ferranti which Tesla have design.
Meow ;D
...I see what you mean by flux area of wire diameter, I agree there is a voltage but very tiny. Did you mean you had tried a rotating magnetic field? How was the set up (the output coil and the inducer)?...
SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A Rin : 6.3 ohm Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A Rout : 0.5 ohm Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W
We took a couple of automotive alternators and made one stator out of two, about 5 cm thick. Wound 6 inducing coils, 100 turns #20 each, at 60 degrees pitch. The induced armature was plywood wrapped with steel banding with 6 rectangular coils, 14 turns #12 each, also at 60 degrees with one side under every third pole...
Hi poorpluto,
Thanks for sharing your results. You assembly is similar to patent 30378, from 1902. Nothin related to the 1908 patent, thay imho it is based on flux cutting. What happen if you use just one coil? Are you looking for any kind of cancellation by using the 3 output coils?
And lastly, why dont you calculate the power as P = V·I , in this case Pin = 220 volt· 1.5 A = 330 watts ? I suppose that if you requiring 220 volts is becaise the total impedance, not just resistance, of the inducer system requires such a big voltage.
Regards
There is no proof that the Figuera-Generator (1908) ever existed.
Figuera never showed a generator that worked. In my opinion he never got a valid patent for the "1908 Generator".
Buforn filed a number of identical patents after Figuera died. This fact alone seems like a proof that there was never issued a valid patent.
Buforn also didn't demonstrate a working model
...
I had shown the "secondary open" result in my second post to show the magnetizing current, is that what you mean? I don't know how to measure the phase shift between the primary current and voltage, that's why I use another way to calculate the power dissipated (I rms ^2 *R) and I think that's acceptable, right?
I don't understand Q (quality factor?) well. I meant that the secondary voltage must be stepped up to around 11 Vac, then the voltage would be sufficient to supply the magnetizing current (~1.55 A) in the primary in resonance while the load could still be connected to the secondary before or after stepping up. I haven't tested such arrangement I don't know whether it will be sufficient for a self-running test or not, any suggestion?
Certifico: Que he examinado la documentación constituida por la memoria original y
plano correspondientes a la referida patente de invención, expedida en 6 de junio de
1910, por "UN GENERADOR DE ELECTRICIDAD "UNIVERSAL"
I think Buforn really understood Lenz law perfectly. He is not talking about details but precisely mark the USAGE of Lenz law in dynamos generating strong magnetic attraction easily avoidable when using not movable coils.
He kept own secret hidden , how to avoid OTHER negative factors of Lenz law in case of solid state device.Secret is hidden in some parts of his description like "in organized way". It may look like he don't know what Lenz law is about but he perfectly knew all effects of Lenz law and how to avoid them.
"According to this principle are founded all magneto or dynamo-electric machines from Clarke to the most perfect ones, and all have defect that under the law of Lenz, there are in them extremely strong attractions whose action or hindrance to the rotation of the armature is necessary to overcome.
The other way to archieve the same ends, is to constantly and in organized way vary the intensity of the magnetic field, produced by electromagnets.That's plain wrong that there is no need to apply Lenz's law. There is no Lorentz force to overcome but the Lenz law applies.
This procedure has the advantage of not having to overcome resistance of attraction (forces), there is no need to apply Lenz law and therefore not need any mechanical force to overcome this resistance."
Buforn first patent 47706
Hi poorpluto,
Yes I meant the magnetizing current in your second post. IT is okay that it changes only a little when you short or almost fully short the secondary but the magnetizing current flows into the primary all the time from the 220 V mains and for input power estimation the total input current must be considered, if it is 1.55 A or 1.6 A or whatever.
The phase shift could be measured with an oscilloscope, unfortunately, if you have one. What you calculate from the (I rms ^2 *R) formula is the dissipated heat loss in the primary coil due to its wire DC resistance, that is all...
I was only showing you the same big diameter drum generator. This is the real thing you are looking.This is a very good device to compare with the devices we have been discussing!
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,921-alternating-current-generator (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-447,921-alternating-current-generator)
One of the most important things I learned from this build was the core/coil relation. It is exactly as the Buforn patent drawing shows. One center core (induced), with each end inserted about 45% into each outer coil (inductors).
The whole interpretation of a device to create a "virtual motion" by using the repulsion between 2 electromagnets and the movement back and forth of their fields:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)
Bajac, I also find that number misleading. A typical generator, even commercially, requires nearly double the mechanical power to operate at full load. So, as an example, my small 1KW generator requires a 2 H.P engine. Now if we assume that 1 H.P. is equal to 746 watts, then my generator requires 1492 watts of mechanical power to produce 1000 watts of electrical power. Wouldn't that be an efficiency of 67%?
The article also states that the same 37.5KW generator required a 3 H.P engine to run at full EMF. Not full load, but full EMF. This is important because, again looking at my generator, at full EMF it still requires nearly all of that 2 H.P. to run. And I want to make a distinction here, a typical generator governs the exciter current to improve efficiency, so at no load it may show full voltage, but it will not be producing the full EMF. Full EMF refers to the highest state of exciter current, and this state alone will require at least half of the mechanical power necessary for the generator to run at full load.
So to see that this generator required only 3 H.P. to produce full EMF is quite a surprise. I'd be willing to bet that at 4 H.P. it could produce at least half, or 18KW of electrical energy. If that were true, that would be an efficiency of 600%. haha
Speaking of that, I think new principles should be created to make a distinction between a motor and a generator. Most generators are in fact synchronous motors, and all motors also act as generators, but that doesn't mean they are the same. Taking Faraday's disk as an example, there is a generator that cannot function as a motor. Likewise with the generators that Bajac has been sharing with us. This proves that an EMF doesn't have a definite mechanical force associated with it. Because a motor consumes so much electrical power to produce so much mechanical power, doesn't mean that the same amount of mechanical power has to produce the same amount of electrical power. With this consideration in mind, a motor-generator set doesn't violate the conservation of energy, because we aren't using a generator that operates under the same conditions as a motor.
At least you got some lessons to learn sir :)
I have not learned about a rotating magnetic field by summation of several vectors so I'm in no position to give you some suggestions to try a new arrangement. I have not even proven what I believe to be the key of Figuera's devices, coreless induced coil in the strongest exciter magnet possible whether combined with a moving part (flux cutting) or a changing field (flux linking). I hope I have some luck to set my self-running test with of course the result we've been wanting but I'll be away for some weeks without access to my experiment equipments.
Hi all,
I have uploaded a video with the foundation of the Figuera generator based on two poles in repulsion mode. It is a very good video. I recommend you to look for 10 minutes to watch it. I explain why Figuera did not define clearly the pole orientation, and how he emulated a common generator in a motionless device.
The whole interpretation of a device to create a "virtual motion" by using the repulsion between 2 electromagnets and the movement back and forth of their fields:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s)
Regards
The procedure is thus reduced to establish an independent armature circuit, within the sphere of action or atmosphere formed between the magnetic pole faces of opposite name, of two electromagnets, or series of electromagnets driven by intermittent or alternating currents. ...
The machine is formed by a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores...
resistance is drawn in an elementary way to facilitate understanding of the entire system, and "+" and "-" the driving current is taken from a generator outside and extraneous to the machine...
...As seen in the drawing current once it has done its job in different electromagnets returns the generator was taken from,...
...This stream derives a small part and she excites the excitatory drive making machine and drives the small motor that spins the brush and commutator; power is removed and the machine continues its mission indefinitely without any help.
Well now, isn't that a kick in the rear? “she excites the excitatory drive making machine”
I don't ever recall any translation that says a portion of the produced power was used to excite a separate 'excitatory drive making machine'.
bajac
sorry to say, but when manipulating the rotors, a couple of magnets went loose and crashed together (hopelessly broken)
For the moment no funds available for replacement.
Anyway insisting in my previous observations, Lorenz force (and Lenz effect) are present when loadding.
Have you visited the qantamagnetics page ? http://quantamagnetics.com/
There device uses a simmilar design (last version with 3 rotors 2 stators)
I am alternately powering the electromagnets because when the electromagnets are setup to be opposing to each other as one electromagnet starts to power down the lines of force shift toward it causing them to be pushed through the coil. When it is set up this way the electromagnets only have to vary in strength in relation to to each other to cause induction in the secondary coil. In the diagrams I have provided earlier in this thread I have shown how anyone can prove all this out. Also when you do it this way the wires in the top of the induced coil have an opposite sign as the wires in the bottom of the coil. This is why it is necessary to split the coil in the middle, and hook the wires like I did. When the induced coil is used in this way it's flux can not effect the flux of the primary electromagnets.
If I were to take a guess it would be that your six months away from resolving the major problems. If you focus too much on design and not enough on operating principle you will miss the method to close the loop.
Yea I said close the loop. The point where a little is fed back and acts like a lot.
If you want some light reading try Archimedes from 300 B.C.
Bajac, thanks for the pdf, though I can't read it until I get home.
Hanon, it's interesting that you say that. There's a brilliant guy on YouTube that I started following. He made a transformer setup here- http://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE (http://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vRE) and though I didn't really understand, he does mention two secondary coils of opposite polarity.
I was just proving that in a Figuera setup, or other similar design, the flux of both inductors add together. So, if 12V was the source, the combined flux would equate to 24V of flux.If the source is 12 V, the commutator is splitting the 12V in two parts for the two inductor coils (which add up to 12V). How can the combined flux add up to 24V? Is there an explanation?
"No Lenz Law is exerted on the Input Coil from the Output Coil"
"Input is less than to be expected"
"We don't have the necessity of separating Flux (Flux Linking Law E=-dPhi/dt) we only need to modulate Flux (Flux Cutting Law E=B·v·l) and this can be done with very little power like Floyd said all those years back"
"In 1831 Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction - says Gennady Markov. - Then his ideas developed by Maxwell. After that, more than 160 years, no one was able to advance electrodynamics in the fundamental terms of a step. And eight years ago, I applied for an international patent, valid in 20 countries of the world, I created a transformer, which has already received four Russian patent. And my discovery was made "in spite of the laws of " the great physicists . Faraday , the magnetic fluxes in the yoke to successively shape - the contour in one direction. And only then works transformer . And I offered to do the opposite : to take the coil with the same number of turns and turn them towards each other . At the same time creates an equal number of turns and equal magnetic fluxes reaching towards each other, which cancel each other , but not destroyed ( as Faraday and Maxwell, they must be destroyed .) I discovered a new law : the principle of superposition of magnetic fields in a ferromagnetic material. The superposition - is the addition of fields. The essence of the law is that the magnetic fields that are mutually compensated , but not destroyed . And here is the word " but not destroyed " and is the key to open my law."
Bajac, for some reason I couldn't download your document. Could you repost it, please? And yes, it does seem that they were trying to make a fool of Mordey.
The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant. He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back. Just an idea.I am not sure I understand how your setup works. Do you have a sketch showing the expected magnetic flux lines between the inducing and induced coils?
Oh, to build a generator on this principle, look at the illustration. With a three pole rotor, all North pointing out, the stator coils should produce an AC current. Because of the three poles, in operation, when one magnet is leaving a stator, another magnet is approaching the opposite stator. This will produce a combined EMF equal to a standard rotor with a north and south pole. The effect of Lenz's law will still produce a back-torque because the current generated will still oppose the change of the rotor, but because there is no North-South "locking" the rotor to the stator, the running torque will be much smaller. I like to think that this design will show that the back-torque of Lenz's law is really very small.
Hannon
How would this help 2.8 million starving people to eat? How long would it be before they became 5.6 million? Even if it could help solve the food problem there is no free water generator so at some point you would still be in as bad a shape or worse when you run out of potable water. Just something I was wondering while repairing my pc which was hacked 20 minutes after my last post. Im not bothered by it much it provides a distraction from other things. Forces me to clean my drives.
Hi,
I have one doubt: Why the ironless generator in the picture below is not an overunity generator if it does not have a iron core to create drag in the movement? I am afraid that there is something else in Figuera rotary coil patent #30376 than a simple ironless generator.
Hi,
I have one doubt: Why the ironless generator in the picture below is not an overunity generator if it does not have a iron core to create drag in the movement? I am afraid that there is something else in Figuera rotary coil patent #30376 than a simple ironless generator.
As I posted a couple of months ago I think that the foundation of this rotary coil generator is that this generator have TWO POLES AT THE SAME DISTANCE TO THE CONDUCTOR. But this is just my idea. In this case I don´t have arguments to support this interpretation. The conductor is just one single wire between two poles, and it creates a coil which is perpendicular to the magnetic field.
As I understand that patent, the effect created by one pole is compensated by the effect from the other pole. Let´s say that current is induced in the wire (as in any other generator). This current moves along the wire creating a magnetic field around the wire. Let´s say that the North pole attracts the magnetic field around the wire. The South pole will then repel the magnetic field around the wire. As the South pole and the North pole are at the same distance to wire both effects will cancel each other (attraction and repulsion) and there won´t be any drag to the movement of the rotary coil.
If you want to test this Figuera patent I would just suggest to try first with Figuera´s original design. Do not try to invent without even building the basic patent device. Do not try to be more clever than Figuera. I guess you will lose against Figuera :-[
I have devised a configuration of this patent where the net inducer magnetic field (B) which crosses the coil is null in the coil during a whole revolution of the generator (B_net=0). Therefore there is no induction due to flux linking ( emf = -d(Phi)/dt = 0) and there is only induction by flux cutting ( emf = B·v·l ). Is anyone interested? Are you wondering how can it be done? Just play a bit with the electromagnets shape and placement. This is novel as far as I know.
As I understand that patent, the effect created by one pole is compensated by the effect from the other pole. Let´s say that current is induced in the wire (as in any other generator). This current moves along the wire creating a magnetic field around the wire. Let´s say that the North pole attracts the magnetic field around the wire. The South pole will then repel the magnetic field around the wire. As the South pole and the North pole are at the same distance to wire both effects will cancel each other (attraction and repulsion) and there won´t be any drag to the movement of the rotary coil.
Hi
Here's a short video by me with some ideas about the Figuera patent. I think that the flux was directed through either an air gap or solid block, and the pickup wires were contained within then. The main flux could be either from an electro-magnet or a permanent magnet, and that flux is shifted by a secondary electro-magnet which may form part of a tank circuit. Anyway, that's my thoughts for what they are worth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoZCGjQI3Dw&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoZCGjQI3Dw&feature=youtu.be)
Rds
John
Hannon
That is only a part of it which is very important in itself. It will not get it to work on its own. The intensity of the magnetic fields produced by the inducers have to be extreamly strong with a minimum of expended current. ie a better magnet. There is another oddity to his drawing in the patent of the motionless unit. The lines which everyone thinks are conductive leads are not leads at all. They show one half of the system running off the source, the N inducers and the other half running off the feed back from the output. It would be like drawing a circle around the respective halves one run off of outside gen and the other off the comutated resistance which also more of abstract notion then a model in the physical sense. Remove the lines going from the different parts to the other parts and start counting up parts and tell me there is not seven coils N seven coils S and seven possible resister connections but 14 commutator segments. The resister contraption is only there to show the device is resistance controlled but it does not exist in the sense of the drawing as a real physical part of the construction. The magnets them selves control the fluctuation and everything ells including rectification.
I was aware that the software wouldn't calculate an overunity condition, I just wanted to estimate how much flux generated and the experiment result is the ultimate truth although the explanation is very often unknown.
Below I attach a picture showing my set up which is very simple to replicate. The dimension is 8x9x10 cm and between 3-4 kg's weight. I hope somebody here would replicate and then do a more accurate COP measurement, better yet make a self-running set up which will show obviously its overunity.
I did some more tests today and got slightly different results. Here are some of them:
SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A Rin : 6.3 ohm Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A Rout : 0.5 ohm Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W
My set up is very loose and vibrating violently so I guess that's why the result differed from what I posted here http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871) ..
If the reactance of the primary inductance is neutralized by using capacitor, Vin will need only around 11 Vac rms (for consideration when designing self-running set up)..
Good luck
-- 14 electroimanes de inducción con núcleo de hierro dulce o (hierro colado) de unos 120*50*50 mm, con alambre esmaltado de 1 o a 2mm
-- 7 bobinas colectoras con el núcleo de hierro dulce o colado de unos 120*120*50 mm, con cable esmaltado de unos 2 mm
-- las medidas son aproximadas.
-- un regulador de alimentación, para controlar la electricidad de los electroimanes.
es para un generador de 5 o 10kw. Algo mas de 1000 €
estos datos que se los de un BOBINADOR O REPARADOR DE GENERADORES ELECTRICOS. el sistema es similar lo que cambia es la figura
The device you showed in your reply #1637 on page 110 could work on the principle that Figuera disclosed in his 1902 patent (motionless device.) If you follow the teachings of this patent, you can improve on your device.
I have to tell you guys, except from Figuera, I just cannot believe that such a basic concept relating the ironless coils and overunity has been overlooked by the greatest minds of the last 120 years.
I keep going back on reviewing the paper proposing the concept for overunity when using ironless coils and I have not been able to find a flaw in the theory. I also keep searching for any information related to the use of ironless armature coils. Most of the information..
I saw somewhere (can't find the source) in old paper that generators like Ferranti and others used, with rotating ironless armature were called constant current generators.Forest,
Do you mean a set up like what Cadman suggested in post #1637?Yes! It was what I was referring to. I also think that the problem might be the design of the exciting circuit. Have you test the magnetic field in the air gaps? It is very important to get this number right. Designing magnetic circuits with large air gaps is a challenge. That is why now I am using coils with much more turns and intermediate taps with thinner gauge wires.
I did some similar journal search as you did and sadly found out that a coreless permanent generator (for example a wind turbine of NGenTec Ltd company) have a mechanical-to-electrical efficiency of under unity (95% max).We do not have to feel sad for finding out the truth. That is the main goal for this forum. I would encourage you, and anyone in this forum, to post the links to these articles. I would be more than eager to review them.
Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation? Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation?The Lorentz force should always be present but the electric field force can be considered negligible.
But why did Figuera state in pat#30376 that if we only rotate the copper wire, it would not suffer any drag which result in overunity? Who's right? There must be one of them only.That is the million dollars question that we are trying to answer. Please, note that we may find literatures displaying low numbers for the efficiency of the ironless coils but I would always be cautious about it. I would check the testing procedures and assumptions for getting these results very carefully. Why? Well, the concept explained for having considerable lower torques when one of the coils have non-magnetic materials is simple enough and seems to make sense. Until someone reviews the theory and publishes what is wrong with the proposed approach, I would be kind of skeptical. And up to this point, I have been able to find questionable assumptions and calculations when estimating the efficiencies of these machines.
By the way, how is your progress building the motionless generator doing? Did you already build it and post a sketch or picture of it?It is going slow for me. Presently, I have a schedule to have a testing unit by the end of this year. The reason for the delays is the same as anyone else, funding! I am prioritizing my limited resources in other personal businesses that have nothing to do with overunity devices.
I really want to know because I want to propose another theory of operation...If you or anyone else have a different concept for the operation of these devices, please, post them in this forum. We can always learn from them through discussions.
- Varying MMF with one exciter coil or more with only 1 phase like in my set up would result in **transformer induction** (EMF generated by A-Vector Potential). That may be the cause why Cadman and I got a weak EMF in set up similar to what you suggested.As I explained above, designing for these large air gaps is nothing easy. One of the reasons used by Ferranti's competitors to phase out the disc armature alternators was that increasing the power or making them three phase generators require a considerable increase of the air gaps resulting in higher electrical losses due to larger electromagnets. The issue of power versus air gaps was addressed by Figuera in his 1908 device.
- BUT, varying MMF with at least 2 coils having certain deg phase shift (depend on the input waveform) placed perpendicularly would cause the B field to rotate physically (like a lot of tiny magnets inside the core are turning round their axes) and generate **motional induction**.It seems an interesting concept but I still do not understand completely. You can make a better argument if you provide all details how the signals are injected, what to expect in the induced coils, and why it is overunity. For example, the stepper motors use two signals shifted 90 degrees only. The signal you showed have an (absolute) time shifting of 180 degrees approx. Why do you think there will be a rotating resultant magnetic field? How will the resultant magnetic field produce overunity? Can you show a sketch with the sequence of operation expected for this device?
Well,
There is a thread showing a running generator with no back emf, surely based on the same principles as the Figuera patent with the rotary coil, patent #30376 ...
The Lorentz force should always be present but the electric field force can be considered negligible.I know Lorentz force is always present but I doubt how strong its magnitude in generator whether conventional or Figuera's.
It seems an interesting concept but I still do not understand completely. You can make a better argument if you provide all details how the signals are injected, what to expect in the induced coils, and why it is overunity. For example, the stepper motors use two signals shifted 90 degrees only. The signal you showed have an (absolute) time shifting of 180 degrees approx. Why do you think there will be a rotating resultant magnetic field? How will the resultant magnetic field produce overunity? Can you show a sketch with the sequence of operation expected for this device?
According to the image attached in the previous post by the user Ignacio, there are three possible methods to excite the two series of electromagnets:
1- Using the conmutator described in the 1908 patent
2- Using a pure sine wave DC-AC inverter adding a diode (I suppose that the diode is used to eliminate the negative part of the signal)
3- Using a system of relays (that I can not understand as it is described in the image). I suppose that the output signal from the relay system is a pulsed signal.
Note: As I can guess from the image, the drawing of the circunference and the ondulated line inside ,which is the international symbol for AC current, seems not be used here with that significance, but just to represent a variable signal.
hanon: I've had a nagging doubt about the Figuera patent for a while now and it stems from a genuine misunderstanding I once had with an import export mess-up from Spain.
I mean that words have different meanings in different cultures.
Is it possible that Figuera was referring to the fact that he could get AC from DC very
simply using his method?
At that time most generating plants would be on DC, and it would cost a fortune to
convert to AC.
Figuera's device as an industrial grade DC to AC converter would have been worth millions anyway.
Could you re-examine the patent from that point of view?
Figurea uses a clever method to fluctuate the field strengths with his commutator and a number of brushes. The connections to the brushes are most likely the resistance if he used undersize wire. The inducers are standard.
I chose another way to do the same but used the coil design to do the same thing just because I felt like it and its easier for me to calculate.
The picture I posted before was for a method to wind a single magnet or inducer.It is a all one length of coil made up of segments which have taps at points where the wire resistance will be reduced due to an apparent shortening of the length of wire as the same current, one source is connected in sequence to the additional taps.
Aka what makes a stronger magnet? More turns ,more current, better core.
Hello all,
It's good to be back among the living and working.
this is off topic but i am working on a rotating ring dynamo that i converted to motionless using electromagnets with the timing board similar to figueras timing board used by Patrick. board is finished waiting for Two more pay checks to order core material.
here is pic of ring dynamo.
Hi all:
I divide my post in two parts. The theoretical part may be arguable. The experimental data are real results from my tests.
THEORY: In this thread there are many points of view, I am just offering my interpretation of the Figuera patent. I am just telling that Figuera did not use the words "NORTH" and "SOUTH" explicitly in the 1908 patent. He just called "RECTANGLE N" and "RECTANGLE S", as he could also have used "rectangle A" and "rectangle B". For that reason I was copying literally those paragraphs in my previous post, in order that each one may judge for themselves. Patents have a legal background, therefore if he did not use the words "north" and "south" then the patent is protecting all possible pole orientation. Which one is the fair configuration? I am not completely sure, but I bet that he used the electromagnets in repulsion mode and he just moved back and forth the fields.
EXPERIMENT: I had been testing some configurations. I have tested the configuration with poles in repulsion mode (North-North and South-South), and between them I put two induced coils perpendicularly, as represented in the attached picture and the attached sketch. I powered the system with AC (12 V)
I can tell you that the input consumption was not altered when adding a load in the induced coils, nor when I shortcircuited the induced coils. This a good starting point. I got under-unity results, I mean, the output power was lower than the input. But the importat fact is that input power (12VAC, 0.18 A) did not increase when having a load in the induced coil. Period.
This is a simple test which may be replicated in minutes by anyone. Please post your results if you decide to replicate this simple test.
nelsonrochaa
I'm really interested in Your ideas about how this type of energy is created, what is the source ?
There must be a source, I don't believe physics laws to be so incomplete.
Who can prove what is the source of excess energy ? Figuera stated it was magnetic field (not just conversion of mechanical energy into electricity).
bajac
I think we are progressing so fast we need a quick look into the past and connect dots.
I strongly suggest this is related (somehow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY)
and this also http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html (http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html)
Hi Hanon ,
Very usable your test .
Can i ask if you see any type of increase in the magnetic field perpendicular to main coils ?
Did you consider try to connect the main input coils in bifilar mode and pulse them?
Based in some tests that i did , i think you can achieve best results pulsing the main coils with DC at higher frequencies that 50hz .
I make some tests that can be usable to you .
one more time very thanks for your work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRjGMCBAh0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRjGMCBAh0)
Thanks for your work.
Hi Nelson,
Your videos are very interesting . I guess that you are pulsing two coisl and you are collecting the induced magnetic field into a bifilar coil. Is that this way? I have some questions: how are your inducer coils configured: with like poles facing each other or with opposite poles? What method do you use to pulse those coils? (I would like to know this method to use it in my test. Thanks) What is the function of the capacitor? In summary I would like if you could explain shortly the setup shown in the videos. They are really very interesting!!! Thanks.
Have you tested to collect the induced field with some iron core in the induced coil? If you do this test in the future please tell us which is the results. Also try to test with different induced coil orientations..
In my test: I am sorry but I did not measure the magnetic field perpendicular to the inducers. It was a basic configuration just to measure the induction and see the effect of a load in the input power. How can I measure the magnetic field? Which device should I use to measure it?
Hi all,
Important video to watch and digest:
A user in the spanish forum (link) (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&p=6697#p6696) has uploaded a video with the induced coils placed perpendiculary to the inducer electromagnets and using like poles facing each other (N--induced--N) (repulsion mode). Powered with AC from the mains.
See the results: the input is not affected when adding a load in the induced circuit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs)
Thank you very much to this user for noting this effect when testing his devices some time ago.
Regards
Hi Hanon,
Let me show you a similar principle which has been 'dormant' for some years on this forum:
http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772 (http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772)
Member DMMPOWER wrote in Reply #4:
"Yes what I have found, is when you use a permanent magnet with a moving coil you always produce emf.
But when you use two coil that oppose one other with the same oscillating magnetic force they will cancel each other's BEMF."
Gyula
Hi Hanon,
Let me show you a similar principle which has been 'dormant' for some years on this forum:
http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772 (http://www.overunity.com/5890/bemf-magno-motor/msg133772/#msg133772)
Member DMMPOWER wrote in Reply #4:
"Yes what I have found, is when you use a permanent magnet with a moving coil you always produce emf.
But when you use two coil that oppose one other with the same oscillating magnetic force they will cancel each other's BEMF."
Gyula
With relation to the highlighted, through experimentation, I have found the sited claim is as far as I am concerned 100 percent accurate. The phrase "high-tension current" is misleading (but is your best and only clue...) however, in my opinion it is the perfect way to describe the "current" in question, but owing this manner of phrasing, identifying the nature of the beast, and or the mechanism at play and the specific relations necessary to practice the claim is next to impossible. I recommend you spend as much time as you feel necessary in this regard, this is one of the few ways forward
Regards
It is my opinion, one supported by experiment that the attached image is an aerial view. It is my opinion that the inventor is calling our attention into three specific locations and asking us to consider the relations between the three.
Regards
Hi Forest ,
I really can not honestly answer your question ...I am curious as everyone in general who frequent this type of site and study this kind of things.
My findings from the research on this subject are based on experimentation like most people.
Now my thoughts and my interpretations:
Electricity is a form of conversion of energy and i think the first and most important thing is improve the actual systems of conversion because don’t have efficiency in the conventional way.
If we collect a magnetic collapse of a coil to a cap, the collected result is proportional with the magnitude of the coil magnetic field magnetization. To generate this magnetic field you need current circulating in coil by a source dipole.
Now if you increase the magnetic field of the coil, the magnetic collapse when you shut off the main power source (State 0), will be produce at higher voltage and electrostatic current in the cap, greater than main source .
The charge of capacitor will be more faster than you charge with conventionally power source.
And how to use this, to increase the magnetic field without increase the consume of current in main source ?
You need a way to create a fast pulse of high current with the collected power of magnetic collapse coil, and storage in a cap , to create a rapidly discharges of several pulses of high amps much higher that main source can provide, combined with high voltage pulse that can be provided by other coil with BEMF.
The effect of the combination of high current pulses combined with a source of high voltage causes the particles of the atomic nucleus exchange states very quickly, negating the disintegrating forces of positive energy of the protons. At one point, a proton has a positive charge, and a neutron has
neutral charge. and the next moment, a neutron is replaced by positive charge and the proton is replaced by a neutral charge. This exchange of states occurs in unimaginable speeds, thereby nullifying the repellent forces of the same load elements generating a cancellation in the repulsion of two equal poles in the coils. For me is the reason to explain the green gap that occur in my tests.
I think this gap color result is a Cherenkov radiation .
Read about Tesla colorado springs notes and Ev gray circuits and see the similarity in the effects.
This excess energy or what we can call in my opinion never will be possible measured correctly by conventional tools because one of the points used in the conventional measure instruments, (resistance,) seems to be in some form ignored in this type of circuits because their high impedance , caused by the differential of potential in circuit and the reactance of the coils.
I'm just with my thoughts and puzzle what I read and test man :) Man people say that im crazy
Ps -Sorry for the English I wish you can understand what I try explain.
Thanks and good work
Hi Forest ,
I really can not honestly answer your question ...I am curious as everyone in general who frequent this type of site and study this kind of things.
My findings from the research on this subject are based on experimentation like most people.
Now my thoughts and my interpretations:
Electricity is a form of conversion of energy and i think the first and most important thing is improve the actual systems of conversion because don’t have efficiency in the conventional way.
If we collect a magnetic collapse of a coil to a cap, the collected result is proportional with the magnitude of the coil magnetic field magnetization. To generate this magnetic field you need current circulating in coil by a source dipole.
Now if you increase the magnetic field of the coil, the magnetic collapse when you shut off the main power source (State 0), will be produce at higher voltage and electrostatic current in the cap, greater than main source .
The charge of capacitor will be more faster than you charge with conventionally power source.
And how to use this, to increase the magnetic field without increase the consume of current in main source ?
You need a way to create a fast pulse of high current with the collected power of magnetic collapse coil, and storage in a cap , to create a rapidly discharges of several pulses of high amps much higher that main source can provide, combined with high voltage pulse that can be provided by other coil with BEMF.
The effect of the combination of high current pulses combined with a source of high voltage causes the particles of the atomic nucleus exchange states very quickly, negating the disintegrating forces of positive energy of the protons. At one point, a proton has a positive charge, and a neutron has
neutral charge. and the next moment, a neutron is replaced by positive charge and the proton is replaced by a neutral charge. This exchange of states occurs in unimaginable speeds, thereby nullifying the repellent forces of the same load elements generating a cancellation in the repulsion of two equal poles in the coils. For me is the reason to explain the green gap that occur in my tests.
I think this gap color result is a Cherenkov radiation .
Read about Tesla colorado springs notes and Ev gray circuits and see the similarity in the effects.
This excess energy or what we can call in my opinion never will be possible measured correctly by conventional tools because one of the points used in the conventional measure instruments, (resistance,) seems to be in some form ignored in this type of circuits because their high impedance , caused by the differential of potential in circuit and the reactance of the coils.
I'm just with my thoughts and puzzle what I read and test man :) Man people say that im crazy
Ps -Sorry for the English I wish you can understand what I try explain.
Thanks and good work
It is my opinion, one supported by experiment that the attached image is an aerial view. It is my opinion that the inventor is calling our attention into three specific locations and asking us to consider the relations between the three.I agree,
Specifically our attention is directed downward, into what is commonly referred to as the North pole, and into what is commonly referred to as the South pole. It must be noted that the polarity of the middle winding is not indicated, and I believe the lack of polarity here is saying as much as would be said if there was a polarity indicated. I am of the opinion that the polarity isn't present because the coil is not oriented like the other two coils. I am of the opinion that coil "y" is arranged in such a manner that the flux spinning around N and S "run into and through" "y" from one end to the other. When viewed from the perspective of spin directions we find that at the location between N and S the flux is unidirectional. Here we find "y" is cleverly positioned in the location of not only unidirectional flux, but also maximum flux density.
I gather from the disclosure that the inventor assumes that the reader of the document is aware of the spin directions associated with N and S. This, my perspective on this changes things, (they did for me anyway) there is a very specific message being shared by the author, and to me it appears he is demonstrating that a specific geometry is required to capitalize on his invention, very simple but specific relations. This disclosure shows me that the inventor had a very deep understanding of the fields, and knew how to relate the inducing to the induced. The block diagram is just that, a block diagram, one which points us "a" direction. As far as I can tell, after much reading through this thread, this particular direction, the one I am suggesting, has not been considered. I hope that my perspective, aids one or more of you who are desirous of seeing something materialize out of the effort going into this area of research.
Regards
Thank You Nelson. I doubt it is related to atomic change, however. I think it is simply electrostatic force being not static. High frequency magnetic field disturbance, maybe caused by cosmic rays.So called radiant energy. There are other possibilities also but not so many and all lead to external power source. The simplest idea is magnetic field being whirl of energy so magnetic field CAN do work and Figuera proved electricity comes from magnetic field not mechanical power.
I see you are far ahead of us here, and I must state I'm jealous. I was not prepared in 2005 when I found radiant energy emanating from my car coil experiment and precharging all metal objects in nearby. :'( Unfortunately I was working with low frequencies circuit at 200Hz so it was dangerous (at 20kV!!!). I was lucky (to stay alive) and unlucky. Now I know your explanation is perfectly clear . Thank You.
Nelsonrochaa,
I find your description very interesting. I also did some research on this subject. I published a paper proposing what I believe to be the bases of operation of the Edwin Gray tube and devices that use only coils. I posted this paper back on 2012 at this site. You can find a copy of this paper in this link
http://www.scribd.com/doc/205259930/Tesla-Gray-Mark-Meyer-R04 (http://www.scribd.com/doc/205259930/Tesla-Gray-Mark-Meyer-R04)
I think what you stated is very close to what I proposed in the paper. Have you read this document?
Thank you for your help on this thread!
PS: for some reason I can find the document in this site.
You are the first person I have seen who like myself refers to CEMF as the soul of the machine, and who seems to have found what I have found, but in a different manner. Namely, you appear to be demonstrating the blending of the two special case voltage and current sources, special case because they have the ability to seemingly overcome any impedance offered to them. Specifically, you have a voltage source that overcomes impedance combined with a current source which overcomes impedance. You are combining the voltage generated by an inductors opposition to change in current, with the current generated by a capacitors opposition to changes in voltage. It feels good seeing you do this, and doing so with relays. I don't think folks really appreciate or realize what you are showing, I do, and am glad to finally see someone else doing it. I think Ismael Aviso was one of the first to do something similar, but he never showed anyone any specifics.
Keep up the excellent work.
Regards
bajac
I think we are progressing so fast we need a quick look into the past and connect dots.
I strongly suggest this is related (somehow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY)
and this also http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html (http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html)
Hi Bajac,
I read a lot, and of course I've read many articles about the subject GRAY.
Unfortunately never read the document that you generated.
If you have way to provide me would be grateful for'll share your thoughts.
I can not download without paying in scribd. :)
Thanks
My email is nelsonrochaa@gmail.com
my Youtube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8Bo71izl8948rCESU6x8Lg (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8Bo71izl8948rCESU6x8Lg)
Bajac Cook,s patient is not complete it is missing part D in which i have not been able to find anywhere. the patient has been stripped of the rest of parts that are essential for operation.
Nelsonrochaa,
I have attached the latest version of the document to this post. I am also attaching a paper that I wrote back in 2012 for the overvoltage induced in ungrounded power systems.
For more information, you can also refer to the following threads related to this document:
http://www.overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VHZnWU10zIU (http://www.overunity.com/9101/tesla-is-the-father-of-the-tpu/#.VHZnWU10zIU)
Hi
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11291-tesla-father-tpu-part-2-a.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11291-tesla-father-tpu-part-2-a.html)
Bajac
Nice thread.
Does anyone have a link to the complete Buforn 1910 - 1914 patent? I know sections have been translated however I am interested in the whole document(in English). Google translate doesn't do a good job.
Thanks for any help.
Hi all,
Important video to watch and digest:
A user in the spanish forum (link) (http://cacharreo.com.es/foro/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1059&p=6697#p6696) has uploaded a video with the induced coils placed perpendiculary to the inducer electromagnets and using like poles facing each other (N--induced--N) (repulsion mode). Powered with AC from the mains.
See the results: the input is not affected when adding a load in the induced circuit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st254llePPs)
Thank you very much to this user for noting this effect when testing his devices some time ago.
Regards
This is the only file with Buforn´s patents. It is the original spanish text. There are not translations into english
http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/buforn.pdf)
I have read them and all Buforn´s patent are exact copies one on the other and all are copies of the Figuera 1908 patent. You can see it just by comparing the figures in Buforn´s patents and the figure in Figuera´s patent
Regards
Whats strange is "how does the current traverse a magnetic field?" If the alternating current is creating the magnetic field how can it also traverse it?
Ustedes tienen que entender que en 1900, la electricidad era algo nuevo, no se conocía, eran sus propios maestros, etc. Para traducir, no es solo el idioma, son los conceptos de la época.
You have to understand that in 1900, electricity was new, it was not known, were their own teacher, etc..
To translate, not just the language, are the concepts of the time.
Ustedes tienen que entender que en 1900, la electricidad era algo nuevo, no se conocía, eran sus propios maestros, etc. Para traducir, no es solo el idioma, son los conceptos de la época.
You have to understand that in 1900, electricity was new, it was not known, were their own teacher, etc..
To translate, not just the language, are the concepts of the time.
"Los inventores que suscriben, constituyen su generador, de la manera siguiente: Varios
electroimanes están colocados uno enfrente al otro, y separados sus caras polares de
nombre contrario por una pequeña distancia."
(The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several electromagnets
are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole faces separated by a small
distance.)
" SUPPOSE THAT ELECTROMAGNETS ARE REPRESENTED BY RECTANGLES 'N' AND 'S'. " (Figuera patent, 1908)
Please try to find the words "North" and "South" in the whole text of Figuera´s 1908 patent
"Los inventores que suscriben, constituyen su generador, de la manera siguiente: Varios
electroimanes están colocados uno enfrente al otro, y separados sus caras polares de
nombre contrario por una pequeña distancia."
(The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several electromagnets
are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole faces separated by a small
distance.)
The only time the words North and South appear are in Buforn patent. BUT he is referencing the North hemisphere of his discharge wheel. Aside from that its just N and S. Kinda strange to use N and S and not imply North and South.
Regardless all that debating is useless, simple build a rig that allows for the most flexible modifications. My test rig, shown below, allows me to change direction of the current by simply moving the wires. So, I can use N - S, N - N, and S - S.
Guys, we should stop wasting our time with the North and South non-sense.
....
This NN, SS, or NS discussion is becoming annoying and boring! It is just getting in the way of our progress and preventing us from moving ahead!
I always refers in my posts and images to the patents, in order that anyone can judge for themselves.
Bajac: You were convinced of the success of your air gap design. Noone till nor you have reported any result which may be repeated by everyone. Later came Ferranti, and now Cook patent seems to be the one to follow. I guess you sucess , but you should recognize that are also offering diferentent interpretations.
I wonder who is "getting in the of way of our progress" ?? Because I am just helping
Hi hanon,
I wish I could help more but I can not add much more than I'll say for professional reasons.
However warn of the lack of objectivity of thought, distraction and misinformation of people in general.
you're right, Figuera just used the letters N and S to describe the magnets in patent.
What Figuera found, was not needed to use the mechanical work to generate power as a conventional generator does.
Electricity is a form of energy conversion!
What are the factors on which they depend to a current generation alternator?
Number of turns, magnetic field; The rotor movement will induce every 360 degrees in the stator, the movement of electrons in the stator coils thereby generating current.
These factors are present in conventional generators.
Another way of generating power more efficiently, us that would eliminate the friction and the rotor Lenz effect.
Figuera discovered another way to induce movement of the electrons much more efficient than conventional.
How can vary given magnetic field without the mechanical work to cut the magnetic lines?
The figuera device using a switching system in which the resistance varies in intensity over the 360 degrees.
This current variation will create the necessary movement in the magnetic field.
The configuration of the coils must be oriented NN repulsion CW -CWW.
And why? Every 90 degrees north-east from coils, changes to North-South
this and the reason why the capture coils are oriented between the coils CW CWW.
I hope you take something out of my thoughts.
greetings
I always refers in my posts and images to the patents, in order that anyone can judge for themselves.
Bajac: You were convinced of the success of your air gap design. Noone till nor you have reported any result which may be repeated by everyone. Later came Ferranti, and now Cook patent seems to be the one to follow.
v
I guess you sucess , but you should recognize that are also offering diferentent interpretations.
I wonder who is "getting in the of way of our progress" ?? Because I am just helping
I can prove my points just by asking you if you agree or disagree with some images and statements. Then in essence you will be answering your own questions.
Like: do you agree with this image as being a electromagnet and the method by which it works as described by every text book you will ever find?
The single magnet is made of a number of turns around a core. The field is around the wire which is transferred to the core. The center of the field inside the coil is stronger then on the outside.Why? I strongly suggest you learn how to do what a child does best, asking why.
It is contained against itself. Why? because it has two motions against a frame of reference. The spin around the wire and the direction the current is traveling from one end of the core to the other. How do you know? Go flush your toilet and you tell me what you observe.
The magnet is made of turns over a core and the number of turns gives the current more times to circle the core effecting more domains ,but the longer the wire the more it resists the current and the lower the current becomes that can pass through the turns of wire.Otherwise looked at as consuming less current. Agree or not?
It would be helpful if you actually state agree or not.
The crickets are chirping in the silence.
..........IF I COMPLETE MY TEST WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, I WILL POST A LINK TO THE RESULTS. THANKS AND GOOD LUCK!
Maverick you should first determine who's theory it is before you assign it to me.
Last night I found the paper that someone ells wrote a theses on how people learn. In it was how this theory was tested by Joseph Henry first who lived from 1797 to 1878 on how to improve the effects of electromagnet without increasing the length of wire or the current. The writer repeated the experiments to the best of their abilities even going so far as to locate the iron for the magnet from Albany N.Y. at a pig iron factory which had since become a nail and copper sheet factor. It provided enough history to further research the subject. The information was then compared against all other information including the works of all the writers who wrote technical manuals which have been mentioned from time to time in the this thread plus a variety of patents and books I keep in my files.
I only needed two simple experiments to verify it ,one using a volt meter the other using a ballistic rig to test field strength acting on a permanent magnet with a normally wound magnet and the modified version. I reused the coils in the final device after modifying one more coil to complete the two required by the patent.
Does that answer your question.
In my opinion this patent, in that it is so simplified compared to other patents that use the same technology, facilitates the understanding of the functioning of this concept.
The method shown here was also described by Tesla, Smith and many others, there may be some differences fine, but always with the same principle.
thanks
Nelson,Hi Hanon, forget for the later response ,
In your opinion, which is the principle underlining in this patent?
Thanks
Ignacio
How do you adjust the current going to the inducers to re balance or compinsate for the rectified feed being used to replace the battery as a source? Both the working load and the power back in dc are off the output.
You picture of the truck with the magnet pulling itself? How much $$$ do you want to spend to make one?
Yes but the 6 diodes in an automotive alternator waste a lot to heat thats why the diodes are mounted to heat sinks and the alternator has a fan on the front. Even with that if the regulator over powers the field winding the diodes will cook and fail.
I like your drawing to.
Investigating around bucking coils, following the clue given in hyiq.org, I have found some interesting similarities between many overunity devices:
http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm (http://pvb.pavlabor.net/SE/FreeEnergy_27.01.08/%D0%A1%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5/Energy%20%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80/magnetbeschleuniger.htm)
Maybe we should add to this list the Figuera generator
Hello Hanon,
as already had occasion to say in another post,
the poles really have to be opposed North North, and thankfully you realized that this configuration is present in most circuits claiming excess energy production.
The patent Figuera we discuss here is not even 100% efficient however is of extreme importance the concept that explains figuera!
I also think that few people understand how to use the capture coil.
In my video showed that with only one turn, it was possible to capture bifilar 2Amp the generating coil, which means that the generator coil induces in each turn of a coil bibifilar 2Amp.
therefore if would add two independent loops in parallel these same loops would capture 4A .
It is obvious that the coils being in parallel with resistance not risen,
what Figuera tells us is that we can put several independent coils and sum
the product of the catch coils.
bye
Hi Nelson,
I suppose that you are referring to this video that you uploaded some weeks ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI)
Please could you describe in some detail the test you did in that video in order we could replicate your test. I can see that you used a stator from an old motor.
I suppose that you wired the coils to be facing North-North and then you placed a bifilar coil (with one turn) in the middle. Could you tell us some more data? What input pulsed DC current did you use? Input:V=12 Volts, I=0.55 Amps, right ?
I think you pulsed the input current, am I right?, What frequency of pulses did you use? What are those capacitors for? (sorry if I am asking any silly question)
What happen if you do not use a bifilar coil and you just use a single coil? Did you have to move the induced coil in order to find the best place to collect that energy? What is the meaning of the measure of 44 Amps when you clipped the iron core? (I don´t understand this part)
Thanks in advance. I really appreaciate your help and your wise tests !! Thanks
Avenger: I have watched carefully your photos. What value of the 8 resistors are you using? Maybe your are using a very high value in those resistors. As a rough guess: if each electromagnet have 3-4 ohms of resistance then you can use 8 resistor each with 3-4 ohms
A very enlightening video:
Bucking coils:
http://youtu.be/Z-V1z2TdQJA (http://youtu.be/Z-V1z2TdQJA)
Happy new year!!
Hi all,
I want to tell you one story: I started with the Figuera project in october 2012 when I read in many general forums a user posting many times the same message. Just google: Clemente Figuera canarion ...............
"If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.”
Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed
circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as
when, this circuit being still and motionless, the MAGNETIC field is increased
and reduced in intensity; since any Variation , occurring in the flow traversing
a circuit is producing electrical induced current
By varying the relative position upon the commutator of the respective brushes automatically in proportion to the varying electrical conditions of the working-circuit the current developed can be regulated in proportion to the demands in the working-circuit.
It was considered the
possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of
movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase
and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the
electrical current which produces it.
If, for instance, the commutator-space between the brushes a and c, when the latter is at the neutral point, is diminished, a current will flow from the point Y over the shunt C to the brush b, thus strengthening the current in the part M', and partly neutralizing the current in the part M; but if the space between the brushes a and c is increased, the current will flow over the auxiliary brush in an opposite direction, and the current in M will be strengthened, and in M' partly neutralized.
Therefore it
matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of
the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them;
It will be apparent that the respective cores of the field-magnets are subject to the neutralizing or intensifying effects of the current in the shunt through c', and the magnetism of the cores will be partially neutralized or the point of greatest magnetism shifted, so that it will be more or less remote from or approaching to the armature, and hence the aggregate energizing actions of the field magnets on the armature will be correspondingly Varied.
Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current
which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance,
through which circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets, magnetize one or more
electromagnets and, while the current is higher or lower the magnetization of
the electromagnets is decreasing or increasing and varying, therefore, the
intensity of the magnetic field , this is, the flow which crosses the induced
circuit.
The relative positions of the respective brushes are varied, either automatically or by hand, so that the shunt becomes inoperative when the auxiliary-brush has a certain position upon the commutator, but when said auxiliary brush is moved in its relation to the main brushes, or the latter are moved in their relation to the auxiliary brush, the electric condition is disturbed and more or less of the current through the field-helices is diverted through the shunt or a current passed over said shunt to the field-helices.
Hanon
You continue to neglect time. The time it takes for a magnetic field to reach a number of lines for lack of a better description. The time being partly effected by voltage core size and amperage windings. The dc side is slower then the ac side. Granted it is a measure of fractions of a second. The amount of field or strength or number of lines produced per watts in for the two different types of input will not be equal in time to reach the same level of saturation in the time between pulses of dc and cycles of ac in the model. The induced output will not be equal for the two different inputs. The output would have to equal the sum of the two inputs.
NRamaswami Dont assume figurea could not draw or made a bunch of mistakes in his drawings.
No one has actually followed the directions yet.
Look a little more at the resister contraption. Why would he make two parts?one that rotates and one with all those connections to a resister cascade type thing? Is it a three dimensional object using two views in two D or is there really two parts?
Isn't it the way they used to describe resistors...
All I know is the commercial electromagnet receives pulses of energy...and when I change the 6 100 ohm resistors to 2 ohms 25 watt there will be much stronger pulses...
All the Best
Randy
The DC power from the input was interrupted by the rotary device.
.....
It is here that the rotary device was used to create interruptted DC.
If I may ask where or when you were employed ( the reason I ask is everybody that I have come in contact on the traditional side of energy has laughed or scoffed at free energy )...as you state you're well informed in free energy ( have you had success in the ZPE field )...... Since you're in the business whats your view of iron and/or other metals...lastly whats your view of gaps in iron?
...I'm satisfied with the iron I have but whats your view of the gaps and whats needed to jump the gaps...@RandyFL:
RandyFL
Here's another view of it with no one speaking...This guy is nearer the mark. You need to understand interrupters, var, hf oscillations circuits produced by the tank circuit. I am not into this configuration but feel that builders need to understand the principle. I believe NRamaswami found a solid state way to produce the effect. I would really like to see NRamaswami's scope shot and I'll bet it's full of spikes.
The Figuera experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s)
The guy named Harry Hasler... produces a transformer with no gaps and then supplies the gap himself by scraping...technically you just need to insulate the primary, with tape, air maybe even bubble gum, away from the secondary...
My question is... Is Tesla's radiant energy part of the ZPE field or something different...and does a magnetic field dissipate into the ZPE field if it has no other place to go...as a magnet field doesn't disappear.
Here's another view of it with no one speaking...
The Figuera experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2WCAA6st_s)
The guy named Harry Hasler... produces a transformer with no gaps and then supplies the gap himself by scraping...technically you just need to insulate the primary, with tape, air maybe even bubble gum, away from the secondary...
My question is... Is Tesla's radiant energy part of the ZPE field or something different...and does a magnetic field dissipate into the ZPE field if it has no other place to go...as a magnet field doesn't disappear.
This guy is nearer the mark. You need to understand interrupters, var, hf oscillations circuits produced by the tank circuit. I am not into this configuration but feel that builders need to understand the principle. I believe NRamaswami found a solid state way to produce the effect. I would really like to see NRamaswami's scope shot and I'll bet it's full of spikes.
So.........
accordingly the 555 pulses the power transistor to open the gate to let a 9 amp spike to invoke a magnetic field that jumps a gap and invokes a magnetic field into the secondary and ( if not connected to anything ) goes.........where?
@TK..You seems to be the most prolific poster knocking out free energy device claims
No, that's not quite correct, you don't have to "switch off the input" to extract real power from that which is stored as reactive power in a tank circuit. My video demonstrations of wireless power transfer and the microQEG illustrate this quite well. What is necessary is that you don't extract real power faster than it is being replaced into the tank circuit by whatever is oscillating it. Because if you do, then the stored reactive power will collapse until it's replaced by the source.
On Woopy or Kehyo: perhaps a kind inquiring personal message to each of them could bring you answers?
On the quote you repeated from the link: please keep in mind that it is the input energy which supplies BOTH the magnetic energy in the core (or coil) and the magnetic energy in the gap. It is fortunate that in the air gap (which is made in an otherwise closed magnetic circuit) more magnetic energy can be found than in the core, the sum of the two energies makes up for the total input, (minus the losses).
A straight bar or I core has an 'infinite' air gap around it so it is hard to excite into saturation. Of course it can be done, a mere question of AmperTurns.
However, when you arrange straight bars close to each other, conditions for saturation may change, depending on how the magnetic circuit can develop towards a possible closed or closed-like circuit, and in this case you can reduce saturation by decreasing input current, either by reducing input voltage amplitude by a Variac or connecting one of the input wires to a tap on the input primary coil (if you provided some taps beforehand, that is).
....
How can a air gap have more energy than the primary core...in a magnet circuit... air gaps are to be considered the resistor ( reluctance ) in the equation
....
If for example you would need 160 turns of wire to hold a stable electromagnet at 50 volts AC, for pulsed DC you would need 640 turns of the same gauge wire wound on similar dia coils.
...
In fact Pulsed DC behaves strangely. You can simply wind a coil where each turn is spaced out to 1000+ turns and give pulsed dC from a variac using a diode bridge rectifier and when the input voltage goes to 250 volts the output voltage on a load of 5 x200 watts lamps connected in parallel becomes 270 volts. In the same coil. This is not shown when we apply AC where the voltage goes down when load is given on the load meters. Why this is so is not clear to me. And this does not happen even in pulsed DC until we provide 250 volts from the Variac.
Similarly it requires four times the length of wire and turns to create a stable electromagnet at 50 volts for pulsed DC than the the number of turns required for AC at 50 volts. I do not understand these things.
....
Gyula,
not to beat a dead horse... so what you're stating is everything is based on the input ( lenz law, flux, induction, gap potential and secondary )...
X amount of energy from the source is going to produce Y amount of energy... no more... no Less...
is that correct...?
...
What is Pulsed DC? The Analog voltmeter which can show both DC and AC voltage readings showed 270 volts. But the digital multimeter showed 220 volt AC and 90 Volt DC. Now Patrick has taught me that pulsed DC is nothing but AC without the negative or bottom wave while Randy says it is DC.
Hi TK
I'm very grateful and am obliged for the answers and clarifications provided. I agree with your explanations No. 1 and 4. I am not able to understand the clarification No. 3.
I most respectfully beg to disagree with you on the clarification No. 2
Here is your clarification No. 2
Second, the "220VAC" that the wall plug provides is 220 V RMS. This means that the _peak_ voltages are quite a bit higher: about + and - 310 V. When this is run through an unflitered Full Wave diode bridge, the DC Peaks as shown in the waveform below will be at +310V, minus a little bit for the fed voltage drop of the bridge. An averaging meter will then knock off some more from this value -- 270 volts DC might well be an indicated "average" from this kind of waveform. Once this DC output from the bridge is filtered by capacitors, the voltage will be steady and near the _peak_ value of the AC input... not the RMS value. So it is not surprising that a bridge rectifier can put out DC voltage measurements that are much higher than the "nameplate" voltage input (which will usually be an RMS value.) I think this fully explains the Variac results reported by NRamaswami: nothing unusual happening, just some misunderstandings about FWB action, RMS vs. Peak values, and the averaging functions of meters.
I apologize to disagree with you here but effectively what you are saying here is this..
a. There is no loss in the Variac and it is a 100% efficient device. Not true.
b. There is some loss in diode bridge which you acknowledge and it is around 20-22 watts as measured by us. (Does it include AC to DC conversion losses? Here in India it is normally rated at 15% of the input as a thumb rule.. I'm afraid that You do not provide for this)
c. There is no loss in the coil due to either resistance or inductance or eddy currents or heat dissipation..All these losses are there
d. The losses due to the 5 x 200 watts lamps in parallel are not considered.
e. And after overcoming all the above the FWB (full wave diode bridge rectifier) can on its own increase the output voltage which is DC to 270 volts. In DC V=IR So if V increases I also should increse as the resistance if fixed. If both of them increase wattage should increase. So if I agree with you a simple FWB can act as a device that can save not only a lot of energy but can boost the energy output as well when connected directly to mains.
f. Please connect a FWB alone and let us remove the variac and the coil and see if you can get 220 volts to be increased to 270 volts..It should happen if what you say is correct. It would not.I suggest that YOU do this test yourself, and report your results. You may be surprised.
Most times theoretical explanation is correct. Some times practical observations differ from theory. With due respect I would request you to check if you are able to practically observe if connecting the FWB to the mains at 220 volts automatically boosts the output voltage in the meter to 270 volts. It would not. There is another phenomena that is involved here in my very humble opinion and observation. But I do not know if it correct also and it is only a guess. I would post my guess after Gyula has completed.
I again remain very obliged and am grateful for your explanations. My knowledge is not sufficient to understand what you have stated in No. 3 of your explanation and I apologize for my lack of knowledge at this time.
To measure the voltages and power balance properly in circuits such as you are working with, you really need an oscilloscope and the skill to use it correctly. Meters are a poor substitute and have often led people astray in these matters.
"So how did Tesla / Figuera get test results" They did more of the doing and less of the talking and asking other people what they thought about an idea. They expanded their own knowledge and didnt care so much about the base of knowledge of others who had different motivations then their own. If you ask your tail to lead you will eventually run into some crap,it's just the way it is,it's not personal. Do more ask less.
....
I think if the secondary is a thicker wire or as thick as the primary wire, then at a certain length and turns of the secondary and at a certain voltage level we are able to reach COP>1 level. But this can never ever be achieved if we use the transformer design where the Lenz law effect is predominant. But after crossing this voltage level it the COP level suddenly shoots up. I have checked for a 4 sq mm wire ( which is not used normally for wiring) up to 300 volts and it did not cross COP=1 level itself. But when the voltage has gone to 620 it was COP>8. I think all our equipment are rated to fail below this voltage level and are designed for this purpose.
Similarly I have seen that a very thick insulation plays a very important part for the output. I do not even understand why but you can check it for yourself with a three core or four core cable which has a very thick insulation and use it to make an electromagnet and use ordinary wires and alternate the cable and wire for the primary and secondary and you can see the difference. I'm not able to really explain but thicker insulation and thicker wires provides better performance. I think if we use 10 sq mm wire the COP>1 results may come even at 300 volt levels but we never ever would that wire for normal wiring purposes.
When I read transformers I asked why the secondary should not be wound with a lot of thick wire and a lot of turns and length? I felt that both votlage and amperage should go up. What will happen if it is wound like that and did not find the answer any where and so I did this arrangement. Unfortunately the higher gauge copper wires are so expensive I could not check them for the secondary performance. Similarly I do not know why thicker secondary wires are not used in Tesla coils. It will be bulky and uneconomical perhaps but a thicker wire in the secondary of a Tesla coil must provide for higher amperage and if the turns are the same as the smaller wire the voltage cannot go down either. Why no material which can stand high frequency is put inside the Tesla coil? May be I do not have the brains to understand that this will not work but I do not hesitate to ask questions and investigate. This is how I tried.
...
My question is...( because I have never done it ) when you connect an analog Multimeter to rectified DC does the needle go back and forth... LOL ( my assumption is that the needle doesn't have time to swing both ways...)
Also...what is better...clipped off DC from a bridge rectifier or a oscillating half square wave from a 555 ( or arduino or etc.. ) which is more efficient...
Question is what you wish to use the two waveforms for? If you drive a MOSFET switch with them, then the square wave is always better for switching to close and open the switch suddenly. It is another question what you control with the switch.
Gyula
"Perhaps...."
Yes, that's right, YOU posted them at full resolution of 1935.96 kB, 3264x2448 pixels.
YOU can, for a brief time, go back and remove them from your posts, and use your favorite graphics application to shrink them down to a _maximum_ of 1024 pixels wide, or even better 800 pixels wide, and repost them. Then people won't have to scroll back and forth trying to read comments like yours... and this one.
Better hurry though because YOU can only edit your posts for a limited time. After that, we are stuck with your supersized pictures and hard-to-read posts, unless Stefan edits them for you or we roll over to a new page on the thread.
Bajac,
That's huge.... My poor little work space the kitchen table is jealous... I will be moving my stuff eventually. As soon as " the warden " ( my wife ) gets fed up with my working on it...
You know I have to ask the question ( yeah yeah I know you have limited time )did you abandon the Fiquera transformers that you originally made or are you doing something as a add on...basically are you experimenting on something to come back to the original design...the only reason I stopped working towards Tesla's stuff is... as I was emailing Patrick I told Him Tesla's wireless had limited distance and He pointed me towards the Figuera and I started from scratch...and I will stay on it until something " doesn't work " then I will move on...
And thank you for the kind words...
All the Best
PS I take the picture on my apple iPhone and then email it to myself... when I hit send it asks what size and I always enter small... so I don't go into gigantic space
wait wait wait... Hey I spotted the breadboards right next to the black and decker box...you can't put those things on like that it will never work. You're wasting precious time using breadboards in that fashion...the millivolt will never accept a milliamp and run a 2n3055 or BDX53c ...did I ever tell about the time I was in industrial Education class and put cigarette foil into the 120 volt socket both sides...we had do detention for a whole week for that stunt................
/* 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/ (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 tried to run the program above but get errer mesages. I use the Arduino IDE - just new installed.
Do I need any additional library or .h file. I am no programmer and feel very disabled.
A repost.
Hi,
I just wanted to do a kind of brainstorming with the Figuera's device.
Bajac.
@TinselKoalaAh... perhaps so. The only way I can reproduce the compile error messages you've got is to corrupt that line somehow. Even by commenting out the
Thanks for help! :-)
Arduino UNO R3
Other sketches do well
errors:
sketch_jun24a:17: error: 'prog_uchar' does not name a type
In file included from sketch_jun24a.ino:11:0:
sketch_jun24a.ino: In function 'void __vector_9()':
sketch_jun24a:133: error: 'sine256' was not declared in this scope
sketch_jun24a:134: error: 'sine256' was not declared in this scope
'prog_uchar' does not name a type
Seems to refer to this line:
PROGMEM prog_uchar sine256[] = {
---------------------------
The output is not expected to produce sine wave directly at Arduino pins. It is designed to act similarly to a SMPS.Yes, the pulse width changes smoothly between 0 and 100 percent, at the frequency that is set by the potentiometer voltage on pin A0, varying from under 1 Hz to over 1 kHz. The phase of the two signals is controlled by the value of the "offset" variable, which in my sketch is also controlled by another potentiometer on pin A1 and an analogRead statement. In the scopeshot above, one channel's PW is increasing and the other is decreasing.
The primaries will get a diode in parallel and they will integrate the variable PWM signals to a sine current. And while current is directly proportional to flux we will get a sine shaped flux.
So the question is regarding your setup: Do you see at scope the pulse width changing (OK) or are pulses stable (wrong)?
@bajac:
Well, this line in sketch works well for compling:
const byte sine256[] PROGMEM = {
Is there any issue to apply it?
(snip)
TinselKoala
Thanks! You are right. My nano runs fine along IDE 1.0.6. I refused to update the IDE at this PC
Would you please post your extended program?
I re watched the video that you made showing your version on the Figuera...I am sure you have watched " Woopy's version " using the arduino... " He stated that the ghost trace was for free "... A. would you agree with that statement. B. Did you get the same results...or did you get different results. The video that you made was two years ago... C. Have you made any more experiments on your apparatus... Its been stated here, in the forum, that by using the arduino you can get a stronger current... D. Do you agree with that statement... E. have you used a stronger current F. Do you plan to use a stronger current... Lastly what do you consider wrong with the figuera on the Kelly website... 1. Is it missing some secret " ingredient " that He wasn't divulging or died too soon to reveal...and where did you get that ball cap............... I thank you for your answers in advance....and get back to work on the Figuera!]
Hi RandyFL and All.
The "ghost trace" from Woopy's video is the BEMF of the output coil finding an alternate flux path to close the magnetic loop, and it is not through the EMF core side but the other one that is inactive hence the ghost.
My progress is slow with experiments as the parts, cores etc are quite expensive and I cannot afford frying mosfets. Plus, I am running several projects in parallel. Some times I get distracted for months with something completely diffrent and thera times where I'm just lazy. :)
I'm not able to understand how my learned friends here can say that they would small cores and would give pulsed DC current to it in 9 amps or 10 amps..What is the voltage you are going to use? What is the number of turns? What is the magnetic field strength you are going to create to make an impact on the central secondary?
It is not clear to me how my learned friends are going to defy this nature of electricity and come up with a small device that will replicate the performance of Figuera..I'm really not able to figure it out..Of course my knowledge on electronics is zero. My mentor Patrick Kelly literally tried to hit electronics in to my head with a Hammer and Nail but it would not go in and gave up..But I do not understand what Electronics has to do with generation of Electricity..Really confused here..Please guide..
You can create a simple motor effect with a magnet, piece of iron and a battery. Take a strong magnet and place the iron on one of the poles. For this you can use a 16 penny nail. Connect the iron(nail) to the (-) side of a AA battery. Take a small wire from the (+) side of the battery and touch the bottom end of the magnet. You will see that the magnet rotates.
In this case two magnetic fields are created in one object. That object is the magnet. The current from the battery slightly distorts the magnetic field from the battery. Prevent the magnet from rotating and quickly introduce and remove the current from the battery the magnetic field distorts and springs back. In this experiment you end up moving a magnetic field with a current.
This effect can be amplified with electromagnets. Build a coil with iron, tire irons work well. Spin a coil on it, start light say 12 vdc. Connect wires to the iron core and pulse the iron core with 12 vdc. Secure the iron core from wanting to rotate, when this is done again you are creating a Locked Rotor effect as seen in a stalled electric motor.
Find a way to get the distorted magnetic field to do work, shouldn't be that hard. Give credit where credit is do.
- Fernandez
I always recall to read the original patent text in detail to look for the right coil placement. It is not fair to read the patent text just partially, or just trying to read what you want to be read.
In the 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955 and filed by Buforn, a partner of Figuera) you can read:
"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force."
--------------------------
Please explain how your proposals may fit (if possible) this coil arrangement.
For me it is clear that all electromagnets are arranged in a linear way (bar core type), as NRamaswani has designed. Therefore you can use with this design both poles of each electromagnets in contrary to the use of just one pole of each electromagnet as in the original 1908 design.
For me it is clear that electromagnets are just solenoids , not any kind of transformer core type. Please open your minds and recall the generator from Hubbard, Hendershot and others where the cores are not forming any king of close transformer.
I attach the partial translation of the 1914 patent (sorry but it is 30 page long and it is too much time for me to translate it completely, more when it is practically a copy of the 1908 design plus some improvements as the ones explained in the translation that I attach)
Regards and good luck to everyone
Fernandez, Sorry but I do not get to understand your post. Are you suggesting to connect the electromagnets core to a battery? What kind of effect are you looking for?
Thanks
btw...Did you know that Patrick Kelly took down most of what was on the " Figuera " in His eBook.
Nobody has say a a word about my previous post, copied below.
How can you use both poles of each electromagnet if you pile the coil as :N--y--S--y--N--y--S--N--y--S as the 1914 suggest?
Any other option apart from using straight bars cores in all "N/S" electromagnets and "y" coils?
(====N====) (===y===) (====S====)
^ ^ ^ ^
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
pole pole pole pole
In all cases the essence is what he understood with his first rotating machine.
PS could I have all the patents location so I can basically read them ( I thought I did awhile back ).
I don't understand...
We went from the " Figuera " being the next best thing since sliced bread back to wrapping a coil around a nail...
I CHALLANGE YOU !
Let us compete ! I am angry I put up here my unified field oscillator for the OU prize they sent it to there government and changed the rules to the prize ,,,,, ??? why
And you want to insult me ??? why ??? because I am real ??? I dnt play games !!!
ATOM1
Note that also this configuration is the one used in the 1902 patent. I also attach an image from 1902 patent (Patent no. 30378): two straight solenoids (named "a" and "b") and the induced in the middle (named "c", not drawn in the patent, so not clear how to place it)
...I will show a working device after two weeks...If you could do a step by step build log with images and or video as you construct the device, that would be awesome. Whatever you can show is greatly appreciated. I'm an electronics newb but find the Figuera concept fascinating. Small table top example is fine.
So the small Y magnets are fixed and motionless and composed of several reels or coils.
What is the length of one reel. 305 Meters or 1000 feet. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel)
Electromagnets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet)
If small Y electromagnets are composed of several reels of coils what about the large Inductor electromagnets?
With respect, I don't think the generic word 'reel' has any more significance than 'coil' does in relation to the overall 'size' of the intended device. I think it's just another descriptor variation to convey an image.
If you want to see the effect on a table, a small table top device is enough.
Yes! That's all most people are interested in doing, creating a small proof of concept replication, and a small device is easier to improve upon as changes are easier to make and the results are easier to see, plus it's safer!
Tak 22:
Thanks for your post..
It cost me $20000 in my personal funds and very signficiant time to learn this and do this.
The comment has been made that the Figuera device is likely massive. However, he traveled with it for exhibition so this seems
to put an upper limit on the size. Also, it seems that news articles might have commented on the size if it were significantly larger than
standard dynamos.
Noted...
I assumed the apparatus that Bajac built worked...but more importantly I want to hear the results ( what did work - and why something didn't work ) frame by frame I watched Woopy and Kehyo... looked at what they did and what they use/d... I poured over the pictures that Bajac produced... examined and studied each frame each square inch of His work space...what He built...the equipment He uses ( the names of the equipment.... Not because I'm " dedicated "........but because I am " INTERESTED " I'm interested in finding how Clemente reached his conclusions...He must of sat there and watched motors spin ( or anything that spun ) for hrs... days... months...years or whatever until the machine and the mathematics melded......................................kinda like watching Led s light
I think the failure of the devices built by Kenyo, Wopi, and I is not only due to the wrong shapes of the iron cores but also to the small sizes.
Even though my tests indicate a power gain
Why do you think lenz law is such a bad thing? If you use it to your advantage it would be good.noted...
You can create a simple motor effect with a magnet, piece of iron and a battery. Take a strong magnet and place the iron on one of the poles.
For this you can use a 16 penny nail. Connect the iron(nail) to the (-) side of a AA battery. Take a small wire from the (+) side of the battery and touch the bottom end of the magnet.
You will see that the magnet rotates.
In this case two magnetic fields are created in one object. That object is the magnet. The current from the battery slightly distorts the magnetic field from the battery.
Prevent the magnet from rotating and quickly introduce and remove the current from the battery the magnetic field distorts and springs back.
In this experiment you end up moving a magnetic field with a current.
This effect can be amplified with electromagnets. Build a coil with iron, tire irons work well. Spin a coil on it, start light say 12 vdc. Connect wires to the iron core and pulse the iron core with 12 vdc.
Secure the iron core from wanting to rotate, when this is done again you are creating a Locked Rotor effect as seen in a stalled electric motor.
Find a way to get the distorted magnetic field to do work, shouldn't be that hard. Give credit where credit is do.
- Fernandez
I can confirm Bajacs statement that Lenz Law is not present in the center coil output.
How Lenz law is defeated in Figuera design..This is a reasoned analysis by a very Learned person on my use AC..
However I must most respectfully disagree with Bajac on transformers.
Transformer is an electrical device and it is designed to aid in the transmission of electricity. To reduce losses in tranmission it steps up the voltage from the generation point to the distribution point and steps down the voltage at the distribution point. For this it uses flux linking concept and for this purposefully it uses alternatively thinner secondaries of longer length and thicker secondaries of shorter length. It suffers from Backemf due to Lenz law which is normally present in all efforts. If you try to climb a mountain it is tough. This is similar to Lenz law opposition.
Lenz law is not present in certain situations.
However Lenz law or counter emf or backemf can be very successfully used to make self sustaining generators. It was done by Daniel McFarland Cook in 1871. Therefore I must beg to disagree with the statement of Bajac that it is only when Lenz law is absent OU results can be obtained. My experiments show that it is possible to obtain such COP>1 results even with the presence of Lenz law effects. But they are so miniscule that it can be treated as manufacturing defect of meters. Therefore in my earlier design I combined both to achieve cop>8 results but that design suffers from the normally known problems of combining voltages between multiple coils. So I have improved on it now with a simpler design.
I would request that let us share our experiences, knowledge and avoid indulging in oneupmanship statements or teasing others. It is actually frustrating. I had been told not even to come here and post and do my work but focus on research which I do part time as the need to make a living by focusing on my practice is more important to me. Be advised that the patent would take considerable skill to understand it and it is not what it appears to be on the surface.
Most people here have not still understood Figuera Patent. I myself did not until a few days ago. So I do not blame any one. Every drawing including the latest ones, made about the Figuera transformer todate misses two important elements of the design.
Do you think that the Lenz law is what's showing on the secondary ( on woopy's videos )... or is whats on the secondary something else?
Induction by motion.
Yes. But instead of moving the inducers cores you may just move the magnetic lines of force and keep the cores static.
............
(a) is the field between two magnets, (b) the field due to a current in a straight wire and (c) the resulting field if they are put together. This last field is known as the "catapult" field because it tends to catapult the wire out of the field in the direction shown by the arrow.
This would be a good discussion.
- Fernandez
NRamaswami
I will attempt to attach a pdf for you to bone up on mag amps. This one is pretty good even if it is old.
.
All you need to do is this. Create a step up transformer but by using thicker wires than the primary. Higher voltage to be obtained in thicker more expensive and less reistance wires. That is all there to it. You get higher voltage and higher amperage. What about Counter EMF? You surround the Primary on both sides with this kind of wire and the secondary sends two back emf to the primary one like this -----> and the other like this <----- and both of them almost cancel each other out and primary does not suffer.
One of my learned friends laughed at me and said you do not know any thing I will give you a lecture for two hours on electricity and magnetism as a primer. I said ok before that I want to make a permanent magnet. Here is a piece of iron. Do you agree that it is a ferromagnetic material and that can be made a magnet.. He said yes.. I then asked him to convert it to a powerful permanent magnet so that it can lift it own weight and support it. He was stunned. This is not in our practical lessons and we do not do it and how to make magnets is secret. You see where it gets you. First the theory is misdirecting. Second the there is no R&D and third no practical experience. It is all so obfuscating that no one would want to study the subject.
Oh Hanon..
That is what I have been telling you. I have used only the same size wire 4 sq mm to test this concept and I get COP>1 only above 300 volts in this configuration. But when we add two such coils and the center coils together what happens is COP>8. Possibly because the backemf is already reduced in the two primaries and when you place a middle secondary all the voltages and amperages developed combine.
But it is quite possible that if you do not even use the central secondary you can get cop>1 results easily if you were to use thick wires. You can test it by taking a 18 inch long and 4 inch dia solenoid and wind 12 layers of secondary coil inside and cover it with secondary. Power it and you get about 3000 watts out and 3300 watts in. Now surround the Primary with more wires and you cross COP>1 and you reach 115 to 120%. But I felt that this is all due to manufacturing defeact of the meters which must be given 10% to 20% and ignored it.
Remember the wire ratio of the Primary to secondary in this model is almost 1:3. So if you can use about 600 metres of primary and surround it with about 900 metres of secondary inside and 300 meters outside with wires thicker than primary I see no reason as to why you would not get COP>1 position. There is the problem of magnetic field becoming weaker and to avoid that use plastic iron plastic between primary layers. Unlike Figuera the Primary wire and secondary wire must touch each other here and only in the central coil there is no contact between primary and secondary. If you cover the outer secondary with more iron you would find that output further increases in secondary.
I have done a lot of experiments. For many I have ignored them as meter errors but the COP>8 cannot be meter error. It goes much beyound that but we have used the central coil in between and two COP>1 primaries together with the central secondary. That might have been the reason for the sudden boost.
if you look at it all equipment is rated to fail above 270 volts at 50 hz and at 60 Hz I think they are all rated or manufactured to fail even earlier. If your voltage exceeds 270 circuit breakers will cut in. Only some old lamps can withstand above 300 volts.
Can anyone direct me to a photo of the drawing of PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267[/color][/font]
I think I have had a revelation that explains many things but I need to see the original damaged patent before missing wires were added.
Thanks
Garry
Bajac,
How is your work progressing...
Whats your opinion on the diagram on patent 30378 as versus the diagram on 44267 any connection or two separate things?
IMHO the diagram in patent 30378 would give more bang for the buck...
All the Best
Figuring out what
is happening in related WORKING devices such as the Hubbard coil etc seems more fruitful to reach a theoretical understanding
of what is happening. With the right understanding, Figuera would be obvious... including the evasions.
The Figuera will eventually be figured out...( if it hasn't already been ) but the question remains if the person who does figure it out shares...
I for one have everything to gain if the Ramaswami approach works...and I don't think Rams minds if the Figuera is figured out... the only person that I think minded was marathonman ( I wish He would come back - if He hasn't started a new name )... We can even talk about the Hubbard coil... its all information we could/can use...
Lastly... the magnet is still attached to my refrigerator and probably will be for the life of the refrigerator or until I expire ( then I don't care :-)
All the Best
PS Bajac... you didn't answer all my questions lol
@Truthhunter:
The 1910 report shows that the only practical device tested before the Spanish patent office is the 1908 device. But it is not clear to me why we have resistors and a rotary device when simple AC input could have done the same thing. Where is the need for all this complexity? That is some thing I'm not able to understand. Those reports are not available for the 1902 patents filed.
Assuming for a moment that we are successful in this effort, then we find a situation or a solution where any one can make electricity at any place on earth in whatever quantities needed. Investment for that and effort for that would be needed of course. But that is a knowledge that can generate lot of employment to a lot of people and can lead to growth and prosperity and better living conditions for a lot of people at low cost. There is not going to be any patent for this kind of inventions now. So why not share what we have observed. We do not need to attempt to have to reinvent the same knowledge after 100 years..
Variable DC is available through FW diode bridge. The iron immediately saturates.
I have to say that when I wrote the paper, I only had that sketch. I read the text of the patent after I had submitted the document found in post #1.
Thanks,
Bajac
Are you saying that you only used the sketch to write your paper?
Are you saying that you did not even read the text in the patent to write your paper?
This confirm my idea that your design has nothing in common with Figuera´s original ideas. You were looking for any kind of justification to used air-gaps to divert the Lenz effect, and then you saw the sketch from Figuera and you saw in it what you wanted to see. You know this proverb that says that when someone has a hammer in his hands, all the thing he see are nails everywhere.
This is really a big damage to the efforts to replicate Figuera´s patent, the aim of this thread. Now everyone read your paper and sadly the are involved in a different design to the one included in the patent.
Everyone: Please read the original patent text. The rest are personal interpretations. Above we have the demostration...
Regards
Of course I will prove you are interpreting freely the 1908 patent.
Please quote any paragraph from the patent where Figuera states the need for air-gaps.
If you do not provide that quote (which BTW does not exist) I will take as proved that your design, while being genuine, does not have anything in common with Figuera´s ideas.
As you won´t be able to quote the patent, I will prove my point and I will quote a paragraph from that patent stating quite the contrary to your theory of ai gaps. I have read the patent tens of times. I will wait for your quote to post mine later.
I won´t go into personal criticisms. I am just here to speak about technical facts.
BTW, Sine and Cosine are not maximun and minimum at the same time, as Figuera required. Revise your Maths. But please before look for that quote I mentioned above. Thanks
QUOTE FROM 1908 PATENT
"The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several
electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit,
also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly
placed. As neither of the two circuits spin, there is no need to make them
round, nor leave any space between one and the other."
-----------------------
These are the "air- gaps" that Figuera required in his original patent.... Just to show it for people interested in replicateing the original patent. the drawing is an sketch to visualize the different parts. It has no legal validity. It is just for clarification purposes. So you are not patenting what you draw, but what you write down in the text, especifically in the Claims.
Also I have said many times that maybe Figuera used straight solenoids to build his machive with a perfect linear aligment (=====)(=====)(=====) as Ramaswami has built it. I quote below patent from 1914 by Buforn:
In the 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955 and filed by Buforn, a partner of Figuera) you can read:
"If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force."
Bajac: Sorry, but your design does not follow this design. Period. Buforn´s design require to use straight solenoids and stack them up in order to be able to use both poles. That means than when they are not piled they just use one pole. Good luck with your design, but do not tell people that your design fits into Figuera´s teaching
You did not even read the patent to write your paper. This like trying to understand one patent from Tesla just by watching the drawings and not reading the text. Impossible.
Regards
Hello everyone,
I'm new to this thread and after skimming the entire topic I have a few ideas I would like to present for your consideration, devoid of any talk about lens or other extraneous theories.
Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the later Buforn patents I would like to focus on those.
Firstly, the commutator and resistor as it's shown in the patents is simply a variable dc voltage divider. It splits the voltage between the north & south coils. It starts with full volts to the N coil and near 0 volts to the S coil. As it rotates the voltage is stepped down in the N coil at the same rate it is stepped up in the S coil until the N is near 0 and the S is at full volts. Then it reverses the stepping process. This repeats continuously. There is no other explanation. There also is no reason this can not be accomplished with a solid state circuit. Every step, up or down, is made before the previous step is disconnected. The advantage of this is a controlled stepping of the magnetic field of the coils. It never significantly collapses between steps, so this would rule out a PWM driver unless a smoothing cap is used.
I do think Mr. Ramaswami's device deserves further experimentation and development. Although I am impressed with Mr. Ramaswami's build I do not see it as a direct application of the patent, simply because it uses AC current. I believe the intent of the original invention is to provide power from DC input.
One of the members here posted a link to an old book on dynamo design that is very informative. It has formulas and methods for building whatever type of dynamo you need from scratch. Working from a desired output of X volts at X amps at X rpm, the book describes how to calculate the amount of iron required for each coil as well as the number of amp turns for each coil, the length and gauge of wire, and the exciting voltage. The underlying theories for the calculations are also presented. This should all be directly applicable to the Figuera-Bufron devices. From what I have read in this forum topic I think Mr. Ramaswami is the only one using a sufficient amount of iron and wire to get any significant results. It takes a LOT of iron and wire for even a small generator.
Well, enough of my opinions for now. I would build this device if I could find a complete schematic with parts list that would allow me to assemble a solid state driver for it.
Thanks for listening.
Thank you MadMack for your comment. It is always refreshing to see a new person with a different view.
Could you, please, provide the link to the information about the design of dynamos? Every week I search the internet for this type of info.
Regards,
Bajac
@Forest...Ah.. You are asking me to disclose our trade secret.. Not possible. However let me give one simple explanation. Obfuscating some thing and disclosing it at the same time is very easy. See in the Ramaswami device we have described P1 and P2 as serially connected and the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS..
Please advise if this is clear or not. I will then tell you how to obfuscate. Say it now and then I will tell you.
Figuera went a step further and indicated that it is properly connected and the connection may be serial or parallel if I remember correctly.
Now I have a big advantage over the rest of Learned friends of the forum. What is that? I know well that I do not know any thing and so I have to test and learn. What I have learnt is that if some thing works in serial it need not work in parallel.
@Bajac; There is no ambuiguity in the patent. It is clear and it is written for Person skilled in the Art. Who is a Person Skilled in the Art? He does not exist. He is a fictitious person. But he knows every thing and reads every thing and can immediately understand every thing. So if different documents teach different concepts and those concepts have been combined for the first time in an invention, the patent application for that can be rejected because the Person skilled in the art can combine all the prior art literature and say it is so obvious to me. This is the Section 103 objection in USPTO and 50% of the patents refused are fefused under this section. Most of the time, once an examiner takes a 103 objection they would not relent and would refuse.
I beg to disagree with you in my humility. I would request you to read the patent again
This is quoted from the Alpoma net website..http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
I hope I have answered all questions. I sincerely apologize to Bajac in advance if any of my statements cause any hurt but I have no intention of hurting you or any other member of the forum.
This is quoted from the Alpoma net website..http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
I think the translation is done by Hanon but I do not know.
All the translations from spanish into english are by me. In the translations I copied the original spanish text and also my translation into english. I included the original spaninsh text and images in case anyone would like to go to the original spanish source text for more details, or try a better translation. It is important to keep original Figuera´s words in the document in order to have the highest fidelity in future translations.
This is the story: in January 2011 the owner of alpoma dot net website published in an spanish magazine and in his blog an historical report about Clemente Figuera. He asked for his patents to the Historical Archives department in the patent office and he just got the patent no. 44267 (patent from 1908) and patent 30375 (from 1902). The other 3 patents from 1902 were not available to be scanned because they were in bad shape as consecuence of humidity, this was the answer by the patent office.
As I got involved in this story, in october 2012 when this thread was born, I travelled twice to Madrid to visit the Historical Archives, and I could get a copy of the other 3 missing patents. Basically the clerks just told me to have a look. The old manuscripts were folded in the middle and they were in really bad shape. They told me just to look from the outside but without unfolding the manuscripts. Luckly I didn´t obey, and as the clerks were far from my table, I opened all of them and I could make photographs. Thanks to this, now we have patents no. 30376, 30377 and 30378 with us. I remember that day clearly in my mind.
Later I transcribed them into text and I translated into english. I also translated some letters, interviews to Mr. Figuera, the original spanish website and some other documents just available in spanish until then. You can find all this info into the next link. The original investigation and publication of the character of Clemente Figuera and all his story and historical background was done by alpoma dot net website owner.
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258 (http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258)
Later this guy also researched about Constantino Buforn, an economical partner of Figuera, and he found that Buforn filed 5 more patents after the death of Figuera in 1908. Buforn patent were filed between 1910 and 1914, one per year (I do not know why so many identical patents). You can find those patents also in that link (only in spanish...they are 120 pages long and they are identical to the 1908 patent so I decided not to translate them except for a short extract with the parts different to the 1908 patent). Also there, you can find a document certifying the test of practical implementation of the patent from Buforn from 1910. It is clear that the generator was presented to the patent examiner and it worked (it passed the test), but it is not explicitly written the power input and output from the machine. It is a very short report. It is worth to read it.
I am sure that this generator worked in the birth of the 20th century. Now we just need to find the key to make it work again....in the birth of the 21st century ...
Regards
"
The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
"
The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
“The mode to collect this current is so easy that its explanation can be excused since we only have to interpose in between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we will call inductors [inducing electromagnets N and S], another electromagnet that we call induced [“Y” electromagnet], in proximity to them [N and S electromagnets], but without any communication with the same [N and S electromagnets] while collecting in the induced [“Y” electromagnets] the result of the phenomenon experienced by them [“Y” electromagnets].”
Furthermore, a person with learning experience in building magnetic circuits should also know that a magnetic flux that enters a coil on one side and exit the coil on the other side, induces zero volts in the coil. For example, in order for the magnetic flux generated by the N electromagnet to reach the S electromagnets, said magnetic flux must enter and exit the Y coils. This will be the result of making a close magnetic path between the N and S cores.
In no place within the paragraph, the author refer to wires or conductors.
.....
We need a person who can be impartial to validate the translated text or start from scratch. I can understand the mistake if the translator states that the work was done using candles or had a few drinks.
We need translators that are not biased! A translator is not supposed to allow his/her emotions to taint his/her work.
Mack,
I assume you are referring to this book:
http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf (http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf)
What is the page where the passage can be found?
It is an interesting reading. But I wonder if we are comparing apples to apples. For instance, is the lower magnetic residual due to a lower magnetic field of the straight coil?
Bajac
An old image, by Kekhoo, (I think) which sumarize the aim of the 1908 commutator
It is not the same as AC!!!!. If somebody do not understand it please stop saying that it is the same as AC
"We consistently change the intensity of the currents that pass through the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets N. and S."
Maybe this is just a phrase of the times? but how does a current, that's responsible for creating a magnetic field, pass through the magnetic field. This almost implies that the magnetic field is already there prior to the current. If that is the case what is creating this magnetic field.
... the brush “O” rotates around the cylinder “G” and always in contact with two of their contacts.
Core,
It is exactly as Madmack states. The brush is always in connection with two contacts, therefore the signal is continuous without big sparks. It is a system "make before break" . The patent describes this feature clearly:
Using to your advantage a magnetic field composed of a series of electro-magnets
N and S, a resistance and isolated contacts on a circumference in which the contacts
are linked with half of the ends of the resistance and the other contacts
united directly with the resistance.
Added to this a swivel brush always in communication with more then one contact.
Now one of the ends of the resistance is united with the electro-magnet N and the other
is with the S, as a result when the brush is communicating with the first contact
the current all goes to electro N at the time the S are empty, due to the fact that the
current that has to go to them has to advance all the resistance,
when the brush is in communication with the second, the current no longer all goes to the
N due to having to pass through parts of the resistance and some current starts to pass
to S due to the fact that it has to pass less resistance then before and like that
the circuit closes successively.
Resulting in the current slowing or increasing as it traverses more or less resistance
and therefor varying constantly and that function we make continuous and orderly,
and here what we achieved is the proposed order.
"...as a result when the brush is communicating with the first contact"that means one contact. He did not say "....as a result when the brush is communicating with the first set of contacts" or ".......as a result when the brush is communicating with the first and second contact" or ".......as a result when the brush is communicating with the first and sixteenth contact" he specifically states one contact.
".........the current all goes to electro N at the time the S are empty, due to the fact that theNote the use of the word "ALL" in the patent he uses the Spanish word "toda" that means "ALL" if the brush is contacting two contacts simultaneously then the S electromagnet goes through ALL the resistance as the brush will always skip one because it covers two contact points.
current that has to go to them has to advance all the resistance"
"........the fact that it has to pass less resistance then before and like that the circuit closes successively.
I think Core might be confusing himself over the commutator/distributor. It is a circle with bars that lay across to make it easier to have a revolving contact that can be operated by a motor......
....... Has anyone noticed the difference in the patent drawings between the first Buforn patent and the last? What is going on with the last one. On the "y" core there are lines that run length wise. In that drawing the magnetic field generated by the N and S are in parallel with the lines drawn on "y". If these lines represent the coil then there is no magnetic induction as the lines of force don't cut the coil.
I just started reading the last patent. Good luck all, right now I dont think anyone has succeed but that doesnt mean anyone will.
-Core
....... Has anyone noticed the difference in the patent drawings between the first Buforn patent and the last? What is going on with the last one. On the "y" core there are lines that run length wise. In that drawing the magnetic field generated by the N and S are in parallel with the lines drawn on "y". If these lines represent the coil then there is no magnetic induction as the lines of force don't cut the coil.
Hannon
I thought I remembered one of the patents read a second winding could be placed over the Y to run the motor and the inducers to make it self exited indefinitely. .......
@ all
I´m in the way to translate the 1914 patent as accurately as I can.
The translations made with web programs are very inappropriate, because Buforn was not known to be an engineer nor a technician, therefore his old fashioned lexicon and language style, is quite prone to misinterpretation.
will post it here when finished.
cheers
Alvaro
@ all
I´m in the way to translate the 1914 patent as accurately as I can.
The translations made with web programs are very inappropriate, because Buforn was not known to be an engineer nor a technician, therefore his old fashioned lexicon and language style, is quite prone to misinterpretation.
will post it here when finished.
cheers
Alvaro
Hi Core,
Note also that Figuera just called reactangles N ans S. He never said to be north - south polarity, just used N and S as a way to call each series of electromagnets. I do not know if you have seen my video about my pole orientation interpretation. If not, you can find it in my youtube chanel (user : hanon1492). Please search it to see what I mean. If you can not fin it please advice me. Right now I do not want to put the link again because I see a high degree of mess between both Figuera´s patents and I do not want to increase that mess. It has many in common with this other : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls#t=3m00s)
Regards
One thing thats pleasant about the Figuera device is that there is no mystical spark gap or bizarre Tesla coil high voltage effect.
Of course I know they talk about the core material and shape in the patents but what if this core material just sleeves a permanent magnet. So when the N electromagnet is at 100% the magnetic field is composed of the electromagnet and the permanent magnet. At that time the S electromagnet is empty (to use patent text) but the permanent magnet is till creating a force not nearly as large as the N side.
-Core
But all of you are ignoring one element. BuForn demonstrated before the Spanish Patent Office a device that ran on its own. Powered itself and then powered other things.
Randy:
You must study carefully.
That document is here http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258
link http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/test.pdf
Downloaded and attached for your benefit. As I know you well, you are so dedicated but you are very superficial and you are not giving attention to details. Please study carefully.
..It seems that RandyFL is not the only one thinking about it...Thanks for the translation.
Core,
I am assuming... this is a straight view ( looking directly at it ) of your interpretation? could we get a side view?
If you can't with the pc... could you draw it by hand and post it
All the best
...Also intriguing is to place a second induced (smaller) inside the core of the inducedI read it to be hollow as well.
(would it be hollow ?
...
“There is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit”
With the exception of Garry, the underlining principle went right over your head!
Hi all,Great! Thanks for the info.
Patrick Kelly has updated in his ebook...
es igualThanks. Much simpler than what I was trying to do.
"The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
....
If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one
after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet
N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly
placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of
battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the
first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last
electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer
N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until
having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.
With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first
and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as
many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of
inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable
increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force.
…
Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the
large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be
produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient
for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free
all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all
purposes you want."
On the 18th of november of 2014 a user posted the sketch that I attach below....Thanks. I had not seen that image. I thought about the bar along the other side of the coils so it's good to see that may not be a crazy idea. I need to go through this whole thread again soon. The experiments I saw by woopy are very encouraging. He shows basically no change in his meter with the secondary present or not. It's taking me a while to understand this device but I think we are getting there.
...Figuera Device is probably the second device to use a well known principle...Appreciate all the info. I agree with a lot of it. I'm still unclear on exactly how he defeats Lenz. I recall a tesla patent that mentions a lag in lenz showing up as a core is being saturated. I'm thinking this lag is what prevents lenz from hurting this device. The power to the primaries is switched so fast that by the time lenz shows up, it's to late for it to hurt the system. Lenz wants to push back but that coils electricity is already receding, so if anything it may help it recede by pushing back in the direction it's now going anyways. I think standard generators move to slow so that the lenz generated is in phase with the moving magnet allowing it to push back against it. At any rate, I can understand the need to take a brake from projects for a while. Hope you are able to come back after some rest as I find all info helpful.
I'm giving up this research and this is my last post. I have actually asked the admin to delete all my posts and remove my account but that was not obliged.
Figuera Device is probably the second device to use a well known principle and the first being (If I'm correct, Daniel McFarland Cooks Device). The principle is simple. If you make a large permanent magnet core, there is a static magnetic field around it. If you can oscillate that static magnetic field so it becomes an oscillating magnetic field you can generate electricity from the oscillating or time varying magnetic field by putting conductor in the area of influence of the now time varying magnetic field. In order to achieve it you need to ensure two things. High voltage AC must be applied and milliamps must be provided so that the permanent magnet is not destroyed. However this has the possibility of reducing the magnetic strength of the permanent magnet significantly.
Figuera therefore used DC Electromagnets and increased the Voltage by providing a lot of resistance and oscillated the DC using the DC commutator. He avoided backemf by ensuring that both N and S magnets had current always. The rotary device is an electromechanical device. It is quite difficult to avoid sparks unless it is professionally built but can be obtained. Since the current flowing was oscillated DC or as Doug1 indicated undulated DC the magnetism was not lost. If a shunted or shoted coil is placed over the core the shorted coil will act like a capacitor and will develop enormous amperage and so the magnetic field strength of the N and S permanent Magnets is never reduced. So far I have not seen any one mentioning the fact that the core is a permanent magnet core in the primaries.
If it very difficult to use high voltage pulsed DC or DC using mains. The amount of current drawn is very high. We can use step down transformers to make DC and create a powerful DC Electromagnet.
The second thing is that the resistors can be placed in between N1 and N2 and N2 and N3 and N3 and N4 and so on..This will result in the current being progressively reduced and voltage being progressively increased. In the opposite S magnets Since current is given from S7 to S1 reverse is the case. If in N magnets current is high, in S magnets the voltage is high.
Another important point is that Figuera used the amplification method. When you apply the current in parallel the output in the secondary is four times of what is expected if the voltage is halved by giving the current in serial. Figuera avoided this by giving the current in parallel. The current moved from the edges to the center of the magnets and then went back to the edges of N and S. It is similar to clapping the hands. The secondary in the middle is half the diameter of the primary and half the length of the primary. (one primary) Therefore when the clapping hands moved towards the center the magnetic field strength in the center is very high. Voltage is high in one primary and magnetic field strength is high in another primary and this has resulted in the output in the secondary being high. The output is based on the diameter of the wire used in the secondary and the voltage developed. Voltage of the secondary is based on the number of turns and the current of the secondary is based on the diameter of the secondary wire. It necessarily follows that the number of turns in the primary must be high, sufficient to handle the current but also sufficient to create a magnetic field strength even if the current is low.
One way of doing this device without hassles is to give DC current through step down transformers to make the electromagnet a staturated permanent magnet core. This can be for about 2/3rd of the primary core. The rest of the primary core can have few layers of a coil that is neither shorted nor connected to any load but is kept open with the open ends insulated. On this we can have a multifilar coil of very thin wires and maintain the polarity of the cores. The permanent magnet will remain a permanent magnet. The multifilar coil will provide only milliamps and 220 volts AC. The input AC cannot demagnetise the permanent magnet which is in a saturated condition but it can easily distort the magnetic field. The output in the secondary is based on the number of turns and thickness of wires of the secondary. This is one way we can avoid the DC commutator.
I have observed COP>1 results two times. I have tried to replicate the Ramaswami device and reduced the output voltage to 351 volts and connected to the same earth points to which I connected two years back. Input was about 600 watts. Outut was dismal. 351 volts and 0.4 amps. I could not believe myself. Why the same earth points which produced an unbelievable amount of amperage two years back now would not work. Then a member of the forum who has occassionally posted here indicated that the earth rod would have rusted and the rust would have created an insulation and that might be the reason. I checked with a mentor who is a Prof in inorganic Chemistry only to be scolded that how I did not understand this simple thing of chemical reaction taking place and why I did not create fresh earth points after two years. The only rust proof metals that will never rust is 316L grade steel or Titanium. But the earth point for them should be prepared in such a way that they will not chemically interact with the surrounding material for the earth points to work as anticipated and desired. In addition the combination of salt water and the media surrounding the rust proof earth points must also be checked if we want to use the Earth. This is the specific reason why people are not able to use earth points consistently. Once we give a lot of current and water the earth point will interact with the surrounding carbon powder and salt and water very fast and will be rusted so much that the surface area available for conducting electricity is reduced. This is one of the reasons why people find it difficult to replicate the Barbosa and Leal devices. It works first time and second time onwards the efficiency goes down. If the above methodology is not checked and the earth points are electrical conductors working only like inert materials the problem will occur. I checked the centre coil alone and the output was 33 volts and 6 amps and it was able to light 10x200 watts lamps. Naturally not full brightness but the point was that if at 33 volts we get 6 amps and 10x200 watts lamps can glow, at 351 volts the output should be quite high.But when connected to the same earth points the output was just 0.4 amps.
Figuera concept has now been implemented in a number of devices where permanent magnet is used on the transformer cores to increase the output. These devices are bound to fail after some time or if high AC fields are used for the permanent magnet will be significantly reduced and will be divested of the permanent magnetism. In addition the core will be heated if high current passes through and that will also demagnetise the permanent magnet. Figuera eliminated all these things at one stroke by making the entire primary cores DC Electromagnets and made them non-saturated permanent magnets. This is why the BuForn patent claims that what happens in the secondary is insigificant and every thing is done in the two primaries.
Now where is the extra energy coming from? There is no extra energy. This is quite difficult to understand. There is no violation of law of conservation of energy.
This device works like the solar cell. Solar cells produce electricity due to solar radition. We do not supply the solar radiation. It comes in nature. Similarly the magnets absorb charges from the atmosphere and keep conducting it from one pole to other. Every permanent magnet does not.
As I understand there are two particles which move from the atmosphere inside the permanent magnets. One of them is small and moves very fast and likes high resistance and is responsible for causing voltage. This is focussed on one pole of the magnets. The other particle is larger in size and moves slowly and requires thick wires and is responsbile for amperage and is saturated at the opposite poles. Both of them if I understand correctly are positive and negative charges. This is why like poles of magnets repel each other and unlike poles attract each other. It is the nature of magnets to attract the charges from the atmosphere and they keep travelling through the magnets and move out again in to the atmosphere and the process is repeated as long as the magnet remains a magnet. These two particles enter the magnet at diffent poles and once they are saturated inside the magnet they keep moving out to the atmosphere at the other end and the process is continuously repeated. This is why magnets are different from other non magnetic materials. It should be possible to check a permanent magnets aura and the movement of charges must be visible with proper instruments. This is why DC current which requires thick wires could not move to lot of distances and AC current which uses very high voltage could be transmitted to long distances. The voltage causing particle dislikes the thick wires and is reduced in the thick wires. If high voltage were to be transmitted through thick wires of less resistance we would require high current or very high amperage to be moved through the wire and the slower amperage particles cannot travel long distance. I may not be correctly describing but this is what happens.
You can test this by keeping two permanent magnets with their opposite poles on your both sides of your palm and you will know that the magnetic field penetrates your hand and muscles and the opposite poles will stick to each other and the hand will become warm after some time. If you want to do it cover your hand with a plastic sleeve and test as the magnets can easily pinch your skin and cause significant damage. So be careful. This method can relieve arthirities and will cause the blood to be charged and can kill bacterias, viruses and pathogens in the body. It can cure any disease in the human body. But the principle is that it charges the blood flowing in the body. This principle is used in the Magnetic pulsar of Bob Beck.
I understand that the idea that in generators where DC Electromagnets are rotated and output is less has led to the wrong notion that it is conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy. If we put wood or plastic core and rotate it, will it result in the production of electricity. Of course not. A magnet on its own has a static field. The rotating magnetic core causes the rotating magnetic field or time varying magnetic field and the conductor subjected to this field produces electricity. The magnet need not be rotated for this. It is enough if we oscillate the static field to an oscillating field. The energy needed for oscillating the field of a large magnet is low but the output can be very high as it is based on the strength of the magnetic field, the diameter of secondary wire and the turns of the secondary wire.
Some how this is a very unlucky field. Figuera passed away within a few days of filng this patent. Other people who test this suffer. I myself has suffered very significantly and finally decided to stop all this.
Many questions have been raised why I have not posted any photos or videos. Unfortunately we had people checking if what I say is correct or not. Even those replicators suffered. In my case it is both personal and financial and professional and whatever I do I suffer. it is for this reason I stop this.
Whether COP>1 is possible? Yes. It is doable What is needed for it. Identify a ferromagnetic material that will have high magnetism as a permanent magnet and will not be demagnetized by the application of high voltage and milliamps AC input. About 40% of the rods that I used remain permanent magnets. other rods are not. We will need to check the composition of the rods and what is the difference in the molecular structure of the rods that remain permanent magnets and those that are not.
However when you do the COP>1 set up you have a kind of magnetic vortex forming in the central core. This is actually frightening. I'm no hero and at the kind of current I employed this kind of dangerous phenomena occurs. This should be avoided. For this reason the core should be significantly large and it is better to magnetise the core not to saturation but some lower point so that the magnetic vortex kind of things are avoided. I'm not interested in this field any more. It is a fairly unlucky field. I would sincerely advice any one to avoid this.
TK is a very intelligent man. He appears to use power Electronics. He pointedly asked me a question as to what is the shape of the waves and whether the full wave positive sign waves are above 5. it simply means whether the magnetic field is not allowed to collapse. Only when the magnetic field collapses backemf will come or Lenz law will operate. TK indicated he would need to check it with an osciloscope. Prof Figuera avoided all that by using DC to magnetise the core first and then oscillating the DC so the permanent magnet is never demagnetised. Figuera also avoided that even if there is high amperage the permanent magnet would remain a permanent magnet for the DC current is always there. I do not think Prof Figuera had access to an oscilloscope. But in his claims he also pointed out that the heat is avoided in the device and so the maintenance is low. Therefore the core size is high and magnetism was not allowed to reach the saturation point by him. The invention remains state of the art even today after 107 years of its filing. It appears to employ the magnetic amplifier principle but the two primaries are both acting together to create that effect.
I have not checked if the device can be made to operate on its own. I'm told that if the COP>1 comes the device can operate on its own. High Voltage is needed for this to be achieved. But the secondary core must be larger to avoid the excessive magnetic saturation and the heat.
I frankly do not think that this device can be used for electromobiles. you need large cores to avoid heat. The weight of iron and coils that I used is greater than the weight of small electric cars. But my knowledge is very limited and I may well be wrong.
Let me focus on my practice. Sorry no pictures no videos and no responses. Some people in this forum have seen the photos and videos. This is a very unlucky field. Some one indicated that those doing this kind of thing would come under spiritual attacks. it seems to be the case. Let me completely avoid this unlucky field and let me focus on my practice. I will send the rods that became permanent magnets even after applying high voltage and high amperage AC and retain a remanent magnetism to some one who can verify what is their internal structure and what is the modification caused to them and what is their chemical composition and any other thing necessary. On my part I'm least interested in this.
I would again request the admin to delete all my posts and my account. Enough is enough. I decided to write this for no one appears to disclose that the primary cores become semi saturated permanent magnets and remain permanent magnets always and the rotary device is used to create undulated DC to distort the magnetic field of permanent magnets in the primary cores and that the secondary in the middle must be half the dia of the primary and half the length of the primary and so it experiences a sudden increase in the magnetic field strength and then it is reduced and increased again and again. There is nothing more to this device. Prof. Figuera himself indicates that the rotary device can be dispenses with a switch. Possibly an electromechnical switch but I'm not able to understand it. I have been successful only whe high voltage is applied and whenever low voltage is applied the output did not come. So high voltage and milliamps and high number of turns using the multifilar coils or helical coils of small wires and thick wires to send low voltage and high amperage DC to keep the rods powerful permanent magnets is what is needed here. The device certainly works and not a hoax. I believe I have shared all I know now in the forum and so let me leave and focus on my practice.
........... If a shunted or shoted coil is placed over the core the shorted coil will act like a capacitor and will develop enormous amperage and so the magnetic field strength of the N and S permanent Magnets is never reduced. So far I have not seen any one mentioning the fact that the core is a permanent magnet core in the primaries.
Hi,
Someone sent me a personal message asking for the data of the electromagnets I had built. Please, note that I had not checked this website since my last post. I will provide the data again in this post, and then may not return to this forum for months. I apologize but I do not have the time to post, so my reply should take some time.
I have built two electromagnets for the Cook’s device. Each electromagnet consists of
CORE
iron steel: 1018,
relative permeability: 2,540
length: 24 inches
Diameter: 2 inches
INNER COIL
length: 22 inches
diameter: 2 inches
turns: 900 single layer of #24 AWG
measured inductance: 10 mH (without outer coil)
This inductance is very different from the calculated values, which are usually larger than 3 H.
OUTER COIL
length: 21 inches
diameter: 2.5 inches
turns: 380 single layer of #16 AWG
measured inductances: 1.09 mH (and 2 mH with inner core-coil assembly)
I will start the tests for this device. A major challenge is to determine how to excite the device. For the excitation, I will also use two electromagnets (shown in picture) located about the mid section.
I have also built a section of the Figuera’s 1908 device. It was a lot of work because I have to cut Silicon steel sheets with scissors. Then, it was the hammering and drilling. See the pictures. The data for the electromagnets are:
‘N’ and ‘S’ electromagnets:
length: 10 inches
width: 1.5 inch
interface surface: 1” x 1.5”
turns: 1,050 multi-layers of #18 AWG
‘Y’ electromagnet:
length: 10 inches
width: 1.5 inch
interface surface: 1” x 1.5”
turns: 709 multi-layers of #16 AWG
Whe 60 Vac was input to one of the side coils, the output in the ‘Y’ coils was 30 Vac. I am working on the driver to generate the two out of phase pulsating DC voltages. It should be ready for tests within a week.
The old coil winder that I bought had really paid off. It has been a time saver, once you have the set up, it is so easy to wind the coils. It was money well spent.
I should be very busy for the next six months. I will not be able to post. However, I am planning on recording the tests data and publish them later.
I should get back to you by next year with the results of the tests on these new prototypes.
Thank you,
Bajac
Interesting theory. Certainly within the realm of possibility. I would remind you that after the worlds fair in the early 1900's it was decided by all the major bankers and leaders that the world would be a society based on industry not agriculture. Soon after the war of the currents started. Tesla may have partnered with those who sought to exploit the electrification of the nations in order to secure his funding and his place in history. Plus he was really pissed at Edison over one of the projects Edison said he pay Tesla XX amount of money if he could find a way to do something which I do not remember what that was exactly. Then Edison told him he was not serious and that Tesla did not understand American sarcasm after Tesla did the work.
Nice looking build by the way.
Another thing to consider they all learned from the same information sources when they were younger.
...Looks good. Thanks ;D
YOU ARE WELCOME EVERYBODY!
...
...I strongly suspect that the central magnet emits some harmful radiations...Sounds like a valid concern until we know for sure what this device produces and if these effects manifest themselves only when higher power levels are used. As someone interested in this device, would it help to only "turn on" this device when it's inside a Faraday cage? Does a Faraday cage stop gama rays, Xrays and such?
This thread is infected with people who build nothing and have nothing. My personal favorite are the one's who boldly state "THIS IS MY LAST POST......... I SWEAR IT".... and then naturally return to continue posting ???
Since its so EZ to claim success then I claim, on this day, that I, Member CORE have a working device. We now have a Figuera device and a Core Device.
Really?.... Are we to believe that a person who can't figure out how to resize a picture to 800 x 600 can figure out Figuera? ???
Sad day...... NRamaswami pay close attention here THIS IS HOW ITS DONE.
This is my last post, ......you lose
That's right I am taking my ball and leaving
- Core
[/glow]
...by separating the poles. you can not have the Lenz's law present with only one pole.....sorry it isn't going to happen...I would like to know more details on why this cancels or prevents Lenz. I do not question what you say but only wish to understand it better.
NO!...the north magnet will be attracted to the Iron core as will the south magnet causing a Potential difference by time-varying magnetic fields...Ok thanks. Guess the concept is beyond me. Keep up the good work though.
Ah, what a pain tha we cannot look at the picture of original rotating Figuera device from 1902. Finding the source dynamo generator would explain everything.
...both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers..."Good point. Might help to encase the coils in permeable metal also as Ed mentions?
Hey guys, call me a purist, but I think I'll stick with the patent and the way Figuera described it...I changed my mind on what I said in the Ed post but didn't want to leave the post blank so just kept the info there. I agree that staying as close to the patent as possible is the best way to start. Woopyjump had some of the best examples. He hasn't posted in a while. Anyone know what he is up to?
...I don't know what you guys are talking about with the Lenz... Lenz current is the reason why a transformer can be plugged in with nothing on the secondary...But its also why we have to put more into the system than we get out I thought? If there was no lenz then we could plug the device into a much smaller voltage to begin with I think. The magnetic flux in the central coil may be strange also. In the drawing, if N is strong and S is weak then the secondary should be N poles on the outside and S on the inside? If S is strong and N is weak then the secondary will have strong S on the outside and N on the inside? This is assuming the secondary is in phase with the primaries. I can see how if the secondary in this case was delayed, that it would help the strong primary get stronger and the weak secondary get weaker and so on since the poles of the secondary would be reversed from what I have in the drawing. I also no longer think the secondary block wall moves up and down. I think it just stays in place and switches poles ???
...Figuera's generator uses Lenz to aid it, just like an AC motor. That's why it has to be a North and a South. See, because of his commutator, when one is increasing in strength, it produces a back voltage, or Lenz current, in the other. this effectively nullifies a part of the incoming current, so instead of a high current it would only need something small to run...I will have to look at the firing sequence closer. I don't see how one primary increasing causes an effect in the other primary other than the secondaries poles which both primaries have to contend with. Can you draw a picture of how this back voltage lenz current happens. Crayons are fine but sock puppets are preferred.
@MagnaPropThanks for the image and the info. Its helped me to understand it better.
This is my simple drawing...
marathonman, You should keep a civil tongue in your head. Nramaswami has given a huge contribution to this work and shared it freely. So far you have shown drawings. For what it is worth several of your drawings do not work at all. I wasted some time trying them even though there was no reason to believe they would work. I have been at this for over thirty years and have read hundreds of reports from people who have solved the free energy problem, in the end they were mistaken. So when you show an actual machine working I'll buy the champagne. Until then I won't hold my breath.First off i disagree about the contribution of a certain person of whom you speak so highly of.....working an a device that have nothing to do with Figueras device and high jacking this thread for his own personal agenda thus diverting people from our real goal.
Garry
It is established that there are three types of electric fields. The first due to a distribution of charge known as an electrostatic field. The other two are associated with the two types of electromagnetic induction. The first type of induction is known as flux cutting and is due to relative spatial motion with respect to magnetic flux. The electric field resulting from this type of induction is the motional electric field. This type of electric field has unique properties that separate it from the other two. Experimentally, it is confirmed that this electric field is immune to shielding due to the fact that magnetic (not electric) boundary conditions apply to it. Motional electric fields can also exist where the total magnetic field that induces it consists of non-zero components that sum to zero. The other type of induction is due to linking time changing magnetic flux.
...Saw the video but didn't notice the part where he explains how Lenz is not there.
Listen carefully to the beggining of this video when he speak about the toroid: "19th invention and internal cancelation of back EMF"
...
Saw the video but didn't notice the part where he explains how Lenz is not there.
You put two coils in series on a toroid and it magically has no Lenz problems?
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.
The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it, because we will just have to interposed between a pair of electromagnets N and S, which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be in to hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
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
"...two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, and the induced circuit is marked by a thick line of reddish ink, being this way the general arrangement of the appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in another form or grouping."
"...Leaving still both the induced circuit and the core, it is essential that lines of forces to be born and die, or being removed, which is achieved by making the excitatory current intermittent or alternating in sign."
Hi Marathonman,
In patent 30378 Figuera shows an alternate version which is a little abstracted by the mechanical elements.
A 2001 Canadian patent CA2357550 by Bud T. Johnson is the closest to this setup.
CA2357550 - Electrical generator - solid state configuration
https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1
I have to agree that idea sounds simple by Figuera's description it is pretty much lock an AC generator coil at the 90 degree mark and just alternate the flux cutting through the center with electromagnets.
MarathonmanNot sure about that but i am working on one section just to prove my point. have a few transformers laying around and a few i acquired so i am building a mock up. lacking the proper wire but it is just to prove my point.
If your right,you should be able to build a single section unit and run it backwards supplying ac power to the output coil and seeing what comes out of the input coils/inducers. A measurable output that will indicate what the input will need to be in order to achieve the opposite which would be running it the right way round to have the correct output from the output coil.
Hi Marathonman,
In patent 30378 Figuera shows an alternate version which is a little abstracted by the mechanical elements.
A 2001 Canadian patent CA2357550 by Bud T. Johnson is the closest to this setup.
CA2357550 - Electrical generator - solid state configuration
https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1 (https://www.google.com/patents/CA2357550A1)
I have to agree that idea sounds simple by Figuera's description it is pretty much lock an AC generator coil at the 90 degree mark and just alternate the flux cutting through the center with electromagnets.
" In Gramme ring and in current dynamos, current is produced
by induction created on the wire of the induced circuits while
its coils cut the lines of force "
.....
" The inventors believe that is exactly the same that the induced
circuit coils cut the lines of force, than that these lines of force
cross the induced wire. "
Doug1 what is matal ?
So in light of this new information have had to reconsider my proposal. that leads me to believe that it is NYN, SYS, NYN ect.... ectIf that were the case then your setup will produce null voltage because the induction created in the left side of the induced coil would be counterbalanced by the induction done in the right side of the coil ( (+1) + (-1) = 0 ). You are fighting against axial symmetry along the axis joining both inducer poles.
because like you said opposite poles will lead to one magnet so they have to be NYN, SYS.
as one magnet is coming in the other is going out supporting each other in a push pull type of scenario.
so tell me if this is it below.
You know one thing that really puzzles me or rather bothers me is out of the entire internet, thousands and thousands of free energy web sites NOT one talks or tried to figure out Clemente Figueras device .... NOT ONE !. this really bothers me and makes me wounder about this guy. i know their is a lot of suppression, even on this site but still in the back of my mind i have been bothered by it.
Are there any "practical" working free energy devices out there?
.........
I think Tesla's motor and alternator patent is a keeper but you gotta build it, test it and run it.................
Its Tesla's patent 555190 ( a motor and a generator )
I have read completely through that patent 3 times now and I don't see anywhere that Tesla said it would run itself. Where does anyone get that idea from the patent? What Tesla is describing is an early version of an induction motor. This patent is a way to run an induction motor from a single phase source instead of a 2 or 3 phase source. His secondary coils as he calls them produce an opposing field shifted in phase to cause the rotation of the armature. That is all this patent is about.
citfa
Third time was not the charm, take a break try again later when your head is clear you missed every novel feature of this invention.I can only guess your trying to multi task your thoughts which is like being a jack of all trades and an expert of none.
Two more motors of this kind have suggested themselves to me. 1. A motor with one of its circuits in series with a transformer and the other in the secondary of the transformer.
Wow...
nothing gets past you guys...
1. I suggest you go back and look at 3 phase generating and transmission by your local purveyor of electricity...
a. who invented that?
b. why?
2. I would also suggest you going outside or in your garage and open up the hood of your car and see ... I don't know.... maybe a Fxxxxxx "alternator "..........................
a. Gee who invented that thing? I guess ...................its " useless " eh
b. I wonder what its for............duh?
3. An alternator is a.......................................motor turned inside out.........
a. who would want to build an alternator when you could possible find it at the local auto supplies purveyor
b. go look up " ufopolitics " if you wanna build motors
you might not find the forest because too many trees are in the way
ya might wanna actually consider studying the patent..............................................................................
All the best
For those that are having trouble with Lenz's Law this might help.
I can see the forest and the trees. 8)Hello Antijon, you can keep your irony for yourself. I have been watching this "one weekend project patent" thread for years and years and people going nowhere, perhaps is time to rethink from the start.
....
But whatever. you guys want me out of your little marathonman parade? fine. haha, I work just as well on my own
...His first video here https://youtu.be/iGzR0NJ4vREI wouldn't mind seeing a discussion on how this device works. Especially since we know it works and he is still alive to talk to. Even if not exactly the same as Figuera I have already noticed similarities between Figuera and other devices being built which can help lead us to the answer for Figuera. I don't speak russian so his other videos are of little help to me.
Go through his videos and he shows how the secondary has no effect on the primary current.
...Let us know how your experiment goes. Very interested in what he is doing and how it might relate to Figuera.
Magnaprop, I just realized his two secondaries are arranged parallel to each other, physically I mean. This makes a difference in the operation, but I should be able to test his design later. Smart guy, right? I like his other videos about inertia.
How can i take a pic down after posting it? ???
the huge pic was a Paint fail and i would like to fix it.
we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S, which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles
Marathonman, you're right about the patent image, but I think it doesn't affect the design very much.
Suppression if you want to call it that happens later. The constitution includes commerce clauses which will prohibit such a device because it will upset the economy and the tax base to such a high degree. Im the gonna guess every country that does business internationally or with the world bank system will also have difficulties with allowing such concepts to be wide spread. Then of course you have so many people in the communities who are invested in the systems in place that will lose huge sums of money as a result. I wouldnt worry about MIB's I would be more concerned with the guy next door who who might lose his life savings. He's not governed by any rules like a gov employee he might just beat his losses out of you with a hammer. Then as you can imagine it would get blamed on the mystical MIB's. If I were a gambling type I would put my money on the later being the hard part not the device being hard to figure out. Just food for thought.
C.Y.A.
until the present, none has tried to change, at industrial scale, from zero, the magnetic power of the excitatory magnets or electromagnets of a running machine.This strange quote seems that he implies alternating the exciter current of a generator to produce the same results. When considering the generators of the day, with their large exciter coils, what would the results be?
i would tend to think that all human's have an enate history to over complicate EVERYTHING so i think i will stay on the track i am presently on. Figueras was a very simple man that built a simplex device that did not use Magnets in his design.
good luck to the both of you.
here you go
(http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/BH_iron.png)
I am new to this forum and have read the posts dated prior to October 2014. You people have really put forth some good stuff. So far, I have not seen a simple, low power circuit that provides 90 degree out of phase excitations for the Figuera 1908 patent. Therefore, I present the following for your consideration. I hope you find it useful.Well Sam6 it seams that you have not put out any effort because if you did you would of read ALL the post. see if you would of read ALL the post you would be up to date on everything and realize people Have posted low power circuits over a year ago and months ago. my circuit is 5 volt, is that low enough for you.
Attached is a drawing of a circuit whose inputs connect to the count pulse outputs of the CD4017 circuit provided by Patrick Kelly. Each output pulse simultaneously drives the bases of two NPN 2N222 transistors. Each base draws 2.4 ma. The counter outputs are rated for 10 ma, so they are not overloaded. There are sixteen transistors in all. The transistors sequentially ground connecting points in two different strings of series resistors in the adjustment circuits of two LM317T adjustable voltage regulators to provide two quasi-sinusoidal outputs that are ninety degrees out of phase.
Each output is capable of supplying 1.7 Amps. The LM317Ts can handle up to 37 volts DC. If greater current is required, the outputs can be used to provide input signals to emitter followers or other high power devices such as DC drives - assuming the acceleration circuits can be adjusted to permit the rapid response required for this circuit.
The resistors are selected to simulate the equivalent of a 90 degree segment of a sine wave. The values progress from small to large in both strings. The sequence of grounding in one string progresses from small to large, and the grounding sequence in the other string progresses from large to small, thus producing outputs that are 90 degrees out of phase.
If you check the application notes of the LM317T, you will find that they suggest a different circuit for digital output selection. I chose not to use it because the required watt ratings of the small resistors were larger then those of the circuit I used. This is shown in the attached spreadsheet.
I have not yet built the complete circuit. I have built half of the circuit powered by 12 VDC to verify that the LM317T can respond fast enough. It does. However, I do not yet have a completely satisfactory working circuit. The attached oscilloscope picture of one of the waveforms shows that there is a problem in one of the counter circuits that causes some of the segments not to appear. I have not yet fixed this, but suspect that a couple of diodes are malfunctioning as I have seen similar problems while getting this device working.
I would appreciate any suggestions for improvements to this circuit.
Sam6
i did have some guidance from someone that has had a working device for over a year now and i thank him VERY MUCH for dropping hints here and there.
Thank you Chris Sykes, i admire your work and appreciate your in put. I am curious as to why you wanted me to download this as i have an earlier one that i have been studying that is the information that was available to Figueras. i have downloaded it and have been reading it but i must admit it is the same info that is in the earlier version.
is their any specific section that you think i need to study.?????... if there is please let me know
i have also been studying all other patents and have come to the conclusion that all are right about the coil orientation. i have also possibly uncovered another clue to his device and it have to do with Hanon's delay effect.
in most of the patents the cores that were drawn were very long in proportion to the coils and with this set up a delay effect would take place.
also i would like to bring up that the secondary cut away in the first pic. notice that the primary is cut away also. could this be that the primary core was hollow to allow for an adjustment of some kind as in to get the exact delay effect Hanon was referring. if you look at the other patents you will see that all of them have a long secondary core except two that have no core drawn.
first pic is my point
other pics are of long cores.
the last line on the right is suppose to be 'induced' not enduced and Sorry for the stupid large pic !
Ps. my materials i ordered have still not come in and i am really P O ed. so i haven't been able to do any test.
PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION
Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns, while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.
Ref: PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267 (Spain)
the secondary coil is wound in many thin flat pancake-shaped sections (called "pies"), connected in series. The primary coil is first wound on the iron core, and insulated from the secondary with a thick paper or rubber coating. Then each secondary subcoil is connected to the coil next to it, and slid onto the iron core,
Marathonman,
I find difficult to believe that someone has a working device, and he just contacted you in order to help you and he do not want to help the rest of users. Sorry but you are not the kindest person to deal with if someone do not share your ideas. That person supposedly told you his findings while you were trying another design. I can guess that you surely did not accept those finding at first. I refer to your mood just by watching your behaviour with some users as NRamaswami, Darediamond, Sam, Antijon or even me when some of us just posted discrepancies with you transverse coil design (now abandoned by you) or just by advising you of some weak points to take into consideration as I tried to do. I will love to believe you and I would love to know that somebody had discovered the key. That was my aim by sharing all this in this thread. But I can not get it how you could have access to such info.
Top pic Sine/cosine @ 90 Degrees.
Bottom pic Hanon's Sine/Sine @ 180 Degrees.
Come again.
seams simple to me.
seams simple to me.Fine. Whatever makes it easier for you to understand. ;) But know that I'm done pandering to your egocentricity.
you sound like a spoiled 10 year old, ha,ha,ha.
you need to get off your high almighty horse and realize Figueras devise IS NOT a regular transformer that you so deemed yourself some kind of authority on the subject.
NO ONE in this forum is an authority on free energy especially the Figueras Device.
IF you don't like what i post, DON"T FUCKING READ IT.
but know this you will never ever get a working device in the direction you are going. the info i posted in the last month was past to me to get a working device weather you like it or not.
Based on the configuration that Marathonman is describing maybe it could be better to order the electromagnets poles and induced coils in such a way to maximize the magnetic strength of the electromagnets and reduce the open magnetic path of the magnetic lines jumping from one core to the next one: I mean using rectangular induced cores and pilling up all of them close to each other. With same polarity confronted I tend to think that magnetic lines just will be expelled from the induced core when they crash in the center. I think it will not be leakage between adjacent induced coils because the reluctance of air is much much higher than that of the iron core and magnetic lines will jump from one core to another when they are forced by the confronting field.
What dou you think? It is another variation to test which may enhance the system performance. Just my thought.
digitalindustry;
Referring to the comment about the resistor unit. Figueras refers it as a splitter of currant and not an inductor. spreading out resistive wire in this fashion would have no inductive value at all and would seem that he was trying to get as much wire as he could in a small space while maintaining heat dissipative value.
it has already been shown and says so in the device patent that it can have a common core or separate cores if so desired. the core is not shown in this pic you posted but Buforn shown in all his patents. i have posted on this subject and made this aware to the forum.
a make before you break set up would give someone the impression that he was trying to avoid inductive collapse in his set up and would be detrimental to this device and destroy the magnetic fields he was trying to build up and maintain in the core. as was passed to me once the field is brought up to a certain level it is easy to maintain it with little amperage. even though it would create power in the collapse the Amplifying properties of the two primary cores would be destroyed and this is not what we want.
maybe you should familiarize yourself with an induction meter or learn about induction.
I have an Induction meter and am reading more as we speak. i am curious as to what you are attempting to hypothesize in relation to the Figueras device.
Yes there are working Devices but unfortunately they don't wan't to post completely. of the one's i know of they are very cryptic.
ok, take out the word "we" then read it.
all i can say is good luck.
Happy Figuering to all.
DigitalIndustry,
Instead of reading the whole thread I recommend you to read three times the 1908 patent. In deepth. You will find that R is the name for "resistor" (literally mentioned in the patent). You will aso find that Figuera stated that there must be always at least two contact connect in the commutator (what we call make-before-break) or that the resistor has the function of splitting the current and create two opposite intensity ( one field increase while the other decrease, and later the reverse..). Just read the patent 3 times and judge for yourself if the polarity is clearly defined or not. It is a pity when I see people just paying attention to the drawing and not reading in deepth the patent text.
In the next link there is a very useful GIF animation:
[size=78%]http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-28.html#post265699 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-28.html#post265699)[/size]
digitalindustry; take some high ohmage wire for your resistor section, wire it like the pic shows and take your own LCR meter if you own one and measure the inductance. you will get a reading that is so low that amounts to nothing.
so that leads me to believe in the following.
#1 you haven't read not one single patent.
#2 typical human reaction to over complicate a simplex design.
#3 being guided by taught dogma from status quo instructors.
#4 being paid to do so because we are at the point of production.
#5 just a complete idiot that likes to disrupt people.
#6 knows enough to think he knows everything.
NOW digitalindustry pick ANY TWO !
anyone that didn't mention this in 190 pages is either
A - Paid by a gov or corporation to mislead you or
B - was misled by A
apparently Clemente Figueras never got this memo and forgot to put it in his patent.
Have a nice Figueras Day !
;D it will work with resistor too , just no or very little overunity :Pyep i think you'd essentially have some sort of transformer bi-transformer.
yep i think you'd essentially have some sort of transformer bi-transformer.
may as well put a toroid in a toroid and play with that.
Yeah,that's not about Newton third law, or Lenz law - it's all about wrong usage. It is common knowledge for example that every object falling in Earth gravity would not jump again higher then to the place it was at first.However it does not mean we cannot do that !
digitalindustry;
This is the exactly the same post as #2845 and #2858. i am not speaking for everyone but i think we got your concerns the first time.
i don't see the need to repost. just sayin.
i just notice you guys filling the pages with repetitive and redundant data - so in that same sense my images might add a new vector to the fact that you are going over the principals of a transformer.
this image attached particularly highlights the the simplicity in which the original device was conceived.
it would be my advice to try building the 'Resistor' just as is displayed instead of trying to use modern components or if you do you modern components then use a mix to compensate.
i think this is relevant and new info does anyone disagree?
digitalindustry, I see what you mean. Because he used old school parts, necessary for construction, they would most likely contain parasitic capacitance and inductance. But why do you think it's important? What would be the effect of inductance on the resistor?
lol, people are giving you a hard time, but you're not cursing yet, so you're ok in my book. Besides, it's not like you jumped in here with a, "I saw the light," savior complex. And you don't claim to have a little fairy whispering in your ear about the secret, holy grail of free energy... at least I hope you don't, we don't need another one. ::)
And yep, you'll find a lot of redundant posts, and a few posts with Doug's philosophical insight, which I appreciate. The problem is there's not a lot of builders here.
i'm not making grand presuppositions i'm saying to people that take into account that the 'Resistor' in that case may be serving more than one purpose.
i will be working on a concept but not this one soon with a 'flicking' or rotational mag field i will post it when done for analysis.
that so called fairy wispering[sic] in me ear has a 5 kw system working for over a year now.
as he mints to me i post to the forum but whether you heed the information is entirely up to you.
that is why my design took such a radical turn in the last few months was from his operational hints. why he gave to me i don't know, can't answer that.
but i do enjoy helping other that are willing to help them selves
it's about time This is the most intelligent sentence you've posted yet.
Are you also under the impression that the resistor reduces the reactance of the inducer coils?
Looking forward to it. Care to share your setup now?
There's many ways to fulfill Faraday's BxV, which is what I've always been interested in. For instance, in Figuera's generator, B (flux density) increases when input current increases, just like a normal transformer. But due to the effect of two inducers acting with proper phasing, the coil now appears to be "moving" between two magnets. Like in the image below. BTW, have you ever seen those cheeky little shake-to-charge flashlights? They used a single magnet moving up and down in a coil... you know the output would be twice as high if they used this arrangement.
Speaking of flux density, I don't suppose you read my posts about parallel primaries, or parallel inductors?
digitalindustry,antijon ;
Quote "all of these devices are always about a 'rotating magnetic field'
every-time there is inertia there is 'energy' because gravity is 'magnetic at frequency"
it's about time This is the most intelligent sentence you've posted yet.
that so called fairy wispering in me ear has a 5 kw system working for over a year now.
as he mints to me i post to the forum but whether you heed the information is entirely up to you. that is why my design took such a radical turn in the last few months was from his operational hints. why he gave to me i don't know, can't answer that.
sure i am an ass hole, you are not telling me something i all ready know but i do enjoy helping other that are willing to help them selves and not blindly jump in a pit because of a shinny object. i just think that the areas your engaged in are secondary to the main real concern, the pulsing, operation and dimensions of the cores. without these main concerns you will never have a working device.
i know this device was using DC at the time in question because the Canary Island had no AC at the time of his builds and he used a DC motor for his commutator rotation. this is not to say that AC can be used as i so recently found out but the control system to manipulate it will be to very elaborate as compared to DC.
he used DC through a resistor network to split the currant between two opposing Electromagnets (same polarity) as not to interfere with each other but help amplify the incoming signal (push pull/push push) while rotating the commutator to raise and lower the currant in the electromagnets in opposite fashion.
that is as plain and simple as i can put it so if it is not understood the exchange of knowledge has ceased and one's intelligence level will remain stagnant.
Thanks Marathonman for the kind words..I have taken precautions against the electric field but not against the magnetic field. That is the mistake.
The informatiion given to you is correct but your understanding is wrong.
The information given to you probably was like this. P1 is wound CW- Y CW- P2 is Wound CCW.
You therefore think that the identical poles were facing each other. This is why you and Hanon insist that it is NS-Y-SN or SN-Y-NS.
That is not correct.
There are other people who have tried to replicate what I did in this forum and one of them can tell you if he so desires that at 12 to 14 filars of winding for a very low electrical input a very large magnetic field can be produced.
There is another competent experimenter in a First world country who replicated and advised that the voltage is divided in the primary and the Ramaswami device did not work. I also did the same thing and it did not work. I was so completely puzzled. What did we do in 2013. Why the output is coming but why it is lower than the input. The answer is in the email I just sent to this competent experimenter.
The mistake that we did in 2013 was to wind the layers of secondary under the primary as described in the Ramaswami device. The description was given from memory and so I could not understand how the voltage divided and how we got a lower value in secondary output..
In my description P1 and P2 had the currrent going from top to bottom or from Left to Rigth and then return. This causes the voltage to divide in the primaries. Current Moves like this P1----->Secondary P2---------> The current moves in the same direction in the primaries. P1 and P2 are connected in series. This is what we did and the experimenter reported voltage division.
To the contrary try winding like this..
CW-CW-CCW (This is similar to the SN-Y-NS that you think was done by the experimenter who advised you)
But this time give the current from the two ends of the primaries. The current should rotate in the same direction in the two primaries. In this case the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS for the polarity is determined not by how the coil is wound but by how the current rotates in the coils. If the direction of rotation of current is same then the polarity remains unaltered.
But this time current travels like this.. P1---------> Secondary <------------P2. In this case the current moves to maximise the voltage to double of what is originally given. Instead of voltage division that we saw this time the voltage adds up. Magnetic field strength is increased 4 times or more. Because the Magnetic Field strength curve will suddenly shoot up when the number of Ampere turns crossses a particular range. This happens in this type of winding.
This is the reason for the very high amperage suddenly seen in the wire by us in 2013. In the second case the Magnetic field strength is tremendously increased for the same input and then tremendously decreased. The variation of fulx is very high. Our mistake was to have wound the secondary also under the primary and this resulted in the high voltage and high amperage which made the current unusable. If we limit ourselves to the secondary winding alone the voltage remains at the range of 220 to 240 volts and the current is in the range of 12 to 14 amps. We only need to use higher number of wires in the multifilar coils to reduce the input amperage.
If we use pulsed DC we would need to reduce the input voltage for pulsed DC draws too much of current as the input voltage is increased. The secondary in the center would still experience a high output voltage and amperage and the voltage is determined by the number of turns of the secondary. This is why Figuera used a battery in 1908 but used a resistor array to limit the current drawn.
It is normally understood wrongly that if the solenoid is wound CW the pole is of one type and if it is wound CCW the pole is of another type. This is not so. The same CW winding can be used to produce a North pole or South Pole by giving the current from the inside to the outside or from the outside to the inside. Direction of rotation of current changes. This changes the poles. Polarity is determined by the direction of rotation of current in electromagnets.
If we do this the voltage division is now changed by voltage addition. You may test it at your convenience. Giving it to the Earth is not needed. We can give the secondary directly to load. Still voltage will add up and the output voltage is based on the number of turns of secondary. The current is about 12 to 14 amps and voltage is about 235 volts. But it differs slighttly up and down. But please cover the electromagnet with many layers of plastic. The magnet Ends must also be covered with plastic. If possible allow the air to go but cover the device with Aluminium sheets with i feet air gap present between the Iron and Aluminium. Earth the Aluminium sheet configured like a tank for it will have high amperage and low voltage and it should be earthed. ( Just some wire from from the aluminium to an iron rod fixed in earth would do. Not the Normal Earth connection kind of Earth. If you do not allow air to go to the electromagnet and cover the whole thing with aluminium the magnet may not work. Aluminium will prevent the magnet from getting ions from the Air and the magnet may not work.
But this kind of shielding will ensure that no harm is caused as I'm suffering now even after many months of stopping the work.
One of the reasons that I advised others not to experiment is because we did not understand these points. Aluminium shielding will have higher amperage as long as the electromagnet is functioning and so should not be touched and must be earthed.
You may please check with the experimenter if what I say about direction of rotation of current altering the polarity is correct or not. Then you will recognize that this is how Lenz law was cancelled by Figuera.
We have moved the rods out. About 10% of the rods have become mild permanent magnets. Rest remain pure iron. One Metallurgical professor says that there is a possibility that this has caused the iron to change in to another isotope of iron. But this is rejected by another Professor who insists for an element to move from one isotope to another a lot of energy would be needed. We have not tested the iron internal structure to find these things out. So I may not do these tests again.
But the fundamental principle is you increase the magnetic field strength by providing a lower electrical field and then take out a higher electrical output from the concentrated magnetic field. This is the mystery of the free energy devices. There is nothing more.
The driving current, or is an independent current, which, if direct, must be interrupted or changed in sign alternately by any known methodThis implies that he used a driving circuit, which is probably the commutator/variable resistor. Reading the patent, the induced circuit is very confusing, but he may have just wound pancake/spiral coils between the poles.
I am curious as to whom or what patent your are basing your info on? i have every patent from Figueras and Buforn printed and sitting right next to me as i speak that i have read at least 40 to 50 times each and not one remotely resemble what you just described.
all i can say is good luck.
Quote; "I base it on what have been generally discovered and achieved over Lenz effect which Fuguera also discovered that made him to successfully build the Fueguera Motionless Generator.
Completely conjecture statements based on other people not your own experiments and what Figueras actually attained in his device in which you have no idea.
Quote; "When you pulse any Electromagnet, it turns into a Socket which allows the Air base endless Wattage to Plug into it."
Our entire Universe is electric and is where the power is coming from. Figueras device is not a static electro device. it has Nothing to do with air ever. it will work in space as it pulls directly from the field within it.
Quote; "Fuguera used Pulsing DC which is Switch on and off by the ready-made dc motor-powered mechanical switch.
Figueras device is Not switched on and off at any time. it is a make before break type setup to avoid voltage spikes which would kill the intended purpose of building up a magnetic fields and maintaining that said fields in the core with harmonious and continuous swinging of that said fields.
but the multifiller info is good as i have attained amazing results from multifiller primary coils. so much do it jumped across the room when pulsed with 100 volts DC. luckily my door helped stop the torpedo. so take Doug's warning as to completely secure your coils or those things between the legs could get amputated.
my torpedo has 3.2 inch long primaries with aprox 654 turns quad filler @ 2 T each. the funny thing is i could not get proper ohms and B field until i took my two inch secondary coil and multiplied it by the golden ratio of 1.618 thus gives ruffly 3.2 inches for my primary. then everything fell into place, so weird.
good luck.
Happy Figuering
Doug, Mack:
Without going in to much, what I have done is this..
a. Create a primary..
b. Take a permanent magnet and measure at what distance the permaent magnet does not oscillate in your hands by the EM wave from the primary core.
c. bring the magnet towards the core of the primary so permanent magnet will start oscillating increasingly violently.
d. Identify the distance at which the magnetic oscillation does not increase.
e. Divide this distance by two.
f. Build the middle coil for this distance.
g. Keep the middle coil at half or slightly more than the diameter of the primary core.
h. Wind the coils on the middle coil to prevent the iron rods of opposite poles of primary from crashing in to one another and so build the middle core to be slightly above the primary core size alone.
Results:
a. For a single module the output of middle core alone is less than the input of the primary. But irrespective of the load on the middle coil primary input is constant. Primary does not care whether you load the middle coil or do not load the middle coil. Therefore the secondary is Lenz law Free. For this to happen one thing must be done but I'm not disclosing it..You can find it in the Patent of Figuera but he feels it is not necessary to disclose it.
b. you continue to add modules. As primaries are added their resistance increases and so input decreases. As secondaries are added their voltage increases and so output increases.
C. Continue steps a and b above.
Problem with Figuera device is that this requires a lot of iron, lot of coils, and not infrequently the brush of the rotary disc goes. It needs to be very sturdy for long term use. You need multiple modules which costs lot of money.
Within my budget I modified the device and the results were available.
I'm working with a group of like minded replicators and what we are doing and what are the results I cannot disclose without their consent.
It is not impossible to get the center core output on its own to be greater than the input. But certain conditions need to be fulfilled for that. They are so obvious that I'm not going in to them and I consider that disclosure unnecessary.
I'm a very ordinary man without much of knowledge. Until I started I did not know the difference between voltage and amperage. Until very recently I did not know the difference between and implications of connecting in serial and connecting in parallel. So actually when I started I did not know that this kind of device cannot be done. So I ended up listing the conditions needed to create the device and I ended up doing it.
These are the conditions.
1. Primary input should be low
2. Avoid back emf
3. Create Lenz law free output.
Figuera patent does all that and it is very well explained in the patent how to do all this. Unfortunately he is very cryptic. That is the problem. I do not intend to post on this as I have given all info needed to replicate already.
I tried to see in the mind of Figuere if at all possible. First I think if I was building a device for free energy, would I put in massive resistors? This sounds contra productive to me. Besides, If I look closely to the remains of the patent drawing, it looks faintly as if the resistors are placed there in a later stage, this is of course guesswork.
Secondly: Why is Figuere drawing a stack of 7 sets of primary and secondary coils in his patent???? This haunted me for a few weeks, time and again, WY 7 SETS OF COILS???? till I thought of the following.
Every inventor is making deliberate mistakes in the description in his/her patent. This is to my mind not different with the patent of Figuere.
So lets trow away the resistors. Then make a rotary collector system that puts 7 primary coils in series all times. So on the first step of the rotation of the rotating collector device, all 7 primaries of the south are in series, the other are powerless. Then on the second collector position we have again 7 primerie coils in series, this time 6 of the south and 1 of the north, then next position it is 5South and 2North, next 3S and 4N, then 2S and 5N and so on. In this way we have always the same current in 7 series connected primeri coils. This way you get more or less the same waveform as with the resistors, but all the current is active, not used to heat resistors.
Hanon, the thing that bothers me about that description is that all of the secondary coils are wired in series or parallel. If the coils were powered sequentially, some secondaries would be powered, and some not, meaning that some would be powered by the others, losing power to the outside load.
The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several
electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit,
also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly
placed. As neither of the two circuits rotate, there is no need to make them
round, nor leave any space between one and the other.
Forest: 3231 posts and I doubt if any of your posts is any useful. We are still waiting the answer to your previous post. ByeNo answer. Guess yourself, it's very easy.Besides I'm waiting for original scans of patents, but I guess you are not willing to share,right?
http://rexresearch.com/hooper/horizon.htm (http://rexresearch.com/hooper/horizon.htm)
The writer has classified operationally the three most prominent electric and the three most prominent magnetic fields which we find in nature. They are as follows:
Fundamental Electric & Magnetic Fields (m.k.s. units)
(1) The electrostatic or Coulomb field arising from the presence of charges
Ec = Qr/4·pi·eo·r^3
(2) The motional electric field which acts on charges traveling with velocity V across a magnetic induction Bs. This field is produced by flux cutting and should not be confused with Et arising from flux linking
Em = v x Bs
(3) The electric field Et, in this formula arises from flux linking, or transformer electromagnetic induction discovered by Henry and Faraday. In this field B changes intrinsically with time. A is the magnetic vector potential.
Curl Et = dB/dt
or Et = dA/dt
[.......]
All electromagnetic phenomena applied in electrical technology have, as their fundamental basis, the mutual forces experienced by electric charges, and we have seen that these arise in three ways:
Ec ~ Two charges experience mutual forces in virtue of their positions. This is the electrostatic force of attraction or repulsion.
Em ~ They experience additional forces in virtue of their velocities. Thence arise the forces experienced by a conductor carrying a steady current in a constant magnetic field, the forces between current-carrying conductors, and the induction of en emf in a conductor moving relatively to the source of a magnetic field.
Et ~ They also experience additional forces by virtue of their accelerations, from which arise the induction of an emf by transformer actions, and electromagnetic radiation of energy.
Figuera's device would have to have some kind of coupling (weather soft or hard) for the amplification to take place. i think that since one is increasing and the other is decreasing that the currant is coupled between them and causes the amplification in the secondary.
In Figuera's design, with resistors, you can take the fields down to zero,As Faraday said - It does not matter how the change occurs only that it does. A changing magnetic field or a moving magnetic field which is in effect changing, both expand or contract from a region invoking change. In this case there is no right or wrong persay and the reality of the problem at hand is only limited by our creativity in solving it. There is also the issue of Exergy and absolute change within a system. Many seem overly preoccupied with forcing a transformation through dissipation however a transformation is not exclusive to dissipation the alter ego being accumulation. Explosion-Implosion, Equal yet opposite however in one transformation energy is dissipated and all is lost and in the other transformation energy accumulates and all is gained. It does not matter how the change occurs only that it does, "how" is open to interpretation.
and it would increase the EMF. There is no time lag because there's little to no
reactance, and there's little wasted power because ANY change on the input coils
induces EMF. Well, based on Faraday's law just like Figuera said.
It does not matter how the change occurs only that it does, "how" is open to interpretation.
Flux cutting would require a high magnetic field density that protrudes from the iron and cuts the output coil.
Glenn_FR:If you look at my design and the plot trace (from a simulator) you'll see that the current NEVER inverses.
Good start, looks good [...] just remember a sine/ sine 180 goes below zero and figuera did not[...]
Glenn; [...] i don't see how much voltage you are using, Figueras used 100 volts. I'm currently using 12v in the simulator and on the bench. My bench supply isn't very powerfull, around 4A maximum for the moment - but it avoids overstressing the power transistors that aren't yet on proper heatsinks.The wire on the magnets is around 0.4mm - that makes it about 26awg. I can remove the cores to see if they heat as much. Thanks for the calculator link - very useful.
your amperage is not that high so your steel core is probably the source of your heat problems.
In the link below , you will find a mechanical-tesla-switch( a wheel-with-electrical-contacts ) on page-9, it looks like it would function just like the rotating component in Figuera's-Device, and down near the bottom they explain how the principle would work to achieve overunity.
http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf (http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf)
Or, I wonder if people back then thought it may have been OU, because they could not interpret the output and input currents correctly enough, in order to compare them, or if they had the equipment to accurately do that .
Glenn, the 100V 1A is a reference to Buforn's patent here: https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-constantino-buforn-1914_num_57955.pdf) Although I think he means that hypothetically to prove the point that the ampere-turns and EMF is all that is needed, forfeiting the mechanical torque required in a normal generator.
Actually Hanon, I really appreciate this patent copy, a lot of things make sense now. Like the newspaper clipping claiming atmospheric energy, Buforn clearly defines this as the magnetic energy around the wires, the source of induction. It's an interesting read.
You should read up on a perfect current source, which is impossible, but still, as load resistance increases, voltage increases, and so does power out. All you need is a source of current with zero internal resistance.
3. I have no comments to make on NN or NS. I have made both of them to work and I'm aware that for SN-NS-SN kind of thing to work you need a different geometry and the straight line does not permit it. If you go back to the earlier pages there are people admitting that identical poles produce zero volts.Ramaswami, sorry man, but it does work, and quite well. Even in a simulator.
What rotates the rotating-switch-unit, I cannot see a motor mentioned in the device, or even any permanent-magnets to cause a homopolar-motor effect .
could those winding's be considered a load because they are not yet the temporary-magnet that the electrical-current turns them into.
I will also try two identical pickups wired as in the diagrams posted the other day : "[SN]-(SN)(NS)-[NS]"
() = electromagnet; [] = pickup coil
Glenn, there should be a modify button up at the top right of your post, next to the quote button. It may disappear after some time.Hi Antijon,
[...]
Either way, I'm going to say, maybe just try using two independent, matching transformers. Should be able to produce inductive effects without negative effects of primaries acting on each other.
Either way, I'm going to say, maybe just try using two independent, matching
transformers. Should be able to produce inductive effects without negative
effects of primaries acting on each other.
SOME PEOPLE in this forum still think it acts as a regular transformer, i'm glad you have it after ONLY 2 post. now i see why people with a working device don't hardly post because i am sick trying to convince people the simplicity of it all as was passed to me. it's really simple it's a variable inductance magnetic amplifier that amplify's the incoming signal with two variable currant primaries opposite from one another.[/size]this forum needed another sane person (to many bone heads)
Why No one has succeeded after 200 pages..
1. It is an enormously expensive device to construct in the way it is described. So a simple study will not do but practical hands on experimentation must be conducted and then the difficulties of doing this kind of experiement will be known. With his knowledge, reputation, skill and resources it took Figuera about 6 years to do this device.
Yes but Figuera lived in a remote area far from the few electrical companies at the time. He had no access to the electrical resources we have today.
That's why he had to use cumbersome switching in his device, where today we should be able to do it electronically.
It's an extremely simple device and only expensive if you don't want to scrounge around for used parts.
I use the laminations from old tv or MOT xformers which can be gotten from yard sales,second-hand shops etc. I use my chop saw to cut off the
center of the "E" (10 at a time) that leaves me with a "C" for winding the coils.
But yes, if you figure in your time it could be very expensive. Figuera has already done most of the work for us, so instead of 6 years we should
be able to have one going in 6 months.
Back in the 80's tv satellite systems were selling for $10,000. I built a good working system for about 3 or 4 hundred dollars.
Had to make my own 12 ft. dish with feed horn & LNA, & put together a satellite receiver kit.
The point of all this is to be more innovative by using your head.
We shouldn't be trying to built a 5000 watt system right from the start. Concentrate on a small cheaper system to prove the concept theory first
and then we can work on a system to power our house.
cheers
[size=0px]You'll never get this thing working at 16 hz. Thats why it's consuming so much current and lots of sparks.[/size][size=0px][size=0px]If you're using 60hz, then speed up your commutator to 3600 rpm.[/size][size=0px][size=0px] I or some one else will come out with a drive circuit to eliminate that sparking commutator.[/size][size=0px][size=0px]So just hang in there to see what happens.[/size]
I would agree and there are a few issues with electronic switching. First the mechanical commutator makes the next resistor connection then breaks the last resistor connection. This implies for some period of time before the break both resistor terminals are conducting or shorted through the brush. Also, during this time the positive connection of the source is also conducting through the brush to the respective resistor terminals.
AC:
Thanks for the post. You make it all sound so complicated, but yes electronic circuits can look simple enough but when you try them out you can get many of
these transient problems as you just mentioned.
Reading Figuera's notes, he describes well how a regular dynamo works by a changing magnetic field.
He is emulating the performance of these machines by using high power resistors to vary this field. He didn't have the resources which we have today.
So he simulated a stepped sine wave with all these resistors. You will notice that only a varying positive voltage is applied to the coils.
So here is my intention on how to simulate his version.
I'll be using 2 2n3055's to replace all those resistors. These things can vary the current the same way the resistors do,only in a more continuous manner.
The collectors will go to the +12volts and emitters to the primary coils.
The transistors will be biased so that, with no source voltage they'll each be drawing 10 amps.
One of the power transistors will be driven by a smaller one which will be wired to invert the incoming pulse.
The source of these pulses will just be a 60hz oscillator putting out a sine wave.
Here's how it works:
On the positive portion of the sine wave, the first 2n3055 will be turned on MORE creating a current of perhaps 20 amps while the 2nd 2n3055 because
of the inverter, the current will drop down close to zero.
On the negative portion of the sine wave, the first 2n3055 will go back down to 10 amps while the 2nd one, because of the inverter will
increase it's current to 20 amps.
There you have it. 60hz being such a low frequency, shouldn't have any of those transients.
Cheers
Glenn,Thanks for the info about the induced coil. I have read the patents that I've been able to find (mainly thanks to you), and I think that I have understood what was done bu Figuera. I'm working with just one set of coils for the moment to see how everything fits. Figuera used a commutator and resistors to acheive his two inversly varying magnetic fields. I'm experimenting to find the most efficient (and simplest) means of doing this with today's electronics. Efficient meaning not having banks of resistors getting hot. The fact that the coils should be driven 'in one direction only' and possibly with an idle current are design constraints that are not easy to meet with simple electronics. To make it more complicated I've added my own design constraint to run everything from 12v. Aiming for OU is one goal, aiming for something practical is another.
I also recommend to study the patents to find most of the details.
Sorry I do not understand your inverter circuit. It seems just a one step driver instead of the 7 steps used by Figuera. I do not know if it could work fine or not. Anyway I think it does not include a base DC current for the minimun current always present in both inducers.
I would recommend to use a core in the induced coil
Very complicated electronics is not needed. An ordinary step down transformer with diode bridge at out put of transformer and split primary connected to diagonal opposite ends of two primaries with the ends being connected to diode bridge will do the trick of both primaries having different current flowing in them always.
If 2,5 qnd 2,5 are 5 how is 5 and 5 =5?Look at the peak to peak voltage. Peak to peak voltage of 2.5V AC is 5 volts. DC pulse of 5V is 5V peak to peak. It's the same thing. Look, the coils don't care whether it's AC or DC, it just sees a current moving in one direction or the other.
When the source is split into two completely separate magnets with the same 5 volts feeding both in opposition the difference would be the total when it is in motion shifting the fields over the Y. Thats without even accounting for the number of lines being compressed at the point where the two fields collide shortening the distance of movement needed to have induction result in the Y.It doesn't work like that in reality. Magnetic lines don't just leap out of iron and produce "flux cutting" on coils. The reason why is because iron has such a higher permeability than air, it requires a lot of energy to to push the lines out. And this also creates a lot of heat in the iron... say induction heating? If you want to go with that model, good luck.
And this is it in a nutshell. In every simulation or idea I've tried to recreate the waveforms, it always ends up as two waves 180 degrees in time. It's AC voltage. Like in the first image, I have 4 different sources pulsing at different times, but the effect is that the current travels up and down the resistor. The resistor is just a current divider used to produce two clean sine waves.
Continuing with my earlier Post I have pmed Hanon on how to use the identical poles.
Using Identical Poles to Generate Output
You can use NN poles and get results. But not as in the Bucking coil.
You should surround the Core with Square coil. Coil must be wound CCW-CW-CCW-CW and many such cores must be placed on the iron core. You see here all the coils are in replusion mode but they would work. Iron should be a square with 90' and coil must be wound on all four arms as CCW-CW-CCW-CW so that all poles are identical and insert this to the iron core surrounded by plastic and you have output in the output coils.
In between the NN coils what happens is that the flux is three times more than the flux between opposite poles. But the flux dissipiates in all directions. So to capture it you need many coils of the type square coil type. In the Square coil also you will have identical poles facing each other but it works. But why it works is not known to me. If it works we accept it. But it is very expensive to do it.
If you want me to draw this and send this to you I can do it. You will see that you will get immediate results. If you want to draw power from identical poles, use identical poles to get the power and if you want to draw power from opposite poles use opposite poles. This seems to be the law of nature.
Now there is a difference between using AC and Pulsed DC..
Pulsed DC is approximately Four times more powerful than AC. So it will draw in more current which will create more magnetism but more heat.
Identical poles have three times the flux between the opposite poles.
Therefore using pulsed DC and identical poles you can generate about 12 times more output than that you would get by using AC and opposite poles. This is the reason of higher output that earlier efforts were focussed on pulsed DC.
But it is very violent and can lead to runaway currents and burning of wires very easily. It can draw lot of current. It costs more money to build pulsed DC based units.
Controlling AC on the other hand is easier and safer. When you realize that output is not based on input but is based on
a. The amount of iron used and the magnetic field strength of iron core
b. Thickness of output wire
and c. number of turns of output wire
you look at stability, sustainability and safety of operations. All these are present in the NS-NS-NS type of thing and any output sufficient to meet our needs can be obtained. In July 2013 had we used much more thicker wires and used them to create lesser number of turns the problems of excessive voltage that made it unusable would have been immediately solved. The Earth batteries were there any way to provide whatever amperage we needed.
Even without the Earth batteries higher output is available by using the Figuera device. I hope that some other people will now test the Figuera device now since the problem of commutator is solved and how to reposition the resistors is explained.
Unfortunately well trained scientists minds are put inside a cage where they can only think that input contributes to output. That is not the case really. Secondly you all appear to avoid iron core and iron rods which are much more magnetisable than laminated transformer iron. Higher the magnetic field higher the eddy current and higher the waste seems to be the normal dictum. But contrary to that if you use higher magnetic field strength and very thick output wires and thinner input wires and iron rods with gaps the loss due to eddy currents is not an issue. Connecting a lot of step down transformers in series for this reason would not yield the desired result. The material of the core matters.
I think I have explained every thing needed for this device to be replicated by any one interested. If there is a need to post I will post.
when an electromagnetic field colasps, it results into changing of polarity of voltage NOT Polarity Of Magnetic Poles so using an High Voltage DC that is rapidly swithed on and off with either Mosfet or Mechanical Commutator to Power the Ramaswami transfore will work with added benefit of safe looping of the Nramaswami TrafoGen as the back EMF from the Split Multifilar Windings can easily be collected and be used to charge the either super cap banks and or install batteries bank being used to power the inverter being used to powèr the voltage multiplier that power the either Optical Switch or Mechanical Switch been used to Pulse the System.
NOTE: Substantial ount of Radiant Energy can only be colleteod at high frequency of an 'Harvester' and you must use an High Voltage Fast Switching Diode Bridge with the cap.
However, High Frequency with Multifilar Capacitorlike Winding is the MAJOR KEY to ABSORBING EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY THE FREE ELECTRICITY IN THE AIR.
The higher the frequency, the lower the PRIMARY driving power in Watt becomes and the higher the available Radiant Energy becomes too.
Just make sure your harvester is at least a Bifilar Coil.
If you wanna still.use AC which is ofcourse cheaper to get directly from a DC Powered Inveter, I will recomend making an High Frequency Variable inverter Oscillator or Convert or HACK your present inverter by replacing the cbb capacitor used to get the 50 or 60hz AC outputs with one that will allow for higher pulse rate
and use a Pontentieter of higj resistance to control the frequency remember that every Trafo have it limit to frequencies!!!
Nigeria says hello to everyone.
Continuing with my earlier Post I have pmed Hanon on how to use the identical poles.
Using Identical Poles to Generate Output
You can use NN poles and get results. But not as in the Bucking coil.
You should surround the Core with Square coil. Coil must be wound CCW-CW-CCW-CW and many such cores must be placed on the iron core. You see here all the coils are in replusion mode but they would work. Iron should be a square with 90' and coil must be wound on all four arms as CCW-CW-CCW-CW so that all poles are identical and insert this to the iron core surrounded by plastic and you have output in the output coils.
In between the NN coils what happens is that the flux is three times more than the flux between opposite poles. But the flux dissipiates in all directions. So to capture it you need many coils of the type square coil type. In the Square coil also you will have identical poles facing each other but it works. But why it works is not known to me. If it works we accept it. But it is very expensive to do it.
If you want me to draw this and send this to you I can do it. You will see that you will get immediate results. If you want to draw power from identical poles, use identical poles to get the power and if you want to draw power from opposite poles use opposite poles. This seems to be the law of nature.
Now there is a difference between using AC and Pulsed DC..
Pulsed DC is approximately Four times more powerful than AC. So it will draw in more current which will create more magnetism but more heat.
Identical poles have three times the flux between the opposite poles.
Therefore using pulsed DC and identical poles you can generate about 12 times more output than that you would get by using AC and opposite poles. This is the reason of higher output that earlier efforts were focussed on pulsed DC.
But it is very violent and can lead to runaway currents and burning of wires very easily. It can draw lot of current. It costs more money to build pulsed DC based units.
Controlling AC on the other hand is easier and safer. When you realize that output is not based on input but is based on
a. The amount of iron used and the magnetic field strength of iron core
b. Thickness of output wire
and c. number of turns of output wire
you look at stability, sustainability and safety of operations. All these are present in the NS-NS-NS type of thing and any output sufficient to meet our needs can be obtained. In July 2013 had we used much more thicker wires and used them to create lesser number of turns the problems of excessive voltage that made it unusable would have been immediately solved. The Earth batteries were there any way to provide whatever amperage we needed.
Even without the Earth batteries higher output is available by using the Figuera device. I hope that some other people will now test the Figuera device now since the problem of commutator is solved and how to reposition the resistors is explained.
Unfortunately well trained scientists minds are put inside a cage where they can only think that input contributes to output. That is not the case really. Secondly you all appear to avoid iron core and iron rods which are much more magnetisable than laminated transformer iron. Higher the magnetic field higher the eddy current and higher the waste seems to be the normal dictum. But contrary to that if you use higher magnetic field strength and very thick output wires and thinner input wires and iron rods with gaps the loss due to eddy currents is not an issue. Connecting a lot of step down transformers in series for this reason would not yield the desired result. The material of the core matters.
I think I have explained every thing needed for this device to be replicated by any one interested. If there is a need to post I will post.
Just some thoughts about the movement of the two magnetic fields. Both fields move and collide in the the exact point where they find their equilibrium point: this point is where their magnetic forces are equal. Let´s say that the magnetic force is directly proportional to the current intensity (Intensity) and is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (d) from the electromagnets (many Physical Laws show a behavior of dissipation proportional to (1/d^2) ). Then simplifying, the magnetic Force could be represented by: F = K · Intensity / (d^2) , where K is a constant
The point where both fields (1 and 2) move and find the equilibrium point is where there is balance of their forces : F1 = F2 . Also we know that the distance from one electromagnet (d1) plus the distance from the other electromagnet (d2) is the total distance between both electromagnets (L). If we have in one electromagnet a Intensity1= 7 amperes and in the other a Intensity2 = 1 ampere then:
K · Intensity1 / d1^2 = K · Intensity2 / d2^2 -> d1 = sqrt(Intensity1/Intensity2)·d2
d1 + d2 = L -> d2 = L / (1 + sqrt (Intensity1/Intenst2))
Now my question: if the induced core is a low reluctance metal , Could it have a force decreasing proportionally to 1/d^2 ?, or, May it have a magnetic force almost independent to the distance, as consequence of the low reluctance medium? In this second case the movement of the field lines will be very small because the equilibrium point will not be dependent of the distance to each electromagnet. May we need a kind of medium with a little higher reluctance to increase the lines movement?
Is the Figuera Device a Transformer ? (NO)
does it act like a transformer? (NO)
is it wound like a transformer? (NO)
is it like or does it act like Rswami device? (HELL NO)
does it amplify ? (YES)
well then how does it amplify ? (by taking the incoming signal and amplifying it)
well how does it do that ? (MAGNETICALLY)
well how does it do that? (by imitating a rotating generator)
but a generator uses two poles and this device uses only one, how is that going to work? (by two opposite opposing electromagnets varied in intensity in a uniform manner keeping constant pressure between them)
if it is not a transformer then what the hell is it ??? ??? ??? ? (A MAGNETIC/SIGNAL AMPLIFIER.)
why is it not a transformer? (because it transforms nothing)
so your saying all it does it Amplify? (YES)
what did you say it was again? (A MAGNETIC AMPLIFIER)
WOW Imagine that !
Hanon and all:
I apologize if any of my posts have caused any discomfort to any one.
oh by mistake many parts of the posts are deleted. My apologies.
Ramaswami device is an improvement over the Figuera device. Small single piece device. Not multiple ones.
The poles are open and a copper plate if placed will absorb the magnetic field coming out of the core and as the polarities are shifting North South always significant current is induced in the copper or Aluminium plate
The rule is that Electricity is induced in a conductor subjected to time varying magnetic field.
The current generated is directly proportional to
area of the conductor
thickness of the conductor
intensity of the magnetic field
area of the magnetic field and
mass of the magnetisable core
And
Inversely proportional to the resistance of the conductor.
This is how we get huge amperage in Homopolar Generators where only DC is used. So the Tesla Dynamo Electric machine patent rotates the copper disks. If we are use AC no need to rotate the disks and amperage without voltage will be developed.
If we wind the secondary wire on the core and connect to the two copper plates then significant amperage is developed in the secondary and secondary causes the core to saturate and this causes high voltage to be developed in the secondary again. You can test it if you want to check.
Primary does not need to provide high input. I have succeeded in providing very low inputs 33 watts to be precise and powering lamps for up to 2000 watts but the output was not 2000 watts. Output was able to power 2000 watts lamps.
You have to combine the Dynamo Electric machine and Figuera device or Ramaswami device. Any amount of power can be developed with a small input.
While this thread is focussed on making the Figuera device I see the purpose as providing an easy, simple to replicate, no moving parts no complexity device that can be made to work any where in the world. That also seems to be the over all purpose of the Forum.
Using the above principle it is possible to create 300 amps output easily. But core should be large enough to avoid saturation and heat.
I again apologize if I have caused discomfort to any one.
When one coil is energised 100% and the other is near 0%, the energised coil presents, say, it's N pole to the pickup (induced, secondary, whatever) coil. If that coil has a core, it will take on the opposite magnetic polarity and so you'll have a S facing our electromagnet's N. When you inverse the situation, the powerful N pole is now facing the other end of the pickup core : so the pickup core will reverse it's S-N poles. Induced AC current. Simple.I agree. It's a very simple concept. Unfortunately, I've tried to prove to others here that this is the same action as a simple transformer and generator, or any other generating device, but most here can't understand that, as they don't understand EMF or ampere turns, or Watts, or why a generator has a single B field of one strength but links two circuits of very different Wattages.
Hey Glenn,I agree. It's a very simple concept. Unfortunately, I've tried to prove to others here that this is the same action as a simple transformer and generator, or any other generating device, but most here can't understand that, as they don't understand EMF or ampere turns, or Watts, or why a generator has a single B field of one strength but links two circuits of very different Wattages.
I Found out over a year ago that multiple primaries, positioned PARALLEL to each other physically, multiply the EMF on an output coil. This is essentially a solid state generator, because if we view a generator in operation, we see that it has a changing B field, but also a changing area, or inductive path. As an armature rotates toward it's exciter, the B field increases along with, or due to, the increasing area coupling the two coils.
An exact replica of a generator would be a single generating coil with many exciter coils arranged on it's pole face. If the exciter coils were turned on sequentially from one side to the other, or from a min to max number of coils, it would be literally a solid state generator. But in reality, all that's required is to have the exciters powered by AC, the total B field will be the sum of all, the total inductance will be the sum of all.
So in my opinion, which is unwelcome here, Figuera relied on many parallel primaries to increase the Ampere turns on his secondaries. I have yet to experiment with multiple secondaries, but what the hell, it probably works. But one single secondary definitely works, and this is what I'm basing my plans on.
This is all due to my independent experiments, ignored in this thread except by Randy who encouraged me a year ago. I don't have any data, but if you, or anyone, would like more info on this concept, please let me know. I can even make videos to demonstrate it with real devices... at least, to demonstrate the increase in EMF and plausibility of OU. Again, I have not made a documented OU transformer, but it's plausible.
Everyone else, yes I said transformer. ;) Marathonman, congrats on the working model. Looking forward to some videos in action. ahh, funny thing happened yesterday, lightning struck and it started raining bacon... I guess pigs are flying.
............................. this is why the people that have a working device will not post because NOBODY LISTENS.This would explain why you still post.
....that is where i am today with a two core device with outstanding results and can't wait to build a whole unit.If you don't own a camera what exactly are you trying to download from your phone ??? .........because if your phone had a camera you would own a camera.
.....as for pictures well i don't even own a camera and my phone is cheap as hell so i can't download anything from it even if i tried.
i will though buy a cheap camera when i can and post my core setup and what all else i have just to calm the BS factor arising in peoples head.Because asking a friend or a family member to borrow there smart phone hasn't occurred to you ??? (light bulb moment)
like i said all the info posted since about October or November will get you a working device you just have to decide what is real and what is BS.if you read the last few posts by the members here its pretty obvious they know where the BS comes from.
............. as i have no patients with someone that won't listen.That is the mentality of Dictators.
Core ;
Please go molest your neighbors boy again because i am sick of puke fucks like you distracting this forum.(Paid Misinformant) please go back to your Michael Jackson forum. not impressed !
Im still trying to figure this statement out.
"It doesn't work like that in reality. Magnetic lines don't just leap out of iron and produce "flux cutting" on coils. The reason why is because iron has such a higher permeability than air, it requires a lot of energy to to push the lines out."
So your saying the magnetic field around the earth does not exist because the field lines cant just jump out of the magnet core.We all burned up a long time ago and this is just a dream?Cool
..........I just summarize what seems to be an important key: many parallels primaries seems to interact and seems to get an amplification effect. Therefore it seems we should build more than one set
Quote "In my second post I simply asked Hannon basic questions. At no time did I denounce any idea as "Not Practical", "stupid", "you not listening"....etc, however I did ask probing questions."
how did you know i emailed Hanon last night as i never said anything about that. the only way in the world you could know is you ass holes are intercepting my emails.
NRam, when I look at the picture you provided I have a hard time understanding how you are defeating the Transformer effect. I would imagine your increased secondary output would have a proportional effect on the primary. This would especially be true if traditional induction took place in your coil. A larger output would indicate a larger magnetic field on the secondary. This magnetic field would interact with the primary coil, if its circuit is closed.
In essence you are still held hostage by Lenz's Law. Also in the picture are you using a solid core or individual cores for the primary and secondary.
-Core
[...]NRamaswami, the circuits are an attempt to get away from using mains electricity. I know that there is already a nice sine wave (well, not even nice, it's so polluted with CPL and other high frequency junk) - I pay far more than enough for it. I want to try using the Figuera technique with a device that will work from 1 or two standard 12v batteries. That's what the circuits are all about. Thankyou, in any case, for sharing.
I see that people here are building circuits and looking at scopes and making a lot of circuits that I do not understand any thing.
The thing is so simple.
[...]
This can be partly offset by using high voltage input. This is the principle involved.
So, with a bullet-proof jacket and steel helmet against the flack, here goes...
NRamaswami, the circuits are an attempt to get away from using mains electricity. I know that there is already a nice sine wave (well, not even nice, it's so polluted with CPL and other high frequency junk) - I pay far more than enough for it. I want to try using the Figuera technique with a device that will work from 1 or two standard 12v batteries. That's what the circuits are all about. Thankyou, in any case, for sharing.
Glenn
Sir:Generally I was referring to the Lenz's effect experienced when a transformation of any kind occurs.
My knowledge on what is a Transformer effect is low.
To the contrary if we use coils to rotate current on Two solenoid electromagnets a rotating magnetic field is created in the iron core. If another coil is placed in connection with and in between the opposite poles of the two electromagnets the magnetic waves travel through the secondary and thus they cause an induction and therefore the necessity of movement is avoided.True, but when the core are individual, meaning not physically connected, the induction is generally week. Induction is stronger when the Primary and Secondary cores are mated, much like a common transformer. Induction is increased the closer the Induced core is to the Inducer core and vise versa. In a generator the clearance is very small, increase this clearance and output is diminished. This has been my experience.
I have checked the two primary coils connected in series and connected in parallel. For a single secondary coil not much of a change is visible but when more than one is involved the increase in output is visible. We can also explain it that due to the increased voltage of the secondary the amperage also increases and this is the reason for it.This is where I get lost. If you add more coils to your secondary you must be increasing consumption on the Primary coil.
So two primaries have 120 kgms of magneized iron core. The primaries are connected in parallel. The current moves from the center as you can see to the outside and then moves towards the center where secondary coil is placed. Because the central coil is placed NS-NS-NS and the central coil is smaller in a hour glass shape. the magentic field strength of 120 kgs of iron of primaries focus on 30 kgs of iron on the central coil and so central magnetic field strength is higher. 120 kgms of Magnetic field strength is compressed to megnetise 30 kgms of iron. Therefore the magnetic field strength in the central coil is higher.I am trying to visualize the central coil being NS-NS-NS. Does that mean you have three separate cores?
When a secondary coil is wound like this and placed in between two primary layers and connected to the central secondary coil the voltage of the secondary coil increases. When the voltage increases amperage also increases. This happens without drawing additional power from the mains. The increase in the secondary placed between two primary layers appear to me to come from electrostatic induction rather than electromagnetic induction.
Hanon has indicated to me that in the Figuera 1908 device the input was 100 volts and 1 Amp and output was 300 amps and possibly 67 volts to account for the 20000 watts output described by BuForn.Depends how you interpret that paragraph in the patent. It is actually from the Buforn patent if I recall. Buforn was just theorizing and was attempting to make a point. If my memory serves he doesn't state he uses 100 volts @ 1amp in his generator. I believe he stated that in reference to reducing losses in a traditional generator. Doing that a generator that is feed with 100 volts @ 1 amp could produce 300 volts @ x amps. I will go back and take a look.
1. Core is a continuous core of iron rods hammered in. Figuera device is based on Geometrical shape of the central coil being smaller than the primary coils. Smaller in length and diameter. The primary coils move the magnetic field towards the central core and move it away much like the clapping of hands. The device that you show in your picture has nothing whatever to do with Figuera or Buforn devices. I request you to study the patents again and look at the drawings again and understand it.I respectfully disagree with you, my work is based on Figuera's principle and not the patent drawing. If I recall correctly from an article he stated:
2. Let me explain it like this.. You have two primary coils producing induction as indicated above with the secondary in the middle. primaries are connected in paralllel and secondary is separate. Now as per your theory Secondary can have up to COP= 0.95 which is common in transformers I guess. I think you would agree.I was interested in how you are powering your Primary coils. Are you using Mains @ 220 volts? I recall you stating you also pulsed your coils. What mechanism did you use to pulse the coils and at what voltage. Did you use a mechanical chopper?
Now visualize this P1-S1-P2-S2-P3-S3-P4 For Four primaries connected in parallel you have three secondaries instead of two secondaries.
If you separately connect the P1-S1-P2 COP=0.95
If you separately connect the P3-S3-P4 COP=0.95
The square device that you show in your picture as a transformer device shows that device is not a Figuera device. That has nothing to do with Figuera concepts.I personally don't classify a Figuera's device based on what it looks like. Read my comment above regarding the refrigeration compressors. What classifies a device should be its principle of operation and not it's appearance. But is cool, judging by looks really is human nature and it just show's your human.
I believe to attain Overunity in any Electromagnetic power generator, lens law Must FIRST OF ALL be subdued in it design.I'm OK with that statement, and it's probably pertinent here for the Figuera device.
One way to easily a achieve that according to Tesla is via Clockwise and Counterclockwise coil winding style as well Series connected Multifilar coil as Ramaswami MEG shows.I'm not sure that I understand the CW / CCW thing for electromagnet coils - or is it the same as bifilare ?
[...]But that isn't what Figuera did. I'm not saying that it won't work (I'm even fairly OK with the statement) - but it ISN'T the Figuera device.
So it means the syst can be looped. All is needed apart from killing lenz, winding Multifilar Primaries is An HIGH VOLTAGE HIGH FREQUENCY AC DRIVEN PRIMARY.
[...]
My view: Stop postulating new designs and just return to the patent design.
A user has posted this in another forum:
"Hola,
Pensaba que después de tanto tiempo ya quedaba claro que son necesarias más de un grupo de bobinas, todas interactúan unas con otras
Cuando le pongo carga a las bobinas recolectoras o las conecto en corto circuito, las bobinas recolectoras cercanas tienen un incremento de voltaje de un 20 a un 30 por ciento.
Esto demuestra que se puede reutilizar Lenz y que todas las bobinas interactúan unas con otras"
-------------------
I am interested in posting into overunityresearch forum. I think that to be a member there you need an invitation. If a user read this and he may give me an invitation I will be very grateful. If so, please PM with the instructions. Thanks
Dare Diamond:May I have the link to the new thread Sir?
I will answer your Lens Law question in the new thread. Thanks
Sir..
Saw your post and have some time to respond..
I do not know any thing about Refrigeration or quite frankly speaking on any Electrical device. I'm a Lawyer and by some invisible force that kicks me that I have got in to this field.
I have tried to learn Electronics and this soldering thing got me such an allergy I have given it up. So if you say that the square device uses Figuera Principles it might well be and I do not know how your device works and so I have to agree with you particularly for I do not have any knowledge.
I used 220 volts AC from Mains. As far as I'm aware pulsed DC means simply one thing. If you give AC through a diode it produces half waves pulsed DC and if you give it through a diode bridge it will give full wave diode bridge..
BuForn is correct in saying that the Primaries do the job and the secondary coil just sits there if I understand the translation correctly. I do not read spanish and I had a hard time requesting people to get it translated. Especially the last patent of BuForn.
I built a commutator, a custom built one as prescribed by Figuera design and it was not satisfactory. It created a lot of sparks when it ran fast and so the Electrical engineering student working with me made a step down gear to reduce the speed and we had to make it touch three points at one time to reduce the spark but it still had sparks at one contact place. So we gave up.
I have tried to use the FW diode bridge at 220 volts and it drew so much of current that the circuit braker tripped. So I do not use pulsed DC. I have tested it with 50 volts 16 amps step down transformer but the efficiency was low and so I gave it up. We have seen higher the voltage better is the performance. And when the coils are connected in parallel better is the performance.
My understanding is fairly limited on theory and so if what I write is nonsensical just simple plain ignore it as the blabbering of an ignorant person. I'm not a subject matter expert.
I believe that when a coil is wire is looped around an iron core and current is passed electromagnet is created. The current is also present in the iron rods. This current is called Eddy current. This current is more if the magnetic field strength in the core is higher. So current can co-exist in iron rods along with magnetism. If you want to check this test the rods with a tester and you will see that the rods have current. Be careful and put on your rubber shoes and gloves and do not get in to any shock. Do not test this with DC for if you are suffer an accident DC will now allow you to withdraw your hand but AC will allow you to withdraw your hand and you can survive. I hope you are aware of these things. So yes current and magnetism exist together in iron rods.
The thing is this. You can make a given core a strong electromagnet or a weak electromagnet by controlling the current or by controlling the Ampere turns ( Number of turns per unit length). For the same current and same Ampere turns a smaller mass of Iron gets saturated but if you add more iron the magnetism is reduced. To reduce core saturation add more iron. That is the simple formula.
Ok So we have it here.
What is magnetism..We do not know much..
What is a permanent magnet.. When DC current is sent in the coils of wire the material becomes a permanent magnet. Depending on the combination of the material used the Permanent magnet may be a strong permanent magnet or weak permanent magnet. I'm also told that if we sent AC also through steel rods, steel will become permanent magnet always and to remove the magnetism it must be heated beyond the Curie Temperature ( what the heck is that? I do not know really) or we must provide current and bring down the voltage slowly using a Variac.
Soft iron rods are those that will become an electromagnet only when current is sent and will lose the magnetism the moment the current is cut off.
What is the difference between Permanent magnet and Electromagnet. Permanent magnets do not like electromagnets and oscillate violently if we keep them in our hands and move towards electromagnet. Some how this permanent magnet thing which is an inert lifeless thing knows that an electromagnet is present and oscillates in our hand. It does not like to be moved towards an electromagnet. How the heck does it know that it is being moved towards an Electromagnet and why it does not like it.? I do not know..But this is how a permanent magnet behaves. So do magnets have life? We do not know. Permanent magnets also do not show any eddy current..Only Electromagnets show Eddy current. Permanent Magnet is cool to touch. Electromagnet is hot. How do I know? Without knowing any one of these things and the risks involved I used to stand on the wooden floor we have made and used to take the rods from inside the core by empty hand..God was so kind to me that I did not have any shocks for I was standing on the wood always. My driver tested it with tester and we were shocked oh my God Rod has current..Rod has heat and Rod has Magnetism..all in one place..This is the electromagnet.
So what exactly is magnetism? We do not know. Some very knowledgeable clients atttempted to teach me what the heck is Magnetism..I asked them hey you convert this rod to Permanent Magnet, Strong Magnet and Weak Magnet and Strong Electromagnet and weak electromagnet..The knowledgable clients did not know these practical things..So people do not know.
As I understand it, magnetism is like a gas. Same amount of core can have higher magnetism and can be saturated and can have lower magnetism.
You can compress gas and fill it up in a cylinder. The same gas can be given to a ballon and the balloon will become very big and the density of gas inside is so low that the balloon will starting floating in air. So we can think that the magnetism is like a gas.
Now this gas like Magnetism some how enters the iron rods when current is sent through the wires looped around it and a small amount of current is sufficient to create magnetism in a large amount of iron. This magnetism appears to come from air. Because apart from wire and current we do not have any thing else for this magnetism to come suddenly. It cannot come from another star. For we know Air is here and we also know that air has electrical charges. We call it static electricity..
Now because the magnetism is like a gas, it can be compressed and decompressed. If you provide a two primaries which current first like this
P1------>Y coil<---------P2 with the direction of rotation of current being same the situation is NS-NS-NS in all three cores. Ok..
Now if you make the Y coil secondary smaller than the primary coils the magnetism of both the primary coils each of 60 kgm enters the secondary of 30 kgm. So now we have magnetism compressed in the secondary coil.. Here the density of the magnetism becomes higher. Text books say that the strength of the magnetic field or saturation of the magnetic core or some thing like that but essentially it is a case where the density of the magnetism is higher. Let us say about 4 times higher than in the primary P1 and P2.
Now I gave you the example P1-S1-P2 Here we have primary current first moving like this ------>S1<------ and then they move like this
<------S1--------->
I think you would agree with me on this. When this happens the concentrated magnetism in S1 is weakened. So S1 is subjected to time varying magnetic field strength. Or the magnetism in S1 is made stronger and weaker. Electricity is induced when a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field is the rule of Electromagnetic Induction. We see that it is correct for secondary produces current. Connect the secondary to load lamps and lamps light up.
Again look at this The only thing that is done in P1 and P2 is for current move like this -----> and like this<------. That is all P1 and P2 does..
Now if you put P3 and P4 like this again and they do the same thing you have a similar situation and we will call the secondary placed there as S3..So S3 also produces a current.
But if you place all of them like a Train P1-S1-P2-S2-P3-S3-P4 . You see now the S2 gets magnetism increased and decreased. We need not provide any additional current for this in P1, P2,P3,P4..
This is some thing that you cannot agree and will not agree unless you do the experiment as indicated above. You will tell me where is this gas coming from in S2 unless we supply additional current..No need to supply additional current here.
Now forget your text books, forget your theories and listen to this dummy and do the test like this and connect the secondaries in series and connect the primaries in parallel and you will know. Please measure your readings without the S2 being present and with S2 being present as indicated. Any one any where can test these things. Primary does not require additional input to generate magnetism in S2 and hence additional output from S2.
This is how simply I can explain it. I apologize that I'm writing like this but this is the truth.
When Buforn says he has current and magnetism he refers like me ( He is also a Patent Attorney like me..Aha what a coincidence) to the Rods carrying Heat, as well as current as well as Magnetism..What a wonder of the world you see. It is so simple really. You need to create a large train like thing to get this magnetism thing to get in to iron. Most strangely if the wire has thick insulation more current is produced in the secondary and more current is drawn in the primary..No one talks about this except Daniel McFarland Cook in his 1871 Patent.
Is this a violation of Law of Conservation of Energy..No. The Law to be applied here is the Law of conservation of Energy for open systems. There is no violation of that law. Law of conservation for closed systems does not apply here. why? Neither Energy can get inside nor energy can get outside of a closed system. Here Magnetic poles are open.
Incidentally in your device Magnetism will leak enormously at the edges of the square. Magnetism likes to leak out of any system.
This is all I know..Please I beg you to understand that I do not know much..I cannot write about the improvements I have made to these concepts let us say improvements of dummy..but they are so commonsense.
I do not understand how Lenz law first comes if there is no secondary. I can tell you how to defeat Lenz law in a single core solenoid easily as I have already done it. That is a non issue really but Lenz law comes only if there is a secondary. Not otherwise.
I apologize if I have miscommunicated or hurt you in any way without intending to do so. Please I'm not trained in this subject and I do not know much about any thing. So I can only tell you what I have observed.
..I think people do no read this thread any more..
Regards
Ramaswami
That is a non issue really but Lenz law comes only if there is a secondary. Not otherwiseQuote
Lenz law even does not need a single coil:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Dw_4GUYyk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Dw_4GUYyk)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU5RVQotz-o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU5RVQotz-o)
Kator01
Two user saying to have success, one in this forum, and one in the spanish forum, are stating the same: more than one single set is required, because sets seems to interact and increase the output.
Both users say that with one set they could not find OU. One user got it with 2 sets and same poles confronted, and the commutator. The other user think that a minimum of 4 sets are required. He also used same poles confronted, but he is just using pulsed DC, as the 1902 patent.. Pay attention..!!
I need to build my second set !!
Randy, all the info that I think it is important about same poles confronted is collected in my website, in the Globe Sketch below my username
Good luck
Mr. Perxime
Thanks for the link on the Newman book. I am personally aware copper is highly magnetic but using thick wires would have caused a lot of current to be drawn. that was a problem.
You have now given me another method to use high voltage and low amperage. We will now use this method to drive large copper coil.
We are aware copper is highly magnetic and produces enormous amperage. We did not knowhow to produce high voltage and high amperage output. You have opened my eys. Copper is very expensive and I do not know when I will do the experiments I have in my mind. God alone knows.
Hanon..You are using very thin wires and you must use thicker wires.
at this point you need some results that will recharge your spirit.
Hello fellow OU nuts!
i'm very encouraged by the level of experimentation which is taking place (often quietly in the background!), here and there, at OU.com these days - and not so much thread-hijacking by self-appointed 'experts' and naysayers
i'm currently involved in other experiments of my own at the moment, but i am interested to see what you guys discover about this technique
may i just make a couple of observations here -
- i suspect that Mr Figuera was originally attempting to create an AC generator, without having to construct heavy rotational parts, hence his careful recreation of a look-alike 'sinewave' applied to the coils - at some point he realised that he had stumbled on to something unexpected and interesting in the behaviour of his device
- when Woopy produced his 'landmark' experiment (referenced above), a big deal was made of the fact that the output was very much like a square-wave - however, my immediate reaction to seeing that waveform & his load was that it was probably more a result of 'clipping' by driving LEDs, than by the action of his transformer/coils - do we know if the waveform is approx 3v pk-pk?
Happy experimenting, folks
np
- when Woopy produced his 'landmark' experiment (referenced above), a big deal was made of the fact that the output was very much like a square-wave - however, my immediate reaction to seeing that waveform & his load was that it was probably more a result of 'clipping' by driving LEDs, than by the action of his transformer/coils - do we know if the waveform is approx 3v pk-pk?
Your a retrobate !
I guess you missed the part that was " Free "
And I agree... You're a " retrobate "...
Lol...
I had to look it up in the urban dictionary...
wait until you show a video on LEDs... there won't be any meat left on your bones...
In my last post (Reply #3163 on: February 23) I talked about that my test rig consumed an input current of about 4 mA AC .
The first one that shows a self running working Unit producing 10 Kilowatts wins. If you want to show a one watt unit a lemon battery would do. That runs on its own you see. Let us be modest a 10 kilowatts self runner.Assume that your OU-transformer today have a weight of 100 Kg. Your free output is 17 Watt (if true) [50-33=17]
In a car alternator, the field coils are self powered, with a small portion of the electricity produced by the alternator itself.IMHO I think it does...
Is it validates this answer?
The car alternator is the answer until the Figueras is solved ( as MarathonM pointed out )...
If the pulley was larger it would naturally go faster ( more juice ) as Doug1 had stated it does run itself...
Left alone the diodes ( and they are sturdy enough ) they could power anything in the DC area... if taken out the alt. is 3 phase AC ...which incidentally the alt. could be refigured into a 3 phase motor with the b emf used to control it...
I'm not saying stop the Figueras research...I'm saying use the Alt. until its figured out...or invest in the LEDs and alternator company :-)
Lastly...
Ignacio ... please finish the translation ( the bottom part ) of post #3206
R
Yesterday I was testing the circuit posted by Ignacio on the 26th of february to use half wave in each inducer by rectifying AC with two diodes, post #3185 http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611 (http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg475611/#msg475611) and frankly the shape of each of the two signals is quite good. Minimun current of 0.2 A and maximum current about 2A with 12 volt AC input. I used a resistor joining both diodes outlet in order to assure a minimun current,as base current, during all time.
I attach the pic with one signal. The other signal you may guess it unphased 180°. I post to show it because it is an easy way to implement the input signals. Maybe other people could also use it. Really simple.
Still testing this new driving circuit. So far no important results to share. Output was small but a very good AC shape at 50 Hz.
Yes ! two electromagnets basically occupying the same relative space of the Secondary alternating in time = duel or double strength E field. when one electromagnet is out of sink induction is lost and output drops dramatically.
What why and where.
Those who have a working device should give it a try and see if it work as the resistors array or not. It will just take 5 minutes to build it and test it. I can not say if it work, I can only say that the shape of the signals is really good (see pic attached in my previous post) I also got surprised when I saw the signal in the scope.
You just have to tune the resistor between diodes to achieve a value above zero volts. I think I used around 15 ohms with my set of 2 electromagnets in series in each row. Each row has 5 ohms resistance.
Just trying to help and simplify. Take it or leave it.
madddann;
Yes this is from experience, research and observation of the Figuera device. that is why induction falls off dramatically if one electromagnet is not in sink with the other. two completely separate opposing electromagnets will have a massive e field compared to one electromagnet because of the sharing of same relative space of the secondary, not fiction (FACT).
I am working on my rewinding of my mag amp control. just for reasons of my own i have chosen 400hz cores and 400 hz AC for my mag amps which puts me at around 4 to 5 MS response time being controlled with 60hz timing board which is of course 16.6 MS.
Rswami;
2. The rotary device is a spark creator that creates high voltage and high frequency output and that becomes high amperage as well when it hits a copper sheets and that current is fed to the primary.
Good imagination but not in the Figuera device. i would like for you to please show this forum in the patents this statement. of course you can't because it is not there and is not what the rotary device is used for.i'm not trying to be mean or hateful, and definitely not trying to argue just stating FACTS.
the rotary device is a splitter of currant used to take each electromagnet up and down oppositely in an orderly fashion to maintain the e fields generated by each electromagnet over the relative space being occupied by the secondary. (FACT)
Hanon;You help a lot so keep up the good work.
Hannon I told you you would get it in about six months ,your six months expired some time ago. I am tired of waiting watching oil dry is worse then paint.
That will show cop>1 but is pretty useless for sustained operations.Thank you very much for your answer. You're writing: ""but is pretty useless for sustained operations"" Does this mean that the device produces too much heat, seen from a safety perspective ? What more harmful could happen?
Thank you very much for your answer. You're writing: ""but is pretty useless for sustained operations"" Does this mean that the device produces too much heat, seen from a safety perspective ? What more harmful could happen?
What reply / post should I look in to find a properly connected and working cop> 8 machine even if it produces too much heat?
BR Arne (S e a a d)
¿Es esto lo que decías?
Is this what you said?
Hi hanon,
thanks for posting the results of your tests.
I think I understand the supply circuit you use and the fact that you work with 50 Hz frequency of the normal electricity network in your county.
So, if one full cycle of your 50 Hz mains supply is 0.02 seconds long, then the duration of one pulse hitting your primaries is half of this which is 0.01 seconds.
Is this correct so far?
And do you agree that (in accordance with Farady's law which states that the output depends on the rate of change):
if this pulse was shorter you would get more output?
And do you also agree that such a shorter pulse or quicker rate of change in a proper Figuera setup would be achieved by the commutator being run at a higher speed?
PS I am aware that there are more factors which influence the results but do you agree so far?
... I think that is not only the frequency but beating Lenz out of the system.The law of induction as discovered by Farady dictates that double the frequency will cause double the output.
...High frequency is said to heat up the Iron core ...That is correct
...so the core will have to be much bigger than at lower Hertz.That is not the solution because with a bigger core more input-power is needed to magnetize it and so one meets the same problem again.
NRamaswami:
Al usar 220 volt con series de bobinas (7bobinas) cada bobina, recibe ~ 31.4 volt si usas 110 volt (ok) ~ 15.7 cada bobina, con diodos esta bien.
By using 220 volt with series of coils (7 coils) each coil receives ~ 31.4 volts if you use 110 volt (ok) ~ 15.7 each coil, diode is good.
Question draw:
No Patent will disclose full details.
"...and further more, as the current passes to the magnetic field and
returns from it by the two inlet and outlet ends of the resistor,
and as this field is made up of two series of N and S electromagnets,
...
...
... we have achieved the constant change of the intensity of
the current that flows through the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets
N, and S, and whose current, once that his mission is accomplished in the different
electromagnets, gets back to the source from which it was taken."
A curious quote from the 1914 patent (page 28 in the pdf document with its translation)Quote.and further more, as the current passes to the magnetic field and[/size]returns from it by the two inlet and outlet ends of the resistor, [/size]and as this field is made up of two series of N and S electromagnets,[/size]...[/size]...[/size]... we have achieved the constant change of the intensity of[/size]the current that flows through the magnetic field formed by the electromagnets[/size]N, and S, and whose current, once that his mission is accomplished in the different[/size]electromagnets, gets back to the source from which it was taken."[/size]
Strange. Maybe we have to reconsider some ideas discussed days before.
IMO I think that even if you waste the input current as heat ( 1A at 100 Volts in case of Buforn´s design) I guess you could still get the output to be overunity (20000 Watts, as per Buforn design)
?????
What if you did 36 alterations per minute?
It should still work right? As long as there is a change of state, the period of time it takes shouldn't matter should it?
artv
Marathon,
I think now I get it. Thanks for sharing this info.
I found this link: http://sound.westhost.com/articles/variac.htm (http://sound.westhost.com/articles/variac.htm)
"Unlike any normal transformer, a Variac can be used with DC, although it is nothing more than a "rheostat" or variable resistor"
The best design, at this stage, is the simplest one, so that a greater number of people may build it.
I can just imagine Clemente pounding his head on his desk repeatedly muttering wtf. I need a drink.
I can just imagine Clemente pounding his head on his desk repeatedly muttering wtf. I need a drink.
@Forest, Massive..Thanks for the kind words.One thing you should know is that The Members Of Committee Of 300 hates this forum and the only possible means to keep people away from the hidden secrets which people like you have been exposing o this website is to infiltrate this platform wit there machineries which are trained to provide wrong information.
It really amazes me that in this forum where people are supposed to do experiments and share their results with an open mind. We are not getting that kind of info unfortunately.
Electricity comes in Electromagnetism by oscillating or vibrating a magnet core and coils are wound around the magnetic core. It simply means that as long as the magnetic core is not static but vibrating or oscillating electricity is going to be produced. Whether that Electricity comes from Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter or Earth or Atmosphere we really do not know.
Every atom has a North Pole that contains a part of south Pole and a South Pole that contains a part of North Pole. What we see as Magnetic core is only a conglomeration of billions and billions of Magentic core atmos or molecules. No one knows where the current is coming from and how it is produced. When a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor is the Rule. We need not worry as long as it comes.
Open air cores work with high frequency currents. They work very well if the insulation is thicker. It beats me how thickness of insulator plays a role in electrical output. I do not understand it but that is the observation consistent observation made by me and made by others.
Majority of information about these coils are to put it mildly misleading.
When Wright Brothers wanted to fly an airplane they were considered crazy. Sending a satellite to orbit the Earth was considered impossible. Humanity has done it and once the imaginary impossibility is broken many fast developments have taken place in all fields.
Probably I had been chosen to give this information for I'm in no way connected with science and my growth does not depend on what I write whether it is consistent or not consistent with theories. I really do not know why a few people from other countries sent funds to me and asked me to continue with the Research. It again beats me why Patrick took so much of time to teach me through emails.
In 1871 McFarland Cook made the self oscillating device. But the patent provides patently partial information. It seems to be subtantially edited. I feel that I can just use coils of wire alone and do the device but it is risky. So we need to provide for the safety features.
So this is the real task..
When a conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic field, electricity is induced in the conductor is the Rule. We need not worry as long as it is oscillated continuously. Ultra fast switch on and switch off circuits with capacitors or coils arranged as capacitors must then store the energy for continuous vibrations and the only thing needed is to start it.
I'm really sorry to say that not many here appear to do real experiments or make observations and share results. I do. This is the reason for my confidence.
Oscar:There are many lies being fed to public about Solid Iron and the maximum frequency they can withstand.
I think the Lenz law effect is present in motionless systems in the form of backemf.
Earlier in a solenoid I had a quadfilar primary and a single wire secondary. Both are 4 sq mm. 220 volts and 50 Hz. The quadfilar consumed 220 volts and 15 amps. The secondary produced 300 volts and 10 amps on load. The solenoid was iron core.
I can use a Neon lamp in the primary and use a fast charging and discharging RUN capacitor in series and slow charging and discharging capacitor in parallel along with high ohm resistor in series. Neon lamp is a spark plug and so will increase the frequency. Please provide the ratings for the capacitor in series and capacitors in parallel. I can test the device and find out in practical experiment what is the value of frequency and whether the Lenz effect is there or not.
High frequency is said to heat up the Iron core and so the core will have to be much bigger than at lower Hertz.
Low frequency may not be as efficient as high frequency for the same reasons you provide and Low frequency at 8 to 10 Hz can also resonate with Earths magnetic field and can cause health problems as well. A high voltage line carrying 50 or 60 Hz is said to cause cancers to people living near the line and constructing buildings are prohibited near high voltage power lines for this reason.
Aircraft are said to use 400 Hz but beyond that the wires and the iron core are said to heat up. But I really do not know the answer to this question and I can test and find out high frequency has on input and output. I do practical experiments and then find out and do not accept theoretical statements from any one.
It is possible that high frequency can cause the core to heat up very much and so much larger core may be needed. In so far as the rotary device is concerned if we increase the number of contacts to 100 then for one Revolution per second we have 50 Hz output or for 60 RPM we will have 50 Hz and by increasing the number of contact points or by increasing the Revolutions or by increasing both we can increase the frequency. It is not difficult to do. A spark plug cum resistor in series and a capacitor in series and in parallel combination can do it much more easily.
Please provide the capacitor values and let me test and tell you the results. Thank you. I do not accept theoretical statements and test and find out.
Dude, i don't know if you take medication or you smoked to much weed but you couldn't be any farther from Figuera's device if you tried. but that's ok though.Baby!
and damit that pic is big even for my 46 inch screen, i can just imagine a little screen. but that's ok to though.
take a chill pill and reread all the patents then have a brain storm, then come back swinging.
i'm sure you will get it eventually.
and you are right, fuck that committee. i hope they all taste their own blood from the hands of the people they paid to suppress us.
Why are you struggling so hard while the answer is given by Buforn ? 100V/1A gives 20kW output, the voltage is chosen as required by the amount of coils in series, amperage is chosen as required by the amount of copper
The problem is only huge ampere-turns
That is correct. But please do a small calculation on Iron Ns insulated copper wire costs and you know why we are struggling. Just calculate the amount of turns needed and the copper needed and the iron core needed to avoid over heating and you get the picture.
Essentially the problem is solved but it is high cost solution. There is no low cost solution here.
That is the problem. Buforn shows 6 to 8 Primary modules and the secondaties are to be organised as high amperage and lower voltage units which would have to be stepped up in voltage to be used.
But we need to get a minimum voltage out to cross all these hurdles and the cost of the core cost of insulated copper makes it a nightmare.
It is an expensive system. But a 20 KW generator is not cheap. Problem is it may well be the minimum size device with this method.
Regards
Ramaswami
Sir..
Increasing the frequency of primary..yes I have kind of sorted it out. But how do you reduce the frequency in secondary..
And if the secondary is going to provide 20 or 30 kilowatt as it seems how can you reduce the core size if we use a 200 amps carrying wire. Core has to meet the size requirements hhere to avoid saturation. How can you reduce the core size by increasing the frequency is not yet clear to me.
Even if it is so high frequency is said to heat up core and large core cannot be avoided even if we go to high frequency. Higher output with high frequency ..yes I have to agree but need to test but core size can be reduced is applicale only for small units. Not for large ones..
And I do not think every body can do this..Not easy to master and very confusing.
Otherwise so many would have done it by now..
I intend to make an attempt with 120 amp rated.coils but need to check what kind of core size and coils are needed yo reach about 115 volts..Let me try..As everybody points out you need at least three secondary coils to cross cop>1 situation and then we need to loop it back again and the system should continue to run..This will take some more effort..
What is this thread about? About RamaTrafoGen or about Figuera generator?Hanon, you do not have to hate a fellow human like you over a trivial thing.
Darediamond, I dont like you. You posted a message into my site including your email to SELL your design for some money to people who may read it. It really smelled to scam. Obviously your message is deleted. Just posted this in order everyone may know it and may know you. You are not welcome at my site anymore, particularly trying to sell scam designs in the name of Figuera generator. Scam artist.
Those designs are good enough to have a dedicated thread apart from this one. They are far away from Figuera's patents, and you are just adding noise to this thread.
Bye..bye
Afterall, you are not God the creator of everything.
Because you opened the thread so other experienced people should not share ways to make things better about "your thread topic" again?
I am not God, but at least I am the "creator" of my website I have the "power" to reject your messages asking for money to people. Period. Keep away from me.
Bye ... bye
If you look to the left of the threads... there are advertisers. If you wanted to advertise on Hanon's site you should've asked Hanon...if you wanna advertise here " why " ... you should make your own thread. Were trying to get to the bottom of the " Figuera " if you're NOT then you are just as Hanon said........... A noise ....Talk they say is cheap. Keep up with your odd mentality.
..................the winner of arguments has to prove it!
All the Best
R
A FUCKING SPARK PLUG. what the fuck is wrong with you stupid morons?????? does anyone even read or follow the patents or do you people just pass a tray of crack around and post what ever falls out of your babbling mouths.Mara is that you are pained seeing figuera device being Practically demystified and further beneficially modified and presented by INTELIGEMT people like Mr. Ramaswami, Core etc or you have been converted to a Typical Robotic Zombie or what?
I have NEVER in my life ever heard such stupid shit in my life that has come out of your stupid uneducated mouth's of the people on this forum.
i will not sit by and let you stupid fucking morons ruin what so many have strove to accomplish in this forum of Figuera. trying to spread the truth NOT BULL SHIT to people that want to learn.
I personally hope all you fudge sickle bitches get shot by the fuckers that paid you to do so much damage. when my second device is built, the one i am building now i will send it around the fucking world and i hope all you fudge sickle bitches die.
if it's not Figuera GET THE FUCK OFF THIS FORUM !
Doug, Hanon, Randy and others...... i think it's hopeless.
Talk they say is cheap. Keep up with your odd mentality.
You're pushing yourself into the corner of irrelevance...by your insistence! How odd...Seeking " relevance" on here relates to an haughty heart. Now I see clearly what you guys problem is. What a surprising revelation!!!
Good Luck in your endeavors...this is the last response.
Bye....Bye
ps Yes MarathonMan its " hopeless "
Como pueden comprobar, las personas, intentan alejar de CF. O de los datos buenos.
Las pruebas que hicimos, año 2012, :> Batería de vehículo, inverter, vasos de agua (regular la electricidad) condensador, 4 bobinas de inducción, diodo, (consumo 220volt 0.8amp 176watt )= =) salida 2 taladros de 550watt + lijadora de banda 1200watt, + decapador 500watt, + radial 500watt todo encendido, +cargador de baterías 12volt 10amp.
Salud, se termina tiempo.
As you can see, people, try to stay away from CD. Or the good data.
The tests we did, year 2012:> vehicle battery, inverter, water glasses (regular electricity) condenser, 4 induction coils, diode, (consumption 220volt 0.8amp 176watt) =) output 2 holes 550watt + sander 1200watt band, + stripper 500watt, 500watt + radial everything on, + 12volt 10amp battery charger.
Health, time is up.
Ignacio, I realise that 'vasos' may mean 'pot[entiometer]s' - but the effect is the same: variable resistance.Consumo 176watt.
Batfish
Ignacio..
While may not be pure Figuera your effort...
Hi wistiti,
I think it is a good revision because now it collects the polarity in repulsion North-North, and I think this is an essential part of the device.
I miss the 1908 patent text which was already incluided in the previous version. Also I miss a reference to a current regulator composed by resistors, that it is the one explained in the patent claims. Resistor are easier to understand for newcomers than the magnetic reluctance rheostat, which maybe is an optimization but it is more difficult to understand at first sight. For me the essential key is to swing back and forth the two magnetic fields. The method to do it (resistors, rheostat, capacitor, magnetic amplifier,...) is secondary. There are many possible implementation to get the same result.
Hi hanon what do you think of the last update of the pjkbook?
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf
Look at page 24...
Norman,
I did not get fine results with that circuit. The signals shape was good but I could just get 12 watts output with around 30 watts input. I posted the results in the thread.
Wistiti,
If you look for a post I did on the 4th of July 2005 you will find an attachment with more OU devices with this same concept of polarity in repulsion.
About the Canary Island in those years: Figuera developed his first genetator in Canary Island in 1902. As he worked as engineer for the Spanish State he was moved to Barcelona between 1904 and 1906, I do not remember it fine. His last design in 1908 was done there, where he started his commercial relation with Buforn who continued his work after Figuera's death.
I wonder if it is better to have a core for each coil with a small gap betwin the coil or one unique core for the set of 3 coils...??? Have you a input on this?
Sorry. Post corrected. Post on the 4th of july of 2015, not 2005 as I wrote, jeje
Curiously I did the same last year in New Year Eve when I sent a message to some friends saying Happy New Year 2005. One of them answered me: "I think it was a good year" :D :D
hanon posted some pages back some pics.attached his original and modified. if we do like this?
DIS-INFORMATION!!!!!
LIES!!!!!!
DO NOT FOLLOW THEM!!!
THE WORKING CONFIGURATION IS CCW >> CW>>CCW .....etc
Tesla never beat Lenz with same pole configuration.
Anyone can start Punching me as he or she pleases.
THE TRUTH MUST ALWAYS REIGN.
We're sorry your call is very important to us.All our operators are busy at this time.Please stay on the line and the next available operator will assist you.The current wait time is 100 years. Please enjoy the worst music we could find while you wait.
I dont care who you are thats funny in any language.It would be even funnier with the right accent. Cmon Hannon admit it.
forestDo you think about one pole only ?
how much poles we use in current generators? example permanent magnet generator. how much poles of each magnet we use?
The one person I respect in this thread is Mr. Antijon who spoke the truth that the primaries when given in parallel will have an amplifying effect on the output. I was aware of the same having done many experiments.I think magnetic radiation can be prevented by using aluminium foil tape on the Device somehow or can it not?
The only pieces information that is truthful in the Figuera patent description is that variation of magnetic field strength is sufficient and rotation is not needed and the not so clear image of the electromagnets. Rest of the information is misleading. The output voltage of 550 voltage disclosed in 1902 is also correct.
I do not intend to post or reply here. Simple fact is that the output voltage and amperage must be in excess of input voltage and amperage and it is easily achieved by using thin primaries with high resistance and thick secondaries with lot of turns. The output voltage has to be higher than the input voltage.
Even if I slog it out here due to electromagnetic radiation problems this is not going to be a common device. I intend to work on an Earth battery and no longer going to do this. It is very unfortunate but no one wants to live near high electromagnetic radiation fields. The whole device needs to be put inside the Earth for it to be accepted for common usage.
Thanks to all who responded either positively or negatively.
My 2 cents worth:
It has occured to me that these effects may only be present in large coils. This is something which Joseph Newman has noticed.
The reason is that coils have a negligible resistance, so a huge coil can be driven with very little current.
Is there any indication anywhere of the SIZE of Figuera's coils? - other than vague newspaper reports.
darediamond
noone was talking about it is TRUTH OR LIE OR DISINFORMATION. what i wanted to show that electromagnet has 2 poles. why should we use only 1 if it has 2? :)
My 2 cents worth:
It has occured to me that these effects may only be present in large coils. This is something which Joseph Newman has noticed.
The reason is that coils have a negligible resistance, so a huge coil can be driven with very little current.
Is there any indication anywhere of the SIZE of Figuera's coils? - other than vague newspaper reports.
NRamaswami:
"High amperage comes only with high voltage."
There you go again with your total nonsense. My 12 volt 2000watt inverter takes 166 amps from my battery.
Never mind studying electronic theory, just stick with electrical!
Cliff; "Been doing a lot of thinking about this thing and just wondering why Cf chose such
a high voltage of 550 volts when he could have tested it at 115 volts using only 2 units.
I strongly believe that the higher voltage is the key to the whole thing.?"
Figuera's test as you say were done long before his final device. and you and you person below you should know Buforn spilled the beans about the voltage which is 100 volts @ 1 amp. it could even be an average through one cycle..... who knows. the device can be made to reach what ever voltage and amperage you want, it's not set in stone.
one thing everyone has to consider is that once the primaries are at voltage there needs to be some amount of magnetic field (Capacitance) in the primaries in order to feed Part G when shoved out of the secondary in the declining phase. i could be wrong but if the wire was to big (less windings) wouldn't their be less inductive kick to the Part G for storage.
another thing people are failing to realize is that once this thing is powered up and running that part G becomes the power supply when looped back to it's self feeding the primaries regulating the currant as it spins through reluctance in the core of part G.
if one wanted to make this thing switch with transistors all you have to do is use PNP's on the positive side to mimic rotation as long as they overlap in a make before break fashion. if the transistors are on the other side the inductive kickback from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the primary will be blocked from feeding part G and therefore it will not be self sustaining.
Hanon;
I am enjoying watching you bang your head against the table. i know you mean well but part G take care of all the currant change. you are over complicating everything.
if everyone is wondering how to get DC from the output that's AC in the figuera device just use Tesla's way and it is simple. no diodes, resistors or anything else needed.
Interesting information to know.
You Build it the way you fucking want to build it and i will build it the fucking way I want to build it plain and simple.
as for my last post read the fucking head line "interesting info" that's it, that's all it said butt head.
There are several simple low power usage inverter circuits like the one in the attached picture available now and which can be developed to Power a CORRECTLY (N >> S >> N >> S etc.) built Figuera TraFoGen.
well build it and quit fucking wining about it. then when youv'e exhausted all your money and the piece of crap doesn't work i'll be laughing my ass off saying "I TOLD YOU SO"
Darediamond,
I'll not worry about rectifying the secondary voltage until I can prove to myself that the thing works.
If can get 200 watts out for only 100 watts in then I know I'm in business and then will try for something better. No point in building an elaborate setup if it doesn't work.
Hope this answers your question.
Darediamond
How did they rectify ac back then? Do you think the person who was fighting for ac might have found or known of way to rectify ac without using rectifiers or diodes? So the people who were already set up with dc would not lose all their invested money on the dc operated equipment they had in place before ac was fully developed.All the towns that had invested in lighting the streets and a few homes of wealthy people had to be convinced ac could also be used to run the dc they had already invested in.
Tesla filed a patent for it 1889, how long had he known about it before then? People were not sure which would become the dominate means for power transmission at the time some must of thought there was no way Tesla would win out and all the little details about how to manipulate ac were most likely for some not worth patenting. There is no way to know for how long the method was known before the patent filing. So few believed in ac who would bother except the those who were fighting for it. Rectifying ac is not dependent on vaccum tubes or ic's or diodes. They were made after the fact born from the original. The magnetic fields can be used to block the current of ac through cancellation without wasting it as heat to block it.
If you dont know that or the how or have not tried it does that mean it does not work or exist. Im sure you will think it easier and cheaper to just bop on down to some electronics shop and buy some plastic parts and solder together a circuit board .So do it.
Darediamond,
"How will the lenzless HIGH FREQUENCY AC OUTPUT from the Center Secondaries be tapped and used if HIGH FREQUENCY Diodes are not first employed to rectify that aforementioned output and then converted back to AC by Simply using an inverter?
Can you explain Mr?"
From your question, I can only assume that you believe that diodes have to be added to the output of the secondary.
Well yes ,but only if you want to drive a 12 volt inverter for 115volt 60hz output.
I also assume that you believe you can't run a load directly off the ac secondary coil. Not true.
I'll be driving my primaries at much higher frequencies than CF ever could.
I can use my ham rig to light up a 100 watt incandescent bulb using 4 mhz.
You can run any resistive load directly from the "y" output.
Unless connected in series, the Secondary output voltage will always be lower while amperage will be Higher if Thick AWG Wire like AWG#14 or 15 or 16 is used to wind them. So few HOUSEHOLD Resistive devices runs at low Voltage.
Secondary voltage is dependent on turns ratio and voltage ratio follows suit.
e.g: If primary has 100 turns and secondary has 500. that's a ratio of 5 to 1.
If primary is being pulsed at 10 volts then secondary voltage will be 5x10 = 50 volts.
Why would you want to prematurely change the pulsed output to pure dc before testing for over-unity?
I could find many ways of loading that 50 volt output, just for testing.
We should all remember that Tesla's later years were exclusively devoted to experiments
in pulsed dc. Maybe it's just the pulsed dc that attracts the free energy. Nobody knows for sure.
We have to walk before we can run. Just one step at a time.
Nice investigation, seaad! Would it be too much work to replace the 'rotary' coils with Figuera's 'resistors' in your LTSpice sim above and compare efficiency?
Seead,
I see that you have simulated the DC reheostat proposed by marathonman.
But I see that you just got one signal and that signal has positive and negative parts. In Figuera generator we need two signals and just with positive part. Is it possible to achieve with the rheostat?
One more question: Is your simulation software simulating a toroidal core? I guess that a toroidal core will not behave identically to a bar core.
100% Figuera
http://free-energy-devices.com/PatD14.pdf (http://free-energy-devices.com/PatD14.pdf)
No moving parts - selfrunner.......For the same reason Gary Webb was able to commit suicide by shooting himself twice in the head. Devices or people that can cause to much disruption can quickly go bye bye. Lots of economies rely heavily on exporting fossil fuels. When Saudi Arabia has to build large solar power facilities in order to keep making money exporting fossil fuels instead of using it up themselves, you know it's a rather important product that powerful people want to keep in circulation.
So why don't we see these everywhere in 2016?
Norman
.... melting the iron. But the unfortunate problem is that the core at such high saturation is said to output very high Electromagnetic radiations which are inimical to health.
2. There is a type of winding that I tried that produces COP>1 but again that type of winding is said to create 100 times more inimical radiation than the core at saturation.
You are a scam artist. Your post are just to discourage people from replicating this device. All in your post is a big lie. Your are a brake in this project. Nothing is useful from your posts and just miguiding points as saturating the core (nonsense)????, melting the iron (stupidity)!!!!, radiation (a big lie) !!!!
I may guess that you are misguiding people because you have some interests that nobody may be able to replicate this system.
I have a private message from you some time ago telling me that the advice about radiation was a lie. In that time I realized you were a scam artist. That was my fault for not uncovering you. I am sorry for not telling that in the thread then. But never is too late.
You have come back to use the same argument to create terror. I am going to search for that message and I will release the text in short in the good of truth and justice. People will see the kind of person you are.
Bye ... bye
LITERAL QUOTE FROM A PRIVATE COMMUNICATION FROM NRAMASWAMI TO ME ON THE 29TH OF SEPTEMBER 2015.
"There is no radiation from the central coil to affect us and the computers and the cellphones kept in the same room were on when the tests were run and they had no problem. So there was no radiation. But do not disclose this in the forum. "
I regret for not telling this before. I tried to be politely with you suggesting that your device was not as the design by Figuera and to start a new thread and go away from here. But you did not do it and even you create terror again with the lie on "radiation
I just expose what you have done. It is your fault. It is not my fault. My only fault was not to tell it on the very next day to that message.
Bye... byePD: Never is too late for you to start a different thread to tell your important advances and discoveries. I invite/encourage you to do it ...
Bye ... bye
The xomputer is now also affected.
Also the keyboard seems to be affected by radiation.
Take care and bye bye. I will not reply you any further. I am just here to talk about technical subjects dealing with Figuera patents.
You have been posting wrong info on this forum to mislead people.
However I have no intention of providing further info.
Loner,
As well as the similarities to the VTA, I find also many similarities with the Magnacoaster patent by Richard Willis. He also used two confronted north poles with a coil in between and distorted their fields with an external signal. I guess he also based his generator in obtaining flux-cutting induction by moving the field lines.
http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf (http://diysome.web.fc2.com/FE/Hajime/Willis/WO2009065219A1.pdf)
This how it is said to work:
"We pulse an electrical charge into a set of coils that are wrapped by neodymium magnets.
This pulse dissipates the internal field of the magnets.
When the pulse stops, the magnetic field returns creating a supercharged electric output.
We then collect this high output back from the coils.
This high output of power is then rectified and returned to the battery that it came from"
A deja vu?
What do you think of this patent?
Pedroxime..Sir..I'm grateful for your kind words.
Please see below the whole discussion between Forum Poster Hanon and me on this topic. This would also tell you why he did not mention any thing for 7 full months.
---Quote begin---
Mail from Hanon on 30/9/2015
Rams,
In your previous email you said “There is no radiation from the central coil to affect us and the computers and the cellphones kept in the same room were on when the tests were run and they had no problem. So there was no radiation. But do not disclose this in the forum. “
It is a pity that you are stating facts in the forum that are not true. I wonder if there are more details that are not true. I can see here some personal interests to misguide the other forum users. I won´t disclose anything in the forum as I have been doing till now with your info, but I think this is not fair. Right now I do not know what it is true and what it is not true. What I know is that if you are doing things like this it is because the device works. It has been better to stay quiet and not say anything than tell untrue things to discourage people
My Reply on the same date:
You are correct. But I am observung both the things and I am getting two opinions from different experts. I was warned because the primary coils are multifilar and they have wire running below them all types of frquencies are possible. Check Multiple wave oscillator which cured cancers with 98% success rate. The frequencies it emits are harmful but it cured cancer. The device is now banned though it cured cancer.
If any one tests and suffers I am liable. This is why I tell people do not test. My legs suffer from swelling like an elephants legs and If I take treatment it goes out after two or three weeks. No infection has bern detected till date. My driver has a blood clot in his head. So I have warned the forum.
But another professor says if computers and cell phones are not affected there is no issue. Now you tell me what I should do. I have stopped testing. But the professors are insisting that I continue. To be on the safe side I have stopped. Apart from this there are no funds.
If you see the forum I come under concerted attack like no one has been subjected to. If some one replicates and suffers claims I am responsible what do I do? What do yo do if you are in this situation.
I had been severely criticised by a forum member for not closing the magnetic gap and keeping the rods open. You look at your mail you have indicated the same.
What I feel as safe and any one can replicate alone has been reported. You have a lot more information than what I had given the forum. You create a step up transformer using small primary multifilar wires and thick secondary wires. Make the output voltage to reach 400 volts give the secondary wires to earth. See what you observe. The issue is the multifilar coils.
How they are wound decides every thing. They appear to broadcast high and low frequencies. I do not have equipment to determine frequencies. Cater says MWO output inimical frequencies only but when the patient sat in the middle he had beneficial results. Look at me. Computers and phones are ok Legs are swollen joints are weak and I am lookoing like an old man now.
What would be your prudent advice. Just because I have done a lot of things do I owe it to the forum to disclose every thing..
Patrick does not teach all he knows. Under the circumstances unless we measure frequencies clearly and conclude they are harmless I have to give the same advice I gave the forum
My mail dated 1/10/2015 not controverted by Hanon.
XXXX
I was not wrong.
I am given to understand 50 -55 Hz AC is harmful to humans and animals and this is why we are affected. If we want AC output we need to cover the device with several layers of plastic and iron sheets to reduce the 50 Hz radiation to the minimum. The iron sheets block the radiation coming out. This is why people living near high voltage power lines are affected. 55 Hz Pulsed DC is said to be beneficial to human body.
To the contrary 20 Khz to 40 Khz AC or pulsed DC is dangerous to virus, bacteria, pathogens and worms in human body. This is the basis of the Hulda Clark and Royal Rife devices. Cancerous cells or tumours have a thick outer layer and to make them open you need to give either electricity of less than 10 Hz and 20 to40 Khz simultaneously or 20 to 40 Khz and 2 to 40 MHz simultantously. The cell walls are weakened then to allow the 20 to 40 Khz electricity to kill the microbes and the tumour cells return to normal cells. This is what is done by Royal Rife by using a Neon Lamp and Lakhovsky by using his coils.
This is why we were affected and the computers and cell phones were not affected. I was very strongly criticsed by a senior scientist for not closing the open iron rods at the two ends and not covering the entire device with iron sheet and plastic sheet.
-----
Figuera has not shown the closing of the iron and it is possible that he suffered from the experiments and died. However if it was Pulsed DC he would not have suffered and the death may be due to some disease. Any way during 1908 the average life span was not very high in islands and he has lived a full life span for his times.
There are many people in the forum who are extremely knowledgeable. They do know who is reporting the truth and who is misleading or giving false info. However I do not intend to get in to this again for some more time. I'm looking like a frail old man now and I need to receover in health and finances and only then I can do any thing.
-----------------------------
-----Quote End---
Unfortunately at this time I'm not able to understand the Multifilar coils. You make 10 filar multifilar coils they consume less 2 to 2.5 amps when secondary single wire is loaded. You remove one or two coils of the 10 filar primary coil and make it 8 or 9 filar then the coil consumes 25 amps. When it does it COP>1 is automatic. Iron is totally saturated.
I have personally enormously suffered. I had to spend a lot of treatment and take a lot of rest. I do not have proper technical education in this field. I am also not able to understand many of these things. Some people want me to take risks. I'm not interested in doing any thing that can harm either me or others. So the reports that I give are self edited.
There are many forum posters who are highly qualified and extremely knowledgeable. One of them indicated that Don Smith devices worked but he employed 3 MHz frequencies in open air core. That core gave a lot of harmful radiations and so the device was not accepted for use. Many have told me that Multiple Wave Oscillator is a device that is banned in Europe and US. It would interfere with radio communications. There is an international treaty that permits some frequencies and bans others. I do not have much of knowledge in this. what I do know is this..For some unknown reason severe edema was formed in my foot and they were swollen like an elephant leg. I became so weak. I had to take Siddha medicines to recover and then sleep for 10 hours a day to receover my health. This is one of the reasons I have restricted the testing to just once per month.
I'm increasingly getting the feeling that the translation of the patent is not correct. It happens all the time. No blame on Hanon but translating old technical documents is a challenging job and there is a significant possibility for mistakes.
Unfortunately I do not read spanish. So I have to accept what others say.
It appears to me that during the time of Daniel McFarland Cook and Figuera Iron rods refers to Permanent magnets. During those times only DC was used extensively. When we send DC through an electromagnet the core becomes a permanent magnet.
If you look at Figuera he is using Interruptted DC. This will not demagnetize the already magnetized core. So the trick is to make the core a permanent magnet first.
I will try to do a machine where no load is placed on secondary.
HaHa..What is this.. That Patent is not valid you see?Why?
It says opposite pole faces must be used to induce electricity..How come our NN or SS only team rely on this not valid any more patent..
You see this is the relevant part of the 378 Patent..
The inventors, who subscribe, constitute their generator, as follows: Several
electromagnets are arranged opposing each other, and their opposite pole
faces separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are
formed in such a way that they will magnetize and demagnetize quickly and not
retain any residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole
faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes in one
piece, or several, or many. An excitatory current, intermittent, or alternating,
actuates all the electromagnets, which are attached or in series, or in parallel,
or as required, and in the induced circuit will arise currents comprising,
together, the total generator current. That allows suppressing the mechanical
force, since there is nothing which needs to be moved. 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.
Founded on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro
Blasberg, in the name and on behalf of the society "Figuera-Blasberg"
respectfully requests to be granted final patent of invention for this generator
whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that,
in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of
four excitatory electromagnets in each, and the induced circuit is marked by a
thick line of reddish ink, being this way the general arrangement of the
appliance, but meaning that you can put more or less electromagnets and in
another form or grouping.
The invention for which a patent is applied consists in following note.
Note
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
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.
Note is the claimed Portion. This is precisely what I did for a long time. I have then realized that If the core is already saturated peremanent magnet and cannot be demagnetized the current drawn will be lower while the output will be higher.
You only need to wind two electromagnets with 10 filar coils. Then remove one of them and insulate both its ends to make it a 9 filar coil. Then do it for another coil to make it 8 filar coil.
A 10 filar coil draws only 0.5 amps if it is serially connected and 2.5 amps if it is connected in parallel. But you remove one or two coils then the current drawn is 15 to 25 amps. The core is saturated and you get an enormous output in excess of the input.
If you place permanent magnets in the core the input is reduced in the primary as the amperage needed for making the core saturated is less and there is no complete magnetic field collapse.
In any case I have tested and speak from my experience and my own troubles.
Ah Ha.. What is a Coffee Break meant for.. Go to overunity.com and Bomb Ramaswami and enjoy the 15 minutes..You all made my day..
Enjoy your weekend..Bye Bye
Since the sketch on the patent shows N-Y-S magnetic configuration, I do not understand why there is any issue with the magnetic polarity of the inducing coils.
To me, it is a "crystal clear explanation" in the patent.
So what are you insinuating Mr. Bajac?
Which configuration works?
N>>S or N>>N?
Hi Hanon.
what is your site?
Tank you!
The 1902 report says that the Figuera took the energy from the Atmosphere. Used a small device. Using the atmosphere essentially means using electrostatics or capacitors. None of the patents show any capacitor.
2. High Frequency is used to Run the Primary.
Totally contrary to the teaching of Figuera. Figuera used mechanical switching, therefore he could have just used low frequency excitation. He did not used spark gaps nor electronic circuits, so he could not get high frequency. Please read the patent and study it. Figuera used around 100 V and 1A.
You see. It is not me the one who is suggesting using HF. HF is asociated to high voltage and therefore microwaves. Take care. This is totally contrary to the low frequency generator of Figuera. Which is the maximum frequency that you may get with a mechanical switching? 50 Hz, maybe 100 Hz? This device is as the one from Hubbard, Hendershoot generator, all powered at low frequencies. Please do not propose systems far away from the patent design.
Darediamond:I strongly agree with what you said here ''I don't think HV is necessary for this unit to work.'' because we can now easily switch the Primaries without using Mechanical Switch.
But why go that slow and costly lane when you HAVE A FAR MORE BETTER OPTION IN THE NAME OF INVERTER??
WHY??
http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html (http://www.circuitsgallery.com/2012/09/sg3524-pwm-inverter-circuit2.html)"
This chip only puts out 60hz for a regular dc to ac power inverter and you still need the power amplifiers.
An 8 pin op-amp or even a 555 chip can be made to put out a sine wave at any frequency you want.
It's a far easier solution for experimenters than a complex 16 pin ic that has features we don't need.
I agree with you that higher frequencies would greatly increase efficiency. This was proven years ago when
they stopped using bulky power xformers in computer power supplies & instead are pulsing very small xformers
in the khz range. Ultra light units that can put out 20 amps.
Don Smith said that doubling the frequency would quadruple the output.
I don't think HV is necessary for this unit to work. We only need a strong magnetic field that keeps varying in
the one direction. It can be made as strong as you like just by reducing circuit resistance.
Because magnetism & electricity are so closely related, you can use either one to attract free energy.
High voltage potential of a single polarity is one way. Or a strong magnetic field that varies only in the one direction
is the other.
Too bad people get confused between the two and want to use both at same time.
Here I will state my theory along with the dozen of others on this thread.
Charged particles of matter (only pos. or only neg.) are attracted into the strong magnetic field of the air gaps.
Therefore the more air-gaps or units the more energy we get. This is also why CF used 7 units. Magnetic exposure
to the environment, I think is the key. This being so, then the width of the air-gaps might need to be optimized.
CF was trying to replicate the theory of a dc dynamo which has a half dozen or so coils whirring past a magnetic
field coil. The more coils, the more power.
That's the main reason for his 7 units. Other reasons are:
1. A coil too large in diameter will suffer inefficiency. Outer layers not getting as much magnetic field as the inner.
2. Not enough room for larger coils.
3. Coils with large circumference will need much longer wires for same amount of turns.
It's amazing, people that DON'T even Know what PART G is are suddenly an EXPERT on Figuera with no working device giving out advice on how to build a free energy device.
NOW THAT'S PRECIOUS.
Hanon can i interest you in two SHAM WOW'S and some rubber spoons for the invaluable Tech support you just received.
you should be thrilled.
The heart pulses in a vortech motion. meaning it twist's as it contracts, if you want to sound like you know anything at least research it first.
All,
Are you sure that you want to follow a felow as the one that send messages as the copied below. Just for your information.
I just say: read the patents, study them, and later test every possible polarity. But follow the patents !!!
Building Part G the way figuera Built it as we speak, by the way lets hear your interpretation of part G that you so called nullified. oh my god what a good laugh. EVERY ONE can be at ease now that darediamond has nullified part G.
you offer nothing just like Rswami does, just a lot of hot air that NO BODY follows that has any common sense.
My final device is almost complete how about yours, and i did say "FINAL".
Hanon i wouldn't follow the nut case if you paid me to. i think i'll stay my path."the right one"
and by the way Hanon didn't bow, he came to his senses, because i sent him all of my research plus he has his own and he quit listening to stupid shit.
imagine that !
the Figuera part G is NOT nor ever will be Resistors.
Once the machine is operating where does the power come from to operate it? If it comes from the machine itself why would i care how much it uses to operate?Seems that wasting 100 watts in heat is not good to produce 20,000 watts output, as Buforn claimed in his patents.
JEALOUSNESS! of what, a moron that knows squat of part G. hell you miss lead people for years why stop now. your the reason people are still gagging on the drawing.
WHERE is YOUR WORKING DEVICE. "NOT" BECAUSE YOU DO NOT HAVE ONE. you think because your some big time electrician that people should listen to your NONSENSE.
hell my 13 year old roommates grand daughter even said that guy's stupid. he don't know sqat. crap i laughed for an hour.
Good luck people YOU WILL NEED IT.
PS. your paper was a complete JOKE that is worthless except for starting the fire place. HOW PRECIOUS !
Bajac"
Just saw your post..
I think you indicated the air gap to be present between the cores if I'm correct. If not I apologize.
How can there be an air gap between opposite poles? The iron will lierally crush any material that you put in there. Alternately if were to put a strong material the magnetic flux will be considerably reduced. Assuming you put holes (best case) between the air gap to let the magnetic flow continues what is the advantage of it in having a continuous iron core? I have always used continuous iron core. Never had any problems. The continuous iron core made up of rods however has many airgaps that let the air flow through the core so it cools the rods.
I'm unable to accept the idea that the cores have an iron gap.Can you please advise on this?
Again I apologize if you did not suggest the air gap theory. I have not read your paper on Figuera and now for me the interest is only to learn what others do as I have failed in my efforts.
I was able to make a paper on the Figuera's device based on the sketch, only.
.....
I liked the paper that way because it was not driven by the writing in the patent.
.....
Nevertheless, I was right on the money.
Crystal clear, that you did not read it the patent to make your paper.
You invented the air gap requirement which is not mentioned in the patent text. Even the patent text states that there is no neccessity for the inducers and induced to be separated. Read the patent and look for that sentence. I already quoted it months ago. You design, while being genuine, is not what is explained in the patent. I wont go into further discussions: I feel that I follow the patent ideas. And you feel the same. No way of resolving this.
I just say to everyone: read the 1908 patent and read the Buforn´s patents many times. This is the only path to study the system. In the other hand your paper is just a document which tries to replace the patent ! Big mistake ahead !!
Why to be guided by your own paper when we have the patent text instead?
This "patent application" is in error because there is a conflict between the sketch and the description part. This is a cause for "rejection" and a final patent shall never be allowed with such an error.
This is what you have to say to justify the "air gap theory" which is not even mentioned in the patent text ? You see errors in the patent text where there aren't. The patent was valid and it was in force for some years in Spain.
The patent was granted. I told you but you did not believe me. Below is the proof ( Fecha de concesion = Granting date ). I do not matter if you do not want to listen, but please do not misguide people with your deep interpretation of the patent.
I just say people to read many many times the 1908 patent. And for more details they can refer later to the last patent by Buforn (1914) whose claims and drawings invalidate completely your view of an air gapped transformer with splitted primaries. This 1914 patent is also translated into english and available for everyone. The patent should be our Bible. Not your paper, which IMO is a way of fitting your theory into this device, paper which , as you recognized, was done without even reading the patent text, just by watching the patent sketch. !!!
At least I agree with you that we should get back to work.
This patent document of Figuera appers to me to be fake.
Why?
Please see this attachment.
The spanish patent office does not have any application in its records filed by any Clemente Figuera or Clemente Figueras.
How did Hanon get these supposedly old patents?
Hanon, Bajac, Marathonman and all other Friends from Spain
A personal request.
This patent document of Figuera appers to me to be fake.
Why?
Please see this attachment.
The spanish patent office does not have any application in its records filed by any Clemente Figuera or Clemente Figueras.
How did Hanon get these supposedly old patents?
As Bajac points out the Patent is some thing that cannot be worked. The commutator design provided by Marathonman is valid but the wikipedia page on that tells clearly that the disadvantage is that the carbon brush will wear out and needed frequent replacement. So how come the patent says that once the machine is started it will continue to run indefinitely.
Apart from some claimed old Newspaper Articles is there any solid proof that these claimed patents are not fake?
Please do the search yourself in the European Patent Database and I went to the Spanish Patent office website and searched. Look at the attachment.
Can any other spanish friend visit the Spanish Patent office and ask for copies. Please do not tell me that records are not available. Older records than that are available in European Patent Database and that is the largest repository of Patent documents.
Please check and advise. Bajac I think you can verify. Please do it.
Seriously?!?!
All are entitled to their opinion, I would highly recommend those who agree with your assessment carefully review Tesla's technologies which are closely related to that which is being debated here. One will surely find that no comparison can be made between the work and position of the two. If one is lucky, and that is a HUGE if, the review of Tesla's work might give one a few insights into exactly what it is that folks are not seeing in the technology under debate.
Regards
This thread has a direction, and I don't have any desire to start a new one.
I'll soon be ready to try out my own unit as I just got in some power transistors which I needed.
Anyone ordering these things from China should be aware of factory rejects or seconds.
I received 10 pnp tranistors a few weeks ago and they all checked bad with open emitters. Can't complain because the price was so low
and free shipping. It's the long waiting time that really matters.
Forest:
P.S. I have a question to those of you who knew electronics. If I make a transistor amplifier to amplify small sinewave from a Wien bridge oscillator into a 100V 1A current still sinewave, would the inductance react with reactance to this one as to the ordinary sinewave current from grid ? Let's imagine a single transistor amplifier connected to the 100V DC source and driven by a signal from such a generator. Somebody ?
I am assuming you'll be driving just ONE of the primary coils at 100v/1A with 60hz sine wave. Then I would say "yes" the output would be like
that from the grid. But why try to replicate an ordinary transformer?
Because there are TWO primary coils to be pulsed, then you will need two separate amplifiers.
I'll be using a wien bridge oscillator to drive two different transistor amplifiers. A type npn and a type pnp.
Study the "G" switching diagram to give you a better idea as to what needs to be done.
ps Bajac...........what about your progress report/s.... sheesh
OMG all 10 were bad, i'm very sorry Clif but i couldn't help from laughing. i received my 14 IXGK400N30A3 from Mouser and all of them were good.
although solid iron will go higher than that frequency, i think i'll stick with 60 for now just to see how things work out. another fact is that if you run it at a higher frequency part G core has to be able to handle it also.
and by the way if you build part G and do a shotty job it will spark like mad but a certain person i know used a grinding tool just for that purpose and said it couldn't be any more perfect. and also stated that if the brushes are very good quality their is surprisingly very little wear.
I see the broken record is back.
Clemente Figuera was more of a genius then i first realized. very few people used a magnetic field to limit or rather in Figuera's case vary the currant on a continuous basis with part G. Nicola Tesla was one of them also.
that is why i posted a pic of a bar being pulled out of a coil because that is what is happening in Figuera's part G. using a magnetic field to vary the currant between set N and set S.
this can be verified by EVERYONE in this forum at home.
as part G rotates it becomes the controller for the entire device using a magnetic opposing field and reluctance in part G to very the currant that is in constant rotating motion.
all currant is available to the primaries because everyone knows currant runs from negative to positive so that leaves part G to vary the currant. as the currant travels through the winding it causes a magnetic fields that resists the flow of currant, so more winding less currant less windings more currant.
also as the declining electromagnets are shoved out of the secondary the energy is stored in part G in the form of a magnetic field being replentished every half turn or every declining phase of the electromagnets.
so that tells me that part G is not only more valuable them meets the eye, it CAN NOT be replaced with IC's.
well at least on the low side anyways.
this is a lost art that most do not know about and probably can't find in any junk books of today.
"RELUCTANCE" RESISTANCE TO CURRANT FLOW ! "MAGNETICALLY"
the same thing with part G. almost no one on this forum can fathom the idea of magnetic resistance and the extreme advantages of using such technics compared to using heat death power wasting resistors. nor the fact that the core of part G stores magnetic energies in the process.
That's hillarious and shows your ignorance as to my extensive work bench tools. SO why didn't you people post your findings??? seams to me all that happened was the mouth started flapping and no posted results.
Post your findings and share your results, it's that simple.
or is that to much to ask from self appointed superior beings.
Hitting a coil with a north pole on both sides only works if you space the magnets properly.
Or time the magnetic influence seeing the coil.
Same thing.
artv
Part G is a continuous wind and the reduction of currant is dependent on how many winds are on part G's core. i do not have the math prowess to calculate that so i had to take the hard road and wind then test, well the first time was wrong so i added a few more winds and that was it. see both primaries have to be balanced and has to match the other exactly when taken high and low, if not the pressure between them will drop and induction will fall to half of what is achievable. you have to remember part G or rather the whole system is DC and part G is basically a Variac but with DC. the opposing magnetic fields will help regulate the saturation of the core which will regulate the currant on an continuous basis.
the pic below is a simple test from a friend that suggested the use of a paper clip on a straw to test where the two fields are at all times. the metal paper clip will follow the two NN fields as a visual indicator of how far your fields move and to let you know weather or not the fields clear the secondary.
William J Hooper did a simple table top demo in one of his lectures that proved the figuera device is NN design in an pure B x V device. the pics below prove scientifically with out a doubt many, many years later that Figuera's device is NN orientation. according to Hooper when two North opposing magnetic field are present near each other the B fields are cancelled but are additive. when one is moved at a certain velocity in and out from the wire and the other the opposite a pure B x V field is created. to be precise B X V = (-B) X (-V). This will cause the B fields to be cancel = 0 but both products are positive and additive as explained in the pic below.
the only difference between Hooper's demo and Figuera's device is his test has the magnets vertical and Figuera's were Horizontal. their is no difference in the outcome the results are the same B X V = (-B) X (-V) both positive and additive.
the other pic is the proof that NS electromagnets are not possible in the Figuera device. if the north magnet is taken high and the south magnet is taken low the currants are the opposite direction so the cancel out allowing only a small currant to flow because the peaking magnet minus the declining magnet will amount to almost nothing. that is why EVERYONE that uses NS will end up with nothing because they paid NO attention to spin, B field's, and induced direction. assumption will bite you in the ass every time as i am totally aware of this.
Ac can not be used in the Figuera device as been said MANY, MANY times before. the field CAN NOT build up fast enough.
your interpretation of the Figuera device is all wrong.
Scientific proof has been laid out and yet you still chose to ignore it.
all i can say is good luck fella you'll need it.
Marathon, you do not seem to understand what I am hammering. How do we in this modern time make the primaries consume less Wattage while switching them to and fro to energise the middle output coil?
Is there no solid state alternative to Part G because from my practical research, low frequency will make the primaries consume high wattage?
How will lenze be cancelled if he coils are wound in same direction as you have been hammering that CC to CC or CCW to CCW are the correct positions?
When did Figuera mention cancelling Lenz Law? Your fixated on something you dont even clearly or completely understand. Even if you could cancel it in a generator you wont cancel it in the load that is attached to the generator so how would that work exactly? Or do you intend to have a free wheeling gen that does no work. Even Harry Potter had to wave his wand and speak his spells to make something happen. the only way to have no resistance to change is to do nothing and change nothing.. Can you recognize when Lenz has been eliminated?
deradiomond;D ;D Marathon is the Mask On Dough1 Face Vice-Versa. Hmm... What a bang!
Thats pretty funny i needed a good chuckle. Everyone has to be something even if it is to be consistently wrong as that thing they are. On the upside you are consistent.
Your free to think what you wish.The more you reply the more you expose yourself. I am free to think what I wish you said again?
F.Y.I.
Download this book:
"The Inventions Researches and Writings of Nikola Tesla," by Thomas Martin, The Electrical Engineer, American Institute Electrical Engineer, NY, 1894.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaBook.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaBook.pdf)
Go to {read} Chapter XXIII, page 109, "Tesla Polyphase Transformer."
Referring to Fig. 94 on page 109 - replace the "Generator [left-hand device in diagram] with Figuera's Commutator.
A commutator is also referenced in the text. The "Generator" operation works in a similar manner to Figuera's commutator; although the generator would be pseudo linear versus stepped.
Is the B-EMF eliminated in this design since strength changes in magnetic field rotate 'around' Ring A and need not reverse or fall negative? Can this design support an Asymmetric Transformer scheme, thus providing more out than in?
This was published by the AIEE in 1896 and Figuera's patents, I believe, were dated around 1902, so it may well be directly related.
FIN
That Tesla reference is unrelated and serves only to complicate matters. Figuera is elegantly simple. The part G in Tesla's device is an alternator! Part G is a variable resistor for DCin Figuera's case.no relation whatsoever!.The patent states that this is a polyphase transformer to ease power distribution to various loads of different requirements simultaneously to improve efficiency. Back emf can be suppressed in the induced coils of said transformer but the aim of this thread is to understand Clemente Figuera design...there are other threads where Tesla's polyphase transformer can be discussed..including the TPU thread..kindly let's stick to the subject matter.
It never ceases to amaze me how you people can blindly post stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with Figuera's device at all.
Read and digest William Hopper Motional electric field paper. you will find that the Figuera device is a pure BV device hands down. he proved that not only is Figuera's device is NN orientation but that it is a pure BV device with B fields cancelling but are positive and additive. just because the B fields are cancelled does not mean the Electric fields are. they are in fact not cancelled and are positive and additive with the Secondary residing in the space where B = 0 but E fields are alive and present.
this man proved with out ANY doubt 70 years later that the Figueraa device is pure BV in nature. if you doubt him you need to see his credentials before you run the mouth to disagree.
Hanon i know not where you are coming from because the Figuera device is a completely different operation. Magnacoaster uses a ringing effect and Figuera's device is pure BV in design and basically may be the only one of it's kind. it is a overlooked simple fact the hidden BV field.
well excuse my stupid unintentional miss spelling. William Hooper is the closest i have came to describing the figuera device. if it was just a coil between two magnetic fields then why hasn't anyone on here built it, if it's that easy. get real ! probably because no one has the balls to admit they have NO clue about the Figuera device. study the field interaction for months then come back to the table with something useful.
Maybe reading this page will clarify some aspects:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/
While i agree it is a good presentation, you lack the subtle detail of each device. you have had that information for quite a while and i have fed you quite a lot of info personaly but yet have not advanced any farther with the info. it's like your refusing to think each process in depth ignoring subtle details that are needed to get the device operational.
it's like you were handed a screwdriver and a screw but refuse or lack the knowledge to screw the screw into the wood. all i can say is you need to learn to use the tools in front of you or find a new hobby or profession because staring at it for years and posting the same information accomplishes NOTHING.
if the people of this forum don't take the time to completely study each piece of Figuera's device, then there is no hope of this forum of ever building a working Figuera device.
For those who really want to replicate this thing,just study C.F's comments.
He says " Because of the splitting of the primary into two parts, Lenz's law
has been abolished for this design, allowing a spectacular performance where
the current drawn from the secondary winding has no effect on the current flowing
in the two halves of the primary winding. There is also no back -EMF as current
flows continuously in both halves of the primary winding."
it is cheaper to use magnetic fields to curtail currant flow then resistors. you must of spent a small fortune on high power resistors.
Hello jegz,
Normally I do not respond to posts [info provided is only F.Y.I., and on occasion is found to be of value]; but, due to a flight delay, I make this rare exception - time permitting.
Briefly, Symmetric Transformers/Systems (normal) can not achieve an efficiency greater than 100% and fall to near 94% (if well designed and constructed) with no load. BEMF will reduce this considerably when loaded.
Asymmetric Transformers/Systems can achieve an efficiency of greater, or less, than 100% - an example is Bi-Filar wound which can significantly reduce BEMF.
Please see this link, in particular post #7, for much greater detail and discussion:
http://zaryad.com/forum/threads/asimmetrichnye-transformatory-v-sverxedinichnyx-sxemax.8970/ (http://zaryad.com/forum/threads/asimmetrichnye-transformatory-v-sverxedinichnyx-sxemax.8970/)
The forum is Russian. If you do not read/write Russian you can use "IM Translator" Firefox Add On and get an English translation - the authors there write very well so the translation works quite good; plus the forum is heavily moderated! BTW, IM Translator is free, can translate a full web page, has three translators, provides a technical Russian dictionary, in-line translation, etc. It's excellent, but not perfect yet (Russian language is complex and a bit difficult, but the people are great - and somewhat nice crazy!)...
A broader OU Theory subject link is:
http://zaryad.com/forum/forums/obschie-principy-ustrojstv-alternativnoj-texniki.136/ (http://zaryad.com/forum/forums/obschie-principy-ustrojstv-alternativnoj-texniki.136/)
And again, some excellent discussion and information...
Must run (fly) - have a very good day!
To quote Red Green: "Remember, I'm pulling for ya, we're all in this together."
SL
Good to see ya Cadman, lone time no hear. i have but one thing to say and that is.Wao! If it is not Sir Marathonman then it is a counterfeit. Whenever overunity.com comes to my mind, it is you and Ramaswami that ring on my mind. Yes I am an ardent critic of you but I still do respect your views.
After three years of constant study, research and on hand experience, i have concluded that the Figuera device operates in said capacity according to the 1908 patent and the following is my interpretation of said free energy device.
in the patents it can be seen how ingeniously and by mechanical methods, how the engineer tried to generate electrical energy inside a coil by varying the flow of two opposite and opposing magnetic fields, trying to get into the machine the same characteristic behavior of a conventional generator, but without moving parts.
What is the Figuera device
In a standard generator we have what is termed a quadrature. the incline and decline of the north magnet and the incline and decline of the south magnet. also we have what is termed "the cogging effect". the cogging effect is where the rotor passes the stator electromagnet and opon passing the electromagnet an extreme attraction force wants to pull the rotor back in to register (alignement) causing the motor to bog down from the heavy load of the attractive force. this extreme force from present day generators has been the same since the days of Praxii in France and has not changed. thus we are left with a system that is completely crippled from the cogging effect and inefficient beyond belief. the amount of fuel used in this type of system is staggering and certainly benefits only the Oil Companies and tax hungry Governments.
in the Figuera device both electromagnet accounts for only 1/2 of a quadrature but with no cogging effect what so ever since the device is stationary and no moving parts. thus allowing the half quadrature to be much more efficient in terms of power usage (input) verses power output. since the cogging effect has been removed the amount of power that was wasted on rotation is now available to the system for use to power it's electromagnets and rotating brush motor which amounts to very little leaving a system that is so efficient it powers it self and the load indefinitely. once the system is started with an external power supply, it can be removed and the system remains running with no noise, lubrication, pollution or waste products to deal with. the implication of such a device is utterly mind boggling and a game changer to the average human. allowing each and every human to grow their own food 24/7 365 days a year, pump their own water, power their own home and personal vehicles. thus changing the very Evolution of the human race advancing toward a more productive, peaceful, harmonistic society riding the powerful elite of their choke hold on the human race through control.
The Figuera device consist of a complimentary set of primary opposing electromagnets (Set N and Set S) between them resides an output coil/core (Y) governed by a controller part "G" that varies the currant allowed through the the primary electromagnets.
the primary electromagnets are varied in currant in unison, one taken high, the other taken low, just enough to clear the secondary then reversed. in the said action a unique condition takes place in the area the secondary output coil resides in causing a condition known as a Motional Electric Field. as both primaries are occupying the same relative space in space, we have a set of conditions where both B fields (Magnetic fields) are opposing one another therefore effectively cancelling each other out. in this unique condition, both fields are effectively equal zero but the electric fields of both electromagnets remain intact therefore doubling the effective E field compared to one electromagnet alone.
by using a DC source through part G, the original source is effectively split into to two separate feeds allowing the primary electromagnets to be varied separately in unison allowing the cancellation of B fields and the additive E fields to remain to be collected by the secondary, a condition known as a pure BV field. the secondary according to the patent is "properly placed" in this area that is effectively zero B field zone but where the Electric field is actively present and doubled in strength.
Superimposed magnetic flux from the two sets of electromagnets (Set N and Set S) consists of one electromagnet with left to right spin taken high, and one electromagnet with right to left spin taken low in unison. thus we have a unique condition in the space surrounding the secondary: the resultant magnetic flux, due to superposition of fields, is zero; and the resultant Motional electric field intensity is E = B1 x V1 + (-B1) x (-V2) = 2B1 x V1, or E2, double the intensity attributable to one electromagnet alone, where B1 is the magnetic flux due to the electromagnets and V1, the electron drift velocity in, say, the in and out direction. although the magnetic flux energy in the device is reduced to zero, the electromagnetic induction giving rise to what we term the Motional electric field has by no means been cancelled nor reduced in any way as both are positive and additive .
another unique condition of the opposing primary electromagnets is that while one electromagnet is taken high, the other is taken low but in doing so in it's receding action, the rising electromagnet basically shoves the receding electromagnet out of the secondary core into it's own core from where it's magnetic field was born. this action causes a considerable amount of magnetic flux to be confined in the said core thus allowing the magnetic energy to be shoved out the back of the receding electromagnet into part G to be stored in a magnetic field for later use therefore feeding it's self every half turn of part G. if the receding electromagnet is taken down to far or the primary electromagnets are not in complete unison the pressure between them will cease and induction will fall low to the output of the peak of the rising electromagnet.
Part G
after much research into the origin and function of part G, i was able to narrow, with the help of a colleaque, the origin, device and manufacture of the part G device to Germany and Zeiss or Otto as the manufacturer. both companies produced precision variac of the highest quality and were the go to companies for quality workmanship. more then likely it was Zeiss as the dates and events are to easily lined up.
one little known fact is that DC can be used through a variac and produce similar effects of currant restriction through variation with a twist of a knob. Figuera on the other hand chose to have the core wound with one continuous wind, one end to Set N and the other to Set S all while varying the currant through the rotating brush making contact with two winding's at a time in a make before break scenario to avoid currant disruption to the primary electromagnets. this action would be detrimental to the function of the device if bemf were allowed to take place as all induction would cease and power production would come to a halt.
part G is a magnetic resistance device rarely used in today's modern world, a forgotten relic in a world of silicon ic's that can be had in any style, shape or form. part G is unique as it splits one DC feed into two separate independent feeds. this feat is accomplished through two opposing fields as the currant enters part G through it's winding's causing two opposing magnetic fields. these two magnetic fields restrict the amount of saturation of the core restricting currant flow through reluctance (magnetics).
part G is connected to the primary electromagnets to allow the inductive kick back from the receding electromagnet to be stored in it's core every half turn of the rotating brush, thus allowing the stored magnetic field to be converted into currant feeding the primaries as the brush rotates. this action of part G is similar in action of an inductor allowing energy to be stored and used, as the brush rotates so does the magnetic field.
when constructing the device a second secondary can be wound on the output core allowing said secondary to be used for the sole purpose of powering the device to replace losses occurred through heat and wire loss, which accounts for very little aiding the inductive kickback from the declining electromagnet allowing the device to be self sustaining.
once this device is started with an external power supply, the supply can be removed and the device will run indefinitely powering what ever you so choose.
scientist's of our present day say that free energy is "impossible" yet their are over 10,000 free energy device patents in the united states and over 40,000 globally, most of which were illegally seized by the patent office under the guize "of national security". funny thing is the US patent office is not even part of the US Government ( independently owned and operated) yet they are continuously allowed to do so, steeling average citizens free energy patent. the suppression of free energy is coming to an end as all through out the world are becoming aware of the ability to self sustain. Maxwell and Faraday proved with out a doubt, that free energy is possible. if this was not so then why did J. P. Morgan, a rich banker, spend million trying to hide the fee energy equations through Heaviside, Lorentz and possibly Einstein through bribe monies. J. P. Morgan even went so far as to pull school books and had them changed and put back into circulation. he was also responsible for the suppression of the most gifted person of our time, yours truly Nicola Tesla. reducing him to the point of feeding pigeons for the remainder of his life.
if perpetual motion is not viable, then apparently our Universe did not get the memo, wouldn't that be awkward if the world stop spinning tomorrow.
YES IT"S ME!
OMG! i'm still laughing 3 hrs later Doug. OH SHIT that was funny!
the sad part is some other fool with no life at all recorded 12 hrs of cricket shit.
i know it falls on deaf ears but i had to show what i know.
all i can say is read and learn, use the ears instead of the mouth cuz that their is good stuff.
Well, I didn't name you directly, but regardless, I don't believe hearsay, and nor should anyone else. Skepticism is a part of due process, and it keeps us safe from playing a role in someone's fantasy.
Unnecessary, but thanks. If he has a working model but refuses to share, he can:
A. Keep quiet
B. Kiss my ass
C. Both of the above
I pick C.
Lies, lies. When you first started posting your "ring dynamo" idea, we, the regular members of this thread, schooled you until you learned the basic principles. Remember that? We told you it wouldn't work, but you adamantly denied, and claimed that everyone else will have a "non working device". In the end everything we said started to sink in, and now you claim our ideas as your own. Anyone can look back and see that "your" new design is the same design we've been going over for a long time. If anyone should be credited with the design it should be Hanon. He stuck with it even though I and others were trying different configurations. In the end, Hanon proved to be correct.
Funny that you say that. If we look back to this post: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg467996/#msg467996 we see you "helping" a new member, who, by the way, has already constructed part of a driving circuit. He generously shares with us his knowledge, experience, schematics, and waveform, and you berate him in your arrogance. Congratulations, you helped another lost soul find his way to the fairy man's benevolence.
You want to talk about intelligence? Really? Come on man, drop the gloves, let's do it. You're a hundred years too soon to talk about intelligence. And please, work on your spelling and grammar before you try to school someone. My college English professor would be hitting you with his umbrella.
Sorry, no magnetic resistive devices on the market. you will have to build it.Ok thanks!
Wow! really.
can be made for one light bulb or 1 million light bulbs. sky is the limit.
no need to be sorry, except for question #2.
read patent and repeat.
Your ignorance simply amasses me. there's a wealth of knowledge on the table yet you choose to ignore it and do what do best, run your mouth.How smart are you in covering your lousy tracks?
i'm really impressed.
and you wonder why you don't have a working device. so now your on two forums spreading your stupidity, how quaint .
you remind me of Einstein, he to was border line retarded and amounted to nothing, spouting nonsense.
please do this thread a favor and move on to another thread if all you come with is negativity.
I don't have to cover my tracks, people make mistakes. it is all about learning from them in which i did and then some. my knowledge of the Figuera device surpasses most everyone on this forum except Doug. why ? because of my desire to succeed and learn.Who needs to be felt sorry for if NOT you Marathon man, the Kite.
i freely share what i have learned and if that's a crime then i am guilty as charged.
i would suggest you quite living in the past and get back to your research.
i really doubt your on this forum to learn though, your actions say otherwise. this is probably why no one listens to you because of your ill intentions.
i almost feel sorry for you, NOT!8
good day Mr. darediamond
Daredummy your as ignorant as they come.4 hours ago, the spirit of disobedience in you nearly calmed down but you disrupted him and that make him go haywire. See what he is making you do now. Just listen to yourself and have a rethink. Many people have challenged you in the past but you never give any sensible and convincing defense of what you are promoting. But there one thing you always do: keeping to immaturity; acting like a baby.
post your stuff and ill post mine.
I haven't seen shit from you either, i wonder why with your warped thinking.
Could someone post a completed and updated circuit diagram of the Figuera's device, taking into account all the discoveries already made in this thread, please?I hope so too!!!
QUOTE "I have read everything I could find from Doug1 and from you, a lot of goodies there.You can come up with whatever to egg yourself on. But then truth is Dough1 is not part of your lies for the second time again here on this page http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12439-re-inventing-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-11.html he quoted Renowned UFO Politics about what the correct polarity is and he was schooled about it.
So I followed you from the start to now and I have seen the progress you have made, very good research and nice pictures to explain.
It is very helpful when I try to understand how the Figuera device works.
I felt that I have enough info now to start my self.
I have also read the patents available on line too.
I have seen Darediamonds posts, I really don't know what he is trying to achieve?
Seems like he is trying to confuse things and to make you and doug1 to be pissed and leave the thread.
I guess he want the research to stop, I don't see any other logical explanation."
this is a direct quote from another new person, i get these types of PM's on a daily basis from many, many people. do you ever stop and wonder why ??
people of this forum, there is many ways to wind your primaries, just use common coil winding techniques. as for the part G well it is a magnetic resistor/splitter and needs to be wound according to your primary/secondary ratio and core material.
if you are using a 1-1.6 ratio then i have to take my receding primary down only 1/3 rd of the way to clear the secondary. if you use a 1-1 ratio then you will need to take it down half way to clear the secondary.
get my drift.
MM
My understanding of one of Faraday's experiments is that he pushed a bar magnet toward a loop of wire that had a galvanometer attached to the ends of the wire. When he pushed one pole of the magnet toward the wire, the galvanometer deflected in one direction, and when he retracted the magnet the galvanometer deflected in the opposite direction. The magnitude of the deflection was proportional to the rate of change of the flux through the loop.
If he went to the other side of the loop and caused the same pole of the magnet to approached the loop, the deflection of the galvanometer was opposite that of the initial approach deflection. In other words a magnet approaching a loop from the right produces the same deflection as a magnet receding from the left and vice versa.
My further understanding is that in a setup with 1) two bar magnets facing each other separated by a nonmagnetic bar glued between both like pole faces to keep them separated by a fixed distance and 2) a stationary loop with an attached galvanometer is wrapped around the nonmagnetic bar; if the magnets are moved back and forth, the galvanometer will move back and forth with twice the deflection magnitude as that of a single magnet moved at the same rate.
That says to me that Marathon Man is right: that the electric fields produced in a coil by two like poles of electromagnets facing each other when powered by voltages 90 degrees out of phase are additive.
With that in mind, I have attached a set of calculations for a single phase magnetic circuit based on that principle to produce 16KW. It appears that such a unit will fit in an area less than two feet square by a foot high, and weigh about 300 pounds. One of my major concerns is cooling requirements, as it will have losses amounting to about 1500 watts. I don't know how to calculate the temperature rise and would appreciate help in making that determination.
I have used the equations and methods outlined in some books that have been referenced earlier in this forum and are mentioned in the attached document. Because I want to have a proper understanding of the principles involved, I ask that forum members look the document over and point out errors due to improper logic, misunderstanding of principles, or stupidity. When exploring unfamiliar territory, I need all the help I can get. I would appreciate your comments, criticism, and corrections, as I am want all of us to be able to build these devices with defined outputs without having to mess around with trial and error.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
This is my circuit i am presently working with if you must know.Thank you!
drawn for simplicity and understanding.
This is my circuit i am presently working with if you must know.
drawn for simplicity and understanding.
Hannon
The condition to two fields in respect to time and strength are why it is zero. Two objects exerting the same amount of pressure on each other cancel out in the middle while the force if the two subjects are elastic will expand in the only direction left which is out in the direction where no force is applied. Thats not what is happening in the generator exclusively, the force is not equal in respect to time or strength except at the minimal level to do away with the additional time to build up sufficiently at the rate of speed required. Reversal takes time and magnetic friction generates heat none of which are useful except to cook food or heat water.
I feel for Vlad he should have chosen a better venue.
again, i am amazed i even respond to your continued delirious delusions and miss quotes. look at your post again, you will realize he is talking to Hanon NOT Doug1. DUH!Marathonman, words and vocabularies can he easily be easily developed and expressed. You know why? Talk is CHEAP.
ufopolitics is wrong also, if you take a north electromagnet up and a south electromagnet down the spin directions are opposing, that means the induced currant will be opposing also. you people never cease to amaze me. the Figuera device can "NOT" nor ever will be a north south electromagnet. this is, and will always be a scientific fact no matter how hard the bone head try's to make it work it just won't happen.
do you people ever stop to realize why no video has EVER been posted getting high output with N/S set up.
BECAUSE IT WILL NOT WORK ! DUH !
again, i am amazed i even respond to your continued delirious delusions and miss quotes. look at your post again, you will realize he is talking to Hanon NOT Doug1. DUH!Marathonman, words and vocabularies can he easily be easily developed and expressed. You know why? Talk is CHEAP.
ufopolitics is wrong also, if you take a north electromagnet up and a south electromagnet down the spin directions are opposing, that means the induced currant will be opposing also. you people never cease to amaze me. the Figuera device can "NOT" nor ever will be a north south electromagnet. this is, and will always be a scientific fact no matter how hard the bone head try's to make it work it just won't happen.
do you people ever stop to realize why no video has EVER been posted getting high output with N/S set up.
BECAUSE IT WILL NOT WORK ! DUH !
well then can you take the two idiots DD and RSM with you.See your life?
if any Mother Fucker doesn't think my research isn't sound well i guess you need to take your getto ass to a physics web site and try to learn to read.
every fucking thing i posted in the last 9 months can be verified unless your a getto nigga named darediamond that has Rswami up his fucking ass. both of you are complete fucking IDIOTS. trying to turn a transformer into a fucking generator. STUPIDITY AT IT'S FINEST !
if you people of this forum believe this totally deranged psycopath moron, then there is no hope for this thread.
so stick it up your getto nigga ass dareasshole you fucking piece of shit.
ps my black mechanic friend down the street gave you that nickname getto nigga. he thinks your an idiot piece of crap to. imagine that !
Hi Hanon,I like your concept for the g part!!!
I appreciate all your work in translating the patents. From your site I offer a mechanical emulation of the field movement you portray, this is made with cylinder magnets, not ring magnets.
Can you build variable frequency pure sinewave inverter ? :-( it's not that easy.Forest, the world is a global village. Simply go on to www.Fiverr.com to contract the build of a variable frequency pure sine wave inverter to an electronic Engineer on that site.
I have tested the geometrical pattern of the electromagnetic core with identical poles opposing each other and connected through a straight bar. Zero wattage.
OK Mr. Ramaswami.
I think you are missing the point in the video but I have no desire to argue with you or anyone else here. Life is too short.
To anyone who watches that video and only sees a moving core, please look more carefully at the setup and see everything else that is there. Is the flux balanced from one end to the other? You should be able to imagine how the flux will be arranged in the two setups. The strength of the magnets does not change. Their polarity is not alternating back and forth. The method of actuation is the same. The coil is the same.
So what must be the cause of one induced emf being higher than the other? The video relates to the Figuera generator. How?
CM
Mr. Ramaswami,
Can't disagree with that. Except the imagining things part. If you have no imagination you will never conceive any working invention. And if a person is closed minded and not willing to entertain new ideas, well, that's their loss.
I never posted a video because the one I made with a N-S configuration wasn't any better than a regular generator. Like yours, it wasn't a self-runner. When I get the new one finished I'll be happy to post a video.
CM
You are correct on NN being Lenz law free. But to do that you just need to apply your mind and experiment.
The 1902 patents are NN. You may try that to get NN to work.
Regards
Ramaswami
Figuera himself says the Part G can be replaced by a switch.
Mr .Ramaswami,
I believe English as a second language is the cause of many a dispute on these forums. English is weird, with much meaning derived from context.
I only verified that I could not get OU with a N-S device, but someone else may be able to. I think the N-N setup has more potential, and I will see if I'm right. This N-N device of mine does not exist yet, it's imaginary.
Yes, imagination, the creative thought process. To look at a core with magnets on the ends and to see in my minds eye the shape of the concentrated flux of the N-N opposition. To imagine that area of high flux, never decreasing in intensity or polarity, moving back and forth through another coil and inducing an emf at all times. Then imagining a N-S configuration with the flux of each inductor combining into one field, then the center of that field, at the bloch wall where the flux is the weakest, moving back and forth through another coil and inducing an emf.
I have a folder with all of your build info saved in it as well as the pdfs of P. Kelly. No disrespect but I think your device is an AC transformer, a very imaginative and clever transformer but not Figuera's generator.
Regards to you,
CM
Westi
Resize your picture please, it is 3,264px × 2,448px any photo editor program should be able
to shrink it down.
OK Mr. Ramaswami.
I think you are missing the point in the video but I have no desire to argue with you or anyone else here. Life is too short.
To anyone who watches that video and only sees a moving core, please look more carefully at the setup and see everything else that is there. Is the flux balanced from one end to the other? You should be able to imagine how the flux will be arranged in the two setups. The strength of the magnets does not change. Their polarity is not alternating back and forth. The method of actuation is the same. The coil is the same.
So what must be the cause of one induced emf being higher than the other? The video relates to the Figuera generator. How?
CM
take some bare wire and wrap a iron or laminated core that has been coated with (your choice)) an insulator. put about 20 winds of thick or rectangle wire around the core (not touching) then secure. take two twelve volt car bulbs and attach the two ends of the core to each of the positive side of the bulb. take the remaining bulb wire and connect to the negative side of the battery. now take the positive side, with attached wire and touch the core winding's in the middle.
what do you think will happen, both bulb intensities are the same. now touch at either end of the coil and see what happens, one bulb will be bright and the other dim. do the other end and see the bulb that was bright is now dim and the dim bulb is now bright. if this is done in rapid succession this will mimic the actions of the figuera device completely.
Congratulations you just built your fist Figuera part G consisting of a splitter of currants and a magnetic resistor.
MM
The Part G is a current interrupter which makes the current supplied interrupted current or pulsed DC input.
The problem with Ramaswami and Darediamond is because they are just using pulsed DC or AC to feed the generator. They did not have ever used the two signals created in the commutator properly built. Therefore they just have results with North-South polarity. With North-North they have null results with pulsed DC or AC as expected because they are not moving the fields. North-North requires the use the comutator described in the 1908 patent. Period.What is it is to be studied about Part G which you are wrongfully promoting? Are you saying in this modern times, there is no 100% better efficiency to that Part G of a thing?.
I do not know how Ramaswami says that North-North, or South-South, does not work if he have never built the commutator as the patent describes. And he just repeat and repeat that the commutator is just to pulse the current. This is totally false. Also are false some statements done by Darediamond some days before telling that the commutator may be sustituted by a sine wave inverter. False. Please study the commutator.
Cadman; you are wasting your time talking to these simple mined single sided individuals that take things at face value. (visually)
just like the table top demo William Hooper did, he moved the magnets in unison exactly as the video did. this causes a double intensity E field to form. the goof can't see what is really happening because of his extremely narrow mind and inability to see outside the box.
this is the Figuera device all day long. they moved the magnets, Figuera moved the magnetic field, plain and simple. ( except to a few)
and in order to do this Figuera figured out that he could get completely separate feeds from one DC feed by opposing magnetic fields in part G. this device can be built by anyone at home to prove it's validity.
take some bare wire and wrap a iron or laminated core that has been coated with (your choice)) an insulator. put about 20 winds of thick or rectangle wire around the core (not touching) then secure. take two twelve volt car bulbs and attach the two ends of the core to each of the positive side of the bulbs. take the remaining bulb wire and connect to the negative side of the battery. now take the positive side, with attached wire and touch the core winding's in the middle.
what do you think will happen, both bulb intensities are the same. now touch at either end of the coil and see what happens, one bulb will be bright and the other dim. do the other end and see the bulb that was bright is now dim and the dim bulb is now bright. if this is done in rapid succession this will mimic the actions of the figuera device completely.
Congratulations you just built your fist Figuera part G consisting of a splitter of currants and a magnetic resistor.
MM
It will never cease to amaze my how someone can deviate from a patent so much with out ever understanding the patent in the first place. and spout off changes that can NEVER be proven scientifically or otherwise. to me that is just plain stupidity. so i guess Faraday, Maxwell, William Hooper and others are all wrong.You are always worried by my post thinking I am seeking attention. I laugh in Chinese.
please my stomach hurts from laughter.
there is no bucking fields as you say, they are opposing but when one it taken high the other low the currants will be in the same direction.
do this thread a favor and READ THE DAMN PATENTS!. i guess that's to much work and it's easier to flap the mouth. if you hadn't noticed NO ONE LISTENS TO YOUR BULL.
READ THE PATENTS !
wistiti; i think your core is to small and try silicon iron not ferrite. ferrite core will not produce a strong enough magnetic field. and also make sure the winds are not touching, or use coated wire and sand the top of the wire coil.
Marathonman,You who have been schooled severally by respected Goal achievers still keep up with fruitless experiment. Youbcan please keep quiet to let truth reign. I remember how your friend the Kite A.K.A Marathonman, crazily pounce on Ramaswami in the past.
I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W). I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.
I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance, XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.
Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures
PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.
Marathonman,
I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W). I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.
I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance, XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.
Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures
PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.
Marathonman,
I tested your simple design to emulate a magnetic resistance exactly as you described. I used laminated magnetic steel wrapped in paper and 30 turns of thick household wire with plastic insulation. I used a 12 volt battery and 2 car bulbs for 12 volts and 5 W (type W5W). I connected in each side of the coil and in the middle point of the coil. In all cases I got the same ligth intensity in both lightbulbs.
I think that the desired effect is only achived varying the impedance of the system. Intensity = Voltage/Impedance. So you have to vary the inductive reactance, XL = 2*Pi*Frecuency*L . Therefore if you do not create some frequency it is not possible to get it. I do not know if in a toroidal core with a rotating brush that frequency may be generated. Thus why variacs works with AC.
Tomorrow I will try to upload a video. Now I can post a couple of pictures
PS. If you keep feeding trolls they will come back for more food. You are doing exactly what they want you to do: argue and discredit. It is better to stay quiet.
Reply #3848 on: August 05, 2016, 12:17:09 AM »
Marathon Man
#3811 on: July 28, 2016, 11:54:32 PM » You said you would PM me regarding methods you use for your 20KW unit. Great! How do you go about that? Unless you have some other method you can use my email... briceelectric@yahoo.com.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
Considering that Marathon Man has not yet replied to my request for information about his methods for producing a 20 KW Figuera device weighing about 120 pounds, I created a spreadsheet (attached) for designing a Figuera single phase power section. The results show a unit that is much larger than Marathon Man's. It has been explained to me previously that I really don't know what I am doing, so I would appreciate forum members looking this over, pointing out my errors, and showing me how to correct them, as I want to get this right.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Sam
forest; Are you referring to D.C. OR C.F. device. just curious.
wistiti; your deck need resurfaced and sealed before it gets to bad. just sayin. your toroid as wound will have a hard time getting a brush to rotate across it. precision is required most in this area.
Please, stop this maddness. Figuera device can be powered by AC and pulsed DC. Tha's obvious why the latest is powered by pulsed DC, I thought we already discovered why... ?Forest are you being forced?
Some good advice or way to go for the rotating contact of the G part??
I have see the variation of intensity in the lightbulb by rotating manually but have hard time to avoid sparking...
Be Wise.
Part G is a DC to AC converter in mechanical way.
Wind your Primaries in Attraction Mode but your secondaries in Repulsion Mode and Utilise AC to activate the Motionless MOGEN youbhave just created.
Another one who does not understand the commutator Part G. Please read the patent again. Or maybe for the first time.
AC = 1 signal
Commutator = 2 signals, one to feed each set of electromagnets.
I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations
Gmolina,
Figuera used two signals unphased 180°, not 90°. The patent states clearly that when one was at maximum the other was at minimum and viceversa. That why he patented his commutator and included it in the patent claims. In other cases he has said that AC was valid. If that were the case some very smart guys as Darediamond will had used AC from other known method in that time, as a common geneerator, and they had bypassed the patent protection. That is not the case.
I wonder if people really had read in deepth the patents. At least the patents and understand them. Later you may test all possibilities with the polarity NN , SS, NS. But for clear reason I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations
Gmolina,
Figuera used two signals unphased 180°, not 90°. The patent states clearly that when one was at maximum the other was at minimum and viceversa. That why he patented his commutator and included it in the patent claims. In other cases he has said that AC was valid. If that were the case some very smart guys as Darediamond will had used AC from other known method in that time, as a common geneerator, and they had bypassed the patent protection. That is not the case.
I wonder if people really had read in deepth the patents. At least the patents and understand them. Later you may test all possibilities with the polarity NN , SS, NS. But for clear reason I think some users dont have the problem of not understanding the commutator. They are just creating confusion and hijacking this thread for some reason.... Patents are our bible. The rest are interpretations
Suppose two primaries and two secondaries coils in the middle of the primaries. If the primaries are in attraction mode the only field transversing both secondaries is:
N ---------------> S. As per Lenz, the induced field of each secondary will be <-------- in one secondary and <-------- in the other secondary. Both opposing to the primary field. How the hell are you going to buck both secondaries? Impossible. No way
If the primaries are in repulsion their fields will be N -------> <--------- N . In this case one secondary will oppose to its closer primary field: <-------- and the other secondary will oppose to the primary field of the other primary coil: -------->. There you have two bucking secondary coils. Perfect bucking output coils. In this case you may use pulsed DC. You just need to collide two fields in the center point, right in the point between both secondaries coild, no need for movement of the fields in this design based in flux linking.
Summary :
Attraction N ------------------------> S
<-------- <---------
Repulsion N ----------> <----------- N
<--------- --------->
...and that a straight core can be implemented as long as there is movement. so try your staight core again but with movement. might need to change wire though. ie. magnet wire with top sanded.
I wish i could kill the stupidity because it's running rampant on this thread.
You people are completely WRONG ! one north electromagnet taken up while a south electromagnet taken down will not work because the spin directions are opposing. does your feeble tittle minds even comprehend what the hell i just said. probably not because small minded people think small together.
I REPEAT, SPIN DIRECTIONS ARE OPPOSING with a N/S set up. look it up on any fucking Physics web site of your choice, just do it.
you will find that all you N/S'ers are completely wrong from the git go. of course you people probably WON'T look it up because you to stupid to do the research and would rather run your big fat fucking mouth instead just for the sake of arguing and to save your sorry asses from complete Embarrassment. your research in the figuera device is piss fucking poor and lacks ANY SCIENTIFIC DATA TO BACK UP YOUR ABSURD CLAIMS.
all the data i have posted CAN be backed up scientifically and COMPLETELY proven with out one single notion of doubt unless your a complete idiot like daredummy of rstupid that post the most outlandish, Ridiculous shit i ever heard that has nothing to do with the Figuera device what so ever.
when GOD said get in line for brains, you two must of thought he said trains and both of you got on the slowest one you could find. ha, ha, ha, that's funny stuff there.
i repeat, repeat, N/S spin direction when used in the Figuera set up will not work, look it up yourselves "if" you can read. the ONLY way Figuera could get a stationary dynamo to work is with two opposing electromagnets, one taken up, while the other taken down causing not only the B fields to cancel but the Electric field to be doubled in strength.
with N/S set up the attractive forces are to strong to vary any kind of field what so ever.
my 1 year old grand child knows not to put the square block in the round hole because it wouldn't fit, i would suggest you two simple minded people do the same. being stuck on stupid does nothing but back step this thread and hamper what we are trying to achieve. if you can't handle the truth or the reality of the Figuera device then i would suggest you two clowns get your own thread and call it "Figuera's device, pee wee hermin style" or even " IDIOT 101" advanced class at 7 pm.
'WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE WILL WORK except pure DC"
COMPLETELY WRONG STATEMENT, i would expect a little better from you Forest since you've been on this site for so long. stop feeding the simple minded trolls, pets are not allowed.
your statement is so far from the truth it's not funny, this tells me you and the trolls have not built even a demo device to back up you claims.
there is, and never will be resistors in the figuera device what so ever. resistors wastes electricity that is why figuera chose to it magnetically, no unnecessary waste.
part G can never be replaced or removed because the kick back from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary is stored in part G's core in the form of a magnetic field similar to an inductor, to be used at the next half turn of the brush, feeding the next set of electromagnet.
this part can never be replaced with an inverter either as there is no place to store power in the form of a magnetic field. i'm not being disrespectful to you but you need to study the patents a little more before you post such completely wrong statements.
this is for all the misinformed people that think N/S will work. study the bottom graph, do you not see the induced are opposing in the Figuera device, DUH !. if you can read then it will tell you it won't work PERIOD ! this graph was pulled from a physics web site so if you disagree with it then i guess the whole world is wrong and only you are right. get real !
now, look at the top graph, do you not see the fact that the induced of N/N set up in the Figuera device are in the same direction, meaning they support each other while B field cancel causing double intensity E field. if you can not understand this simple scientific fact that is staring you smack dead in the face then you are to stupid to attempt a Figuera build.
i can though, draw it out for you in crayola crayons, with nice pretty colorful pictures with pop up's that can help you understand my meaning, but "if", and only "if" you talk nice to me.
i again say N/S WILL NOT WORK ! study the bottom graph and pull your heads out of you ass before it's to late to build a device. our whole way of life will change shortly at the hand of evil people that want us in bondage. people like the BUSH'S, OBAMA'S, CLINTON'S, ROTHSCHILD'S, ROCKEFELLER'S and so on, will destroy this world.
"We are tired of your useless diagrams please."
Well sir were "ALL" tired of you big mouth and completely stupid ideas. imagine that ! besides i know it is just your irritating mouth running because i have people pm me all the time thanking me for my detailed drawings saying it helps them understand.
"Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?"
YES ! the Figuera device you idiot, unlike ANY generator in the world.
"Does AC Generators utilizes SS or NN rotor Manet arrangement?"
are you that fucking desperate and stupid you have to ask SUCH a stupid question. oh, well, i forgot whom i was talking to.
"Mr Kite"
You damn right i'm soaring high in the sky while looking at your stupid little self on the ground. what's your iQ 85
NO BODY WANTS YOUR LOOSER ASS ON THIS THREAD, NO BODY LIKES YOUR RIDICULOUS COMPLETE NONSENSE POSTING OR IDEAS.
please leave this thread, you are chaotic, disrupting and a down right piss ant of a man that gives black men a bad rap. you are nothing but a big mouth, jive taking, getto running piece of crap.
"if you can not at least be a man to practically defend yourself."
unlike yourself that closely resembles a "BITCH"
dude, no one on this thread wants you here, no one likes your idea's, no one cares to listens to your mouth run constantly. and if need be everyone will sign a petition to bar you from here, so do us all a favor and leave this thread. can you understand english, leave this thread for ever.
i bet you road the "special bus" to school, you know the special needs bus.
Doug, tell him he did good today cuz i'm not.
well guys i guess this thread is over and done with, as long as this moron remains we will never get any where. i already know how it works so no sweat off my balls, but i tried to pass it on only to be blocked by utter morons.
good luck with this IDIOT !
MMAnd you are not even doing the rigth work. Are you?
I dont need to tell someone they did a good job they will know if they did for themselves. People who need a pat on the back for showing up to work are annoying. Personally I would be happier if they do not show up because they tend to do the least amount of actual work and take the credit for all the work done by all the people who did.
"Could you.please.point to one that uses.such geometry in the Whole world?"
YES ! the Figuera device you idiot, unlike ANY generator in the world.
All of them work off the same principles the same rules.Clemente just got rid of rotating the magnet but kept the changing magnetic field with the strength required to produce a viable output. That in itself should be enough to figure it out. Once you understand a rotating generator you should be able to come up with a way the same way Clemente did. So easy a child could do it. Remember that statement?
Dare & Rama. We are all here because we are looking for answers ..part of that includes having differences in opinion and that's perfectly fine.Its obvious Marathonman enjoys using foul language and will look for any opportunity to do so....even call someone nigger just because of a circuit diagram. please be the bigger man and stop responding ..keep tinkering ..that's where the rubber meets the road ..I wish you all the bestJegz, thank you for the nerve cooling words.
Hanon, as much as you may hold the view that this thread is being hijacked, think of Don Smith or TK who took Tesla's ideas and coupled them with technologies that were not available to him at the time and in the process improved them...Which is why the idea of using AC instead of part G could be feasible..as there is motion of magnetic flux but one where the B fields of the inducers are aproaching and retreating (assuming N....N configuration)..whether this is more efficient or not , only time will tell...but its no reason to stop asking questions..bottomline flux cutting is still achieved, its now only a matter of figuring out how to strengthen the inducer magnetic field strength for the least input possible.
...
Mr. Cadman..You have indicated that the Ramaswami device configuration works but is COP<1. ...
Jegz
Thanks for your kind words.
I can confirm that if we increase the number of wires in the multifilar coil inductive impedance increases enormously and very low current is drawn but high magnetic field is achieved in primary core. We have done this even before I started posting here and has disclosed it in one of my first posts.
I will not post here until I can post a video.
Thanks againr
And you are not even doing the rigth work. Are you?
"Clement just got rid of rotating the magnet but kept the changing magnetic field" And yes that would now.mean he bucked the Primaries or made use of N to N or S to S to achieve rotating magnetic field?
He eliminated rotation and moved the field of greatest influence over coil Y. Flux leaves one side and re=enters the other side of a magnet. It has direction which is constant. Out of the north into the south. The Y coil is effected by a changing field, induction ring any bells with you? It's the direction of flow of the field which is what happens when you flip a single magnet near a coil. If you use the strength of one of the fields to move the point of collision of the two fields you have a difference of flux flowing in different directions from the two opposing magnetic fields with out turning a large mass to flip the field of a massive single magnet. You can control the strength of each of the two magnets. The difference between a transformer and a generator will be your undoing. Enjoy your cop 1 trafo. I still defend your right to trial and error. Just remember the objective as you get increasingly further from Clemente's generator design. It's not even close to a bucking coil design. There is no double coil in the Y's that wouldnt work as per the design in the patent but I would not expect you to understand why that is. You have Beardon on the brain itis.You can keep running your mouth. What is real is real and you hve finally aligned with it at last.
KEEP CALM,
FORGET THE PATENTS
AND
FOLLOW DARE AND RAMA IDEAS
.
dareasswhole;You keep exposing yourself the more. I am glad you always fall for the cheàp bait thrown at you in Random. Wao so surprisingly revealing!
you have got to be the most ignorant bastard i have ever come across. Doug lives back east and i live in Texas you dumb ass wipe. so now your attacking everybody that doesn't follow you fucking bull shit ideas that you have not even tested, oh excuse me your whole "two" tests and now your some big shot Figuera know it all, fucking please getto man. how much are you getting paid to disrupt this thread you monster pile of shit.
i talked to homeless people that understand the Figuera device better than you do. all you have is the meg up your ass but i guess you like it up there fag.
YOU are the one spreading disinformation and constantly running your big fat mouth. you are a piss ant of a man and i curse the loose woman that bore you. i bet she's really proud of her retarded son. hows the little special bus ?.
read and study the patent dumb ass or can you shut that big F-in mouth of your long enough. probably not!
to all the retards of the world, "darefaggot" the two test wonder, is going to dawn his pink cape and save the world with his totally screwed up idea. your a retarded bastard and to stupid to realize it. your right Hanon lets all completely loose our F-in mind and follow this completely insane moron of a person that has an IQ of 85.
dareasswhole i would let you clean my toilet let alone follow your stupidity. i have never met a more stupid, ignorant person in my life then you that doesn't know when to shut his big fat getto mouth.
i pittey stupid people like you, always trying to steel the show to make up for his lacking of a real man. come on getto man fag, lets hear more of your stupid, outlandish getto idea's. better yet let's see your getto device work, come on stupid we want to see your getto device work, all the 85 IQ people want to see your getto device work
better to be a wolf than a faggot with a meg sticking out his ass. ha, ha, ha, ha
by by getto man.
I HAVE SOLVED IT.
If you combine Figuera's patent with a MEG, a rotoverter, a GEGENE and a SSG plus Tesla's magnifying transmitter you can output it through darediamond's copied inverter schematic (you can build it easy) and have COP>gazillion!
All you have to do is wind #31 inverse twisted multifiler (200 strands at least for HUGE magnetic field) spiral cone shaped bucking pancake coil on your core (must be molded) and pulse it at 1.21 GHz to excite the aether and the zero point energy will flow in and give unlimited power!
Complete plans and never before revealed secret details only $19.95 US
Paypal accepted
--
Honest!
Newsflash
There is already a working COP>1 device following the principles being suggested by Dare giving 2.5 times OU..verified by Jlnaudin as well...Im assuming most have heard of it...if we brainstorm peacefully I see no reason why we can't do better
GEGENE!
http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/indexen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/indexen.htm)
with 900 W in and 2.3 kW out it is very easy to do a selfrunner !
did you see any selfrunner ?
Yes, you need to construct simple HF transformer and HF power diode bridge.
...then again Hanon and Clemente are..lol
That was a joke. sorry if you were offended Hanon.
Yes figuera uses 2 signals to create Variation in magnetic field. The same can be achieved with 1 signal..the difference will be that Set Y will have a magnetic field approaching from both sides simultaneously...but flux cutting will be achieved in a motionless manner nonetheless
That was a joke. sorry if you were offended Hanon.
Yes figuera uses 2 signals to create Variation in magnetic field. The same can be achieved with 1 signal..the difference will be that Set Y will have a magnetic field approaching from both sides simultaneously...but flux cutting will be achieved in a motionless manner nonetheless
Figuera was a suppressed scientist who lived in an island. The patent texts as we shown are edited.. from our experiments we see that they are significantly altered. By whom I do not know.
The 1902 patents used the gap between identical poles. But the patent text says opposite poles. How do I know..experimental observation.
The 1908 patent is not even a patent application but is a disclosure document program. These documents are secret forever.
“Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and
accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine.”
Dont get yourself to wound up MM. He is the one who is trying his best to keep anyone from from the truth. All his efforts are to drive people to another type of device not related to the title of the thread by simple methods or tactics. Bait and switch, false accusations. You even pointed out he could go to the site manager and ask if we have the same ip address but he is not interested in the truth contrary to his statements. For some reason which is unkown he doesnt even give a method to his madness. Just be prepared to purchase the eventual circuit driver after you waste a lot of money and time on piecing together with poor instructions his dream circuit. What ever that is. He is a tool like a left handed wrench. Throwing around the phrase dont destroy the dipole. I doubt he even knows what that means based on his design. It will be better to just wait him out as he performs the hope girl two step. He is eager for commerce even stating the world as a single resource of cheap labor. He is the opposite end of the spectrum to any person who wishes to be independent or self sustained. Notice what people he is stroking. anyone who is going to help lead everyone away from the patent. He could with out any effort start another thread for his personal theory but he insists on hijacking this thread. Very curious to know what is in it for him? I guess time will tell, there is enough time to wait and see even if it takes a couple years. MM imagine what you can do in that time. I think i will just lurk and watch the car wreck ,I have my score cards and my comfy chair and plenty of coffee a perfect view of the impact sight. Just have to wait for the blinking yellow light to confuse the hell out of him. I call dibs on any change in his pockets the alternator and starter spark coil packs if he is driving a gas'r.Why do you and your cohorts think like a.baby always.
QUOTE;Oh Mr Marathonman, you can keep falsly egging yourself on. But I will keep on challenging you to show us what you claimed to have practically built.
"Fact
1.The patent was filed in 1908 ;the technology was primitive compared to what we have today
2.We have No idea whatsoever as to the exact coil configuration used as that was not expressly stated in the patent.
3. Part G was depicted a s a set of resistors
4.The jury is still out on whether the poles are attracting or in repulsion mode..this wasn't expressly stated either."
While granted it was a while ago somethings can't be replaced as in part "G". it will never self sustain with out it. NEVER !
fairly simple to deduce after trial and error, there is only so many ways to wind a coil especially of the time frame.
it even says it was drawn in an elementary way to get the understanding across, do you seriously think he would waste power unnecessarily like that. do you not have the ability to see past a simple drawing that says it is just a drawing, well em, i guess not.
the jury is not out, six plus people says the polarity is NN including one that has a working device. not to mention my demo device with 100 watts in and 300 watts out all at NN set up.
most of the speculation on N/S on this device was backed by no or little research and the ones that did do research got little to nothing out because of the opposing induced.
completely irrational statements backed by irrational thinking with no research what so ever leads one to no where very fast and does nothing but distract the real purpose of this tread and it's followers.
and i'll be darn if i am going to stand around while some unintelligent lemming from the pic below runs his mouth at every thing i post about the Figuera device that can be verified by any real semi intelligent researcher. i have over three years and mega thousands of hours of research in each piece of the Figuera device and have read every patent no less than 50 times each reading between the lines.
you, my friend, are sadly mistaken if you think i don't know what time it is with the Figuera device.
you people aren't even in the same ball park as me.
ps. GEGENE! is not even close to the Figuera device. no resemblance what so ever.
and not a single cuss word from my sailor mouth, yah ! ex military.
May I request all who differentiatea between a Generator and a Transformer to explain what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer? I have never ever hidden the fact that I'm not trained in Electricity and Magnetism. Apart from doing a lot of experiments and varying the parameters I cannot claim any formal technical knowledge in Electricity and Magnetism. As far as my very limited knowledge and understanding goes a Transformer does the job of stepping up or stepping down the voltage. When the voltage is stpped up the current is reduced and when the voltage is stepped down the current is increased. Transformers of this kind are used in many devices and also used for Electrical transmission. In a Transformer the output is always less than the input. Or a Transformer is always COP<1.
Generators on the other hand produce Electricity using the principle of Electromagnetic induction.
As I see it the Figuera device and all other devices whether they rotate the magnetic core or do not do only one thing. They create a time varying magnetic field. A conductor subjected to this time varying magnetic field gets induced Electricity. When we rotate a core as Figuera observed the magnetic drag applies and so we need to provide far higher mechnical energy than the output Electricity. But if we do not rotate the core but rotate only the magnetic field in the core we need to give only a small amount of electrical energy.
Regarding the statement that the magnets in Figuera device can be permanent magnets yes that is very true from my observations and from a theory.
I do not know if this is true or not. But Patrick has taught me that if the magnetic field does not collapse to Zero Lenz law effect would not come in to play and so if we use a circuit with full Wave Diode Bridge and make the output wave +5 to +5 at the bottom and the wave is made in to a full positive sign wave never reaching zero Lenz law would not apply but the magnetic field will be oscillated and electricity would be induced in the conductor. I had the circuit built but the output was only in milliamps and Patrick for safety reasons has limited the voltage to 40 volts. The circuit repeatedly broke down. Even when it worked there was no magnetism in the coils for at 40 volts and milliamps it is not even one watt of input and you do not expect to generate output with that. The circuit can work if the core is permanent magnet of high strength and if the voltage is high. What I have been taught is that Lenz law can come only if the magnetic field collapses to zero to reach no magnetic field condition but if the magnetic field does not collapse to zero and some magnetizm is always present no Lenz law effects can manifest. But again I do not know if this is accurate.
One thing that strikes in the Figuera circuit and BuForn circuit is that the Primaries always go to the Earth. Only if the Voltage is high there is a need to connect to the Earth. If the core was a Permanent Magnet core electricity need not be spent to generate magnetism in the primary coils. I can very assertively say that higher the voltage in the primary higher the voltage in the secondary. This I have observed from direct experimentations.
Patrick wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device first but it did not work. I have now made it to work.
Since the Hubbard device did not work we tried with Figuera device. Single module only and it was COP<1. We tried to do the multiple modules as shown in the 1908 patent and were disappointed that the results mentioned do not manifest and voltage did not merge. So we built a large core and tried again and it was COP<1 and so I put the secondaries under the primaries as well and tested and in one experiment the secondary voltages merged and the output was COP>8. Because the output was 620 volts or so I directed my staff to disassemble it as they used to experiment carelessly. We have subsequently built many devices and found that we need to cross a particular Voltage in the output coil for the secondary to cross the COP>1 and then it suddenly zooms. If we use permanent magnet core and use high voltage electricity as input to oscillate the permanent magnet core high frequency is not needed and output can be high.
There are many here who do not conduct experiments and post only theory. I do not find fault with them. The labour costs are very high in Western countries and it is not easy to build large cores and experiment. We have wound all coils manually and we have used lot of soft iron.
About 75 kgms of iron, or about 15% of iron bought by me for these experiments have become very mild permanent magnets. This magnetism is destroyed only if we heat the rod.
Now let me know how a motionless device that does not move core but rotates the magnetic field but provides much higher output than input can be called a Transformer and not Generator. Let me also know if the Figuera device acted in violation of the principles of Electromagnetic induction.
Actually these devices are very simple to construct. They are large and need to be built manually and are costly but the principles are very simple. You do not need high frequency but a high voltage input would suffice. High Voltage when combined with permanent magnets always produce COP>1 for high voltage low amperage input is sufficient. Secondary can be thick wire and it would produce both high voltage and high amperage. The permanent magnets need to be large. There is nothing more.
High Frequency is not problem if proper materials are used and I had been taught by a competent person that if we use high votlage and high frequency and ferrite core the size of the devices can be brought down easily.
The French Patent that shows the device to be placed inside a refrigerator is very intelligent. Commonsense approach to keep the cores cool. I do not think many modules are needed and a single module would do.
In my experiments the best one is Ramaswami device and then the Hubbard Configuration and then the Figuera configuration.
I have not attempted to build a self runner for Patrick has warned me that it can result in runaway currents and may even bring in lightening for the self sustaining device is said to bring in extra energy from the environment and can attract lightning and prefer living beings than iron to strike. Is this true or not I do not know but why take a risk when I'm not competent? So I have avoided doing that.
Let me know what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer now..While some people claim they have a working Figuera device and 100 watts input and 300 watts output but would not show it at least there should not be any difficulty in explaining what is the difference between a Transformer and a Generator so at least the confusing language is avoided or understood and an ignorant person like me can learn something.
Regards,
Ramaswami
May I request all who differentiatea between a Generator and a Transformer to explain what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer? I have never ever hidden the fact that I'm not trained in Electricity and Magnetism. Apart from doing a lot of experiments and varying the parameters I cannot claim any formal technical knowledge in Electricity and Magnetism. As far as my very limited knowledge and understanding goes a Transformer does the job of stepping up or stepping down the voltage. When the voltage is stpped up the current is reduced and when the voltage is stepped down the current is increased. Transformers of this kind are used in many devices and also used for Electrical transmission. In a Transformer the output is always less than the input. Or a Transformer is always COP<1.
Generators on the other hand produce Electricity using the principle of Electromagnetic induction.
As I see it the Figuera device and all other devices whether they rotate the magnetic core or do not do only one thing. They create a time varying magnetic field. A conductor subjected to this time varying magnetic field gets induced Electricity. When we rotate a core as Figuera observed the magnetic drag applies and so we need to provide far higher mechnical energy than the output Electricity. But if we do not rotate the core but rotate only the magnetic field in the core we need to give only a small amount of electrical energy.
Regarding the statement that the magnets in Figuera device can be permanent magnets yes that is very true from my observations and from a theory.
I do not know if this is true or not. But Patrick has taught me that if the magnetic field does not collapse to Zero Lenz law effect would not come in to play and so if we use a circuit with full Wave Diode Bridge and make the output wave +5 to +5 at the bottom and the wave is made in to a full positive sign wave never reaching zero Lenz law would not apply but the magnetic field will be oscillated and electricity would be induced in the conductor. I had the circuit built but the output was only in milliamps and Patrick for safety reasons has limited the voltage to 40 volts. The circuit repeatedly broke down. Even when it worked there was no magnetism in the coils for at 40 volts and milliamps it is not even one watt of input and you do not expect to generate output with that. The circuit can work if the core is permanent magnet of high strength and if the voltage is high. What I have been taught is that Lenz law can come only if the magnetic field collapses to zero to reach no magnetic field condition but if the magnetic field does not collapse to zero and some magnetizm is always present no Lenz law effects can manifest. But again I do not know if this is accurate.
One thing that strikes in the Figuera circuit and BuForn circuit is that the Primaries always go to the Earth. Only if the Voltage is high there is a need to connect to the Earth. If the core was a Permanent Magnet core electricity need not be spent to generate magnetism in the primary coils. I can very assertively say that higher the voltage in the primary higher the voltage in the secondary. This I have observed from direct experimentations.
Patrick wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device first but it did not work. I have now made it to work.
Since the Hubbard device did not work we tried with Figuera device. Single module only and it was COP<1. We tried to do the multiple modules as shown in the 1908 patent and were disappointed that the results mentioned do not manifest and voltage did not merge. So we built a large core and tried again and it was COP<1 and so I put the secondaries under the primaries as well and tested and in one experiment the secondary voltages merged and the output was COP>8. Because the output was 620 volts or so I directed my staff to disassemble it as they used to experiment carelessly. We have subsequently built many devices and found that we need to cross a particular Voltage in the output coil for the secondary to cross the COP>1 and then it suddenly zooms. If we use permanent magnet core and use high voltage electricity as input to oscillate the permanent magnet core high frequency is not needed and output can be high.
There are many here who do not conduct experiments and post only theory. I do not find fault with them. The labour costs are very high in Western countries and it is not easy to build large cores and experiment. We have wound all coils manually and we have used lot of soft iron.
About 75 kgms of iron, or about 15% of iron bought by me for these experiments have become very mild permanent magnets. This magnetism is destroyed only if we heat the rod.
Now let me know how a motionless device that does not move core but rotates the magnetic field but provides much higher output than input can be called a Transformer and not Generator. Let me also know if the Figuera device acted in violation of the principles of Electromagnetic induction.
Actually these devices are very simple to construct. They are large and need to be built manually and are costly but the principles are very simple. You do not need high frequency but a high voltage input would suffice. High Voltage when combined with permanent magnets always produce COP>1 for high voltage low amperage input is sufficient. Secondary can be thick wire and it would produce both high voltage and high amperage. The permanent magnets need to be large. There is nothing more.
High Frequency is not problem if proper materials are used and I had been taught by a competent person that if we use high votlage and high frequency and ferrite core the size of the devices can be brought down easily.
The French Patent that shows the device to be placed inside a refrigerator is very intelligent. Commonsense approach to keep the cores cool. I do not think many modules are needed and a single module would do.
In my experiments the best one is Ramaswami device and then the Hubbard Configuration and then the Figuera configuration.
I have not attempted to build a self runner for Patrick has warned me that it can result in runaway currents and may even bring in lightening for the self sustaining device is said to bring in extra energy from the environment and can attract lightning and prefer living beings than iron to strike. Is this true or not I do not know but why take a risk when I'm not competent? So I have avoided doing that.
Let me know what is the difference between a Generator and a Transformer now..While some people claim they have a working Figuera device and 100 watts input and 300 watts output but would not show it at least there should not be any difficulty in explaining what is the difference between a Transformer and a Generator so at least the confusing language is avoided or understood and an ignorant person like me can learn something.
Regards,
Ramaswami
Attached is a confusing device. Principle of Figuera device and this device is same. Electromagnetic Induction. How does this device is to be wired? NS or NN? It confused me for many many months. All devices work on the same principle only. Let me know how this device is to be wound and connected and how it can be made to produce output and how it can be made to produce high output. It is a simple device only.Rama " bombastic talks are made in arrogance" meeen lol! They dun know! There in there land, it is Kites that rule the sky!
Only when your dear and near ones or worst you are hospitalized and in need of blood you recognize that all human blood is the same red color and only thing that is needed is compatible blood group for blood transfusion. Until that time bombastic talks are made in arrogance.
Life is very simple and Nature is very simple and Peaceful. But it takes a lot of time to understand it.
Regards,
Ramaswami
Rama that looks like a hubbard device . I recall you mentioning on this forum you had tried it as per Joseph Cater's instructions and it didnt work.
I have to make a small Figuera 1908 device and take a video and show that it would produce output in the
central Y coil only when the straight core is placed NS NS NS and for it to be NS-Y-SN we need to have a different geometry.
I will do it within a week.
Mr. Ramaswami
When you show this to prove your assertion also please show the exact complete physical construction
details, electrical circuit including power source details, coil winding direction and any ground connections.
If you are to prove anything then you must be thorough or else it will only lead to further arguments
and confusion.
Respectfully,
CM
It's a shame that putting someone on your ignore list here doesn't actually hide their posts like it does over at Energetic Forum. Here I just see a little added text at the top of their posts "You are ignoring this user".
Gee, that's just what i wanted.
Over at EF it hides everything they post.
Soooo nice.
(And yes the box is checked in the user settings here)
I totally agree Sir.. I will give specific construction and show how it works and how reversing the direction of current flow stops the output in the central coil. we will only have a single N and single S and single Y magnets as shown by Figuera.
Mr. Marathonman:
I have avoided coming here and posting here for it drains my energy and wastes my time. It is only the abusive language that you used that forced me to reply and respond. By the way why don't you show your 100 watts in 300 watts out working device as a video? Who or what prevents you from doing it? I certainly would like to see it as are all members here. I have shown the other device only to emphasise that geometrical shapes matter. Otherwise why would I post it. You need not feel concerned. Do not worry.
Regards,
Ramaswami
I don't have a single concern when it comes to your BS. i don't follow confused individuals that spout utter nonsense.Mundane excuse as usual.
well the video you are waiting on won't happen since i sold it to someone on this forum to buy my cores. matter of fact, i sold it to someone who ran their mouth like you. imagine that !
if i build another and give it to you would you leave also, probably not, you like running your mouth and hijacking this thread to much.
Forest are you being forced?
Did you just say AC can be applied to C.F device?
How come you let that out ?
Well there is no madness anywhere but there is deliberate Deceitful propagandas to prevent people from getting liberated.
When you vibrate Direct Current and Pass it through an Iron Core Electromagnet, what do youngest as output? You wanna tell me it will remain Pulsing DC?
Is there no Iron Core in the Part G?
Is not the Motor driven commutator acting as Vibrator for the copper wire wound Toroid?
What output do you then get from the toroid? Pulsing Direct Current Still or ALTERNATE CURRENT?
I request you teach me what I do not 'actually' Know.
YOU ARE THE DUMBEST PERSON ON THIS FORUM.Moron you are and you are practically proving that over and over. At least you are defending something about yourself and that is state of foolishness.
constantly spread bull shit lies.
constantly spread your crappy circuit non tested at all, just bull crap unprovable theories from a warped ass mind.
you need to go back to school getto man.
your trash with an even trashier mind.
piss pore researcher you are. whats the matter baby, no one following your bull shit unproven lies.
"defend your baseless theory"
i would tell you the same thing but your to stupid to prove your theory. iv'e proven mine many times over, your just to stupid to see it. to busy flapping your jaw.
by-by getto man.
Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change or a motion in a magnetic field is so directed as to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force opposing the motion.
I think you have already achieved lenz free.
... Cadmon.. I have already explained the answer to the question you posted in my earlier posts. Even Core asked me the same question and I answered it. ...
darediamond,I have made a post in which covers answer to our question. Search for it. Granted I have few posts posted on his thread so you should be able to find your way via.
I have a question for you that relates to the subject matter of this thread, in particular the 1908 and later patents.
Imagine a hypothetical inducing coil as depicted in the patents.
The coil has a core with 32 cm^2 cross sectional area perpendicular to its length.
There are 500 turns of wire on this core.
10 volts DC and 1 amp of current flow through this coil.
Suppose this coil produces a flux strength of 24000 gauss which is used to induce an emf in the adjacent secondary y coil.
Without adding any magnets or additional coils, or changing the voltage or amperage flowing through the coil, or the number of turns of wire, how can this coil be modified to increase the flux strength to 48000 gauss?
I know how I could accomplish this but I am curious as to what method you personally would employ.
CM
I have made a post in which covers answer to our question. Search for it. Granted I have few posts posted on his thread so you should be able to find your way via.
Goodluck Mr.
No thank you. I asked you for your view on a pertinent question but if all you have to offer is attitude then you can keep it for yourself.
To Farmhand and Shadow:
You are off the mark.. What is the purpose of the rotary device..To create an interrupted or alternating current that will change signs when it moves from one point to another point.. When your mains supply is already alternating current the rotary device today is not needed and remove the rotary device and the resistor setup and just feed directly from the mains.. That way you get sign wave and 50 Hz or 60 Hz current automatically. Figuera did not disclose the best method of carrying out the invention and so he disclosed a weakest method of carrying out the invention. His disclosure substantially hides one important point. Both the primary electromagnets must be of equal strength for the device to work best. They should not be of weaker compared to one another. Of course his set up made the two electromagnets alternately stronger and weaker and we did not test that but in our tests we got the best results only when both the primary electromagnets are of equal strength.
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.
The set up is NS - NS - NS The bolded outer electromagnets are the step down transformers where the secondary is placed near the core and the primary of many turns and preferably bifilar or trifilar or quadfilar is wound upon it. I used Quadfilar primary. Secondarly is a single wire. In the middle electromagnet you increase the number of turns many times and many layers. In all I used about 1300 meters of 4 sq mm wire out of which about 500 meters were primary and 800 meters were secondary. The electromagnets were built on a plastic tube 4 inches in diameter and 18 inches length. We used soft iron rods to create the electromagnets. 3 such devices were placed in the NS-NS-NS configuration. That is all that is needed to test and verify the results. This device works.
However be careful. When you give 220 volts electricity the electromagnets take about 7 amps but the output is really dangerous 630 volts and 20 amps output..You may get more or less depending on the number of turns and depending on the input voltage.
This is a modular device. Figuera called it Generator Infinity. This is true. If you use the output of the first module to feed the second module and the output of the second module to feed the third module you are going to get increasing voltage and amperage. Any one can test it and see the results themselves. But be extremely careful as the resulting voltages are deadly as the amperage also is very high.
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.
If you use this in an Electric car, the car can run any amount of distance. Only thing is that we need to convert the AC output to pulsed DC output to run a DC motor or may be use a capacitor to make it a perfect DC current to run it. A Battery, an inverter and this set up and then converting to pulsed DC through a bridge rectifier and then a capacitor to make it perfect DC is all that is needed. May be use a solar panel to keep the battery charged. Since the battery would be used only at the starting time, it will not diminish and in any case the alternator present in the car will keep charging the battery. This is an extremely simple device really and I do not know how you people who are all experienced electrical engineers have missed the mark.
Let me see comments that will call all this a mirage. But do test it yourself and check the results before calling my results bad..
darediamond,
I have a question for you that relates to the subject matter of this thread, in particular the 1908 and later patents.
Imagine a hypothetical inducing coil as depicted in the patents.
The coil has a core with 32 cm^2 cross sectional area perpendicular to its length.
There are 500 turns of wire on this core.
10 volts DC and 1 amp of current flow through this coil.
Suppose this coil produces a flux strength of 24000 gauss which is used to induce an emf in the adjacent secondary y coil.
Without adding any magnets or additional coils, or changing the voltage or amperage flowing through the coil, or the number of turns of wire, how can this coil be modified to increase the flux strength to 48000 gauss?
I know how I could accomplish this but I am curious as to what method you personally would employ.
CM
All else equal, volts, amps, wire turns, core length, then doubling the cross sectional area of the core doubles the flux.
The flux density remains the same but people forget the density is per area
http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics
i
http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/94828/what-is-the-physical-significance-of-the-unit-ampere-meter-in-magnetics)
This means that if the cross sectional area A of a ferrite doubles, Magnetic flux also doubles.
Yes,okay,I thank you a lot for this advice !
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-field-current-carrying-wire/v/magnetism-6-magnetic-field-due-to-current (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-field-current-carrying-wire/v/magnetism-6-magnetic-field-due-to-current)
This let me remind to an offered image from member GM,timely up to 1 decade before,who showed us that for permanent magnets not the wide or lang is important but the N- or- S-pol active area !
Analogon.
1+1=2
http://gap-power.com/replications-by-others.html (http://gap-power.com/replications-by-others.html) em force + pm force = ........
In the video he demonstrates the power of a magnet's lifting capacity of 6.99 grams. He then demonstrates the lifting capacity of the coil of 21.57 grams. He then demonstrates the lifting capacity of the combination, magnet and coil, in amplification mode, which is 76.65 grams. My thoughts on this is: ... 6.99 grams + 21.57 grams = 28.56 grams, which is what one would expect the result to be. But no, it was 76.65 grams. 76.65 divided by 28.56 = 2.68 times more power. He then demonstrates neutralization mode and how the magnetic force was completely blocked, with a lifting capacity of 0.0 grams.
There is a push&pull attraction/repulsion force difference
The amplification mode is known as experimental results by the Flynn brothers.
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood4.gif (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood4.gif)
https://web.archive.org/web/20020610043439/http://flynnresearch.net/Software.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20020610043439/http://flynnresearch.net/Software.htm)
Here the open/closed permanent magnet path circuit result:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood5.jpg (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood5.jpg)
and here the static or rotoric use:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood10.gif (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/harwood10.gif)
If there are constructed such devices,in conjunction from electro- and permanent magnets,
which is the amplification mode force effect formula ?
http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20technology%20white%20paper.pdf (http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20technology%20white%20paper.pdf)
page 5
Low power consumption per unit of force/torque. PPMT devices generate twice the magnetic flux strength and four times the force of an equivalent direct field coil system for the same electrical input.
No power consumption for latches,linear actuators,or rotary actuators to hold force.
Since PPMT devices derive their primary motive force from permanent magnets they hold with full force during power-off conditions.
The problem what I see: this progress was in a 40 years schedule by known use of material specifications.
WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE USED MATERIALS AND PRODUCTION QUALITIES
OF THE FIGUERA DEVICE
Sincerely
OCWL
How many have actually kicked back in your favorite chair, or sofa, with a nice adult beverage, possibly chilled, and contemplated what Lenz was suggesting? It's not a bad idea, contemplating that which he suggests through his penned observation. Laws are made by men to govern men! Lenz did not pen a law, he placed his thoughts on paper, and shared those thoughts with like minded men of his time. Influential men in his time, with vested interest in the future shaped the future using ideas presented to them by insightful individuals. They decide which ideas would become the ideas which all men would structure their lives around. Place yourself in the position of the man who made the observation, respect the position of those few who comprehended its ability to bind the ignorant together.
When Lenz's observation is truly comprehended, we observe that the way forward is as simple as creating a beat, those among you who can will comprehended what has just been given. Lenz is not holding any of us back, ignorance, and its cousin arrogance is.
step-by-step lecture research:
30376:
30377
The Figuera device has physical rotating parts and a motor makes part !
30378
induction occurs because of the intermittences of the current which magnetize the electromagnets, and in order to achieve these intermittences or changes in sign, only is required a very small quantity or almost negligible force, we, with our generator, produce the same effects of current dynamos without using any driving force at all.
Enough for today
Sincerely
OCWL
Between the later patent publications read ,especially marathonman and 100% Figuera device related and in original language :
1.problem: translation/transduction from a uncommon/foreign language (also today a great problem: automatic translater comparision)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOv19wRBnvftioqQ-W8IScg (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOv19wRBnvftioqQ-W8IScg)
clearly only one view from the object and trial by prototyping
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89DyGj1nHcU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89DyGj1nHcU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0K7ToVjkh4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0K7ToVjkh4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c01LV-k-Piw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c01LV-k-Piw)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYnm64SZuCU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYnm64SZuCU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es6PbrJRCsE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es6PbrJRCsE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVIbNk-ELUE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVIbNk-ELUE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJQF0-H7RQM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJQF0-H7RQM)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbfnhKL-po (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbfnhKL-po)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSunv5bnj_w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSunv5bnj_w)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_yJZfbZB4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_yJZfbZB4)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdzFY7XrFfY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4H06wl1O-o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4H06wl1O-o)
How many comments ? How many followers ? net-wide ?
second youtube-experimenter:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMyDmJ_wt7YeP5hshuvgc2Q (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMyDmJ_wt7YeP5hshuvgc2Q)
This is from a 2012 version of Patrick Kelly ebook, chapter 3, about Richard Willis generator and a simplified version done from a user called silverhealtheu.North South for Motor North North for Generator in the motionless MoGen of Silverhealtheu.
"
The input power supply is fed to an electromagnet but is converted into a pulsed supply by the use of an interrupter switch which may be mechanical or electronic. As can be seen, the arrangement is particularly simple although it is an unusual configuration with the electromagnet core touching one of the permanent magnets and not the other. The magnet and electromagnet poles are important, with the permanent magnet North poles pointing towards the electromagnet and when the electromagnet is powered up, it’s South pole is towards the North pole of the permanent magnet which it is touching. This means that when the electromagnet is powered up, it’s magnetic field strengthens the magnetic field of that magnet.
There is a one-centimetre gap at the other end of the electromagnet and it’s North pole opposes the North pole of the second permanent magnet. With this arrangement, each electromagnet pulse has a major magnetic effect on the area between the two permanent magnets
...
Silverhealtheu. One of the EVGRAY yahoo forum members whose ID is ‘silverhealtheu’ has described a simple device which appears to be not unlike the Richard Willis generator above.
The device consists of an iron bar one inch (25 mm) in diameter and one foot (300 mm) long. At one end, there is a stack of five neodymium magnets and at the opposite end, a single neodymium magnet. At the end with the five magnets, there is a coil of wire which is strongly pulsed by a drive circuit. Down the length of the bar, a series of pick-up coils are positioned. Each of these coils picks up the same level of power that is fed to the pulsing coil and the combined output is said to exceed the input power.
"
Look for the similarities with Figuera...
DougBut why would my friend, my darling 5&6 Mr.Marathonman nott want you to post on here again? Why did make such request? Definitely the correct practicals and theories made available by you is giving some people heartache.
You may please call me Rams if it is easy to use.
I have to decline to accept the bait. In theoretical knowledge you are a Tiger and I am a cat. Not fair game here.
I only shared my experiments and observations.
lancaIV..sir..the one more observation that I need to share is that increasing the primary voltage dramatically increases the secondary wattage. You can reduce the primary amperage by using multifilar coils with plastic iron sheet plastic placed between layers of primary multifilar wire. Magnetism is intense. Input is AC. Cause is increasing inductive impedance in primary. I can only experiment once in a month now and if I have reportable results I will share.
My coils are fairly large. They are heavy. It takes time and effort to winfmd them and experiment.
Marathonman.. here is a deal you cannot refuse. You tender an unconditional apology to all including Mr. Dare Diamond and I will not post here in this thread. You know I am honest.
Regards
Ramaswami
Oh..This is the difference between transformers and generator. .well. Doug I used soft iron rods and weak residual magnetism is present in about 15% of the rods. They are very weak though.
You can say impurities are the reason.
Can you point out the specific part of the patent thatvsays no residual magnetism is present.
Regards
Ramaswami
Sir..For every 200ohms resistance, minimum of 500V is needed.
What I observe is this. .
Here mains voltage is not constant. It flutuates between 190 to 220 volts. In the same set up output of secondary is 30 volts when input voltage is 220 volts. Output of secondary drops to 18 volts when input voltage is 190 volts. We have 50 hz here.
Similarly if you increase the voltage to 1000 volts frpm 100 volts output voltage will shoot up. Secondary resistance being constant when secondary voltage is increased the amperage also raises. Amperage is based on secondary wire thickness and amazingly thickness of secondary insulation. I understand thick wire producing higher amps but I do not understand the insulation part. Information on insulation is available in Daniel McFarland Cook patent and in Joesph Cater book. No where else.
Don Smith wrote double the voltage quadruple the output. This is true for secondary.
I cannot write on specific numbers as I have not experimented andobserved but if you increase primary voltage secondary is bound to increase. If you are inclined to experiment please pm me.
Doug..Intensity of magnetic field and input voltage are the two things that matter from my
observations. Please explain in simple English for people like me to understand if you feel otherwise.
Regards
Ramaswami
Cadman : #4030 ! #4031 !
what-you-read-is-what-you-get ?
Sir. .That 20000 watts with 300 Amps means about 67 volts. I tried to do it but it is not working. 300 volts and 70 amps could be credible or even the reported 550 volts at 35 amps is very credible. Will require a 10 sq mm wire to handle that current.
Regards
Ramaswami
Analysis paralysis !
Ramaswami, this VA-relation is new for me ! Which publication ?
If it is written 100V and 1A to 300A and totally 20000 W then the tension has to be in the 67V range( pure mathematical by dividing,not VAr including et cet.)
Questionable: 1928 15 hp for heating , Canaries Islands ? Un Palacete mucho grande ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Islands) climate
Average low °C (°F)15.0
(59)[/color]15.0
(59)[/color]15.7
(60.3)[/color]16.2
(61.2)[/color]17.3
(63.1)[/color]19.2
(66.6)[/color]20.8
(69.4)[/color]21.6
(70.9)[/color]21.4
(70.5)[/color]20.1
(68.2)[/color]18.1
(64.6)[/color]16.2
(61.2)[/color]18.0In the european south home heating has not been common.
(64.4)[/color]
In my chamber there is not a heater,2016 !
But pardon,Canaries make part from the african shelf ,only geopolitical spanish-european !
Patent publication: Trustable numbers ?
Cadman,you know it all : 1928 ? Pardon,I do not know it ! Figuera-Buforn generator/ load inrush current relation ? Only resistive load ?
Cadman,this are the questions ! Search range !? Only Spain or Europe or world-wide ?
Answer which would only get : several different types !
I would say,each machine: unikum ,1928 ! No industrial mass production norm !
Sir..I am yet.to.test the NSNS theory but I powered.my multifillar coil with 200VAC and hold a magnet above it and viola there start to be a Vibration of the underneath Electromagnet. I turned to the other.sides, the vibration sprang up too indicaticating that the Polarity is ever instantly reversing from N-S to.S-N on each sides and thus cormirms that N-S to S-N makes a Motionless Motor.
This is a very expensive project. Each test required a team work.
I do not understand your comments on material as fuel or material consumption. Material remains intact.
If we provide current to make primary electromagnets and from there we try to generate electricity from secondary most of the time we are biund to fail unless we reach core saturation. On the other hand if we use partially magnetised permanent magnet core in primary then we needcto give high voltage and lower amperage only to get very good output far in excess of input. This is quite simple and straight forward. Using Ac input multifilar coils and a mild permanent magnetic core in primary we can easily achieve this. But none will accept this.
How we can make this in to a self runner is not clear to me. There are theories but I have not even tried ascthey are said to be very dangerous to conduct. I cannot take risks.
Somehow 15% of soft iron used by s has become permanent magnets. Very mild but not clear to me how. Professor who lokked at my results wanted me to test each rod for magnetism and we took a long time and got about 75 kgm of soft iron rods of different magnetic strength.
I cannot say why the same rod is stronger at one end and weaker at another end. Their magnetism is removed only by heating. Somehow magnetic remanance has formed in soft iron rods but not in all and even in the same rod it is varying in places.
I will be working on other principles as time and money permits and subject to availability of team. Whatever I indicated can be verified easily.
In fact Mr. Cadman accepted that He tested the NS NS NS variation suggested by me and found it to be cop <1.
There is nothing surprising in it as he used single module and used current to make primary electromagnets. If he has used higher voltage input and permanent magnets he eould have got bettee results.
I find my results and observations to be different from a lot of accepted info stated here and we have replicated again to verify our results.
You can test yourself as you indicated you have done extensive research. You can increase or decrease the input voltage and verify how the output is affected. I would also suggest that use multifilar coils in primary alone. In secondary we need to use a single highly insulated thick wire.
Except for the self runner part I have verified the other results.
Generally speaking Nature generates electricity in two ways. Electrostatic and Electromagnetic. If we combine both of these methods probably it is possible to build self runners but I do not have the technical expertise to do all these things nor the funds. I am also exhausted.
Regards
Ramaswami
I am yet.to.test the NSNS theory but I powered.my multifillar coil with 200VAC and hold a magnet above it and viola there start to be a Vibration of the underneath Electromagnet. I turned to the other.sides, the vibration sprang up too indicaticating that the Polarity is ever instantly reversing from N-S to.S-N on each sides and thus cormirms that N-S to S-N makes a Motionless Motor.
Ramaswami, you need no magnet to reduce the inputs current. All you need is High frequency, High Voltage. And Ferrite Core.
I am yet.to.test the NSNS theory but I powered.my multifillar coil with 200VAC and hold a magnet above it and viola there start to be a Vibration of the underneath Electromagnet. I turned to the other.sides, the vibration sprang up too indicaticating that the Polarity is ever instantly reversing from N-S to.S-N on each sides and thus cormirms that N-S to S-N makes a Motionless Motor.
Ramaswami, you need no magnet to reduce the inputs current. All you need is High frequency, High Voltage. And Ferrite Core.
"This is not written in the official and original Figuera/Buforn documents as working principle."
You are wrong.
With NN poles and pulsed DC or AC the induction is 0.0 because there are two fields colliding in the center of the induced coil and final result is null.
To get induction with NN poles you need the commutator as described in the 1908 patent. Period. You need to move the two field, which does not happen with pulsed DC or simple AC.
This is not difficult to understand, but I see people interested in posting that NN does not work. I may guess many interests are present here to confuse people snd tell that the comutator is just to create AC which is untrue. I just say to test both configuration NS and NN with the 1908 commutator and then each one may see the difference and choose the design they prefer. Test and choose for yourselves.
I am just answering the technical statement, nor the others statements that I have other way of seeing those things. "overrulling my objections sent me funds" ??? OMG..
Hello hanon,
I have no problem with your explanation !
If you read the whole forum even some posts I did in 2013 you will see that from that date I defend the poles in repulsion design while the user you mentioned only used north-south polarity in his post and designs. I did not convince him of my point and he did not convince me of his proposal. If you really want to understand the patents you just have to read them tens of times as I did and analyze them in detail.Less reading of strange and unrelated patents are you post here daily and more reading of Figuera patents, especially the one written in 1908. This is the key.
Good luck and keep on searching for more patents..
" Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE"
Imagine this would be the drive from an vtol : how many transmission steps you want to have ?
think 4Dimensional,but begin with a conventional car drive
then think on land,under sea and on air
you are both right ! The Wheel : cw and ccw ; Audi Quatro transmission ? 4 X wheel-e-drives ?
engine propulsion and transmission probably as automatic (solar-planet-gear)
all terrain and spaces vehicle
Do you really think that I am in search ?
Sincerely
OCWL
The up grade on the new one is the ZEN SPITFIRE MEGA WATT ZERO POINT GENERATOR HAHAHAHAH AND YOU KNOW YOU CAN NEVER BEAT THAT ONE HAHAHHAAHAH LOL XXXX PS I WIN !!!
SORRY FELLAS BUT THIS THREAD IS DEAD THANKS TO LANCA.Oh yeah, he is soooo reallly Deaed,indeed !
MM
Doug;
You already know if it is not written in crayola crayon he won't understand it.
Quote;
"My interest is not going into any dispute, believe me. I just stated in EF that the toroid was not mandatory because it was not described explicitly in the patent."
explicitly means at the comprehension level of a fifth grader and written in crayola crayon. this device is way beyond his level and is a complete waste of your breath. it is written in the patent your just to ignorant to put it together.
we all know hanon can't comprehend long words or any abstract out of the box thinking so why waste your time. it is like trying to teach a turtle to run....... WHY ?
Quote;
"I think your arguing for arguments sake."
entirely correct as his track record can attest to that.
MM
you can re-examine G and the few parts it is made up of. As the field from N or S retards power is sent back into G at which time you have to start looking at it from the point of view of an amplifier. Where now you have two sources of input which if combined at the right time increase the output of G to the next increasing inducer. If the core becomes over saturated by ether input its dead. Since the goal is to be self sustained plowing it full of current from ether source from the start is counter productive since as a generator it will produce power over time enough to operate itself and do work.
@Doug1Maybe the two possibilities are co dependent. I can assure you energy is not dissipated from the moving field "through" the static windings of the stator section. Other wise it would be a transformer based off of mutual induction. ps i would not use the word discharge because it has been overly abused and it's meaning is diluted which will lead to further confusion and sideways insanity bring about talk of quantum relations and the speed at which Uranus is traveling compared to the universal expansion which caused a static discharge to fly out a fly's ass as he was southward bound in flight across the equator. Nah it's best to keep it as simple as possible. When you use two big words that can have many different meanings too close together shit goes very wrong.
You seem to believe the inductive discharge from the inducers is sent back to G at which point the input may be added to the energy in translation not unlike many resonant self-oscillating circuits. Fair enough however I fail to see a "mechanism for gain" in this theory as energy is being taken from the system in the induced coils. Not unlike many resonant self-oscillating systems the input can be very small however once a load is applied to the system the load always reflects back to the source. Can you explain why that would not happen in this case?.
I have come to believe one of two things must happen, 1)Energy is not dissipated in the output section as expected for some reason or 2)a mechanism for gain within the system compensates for the energy dissipated in the output for some reason. In either case there should be a valid reason as to why the output does not effect the input as we would normally expect.
AC
I can assure you energy is not dissipated from the moving field "through" the static windings of the stator section. Other wise it would be a transformer based off of mutual induction
Here is your question:
So you have tested the process in reality and found for a fact that almost no or substantially less energy is lost in the inducing circuit when the field moves through the static windings of the stator section which power a load?.
Are you pulling my leg?
Sam;
Quote;
"I have not yet built this contraption, and would appreciate suggestions for improvements, corrections, and especially those pointing out mistakes."
I would start from scratch from what you have, following a tad but closer to the patent.
to every one else;
QUOTE;
"I have not yet built this contraption"
Does that answer your question and how did you miss that.
MM
Gracias Ignacio por reponder, podrias decirme si las bobinas colectoras son de aire o tienen hierro dentro? los electroimanes estan solamente superpuestos o los unes a las bobinas colectoras con hierro por dentro? realmente vistes una generacion de corriente importante? gracias por todo y hare las bobinas y los electroimanes cuando tenga esas pequenias dudas aclaradas.Bobinas colectoras; núcleo de doble T de hierro 10cm, y otras de núcleo de hierro de 3cm.
PD: no esperes que todos te den la razon ya que en estos sitios no sabemos quien es quien ,entiendes. Saludos. :D
https://vimeo.com/178144785 (https://vimeo.com/178144785)
Good luck in the Figuera device.
Marathonman
it's not really a variable resistor; it's a variable inductor It must be intermitantly making/breaking contact as it changes from one coil position to another....
when the change stops the same current through both sides (mostly, there is a tiny different in resistance),
and after a time of the magnetic field buildup...
Although I'm not entirely clear why turning one way lights one and turning the other lights the other... maybe because of the changing indductance, as it reduces, the current is increased while the other is decreased because of increased induction?
The primary coils can be easily arranged to make first core to be made up of thickest wire, second somewhat lesser in thickness and so on when a minimum amount of current would flow through the last core. We can put the same type of coils in the reverse order in the other primaries to make the same effect so that the secondary would be exposed to different current on either side always.Was alternatively going to propose multi-tap battery/capacitor cells switched for varying current; but that led to lots of work done by the ends and much less in the middle; which would be hard to overcome too...
You do not need a part G to be present today. We need to oscillate the direct current from a battery for this arrangement to work and this is where the Part G was used in Figueras times but today with Transistors it is a much easier task and Part G is not required. We would only need to use a 555 transistor to be able to oscillate the DC current going through a Mosfet.
This arrangement will obviate the need for a resistor array and Part G as shown in drawings. But the variation of current must be present.
I suspect that it is a permanent magnet core and the primaries are Air core. An iron core offers resistance to current and so would draw lesser current than an air core. Even if there is no iron in the primaries the coils in the air core would make the induction to be present in the secondary permanent magnet core in the center and they have to oscillate the permanent magnet in the center only. This would enable the gap to be present whether we use the identical pole arrangement or opposite pole arrangement.Hans Coler device? Coils wrapped on permanent magnets, I guess in theory mutually interfering with each other to cause generation... https://rimstar.org/sdenergy/coler/index.htm (https://rimstar.org/sdenergy/coler/index.htm)
If the permanent magnet core is present in the center irrespective of whether the poles used are opposite poles or identical poles the oscillation of the magnetic field would be present. When the coils on the secondary are subjected to time varying magnetic field they must get induced electricity. In my experience higher the voltage of the primary higher is the voltage of the secondary. Greater the number of turns of the secondary higher is the voltage. Higher the voltage of the secondary and greater the magnetic field strength higher is the amperage of secondary. These are practical hands on observations.
it would seem after five year people would would pull their heads out of their backside but i guess reality just came crashing down as it seems i have been talking to bobble heads with the information bouncing off of the heads like that of a pinball machine.
Marathonman
I post scientific FACTS of the Figuera device proven on the bench only to be jumped on by these uncontrollable heathans of men that could not even be considered men by any right.Please show your working replication with self-runner? Then we have a information to share. If you do not have anything to show you are wasting your time with walls of text here.
Sead; Actually that which is in the orange ring is actually sliding adjustments as to balance the primaries from peak to peak. minor oversite that is it nothing more nothing less.
Marathonman
Seaad;
your a total fraud and a waste of a human being that is trying to prevent a free energy device from being sent to the world for replication. who do YOU work for.
Matathonman
This is a challenge to get people that are not use to a technology up to par and understand it's implications.I hesitate to mention this guy; he certainly doesn't need your attitude...
Taking a defensive position as always ? It is how you people cope with unknown and unresolved issues in new technology that just happens to be 110 years old.
Just because You don't understand it doesn't mean that it is NOT CORRECT...it just means you lack the brain power, intellect and power of reasoning to think outside the box understanding it's operating conditions. this device operates in accordance with all known applicable laws set forth by the founding fathers of Physics and Science and violates not one.
so my suggestion to all that don't understand it's working conditions and parameters should either learn how this device operates or quit posting on this thread entirely as you are nothing but a waste of this threads time, the readers time and my time.
post somewhere else if you can't understand it or don't take the time to learn. remaining completely ignorant is of course your prerogative just not my cup of tea.
Marathonman
[/size][/size]
i have a home base that is quiet and i really don't need this BS if this is all it is about.
I AM MARATHONMAN
so tell me brainiac how is the resistor array going to recycle the reduction of magnetic fields and use them in a positive way to off set the potential drop of the rising side.
Marathonman
marathonman
in defense of readers here [and the many builders ]
Is there a test/schematic which builders here can do at their home which will show an anomaly heretofore unknown or misunderstood??
Can you post this NOW ?
Chet
In earlier posts, you have correctly pointed out that the combined strength of two like, opposing fields at their collision point is additive. When that collision point moves past a coil of wire placed between the electromagnet poles, a generator is formed due to the relative movement of the collision point and the coil. This involves flux cutting, not flux linking. The output capacity of the generator is determined by the strength of the magnetic field, the frequency of field movement reversals, and the coil properties.
The field strength required for a 23 KW generator can be created with an expenditure of approximately 240 watts per exciter coil. Those calculations are shown in my design spreadsheet which was posted here earlier. The calculations are based on proven generator design principles. You are correct in observing that none of this energy is recovered. But the capacity of the ou tput coil is about 50 times as much as the energy used to drive the exciter electromagnets, which is much better than a transformer which is based on flux linking, not flux cutting.
If you can show where these calculations are wrong, I will appreciate your pointing out the specific errors and how to correct them before I spend several thousand dollars constructing a flop. You shall have done me a huge favor.
Sam6
Seaad;
the top pic i have no clue as to origin, the bottom pic was just used for illustration purposes only to convey a point.
my part G consists of three toroidal core #70 from Bridgeport magnetic's resined together,
when i get the new core wound i plan on making a video with two 100 watt bulbs being raised and lowered in complete unison as the brush rotates completely defusing all doubt of the validity of part G and it's inductive origin.
i will enjoy that immensely.
I have a little more at Hyiq but fore warned any trouble and it's cut ville for the problem maker as Chris and the crew will not stand for it. i simply love it.
i had no schematic for which to go by only information that was passed to me . life doesn't always give you a schematic in which to go by so just think of what i had to do, the research and bench work to get to where i am now, i am seeing the fruit of my labor finally.
Marathonman
i guess that is the real problem with the world today as no one wants to take the time to either use their brain god gave them or think for any length of time.Please do not take offensively - people use facts not fantasies for real world applications. Same situation with your posts as you are flooding this thread with them. One video proving you claims would be much better than hundreds of posts. Simple as it could be... "Seeing is believing".
MM
Perhaps an electronic part G approximation may work. If so, all you need a is a coil with several taps that connect to ground via switches (transistors or FETs) and have the ends of the coil connect to the negative side of the two exciter coils that are fed from the electronically controlled power supplies. The switches are easily synchronized with the sine wave generator as shown in the attached concept drawing. This is adapted from the drawing I posted on page 289. It only shows the changed pages.
I realize that you have posted copious explanations of how part G works and I understand what you are saying, but it seems unnecessary for the following reason. A generator is formed when a conductor cuts the flux lines of a magnetic field. It's the relative motion that matters. If two electromagnets have like poles facing across a coil, their fields collide somewhere between them and add, and if their relative strength is changed by changing their excitation voltages, the collision point moves toward the weaker field. If the electromagnets are excited by complementary waveforms, the collision point moves back and forth across the coil causing flux cutting due to the relative motion....and you have an AC generator with the frequency of the excitation voltages. It seems to me that the part G plays no part in that action and is not necessary. Perhaps my experiments will show me the reason why you say it ain't gonna work. :(
Sam6
THE MAGNETIC FIELD HAS TO BE MOVING,I'm agree fully to that above.
NOT JUST PULSING OR VARYING IN INTENSITY..
.OTHERWISE IT IS JUST LIKE A TRANSFORMER..
"I no longer find it necessary or desirable to post on this website as i do not enjoy rhetoric or foolishness posted from non-intelligent people..."
Finally you noticed your posts are just abusive and non-intelligent.
But inductance Control change od current not currentreally ? try adding another winding to it and passing DC trough it and see what happens !
What no barrage of self attacks trying to demean or belittle me. what is the matter trolls you finally got out smarted at your own game.
I have never ever played games with anyone ever. i have spoke the truth all these years and would not dare lie to anyone as it is not in my nature.
I truly want humanity to take a different path as the one we are one controlled by Corporate world will destroy us all. all i want is for the average person in this world to stop being taken advantage from these crooks that manipulate us at any chance they get. the Figuera device and the 1932 Coutier device can change the balance of things. stop spending your hard earned money on fuel when this device can change the balance in our favor.
Read, study and build is all i can say. your very life could be at stake.
Regards and most respect,
Marathonman
Thanks Marathonman for your comments but I never heard ofdo you mean Tesla's Unipolar Dynamo by any chance ?
"the 1932 Coutier device" do you have a reference to that.
I understand what the flux change does without motion but the trick
is how do you embody that? I've read and tried but simple setups
have not been successful and no one to date has done that either.
Norman
Cifta,There is a special expression which plays an important rule :
I am reposting an older post from myself here down below. Flux can be changed by either changing L or I (they only teach you the "I"-variation version in school, and in your case online). So current can certainly be changed by changing inductance.
Here is the old post:
MarathonMan is spot on.
EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used.
And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.
The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.
PmgR
=====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net/) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org/)*
Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org/)
Cifta,PMGR,
I am reposting an older post from myself here down below. Flux can be changed by either changing L or I (they only teach you the "I"-variation version in school, and in your case online). So current can certainly be changed by changing inductance.
Here is the old post:
MarathonMan is spot on.
EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used.
And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.
The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.
PmgR
=====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net/) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org/)*
Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org/)
PMGR,Dear Carroll,
I think you missed the whole point of my post. Of course you can change flux by changing the number of turns of a coil. I never said you couldn't. What I see as foolishness is believing that changing the flux will have any effect on a DIRECT CURRENT. If you know of a way to control DC current by changing the flux then please feel free to explain that. Once the voltage stabilizes the only thing that will change the DC current is a change in the resistance of the circuit NOT the inductance as inductive reactance can't even be calculated if the current is DC.
Respectfully,Carroll
Dear Carroll,Or by physical experiment and results publication : go to espacenet
I did not miss the point of your post. The issue is that you already assume a DC current from the start (t=0) while driving the circuit with a DC voltage source. The circuit will start up with a transient current and that transient will never converge to a DC value because the inductance is being changed continuously as a function of t (time). This is because there will be a voltage generated over the coil that is equal to d(flux)/dt=d(L*I)/dt.
So you have a DC voltage driving the circuit and a time varying voltage over the coil. As such the current will not be constant, but vary as well (and keep varying) over time as long as the inductance keeps varying.
These things can be very easily proven mathematically, or with a simulation.
PmgR
Yep well put , but again in theory. You would need like below micro-second switching time between one turn to another for real change in inductance
endlessoceans;
I have been researching this device for 6 Years (EXCLUSIVELY) with many, many hours on the bench proving what was shown to me by the original replicator. i think i do know what i am talking about, with full build almost finished.
the posts are for people to learn but i guess on this site people just shut their free thinking totally OFF along with logic and let the mouth take over. i just don't know any more.
Forest;
Do you not think an 80 wind 3600 RPM rotating brush is NOT in the low to sub millisecond range. please do the math Sir.
Regards,
Marathonman
Give me example of one single of my post which would be as useless as yours and stop this silly game. I'm not Tito
You would need like below micro-second switching time between one turn to another for real change in inductance
And you MR endlessoceans would be entirely correct. i just posted the times to give someone heads up how fast the switching is done but in reality it can happen at much, much slower frequencies.
years ago i told a member Hanon that he could hook a Variac up with DC then attach two lights to the output then twist the knob and watch the lights do the same thing as the Figuera device. when he twisted the knob both lights raised and lowered opposite of each other in complete unison which was acting as an active Inductor with the twist of the knob.
the frequency couldn't have been more than a few hertz at best and yet the bulbs raised and lowered perfectly in unison. here lies the problem with most self appointed authorities on this web site " Their brain gets in the way" of proper reasoning and post negative comments because it is outside of their understanding so it must be wrong. mind you I am not pointing fingers as they expose themselves.
this video is something people like Cifta, Bistander, Seaad, elcheapo, Ranswami, darediamond and the "like" refuse to acknowledge the facts that Inductance can and will control current flow but i won't mention no names. Ha, Ha, Ha !
the reality of the matter in question is the Figuera device used an active Inductor to control the current flow through the primaries at the same time as storing and releasing potential thus all the DOGMA TAUGHT schooling in the world can not change this fact or complete ignorance for that matter.
another person with a brain....... this is a good thing.
regards,
Marathonman
https://vimeo.com/178144785
Hi d3x0r , All
That stay on lit delay effect is a bit puzzling. And I wonder if the voltage across the bulbs goes higer than the battery voltage? I have tried to simulate this circuit with a 20 steps LT Spice Simulation but it gave no such delay effects. I think we have to build a simple test bed with a real variable transformer. But sadly I don't own such. Maybe someone in the audience here is in the possession of a variable transformer and can replicate that simple test with an osc-scope connected also to verify the effects? A higher voltage across the bulbs and the delay effect.
$ 1 0.000005 5.459815003314424 50 5 50
l 384 160 464 160 0 0.1 -0.4334366751837754
l 464 160 544 160 0 0.1 -0.43343622777604196
l 544 160 624 160 0 0.1 0.119634638944217
l 624 160 704 160 0 0.1 0.11963587722670607
l 704 160 784 160 0 0.1 0.11963735683521352
l 784 160 864 160 0 0.1 0.11963853663744134
r 384 160 320 160 0 1
r 864 160 928 160 0 1
g 320 160 304 160 0
g 928 160 944 160 0
159 432 208 464 208 0 20 10000000000
159 512 240 544 240 0 20 10000000000
159 592 272 624 272 0 20 10000000000
159 672 304 704 304 0 20 10000000000
159 752 336 784 336 0 20 10000000000
159 832 368 864 368 0 20 10000000000
w 464 160 464 208 0
w 544 160 544 240 0
w 624 160 624 272 0
w 704 160 704 304 0
w 784 160 784 336 0
w 864 160 864 368 0
R 256 208 208 208 0 0 40 12 0 0 0.5
w 256 208 432 208 0
w 432 208 432 240 0
w 432 240 512 240 0
w 512 240 512 272 0
w 512 272 592 272 0
w 592 272 592 304 0
w 592 304 672 304 0
w 672 304 672 336 0
w 672 336 752 336 0
w 752 336 752 368 0
w 752 368 832 368 0
163 416 512 432 496 0 10 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w 448 224 448 480 0
R 416 544 368 544 1 2 1000 2.5 2.5 0 0.5
w 480 480 480 336 0
w 480 336 528 336 0
w 528 336 528 256 0
w 608 288 608 368 0
w 608 368 512 368 0
w 512 368 512 480 0
w 544 480 544 400 0
w 544 400 688 400 0
w 688 400 688 320 0
w 576 480 576 432 0
w 576 432 768 432 0
w 768 432 768 352 0
w 608 480 608 448 0
w 608 448 848 448 0
w 848 448 848 384 0
w 640 480 640 464 0
w 640 464 816 464 0
I 816 464 816 576 0 0.5 5
w 816 576 736 576 0
o 6 8 0 4099 2.5 0.8 0 2 6 3
o 7 8 0 4099 2.5 0.8 1 2 7 3
If "L" increases "I" decreases, if "L" decreases "I" increases.the electromagnetic force written =d(L*I)/dt
EMF=d(L*I)/dt.
plain and simple.
Regards,
Marathonman
Seaad;
not only that the fields in each half will be opposing thus cancels each other out so no current control at all.
Marathonman
First pic is the paper between layers of double layer up and back.Hi Marathonman!
second pic is completed primary.
Regards,
Marathonman
Tell me WHAT you see as a short.
Marathonman
The reason i did not post a wiring diagram is because of the two scenarios and i will not find out which one is correct until i build it.
the plus sign is connected to the brush and the negative is connected to the negative of the primaries, follow me so far. i then ran the secondary loop back through a commutator to the positive brush which being commutated will always stay positive and the other to a negative brush on the opposite side of the positive brush. when it rotates and comes to the position you are referring the secondary will have no power in it as it will be at the zero volt line.
Marathonman
This is my Part G. 246 turns 18 AWG. L=2.4 Henries. Height is 4.5 inches, OD 5.7, ID 2.2 inches. It was a variac 250 Volts, 9 Amp. 246 leads are tinned.
Thanks and good figuering!
creasysee can you make your Variac working??
https://vimeo.com/178144785
"So we cannot connect any load to the device."
completely false, there has to be a load connected to the device at all times in order for proper function. when a load is connected and current is flowing a second field forms opposing the first and it is known as the Lenz Law. it is this field this field that the primaries push from side to side across the entire length of the secondary.
Yes keep things adjustable at all times as one misalignment could change the operation of the device and hamper it's output.
No load, no opposing field, no output, it's that simple.
and yes the device works in that range specified. no flipping of the domains like in ac.
What is your question and what don't you understand.??? i have posted a lot of information in the past posts that were really informative. please let me know.
The magnetic fields of the primaries will always be opposing as the Lenz effect will always keep them opposing whether they are increasing or decreasing to maintain the pressure between them. by raising one primary and lowering the other the Electric fields are alligned as such to be positive and additive thus presenting the secondary a magnetic field with the same intensity as a north south field of a standard generator.
In the Figuera device there has to be load attached to the secondary in order for the device to work.
this is exactly in accordance with Faraday's Laws of Induction that states all that is needed for EMF to occur is a rise or fall of the magnetic field.
IF no one can understand this Graph then there is no hope for the person trying to understand it. don't worry about the wording just concentrate on the direction of the fields as per the increase and decrease. this is the reason we have overunity because the Motional Electric field does not conform to the laws of conservation of energy and the fact that the exciting system potential is reused not destroyed.
Regards,
Marathonman
I have the feeling Figuera was in the same situation as we today and he just found a way to modify the existing motor or generator
I completely disagree. Figuera was a Physics professor that taught at a college then became a forestry ranger. he knew exactly what he was doing at all times
...
It's not proof, your argument cannot be accepted, it is an argument of authority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority).
See the story of this other professor, a physicist who thought he had discovered the N rays (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_ray) ??? . It was an illusion.
I have enough money to fly to your country and eliminate you so i would suggest you F-in delete my name at once you fucking prick. i am a expert in rifle and pistol and can take you out at over a mile a way so if you value your freedom i would suggest you delete my name fool.
next time i will not be so Nice ass hole Arne.
Regards,
Marathonman
This is a terrible thing to write for many reasons , these types of writings bring immediate attention to the author.I'm horrified!
This is not grandpa’s world anymore red flags such as this are no longer ignored and taken quite seriously given recent violent events .
This behavior can put your whole world under a microscope.
Sorry MM my fault.Hi Arne,
Regards Arne
Attached is one of our preliminary circuits we devised. Its actually based on the study of Joseph Henry. We figured that Figuera lived in the era of Faraday and Henry. So logic would dictate that the answer would be found in one of there works.
seaad, I too have been following. Amazing things happening over there, Men on a mission.yeah!
The mission statement: Be part of something Better
How true!
http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/clemente-figuera/?order=all#comment-113491cc-bb60-469a-9725-a88f0122b9ec
""Chris posted this 21 hours ago - Last edited 18 hours ago
My Friends,
Information I have received, Marathonman is going else where.
Yes, magnetic field is the source of energy, the supposed conversion of mechanical energy is the FALSE ASSUMPTION by the wrong method of generating electricity.like two strongman pulling the same rope but doing it in opposite direction.
So how does 1902 egg of Columbus work?
Hanon quote
Post 4690
Here https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/4680/ (https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/4680/)
QUOTE
Very important post and attachment (Egg.pdf) by user "Fernandez" in another thread
Read it deeply.
It agrees totally with Figuera´s design:https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846 (https://overunity.com/14906/joseph-henry-on-the-discovery-of-two-distinct-kinds-of-dynamic-induction/msg571846/#msg571846)
I attach here his document (Egg.pdf)
END QUOTE
@ Bistander
The above quote/post and referenced topic (Fernandez) have been getting poked and prodded
For quite some time ?
And honestly most I had asked for an opinion pointed to soft “old timey “ iron wire or components
As were used in Daniel McFarland Cooks claims ( his device)
And most felt the Fernandez claim has legs in Cook’s patent?
Bistander
Do you like cheeseburgers?
This needs poking and prodding now ( yes the AC part is ….?
Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
It is Fernandez claim I would love input on
Specifically
How to start a bench setup for a beginning towards understanding
The claim ?
Even throw out all I have written here ( even PDF ??)
“Your thoughts on Fernandez writings”
How to investigate….?
BTW
Still awaiting feedback on Mr.Corbin’s claims
EDIT
PPS
Since almost day one Fernandez has written strong opinions and referenced
Experiments ,
His posts below
https://overunity.com/profile/fernandez.101771/area/showposts/ (https://overunity.com/profile/fernandez.101771/area/showposts/)
Sorry I thought he was asking hanon …
Screenshot below Fernandez Columbus egg
And then I asked you ( for your opinion
And ?
A cheeseburger for your troubles…
Respectfully
Chet K
Sorry I thought he was asking hanon …
Screenshot below Fernandez Columbus egg
I get it that egg of c. is just an analogy.I just wanted to ask what is the underlying principle of operation?Any ideas?
The 1902 patent had stationary inner and outer primary electromagnets and what rotated was a drum type setup with the secondary windings on that. He improved it throughout the series of 1902 patents then sold them to the Bankers to pay his financial backer Buforn off and have money for his crown jewel, his 1908 stationary generator.
Very true, the Figuera device has nothing to do with the egg of Columbus other than it's shape. My opinion is he transitioned from the difficult design of the 1902 patent to the much easier layout of the 1908 patent with two rows of inducers and one row of outputs between them. One rotated (1902) the other did not (1908) except the controller which took a small motor.
The motor was there to rotate the brush or group of brushes and the commutator in the 1908 patent. The 1902 patent had no core for the secondary just some kind of drum. I honesty have not studied the 1902 as much as the 1908.
Very true, the Figuera device has nothing to do with the egg of Columbus other than it's shape.
An egg of Columbus or Columbus's egg refers to a brilliant idea or discovery that seems simple or easy after the fact.
Christopher Columbus, having been told that finding a new trade route was inevitable and no great accomplishment, challenges his critics to make an egg stand on its tip. After his challengers give up, Columbus does it himself by tapping the egg on the table to flatten its tip.
“Most geniuses—especially those who lead others—prosper not by deconstructing intricate complexities but by exploiting unrecognized simplicities.”... Andy Benoit
Hello IMIGHTKNOW,
Since you have years of studying and researching Clemente Figuera, could you explain why you keep claiming a rotating member is in the 1902 patent?
From PATENT CLEMENTE FIGUERA (1902) No. 30378 (SPAIN)
The invention for which a patent is applied consists in following note.
Note
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
alternating current which creates an induction in the motionless induced circuit,
placed within the magnetic fields of the excitatory electromagnets.
Barcelona, the 5th of September of 1902
Signed: Clemente Figuera and Pedro Blasberg
Exactly
It just surprised me with very low revs and good torque.
Please excuse my openness kolbacict but what do you plan on doing with that motor?
Quote; "Completely different machine"
I don't think so and I think everyone has it wrong. Why would Figuera build a non moving generator then switch to a rotating for two patents then switch back to non- moving again. He did not and the entire series was a drum secondary that rotated but the two groups of patents were worded slightly different to appear as different.
The only non-moving patent is the 1908 patent with opposing electromagnets which in my mind of years of combing these threads on line that everyone has them misunderstood but just a few which are no loner on this forum.
Why would you ask such a silly question as it was quite obvious as to the sale of his 1902 series of patents to the banker. Any other silly questions as i do need a good chuckle now and then lol!
...
For me, the only thing that remains incomprehensible is the purpose of a thick wire wound with a snake around permanent magnets. Shown with a red arrow.speed measurement or speed/torque control with DC, like in magnetic amplifier.
The ends are brought out, but not connected anywhere (not used).
The Magnetic Amplifier. The purpose of the magnetic amplifier is to amplify a.c. signals in order to make them suitable to drive a motor (servo motors, etc.) or to actuate a relayhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/magnetic-amplifier
1908 patent can in no way be the egg of Columbus as they were referring to the 1902 series of patents. The very structure of the two rows of opposing electromagnets with a secondary in between and the inductive controller with a motor, rotating brush or brushes and commutator would make it impossible to look like the egg of Columbus. But that is just my opinion. ;D
speed measurement or speed/torque control with DC, like in magnetic amplifier.Eh! and I was hoping that these were the conclusions for transferring the motor to the OU mode. :)
Wesley
Has no relation. Excuse me. I've just dreamed to break it apart for a long years. :D
I am just curious, what does that motor have to do with the Figuera device? Is it part of a build?.
The link you posted has a mistake //Thank you for your comment.
Quote; "As the DC level in the control coil//
He was about to make Nuke, but he didn't.
...
An inductor and inductive reactance is the only viable solution according to physics...
I guess people do not study physics on this site or OU apparently.https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg575094/#msg575094
I thought we settled that issue back in 2016, 'round about here, thanks to hints from Doug1.
http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/10712-re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera?p=403949#post403949 (http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/10712-re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera?p=403949#post403949)
All I see is individuals throwing in their own interpretations into the mix which nets nothing halting advancement. Unless the original is understood completely then how on earth can a variant be built. Humanity can't and never will benefit from this unless the collective agrees on specifics then moves forward as a group.
Randomly building with electronics or throwing in items that might be beneficial is a complete waste of time and will inevitably lead to failure.
Maybe you can take some good ideas from the link below:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/
To ensure that the current is not completely interrupted, it is enough to connect the moving contact to one of the terminals of the resistor. How it is done in potentiometers connected according to the variable resistor circuit.
I believe this means we can never let the field collapse. Moreover, if we follow it word for word, it is "always touching more than one contact"..
Hanon
Well done and your research goes well beyond that of any person I have ever seen.
AC
There are no resistors in the Figera device. :-\
Make before break causing an orderly rise and fall of current flow to the primaries by making contact with more than one at a time. Following the patent drawing is insane as it specifically says " Just a drawing for the understanding of the device only"
Inductive reactance of an inductor with a moving positive brush is how Figuera controlled current flow NOT resistance. Do you think an ex Physicist, Teacher and Engineer would use heat death resistors in a so called overunity device, I think not!.
All,
Maybe you can take some good ideas from the link below:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/)
Note that in common moving generators the field electromagnets do not suffer any lenz effect (back emf) when rotating coils get in front of them. They do not increase its current consumption. The effect in generators is that moving parts suffer from dragging or cogging, but field electromagnets do not vary in consumption. This is the effect under Flux Cutting Induction.
Transformers on the other hand do suffer from back emf because they work with Flux Linking Induction.
If you may get a motionless generator, then the dragging effect should be avoided, because if you only move the exciter fields, they are massless
I can't stop my desire to turn Mike Corbin's device into a solid state generator :) .
Coming soon somewhere in this section.......
Boris
Floodrod, assume nothing. Figuera and Buforn patents show both ways.
Regarding Hanon’s research,
If you pay attention to what Hanon presents at his web site, he is correct about the same polarity opposing. What is not correct is the depiction of the exciters fluctuating from minimum to maximum. We all fell for this, even though the patent warned us the drawing was only an example for the principle.
Think about it. Hanon’s drawings show the two fields moving left to right alternating from Max to Min and backs it up with the video showing the better results with opposing magnets.
But the video uses movement of the coil which negates the patent claims.
In the video the strength of the magnets at each end never varies. That’s the important take away, the exciter fields must not diminish in strength. Reducing one field will not keep the magnetic compression between the exciter fields. You have to keep the strength and compression while moving the exciter fields relative to the induced to duplicate the results in Hanon’s video.
This is what I mean
Hi all.
Nice idea Cadman, did you try it out yet? Maybe compare hanon's version vs yours...
Finally a path forward, THX.
Dann
This is what I mean
PS. The bar in the middle looks like some kind of reinforcement of some kind as it looks to be on top of the cores. The core will have a lot of force on them during the switching which mean they will need to be secured in some way.
Any thoughts?
"(trying to bring 2 repelling fields together is against the way magnets want to go)."
But isn't that compressing the field lines?
I think you misunderstand that graph you posted. Look at the induced, I take it as raising one while the other is reduced all while compressing the field lines.
Bucking coil tests.
https://rumble.com/v2f7gt0-march-28-2023.html
The pic you sent me (attached) shows standard induction. If you are proposing the Clemente device is configured like the image- then you have a standard transformer which is subject to Lenz.
LEFT SIDE- Magnet motion is opposed from the induced field..
RIGHT SIDE- Magnet motion is opposed from the induced field...
Yes it will induce good, but every milliwatt you draw from the induced will pull from the source.
Now if you flip one of the magnets in the same motion you cancel Lenz - BUT you also cancel induced power.. Those "Skilled in the art" will understand what I say.
I don't think Clemente is lying in his patent. I doubt he is labeling NORTH as "S" to deceive us.. But I do believe he is hiding something, either by mistake or on purpose.
I recorded this video about a year ago.. It demonstrates how it is possible to change induced power direction by utilizing properly positioned partial cores. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt-k6KOlip4
As I said earlier, my whole contention is that I am not convinced same poles are used and I am leaning towards the secret being in the core configurations (which the patent is mum about).
CONFESSION TIME--- > I do NOT have a self-runner... So my views mean VERY LITTLE- just like everyone else who does not have a Self-Runner.. So take it as you will.. Someone would be foolish to believe my words when I can not produce OU.. You are free to believe "Compression" is the key, or whatever else you want. And I have no right to say others are wrong UNLESS I can prove I am right by producing a self-runner..
This is not standard transformer action by no means what so ever. I am still scratching my head on some of your assumptions but it is what it is .
The labeling was after his north and south hemisphere of his controller not poles of a magnet
Construct the inducer coils using very narrow ‘pie’ coils like the old guys did for induction coils, but not connected in series to make 1 long coil. Not only that but energizing the pies in the sequences shown in my drawing.
Also if the 2 inducers are, say NN poles facing, the resulting consequent poles between them are a double SS. This has been known since the 1800s.
Oh and one more thing, please stop using solid cores. It’s self defeating.
floodrod, yes that’s the way the individual coils would be constructed but the wiring between those two groups is anybody’s guess.
IMIGHTKNOW, varying the magnetic field through the core will induce eddy currents, it doesn't have to reverse polarities.
@all
You guys see why I haven't tried to build one this way. The operation doesn’t match any of the patents and it’s way too complicated to operate. But it is the only way I can think of to duplicate Hanon’s video device without physical movement.
That said, constructing the individual exciter coils with pies or rings connected in parallel like Doug1 said makes a lot of sense in order to have “a group of real electromagnets, properly built to develop the highest possible attractive force” and still have a short enough time constant to magnetize and demagnetize those electromagnets 30 to 100 times per second. He didn’t have today’s electrical steels, just soft iron.
Nowadays I’m leaning heavily towards patent 30378 as the way to go. It doesn’t mention anything about commutators at all. And I can see strong analogies in this patent to the HES generators.
... Secondaries in the other hand NO!. Way to much eddies and Hysteresis. The problem with that is soft Iron is crazy expensive so that is definitely out.
...
Well Clemente Figuera used it so go figure. ;D and yes I am very aware of the classifications of magnetic materials. The Hysteresis graph on pure iron is darn near a small sliver vertical column which I would equate with low losses. Very little pinning sites in pure Iron.
For me, the only thing that remains incomprehensible is the purpose of a thick wire wound with a snake around permanent magnets. Shown with a red arrow.
The ends are brought out, but not connected anywhere (not used).
Nice Figuera device!, Do you know the difference? that will keep the thread going. ;DCome on. Good for general development. Did you know that such motors exist?
Yes I am new here but does that really matter or give you or anyone else the right to disrespect a thread or the researchers in such thread. This is the very reason why OU has such a bad rep on the net is this very thing. Posting a comment in a thread occasionally is not hijacking nor is commenting or giving an attaboy.
Posting of completely irrelevant material for your own personal gratification or distraction not the group as a whole is down right disrespectful and immoral on many levels.
...IMIGHTKNOW,
Truth be told, ...
I think I made some Big Progress.. I went over the patent line by line looking for clues and came across these 2 statements:
"Let be "R" a resistance that is drawn in an elementary manner to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system"
and-- "whose current, after completing their task in the different electromagnets, returns to the source where it was taken."
First observation is that the resistor coils are an "elementary drawing" for understanding. But obviously his were something else. or doing something else.
Second- Why was it so important to specifically say " current returns to the source where it was taken" in Clemente's and Buforns patents?? .. Seems a little weird to keep saying that.. And we all assume it means goes from positive to negative..
Then it hit me- the resistors need to be able to collect energy and return that energy to the positive terminal where the current was taken. Then any Lenz from pulling power from the induced coil will transfer back to the transformer resistors where it will all be recovered back to the positive terminal by means of the transformer secondaries..
So there is "No Lenz" because we are recovering lenz from the transformer resistors! As the input goes UP from Lenz- the recovery from the transformers go UP as the same rate..
So I rigged it up.. 8 make-b4-break terminals on 7 step-up transformers.. I got alternating AC output on the induced, and when I short the induced, the amperage output on the resistor electromagnets goes up...
Basically I summarize there is "No Lenz" because we are collecting it on the resistor transformers.. The waxing / waning action in the transformer string sets up a situation where the Lenz can be recovered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of_ZXdU2DLU
IMIGHTKNOW,
More than one member here thinks you are the person a.k.a. marathonman. Are you?
bi
...
I know MM, I have one of his electronic boards he designed to electronically switch part G. Simply flawless design to nanosecond frequency switching with only 38 lines of code. Can you do better bi?
You have no clue as to the Figuera device and probably never will. Keep on tainting threads your good at it. I was warned about your mouth prior to coming here. Good day discussion over with your kind.
Cadman;
I think I understand what you are saying now, please correct if wrong. Your proposing to switch coil count as the brush rotates having more coils active on the high side and less on the low side then vise verse.? If that is the case then where does the resistance come into play knowing that resistors burn off potential as heat yet inductance stores and release from magnetic field.?
From just reading Doug1 and the patents the primaries are wound specifically as electromagnets so current control has to come from somewhere.
An inductor has large amounts of flux available to control current flow yet can be made variable through the use of a rotating brush.
Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current
which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance,
through which circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets,
One of the ends of the resistance is connected with electromagnets N, and the
other with electromagnets S, half of the terminals of the resistance pieces go
to the half of the commutator bars of the cylinder and the other half of these
commutator bars are directly connected to the firsts.
So to clarify what we are seeing-- We are creating 2 sinewaves which are 180 degree out of phase from each other. But the astounding part is, this method allows you to create these waves with positive only and without ever changing the direction the input current is entering the coils. This statement is the gist of the whole concept and why now I believe this method is real.
Floodrod.
Keep up the good work. To my knowledge your one of very few people who has actually made an effort to build and test the patent as the inventor claimed.
AC
From the real inventor who built working technology, Figuera. He clearly calls for a resistance to be used in the circuit...
Floodrod
Keep up the good work. To my knowledge your one of very few people who has actually made an effort to build and test the patent as the inventor claimed.
AC
Whether actual resistors or inductances were used is open to debate. I have used hand wound nichrome wire resistors and an auto-transformer based design. Both worked, and used a commutator to produce the stepped wave form output to the exciter coils.
Neither one is a ‘special secret’ to a working Figuera generator.
Yes Floodrod, keep up the good work and follow the path your experiments lead you.
PS.
Another thing. A dynamo capable of running a 20HP motor would be big. Hundreds of pounds of iron and dozens of pounds of copper.
All we’re trying to make are toys as a proof of concept.
Personally, I don't even want to experiment with extracting power from coils until I perfect the sine wave. The idea is to create two near perfect sine waves that bottom out on the zero line. So basically we are simulating two sine waves with a positive bias.
And as I said earlier, we can actually do this without switching direction of current going into the coils. If you start drawing it out and thinking how back EMF and induction work, you may see the advantage that I'm seeing.
The magic occurs from the decreasing current. Or when the sine wave is going down. And every time one side is going up, the other side is going down.
PS There is no BEMF in this device or induction is lost I hope you realize this.
Go to Las Palmas of Great Canaria and find Figuera device photos in museum that would be more productive then bla bla talk hereYou're correct about the blah blah
Sorry It doesn't bother me that your gay. ;D I just don't care and the fact that MM does have his own site not me . We have a full lab and I am thankful for that. Good things on the horizon.
Specs like what loads are you building to as in just like a standard generator. You do know to build a gen you do have to have a load in mind.
Then you have to figure our how many secondaries you are willing to deal with or are willing to split the load to. Then your primaries have to be built on that assumption being split each being accountable for 1/2 the secondary load. Since resistance is detrimental to all devices It is likely they need to be wound specifically as electromagnets to react to specific current changes immediately. One long winding will not do, to much self inductance, capacitance and resistance. But I imagine your actually smart enough for all that.
Another thing the inductive resistance has to take the reducing electromagnet just far enough to get the sweeping action across the secondary then back to full potential as the other is reduced otherwise induction will fall. But again I am sure you knew that Right ! ::)
Not to mention a slew of other things you probably didn't account for or surely didn't think of. ;D
But then to think of it your lovely ability to work with others just might get you there, Doubt it!
What you could start out by doing is apologize for being a dick and learn how to work and talk to people. Your chances might be a little more successful. ;D but then again I am on the worst rated forum Doh figure!
We will see if you can piece the puzzle together without the aid of popups like the rest!
Have a wonderful day there fella!
PS, Lovely sim, to bad your cores are wrong!
Hi Floodrod,
How's it going, any progress?
Check Buforn's patent.. He is feeding the electromagnets negative return back to the positive brush.
No patents have any mention of a "battery" input source. There is no way Buforn's drawings will work Unless the output coil is also the input to get it going..
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.
and “+” and “-” the excitatory current which is taken from an external and foreigner generator.
Request to Math Wizards...
Can someone help me calculate the resistor values to achieve the wave in the image as designed? I have spent dozens and dozens of hours calculating different values over and over and can not get the pattern right for the life of me.. Maybe it's not possible??
Goal- 2 sinewaves exactly 180 degrees out of phase perfectly equal.. Crossing at the exact middle..
I am currently getting the waves equal by using 2 separate resistor rigs.. But I want to see if it is possible to form 2 exact waves that cross in the exact middle as the patent is drawn..
Nice work.
Try the same value for all resistors, voltage dividing is linear.
You could try a sliding potmeter, then you can vary the ohms manually by hand, total resistance is always the same.
Request to Math Wizards...
Can someone help me calculate the resistor values to achieve the wave in the image as designed? I have spent dozens and dozens of hours calculating different values over and over and can not get the pattern right for the life of me.. Maybe it's not possible??
Goal- 2 sinewaves exactly 180 degrees out of phase perfectly equal.. Crossing at the exact middle..
I am currently getting the waves equal by using 2 separate resistor rigs.. But I want to see if it is possible to form 2 exact waves that cross in the exact middle as the patent is drawn..
Imightknow
Agreed and I also noticed there are some people who consistently spam post random unrelated pictures or links the moment there is some movement towards a working principal of a free energy device. There should be no surprise here and it's common knowledge most big corporations and some governments hire paid shills to spread misinformation and distract on all forms of media.
I even ran some social experiments where I would move the conversation towards some more relevant facts, ergo bait them, and note which people made obvious attempts to distract and how they did it. The mistake I think most make is confusing ignorance with intent. To suppose some fool just spam posts every thread with nonsense where progress is being made but not recognizing the consistent pattern of behavior. You see the same people always do exactly the same things in the same way as if on cue.
My favorite is the "I'm one of you and look at all my builds shtick". Let's just build random shit which has no chance of ever working then criticize those who actually want to understand how they could work. Of course working principals could lead to a working device rather than countless nonsensical builds which never will. We naturally want to believe those who appear to have made an effort, a build, and that's the whole point. Anyone could build any number of nonsensical devices to mislead and distract a majority of people. Look, look at all the work they did, they would never mislead us or is the whole point to distract?.
Well said and it's really hard to know who is who but I found there is one way that works and seems obvious.
When someone offers something which makes us actually think or has some tangible value it's more likely to be sincere. Thinking independently and producing something of value is why were here. Look for the value in it, if there is no value or we have not learned anything then we have our answer...
AC
Hi Floodrod,
Quick question:
Would a Dual Channel synchronized Sine Wave Generator (30MHz 50 ohm adj->20V output) work for driving your coils?
If so - let me know...
Something like the JDS2900 (pdf manual attached)
Features Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzRBYPXVMQs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzRBYPXVMQs)
SL
Thank You SL, but I don't think it will help. With this setup, there can be no flipping of polarities in the primaries. I don't think anyone really sees the operation like I do (not that I am right).
So to explain, lets take a coil.. We can induct it to go NORTH in 2 ways..
1 way would be to bring a north magnetic field into it. Growing north will cause the coil to try to repel the motion and make the coil go North.
2nd way would be to pull a SOUTH field away. Again, the coil tries to stop the motion and as South is leaving, the coil turns NORTH.
The Figuera setup mimics the second way. It causes the induction coil to react to a field by pulling away the field ** Without flipping polarity on the primary***..
Now if we hit the induction coil from both sides, one field growing and the other pulling away, the coils are acting like a North and South even though current direction and winding direction are the same in both! We get real AC from the induction coil between them. But the best part is how the electromagnets should react in this setup with respect to induction back to the primaries.. The magic happens in the electromagnet with the shrinking field.
Just think of how a transformer works. The normal way we get the secondary to go North is by making the primary grow North. But with this method, we can get the secondary to go NORTH with the opposite current direction in the primary by retreating south..
1. The electromagnets driving current must never switch polarities.
2. The electromagnets must simulate 2 sinewaves 180 degrees out of phase. And evenly.
3. We can not collapse the fields, 100% duty cycle is needed.
I appreciate you looking out..
Now, both channels can also be amplitude offset by +/- 10VDC (PPmax is 20V) so at say 5Vpp they would not cross zero but remain positive
for the full cycle [+10V to 0V].
You need a class A amplifier which never turns off or goes below the zero line.
https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/amplifier/amplifier-classes.html
LoL- my cheap function generator makes both waves with a positive bias just fine.. No problem with diodes.
Any recommendations on 2 channel amplification? I think regular lower frequency is what we need here. Figuera ran his off a motor with 16 contacts which make 1 sinewave per rotation. So he certainly wasn't running 100's of hertz..
Citfa's Class A Amplifier is a good way to drive the coils and likely the simplest to implement.
Another option is to use a Voltage Follower Op Amp (a single supply rail or, if you have it, dual rail).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlcMhb7GYIo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlcMhb7GYIo)
I think a regular more efficient amplifier may work.. Those Class A's are hot inefficient beasts..
Signal generator set to Triangle- then run the Stereo amplifier output through a bridge rectifier. It flips the negative side to positive and evens out nicely.
Or if you want to mimic figuera's steps, you can use Post or Neg Ladder through a rectifier. Again it flips the negative side to positive in an equal manner. Now it look like the resistor rig.
Then just use 2 channels and set the phase to 180.
(using regular sine is close, but it V's at the bottom a little too much, unless your signal generator can make a half-circle sinewave. ) But that triangle looks pretty dead-on to me..
Now I don't have to wait weeks..
FWIW - Your FG has AWG (store arbitrary signals) so you should be able to store an "Up Ladder" + "Down Ladder" sequence
(and vice-versa for your other input) and replay them in a loop. I haven't tried it so just guessing? But might be worth a look.
However, you might have to "build the waveform" using the software supplied with the generator [another option].
SL
Hi SolarLab,
My favourite is Spectrumsoft's Micro-Cap but it appears it has become obsolete (ceased
updates a while back and the web page is gone :'( ).
The image I posted is using a regular stereo amplifier. I got the wave full positive bias after the amplifier...
Scope is hooked up to the DC side of bridge rectifiers on the output of the stereo.
imho the fields don't oppose, the purpose is to make one N pole grow and the other S shrink,
...
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one."Exactly, and the diagram of a regular dynamo shows N and S to indicate the poles.
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one" <--- he was describing how a regular dynamo works..
With 1 way current, growing and shrinking 180 degrees out of phase, the only way it will induct is Like Polarities..
Shrinking North acts as South..
Shrinking South acts as North..
Growing North acts as North..
Growing South acts as South..
demonstrating this on a live bench.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ)
Exactly, and the diagram of a regular dynamo shows N and S to indicate the poles.
Also: "since any variation occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical induced current "
N-N would be a moving monopole field which may have desirable effects too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWcPcOg_yc0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Enr6_d3yU)
https://www.eeweb.com/a-flash-from-the-past-figueras-generator/ (https://www.eeweb.com/a-flash-from-the-past-figueras-generator/)
Thanks for testing, looks good. Attraction mode seems to buck voltage in the induced instead of being additive. Last thing to test is the behavior of back-mmf created by the induced when a current is allowed, and how all voltages interact (scope on the input coils, both at the same time if possible. It's VxI that determines power and consumed energy, and if V is eliminated through mutual bucking, then who knows, just an idea). Pls also test attraction mode in the loaded state.
The emf in the center coil seems to be induced by flux cutting though the coil sides like a dynamo (Lorentz force flux cutting), and not by variation through the center aka flux-linking, guess you may be right.
Alan
Here all the longtime researchers from your YouTube links
Are now open sourcing
And sharing the many reasons why they started a new forum
https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/ (https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/)
Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Alan
You have been dropping crumbs for years here ,
Do you have an experiment ( actual gain mechanism?) to support your assertions ?
Open source is the only path forward…
Too many years of …..
?
I have since succeeded in causing the Back-EMF to be high enough to flow back to the Positive input lead and flow current back to the source using 2 coil positive biased 180 shifted waves. Theoretically it should now be possible (with the right coil setup and frequency parameters) to transfer inducted power that we pull into Back-EMF and send it back to the input to feed the circuit.
I don't know about all the cutting / linking / compression, etc. This setup is simulating reciprocation of 2 magnets of the same polarity (repelling) on each side of a coil. If both magnets move at the exact same time and speed, induction only occurs if 1 is approaching and 1 is going away. Otherwise it bucks and no induction.
My goal is to use the pickup coil's field to push the emptying coil past the zero line into the full other polarity.
"when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one" <--- he was describing how a regular dynamo works..You're right, I wasn't aware of this:
With 1 way current, growing and shrinking 180 degrees out of phase, the only way it will induct is Like Polarities..
Shrinking North acts as South..
Shrinking South acts as North..
Growing North acts as North..
Growing South acts as South..
demonstrating this on a live bench.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Syk9t7foYQ)
Thanks Solar Lab, If I may suggest, please reference the Buforn patents to see the coil / core arrangements. It seems they used a full core in the pickup coil with the ends extending and intruding into the driver coil's hollows. But the iron through the driver coils appears to go under 1/2 way and does not make contact with the other pole.I have had a good read and would like to make the following comments.
I have been experimenting and am seeing pretty big differences in % of power that gets passed to the source with different arrangements. Both frequency and core arrangements swing the results.
Alan- thanks for posting that. Now if you can, think how a transformer flux works when the secondary passes it's magnetic field back through the primary which raises input. With positive biased waves, we get real AC from the induced, but now we never flip polarity on the primary input. Try to picture how the downward cycle will affect the primary under these circumstances.
And if you see what I am saying, now if we use 2 coils out of phase, we can start to see why the resistor rig is of upmost importance. It has a direct connection between both coils. Electronic versions will be useless unless we can establish a way for the emptying electromagnet to allow current flow to the filling, but never the filling to the emptying.
Yeah, but (from my understanding, how I see it) the current isn't (directly) drawn from the flux, but the flux creates an output emf which causes a current to flow and when the current flows through the secondary coil, it in turn generates an mmf and its flux that has the polarity to oppose the flux that caused the voltage in the secondary, causing magnetic induction in the primary that adds to the self-induction (right-hand rule applied to i1 and flux2) if the secondary coil is used as a negative power source. And the secondary becomes the primary and the primary the secondary, similar to what is said about generators that simultaneously functions as a motor with a back-torque.
And the secondary becomes the primary and the primary the secondary, similar to what is said about generators that simultaneously functions as a motor with a back-torque.
I have been looking at the Figuera device for at least a decade, and have come to the following conclusions.
The Figuera patent cannot work as described.
You are magnetizing 2 electromagnets N and S and causing an induced current in y.
How on earth can THAT produce more out than in?
I have had a good read and would like to make the following comments.
My comments are with good intentions and I am trying to help.
Floodrod.
I have been looking at the Figuera device for at least a decade, and have come to the following conclusions.
The Figuera patent cannot work as described.
You are magnetizing 2 electromagnets N and S and causing an induced current in y.
How on earth can THAT produce more out than in?
IT CAN'T!! You know it and I know it and every OU researcher knows it.
(If you can prove me wrong I will be highly delighted.)
However, there is one thing you are all missing.
In my opinion, Figuera can only work if it generates plasma in the rotating contact device (or if we use a better modern frame of reference): the distributor cap.
Take a look at a working distributor cap and look at the electricity carefully.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0u9qsvPEcE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0u9qsvPEcE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCBw11fymiQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCBw11fymiQ)
My advice is to get hold of an 8-cylinder distributor cap from a scrap yard (16-cylinder would be better), modify the rotor to make more contacts, and generate plasma.
You can probably 3d print a modified rotor. (or maybe 3d print the distributor cap also)
Then you are in the same ballpark as Carlos Benitez, and the Alexander patent.
Then you can possibly get newly magnetized electrons in and around the distributor cap to enter your device.
Remember the initial descriptions said that Figuera was getting electricity from the air. I suspect he dumbed down his patent to protect his invention.
Now, at least, we have a logical working principle of operation.
At that time it was also common for coils to come complete with interrupters. Interrupters were often not even referred to in patents as everyone knew that a transformer would only work with an interrupter in those days.
In my opinion, it is a huge mistake to look at very old patents and try to modernize them using MOSFETs and solid-state switching devices. Very often the stuff we remove is the stuff that made these old devices work.
Thanks for that. I was not aware of this patent and it will require some study time.
a.king21,
It appears some of Figuera's patents work in a similar fashion as the Holcomb devices (LinGen analysis - see the OUR Holcomb thread). Also,
there is some good technical information on the Holcomb web site and HES facebook page.
One of the primary gain mechanisms is found by examining the material B-H Curve. Another is the concept of only moving the Magnetic Field.
Also, in the above post, AC makes the point of increasing the "frequency of operation" - only having to move the magnetic field makes this viable.
Therefore, any small gains can add up quickly. Don Smith used this in his scheme. Combining only these might do it! Some interesting stuff IMHO.
FWIW... Holcomb patent analysis starts about here - a.k.a. "LinGen;" and includes patent review, support material, and animated CAE cartoons:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509 (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509)
SL
Thanks for that. I was not aware of this patent and it will require some study time.
He essentially repeats Figuera's claim in a different embodiment so it is very interesting.
The billion dollar question is: has anyone purchased a device with this technology in it?
Or..... is this another Nikola type method of screwing investors according to this article:
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/14/1129248846/nikola-founder-electric-trucks-guilty-fraud (https://www.npr.org/2022/10/14/1129248846/nikola-founder-electric-trucks-guilty-fraud)
aking21I am only quoting Figuera, who states that this can work with one triple coil system. ie N.S, and y. just vary the resistance.
Apparent simplicity can be deceiving, did you know wind power follows the cube rule?.
When the wind speed doubles the power available is now 8 times larger ie 2x2x2=8. At first it seemed very non-intuitive to me. Until we understand that twice the mass of air moved through a given plane at twice the velocity. It's not only the velocity but the mass-velocity or total change in momentum which determines the power.
So we need to be careful about looking at things in a superficial sense. What peaked my curiosity is that Figuera often spoke of the total amount of change within the system. Implying that like the power in wind there's more energy available than meets the eye. Something simple already present but so non-intuitive almost everyone overlooked it.
AC
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.
Well, maybe the secret was in converting output using commutator to DC then return back to the input creating each loop more magnetic field more output current up to the point when all core material was saturated .... just my blind guess
All else equal the thick bobbin ends will result in fewer At/m and less magnetic field strength.
Thin or no dividers with short section length will give more At/m, greater field strength and a smoother field movement.
I also included another picture of a 3D printed former you may recognize from figuera's patents. I packed the former with iron filings and a binder then glued a lid on. It works well and the core is comparable to transformer cores in it's response. Winding coils on the former was fun but no more difficult than a toroid.
AC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk
Output sucks as expected. But first glance at what it does..
Hi floodrod,
I don’t want you to waste your time but that setup is backwards from the way Hanon’s experiment was set up. There should be two reciprocating coils, one at each end with a single induced in between. Your commutator is make before break, isn't it?
https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg575785/#msg575785
Also to duplicate the Buforn setup takes at least 3 cores as shown in his patent drawings. And with just 3 coils and straight cores in a row like Buforn’s, one complete coil is not effective (the outer halves of the end coils).
But again, don't spend your time on it just for my account.
Please expand on this. This patent basically appears to describe electromagnets powered by alternating currents placed real close together. Then between them is placed something like pancake pickup coils. I say pancake because they must be thin to fit in the close gaps.
Am I correct to assume this differs from a standard transformer because of the 2nd electromagnet of opposite sign on each side? I know from lots of tests that if I clamp two opposite sign electromagnets together, the driving current goes WAY down (depending on frequency). Can you explain the dynamics of this build to us?
I looked at and tested the partnered or opposing coil setup but to be honest I'm not buying into it. Not to imply anything towards you but too many people I don't trust are trying to push this concept, my intuition say's no and it doesn't fit with the descriptions most FE inventors used. So it's a hard pass on that setup for me and there's too many red flags.
When you read the Figuera patents do you get the feeling something doesn't add up?, I do.
So trying to decipher the diagrams and language of any FE inventor becomes a minefield of assumptions. Any wrong move in any direction and it just doesn't work. Which is really cool because we never know what were going to get. One circuit does nothing and then we make a small change and everything changes... that's cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es4zSnx07rk)
Output sucks as expected. But first glance at what it does..
It seems output coils are perpendecular to input coils.Looks like that each output coil has inside electromagnet which windings are perpendecular and each output coil surounded by perpendecular electromagnets. And all this 7 input electromagnet switched on/off at the same time
Thanks Maddmann- I viewed the patent but can't clearly make out the coil arrangements. I don't mind trying things, and yes I have many dozens of coil styles to play with. But I would need a clearer diagram of the coil arrangement to duplicate.
SL- Can you show which Figuera image has a completed path? They all look incomplete to me, even the 1908. I agree tho that we probably didn't receive the correct complete coil arrangement.
https://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg578180/#msg578180
Note on the Figuera Patent image, shown on Floodrod's previous post, where it shows the array of N-S with the "Y" member (output) sandwhiched between...please note a "rectangle shaped" component which travels between all three parts exactly in their center [[N]-[y]-[S]]
Wouldn't this rectangle indicates to have a single core between all three coils parts?
The undersigned inventors compose their generator as follows: Several electromagnets are placed one in front of the other, the poles of opposite names being separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they quickly magnetize and demagnetize and do not retain residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes one by one, or several, or many. The excitatory current, intermittent or alternating, drives all the electromagnets, which are connected either in series or in parallel, or as necessary, and currents will arise in the inductive circuit, which together constitute the total current of the generator. This allows the mechanical force to be suppressed as there is nothing to be moved.
Note
Invention of an electrical generator without the application of mechanical force, since nothing moves, which produces the same effects of operating dynamo-electric machines thanks to several stationary electromagnets excited by intermittent or alternating current, which creates induction in a stationary inductive circuit placed within the magnetic fields of the exciting electromagnets.
...Hello Mr. Rakarskiy,
It is technically impossible to fulfill such a condition. I tried to do this many times. If a groove is used, then there will be no magnetic lines of force in the groove that will cross the inductor wire. In the cavity of the groove, the magnetic induction will be several times less, which will not allow the formation of conditions for the fulfillment of the formula: E=Bmlv
...
Hello Mr. Rakarskiy,
Yet all these (millions) of motors and generators work extremely well using wires in grooves. Perhaps you need to adjust your understanding of the process. This may be helpful. In the video, he explains how energy is "carried" not in the wire, but rather in field around the wire. The steel of the core surrounding the groove facilitate these fields. Force results from field interaction.
[...]
Note on the Figuera Patent image, shown on Floodrod's previous post, where it shows the array of N-S with the "Y" member (output) sandwhiched between...please note a "rectangle shaped" component which travels between all three parts exactly in their center [[N]-[y]-[S]]
Wouldn't this rectangle indicates to have a single core between all three coils parts?
Ufopolitics
Once again, I want to draw attention to Figuere's patent. I don’t know where the autistic text comes from here, there is only a drawing for a patent. The second is to do what is described in the patent, which is not shown in the figure. Highlighted in the quote with "reddish ink", in reality there is a drawing (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXhZVhFgbecFdgJL41_62R9Jfue3_O7EFzBFCqZMS_2l7pGaU4wWyQHIpoRPRNORdDYnqpqw-ijlreeFOFRoHWPqCn8O3SvGtZ28FOLAfn4SQzTvbYfVB8fYnjxOV3VJu3Yf8NTD2UYowtKqE1ZK3fzFCrkOWIon307q2cibNzirF7cFE2c6ztpLka/s843/2020-07-09_135157.jpg) in detail, this selection is missing.
Patent No. 30378 September 5, 1902 (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf)
Quote:
The undersigned inventors compose their generator as follows: Several electromagnets are placed one in front of the other, the poles of opposite names being separated by a small distance. The cores of all these electromagnets are formed in such a way that they quickly magnetize and demagnetize and do not retain residual magnetism. In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes one by one, or several, or many. The excitatory current, intermittent or alternating, drives all the electromagnets, which are connected either in series or in parallel, or as necessary, and currents will arise in the inductive circuit, which together constitute the total current of the generator. This allows the mechanical force to be suppressed as there is nothing to be moved.
Based on these considerations, Mr. Clemente Figuera and Mr. Pedro Blasberg, on behalf of and on behalf of the Figuera-Blasberg Society, respectfully request the grant of a definitive invention patent for this generator, the form and arrangement of which is shown in the appendix. drawings, warning that only eight electromagnets or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets each are sketched on them, and for clarity, and the inductive circuit is marked with a thick line reddish ink , since this is a general device device, but in the sense that it is possible put more or less electromagnets in a different form or grouping.
Repeatedly studying the devices of dynamos and modern synchronous generators. I concluded that the drawing was corrected, or there should also be a drawing with an electrical circuit for excitation and an output phase, which is missing.
Now the question is: if the buyer buys the rights and a working prototype for 60 million pessetes (320 kg in gold at the time of sale), will he leak information to devalue his purchase.
Hello Floodrod,
why not draw it all the way to the end of each primary if it was so?
Ufopolitics
Maybe the original patents had several angles but only the top angle made it through the time portal.
Attached is what Buforn's series array might have looked like from the side.
Interesting angle, but then the N and S designations don't correspond correctly, do they?
bi
Maybe the original patents had several angles but only the top angle made it through the time portal.Floodrod, If you close the flux path of the inducers with the current varying from high to low (opposite) on each side then you'll end up with a relatively constant flux and get no induction as there will be little to no change.
Attached is what Buforn's series array might have looked like from the side.
I believe this drawing posted by Floodrod is probably the closest to the actual device of any configurations I have seen. I have marked the flux paths though the output coils to make it easier to understand. When A phase is fully on and B phase fully off then the flux would follow the red path. When the opposite B phase is fully on and A phase fully off then the flux would follow the blue path. The big advantage to this configuration is that there is a completed flux path for both phases and both phases get equal power applied to the output coil.
Respectfully,
Carroll
I believe this drawing posted by Floodrod is probably the closest to the actual device of any configurations I have seen. I have marked the flux paths though the output coils to make it easier to understand. When A phase is fully on and B phase fully off then the flux would follow the red path. When the opposite B phase is fully on and A phase fully off then the flux would follow the blue path. The big advantage to this configuration is that there is a completed flux path for both phases and both phases get equal power applied to the output coil.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Hi citfta,
Sounds good when y coils have no load, but doesn't hold true if load currents cause opposing mmf in y coils.
Hopefully bench tests can shed some light.
bi
I think Figuera device produced DC pulsating output.
On every single patent, it shows the 2nd series electromagnet array entering the first coil on the opposite side of the first electromagnet. But only on 1 side.. The other side enters and exits each electromagnet on the same side.use a relay between voltage generator and coil to pass short impulses.
I have pondered this for weeks.. Why wouldn't they draw the positive feed where my red line is to match the first array?
Is it possible the first side is all North (N,N,N,N,N,N,N)
And the 2nd side is one South followed by all North (S,N,N, N,N,N,N)
I can't think of any other reason for this, and I do not think it's a slipup that coincidently happened on every patent.
Is there a simple explanation I am missing?
On every single patent, it shows the 2nd series electromagnet array entering the first coil on the opposite side of the first electromagnet. But only on 1 side.. The other side enters and exits each electromagnet on the same side.pulsed dc output
I have pondered this for weeks.. Why wouldn't they draw the positive feed where my red line is to match the first array?
Is it possible the first side is all North (N,N,N,N,N,N,N)
And the 2nd side is one South followed by all North (S,N,N, N,N,N,N)
I can't think of any other reason for this, and I do not think it's a slipup that coincidently happened on every patent.
Is there a simple explanation I am missing?
As i said no generator or transformer including Figuera produces pulsating DC. Only way to produce DC would be to increase flux continuously to infinity (or decrease it from infinitely large flux toward 0). That is of course impossible.be that as it may, the above produces a good pulsed dc output.
We are obviously not talking diodes or some other method of rectifying the output. Induction itself is always AC. Unless we get into scalar waves and higher energy forms, Schwartz for example says his ERR box is producing DC with small AC component), but that is totally different pair of shoes.
be that as it may, the above produces a good pulsed dc output.
It does not. It is unclear what exactly have you imagined in the diagram, it seems flawed polarity wise, i have seen many similar Figuera suggestions over the years. But it does not really matter.I understand what your saying in general and you are correct, however, the diagram shows a pulsed dc input on each side of the induced coil. This results in a single polarity output - no reversal - simply a rise and fall of flux through the coil.
ALL induction configurations produce AC.
Coil will produce voltage of one polarity while it sees increase of flux in certain direction.
As long as flux in that direction keeps increasing voltage of that polarity will be induced, if it is increasing at constant rate flat DC voltage will be induced.
If the rate of increase is changing pulsed DC will result.
But the very moment that flux stops increasing there will be no more induced voltage.
And if that flux starts to decrease voltage of opposite polarity will be induced in same manner.
So, as i said, unless flux in one direction is increasing to infinity, which is of course impossible, you cannot get pulsed DC by induction, not in the generator not in the transformer.
Feeding transformer a pulsed DC results in AC, etc.
You may get almost pure pulsed DC by shoving magnet into the coil very fast and then pulling it back very slowly so opposite polarity voltage would be very small. But that is still AC.
I understand what you are trying to say but there is no induction in such case.This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.
If you got a long coil, does not even have to have many turns, just 1 layer is enough, and you drop the magnet,
lenz (induction) will manifest only upon entering and leaving of the long coil.
When magnet is inside, turns above the magnet see that flux decreasing while the turns below the magnt see it increasing, you got two equal and opposite voltages canceling out.
There is no induction in such case.
There is a video demonstration of this on youtube. I may link it. Guy is surprized how closed coil provides no more resistance to fall of magnet than an open. Well, for given reason.
This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.
https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html
I understand you envision it like that, it has been envisioned in similar manner for many years here.
Fact remains if magnet falls through a long coil as you proposed there will be no induction except when it enters and leaves, and it will be AC.
As for your video, you are sliding face of the magnet across one side of the coil, so that is a very different story and is similar to something i used to do, two big multi year projects based on an idea of two opposite magnets N to N on opposite sides of a toroid coil cutting wire and that induced field in the toroid has no choice but to be at 90° to the main (vertical) magnet fluxes, i was expecting pure DC voltage from it for flux always cuts wire in one direction, but it ultimately failed, induced voltage was too low. But nevermind that.
In your video side fluxes cancel out, two equal and opposite side fluxes are linking with the coils. Main induction in your video is due to central vertical flux. Such induction should theoretically produce DC, i in fact i spent large amount of money and years of work on two different models of such generators that were not meant to be.
Anyway, you can check the output waveform when you do the induction on the side like that, make the coil longer cause at the poles it will surely be AC. According to these it is not but they used iron core.
http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/7086-generator-with-lenz-less-toroidal-stator (http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/7086-generator-with-lenz-less-toroidal-stator)
*Here, this guy confirms what i wrote above that voltages inside the coil cancel out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkrwy1KjcBQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkrwy1KjcBQ)
This is what led me to the possibility of creating an inductive battery of sorts, I simply envision the figurea device using similar techniques because of the pass through circuit on return.Bingo! You have no idea what you just have done, you shared the most basic proof of concept for free energy.
https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html (https://rumble.com/v2u7rjg-example.html)
Sounds like you had some awesome projects regardless the outcome. Would have liked to be there looking over your shoulder... sounds fun! I've also worked with a double north opposing in a similar manor. It seems to me that a closed toroid wouldn't function as a generator like that but an open magnetic circuit would. A closed circuit would need at least 2 poles and commutator to extract the dc - similar to how Gramme built his originally in the 1800's. They used a toroid and NN SS configuration to move the flux through the rotor and commutator to maintain a dc output. Brush build quite a few similar before he moved on to other designs again in the 1800's. ( US189997)
Regarding the magnet down the coil, the dynamics are different using a magnet with both poles or sliding down a solenoid with a single pole.
The latter would be more like a generator where the coil wires are cutting through the magnetic flux field as the magnet moves along the coil. The voltage would be dictated by the amount of turns within the area of the magnetic field and current by the resistance of the entire coil. The part within the flux field would be generating an output where the balance of the coil would basically be distribution.
The little solenoid does produce a dc output on the scope. I built a similar solenoid about a foot long with a reasonable amount of wire which had 4 coils on the outside. Each coil activated in sequence along the length, also producing a pulsed dc output.
I'm not sure what you were referring to in the energetic forum link, the google search only brings up and error. Good conversation !! We can learn a lot comparing notes...
why remove lenz forces ? why not just balance them to zero ?That would be wonderful Forest... any ideas on how to accomplish it?
Alan, your right about the flux capacitor in a sense... I believe cook had the closest version of such a device if there was one. I read once that all that is needed is 2 wires of different sizes to reproduce this phenomenon - I believe it was hendershot that made the statement, don't ask me to find it again... hidden in the massive amount of research files only to be remembered as significant.
Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things.
Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things. "
nix85 your definitely right about there being nothing new, at this point it's more about rediscovery than actually discovering something new - although the opportunity still exists in many forms.Do you have an image of the circuit that is shown in the video?
I've spent an enormous amount of time researching the beginning of all this, it seems discovery boomed from late 1700's to late 1800's then by the early 1900's all that was learned was scrubbed and hidden. Those are the secrets we are trying to re-discover. One patent that vaguely spills the beans is from gramme 1882 ( US 269281 ) (beginning at line 37 pg2) which pertains to a "problem" being solved in this patent as is explained in the text. Stating " the reaction of the current upon itself is more energetic than the original which produced it". This "problem" is, I believe, a small peek into re-discovery. Reproduceable by sending 2 signals down a line. As they cross each other on the line they become additive... a combination of both energies at the same moment - a rogue wave as it were. They all new about it back then ( tesla, cook, stubblefield, figuera, hendershot, etc ).
I'll leave it there as this subject can divert you down many many rabbit holes which may not be on topic of this thread.
Alan, your right about the flux capacitor in a sense... I believe cook had the closest version of such a device if there was one. I read once that all that is needed is 2 wires of different sizes to reproduce this phenomenon - I believe it was hendershot that made the statement, don't ask me to find it again... hidden in the massive amount of research files only to be remembered as significant.
Nix85, I don't believe you can remove the lenz forces from a generator/alternator and still produce an output... seems it's part of the natural scheme of things.
Ok, busy day ahead - I'll try to get back later .... happy researching !!!
Do you have an image of the circuit that is shown in the video?Hi alan, do you mean the one with the solenoid, magnets and LED? or the picture of the fig device with a dc output?
I believe all "Forces" that are exerted upon something else, Including "Lenz Force" should be harvestable.I believe your on the right path to discovery. Many of these devices all had something in common that has been covered up over the years. Cooks special "insulation", stubblefields in ground coils and heating plates, morays radiant receiver, teslas radiant receiver, hendershots reciever.... on and on we go, the details being scrubbed from existence over the years. Something is always left out so it cannot be reproduced.
In a standard generator, Lenz acts to impede the rotor's motion and that force is directly transferred the bolts or braces that hold the "stator" stationary. If the stator was not braced, the stator itself would be in motion from the Lenz drag. So the question becomes, how best to harvest the torque applied to the stator brace without sacrificing the generated power.
This is what Figuera accomplished with a non-moving generator. He devised a way to re-route the reciprocal magnetic field back into the device.
Just my opinion
I believe all "Forces" that are exerted upon something else, Including "Lenz Force" should be harvestable.
In a standard generator, Lenz acts to impede the rotor's motion and that force is directly transferred the bolts or braces that hold the "stator" stationary. If the stator was not braced, the stator itself would be in motion from the Lenz drag. So the question becomes, how best to harvest the torque applied to the stator brace without sacrificing the generated power.
On the Figuera device, a better analogy would be a spring being compressed, changing it's tensile strength and then expanding.... In effect the spring would produce more force thus work on expansion than it took to contract it because the properties changed.
I have been thinking that a possible configuration for Mr. Figuera 1902 motionless generator http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf (http://www.alpoma.com/figuera/docums/30378.pdf) is based on exciting the coils with a two-phase AC current in order to create a rotating magnetic field in the generator (as Tesla´s egg of Columbus). In this case the 1902 generator would be also composed by two unphased signals delayed 90º as Mr. Figuera did it in his 1908 generator.
I would like you guys have a look to D'Angelo patent www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf (http://www.overunity.com/www.rexresearch.com/angelo/us2021177.pdf). In figure 15 (XV in romans numbers) it is represented a generator very similar to Figuera´s 1902 generator. D'Angelo excited his generator with the unphased signals represented in figures 5b and 5c (V-b and V-c in romans)
More info about D'Angelo: http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/angelo/angelo.htm)
Please comment your opinion about this patent. Do you see any paralellism between Figuera´s patent and D'Angelo´s patent?
Using his recent knowledge of the operation of synchronous generators and the EMF pointing system in the phase wire, having studied the design of Antonio D'Angelo's motor-generator, he hypothesized how this system actually works. We have four rotor magnetic poles excited by an electromagnet from a DC source (the diagram shows a battery, which is also the current source for the driven stator electromagnets). We have eight stator pole rods, with one rotor pole overlapping two stator pole rods. Each rod has an excitation solenoid winding, controlled through a commutator brush assembly on the rotor shaft. The device has two generator phases, which are placed between the stator rods so that active zones are formed to inject charge into the focus of the varying magnetic flux. What this means can be found in my publications: "The Invention of an Electromagnetic Generator" and "A Transformer with a Mystery", in which I talk about a system for inducing EMF in a conductor that does not cross (cut) magnetic lines of force.
In the figure I have shown the moment of maximum formation of magnetic ring fluxes (Φ1, Φ2, Φ3, Φ4) in the rotor/stator of the system, focusing on the figure in the patent. The rotor rotates clockwise due to the corresponding excitation of four electromagnets (highlighted in yellow in the figure). The other four electromagnets are switched off, which, by design, is to provide for the retraction of the rotor pole into the zone of the active electromagnet switched on in the mode of the corresponding active stator pole. To accomplish this action, the clearance zones of the rotor poles must not be equal. In the zone of attraction - the minimum clearance, in the zone of switching off of the rod electromagnet - the maximum permissible clearance. Or in the body of the plane of the rotor pole. In this case, a small selection of core material is made. Otherwise, this position is ideal for magnetic locking. Turning the second electromagnet on repulsion will cause the magnetic circuit ( Φ1 - 1 window, Φ2 - 3 octo, Φ3 - 5 window, Φ4 - 7 window) to collapse, which should form the EMF in the generator phases. If we consider the stacking of the phase wires, it is under this condition that the function allows to induce EMF in the phase wire (for this position the active phase is highlighted in red color) and the rotor rotation proper. When the rotor rotates and the pole tip reaches the center zones of the stator active electromagnet and the rotor pole, the active electromagnet is switched off and the inactive electromagnet is switched on, the pole being activated to attract the rotor plus. Thus, when the rotor rotates, the next closed magnetic fluxes will already be formed to establish the second phase.
Thus, we get two independent generator phases and a rotor rotation and excitation system.