Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

[hanon]

Hi,

Each day I see more differences from the text of the patents and the ideas which are surrounding this forum. It is a pity not to try first the original design instead of thinking of conspiracies and hidden keys.

About the translation of the commutator I think it is fine. I can dissect it to see it more clear as this:


"half of the terminals of the resistor pieces go to the half of the commutator bars of the cylinder and the other half of these commutator bars are directly connected to the first half of the commutator bars"

As you can see from the drawing the other half of the terminal of the resistor pieces are not joined to anything. Those terminal are the ones that are located in the upper part of the resistor box.

How many users around here have tested with the original commutator and the 2 original signals? I think you should start for testing the original design, but this is just my humble oppinion.

NoMoreSlave,  I have read your pdf about the inverter. It is really interesting. The links are very interesting. Do you speak spanish? One link is a video in spanish...so I thoulght that maybe so. The UDT that you referred it is really interesting...

Your final design is very similar to the one from Bajac.

I am sorry for telling this but Figuera did not mention any air gap in his 1908 patent text. Maybe it is time to reconduct this forum. Please read the patent and quote here at least one sentence where Figuera said anything about air gaps...

I think that air gap design is genuine. It may work but comparing to the patent text I have to say that there is no mention to any air gap. It could work. It is a very clever design but we have to put into doubt anything that is not included in the original text

This is the only sentence where Figuera describe the coil disposition:

"As neither of the circuits rotate, there is no need to make them round, nor leave any space between one and the other"

I suppose that someone will feel upset for this statement. Please in case that someone want to argue with this, please just quote one simple sentence where Figuera told something about air gaps. Maybe Figuera used air gaps, maybe not, maybe he did it but he avoided to tell it

My intention is just to help to discover the Truth. The air gaps may work but they are not referred in the 1908 patent. Also the last Buforn patent suggest that the electromagnets shapes are longitudinal. In this case this Buforn design has any sense.

[NRamaswami]

Hi Hanon:

.see in this forum many people speaking many languages write in English and that makes things looks imperfect. The patent certainly does not refer to any air gaps. I have used a common plastic tube with common iron core and we get the same results that we would get when using three plastic tubes split in to three...magnetic flux cancellation is some thing that I hear frequently here if the cores are used in NS-NS-NS combination..I'm sorry only when we use it that way we get results. Howard Johnson's secret book of Magnets claims that when you use NS-NS-SN the magnetic flux is increased three times. We do not get any volt when we do it.. If we use the NS-SN-NS combination results of output are less than NS-NS-NS combination..There is no magnetic flux cancellation...Air gaps are not mentioned in the patent but as you say it can be used effectively as we have found out..

So as I understand it now the drawing shows at the top left all 16 points connected.. But only one resistor array is shown for the N and S multiple opposite Magnets and another parallel resistor array that is indicated in the top left is not shown for simplicity reasons.. Am I right. If the drawing as used in the top left of Buforn patents were to be used there need to be two resistor arrays and the result would be a commutator bar which will touch four points two in one side and two in the opposite 180' side to run without making sparks for long life but one which will make the primaries oscillate in strength constantly..

Alternatively there is only one single resistor array but the those on the left hand side must be connected to the top of the resistor array points which are not connected now to achieve the same result with a single resistor array..

If the commutator bar were to touch only two adjacent points when the bar comes to half side power will not go to N or S magnets..If the commutator bar were to touch four points two on one side and two on other side the continuous fluctation would be ensured..

This is what the patent says as the principle which is not in question..

Here what it is constantly changing is the intensity of the excitatory current which drives the electromagnets and this is accomplished using a resistance, through which circulates a operating current, which is taken from one power source and passed through one or more electromagnets, thus magnetising one or more electromagnets. When the current is higher, the magnetisation of the electromagnets is increased, and when it is lower, the magnetisation is decreased. Thus, varying the intensity of the current, varies the magnetic field which crosses through the induction circuit.

As is seen from real life experience of using large number of coils the first coil where the current enters is the most powerful one and the subsequent coils have literally no electric field due to resistance of coils..but all have magnetic field which becomes constant at low current input which results in the secondary getting zero current at lower inputs.

Only when the current is sent to enter the N and S magnets alternately or fluctuate in strength due to various resistances encountered , the electric field will be created in the N and S magnets alternately..Only when the electric field increases and decreses the magnetic field will increase or decrease..It is only then magnetic flux operates and the secondary comes to life..Am I right in this understanding?

This then was what was done by Figuera to get a large magnetic field at low input by using a lot of coils of wire spread on a number of electromagnets..But he then altereted the point of entry of current at various N and Electromagnets so that magnetic field strength is constantly changed..Electric field strength is contantly changed..Mangetic flux is contantly made to flow from N to S and then from S to N at various points..

When we use a large input current and less number of turns the problem of lack of electric field does not appear but that requires a lot of input current but by using a lot of reels of wire the input current cannot be higher than 100 to 200 watts and can be easily brought down to even 24 to 36 watts.. But the point is the where current enters determines which electromagnet will get the maximum electric field and one of N magnets and one of S magnets at the opposite end probably continue to get charged up fully but the current flows through the others also based on resistance..

Principle is easy to understand..Bringing down current input is also easy if we use large coils of wire..But this part is the toughest one. probably we will do this as well...I have not yet received the commutator and let me use both the Chapter3.pdf electronic version and the commutator versions and see which one is easier..It has taken so much of time for me to learn as to how we can bring down the input current but increase the magnetization at the same time..Let me now try my hand at fluctating the N and S magnets.. Then the secondary would come to life..

I agree that airgaps are not mentioned in the patent but they do work..If we create a powerful magnetic field 1 cm distance is adequate..Only when we have few coils and low input combination the distance of the air gaps matter..I hope others will agree..

[hanon]

Hi,
Why do you say that electrical field is different in the first, second, 3rd...electromagnet. The patent says that each row is connected in series, so, the current along all of them is the same, and thus the electrical field should be the same in all of them. Am I missing anything?

If you want to flutuate alternatively each row maybe you could try to excite the N series with half wave rectified AC signal and the S series with the other half rectified wave. This is not Figuera but it is a test that will take 5 minutes and just a few diodes.

[NRamaswami]

Hi Hanon:

When current enters NP1 it has go through a number of coils and then it goes through NP2, NP3,NP4,NP5,NP6 Np7 and then it moves to SP7 to 1 in that order..You are not taking in to account the massive resistance or ac impendance of the coils..That is what reduces the electrical component in the first place..I'm using only two large primary cores and when we connect the 200 volts input becomes just 200 watts now. If I connect multiple electromagnets as done by Figuera very little wattage would be spent on the input..I'm looking at other ways to increase the electric field using the coil shapes itself without increasing the input.. Let me see...if it works out..We will try tomorrow afternoon or evening..That may possibly eliminate the commutator as and resistance as well...

Pulsed DC is very powerful...four times more powerful than AC.. The AC impedance of the pulsed DC is four times lesser than that of AC. That essentially means that pulsed DC would need four times more coils to get the same low input wattage or alternately if the same coils are used would consume at the input four times more electrical input..

[Doug1]

Pulsed DC is very powerful...four times more powerful than AC.. The AC impedance of the pulsed DC is four times lesser than that of AC. That essentially means that pulsed DC would need four times more coils to get the same low input wattage or alternately if the same coils are used would consume at the input four times more electrical input..

The resistive controller takes care of that. If you use wire length to control the input then you lose the peak electromagnetic effects which only last for the time length of the peak output from induced when it is at it's peak. Which is very short. The time it will take for a high resistance winding of length to charge up the magnetic field will take to long.
  If your working with 50 to 60 cycles per sec in the output then it will be 100 to 120 peaks + and -within a sec for maybe a seventh or a tenth of each cycle. There is not even enough time for the domains to relax completely so it has to be under pressure, none of the inducer magnets going into a non magnetic state or a reverse state.