Clemente Figuera

  • Topic Is Locked
  • 44K Views
  • Last Post 16 July 2019
Wistiti posted this 09 January 2018

 

 

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!

 

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Chris posted this 09 January 2018

I think it should be noted, and is very important, all the research done and data gathered is important for the Historical Record!

It is up to the reader of the information to Prove or Disprove the information contained!

It is very easy to Prove or Disprove! A very simple Experiment like The Mr Preva Experiment can shed a lot of light on these devices!

In saying this, the words used by Clemente Figuera, forgetting all else, the words used, are critical:

  • induced
  • inductor
  • magnet
  • electromagnets
  • turns
  • variation
  • field
  • traversing
  • voltage
  • current - 37 times second to top, The top word in this document is Figuera at 42 times.
  • dynamos

All these key words, are critical to only one thing: 

Electromagnetic Induction

It is even said, by Clemente Figuera himself:

This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267 (Spain)

   Chris

 

  • Liked by
  • Wistiti
Chris posted this 10 January 2018

 

How many Coils does Clemente Figuera Use?

 

How many Coils does Melvin Cobb Use?

 

How many Coils does Alexander Frolov's Phi Transformer Use?

 

How many Coils does Don Smith Use?

 

How many Coils does Floyd Sweet Use?

Divide by Two and exclude EX1 and 2 because they are Dive Coils.

  • P1 = 2 + FB1 = 3 Coils
  • P2 = 2 + FB2 = 3 Coils

EX1 and EX2 are Drive Coils, for Feed Back, or Feed Forward, depending on how you want to look at it,  giving a Time Constant via an Induced E.M.F from the two Power Coils Opposing Fields squeezing out the side through the EX Coils.

Turns Ratios and the Wavelengths used are important, we know this already.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Wistiti
  • Vasile
Chris posted this 10 January 2018

Hello and Welcome Marathonman!

I agree with your posts, that last one in particular, speaks volumes...

The field energy is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the total electromagnetic field. As a result, the simple addition of the energy fields of the total field can be many times the energy of the initial fields separately. This property of the electromagnetic field is non-additivity of the energy field. For example, when added to a stack of three flat circular permanent magnet energy of the total magnetic field is increased to nine times! A similar process occurs with the addition of electromagnetic waves in the feeder lines and resonance systems. Total energy of a standing electromagnetic wave can be many times greater than the energy of waves and the electromagnetic field to add. As a result, the total energy of the system increases. The process is described by the simple formula of energy field

Andrey Melnichenko - Transgeneratsiya electromagnetic field energy

 And

The underlying principal (forget Millikan’s experiment) has been derived in that magnetic effects vary on the square of the current. As the load on the machine increases, the volt-ampere product increases. The rate of flow of charges increases.

Floyd "Sparky" Sweet - The Space-Flux Coupled Alternator

We have an experiment here we, well I refer to all the time, The Mr Preva Experiment, this proves exactly this. It is undeniable and only Fools try to dispute it.

You are right in what you say, I have found the same things, spending many years gluing a long trail of references and data to support my findings!

Simply, hard provable data can not be disputed by any sane mind!

Welcome!

   Chris

Chris posted this 10 January 2018

@Marathonman - Are you aware of the very old devices called Mag-Amps, Saturable Reactors and the like?

 

“Now I'm going to say something I should not. Floyd Sweet was privileged to work with the  Germans after WW2. He pulled this trick on me with the VTA except I caught him and was  booted out he only made it look like he condition the magnets . The Germans already had  developed, kept away from the people rotating mag amps and Sweet worked on them. ( He  was an electromagnetic expert in this field) It was funny to me when I would go over to  Sweet's place with the coils I wound for him and when I would leave it would be working the  next day. I asked him to remove the 100 watt power Amplifier and he refused so I left then  was asked to never return by Tom Bearden, Tom did not know as I never told him. Tom even  brought one over to me to test away from Floyd's house where it was working before Tom  left to have it tested. Floyd went nuts when Tom told him he was testing this at my shop. It  did not work. So whatever GE had knowledge of , Floyd knew How, but I can make this  machine work either way.”

...

“That is why nobody can make it, Sweet device also Magnetic Amplifier.”

John Bedini

 I was never able to confirm any of this. But back in those days it was how they did things. So its hard to say.

We are growing stronger every day, with every new member, we are working as a team and we are moving forward all the time. Our Collective Will makes us in stoppable! We are already making a difference!

We work for the next Generation, making the difference the last Generation should have, but only few did.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
  • tribulationcoming
dummyload posted this 10 January 2018

I was offline for a little bit, so I hadn't seen the reply from Chris when I posted. I just deleted my post. It just seemed that the mag amp or DC Variac described had a special construction.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Zanzal
Chris posted this 10 January 2018

I was offline for a little bit, so I hadn't seen the reply from Chris when I posted. I just deleted my post. It just seemed that the mag amp or DC Variac described had a special construction.

Hey Dummyload - I may have been late to reply, sorry, I have been really busy lately. got a side project and its taking a lot of time.

GE built what's called an Amplidyne, it is a Rotating Magnetic Amplifier. I do not know if this was what Floyd may have worked on, but it fits the description given by JB.

One has to ask the question, why would GE put a "Generator" on the end of a Motor? It clearly served a purpose, especially on the gun mount control system in the Military.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
  • Vasile
Chris posted this 10 January 2018

in the figuera device part G is basically the same thing with a twist.

Marathonman

Agreed, it is, the Twist is Electromagnetic Induction, we are Amplifying Voltage and Current in excess of Unity, and above! Charge is Separated, Conduction Improves, which in turn Resistance drops, because Conduction = 1 / Resistance.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
  • Vasile
Chris posted this 10 January 2018

I agree, it is a Pressure, it is T.H. Moray's "Pump":

Electricity is not made by the generator, it is merely pumped. From that standpoint, an electric generator might be referred to as an electric pump and the Moray radiant energy device as a high-speed electron oscillating device.

T. H. Moray - The Sea of Energy in which the Earth floats

 There is beauty in Logic. A Jet Engine, Air Pressure, a Turbo is the same. This video of mine, Stress is a Pressure:

 

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
Chris posted this 11 January 2018

Hahaha Nicely worded - We feel the same way Marathonman! I assure you!

For the sake of Science and the way Science has discovered Nature and all of the Great Scientists that have contributed to Science, I follow Science and do Science, but Experiment is what guides my beliefs. Not the Dogma of bad Scientists! Which is NOT Science!

As all Great Scientists have, even the Great Nikola Tesla, worked with the Fundamental concepts of Electrical Energy, as this is my focal point. This being Voltage and Current, the quantities we Measure and observe.

I have my own views on how these particles have managed to stay in existence for as long as they have. I have chosen to stay largely silent on the underlying concepts, simply because I do not wish to confuse people.

I want to stay on target and leave out all unnecessary complications, at least where possible.

That's just the way I want to go with my work. Any following my work, and the progress I have had in the study of Floyd Sweet and my side projects that relate and correlate to Floyds Sweets work, can then follow the same Concepts laid out in Science, a Standardised View Point that is well documented.

I need not re-invent the wheel, only tighten a few spokes...

The reason I say this here, is, this is how Clemente Figuera also approached his work. As many Greats did following Figuera.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
  • Vasile
Zanzal posted this 11 January 2018

i am a man of my word and live by my word and you people will get the information in my head if it kills me or they kill me first.

No worries man. As of this year (((they))) don't have the influence they once had. Also I don't think they kill people for knowing about FE or how to build FE devices. Though I am fairly certain they killed people who tried to upset the balance or status quo or who had invented something truly special. Unless you are manufacturing anti-matter in your basement or trying to put a FE device in every home/car you don't have anything to be concerned about IMO.

Chris posted this 11 January 2018

As of this year (((they))) don't have the influence they once had

World Wide Eutrophic Smack Down of Evil - I am totally tickled about this! (((they))) have been reaped and this time the Grim Reaper is shinning light for all!

Team Q

   Chris

Chris posted this 11 January 2018

since currant is flowing in two direction we have a north north opposing fields at the positive brush that keeps both sides of the inductor separate allowing complete unison as the brush rotates.

And this is the part that is music to my ears!

We have, from the Horses mouth, Clemente Figuera, that the Clemente Figuera Infinite Energy Machine was, in his words:

 

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.

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.

The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. 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; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.

Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.
In order to privilege the application to the production of large industrial electrical currents, on the principle that says that “there is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application of said principle.

This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.

PATENT by CLEMENTE FIGUERA (year 1908) No. 44267 (Spain)

The truth is, Electromagnetic Induction does produce an E.M.F and as a result, most of the time, a Current, an M.M.F will become available.

Of course, these two quantities are our Focal Point.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Vasile
Zanzal posted this 11 January 2018

Good info here, definitely convinced me to give this one a try. For a small prototype what is the recommended construction recipe here. I understand the coils all need to have a soft iron core (which is difficult and somewhat expensive to source). Can anyone recommend based on experience:

1. minimum number coil sets (7 shown in the patent, can it be done with 1 set, 2 sets, etc?)

2. minimum/maximum dimensions for soft iron cores for N/S coils and also for pickup? 

3. wiring gauges for wiring for both the N/S coils and also pickup?

Just looking for basic replication starting point, not for use necessarily on a practical scale. 

 

Chris posted this 11 January 2018

Hey Marathonman, yes, I see.

Studied and read many times. Perhaps my interpretation is a little different from yours.

Do you have your own schematic drawn up?

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Vasile
Chris posted this 11 January 2018

In the original documentation some images were placed in the mix, I have no idea if they are legit!

 

 

I do suspect someone has gone a little crazy with a red pen... Inflicting some pain on what was really being said.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Vasile
Chris posted this 11 January 2018

and i hope your understanding Chris is not based on that pic.

Hey Marathonman,

No sir, expressed was scepticism, not faith!

   Chris

Chris posted this 11 January 2018

Chris;

Interpretation is a little different than yours.

well lets here it and i will explain in detail if there are errors.

Marathonman

Hey Marathonman,

I guess I work a little different than most. I look for Key Words, Key Sentences and then I use Fact to disseminate Negative Sentiment.

Basically, I look for provable Facts. Facts that can be proven to be true on the bench. All else I put in a "Maybe Later" basket. So, what Facts do we know about  Clemente Figuera?

  • He studied in depth Dynamos, same type of device as we know today as an Electrical "Generator"
  • Obtained from the Clemente Figuera Device was an excess of Current and Voltage
  • This Excess was attributed to Faradays Laws of Electromagnetic Induction.
  • As was mentioned, the word "Current" was one of the top words used, we know a Changing Current is analogous to a Changing Magnetic Field, thus supporting the Electromagnetic Induction hypothesis.
  • Fact is, the description of the device does vary from document to document which could mean several things.
  • Clemente Figuera spoke of "the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced", this we have evidence and experimental proof several times in other Devices.
  • It was often mentioned, pluralised: "induced currents", for example: "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"
  • Fact is, the Sum of two Currents is greater then one Current Individually. A quality we are focused.
  • No one description of the device holds with Electromagnetic Induction.
  • The use of the term: "induced" is regularly mixed up, or confused with the mentioned Coil and or Input to its respective Output - Remember Figuera studied in depth Induction, he knows what "Induced" means!

The list goes on, but I think there is enough here to see what I mean. To get a bit of a handle on where and what I look for.

My one line interpretation of the Clemente Figuera device: 

A Machine that took full and complete advantage of Electromagnetic Induction to produce an excess Output Power in respect to its Input Power.

I hope this helps?

   Chris

 

Chris posted this 11 January 2018

Hey Marathonman,

Just for the record, I think youre on the right track.

Todays massive Hydro Generators can be very efficient. Today’s standard reaches up to 99%.

One has to think about this for a while, What exactly is measured and what is converted to what in these measurements?

Shaft Torque is 100% of the Input Energy, this is the unit Newton Metre.

The Output is Electrical Energy, this is Watts, which is Joule's per second.

So what's the < 1% - Bearing Friction, Hysteresis and Windage Losses. 

A Transformer, the same problem exists, Hysteresis Losses and so on.

The Problem here is, we have a ratio of Input to Output! This ratio is a function of the Energy Conversion Process. This is a Closed System and no extra work can be done at any time during this process.

Energy Input: One Unit

Energy Output: Transformation of the One Unit less losses.

Ensuring a System that is ALWAYS below Unity.

In our System, we must invoke more than one Transformation, I have shown how to do this here: Some Coils Buck and Some Coils DONT

   Chris

Chris posted this 12 January 2018

I agree and Figuera bucked the system all to hell

that is why he says a transformation of mechanical work to electricity in layman terms is BS.

Agreed Marathonman, he does actually point this out in his text:

electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one

...

what is sought is the patent for the application of this principle

You can check the context if you like, but there is a direct correlation between the two snippets. One is the 'objective' and the second is the 'intent'.

Clemente Figuera was a very smart cookie! Well before his time.

Gnite, sleep well.

   Chris

Chris posted this 12 January 2018

Just tried another browser and no dice still no pic post.

Hey Marathonman, an odd problem!

What browser are you using? And what Version?

Can you try the following:

  • Turn off popup blockers.
  • Turn off any Active Screen Filters you may have
  • Update Java to the latest version.
  • Turn off any anti Virus software.

If you can try one at a time, then try to add an image, this may narrow down whats causing the problem. 

Of course, when done, turn them all back on!

TinyMCE is perhaps the most popular html editor in the world! The website: https://www.tinymce.com/

Perhaps try on their site with one of the many demo's there also.

No one else has reported this problem, is anyone having this problem?

   Chris

 

P.S: So you're not getting the second popup after clicking the Image Button like this:

 

 

 

Chris posted this 12 January 2018

I get the pop up but the browse button is not there and the rectangle boxes are covering up half the words. i already have the pop up turned off, java is ok and Flash is allowed so beyond that i haven't a clue.

I will attach a pic of the pop up box.

Hey Marathonman - I have to go out, but real quick, try pasting the Image path into the box 'Sour' so it might look like something like:

  • C:\Users\Chris\Desktop\Image.jpg

but yours will be different path, and then try clicking Ok.

See if you can make some progress that way?

The image you posted, I have not seen it before, have no idea why you're getting this box.

You've followed all the steps here: Help with using the Forum and that's the box you get? This is completely odd!

   Chris

Zanzal posted this 12 January 2018

Can not copy and paste won't let me. even tried the new Mozilla Firefox, Google chrome, Internet Explorer and Chromium,  the same thing.

Marathonman

I don't get the browse button either so I cheat:

1) Upload the image as an attachment after creating the post
2) Copy the attachment link below the post into the clipboard
3) Edit the post and insert the image using the attachment link url
4) Wait a few seconds for the image to appear then edit the dimensions of the image to better fit the forum.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Vasile
Wistiti posted this 13 January 2018

Hey MM, it is a pleasure to have you here with us!


I want to start with a welcome to finally a forum where people can freely share their building experiment without the fear of being challenged by bad mind people...

Here people are free to experiment with the bucking coil ,POC, technique (cause we already know it work) or any other approach they want. 

The main idea here is to build, learn and share together.


With that say, please do not be upset if the “mass” do not replicate what you are sharing.... This “mass” builders is not so high in number and some share their experiment and some other prefer to not... That the way it goes and it is ok like that.

Anyway, everyone learn and progress at their convinience...

Again I’m happy to have you here sharing!

Zanzal posted this 13 January 2018

Those coils turned out pretty nice.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Wistiti
Chris posted this 15 January 2018

  Yesterday i tried to log on and got an error message. i  took a screen shot of the error and printed it out as a PDF. the attached is that error message. i would of used a personal message but you can't add after posting there. you can delete it after seeing it if you want.

Hey Marathonman, a bit of a pain this message. The Antiforgery token has been issued twice and one becomes invalid. Its normal if you try to logon over top of an existing login. Not to say you did, but sometime hitting the login button twice fast while logging in can cause this. Other things can cause this also. Its ok, no problems your end, or Server side, its just an issue with the login.

This is resolved by closing the page and trying again or sometimes going back and using the previous Token.

Thanks for letting me know!

   Chris

Chris posted this 16 January 2018

Sorry to hear Marathonman, a bad day! Hope your day improves!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Vasile
Zanzal posted this 17 January 2018

Not to derail, but I should point out in reference to that graphic that the bible provides an answer to key to the Kingdom of God. The key Kingdom of God is the Messiah. There is a door only he can open and only he can shut. This door provides entry into the Kingdom of God. Further its understood that flesh and blood (which is powered by DNA) cannot enter the Kingdom of God. These things can be described in sciency terms (higher dimensions, virtual universe simulations, etc), but DNA is not the key to the Kingdom of God.

 

  • Liked by
  • Vasile
Zanzal posted this 17 January 2018

WOW ! i just laid out so much info to the figuera device and all you can say is is a comment about something i completely forgot that was on that graph about a book that is basically a complete lie in the first place twisted by man to suit his own needs as a tool of control.

it seems i might be in the wrong place to present the Figuera device and need to reassess my reasons for being here .

Marathonman

Greetings Marathonman,

Yes, I appreciate your sharing and being here. I have a religious obligation to combat heresy just as I have an obligation not to lie or to steal or to harm other people. We have to be true to our beliefs. Feel free to express yourself in any way you see fit, I shall do the same and with much politeness if at all possible.

Zanzal posted this 17 January 2018

So how did you like the info on the mot's ? hopefully it will be useful to builders of very small test builds as mot's are easily attainable.

I thought the info you provided was very complete and concise and your own turned out excellent. I was sad to hear about the mishap. I myself don't have the equipment or machining skills today to take the same path, but there are those that can and will thanks to that info. I was thinking about obtaining some smaller bar stock and making a scaled down version. I'm doing some research into the solid state version of part G that uses two decade counters. I find that device alone to be very interesting and I'm going to build one and study it as soon as I can.

Zanzal posted this 19 January 2018

down load all pics and graphs and study this device like crazy. be sure to tell other people about it and what you are doing to help humanity, you will be surprised at what you can accomplish and what doors will open.

Have you considered the level of danger individuals pose to your work? Everyone so concerned about the Rothschilds, never realize there are those who would suppress this because it suits their interests as well. Especially because of where you live, lots of people with ties to oil, wind, and solar. Think about this: Someone blabs and tells their rich Uncle about your research, the next day two ex-cons show up and rand-sack your home. You remember the theory that everyone is connected by at most 7 levels of separation?

I have the flu, don't feel well and 10 hr day is long tomorrow so i must rest.

My whole house over here recovering from whatever is going around. Get well soon.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Zanzal posted this 20 January 2018

Zanzal;

According to your post two weeks ago there was no threat yet today there is one.

You may have to take me literally sometimes. I'm known for splitting hairs. My words were this:

No worries man. As of this year (((they))) don't have the influence they once had. Also I don't think they kill people for knowing about FE or how to build FE devices. 

What I was saying is that group of people often referred to as the cabal aren't a serious threat to researchers. At least not in the early stages. Invent something revolutionary, and they come into the picture to take it from you (force or money depending on the nature of the invention and its implications), otherwise they are content to watch. Or at least they were, they've lost control now. Another threat may emerge to replace them, but again I don't see them as a threat to most FE researchers.

Now people who want to change the world have other threats to contend with. That's why I asked if you had considered human nature here.. Forewarned is forearmed.

Chris posted this 21 January 2018

@Marathonman - please check your PM, I have asked to edit and tone down your last post. 

We want to keep Civil and Respectful communication going here, unlike the other forums.

Thank You for respecting our Code of Conduct.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Wistiti
Zanzal posted this 21 January 2018

you contradict your self in the same paragraph. research into the suppression of FE devices might be to your advantage as my 15 years Plus of research suggests otherwise. the list of murdered people following the FE path is longer than my front driveway.

I re-read what I posted and I don't see the contradiction you are referring too. Since I also read your original post where you made it clear you did not want to continue the discussion, I will leave it at that.

Zanzal posted this 21 January 2018

I found this video while searching for information on Clement Figuera, has some good details in it:

 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Chris posted this 22 January 2018

I found this video while searching for information on Clement Figuera, has some good details in it: 

Hey Zanzal - Thanks for sharing!

For the Record, I disagree on this working principle. But I am interested to see what the end result is. My interpretation of this device is quite different, yes, I have read all patents and paper work.

The "Secondary Coil" will still exhibit Lenz's Law, Opposite magnetic Field effects, that will Reflect back on the "Primaries".

If the Primary Coil, is subjected to, any sort of, Magnetic Field Reflection, Lenz's law, from a Secondary Coil, then we are still stuck with an in-Efficient Transformer. Remembering the Magnetic Field, is Current, which is MMF and two opposing MMF's at the same time, if you have to pay for one of them, well, we know what a Transformer does.

That's my opinion and my experience, but happy for Marathonman to prove me wrong? Or anyone else?

   Chris

Zanzal posted this 22 January 2018

If the primary's oppose, which primary is the secondary linked too in a transformer....? If secondary flux is linked to N wouldn't it's opposition to N assist S or vis versa? Because the power though N is opposed by S (via part G) that the flux linkage normally enforced through Lenz might be opposed in this configuration.

Normally because of Lenz transformers can't gain energy from time rate of change.. Because the draw on the primary is always proportional to the secondary.. However, if that symmetry can be broken even by a little, then increases time of rate of change could increase power output, couldn't it? Further multiple transformers producing even a small percentage of excess power could result in a lot of power when put in series. I think your assessment is not unreasonable Chris, but its far from clear that this is a simple transformer. There is a lot of consider here so I think its worth exploring more.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Chris posted this 22 January 2018

Hey Zanzal - Perhaps Marathonman will prove me wrong?

I am going to leave the floor to Marathonman or whoever else, and see if they can show I am wrong. I will read from now on.

   Chris

Zanzal posted this 23 January 2018

Hey Marathonman,

Looking forward to seeing more on this. Your build is off to a great start. I'll reply back if a question comes to mind, but I'm going to focus on other projects for now.

Chris posted this 23 January 2018

I must post to say, sorry Marathonman, I have to disagree again, Electromagnetic Induction is Electromagnetic Induction and the rules or Laws don't change from Transformer to "Generator", Electromagnetic Induction is the fundamental Law, can not be changed.

A Transformer works on the Fundamental Electromagnetic Induction Laws, as does a "Generator", they are not the same devices, but the Laws are the same.

Transformers are designed around the exact same Equations as Electromagnetic Induction and Efficiencies are about the same for well designed devices.

So, I have to disagree with your interpretation and differentiation of the two devices. The underlying principles are the same, even though the devices are not the same.

The Hooper-Monstein Experiment might be worth your while looking into. Also you may find the Flux Gate Magnetometer interesting.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Vasile
Chris posted this 23 January 2018

I should have said - We have two different devices that both give us the same end result via the same fundamental Laws:

  • A Coil of Wire with Positive on one Terminal and Negative on the other Terminal.

   Chris

Chris posted this 24 January 2018

Since i started this journey i have had a ton of people disagree with my findings so it is nothing unusual. most of the defiance is because of the lack of understanding or the total mind set of dogma classical training. in most cases the confusion are of spin direction or the fact that we have one electromagnet coming in (increasing) and one going out (decreasing) thus changes the spin or rather the E field direction and NOT the original magnetic field which does not change. just because you are pulling a magnet away from a coil does not change the fact that the magnetic field is always in one direction but the fact is we are catching the back side of the spin thus changes the direction of the E field to match that of the increasing electromagnet giving us an output that is the square of the two electromagnets in coherency thus four times the output as two non coherent.

Hey Marathonman - Although I disagree, doesn't mean I am not willing to learn, perhaps I have missed something in my journey? I am not stuck with dogma or ignorance - I am a student of Nature and all it has to share.

Every day I wake I look forward to a little more enlightenment, Learning is my thing, I am looking forward to your sharing of something new.

   Chris

Chris posted this 24 January 2018

Hi Marathonman, I am not "ruffled" I am interested in seeing what you have to share. I am back in reading mode now.

Will watch your progress.

   Chris

norman6538 posted this 07 February 2018

I did Marathonman's Test 1 and got very little current and the same for test 2. I suspect some coil/magnet geometry problems and will increase the repelling magnets gap to 1/2 in from 1/8 so it will be about the same as the coil width so the same pole is approaching the coil and also leaving the coil out the other side.  I will be pushing the magnets through the coil hole so its more like the Figuera configuration instead of pushing the past the cored coil. I use black silicone seal to hold the magnets and that takes a good 12 hrs to hold. Hot glue will not hold the repelling magnets. I am using 3/4 ceramic magnets.

 

Anybody else get some better results?

 

I tested the wider gap between repelling magnets and did not get a greater current.

Now what?

 

Norman

norman6538 posted this 07 February 2018

Could you describe the physical movement that you used for the test. Most people pass a magnet over one of the core ends...And when you do that you will get one voltage polarity as they approach each other and another when they leave each other. But I chose to pass my magnet through the coil and you get the same voltage polarity approaching and leaving as in passing the core.

Mechanically going through the coil does not make a generator. Were it not for my such experiments I would not understand this at all.

Now picture a magnet being flipped so that N goes in and gets flipped so that N also comes out which means the coil voltage polarity does not get flipped....Figuera did that so that he got the same polarity  approaching and leaving instead of switched polarity. But I am not sure about the current doubling. My test will show that when the glue dries over night.

Norman

 

 

 

Norman

electrocute posted this 28 February 2018

Hello everyone

I am a newbie here and I caught interest in the Figuera-device when this thread was brought up. By watching the priming video by wisiti I thought it should be possible to test if it was something to this principle by doing a simple experiment.

The goal is to have one magnet moving out the same time as another one is moving in. Supposedly a pickup loop will then “see” a fading N-pole on one side and an increasing N-pole on the other side. This would be a new way of inducing something into a coil and the outcome not so easy to predict.

I first fixed one stack of neo ring magnets on a brass rod and dropped it through a vertical pvc pipe. On the outside of the pipe I had a pickup coil about 30cm from the top. The pulse was recorded on the scope. This would be the reference (normal induction). Peak value about 4.4V.

Then I fixed two stacks on the rod and dropped it from the same height. In this first test it was obvious that the spacing between the magnets was not optimal, so I decreased a little bit and did a new drop. Now it seems that the generated pulse is exactly what is proposed in the video:  double voltage – over 8 volts!!!

This is of cause a very crude experiment but may be the proof that this principle really has some merit.

 

This is what I used:

 

 

Pulse from one magnet stack:

  

 

Bucking magnets 1.try

 

 Bucking magnets 2.try: (now the scale is 5V/div)

 

 

-electrocute

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Marathonman
electrocute posted this 05 March 2018

MM,

I did a couple of experiments some time ago with two electromagnets. As I understand the goal is to have one electromagnet going from 100% to zero at the same time as the other is going from zero to 100%. The result should be a triangular curve. In my first experiment I did this with just two transistors driven from a 2-channel function generator. I had a magnetometer with which I measured the resulting field on the pole faces. It took a lot of tuning of the timing of the pulses together with the driving voltage from the power supply and the resistors in the back emf circuit to get a fairly good triangular curve. If the timing was not set right the field would start above or below zero. The very interesting thing I observed was that the output was a square wave. This could mean that with this kind of field the induction is constant, giving DC in each cycle. But of cause change polarity each cycle.

In the next experiment I did I wanted to boost the field strength and at the same time improve the linearity of the curve. Since the loading current was depending on a RL-circuit in the first experiment (which gave a fairly linear curve) I would try to load through a constant current source. Darlington bipolar gave a nice linear curve. But for the decrease I used the same RL circuitry as before. I also used some smaller coils which gave higher field, about 0.5T as 0.1T in the first experiment. Unfortunately my magnetometer probe was smashed between the magnets so I have not finished the experiment yet. I think a magnetic field instrument is a must in these experiment. A new probe is under way from Ebay.

I am not sure if the fields should go from 0% to 100% or maybe from 50% or higher. It's difficult to know exactly what the part G does but as far as I can see there is always some resistor in the circuit, never a full break. That should indicate current always above zero.

As you may understand I am not so dedicated to a mechanical version of part G, partly because I don't have the means to make mechanical parts and also because I believe it is possible to make the necessary waveforms with electronics.

-electrocute

Enjoykin2118 posted this 16 March 2018

The same laws rule the Figuera's overunity machine.... This is that rule

ps: The same HZed FORCE like in Mr.PREVA device, HZ(ed) antennas, Floyd Sparky Sweet VTA and all OU devices.

Vladimir’s Korobejnikov and Ted's Hart mathematical work is the realization that the electric charge in dynamic electrons always has two components - forward and rotary(spinor 1/2). As a result, the electromagnetic field of this dynamic charge consists of two complex components: two (№2) separate and distinct electromagnetic fields Vector and Scalar EM-FIELDS. The properties of these two electromagnetic fields are very different in space. Conventional Hertz devices work on the forward progress of electric charges (current) in the conductors. A feature of the HZ device is that the cylinders have some conventional forward electron progress (conducting current) but the ROTARY movement or Electron's spin is master dominant. This sets up a condition to create magnetic streams counter to each other (compensated balance fields) and generate longitudinal HZ magnetic field (aka Scalar field, aka compression/decompression field, aka shock wave, aka radiant) those of the ordinary tuning coils.

 

 

Attached Files

Enjoykin2118 posted this 16 March 2018

How to generate Spinor field or simply make electrons twist together at the same place ?

Order electrons to TWIST at place where they are by creating two vector magnetic streams counter to each other in well known Chris Sikes configuration known as partnered.

THREE RULES MASTER HZ-ed aetheric FORCE.

1. Two opposite (each other) conducting currents create two opposite vector magnetic streams.

2. Timing or time lag or phase shift between two halves of partnered coils or precise time-lag between two vector magnetic streams.

3. Critical frequency at which wave-lenght of HZ(ed) going to infinity, and the term of @speed@ become the nonsense, because instantaneous power transfer through the whole Aether, or simple HZ(ed) would become the Aether's property.

Think about the Aetheric power involved in neverending game of dynamic fields.

ps: In Fernandez project coils are for sure 100% in Chris Sykes Partnered configuration. Pluse time-lag to achieve HZ(ed) Critical Frequency. And result is always BINGO.

Same stuff in A.F. Möbius Partnered HZ(ed) coils.

Enjoykin2118

Enjoykin2118 posted this 16 March 2018

How to catch  "uncatchable" HZ(ed) field ? 

Antimony posted this 17 March 2018

I am fascinated with Figuera, and your work MM is interesting. I have been interested in replicating it for a long time but i wasnt able to make the rotary switch, or anything like it.

Are you going to follow the patent, and use a rotary brush switching?

Thanks for sharing.

/antimony

Enjoykin2118 posted this 19 March 2018

Tell us the basic principle of figuera device IF YOU KNOW HOW. All great stuffs must be extraordinary simple.

i am 100% sure that without HZ(ED)-component there is no practical way to obtain C.O.P.>1.

The only way we can obtain it is partnered coils (or partnered magnets) configuration. i saw it in Floyd's VTA , in Figuerea Device and in many working and suppressd free energy devices.

Point of view is EXTREMELY simlpe. Suppress two opposite vector magnetic fields with proper timing and don't forget scattering phasing of coils and trigger HZ(ed) component which is self independent once properly triggered. HZ(ed) is obligatory responsible for generation of free energy because it is part of Aetheric forces. As Tesla said - there is no energy in matter, so the source is out of it, in Aether. HZ(ed) is portal to the Aether.

Why you always made big volume devices, why not start with small model ? The point is not in size but in idea.

p.s. what the hack is HZ(ed) ?

it is a STANDING WAVE, MAGNETIC STANDING WAVE!

This "came to hit now"! Behind a wave guide wall, there is quite concrete wavelength, and in same timinging, it is equal to infinity in a wave guide.By the way, at an entrance to a wave guide the plane wave turns by 90 degrees and with sidewise or precise - magnetic component, slip through it..

Regards

Enjoykin

 

Enjoykin2118 posted this 19 March 2018

MM ok, I UNDERSTAND.

Good luck with Figuera.

Enjoykin

Enjoykin2118 posted this 19 March 2018

Yeap.

Already done in attached file. But nobody listen and read.

By the way, yes!, we are still on the same suppressed (mirrored) side of reality.

ps.  What HZ(ed) did with ordinary radio - in case with HZ(ed) antenna ?

http://www.xferra.com

Regards

Enjoykin

 

Zanzal posted this 05 April 2018

Good stuff Marathonman. You've inspired me to try one of these soon. I've got a couple ideas for approaches for a solid state part G. The most simple approach involves combing a constant current source with a sine wave along with an NPN and a PNP transistor to create two oscillating current limited DC sources that are 180 degrees out of phase. A simulation here:

Oscillating two phase DC source

The two opposing coil sets would go where the 1 ohm resistors are.

Should that approach fail to get good results I will likely try a 10-transistor Johnson Counter feeding a 10 tapped toroid approach, but not the one recommended by Patrick Kelly as that one appears (to me anyway) to have some flaws.

EmilP posted this 16 April 2018

Dear Mr. Marathonman,

I read all the posts and have some suggestions:

1. Part G would be good to be totally independent of the rest of the configuration for better testing of variants, regardless of the configuration of the toroid, conductor coils, etc.

2. In the case of the final version, the brush can be used directly on the toroid, but on the inside of the toroid, to use the centrifugal force to press harder on the toroidal windings. (one problem is: copper is softer and will be rubbed).

I studied on a car distributor rotor that exactly what it does (send the spark to spark plugs) and is balanced for high speeds. The rotor contact is made in distributor cap and is made of a hard material.

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/mq8AAOSw8d5ZSPwR/s-l1600.jpg

Sorry for my english, I'm using Google Translate.

Yours,

Emil Platon

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Hopeful1 posted this 17 April 2018

marathonman

"Thank you" seems inadequate. What is missing from most forums is someone who is unselfish enough to share ALL their research and discoveries for the betterment of mankind. On this site there is none of that, only like minded people who want to see man progress.  I have had this patent saved for a lot of years and understood the basics of how it works, but thanks to your work i may someday be able to make it work. Thank you again.

Tony

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Wistiti
EmilP posted this 28 April 2018

As an alternative to using brushes, you could replace with

heat treated copper, which has some spring to it.

I am with you in the effort to achieve the Figuera prototype.

Thank you for sharing your ideas and the progress of your work.

 

 

EmilP

  • Liked by
  • Chris
EmilP posted this 28 April 2018

Your brushes are the ideal case, I have just presented a simpler alternative to tests.

On rollers I saw a sparkle in a video.

I have the electricity on hydro (a small creek) that offers me 1.5kw with which I assure the house needs and hot water.

The heat is made with wood, and that's why I want to make the Figuera device, as time passes, I get older, and it will be hard for me to hang on to the stoves in the house.

I've done all sorts of home automation and I think I'll do it with you too.

Thank you again.

EmilP

  • Liked by
  • Chris
onepower posted this 28 April 2018

To brush or not to brush is the question?.

Given the choice I would rather change brushes every five years rather than change oil every 5000 Km and fill my gas tank twice a week. I would be happy to change those brushes knowing that power bill and that heating bill most pay was not coming in the mail. I would take care and patience changing those brushes making sure everything was just right because they represent my freedom and independence from a system bound to consume itself.

We should note there are no electronics to my knowledge which can handle a stray 50 Kv voltage spike yet a brush has no problem with it. Even a small carbon brush can handle a periodic 600 amp discharge which is not true of most electronics. In fact it is the most robust switch one can have in our toolbox.

Never underestimate the virtues of simplicity.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 03 May 2018

Marathonman, you are not alone!
Thank you for sharing such detailed information and I am sure inspiring many to try to build this device.
I am also in the middle of a build and I have a few observations to share.

Primary Coils
I decided to compare the different basic winding techniques for the primaries on a Gauss per Amp Turn basis. I used a static constant current supply to get a relative comparison. Gauss was measured at the same identical position on the edge of the core face (I am using a fast soft iron for the cores).

Magnet Wind
As the layers are paralleled up, i decided that the amp turns must be counted as if for one layer. On that basis i got 0.21 Gauss/AT.

Normal Wind - 0.51 Gauss/AT.

Tesla Wind - 0.73 Gauss/AT.

My Part G
I had made a 320 turns continuous wind of 1.9mm wire on a variac iron core torroid 240 o/d 115 i/d 80 high with top polished.
With closed wind, inductance at any two diametrically opposed windings is 1846uH at 100Hz.
Thus I think Part G behaves as a tripple inductor, one static across the two brushes and two dynamic from the north brush to the taps, the static inductor being increased as the torroidal flux builds.
I think this can only be achieved if the windings are closed which poses a question I would like to ask about your C core version, will it behave differently to the torroid version?
I will finish the Part G build in the next few days and then try to estimate its performance so i can finish the full complement of coils.


Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Wistiti
Aetherholic posted this 04 May 2018

Marathonman,

This is the first time I have posted on any forum for the very reasons you stated. I also have got tired of reading replication information with only half the story. I feel its better to give full information even if the result doesn't work out, at least the reasons can then be fully investigated.

The coil tests I did were done at 2 amps constant current but were intended as a relative reference not absolute values to illustrate the effects of the different winds given identical coils and that the tesla wind does indeed give almost 50% more flux than a standard wind.

My part G coil was selected based upon getting the biggest coil I could get from any supplier who was prepared to do a full wind for me so for this build I have to live with whatever it will put out until I can model what part G is so that a full custom design can be done.

The word "static" that I used was to mean mechanically non variable to differentiate it from the dynamic inductances. Of course the inductance will change depending upon the field.

I have come to believe that Part G is in fact a genius replication of the coil triplets working in reverse with the static inductance being equivalent to the secondary coil and the dynamic inductances equivalent to the two primary coils but in this case the secondary is permanently energized and is used to power the primaries.

At the NN brush, there will be a south pole on either side, a south flux linking the two souths running through the core and a north torroidal field OUTSIDE the core but able to influence the windings. The SS brush will be the reverse. So we have a pure North and a pure South rotating in the core as you said  with an outside North and outside South rotating through the windings. (demonstrable by ferrocell and CRT viewing bucking fields). in other words, the same arrangement as two primaries and a secondary triplet BUT working in reverse with the secondary being permanently energized providing the field which is then modulated by the dynamic inductances. Pure Genius.

I will post pictures of the build.

Regards,

Aetherholic

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 04 May 2018

For some reason I cant seem to post pictures other than as file attachments.

The attached picture in my previous post is Part G drive shaft with commutator, slip rings and floating drive for the brush plate.

 

 

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

EmilP posted this 04 May 2018

I have to tell you that it is an honor and a pleasure to participate in such a forum with quality people and professionals.

Neither I, like Aetherholic, have joined the forums until this year, although I have read thousands of posts over the past ten years.

Marathonman: You are not alone in the effort to make and learn others about the Figuera device, even if we do not post too much, we read regularly everything that appears here. Certainly a good many of those who read want and try to make the device, I'm sure of that. At each Figuera device created, the author will think about Marathonman ...

Thanks again, I never talked that much.

EmilP

Chris posted this 04 May 2018

@Aetherholic, EmilP,

Welcome!

All here are safe! We will not allow Trolls! We are in control here and Trolls will be Booted and reported as Trolls!

Marathonman is doing a great job of keeping the ball rolling with Clemente Figurea's Infinate Energy Machine and all posters are welcome.

Appologies MM, off topic, the floor is yours again my friend!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Marathonman
onepower posted this 04 May 2018

It would seem to me the process may be similar to a heat pump.

If we dissipate X electrical energy in a resistance we can expect to produce X heat energy as a result. However with a "heat-pump" we can dissipate the same X electrical energy and move up to six times more energy as heat from one place to another. In this case the external heat energy moved within a system would appear to be somewhat independent of the electrical energy dissipated.

Strange isn't it?... that energy is said to be conserved and I believe it is in the grand scheme of things yet here we have a common example where we can input X energy in one form and move six times more energy which happens to be in another form. It would seem to me that if a heat pump is not bound to a 1:1 energy equivalence ratio then perhaps we have been approaching this problem from the wrong angle.

One could say that we may have been taught the poorest way of doing things in our textbooks so far as the utilization of energy is concerned. 1X in 6X out... it's hard to argue it cannot work when it has been proven to work for decades. It's simply a matter of approaching the problem from the right angle with an open mind. 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 05 May 2018

Here goes with some more info and another pic.

This is my part G waiting final mechanical tweaking and wiring. Marathonman, yes I have holes through the slip rings for the commutator wiring. This build uses some 3D printed ABS parts so that I can adjust if needed. I am using a 4000rpm 24V DC motor with pwm controller at this stage. It takes 1.5A or less to turn the Part G and yes I have spun it up to 4000 without a problem, so I expect the 36 watts of loss to be inconsequential in this system.

The brush disc is 5mm Aluminium alloy. The brushes are 12X25 custom made with double wires as I have no idea yet what current can be produced. Theory is one thing, experiment is another as we all know.

This build was made fully adjustable so I don't expect it to last a long time, enough to be able to produce the full system. Then re design it based upon that experience.

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Attached Files

EmilP posted this 06 May 2018

Congratulations on professional and aesthetic construction at the same time.
I have a question: does the brush disc, that aluminum alloy also provide electromagnetic shielding? The variable magnetic field generated by the strong toroid could affect the rest of the mechanisms and the DC motor?
I was thinking of using a hard plastic disk used for sanding, which also has the connection side.
The three modules (Switching, Variable Induction and Coil Block) of the Figuera device, in my opinion, must be as insulated as possible so as not to interfere with each other.
EmilP

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 06 May 2018

EmilP,

I kept the motor as far away as possible from the torroid for that reason. The drive shaft is 316L stainless steel, non magnetic but is also relatively soft so you have to be careful not to stress it too much (I always make two of everything just in case). The disc is supposed to be non magnetic but as we know aluminium will levitate in a strong moving magnetic field. If this does happen I will remake it using stainless steel. All the screws and threaded rods are also stainless steel.

I think your idea to use a plastic disc is also ok except that you might need to use a spring to give enough brush pressure, I am currently relying on the weight of the aluminium but I also have space for a spring.

Aetherholic

 

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Marathonman
Aetherholic posted this 06 May 2018

Marathonman,

I hope our efforts will encourage more to join in. In these days of laser cut acrylic, lasercut and cnc metalwork and 3D printing together with CAD it makes it less difficult to be able to build devices like this.

For my bobbins i use acrylic tube cut to over length by the supplier then I use the big flat face of a standard grinder to get the length within 0.2mm which is needed because I use a winding machine. The ends are laser cut acrylic and glued using acetone which after a few hours is very strong.

I am looking forward to seeing your C core in action with the square wire wind, something I would need a few beers and some Dutch courage to attempt.

Aetherholic

 

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Marathonman
Enjoykin2118 posted this 07 May 2018

What would be if he used such a big toroid for Tesla Scalar Transformer ?

Tesla's Scalar Coil in action.rar {45Wt in, 2,19kWt out}

https://uploadfiles.io/jpv3v

Best regards

Enjoykin2118

 

 

Aetherholic posted this 08 May 2018

Now the comic interlude is over back to the main sub plot, getting to a working part G. The large brushes had too much bounce so I spent 16 hours redesigning some brush holders for the smaller brushes, 3D printing them, assembling and testing. Looks like they are good. The problem was spring tension, the best seems to be the coiled strip type which provides a more even pressure. Sounds like a jet turbine at full speed, looks like a Tesla scalar coil and functions as a part G. When static it makes a good coffee morning conversation piece. A variety of functions according to the beholder. I am posting from my phone at the moment so no pos, will post some more tomorrow. Maybe I will ad coffee grinder function also.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 08 May 2018

Seriously, the challenge of rotating brushes at 32m/s on top of a torroidal core and maintaining uninterrupted contact is huge. That's why it took Zeiss to make Figuera's part G.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 08 May 2018

And why he used a wheel brush.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 09 May 2018

Marathonman

My brush velocity at 210mm brush center diameter is 32.98m/s. This is the disadvantage of the torroid unless you do what figuera did. Your C Core has a huge advantage as brush velocity is much lower due to the smaller diameter and the adjustability.

Brushes seem to be a whole art in themselves with numerous materials, some as low as 17m/s up to 40m/s max velocity and numerous different wear factors and resistances so its important for anyone wishing to build this device to study the brushes also and the brush holders and the springs.

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 09 May 2018

Another point to do with brushes and springs. As the centrifugal force on the brush increases it is possible for the brush friction to overcome the spring in which case it will stick in the holder. The only real solution for this is to have a lever mechanism with a weight to increase the brush pressure according to speed. Figuera's inner brush wheel must have acted in this way naturally.

I have experienced this phenomenon with the commercial brush holders I am using.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 10 May 2018

Resolution of the brush lift problem.

I added a lever and weight to press on top of the spring.

I had to counteract 84N of force so an M6 screw and 2 nuts worked out nicely.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
EmilP posted this 10 May 2018

Aetherholic;

Congratulations, I knew you could find a solution.
It's normal to be able to adjust the spring pressure on the brushes.
I'm with you, it's very exciting this building you do.

EmilP

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 12 May 2018

Some more progress information.

Here is a not too good quality scope pic of the part G outputs N and S at low speed (yellow and blue).

So here is confirmation of the dual sine waves.

I can also confirm that there is huge energy stored in part G as if the brushes lift there is a very big negative spike despite running with magnet wound coils so the inductive collapse is mostly the energy in the torroid.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Aetherholic posted this 12 May 2018

An experiment on the coil triplet setup for those who have not done it yet.

Setup: two channel signal generator, channels phase locked 180 degrees out of phase, DC offset with 700mV 50Hz sine wave. Each channel connected directly to the gate of an IRF450 mosfet driving a magnet wound coil on the low side. High sides of both coils connected to DC. Both drive coils either side of an output coil as Figuera. The output coil with a load of 5 Ohms.

First test: coils in attraction mode

Second Test: coils in N-N repulsion mode

In both scope shots blue and yellow are the drive coils measured at the low side, red is the output coil.

Ignore the measurement numbers, look at the traces.

I think this proves the validity of the bucking arrangement in the figuera device.

Also, when testing the output coil windings with a magnet the entire winding length is north confirming that the north is being pushed out of the core.

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Chris posted this 12 May 2018

Aetherholic, Marathonman,

You lead the world on the Figurea device! Bucking Coils has already changed the world, more are waking to this everyday!

Aetherholic, as you said, initially the measurements are not important, what is important is the Effects! Why? Because one can learn more from the effects than anything else!

It is very easy to improve the effects further, once learnt from!

Well done, great work!

   Chris

Chris posted this 12 May 2018

Good news, my C core is on it's way as of yesterday.

 

Chris, the PM function is blocked. tried a few minutes ago and all that happens is the log in screen and that is it, even after i am already logged in.

 

Hey MM, great news!

Re the PM, can you please clear your browser cache, it is working, I have tested, could be a cache problem.

:Let me know how you go.

   Chris

Jagau posted this 15 May 2018

Yes MM

inductance increases with the current,

it would be the same thing in experience of PREVNA do you think MM?

Jack

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Jagau posted this 15 May 2018

Ok MM


I put the link on this site for prevna to verify, it is a very very interesting experience start by Chris.


http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/the-mr-preva-experiment/


Jack

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 16 May 2018

Marathonman

WOW that C core is certainly a thing of beauty, cant wait to see it wound and ground!

I have been busy making sure I had found all the potential problems with my Part G 1.0 so coming shortly will be Part G 2.0 including the following fixes:

Increased shaft diameter and two angled roller bearings for self centering

A zero friction custom brush holder to fix the 84N force problem

A custom made slip ring rated for high speed

An adjustable bed for the torroid so it can be leveled accurately.

The part designs will go to CNC tomorrow so I expect to be back building a few days after that.

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Enjoykin2118 posted this 17 May 2018

Well we wouldn't know enjoykin since no one on this thread is working on the Tesla device and maybe a good clue is the title of this thread. don't you think that is a little on the rude side. i mean really.

Well you would be completely wrong if you think he used multilayer winding's like Hooper so it seems you know nothing of the Figuera part G which is typical of most that don't put the time and effort into the real device operation. unlike myself that devoted my life to this one device. just because you THINK it would work doesn't mean it will ACTUALLY work. build it and find out.

that's twice now, what next Dunkin donuts.

 

Marathonman.

 

Hi MM

Honestly, i think my comments are not rude to anybody. But you have a free will and spirit and you can think whatever you want.

This is my variant of Figuera concept.

ps: MM i really wish you big piece of luck with your part G, but I am really suspicious (99,9%) you can repeat Figuera experiment and device and make it work. Why? You need examine first principle and generation of second magnetic field, complete mosaic and build a Figuera device. Simply becuase all Free Energy devices including Figuera one, were based on mighty HZ (second magnetic field [scalar]) which i mirrored side of FE coin. In top schematic is preliminary concept for extracint HZ field out of Aether, using ordinry partnered (bucking) coil configuration and simple electronics.

ps: I did't try Figuera replication only due to Bankster's hoax all about Figuera. But i know he had succeed. Made maybe 1st FE generator before 100 years and pay for it withown life.

 

Enjoykin

 

Marathonman posted this 20 May 2018

I really find it quite comical watching people hopping from thread to thread on this and other forums like a chicken with it's head cut off never concentrating on any one subject.  the reason i know so much about the Figuera device is that i stick to just the subjects that pertain to this device testing those parameters on the bench only that way i know everything there is to know about it. i do not have time or the inclination to study other devices as all my concentration is on the Figuera device and i will not rest until my device is completely operational.

after i am finished with this device i think i will concentrate on the 1932 Coutier device that way i can give that to the world also along with the Figuera device.

Together we will change the world.

 

Marathonman

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
Marathonman posted this 20 May 2018

The whole idea behind the Figuera device is using two opposing electromagnets that compresses the field lines to match that of a standard generator. that's certainly not all though as just compressing fields line will not get an output because the both E fields are opposing at that point and no output will occur. so think about that for a moment, how will you get those E fields in the same direction to match one another. you take one up in currant and take the other down in currant at the same time allowing the E fields to match being positive and additive in their relation to each other. the difference between increasing one electromagnet is the same aspects as taking a magnet towards a coil and the decreasing electromagnet is the same aspect as taking a magnet away from the coil. the spin direction does not change but we are catching the back side of the spin of the reducing electromagnet  since they are on opposite ends the  the E fields match thus being positive and additive.

since Faraday laid down the laws of induction there has to be some kind of movement in order to get induction from the electromagnet either being the coil of wire that moves or the increase or decrease of currant to the Electromagnets. this is still not all as the movement of the magnetic fields will cause the electric field but there still has to be movement of the secondary through the electric field in order to get currant to flow.
now things get tricky, how are you to get the secondary to move in a static non moving system across the electric field to get currant flow into the system. one might say that is impossible to do but Clemente Figuera was not an ordinary person and has figured this all out in his sheer genius mind.
what Figuera figured out was if two opposing fields had a secondary in between them with the primaries raised and the other lowered in currant that the primaries will cause the secondary to polarize and currant will begin to flow in the secondary and the load. when this happens the secondary will form a secondary field to the first (lenz law) that opposes this field. the primaries and the secondaries then part ways and become separate systems. this opposing field of the secondary is what sandwiched between the primary opposing magnetic fields thus causing the sweeping action across the Electric field from the raising and lowering of the primaries controlled by the inductor part G.
in the actions of part G and the primaries, one side of part G and the primaries are raised and the other half is lowered in currant but in doing so the reduced magnetic fields release that reduced portion into the system along with the secondary loop back causing an amplification to the rising side of the system off setting the potential drop of the rising side as all rising magnetic fields there will be a potential drop across the conductor thus the three forms of potential will give amplification to the rising side of the system. as long as part G's positive brush continues to move you will get a constant change in the magnetic flux to currant ratio causing a very orderly linear rise and fall in currant in complete unison.

Marathonman

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 22 May 2018

Marathonman

Your time is not wasted.

Those of us who have got off our asses and and done the experiments and are building the device know how it operates and are in complete agreement with you. The problem with building this device is in solving the mechanical issues with part G and tuning the coils to work with it which is an adventure in itself. That adventure should be documented so others can learn from it.

My new CNC parts start arriving tomorrow so by the end of the week I hope to have a rebuilt part G so I can proceed to playing with the coil setup.

I will continue to document the progress good or bad because in the end, if you dont make mistakes you never learn anything. If I dont achieve a working system it will be because my implementation is not correct as I have already proved by experiment that the operating principle is correct.

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Peter posted this 22 May 2018

Hi Marathonman and Aetherholic,

 

First of all, thank you both for your (brilliant) hard work, and the fact that you're willing to share all the info needed to build this wonderfull generator. remember, you are not alone in this quest.. I think that besides us, a lot of people are trying to build this device..

Please don't let them trolls get to you..keep sharing info, and i am sure together we can build this thing, no problem.

Right now i am also building my part G..  al be it on a somewhat smaller scale.. ( look at the size of your C-core Marathonman, that's impressive..and plenty overhead..) .

Can't wait to see how both your builds are coming along..

I'll try and post some pictures of my build a.s.a.p. in the mean time,best of luck to you both. Namaste

Greetings from the Netherlands.

Peter

Aetherholic posted this 22 May 2018

Hi Peter

Great to have you onboard in this great adventure, and that you are prepared to share your hard work, I am very interested to see your part G solution.

Namaste

 

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Peter posted this 22 May 2018

Hi Aetherholic,

 I think we are in the same part of this great magnet. I live in Heerlen (limburg), where are you from??

Quick question about your part G..  I only have the Positive brush installed on my core, but i see that you have 2 brushes ( + and -)

Are they both on seperate commutators?  is the - brush to feed back secondary power to part G (45-135-45-135) ?  or is it mandatory for good operation.??

Kind regards,,

Peter

I started with a 3D model of part G. It has got 76 windings 2,5 sqmm, and 1 brush rotating inside

3D model Part G

The RED bottom part is a 3D print to ensure all the wires have the sameexact spacing in between them.

Aetherholic posted this 22 May 2018

Hi Peter, let's just say I have travelled a lot but have spent many happy times in Eindhoven and Enscede. Marathonman explained the role of the two brushes in his numerous eloquent posts. The north brush is a dc feed whilst both brushes are also feed forward from a commutated secondary.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Marathonman posted this 22 May 2018

Welcome Peter is is always a pleasure to have one aboard that is eager to join in. i have ample information i have posted from my research and bench work that i hope you took the liberty to access. i do like the idea of a wire alignment guide on the bottom of part G. uniformity of  magnetic fields is definitely a must in this device so it is not a bad idea. the positive brush is on slip rings and the secondary feedback is commutated allowing both brushes to remain their sign always. yes, the secondary is mandatory for continuous operation replacing losses and amplification to the rising side of the device.

one thing i have to say to ALL is i am sorry for my harsh posts in which i have deleted. i have some pressing issues from here and other sites plus personal issues at home that caused my judgement to slip thus my patience also and for that i am truly sorry.  i have tried to maintain a pleasant posting atmosphere all while dumping a boat load of information from my research and bench work so others can test and replicate but recent pressing issues seemed to be a little overloading at times. the recent Law suit i filed on my mechanic was the final overloading issue along with cash flow problems.

Aetherholic;

 Thanks for the vote of confidence and the assessment of both brushes was very well said.

there are a lot of people out there that seems to think part G can be eliminated which basically boils down to a misunderstanding of just what part G does and how important it actually is.

part G spits the feed into two, forward biases like a mag amp, reduce and raises the currant on a continuous basis through self induction (C-EMF),  keeping them separate with north opposing fields,  stores and releases potential to either off set the rising side or stores the potential for the next half cycle along with the storing and released potential of the primary electromagnets then uses the secondary output to replace losses and amplification . all this happens inside of part G which will become the power supply once the starting is removed.

so all i can say is try that without part G and tell me how that goes.

PS. Eindhoven is a beautiful city especially at night.

WOW ! 10,000 views hit today.

Thank you all and THANK YOU CHRIS

Marathonman

Zanzal posted this 22 May 2018

Hey Marathonman,

I'm glad you are here and whatever harsh words might have transpired are in the past. Everyone whose been here sees how much effort you've put into all this understands your frustration and how easily it can result in unfortunate exchanges sometimes even from misunderstandings. You've done a great job working to right those wrongs and you've also made great improvements on the level of patience you extend to those of us who don't exactly see eye to eye with you.

I just thought you should know that even though I don't really have much to offer to this conversation being so inexperienced, I really admire your focus and commitment to a single device. Its not a knock against others but rather just something that sets you apart. Thanks for all the great stuff you share, because of it I have great confidence that you will do all that you've said you will. 

Also thanks Aetherolic although you've only recently joined you are doing an excellent job. I enjoy following everyones progress in this thread. Good to see new people join in too, looking forward to all the new contributions.

Marathonman posted this 22 May 2018

Thank you Zanzal for your very kind words.

It's quite funny just the other day a friend i haven't seen in a long while came over. i showed him my progress and explained all the ins and outs of the Figuera device.  after my presentation to him he asked if i had been a teacher in my past from the very thorough and precise explanation of things.

i guess i have never really thought about it but i guess i am so descriptive and dedicated  to this device is for one, i am completely infatuated with this device and two, so many people in this world does such a half arse job at things or are a total liar trying to get their 15 minutes of fame through deception.

all i want to do is make the world aware of the fact that we have been conned for over a hundred years that we need to buy power from some Corporation with are hard earned money or buy fuel for our smog farting machines we call automobiles.

none of this is true and my goal is end the con job once and for all.  between this device and the 1932 coutier device i will make a change one way or another.

I feel privileged to be here sharing with you people that has joined me on my journey.

Marathonman

Marathonman posted this 22 May 2018

There are still a lot of people out there that still believe part G will not work and that inductance can't control currant flow. well guess what, the evidence has been sitting right in front of your face for many, many years unnoticed.

here is a quote from Wikipedia;

The inductance of a circuit depends on the geometry of the current path, and on the magnetic permeability of nearby materials; ferromagnetic materials with a higher permeability like iron near a conductor tend to increase the magnetic field and inductance. Any alteration to a circuit which increases the flux (total magnetic field) through the circuit produced by a given current increases the inductance, because inductance is also equal to the ratio of magnetic flux to current[14][15][16][17]

what this means is by increasing the magnetic field to currant ratio will in fact cause less currant to flow as the magnetic linking to the circuit increases thus the reverse EMF (C-EMF) to the original currant flow increases. so by rotating a positive brush making contact in a make before break scenario (Constant currant flow) you are constantly changing the ratio of magnetic field to currant on either side of the brush which has a N><N opposing fields to keep them separate but will remain in complete unison. as the brush rotates one link is taken away on one side but added to the other side keeping both primary electromagnet is complete unison. each time a loop is added it increases the magnetic field to currant ratio thus causing the currant reduction. the opposite is also true, with loops being taken away there will be a decrease in magnetic field to currant ratio thus more currant will flow. the reducing side will release that reduced potential while the increasing side is storing into the magnetic field for the next half cycle.

when the reduced currant situation happens as the circuit length is increased the stored magnetic field will release that reduced potential into the system with that of reduced potential of the reducing primary combined with the secondary loop back causes the amplification to the rising side of the system.

answers to your disbelief has been there all this time just waiting to be read and understood. the whole action from above is taking a passive inductor  from a static position to an active position then getting constant currant control as the positive brush rotates

thus concludes inductor advanced class 105. resistor 101 introduction was canceled due to fire damage in the bullding. ha, ha, ha, ha ! 

my grand father once told me that you learn until the day you die so from that it is never to late to learn as long as God gives you breath.

 

Marathonman

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 23 May 2018

Vidura;

Again another post of a circuit that was not proven in any way shape or form. we are not pursuing some fly by night circuit i dreamed up last week. i have been researching this device for almost 6 years and have proven everything on the bench and am here to build and share my findings. it would be highly appreciated if people would stop posting random ideas that popped into their head yesterday or last week and expect people that are actually doing tests i have already performed to drop what they are building to jump on your fantasy ideas.

If you would of read the entire post you would have realized we are already on a mission of provable Physics and really do not care to partake in your unproven circuit. i am not trying to be rude but random posting with no prior knowledge is rude in it's self and a disruption and distraction to the people building on this thread and the readers. if in the future when you have proven your circuit then you can get your own thread and post all you want.

until then it would be really nice if you read the entire thread and catch up to where we are all at in this present time. that way we will be on the same page. it is not about not posting, it's about catching up to us then post.

PS. we are not experimenting on idea's we are building the actual device in the patent.

respectfully,

Marathonman 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 23 May 2018

Peter

Good job with your design, I have something very similar pending tests with what I already have and seeing the results of Marathonman's epic C core solution.

With your arrangement you have the advantages of lower brush face velocity and centrifugal pressure is in the correct direction on the brush so I doubt you will need springs. Figuera may have used a wheel rather than a brush, in fact maybe 2 wheels slightly staggered to make sure a make before break for each brush.

For slip rings I recommend a commercially available solution. Most manufacturers can build what you need. The one I use can guarantee 200 million revolutions at 5A per channel (I have 6 channels in my new one just to use in parallel if I need) and 10 mOhm of noise. With something as complex as part G to build its just one less part I need to worry about as any interruption of the current flow will kill the overunity.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Peter posted this 23 May 2018

Thanks Marathonman and Aetherholic,,

These sliprings sure look fine. I have tried  slip rings from an old vacuum cleaner before, but they are really flimsy, and i do not think they can handle the current. So i'll be ordering these online to.  

I still have one question about this part '

The addition of the secondary attached to the system is there to supply currant from losses and aides in the amplification process to the rising electromagnet.. The secondary feedback is commutated allowing both brushes to remain their sign always. yes, the secondary is mandatory for continuous operation replacing losses and amplification to the rising side of the device.

Could you post a schematic of how to attach the secondary to the system? Is the output from a secondary on a seperate 8 sided commutator connected with the - brush ??

Thank you, kind regards,

 

Peter

 

PS 200 million revs.. that's 46 days  24/7  at 3000 rpm (50Hz)

Marathonman posted this 23 May 2018

Yes peter the secondary is connected to a commutator so when the brush rotates it will allow the negative sign from the secondary to always remain opposite of the positive brush allowing the secondary to replace losses occurred and give rise to amplification to the rising side. one side of the commutator from the secondary input is connected directly to the positive brush and the negative is connected  to it's own opposite brush so when the motor is rotating the actions of the commutator will keep the signs in their proper place. this will allow part G to be the power supply when the external is removed.

i cant't say i have a schematic but below will give you a general idea what is to be accomplished.

Marathonman

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Marathonman posted this 23 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Aetherholic posted this 23 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Marathonman posted this 23 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Aetherholic
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 23 May 2018

Marathonman, Was that the inner torroidial part G or the flat face torroidial part G?

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Marathonman posted this 23 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Aetherholic
Peter posted this 24 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Aetherholic
Marathonman posted this 24 May 2018

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

 

 

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Marathonman posted this 24 May 2018

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

 

Peter posted this 24 May 2018

 

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..

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 24 May 2018

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

Aetherholic posted this 24 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Aetherholic posted this 24 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
Marathonman posted this 25 May 2018

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

Aetherholic posted this 25 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 25 May 2018

no, lets move on from here to avoid confusions to the readers.

Marathonman

Marathonman posted this 25 May 2018

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

Peter posted this 25 May 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 25 May 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 25 May 2018

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

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 26 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 27 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Peter posted this 28 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 28 May 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 28 May 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 28 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
Peter posted this 29 May 2018

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

 

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
Marathonman posted this 29 May 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Peter posted this 30 May 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 30 May 2018

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

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Peter
Peter posted this 31 May 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 31 May 2018

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/

Aetherholic posted this 01 June 2018

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

Peter posted this 01 June 2018

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

 

EmilP posted this 01 June 2018

Aetherholic,

A true artwork! It's always a surprise and a pleasure to see what you've been able to build.
EmilP

Marathonman posted this 01 June 2018

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

 

Vidura posted this 02 June 2018

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?

Marathonman posted this 02 June 2018

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

Peter posted this 04 June 2018

brush_commutator_info

Kind regards,

 

Peter

Marathonman posted this 04 June 2018

Just a little hard to read but thank you.

Marathonman

Marathonman posted this 04 June 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 05 June 2018

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

Aetherholic posted this 05 June 2018

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

Aetherholic posted this 05 June 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 05 June 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 06 June 2018

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

Marathonman posted this 06 June 2018

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

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 07 June 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 09 June 2018

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

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 14 June 2018

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

Peter posted this 15 June 2018

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

 

Show More Posts

Topic Is Locked

Members Online:
Since Nov 27 2018
Recomended Protocol:
Your Support:

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:

PayPal De-Platformed me!

They REFUSE to tell me why!

We now use Wise!

Donate

The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!

Perhaps a Bank Transfer?

  • Bank: Bank of Queensland
  • Name: Christopher R Sykes
  • BSB: 124-001
  • Account: 21580359

Thank You So Much!

Weeks High Earners:
The great Nikola Tesla:

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 go 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).

Close