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

[bajac]

I have to say that I would have not expected a person with learning experience on building magnetic circuits to imply that drawings can show magnetic gaps when the intent of the design is not to have them. The order of magnitude in performance for a close-path magnetic circuit and one with gaps is thousands, or the order of the relative permeability. The de-rating in performance is analog to designing for a race car but showing it with a 3-ton load in the trunk. I am sure that if Figuera's intention was to have close magnetic circuits, he would have never ever depicted the circuit in the sketches with gaps.

Furthermore, a person with learning experience in building magnetic circuits should also know that a magnetic flux that enters a coil on one side and exit the coil on the other side, induces zero volts in the coil. For example, in order for the magnetic flux generated by the N electromagnet to reach the S electromagnets, said magnetic flux must enter and exit the Y coils. This will be the result of making a close magnetic path between the N and S cores. I remember commenting on the Thane Heins bitt transformer that it was a de-rated Figuera's generator because it shows the Figuera's configuration with close magnetic path.

To me, this issue is common sense, and therefore, it is becoming annoying to continue this discussion. I will not comment on this issue again until I see the results of an experiment.

I also wanted to say that I received the iron cores, last night. I will take them to a machine shop to shape them. I estimate this process to take between 3 to 4 weeks.

I will keep you posted.

Bajac

PS: Randy, the link does not work. Could you verify the webpage and re-post it?

[RandyFL]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kCxHgM5zNI

How to Build Nikola Tesla Free Energy Alternating Dynamo and Exciter Motor - Diagrams - DIY

by FlyFisher

I thought it would be a refreshing break ... it is inspiring when you think about the possibilities if it worked...

All the Best

PS if the link doesn't work... look the title up on youtube.

[MadMack]

Pertaining to the Figuera device, here is a passage from a book printed in 1910 on the construction of a Tesla high frequency coil.
The passage is about the primary transformer, running on 110 volt AC mains current.
_____

The efficient working of a transformer depends largely upon the design of the core ....  A straight core is always best to use; for on the fall of the current from its maximum value to zero, the magnetic flux falls from its maximum value, not to zero, but to a value which depends on the residual magnetism. The residual magnetism in an open circuit is much less than in a closed magnetic circuit, so that when the current suddenly becomes zero, the magnetic flux drops lower in an open circuit than in a closed one. As the electromotive force in the secondary is proportional to the fall in the magnetic field, it is greater with a straight core than with a closed circuit of iron.
_____

This explains to me why the later patents show straight cores.

Mack

[bajac]

Mack,


I assume you are referring to this book:


http://www.electricitybook.com/tesla-writings/tesla-high-freq-coil.pdf


What is the page where the passage can be found?


It is an interesting reading. But I wonder if we are comparing apples to apples. For instance, is the lower magnetic residual due to a lower magnetic field of the straight coil?


Randy,


The link works now. Thank you.


Bajac

[hanon]

About the subject of the inducers and induced touching or not , I found something weird that I posted in this post with quotes to two Buforn patents:


http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg437938/


Buforn in his 1910 stated "no touching" between inducer and induced. Then in his 1911 patent stated the contrary : "touching" between inducer and induced. Why this change? I do not know


Finally in his 1914 he claimed both configuration and in this patent he included the detail that Ramaswami refers about "without communication between the inducer wire and the induced wire", which also is weird because it is supposed to be so without need for a formal statement


For any reason Buforn changed this detail: maybe a trick to mislead, maybe a complementary feature that he noted to work fine also  so time after his first patent....who knows...


What it is included in all patents is that the induced coil must "be placed properly" (quoting literally) . I guess that all placement and configuration should be tested in order to find the right one. Some OU generator as Hubbard, Hendershot, Don Smith and others is supposed to use big distances between coils and very open magnetic paths. I do not say that there shouldn´t be space between inducer and induced, but in case that an space is required it is possible that the objective is not a small gap to divert the induced magnetic field but a certain spatial placement


Sorry but I do not share the interpretation that Figuera draw the coil from a top point of view, with air-gaps, with transformer-type cores to divert the induced field away from the powering inducer and with 90º unphased signals. All these is quite a forced interpretation of the 1908 sketch to match a personal design. genuine design but not the one from Figuera. I have demostrated that the patents show that the drawing shows three straight cores (solenoids), in case of gaps required they do not have the aim of diverting the induced field, and that the two signals are opposite (180º unphased --> sin(alpha) & sin(alpha+180º). The 1902 also used two inducers without the objective of diverting the magnetic induced field.


I quote below a paragraph from Buforn´s 1914 where he included both possibilities:

"

The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interposed between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire.
"