Hi guys!
In the past I play a bit with the Figuera concept. It use the POC as we already know the potential. I think this guy, Marathonman, understand the principe behind the Figuera device...
Chris, if there already a tread about Clemente Figuera, feel free to move this at the good place!
Just remember Buforn spilled a little more beans in his illegal patents than Figuera did. he stated that 100 volts and 1 amp produced 20 kilowatt so it might be to ones advantage to shoot for something similar or at least in the ball park of your country you live in. your parts do not have to handle massive amperage.
the whole reason part G uses thick wire is i think Figuera was trying to achieve the most perfect inductor as possible with the least amount of losses and resistance is the main factor in the losses of an inductor. not only that the primaries are to be as little resistance as possible for the least amount of ohmic losses also since part G controls the currant not the primaries.
Marathonman
Peter, That isn't the contact life, it's the guarantee to be within spec at 5A for each channel so I think I have a chance with 6 channels in parallel at 1A for a reasonably long life for the part. I didn't find any specs for normal brushes as good as that so if you have any better information I would be pleased to hear it.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
I can always tell when the US Government is snooping on the line, it slows down considerably like right now.
The information that was passed to me years ago from a person that had built the Figuera device stated that he used a high speed grinder/buffer at the speed the brush is rotating to precision flatness on part G and was completely shocked at just how little of brush wear there actually was. not only that, the precision top eliminated the sparking to an unnoticeable level.
i personally am taking this advice and that route with my part G. also it would be advisable to have a cut off switch for the secondary output to part G to shut the device off and maybe the loop back to the primaries.
another good thing is if people are having trouble understanding what i have posted in the past you can use BullZip PDF printer highlighting any and all information then click print choosing Bullzip and it will print all the info in a PDF on your desktop for your review. this will allow you to review all information at your leisure to absorb and understand what has been presented so far. i have a Figuera folder full of PDF's on any and all info pertaining to this device for quick review.
Marathonman
Marathonman, Was that the inner torroidial part G or the flat face torroidial part G?
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
That would be the flat face toroid. what he used was a 100 amp alternator core taped to a flat surface wound with very thick wire at around 80 to100 winds. the brushes were mounted in the fan hub assembly. he also used springy wound metal coil for his brushes not a plain ole spring.
the brushes i bought have some good pressure behind them when i compress them so i am hoping it will not have to modify them but it is what it is.
Marathonman
Hi Aetherholic,
I found some nice High speed sliprings @ senring for up to 12000 rpm!!
http://www.senring.com/high-speed-slip-ring/
Also found some using a liquid metal to make the contacts, so no internal wear in these ones.
http://sleepringen.nl/draaicontacten.html
Although i don't think i can rev them past 1000 rpm 
Kind regards,
Peter
So far with all my observations and tests it would seem that as long as the core of part G was a closed core it will work. the reason a toroid in my opinion was used is because of it's efficiency in the confinement of the magnetic field in it's core which when built properly would be in my estimate in the range of 98 to 99 % with thick wire to decrease ohmic losses.
this in the Figuera case is exactly what he was shooting for, the MOST EFFICIENT INDUCTOR and PRIMARIES.
since it was more than likely Ziess that made Figuera's part G in Germany as his partner Abby had perfected the microscope lighting apparatus using an EI core to control the lighting it could quite possible be the original was an EI core with a very fat center core with smaller outer legs. the patent is completely worded and backed up with a drawing to reflect just the rotating part which the whole thing was very cryptic to start with and even stated that it was just a drawing to understand it's function only. so in my opinion he could of darn near used any darn drawing to convey the point especially the drawing of R which just caused more confusion beyond belief being worded as of just some resistance.
one of the reasons of me wanting to try the C core was not only the ease of winding as we all know a toroid is a royal pain in the arse to wind but it should be easier to balance which has raised it's ugly head in the toroid set up. granted the toriod type does in fact work but the balancing is a factor. the original replication uses a toroid so i for one know it works.
their will seem to be a slight drop in efficiencies when using the C core as all bends will cause a slight loss in magnetic field containment but i really do not foresee this to be a major problem.
the reason Figuera wound his primaries with as little ohmic losses as possible equates to the most efficient electromagnets attainable. resistance always seams to be the limiting factor in a system's efficiency so with the least amount of resistance you will get not only a fast responding electromagnet but with the least amount of losses possible which is converted to heat and is non recoverable. yes, once potential is converted to heat it is non recoverable in the system.
this is the reason why the primaries are wound to be the most efficient electromagnets possible because of the above stated but also that they DO NOT control the currant flow. why add more complexity to a system that doesn't need to be there (REMEMBER SIMPLICITY) . PART G CONTROLS the currant flow NOT the primaries so wind your primary electromagnets specifically as electromagnets.
winding part G with as little ohmic losses as possible will equate to the most efficient inductor you can have. please remember always part G does NOT USE RESISTANCE to control currant flow it uses self inductance which is the reverse EMF generated in it's self that opposes the original currant flow. this is called flux linking and changes as the brush rotates.
all resistance in the Figuera system will cause heat losses which is non recoverable, i repeat (NON RECOVERABLE) but using a system that transfers a stored magnetic field to electric potential and back with very little resistance is very very efficient.
Peter;
you really don't need those super high expensive slip rings as i think they are a waste of money. the slip rings are not the issue it's the rotating brushes that are the issue. the standard low cost slip ring on the site you posted will work just perfect for this application.
the real problem should be concentrated on and that is the centrifugal forces on the rotating brush which is the reason the original replicator used springy metal on the brushes.
it is ultimately your money but it could be spent more wisely.
regards,
Marathonman
What i am about to say is a little off topic, it still pertains to the Figuera device and all electrical machines of man but it really should have it's own thread for research as it is very controversial and tends to send people screaming down the hallway. .
here is a quote from a PDF on inductance and magnetic energy;
" Any circuit in which the current changes with time will have time-changing magnetic fields, and therefore associated induced electric fields, which are due to the time changing currents, not to the time changing magnetic field (association is not causation)".
i tend to agree with this statement because i have come to believe magnetic fields as the breaks (resistance) or controlling mechanism to the electric field.
even though a magnetic field is created around a conductor when currant is flowing it is at right angles to the currant flow but the electric field is parallel to the currant flow at all times. when a magnet is brought close to a coil of wire we were told by our forefather in Physics that the change in a magnetic field causes currant to flow. what people do not understand is a magnet is an electrified object with domains locked into place causing a constant currant flow around the magnet it's self.
the currant flowing in the magnet is what is causing the electric field of varying degrees of intensity so when you bring that so called magnet into a coil of wire what you are really doing is changing the intensity of the electric field intensity around the wire which causes currant to flow. the magnetic field has nothing to do with the generation of currant what so ever and is just the resistance to the electric field.
in the figuera device part G when i speak of magnetic linking it is actually the addition of the winding's and an addition of the reverse electric fields to the original currant flow. as each winding loop is added or subtracted to each side of the brush it causes a addition of reverse electric field that is paralleled to the original currant opposing it flow.
as i said it is really controversial but after 200 years it is about time people start finding out the truth that a magnetic field can not in any way create a electric field and cause currant to flow. magnetism is the breaks (resistance) to the electric field.
now that i literally screwed everyone's mind up lets get back to the Figuera device
EDIT; i just figured out that their is a contradiction between the statement from above quote and the gravitation dimensions being cancelled from a two dimensional magnetic field so i will have to dwell on this for a while before i post any more on the subject.
Marathonman
Marathonman.
That sounded a little bit like Ken Wheeler's 'Uncovering the missing secrets of magnetism'
Great read by the way.. gotta love that ferrocell
About the slipring. don't know yet how much these cost, so if it's to expensive i'll try the other ones..
Ferrocells are showing the magnetic field lines only and have nothing to do with the electric field so it is basically uncovering the secrets of the Electric fields. but anyways it does tend to tangle up people's brain to much and cause massive disagreements so i'll leave that alone.
meanwhile i found a good slow epoxy that has a 3 hour window which is good window to wind in and cures in 24 hours with 3,300 psi sheer strength as it will be used for the square wire and C core.
http://www.monarkgolf.com/golf-components/tools-supplies/24-hour-shafting-epoxy-total-8-oz..html
not bad for 9.50 for both parts.
Peter;
even the cheap ones look fantastic and overkill for what you need but will last a good while.
marathonman
Peter
There are 2 main types of liquid metal sliprings, mercury and Gallium alloy. The Mercury ones are higher speed and longer life. In my particular setup it was mechanically easier for me to use the type I chose as I needed the shaft bearing as close to the bottom of my disc as possible so there was no room for a slipring below the disc and this precluded me using the liquid metal types that were available where I am.
Matathonman
The only reason I chose to use a commercial slipring was for speed of build and the internal bearings allow easy setup. The idea was to remove as much friction as possible, just one less part to worry about initially as my goal is to get to a working system as quickly as possible. My reasoning was that using brushes for the slipring I experienced too much vibration on the brushes I was using and I wanted to quickly remove another potential unknown from the system so that I could concentrate on the interesting stuff.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Further Experimental Results - Output Coil
Whilst waiting for my cnc parts which got delayed until tomorrow I decided to test my previous observations about the north field being completely ejected from the output coil core and forming a toroid.
I took my previous setup using transistors with a 360 turn 4 layer O/P coil which produced 7V open circuit and decided to wind a 12 layer O/P coil which according to standard theory should give 21V open circuit. I am happy to report that I got 42V open circuit which seems to be in agreement with having a toroidal N field. I also think that it is important to consider the diameter of the o/p coil because I believe that my first few layers are not in the best position in the toroidal field so later I will probably try making a bigger gap between the first layer and the core to get a better position within the field.
All comments welcomed.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Aetherholic
It sounds to me your surface of your part G is not true flat surface thus will cause skipping or vibration. i warned everyone it has to be a truly flat surface and should be precision ground.
you started off good with the output coil but lost me with the toroid thing in which i have no idea what you are talking about. as for the north field well they are both north fields opposing and all one is doing is reducing one to clear the secondary while the other is increasing causing the reducing electromagnets E field to span the entire length of the secondary. the whole core will register north fields because we are using two opposing north fields. can you please elaborate further.
Marathonman
Marathonman
Sorry for the unclear explanation, I will attempt to make some diagrams later today and edit that post to make it more intelligible.
The vibration I was referring to was on my previous slip ring which was due to too many mechanical factors to solve in a short space of time so thats why I moved to a ready made solution.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
no, lets move on from here to avoid confusions to the readers.
Marathonman
I think a lot of people are having a hard time with two bucking systems being worked on one from Chris and one from me. people have to realize that YES, we are both using bucking systems they are completely different in the switching category. in the Figuera device he simply uses two opposing electromagnets to compress the field lines to match the high intensity field of a standard generator then lowered one and raised the other in currant at the same time to get the Electric field alignment in the same direction thus allowing the electric field to be positive and additive. once the primaries have polarized the secondary and currant begins to flow the lenz law kicks in and produces an opposing field to the first and it is this field that is swept from side to side imparting phantom motion in the secondary.
resonance is a whole other ball game which needs precise calculations of L,C and R.
Marathonman
Hey Marathonman,
Be careful with that epoxy, better to wear a descent APEC gas-mask. These epoxy fumes are ..well let's just say they stink big time.
Found a nice 8 pole commutator inside a big broken electric power drill. double brush setup with angular springs, all intact.
Also have A LOT of MOT's lying around, maybe the coils and iron core's in there can come in handy.
Although i think i'll keep the primary's quit small, i think you mentioned a while ago that the volume of iron in the core of part G needs to be the same (or exceed) the volume of iron used in the primary's.
My part G core has a height of 40mm ID 78mm OD 145mm that's about 260 Cubic cm.
kind regards,
Peter
I had a nice long post and lost it all as the site went bonkers again. it is doing it again Chris going to the log in screen when i try to post even after being logged in loosing my entire post.
Peter;
your part G sounds good and that commutator is one heck of a find. you can use those mots for the Figuera device or the 1932 Coutier device so do hang on to them. the center legs are good for the primaries and the outer legs for the secondaries for a small scale build.
i have been an industrial painter since 1990 so chemicals are nothing new. i'll eat that epoxy for lunch. ha, ha, ha, ha !
i went by to check on my CNC job and they have not even started it yet. man you talk about being pissed but then again there were corporate running everywhere from back east and shutting down early for a memorial day BBQ. i am really getting impatient and want to finish my build.
after i finish this build i will be either looking for a three phase transformer as all legs are the same size and a lot of core material or i will be getting them cut from Temple transformer lamination to build a whole house 15 kilowatt device.
Marathonman
The graph below is basically what is happening in the Figuera device. when the primaries are in play, one taken low the other high it will polarize the secondary allowing currant to flow in the secondary and the load. once this takes place the secondary will produce a secondary field opposing the first (Lenz Law) then the primaries and the secondary will then part ways similar to that of a squirrel cage motor. when the secondary opposing field is established it is this field that the opposing primaries push from side to side across the Electric field giving the secondary the illusion of having motion to the Electric field causing currant to flow.
it is the primaries that create the electric field but it is the relative sweeping motion of the primaries that exert motion into the secondary. the only time power from the primaries is transferred to the secondaries is to polarize the secondary then the primaries power draw will drop to that of the IR2 losses and the reduced primary back to full potential.
just like a standard generator does, the primaries create the Electric field but it is the motor rotating the secondaries that cause motion through the Electric field thus causing currant to flow. in the Figuera device the primaries being reduce and raised with the sweeping action induces motion into the secondary causing currant to flow.
Marathonman
It is memorial day week end in the US and my buddies and i are throwing huge T-bone steaks on the grill (I'm the Chef) with baked sweet potatoes smothered in butter and a nice cold chef salad with all the fixins. while i do honor the fallen in their protection of our country it was still all for the wrong reasons.
I refuse to honor the vile actions of the Rothschilds and the Rochefellers to further their wicked scheme of world domination using the military personnel to advance their agenda.. i am what i am and even though i served in the armed forces (NAVY) they are the wicked ones that need to be eliminated once and for all.
I salute my fallen comrades around the world as your death was not in vein. I WILL REMEMBER every time a person builds a new Figuera device and this my fallen comrades i promise.
Marathonman
I can not emphasize enough the need for the solenoid calc too to get in the ballpark of lbs pressure needed for your primaries. the use of a high power adjustable resistor comes highly recommended as it allowed me to power my electromagnets and test them with any power supply without the power supply freaking out and shutting down or burning up.
an adjustable resistor like the one below will help in your testing procedures. it is a 300 watt resistor and works just perfect in dialing in the exact lbs pressure. i think at the time it was 26 bucks so i think they went up in price. as you see this one has lots of dings from a lot of use. putting it in a system with a push pull fan allows them to handle a little more power.
you really don't even need to measure your primaries just hook the resistor in series with your electromagnet and adjust the ohms to your target then apply power then test the lbs pressure. if your low add a layer, if your to high reduce them.
https://www.galco.com/scripts/cgiip.exe/wa/wcat/catalog.htm?searchbox=adjustable%20resistor
Marathonman
Hi All,
Took a picture from the 8 pole commutator brush setup i found. AT least i first thought it was an 8 pole commutator, but after a closer look, it seems to be a 7 pole commutator. Still the brushes i can use, just have to look for another commutator.
Made a 3D model (to scale ofcourse)
And added it to my existing 3D model.
Put the commutator brushes on top (feedback into part G)
I first like to build my projects 'virtual' to see all clearances and needed measures beforehand.
Also the little DC motor i ordered, will be coming in soon.. I'll keep you guys posted.
Kind regards,
Peter
Peter;
You can definitely see what brush had the most currant flowing through it. i know theoretically they are both the same but that is not the case in reality.
i would like to know what program you are using for your 3D rendering. i have not had much exposure to 3D modeling and would like to learn. mostly i would like to learn how to do 3D modeling with animation to show people the reactions of the magnetic and electric fields in the Figuera device. people are still lacking in the visualization department and it would really clear the air having such a visual representation of the working device. to actually see the advancing and retracting of the magnetic fields in real time would be worth it's weight in gold at this point.
with this type of a visualization i could show people just why Figuera did not take the electromagnets down past 50 % and why induction would cease from loss of pressure. seeing the fields in 3D is what nature does not 2 D or even 1D like we perceive it to be.
using a longer shaft might help bringing your slip rings out of the toroid for more room.
very nice rendering peter. keep up the good work.
Marathonman
Yes i agree, actually seeing the fields sweeping action across the secondary coinciding with the brush movement would be awesome. i can describe in great detail but a good visual is but a thousand words.
i'll check into that program.
Marathonman
In the graph below which is not very good i might add but it gets the point across, you will notice the field lines are compressed at the collision point just like that of a standard generator high intensity field. the graph is showing just two bucking coils with the fields in opposition but both are powered up at equal amounts with no movement. being equal, the E fields will also be equal but opposite directions cancelling each other out so no currant will flow.
in the second graph the primaries are opposite in relation to each other, one increased while the other is being decreased while the magnetic fields are in constant opposition. what this does according to Physics is reverse the reducing electromagnets Electric field causing both to be in the same direction or in complete coherency being positive and additive. the magnetic fields will always be opposing but the output is directly related to the amount of pressure maintained between the electromagnets which is directly related to the intensity of the Electric fields .
the Electric fields are shown separate for clarity only, in reality they are a circular field around the secondary.
Marathonman
Marathonman,
Here's a little animation i made showing the brush settings along with the potentials in both primary's.
Please correct me when i am wrong, but i think that this is how it's supposed to work
sorry for the video compression, that's on VIMEO.
The video does not repeat but you can pause the video, and scroll through.
A short explanation, and please correct me if i am wrong MM..
If the positive brush (red) is at 9 O'clock (points to the left) The red primary will have maximum potential.
The blue primary will have minimal potential (not zero !!, never to zero)
The positive brush (red) turns CW, and as it hits the 3 O'clock mark, the red primary will have minimal potential (not zero!!)
and the blue primary will have maximum potential.
The positive brush keeps turning, and the previous sequence will repeat from 3 until 9 again.
I tried to also show the induced magnetic fields of each coil. blowing up one, and schrinking the other
These two fields will push and pull the secondary's magnetic field from left to right, sweeping it across the secondary.
This will happen 50 times per second, as the brush rotates with a speed of 3000 rpm.
The commutator peripheral velocity vc = π DC N / 60 should not be more than about 15 m/s.
(Peripheral velocity of 30 m/s is also being used in practice but should be avoided whenever possible.)
Higher values of commutator peripheral velocity are to be avoided as it leads to lesser commutation time dt,
increased reactance voltage and sparking commutation.
The inner diameter of my part g is 76 mm, so the peripheral velocity from my inside brushes is about 6,25 m/s @ 3000 rpm
kind regards,
Peter
Very good Peter now you can use VideoPad video editor and add as many loops as you want to get a longer video. yes you are correct in the operation of sequences but the reducing primaries do not pull the opposing secondary field since there is always pressure between the primaries sort of being locked into place. even though the primaries always have pressure it is basically the rising primary that does the pushing. opposing fields can not pull as they are just that, opposing with the secondary field in the middle.
I see it as long as one has proper pressure in his or her setup the brushes should be fine as was the original replication. in my toroid part G the inner area is way to small for a brush setup so i had to use the end brush setup with a diam of 3.5 inches. the new brush holder has a possibility of extending out to 6 inch diam but i do not foresee me having to use it out that far. if i should have any problems i will switch to a spring type pressure system that presses down from centrifugal force outward.
as for the rpm in the US is 3600 rpm @ 60 CPS. i would like to know where you are getting your information on brush velocity and why you stated this as fact. ? what are you basing it on. ?
nice short video Peter, now if you could sandwich the opposing secondary in the middle of the two opposing primaries you will have a complete representation of the Figuera device. the reducing primary is not taken down that far but it is still a very good job.
PS. i checked on the Cinema 4D and almost had to go to the hospital from choking so much. man i can't believe the Greed from Corporations. i am checking out Blender but what a steep learning curve. i would imagine 8.5 still cost a lot.
regards,
Marathonman
Marathonman,
Thanks,for the info, and checking for the correct operation.
I'll incorporate the opposing secondary in the next animation.
The info about the brushes, some info can be found here:
http://www.brainkart.com/article/Design-of-commutator-and-brushes_12287/
There's more info there, like the coefficient of friction for different brush materials, voltage drop etc.
Also know a littlebit about these things, from my daily job as an electronics engineer.
Worked with electric motors, transformers and generators for many years,
About cinema4d, yes it's a bummer, indeed not with my paycheck. hahaha
I found the programm installed on an old laptop from my employer. ( I don't think they sell this version anymore.)
So just using what i got at hand.. Blender is the next best thing, very nice to work with, plus it's free !!!
Cutting some core's from some MOT's today. I'll try and post some pictures later.
Kind regards,
Peter
Peter;
Many thanks for the brush info. i knew i had centrifugal forces but not exactly how much.
another thing you need to remember is the square of the distance when building the primaries and the secondaries. i posted the reasons for this a while back.
it doesn't matter what size your cores are as long as the end result works right. i am at a stand still right now and it bothers be very much. it seems the CNC guys are also dragging their backsides.
that link you posted Avast labels it as having malware and aborted the connection. it says it is infected with URL.MAL. why would you post a link that has malware ?????
PDF attached is on brush wear, FPM and other valuable info.
It seams with industrial equipment 8,000 FPM @ 2 to 8 lbs psi brush pressure is a normal max so my 3.5 inch brush would be 3.5 x PI 3.14159 = 10.995 x 60 = 659.7339 x 60 = 39584.043 ÷ 12 = 3298.6695 FPM which is less than half. even my new brush holder @ 5.5 inches is only 5183.6235 FPM well within that range.
Marathonman
Marathonman,
Great info in that attachment, Thank you very much
Why would i post a link that has malware??? indeed I would not. I can open the link just fine (sophos end security right here)
No mention of malware. so maybee a fals positive.. i'll try and create a PDF and put that up for download.
Like said, no worries here..
Kind regards,
Peter
That is also quite possible Peter. yes, thank you for the PDF as things like that can always be saved for further review on one's computer and be available to the readers also.
I did like that info on brush RPM and such and it would be to everyone's advantage to share like that. i am always finding things like that on the net. i post in greate detail but sometimes i forget to share where i got the info in the first place.
I wonder what happened to Electrocute and Atherholic as i have not heard from them in a while. there will be another joining in soon and his name is Sam. he is not quite on the same system as i or we are but it is the Figuera device none the same.
He like some other people still seam to think generators can instantly output a massive amount of power so is trying to build the Figuera device without part G which will be darn near impossible. Sam is still a good person though and it will be good to have em here with his experience with motors,transformers, electronics and the like.
Generators build up currant and voltage over time not instantly. it takes a few seconds to build up the proper pressure in the system to output more potential which is fed back to the exciters to produce more output. it does this until the output is producing more than the exciters and the load combined. while it seams like to us it is almost instant in reality it takes a few seconds to ramp up which IS NOT INSTANT.
Generators can not do this instantly and people are going to have to realize this very factual statement if they are to succeed with the Figuera device or any generator for that fact. generators generate over time NOT INSTANTLY as it builds up the pressure in the external system.
the magnetic and electric fields take time to build up and if they were to do this instantly every man made device would burn up and that is not good. our Universe does not operate like that people, it does so over time. my post on a standard generator will help people in this understanding.
here is a good place to learn about DC and related matters even though i disagree with most of it but the true operation of a standard generator can be found no where on the net. why ?
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/direct-current/
Marathonman
I have been busy with Part G 2.0
I finally got it working after re doing the main shaft twice due to CNC errors.
Here are some build pics:
Main 2 part shaft and bearings.
Base Plate.
Torroid supprt plate with 3 point adjusters.
Finished assembly
At speed.
The brush holders are no spring, centrifugal pressure, linear array needle roller bearings on the outside face to provide a zero friction surface for the brush.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Aetherholic,
WOW..that really looks the part... very,very nice.. My hat's off to you...Great build.
Can't wait to see what it can do 
kind regards,
Peter
Aetherholic,
A true artwork! It's always a surprise and a pleasure to see what you've been able to build.
EmilP
Yes i see you have been a busy little beaver, quite the set up Aetherholic. it looks like quite a lot of money spent. i can sure feel ya on the CNC as they have me so frustrated to no end.
about your build, what are the orange blocks for around part G's core??? oh i see now to hold part G's core.
from what i see your motor is underneath your part G which is very ingenious. i see no slip rings or i just didn't notice.
very good build skills Aetherholic, it seems you are farther than i am as to many delays are driving me nutz. my set up is not as elaborate as yours but it will get the job done.
good to have you here where we can all share with no trolls to run the sickening mouths like on EF and OU.
Marathonman
Hi aetherholic,
really a very accurate peace of machine!!! You are a skilled man.The top and bottom plates are aluminium, no problem with eddy currents from the rotating magnetic field?
Yes the closed core and being iron soaks up magnetic flux like a sponge. that is why Figuera chose a closed core system. the flux leakage is very, very little allowing it to be very efficient in taking the magnetic to electric potential and back with very little losses.
Peter;
Can you post that PDF concerning the brushes.
Thanks,
Marathonman
Kind regards,
Peter
Just a little hard to read but thank you.
Marathonman
I need to clear a few things up when i have talked about Returned emf and Cemf or reverse emf.
Cemf is the actual resistance to an increasing field, sort of like the brakes as it counters the incoming field and is not consuming power but resists a change. this is what Figuera uses to counter the current flow on a rotational basis. counter emf is produced as the magnetic field interacts with the winding's next to it creating an opposing emf to the original current flow. i have sometimes called this reverse emf and i am talking about the same thing. two words meaning the same thing that counter the incoming current flow. this can be created in two ways. one, the use of changing currant, two, the use of a changing circuit as in length or width that changes the ratio of magnetic field to current.
Returned emf is the spike from a coil of wire when it is pulsed. a huge voltage spike is developed from the collapsing magnetic field that travels in the same direction and can cause a lot of damage unless controlled or harvested.
i hope this clears up a little confusion i think i have created.
Marathonman
I came up with an idea last night. what if one was to angle the brushes on part G, to toe out the bottom of the brush where it makes contact on the winding's. the centrifugal forces as the speed increases would push the brush down eliminating the need to go to extremes concerning the brush lift at high speeds. this would allow the use of standard cheap brush assemblies avoiding the drastic measures.
this graph shows the toe out angle of the brush.
Marathonman
Marathonman I considered this also and did the calculations but as I had the freedom of 3D printing the holders I solved it with needle bearings. However if using commercial brush holders this idea makes perfect sense. The only thing I did worry about was the layering in the brushes but this probably isn't a big issue. Also I found with my brushes the angle for releasing the fiction was quite steep but as I didn't try it that's probably not an issue either.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Marathonman I'm now working on my coil setup. Bearing in mind the magnet wind it appears that to get the field pressure required that the core diameter needs to be fairly large. Can you give an idea as to what range of diameters we should be looking at bearing in mind your considerable research and your friends successful replication?
We can all do the reams of spreadsheet calculations but there is nothing better than practical experience.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Aetherholic;
As i have said before many times i do not have the math prowess to calculate from raw or foreign materials as did the original replicator. what he used was materials that had a know output for a certain amount of material then can be calculated down to lbs of material per output.
the primaries do not have to be that large to get an output remembering the secondary output is divided between the primaries.
i have posted the steps to take when building the primaries and secondaries. first you have to decide what your output needs to be then divide that output between how ever many core you will have in your system. then the primaries can be calculated from that keeping in mind that saturation is the enemy.
contacting the supplier or manufacture of the material is a good start and remember the primaries have to be larger than the secondaries remembering the square of the distance.
using mots one will be able to take the weight of the mot without the wire and divide the weight into the wattage of the transformer giving you the watts per lb of material. say the transformer was 10 lbs @1100 watts. divide 1100 by 10 and get 110 watts per lb of material.
this is the best i can do for you as this is what i have to do. if you can calculate this on a spread sheet then that is even better.
marathonman
To everyone;
The PDF i posted a few days ago has some very valuable information on commutator wire film and brush current density that is VERY VALUABLE and should be taken seriously .
Marathonman
In this first graph the current in half of the system is increasing storing into the magnetic field causing a voltage drop in the system. it is storing into the field from the rising primaries and the rising side of part G only to release some of the potential into the system in the next half cycle. they are additive meaning the voltage drop of both are adding to the total voltage drop. even though the primaries are Electromagnets they will stored and release potential into the system just like an Inductor would.
In this second graph the current in half of the system is decreasing releasing stored potential into the system to offset the potential drop of the rising side of the system. when you have two forms of released potential that are not mutually coupled they are additive giving an amplification in potential that is twice that of one potential alone. with the added secondary adding to that doubled potential you will have an offset of the voltage drop of the rising side plus amplification to the peak primaries as an added bonus.
The current in the system is flowing in the same direction at all times thus allowing part G to become the power supply once the starting supply is removed.
here is a good place to start to learn about inductors and such, the PDF attached is the site i could not link to on magnetic fields and Inductance.
Marathonman
The two graphs posted are each half of the system happening simultaneously, one increasing in current, one decreasing in current. the side that is increasing will be storing into the magnetic field for the next half cycle and the one decreasing in current will be releasing the reduced potential into the system offsetting the voltage drop of the rising side of the system. these two halves of the system are equal in proportion to each other, one having a voltage drop, the other having a voltage rise to offset the other halves voltage drop. the secondary is there to replace losses occurred and to give rise to an amplification to the rising primary.
it doesn't matter if it is an Inductor or an Electromagnet, if it is a coil of wire and especially if it is wound on an iron core, it will release magnetic stored potential into the system when reduced in current. this is plain Physics all day long, when the magnetic field is reduced in current it releases potential into the system increasing the voltage. both released potentials will act as very short term batteries and it is this very Physics fact of why part G can become the power supply once the starting supply is removed. reduced primaries into part G, secondary into part G combined with reducing half of part G will in fact give amplification to the rising side.
part G with the brush rotating changes the inductor size on each side of the brush that either add windings or subtract windings to that side changing the magnetic linking to the system which is changing the magnetic field to current ratio. when you change this ratio you are changing the magnetic resistance to current flow causing the primaries to either increase or decrease in current flow.
all this happens simultaneously while the primaries are being swept back and fourth over the secondary inducing motion into the secondary and the load.
all the information presented is and always will be Physics facts not fiction and can be replicated on the bench by anyone that proves everything i have presented is of course Physics facts.
REGARDS,
Marathonman
Quote from Chris on another thread;;
"Energy In is never ever in a billion years going to magically Create more Energy Out!"
EXACTLY, and well put. people still seem to think that they are to build the Figuera device without part G's inductance adding to the system reusing the potential from the magnetic to the electric.
I'm sorry but this is not ever, ever, ever going to happen if you have to supply all the power to the primaries all the time. standard generators do not operate like this and neither does any device i know of, nature does not operate like this.
in a standard generator the primary exciters once up to working conditions, the power draw is reduced to just the IR2 losses to maintain the field. if the power had to be replace all the time a standard generator would no work the way it does. it brings in energy from outside the system and takes time to acquire the proper pressure needed in the system to maintain the load. it does this over time taking some of the output to feed back to the exciters until there is enough pressure in the system for the exciters and the load.
It is still quite obvious people still do not grasp the way a generator works and if you think you are going to build the Figuera device without part G you are in for a very expensive surprise and should prepare yourselves for an unwanted outcome.
Generators generate over time not instantly, that is why when a load is drawing more than supplied it causes the resistance to drop in the external load causing more current to flow thus return more current to the exciters to produce a more intense field to produce more output then the exciters and the load combined.
electricity is a pressure system and it takes time to build up the pressure in mans systems to operate our machinery.
Physics do not tell a lie when it comes to our world we live in only our incorrect assumption of our observations and senses which generally do not coincide with reality or what is taught in present day school systems.
Regards,
Marathonman
Don't have anything to add at this time just been working very long hours. i have today off but home duties will keep me occupied all day long.
as for my build i am still on hold until the CNC guys get off their sorry backsides which is quite frustrating to say the least as i am very limited where i live. money is tight until payday which everyone knows that drill. i just hope everyone is advancing faster than i am.
Marathonman
I've been scrapping old MOT's .
this is my part G core...
One of these MOT's weight was 3500 gramms (without the coils), and had a VA rating of 1260.
That's about 2,8 gramms of iron per VA
There is also my new DC motor (775 type) and a nice choke coil wich i will use as primary magnet. just have to check how this is wound, and maybee rewind it bifilar
Here's all the stripped E-I cores Brushes and commutator shimms..
And ofcourse some nice pre-wound coils to play around with.. Sprayed some parts black because i accidentally scratched the surface..there. I can tell you that this is one hell of a job,, stripping such a core..
I will build the commutator externally (like in the patents drawing) because indeed the hole in my part G is a bit to small..
Still a lot of things to do..I will keep posting pictures along the way.
Kind regards,
Peter
In physics, scalars are physical quantities that are unaffected by changes to a vector space basis. Scalars are often accompanied by units of measurement, as in "10 cm". Examples of scalar quantities are mass, distance, charge, volume, time, speed, and the magnitude of physical vectors in general.
You need to forget the Non-Sense that some spout with out knowing the actual Definition of the word Scalar! Some people talk absolute Bull Sh*t!
The pressure P in the formula P = pgh, pgh is a scalar that tells you the amount of this squashing force per unit area in a fluid.
A Scalar, having both direction and magnitude, can be anything! The Magnetic Field, a Charge moving, yet some Numb Nuts think it means Magic Science!
Hello my children. This is Yahweh, the one true Lord. You have found creation's secret. Now share it peacefully with the world.
Ref: Message from God written inside the Human Genome
God be in my head, and in my thinking.
God be in my eyes, and in my looking.
God be in my mouth, and in my speaking.
Oh, God be in my heart, and in my understanding.
More than anything else, your contributions to this forum are most important! We are trying to actively get all visitors involved, but we do only have a few main contributors, which are very much appreciated! If you would like to see more pages with more detailed experiments and answers, perhaps a contribution of another type maybe possible:
They REFUSE to tell me why!
The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!
Thank You So Much!
Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe. This idea is not novel. Men have been led to it long ago by instinct or reason. It has been expressed in many ways, and in many places, in the history of old and new. We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who drives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians, and in many hints and statements of thinkers of the present time. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.
Experiments With Alternate Currents Of High Potential And High Frequency (February 1892).
