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!
Way to go Peter on that find. that part G core is great and those mots also. when building the primary core just be sure to get the same weight if possible even though the material is slightly different try to march the width, height and weight as close as you can as it will be able to balance the peak of the primaries easier.
that motor looks big enough to turn the brushes so i hope it can hit 3000 RPM.
good to see a substantial effort on your part.
Marathonman
Here's some spec's of the motor. It'll hit 3000 no problem 
Nice Price-tag also
kind regards,
Peter
I just looked up that motor specs on line and was quite surprised, such a good find. looks like a keeper with low currant consumption to boot.
will make am excellent brush motor.
Marathonman
It looks like i might need to reorder some square wire for my new part G. it got bent some how when i pulled it off the real either that or i need to hook up a pulley system i seen on you tube to straighten up the wire.
I am making some more Primary bobbins tomorrow and i will post the pics of that probably Sunday the next day i have off. things will pick up on my part from now on as i have a steady paycheck coming in.
still fighting with the CNC guys as tomorrow i am paying them a visit and voicing my opinion of their business ethics.
regards.
Marathonman
Marathonman
I have the same CNC troubles, now on my third CNC company after 3 supplied bent shafts and off center holes. How they can take perfectly good CAD and mess up so badly is a mystery to me. Still, now I have one good part G shaft and tomorrow hopefully I will get a new main bearing block so I can rebuild Part G 2.0.
I have been using multisim to try to simulate part G and the exciter array and commutators. So far I have managed to simulate everything and seem to get roughly the same results as bench testing. The final part I am now trying to work out is the connections when under self sustaining mode and the connections for the commutated ac.
The goal of doing the simulation is so that I can get to the point of being able to design the whole system and have a reasonable chance of it being correct without so much experimentation.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Apologies, slightly off topic, re the CNC I am looking at this one: 3020 CNC Router Engraver 3Axis there is also a 4 axis model.
I have also had work done and it can be very shoddy! The way I look at it, if I can do it myself, then faster cheaper and easier.
Of course I am limited by size.
Chris
Chris;
yes i do agree but i do not have the resources to do any thing like that.
To all;
According to my research conducted on inductance any change in the area of the inductor changes the current flow when using DC but when the brush motion ceases so does the current reduction. when in motion the constant changing of the circuit (with current being a steady flow) will add or subtract winding's that magnetically link to the circuit that opposes the change in current flow. this self inductance is the ratio of magnetic field to current and when you change this ratio (increasing or deceasing the Magnetic field) you change the current flow it's self .
Quote from Wikipedia;
"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"
this is Directly from Faraday's mouth himself in his LAWS of Induction stating any change in the circuit causes induction to occur that opposes the change in the first place. the larger the magnetic field the larger the ratio of magnetic field to current thus any change in the circuit it's self will in fact change this ratio.
the graph below is the very thing that is stated above according to Faraday himself that (ANY) change in a circuit will change the inductance. just like a standard adjustable inductor part G operates on these very same principals except part G has a constant moving brush contact.
why is it so hard for people to realize part G is the very thing Faraday's laws discus and is quoted in Wikipedia which is not made up by me. when the brush rotates it adds or subtracts winding to each side of the circuit which is changing the magnetic field to current ratio which is the opposition to the original current flow (Self Induction). the larger the magnetic field the more opposition to current flow and the less the magnetic field the less opposition to current flow and that is plain and simple. the Cemf produced is self induction which is the magnetic linking to the circuit producing a reverse potential that opposes the original current flow.
part G is a prime example of Faraday's LAWS OF INDUCTION but because this very facts have not been taught in our lousy Government Controlled School systems so people are having a hard time realizing these facts. people are taught that an Inductor is solely a passive device when in fact it can and does operate just fine in an active position using self inductance to control current flow which is in absolute compliance with Faraday's LAWS OF INDUCTION.
then on top of these very facts stated above the inductor stores and releases it's magnetic field at the right time to be combined with the reducing primaries magnetic fields to off set the voltage drop of the rising side of the system. the release of potential into the system from (ANY) magnetic field is in fact the laws of Induction set fourth by Faraday himself and can not be denied or disputed by NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON.
Marathonman
CEMF which is Counter-electromotive force is the current produced that opposes the original current flow by magnetically linking to the loop next to it. it is known as the Lenz Law.
Inductors are devices that can store their energy in the form of a magnetic field and then release their potential increasing the voltage in the circuit. Inductors are made from individual loops of wire combined to produce a coil and if the number of loops within the coil are increased, then for the same amount of current flowing through the coil, the magnetic flux will also increase.
So by increasing the number of loops or turns within a coil, increases the coils inductance which increases the CEMF product to counter act the original current flow. so when you rotate a positive brush contact you are adding or subtracting loops within the coil on part G that magnetically link to the circuit which changes the CEMF which is the magnetic field to current ratio.
therefore as the brush rotates the current through the twin opposing primary electromagnets will in Physics fact change in an orderly fashion one increasing while the other decreases causing the sweeping action across the secondary that induces motion in to the secondary.
This is exactly why Figuera used an Inductor taking it from a static device to an active device as the vital piece of his device to control the current flow through his primary electromagnets with the added bonus of storing and releasing the potential at the exact time needed.
These very facts are totally impossible to attain with a resistor network and or electronics. if you so choose this path all i can say is be prepared to open the wallet very wide.
Marathonman
Aetherholic;
How in the world i missed your post i haven't the clue, i am sorry.
yes i have many a woe when it comes to the CNC guy's. i am at my witts end when it comes to them. i have no choice as it is the only one near my house but i am so mad i can just scream.
I think that is so sad that you have gone through three CNC companies having bent shafts. the sad thing is if i did work like that i would be fired yet stupid people get away with it all day long, how i don;t know. everything i do i do to the best of my ability even if it is sweeping the F-in floor it will still be the cleanest it has ever been.
Chris and i have been talking about CNC machines on line but i just can't afford a thing now a days beyond survival which at my age is quite depressing to say the least. that is why everything is so delayed as money is so tight.
Your simulation sounds good at this point in time and i wish you very much luck. i haven't used multisim as of yet but i guess it may be of use. all simulators for part G actual use was totally useless to date as not one simulated the release of the magnetic field and the counteraction of the voltage drop on the rising side and the combined potential giving amplification to the peaking primary.
life can be such a bitch some times then you wake up and start the whole process over again.
Marathonman
Hi everybody! As I saw that there is a notable degree of difficulties in the machining of the mechanic components of part G and the costs of this works. Have you thought about the possibility to make it completely solid state, using part G as inductor and storage devices also, but with some means of semiconductor switching, or combined with capacitors in a kind of resonant tank circuit? I was thinking about, but have not yet a solution, but it might be a possible way to make y work as well.
Vidura;
I have addressed this situation in previous posts many times in the past and you would of known this if you read the tread. the cost of all the transistors used to switch in a make before break situation is prohibitively expensive. you would need a transistor setup for each tap or loop, which will be very high, to mimic the brush rotation and if you don't what is the point.
I to was seeking to pursue this avenue a long time ago until i realized just how many NPN to switch the PNP's i needed which are in the ball park figure of 60 to 80 of each plus the switching board design and parts. so in the long run i decided to not make the semiconductor manufacturer that much richer.
and yes i still have the circuit for the switching on the high side one with optoisolators and one with out. and YES, it has to be high side switching if going that route. as for the resonant circuit sorry isn't going to happen in the Figuera device as it is as simple as it gets already.
one thing your are correct at is part G can not be replaced only augmented.
Regards,
Marathonman
If you people only new the significance of the below equation. it is the reason why the Figuera device Inductor controller part G can operate as it does changing the magnetic field to current ratio on a steady basis. in lamen terms it means if you change in any way the loops in the circuit with the same amount of current you change the self inductance which is the opposition to current flow.
a lot of people still think the Figuera device is Lenzless in which you would be entirely incorrect. in fact Figuera used it to his advantage and knowing any, and i mean any reduction in magnetic field will release that potential into the system which is totally foreign to even some electric engineers.(imagine that)
using the reduced potential to Figuera's advantage was and is as i say "SHEAR GENIUS" to say the least when especially when people can't even get past it as a stationary object that has been to a so called college. (i am so impressed)
studying inductance would be to ones advantage to say the least and thinking outside the box for a change instead of being so closed minded. self inductance can and will change the magnetic field to current ratio if the positive brush rotates on a continuous basis. the Lenz law is the magnetic linking to the loop next to it so if you add or subtract loops you are changing this ratio which changes the opposition to current flow so as the brush rotates so does the opposition to the original current flow.
OMG ! did i state a Physics fact, imagine THAT !
Self Inductance can and will change the current flow whether you like it or not so why not use the CEMF to one's advantage. sorry uninformed, resistors can never in your life time do that.
Marathonman.
you get an Inductor with a rotating brush that constantly changes the loop count that magnetically link to that side of the circuit that produces an opposition to the original current flow. as the brush rotates so does the change in magnetic field to current ratio witch is the amount of opposing EMF to the original current flow.
I am really surprised there was no reaction to Faraday's laws. the most miss interpreted laws according to present Physics.
Marathnonman
I am really surprised there was no reaction to Faraday's laws. the most miss interpreted laws according to present Physics.
Marathnonman
Hello Marathonman,
My first Post and one of the very few with a working unit on the bench but does not do what was intended by the Patent.
Appreciate all of your comments and work but you appear to be all alone and could use some support and hope that I may be able to assist in your endeavour.
First problem I found was that the coils in series where, by the time the voltage gets to the 7th coil, little voltage remains and then progresses into voltage infinity when the resistance coils come into play at step 2 etc.
When I first built the device, I decided that the output coils in series was also incorrect and wired up in series/parallel where I did obtain a small voltage out.
At this point I am deciding the best way to approach the wiring as it is suspect and requires a more profound investigation.
I did not go to any Forums during this build until I had a working unit as I find too many people with too little an idea about anything in particular and are there just sitting behind a keyboard distracting everyone.
Input Coils are 28awg, 19 ohms and best operating current is 0.6 amps, measure 40 x 38mm with center iron core of 1/2" threaded bolts and all mounted on plastic 'L's to slot into a wooden base which allows for easy modification.
Output coils are 20 awg on the same size former 38 x 12.5mm.
Plates are 5mm flat iron top and bottom with the input coils offset from center.
Resistance wire is 5.2 ohm lengths of Manganin wire but am using alligator clips to reduce this down to 2 ohms as a calculation from an attraction Bolt test I did with the coils to determine their ability with added resistance.
I am of the opinion that this IS a resistance and nothing to do with inductance.
This is ac via stepped dc and is proven by watching the voltage rotate through a sine wave as the commutator also rotates..
From the total coil resistance in series, I would need an input voltage of 80 to obtain my best working current of 600mA.
But this then degrades considerably to the 7th coil.
Commutator is using a variable capacitor housing from an old Magnavox Corp Sonizon ultrasonic tester which allowed me to lay out a flat brass 16 pad contact on its rear which works well.
The rotating contact is a brass brush which is ideal and replaces a single arm contact which failed earlier.
Being new here will attempt to upload some pictures which may give you an idea of what's ahead.
My power supply is only good to 40 volts and will attempt that as my next step but really need to consider very closely what is actually happening at the coils and work accordingly from that.
So in essence, a completed working unit but with the usual tuning required to obtain the correct organisation.
Some changes have been made since this picture where the commutator motor has been upgraded and the alligator clips not yet in use and another large power supply added.
The 3.5 Kw load was just some wishful thinking as I have been working in this area for many years and am well aware of the traps involved.
This is the EV Gray bench and I have seven all told and they all have a proposed over unity device (Energy Synthesis) on them and all awaiting my attention.
Behind me is a working EP Dollard Cosmic Ray Detector (CRD) and I also have his Tesla Magnifying Transmitter here as well as all of his Vacuum Tube builds.
My own project is a Tetrahedral Energy Generator (TEG) based on the Steven Mark TPU but is designed using 3 rotating phase shifts into 3 coils with an output coil in the middle and a 4th coil on top working at 3x the frequency of the lower 3. I have only just finished the Tube phase shift units and all I need to do here is test these and then connect everything up for the final testing.
All the Best
David G (Smokey)
Welcome to the forum David.
Well where do i begin, you are very far off the Figuera path to the original design and i doubt you will ever get a self sustaining device with your currant set up.
your primaries resistance is way, way to high and should have been taken the other way with the least amount of resistance as possible. all this resistance only adds up to massive losses through heat. the only thing i see you have correct is...
"This is ac via stepped dc and is proven by watching the voltage rotate through a sine wave as the commutator also rotates.." and even then it is not stepped it is linear rise and fall.
I don't know if you have read any of my posts and research on the Figuera device which in your statements it seems you did not. you will never in a million years get a self sustaining device without part G Inductance to not only control the current but to also store and release potential at the specific time needed and i have posted many time on these very facts and the reason for them
Quote; "I am of the opinion that this IS a resistance and nothing to do with inductance."
you would then be completely incorrect in your opinion. it is a Physics fact and proven by myself and others that self inductance can and will curtail current by magnetically linking to the circuit as the brush rotates then as an added bonus it is back by Physics and Faraday himself.
by you using resistance wire you are wasting a ton of power lost through heat and the resistance of the wire. essentially your present build is no better than a transformer if you have to supply ALL the power to the device at all times. from that your device will not output enough power to supply it's self as electric potential is a pressure system in which your system can not provide and maintain the necessary pressure.
knowing the true operation of a standard generator will help in your quest which i have posted information on that also.
I would recommend reading my posts over the last few months to get a better grasp on the Figuera device and it's operation. if you choose not to well that is your prerogative and i wish you all the luck just the same.
i have been studying this device for six years and have done many, many test to back up all my posts thus it would be to your advantage to read them which would save you a lot of time, money and effort.
ps. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you do not have a fully functional unit as a fully functional unit will in fact sustain it's self and the load with starting supply removed and the reason for this is quite obvious, you did not build according to the patent. your own interpretation does not work so time to make a change to the real patent device.
Regards,
Marathonman
Self inductance is the ratio of magnetic field per the amount of current in a circuit so if you add loops that magnetically link to the circuit you are changing this ratio. if you have say 1 amp of current flowing trough a circuit and add another loop to that side of the circuit it changes the ratio and you will experience a current drop in the system on that side of the circuit.
since self inductance (self induced within the circuit) is the magnetic linking that opposes the original current flow so by adding or subtracting loops to that side of the circuit you are changing the magnetic flux to current ratio.
this is how Figuera changed the current in his primaries one up and the other down in complete unison changing the magnetic flux to current ratio as the brush rotates. if the brush stopped so would the self inductance thus the current to the primaries would become a steady flow since it is DC.
Figuera on the other hand figured out that if you have a rotating positive brush contact he could change the magnetic field to current ratio on a steady basis and use the storing and releasing of potential to his advantage. with the rising side of part G and the rising primaries you will indeed have a voltage drop (Physics Fact) because they are storing into the magnetic field but at the same time the reducing side is releasing the reduced potential into the system (Physics Fact) to off set this voltage drop which is exactly proportional to each other minus some losses and that is where the secondary feed back comes into play to replace those losses and to give an amplification to the rising primaries.
I sure hope you can understand what i am trying to convey to you as this is very important in the self sustaining process.
if you don't understand something please feel free to ask questions as it would be my pleasure to set your mind straight. this is the sole purpose of me being here to teach people about this device and it's operation.
I am not seeking any recognition or 15 minutes of fame what so ever just trying to change Humanity as the currant path leads us to extinction as Corporate and Government greed is killing us off one by one.
Regards,
Marathonman
L (Self Inductance) increases if you add another loop to the circuit which increases the magnetic flux to current ratio thus the opposition to the original current flow. the more loops you add to that side of the circuit increases this ratio which decreases the current flow and the opposite is also true as you decrease the amount of loops that magnetically link to the circuit the current will in fact increase in that side of the circuit. putting them together and separating them with North opposing fields will allow you to control the current flow in to different sets of primaries in complete unison. so as the brush rotates you are adding loops to one side of the circuit and subtracting loops from the other side of the circuit at the positive rotating brush in complete unison.
if the loop is located next to another loop it will magnetically link to that circuit causing a current drop and when a iron core is added it magnifies that reverse magnetic field by many many time then on top of that using a closed loop controller it will have very little flux leakage.
so by the above graph the more loops you add to the circuit the more opposition to current flow and the less loops the less opposition to current flow as the brush rotates.
These are in fact (Physics facts) and can NOT be denied or disputed by ANYONE.
Regards,
Marathonman
Hello marathonman,
Thankyou for your down to earth analysis of what I presented.
I have read many of your Posts but did not initially agree with the 'R' being an 'L' but in looking at the drawing now, as a suggestion, I see it in 3D and the 2nd coil line is at the back of the large drum it is wound on and I hope others can also see this as it is a long coil on a large drum with the 2nd/4th/6th etc turns actually at the back of the drum where we would normally show these in faint or dotted lines.
Why is there a frame around this 'R' device and is it drawn such so as to confuse?
Perhaps this is the reason also why the coil is slanted to the right as that is how you would wind it.
Yes, OK in retrospect and what you are connecting with in your theory is a high possibility.
Will wind a 1/2" coil on a 3.5" plastic drum using awg 20 and see what we can determine in the circuit.
OR do we wind on an Iron bar or pipe as we need to couple to neighboring wires?
Why would this part be called 'R' when that is exactly what it looks like and with reference to Tesla's Colorado Springs Notes of about the same vintage of 1900, a resistor is a sawtooth shape with coils in a loop which confirms your observation.
That's why I used Manganin (Nichrome) wire as that is what that object appeared to me and was discovered in 1905 and suggesting it may have been available by 1909 when the Patent was applied for.
As there was no awg wire sizes mentioned, I did some testing with the many coils I had here all prewound which I had scored on Ebay.
Their physical size was near all the same and why I chose a 1/2" threaded bolt as the core and to my surprise their wire size ranged from 28 to 32 awg with a large range of resistances.
What was also noted was that the 'R' and 'L' values were nearly all the same and as an example - 34ohm/39mH-18/19- 3.4/3.3 - 8.3/7.4 - 2.0/2.3 - 20.8/18.0 - 12.0/12.0 - 12.1/13.5 - 1.5/1.2.
However what was also recorded was the current consumed at 12volts with the lower 'R' having the highest draw at 4.4 amps typical and the higher 'R' at 0.4 amps.
I have no idea what these wound cores were used for but was the reason why they were used and utilised 7 of these in the input sides, having to wind another 7.
I also did a bolt attraction test after these had been prepared ready for fixing on their plastic 'L' base and all had very similar attraction distances.
However there remains the voltage drop problem with the input coils being in series where the first coil receives the full 12 volts but then degrades by 1.5 volts each time it hits a coil in the 7 line up.
As soon as I changed this to series parallel, I obtained a mV output and you could see the sine wave being formed and also the coils being energised.
Again for the output coils, I had also wired up in series parallel as my thoughts there was that you were relying on each coil to add the voltage of the one before in the string line and the last would have the full load on its meagre windings.
Anyway, this is all a part of sorting out what we don't know and will continue with tests.
An original picture would be helpful at this point, don't you all agree?
David G
I personally think your first mistake was taking the picture in the patent to literally. it states in the patent that the drawing is just that, a drawing to understand the function and R the resistance is drawn in an elementary form for understanding only.
No, do not wind on a plastic form .... or if you do slid it over an iron rod or what ever you have. the iron amplifies the self inductance making the reverse magnetic field able to change the current.
I have no theory Mr Dawson on part G as an Inductor.... what i do have is facts and bench work that can be proven by anyone that part G is an Inductor on a closed core.
Think about this David for a second, why would someone use high resistance in their electromagnets when part G controls the current flow. having high resistance leads to heat and heat is the killer of a circuit which leads to massive losses. Figuera used thicker wire for his electromagnets to cut down on losses and used even thicker wire for his part G as thicker wire will equate to VERY little losses and the most efficient Inductor possible. this is not even taking in account that part G becomes the power supply once the starting supply is removed.
as for the primaries i think they should be wired for the least amount of resistance as possible to avoid losses remembering part G controls the current so wind them specifically as electromagnets. this is the reason your 7th coil is so low voltage is because the resistance is crazy high way beyond what you should have. the output coils are wound according to present day winding technique that can be series or paralleled to attain the desired voltage and amperage.
everything i have stated and posted on this site is and always is fact and backed by Physics. please take the time to read over the last few months of my posts and you will begin to realize why i preach what i do that is backed by bench work and tests.
regards,
Marathonman
Marathonman
What is your opinion on core permeability for the exciters and output coils, higher the better or not?
The reason I ask is my cores have an initial relative permeability of 12,000 which is quite high compared to pure iron.
After my testing with 35mm diameter cores I decided to move up to 75mm so i will have 7 sets weighing about 124kg in total when the winding is completed.
What do you think about linear vs hex arrangement for the coil sets?. It seems to me that the hex arrangement will give more field linking between the coil sets.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Core Blimey!
A full set of cores just arrived.
Next job, seal them.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Hello marathonman,
I think I may have outsmarted myself here as the very first commutator I was contemplating was the use of available rheostats/variacs and to modify to a 360 degree but this proved too difficult and why I chose what I did.
So, that organisation labelled 'G' in your view would have been the correct one in using the above types?:
So the obvious choice here is to build one.
In the picture, the large REO is 6" at 1.3 ohms, left are Ohmite 115volt Variacs which I am using as variable inductances and vary from 4.9uH to 1.1 Henry 3" and 16 ohms, middle at 2.5" and 58 ohms and one other in use at 4" and 1.5 ohms which is used for filament voltage setup to 5 volts for 5U4Gs.
The Ohmite is telling us what this type of organisation is capable of achieving as I was most impressed with its use as a variable inductance and in both support of your theory and my very first instincts with respect 'G'.
OK, so we build our own commutator with inbuilt inductive coil.
I also agree that a Variac or Rheostat is able to control DC as well as AC.
I am currently using Rheostats to control DC voltages to rotating Geometric Translators that are being used for rainmaking purposes and how filament voltages were arrived at in Tube Radios.
Voltage according to your analysis at one output coil would be twice supply voltage making 24 volts x 7 = 165 volts which is above what was being used at that particular time in the US as the Mains AC but there may still be some losses incorporated.
The problem I now see here is the 60 hz AC cycle matching which means we would need to rotate at 3600 rpm to meet the 60 hertz requirement.
360 revs in 1 second is quite a whack and am concerned that time here is required to charge the coils but this just appears to be way too fast for my liking.
Please tell me here that I am all very incorrect in this assessment as I was looking for something 'out of the box' that was going to nullify all of the conventional electricity and to give me dielectricity ('one wire' or 'cold' electricity) instead or am I barking up the wrong tree?
This was the point I had arrived at and was suddenly confronted by all the problems if this were to be still a conventional electricity generator but without the 'Cogging' effect?
I apologise if I am repeating points that you have already covered but there is considerable information to digest here that you have disclosed but there is always a slow response when so much detail needs to be absorbed but I do have a unit which can be modified and at least made an attempt.
I will admit that I had notions of a 'something' different happening here before I began a build but it now looks a lot less attractive in dealing with existing or modified conventions in electricity generation.
Respectfully.
David G
A real beauty this cores! Can you give specifications of the material?
Hello MM. One question about the primary-secondary coil arrangements. Is the gap between the cores necessary, have you results from bench testing regarding this?
Aetherholic;
Please explain further on the liner and hex arrangement.
Yes your cores will be fine except the eddies in the secondary will be high with solid cores as i have found out. in the future people need to use laminated cores for the secondary to produce the best output. solid core are fine for the primaries.
David;
"This was the point I had arrived at and was suddenly confronted by all the problems if this were to be still a conventional electricity generator but without the 'Cogging' effect?"
Exactly as said. just like a generator but without the nasty spinning mass of iron.
brush rotation in the US is 3600 rpm and for the rest it is 3000 rpm.
You really need to read my posts David as it will or should answer all your questions.
Vidura;
No, a gap is not necessary and should be avoided. i glued mine together which is enough to stop eddies from the secondary to the primaries.
I have to go to work now so i will post further to you all tonight.
All of you are learning just fine. just try to visualize in your mind what i have posted and you will be fine.
regards,
Marathonman
Aetherholic;
The winding technique i settled with was an up and back wind three times giving me very low resistance with the ability to add more if i need to. as it is i get very good magnetic field strength with what i have as i am shooting for 5,55 lbs of force per primary. i am using three hundred watt resistors to check the pull force of the primaries as to not freak out the power supply.
Marathonman
Hello Vidura,
Yes, Thank You, In proof reading I knew something was incorrect but didn't find it and you picked it up nicely.
Smokey
If any one else would like to disagree with me that part G is an Inductor maybe you should read thus post from someone with a PHD in electrical Engineering.
Quote; "MarathonMan is spot on.
EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).
Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used. And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.
The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.
PmgR"
I do not have a degree but i do have a BRAIN and a lot of tests on the bench to prove it.
Never stop believing in your self and your convictions. i really didn't need to post this as i already knew part G was an Inductor.
Regards,
Marathonman
Marathonman:
The linear and hex refers to one of your previous posts when you were discussing the arrangement of the multiple triplets. Linear layout as per the patent drawing with the triplets in a line. Hex layout as you posted where the 7 triplets are arranged in a hexagon. At this point, although i believe the hexagonal layout is better, I will go with the linear layout as it is quicker and easier to build.
I will wind 4 layers on the exciters, separate layers for magnet wind so i can switch between layers paralleled and tesla wind. From my tests and calculations I am expecting I will need only 3 to 4 amps for max exciter current.
Vidura:
The cores are DT4C soft iron material which is very fast magnetically and has zero residual magnetism. The cores are precision ground on the ends to give a flat face.
Grade Coercive force Coercive Force aging Increment Maximum permeability
DT4 ≤96 ≤9.6 ≥0.0075
DT4A ≤72 ≤7.2 ≥0.0088
DT4E ≤48 ≤4.8 ≥0.0113
DT4C ≤32 ≤4 ≥0.0151
The cores are being sealed right now using Humiseal low VOC sealant. Once the final configuration is settled I will epoxy pot the cores into the bobbins and epoxy the cores together.
The only question I have about this material is its zero residual magnetism. If Figuera used Iron then residual magnetism may have played a part in the exciter cores.
Marathonman
I managed to simulate all of part G using a ring of time varying inductors and resistors, 4 of each, in multisim and the results gave current reduction as you said and which also implies the energy storage in part G. If the current during the exciter modulation is returned back to Part G then part G need only store the resistance power loss and be topped up by the commutated AC from the output coils as you also correctly stated. I intend to use a separate outer layer on one of the output coils for this purpose as suggested by the Bufon patent as I will only need a few volts to generate the required current.
The Bufon patent mentions 100V 1A in relation to the field windings of a normal generator used at that time so I don't think this is necessarily what was used for the Figuera device, merely as a guide to the relative power required for the field generation compared to the power output.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Aetherholic and MarathonMan,
What are the sizes of the cores you are using for your primary and secondary coils? What are the wire sizes and number of turns? What core material and permeabilities are you using?
Same questions for part G (the variable inductor).
I have been running some simulations and here are some issues I foresee in trying to get this system overunity:
Hence my questions above on what you are using so I may do some simulations.
PmgR
pmgr:
I already posted the data for my cores, length will be to suit your particular system, you need to do force calculations and field intersection calculations for the sweep across the output coil. My part G I already posted data also. What you cant simulate is the Output Coil as this does not follow conventional theory. Bench work will tell you what to expect and I already posted some bench work data. At the moment I am using 2.1mm diameter wire for all coils. Generator theory based on my cores, force and a modified faraday calculation tells me I should be able to get far more power out than 2.1mm wire can handle. At this stage I have no other definitive answers. What I can say is that as soon as I have a working system I will post the full specs.
Another consideration is the shape of the magnetic field at the output coil. It is not what you think.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
My cores are 99.8 % pure iron but i can not find the spec sheet on my computer. these core are crazy expensive so i don't recommend them as the cost out weigh practical application. if i find them when i get the time i will post the specs
as i have stated the primaries can be solid core which will produce the highest intensity electromagnets but the secondary on the other hand HAS to be laminated or the rise of eddy currents will raise it's ugly head.
i am on my way to work so i will post more about my core and other things tonight when i get home.
Regards,
Marathonman
Thanks for the specs ,in my understanding the residual magnetism will not be a problem, The only drawback of the solid cores in the secondary s will be the eddy current losses, as I think there will be a field reversal, you might consider to use a laminate, or compound wire corees if you get problem of heating, Also encapsulated iron dust could work.
I would not use any thing less then iron laminated as that is the best for the secondary output core. the most perfect is the solid core for the primaries but hay, who has that kind of money as they are crazy expensive. what i do recommend is laminated all the way through as the cost is much cheaper.
you will realize the increase in the laminated output from the less eddy currents.
PMGR;
I am sorry but my cores are 2 inch in diameter but i must fore warn you do not pay the price for solid cores as they are most crazy expensive.
Marathonman
What you cant simulate is the Output Coil as this does not follow conventional theory...
Another consideration is the shape of the magnetic field at the output coil. It is not what you think.
I understand that the coil arrangement and output coil is not a conventional one, but that doesn't mean it can't be simulated. There is nothing out of the ordinary here that can't be simulated with electromagnetics and the right tools.
My plan was to put your or MarathonMan's coil configuration into FEMM and simulate the magnetic field, coupling coefficients, etc, and extract the necessary parameters that can then be used for electrical simulations.
So any specific configuration as a baseline will be helpful.
Also, if you can refer me to your post for the specific force and field intersection calculations, and your force and modified Faraday calculations, that would be appreciated. I have read through the entire thread a few weeks back, but the amount of material is enormous and it is very difficult to search for and find specific details.
I have a lot of experience in FEMM modelling and doing electrical simulation so would like to help.
PmgR
pmgr
Unfortunately FEMM wont help as the magnetic field is modeled assuming that field lines pass from pole to pole which is completely incorrect as evidenced by ferrocell and crt.
In the figuera configuration we have two electromagnets with opposing fields at either end of a middle core. Like fields add, they do not repel. The force that is mistakenly called repulsion is in fact increased pressure between the inertial planes of the two electromagnets, there is no repulsion plane created in between the electromagnets. Where there is a north there must be a south so if we have a north field acting on the middle core, what do you think the induced core polarity will be and what shape is the north field and the resultant dielectric inertial plane? (Chris, this is the same for air cores, Don Smith style and similar bucking setups).
The result that we have to model is a changing pressure gradient across the length of the output windings so faraday induction becomes induction due to field pressure change which is now a volumetric function as pressure varies in 3 dimensions. What is the evidence? I doubled the layers on the output coil and got 4x the voltage. Why?. Because of volumetric pressure. Faraday is a special case where field density is constant throughout the coil which we do not have in this case.
This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
You wound be incorrect if you think the output coil is not conventional. it is the same as any other generator coils and wound the same. all we are dealing with is a different geometry of the primary magnetic field configuration. the magnetic field at any surface is at it's highest intensity then diminishes from that point but in the Figuera device we have two opposing north face electromagnets that have very high intensity surface areas but you have to consider the pressure between them is compressed raising the field lines to that of a standard generator high intensity N S fields.
what this means is the field lines are almost uniformly compressed across the entire secondary space but it is the E fields that are changed as the electromagnets are raised and lowered in unison causing them to be in the same direction which will be positive and additive. so on that note there still has to be motion from the secondary presented to the Electric field in order for EMF to be produced in the secondary.
low and behold when the primaries first induce the secondaries and current begins to flow a secondary field will form opposing the induced field. when this happens the secondary and the primaries will part ways and it is the relative motion of the primaries that induce motion into the secondaries from the opposing field being sandwiched between the primaries being shifted back and forth over the entire length of the secondary.
the south fields have no barring on the system as much as i can figure as we are dealing with an duel opposing monopole excitation system matching that high intensity field of a standard generator.
when dealing with the geometry of the cores you have to remember the square of the distance....... meaning the magnetic field will only project out as far as the original length of the electromagnet so in order to retain the high intensity field the primary cores have to be larger than that of the secondary cores by at least one third size.
PS. very good two have you aboard PMGR....WELCOME ! and my hats off to you.
Regards,
Marathonman
Here are a couple of graphs to illustrate the point.
1. Coils at equal amps:
2. Coil 1 at max amps, Coil 2 at minimum amps.
Distance is between the electromagnets from LH side (the area the output coil and core occupy). TF is the total force.
Ignore the absolute values, its just to illustrate the point.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
I sure hope you are not taking your primaries down that far Aetherholic as you will indeed loose pressure and induction between your primaries.
Never below half way or the less the better as this equates to a higher output.
Regards,
Marathonman
Marathonman
Yes, I completely agree, I was just illustrating the extreme case.
I sealed the new cores yesterday, now just received new cnc jig for my coil winder so I can wind the new coils. Busy building the acrylic bobbins.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Hey Guys, here's an update on my build.
finished the commutator. 16 shimms 8 connections on the outside which will go to my part "g". And my electric motor on the backside to turn the brush.
I will be placing a new brush soon, because this one is almost at it's end.
The black casing is 3d printed. the axl comes from an old vacuum cleaner motor ( bearings on both sides) I welded the brush holders directly to the rotor.
Next up.. winding my part G core..
Kind regards,
Peter
That is good to know Aetherholic as i was a bit worried there. you are coming along very well with your cores and your bobbins. i myself really enjoyed making my bobbing, it was a lot of fun.
Peter; your build is coming along really nice and that set up is very original, lets just hope the Inductance jump is not to steep and induction drops. will be waiting to see the results.
all of you are coming along just fine and are actually passing me up as i have many loose ends on my part that are slowing me down to a crawl for which i do apologize for.
Regards,
Marathonman
Here is a basic graph of the primaries and the secondary. when the primaries initially polarize the secondary and current begins to flow in the secondary and the load, a second field will form in the secondary opposing the flux change (Lenz Law). the primaries and the secondary part ways and it is the relative motion of the primaries being raised and lowered inducing motion into the secondary across the Electric field formed from the magnetic field of the primaries. the tighter the magnetic field lines are compressed the more intense the electric field becomes.
the secondary opposing field is what is pushed across the electric field the length of the core giving the illusion or virtual motion of the secondary to the Electric field.
in the graph the center field is the results of the Lenz Law when current flows and an opposing field is formed. it is this field that is swept from side to side.
Marathonman
Peter
Good job on your build and a lot of hard work as I know from experience. Looking forward to seeing your core wired up.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
First coil wound
another 20 to go...........
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
a second field will form in the secondary opposing the flux change (Lenz Law)
I am having a lot of trouble understanding this MM. Please help me with it if you will.
I can't see how the secondary can oppose symmetrically opposing north poles simultaneously if it is not itself a mono-pole? You show a mono-pole with the red circle? The secondary surely must have a north pole at one end, and a south at the other end?
If it is opposing both of the north poles at the same time it would need to be a mono-pole I would imagine.
So, prudently, i decided to test my first coil before going further. 47 turns per layer 4 layers Tesla winding gave me a paltry 0.346 gauss per amp turn which according to standard solenoid formulas suggest that my core relative permeability is 3.
I dont know which to throw out of the window first, the coil, core or the computer full of useless calculations.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
it is the relative motion of the primaries being raised and lowered
I think I got myself confused and thought the fields were both rising and declining simultaneously.
The image you show above is the point at which they are at the central part of the current waves, where the fields are of equal magnitude?
In physics, scalars are physical quantities that are unaffected by changes to a vector space basis. Scalars are often accompanied by units of measurement, as in "10 cm". Examples of scalar quantities are mass, distance, charge, volume, time, speed, and the magnitude of physical vectors in general.
You need to forget the Non-Sense that some spout with out knowing the actual Definition of the word Scalar! Some people talk absolute Bull Sh*t!
The pressure P in the formula P = pgh, pgh is a scalar that tells you the amount of this squashing force per unit area in a fluid.
A Scalar, having both direction and magnitude, can be anything! The Magnetic Field, a Charge moving, yet some Numb Nuts think it means Magic Science!
Hello my children. This is Yahweh, the one true Lord. You have found creation's secret. Now share it peacefully with the world.
Ref: Message from God written inside the Human Genome
God be in my head, and in my thinking.
God be in my eyes, and in my looking.
God be in my mouth, and in my speaking.
Oh, God be in my heart, and in my understanding.
More than anything else, your contributions to this forum are most important! We are trying to actively get all visitors involved, but we do only have a few main contributors, which are very much appreciated! If you would like to see more pages with more detailed experiments and answers, perhaps a contribution of another type maybe possible:
They REFUSE to tell me why!
The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!
Thank You So Much!
Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe. This idea is not novel. Men have been led to it long ago by instinct or reason. It has been expressed in many ways, and in many places, in the history of old and new. We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who drives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians, and in many hints and statements of thinkers of the present time. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.
Experiments With Alternate Currents Of High Potential And High Frequency (February 1892).
