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

[NRamaswami]

Dear All:

I have another doubt on the air gap theory..

I think these are the general principles found valid.

Electricity is induced in a conductor When the conductor is subjected to time varying magnetic fields. Alternatively When a magnetisable material is subjected to time varying electric field, it is converted to an electromagnet. When a conductor is wound over such electromagnet as a coil,  electricity is induced in the conductor. The length of the coil, thickness of coil and the number of turns and freqeucny and voltage of the time varying electric field determines the induced current.  The first time varying electric field or the electromagnets through which the first current is sent is called the Primary or Inductor. The second conductor that gets induced electricity is called Secondary or induced.  The induced tends to oppose the inductor (Lenz Law) and so more inducing current needs to be supplied to overcome this opposition and still continue the production of current. These are the general principles whether inductor is rotating or remains motionless and uses rotating magnetic fields. The one possible exception to Lenz law is if the induced is placed between two opposite poles of two primaries and aligned to be attracted by them. For in this case only the attractive forces are present and Lenz law normally assumes that the charges that causes induction are identical charges but if the charges are different as in the case of opposite poles, Lenz law will not apply. The magnetic field propagates in 1000 times to 50000 times more in highly magnetisable material than in air. A small air gap can significantly reduce the effect of the initial magnetization and can require much higher input at the primary. The air gap effectively creates a significant breaking mechnism for the magnetic field propagation and diverts it away from the core to a significant extent or reduces it.

Now the principles taught by the book referred by Mack refers to a straight core being far better than a closed magnetic core like EI core, Toroid, Square or any other form where the magnetic field is closed. We found this to be true after significant experimentation.

Now I'm not able to really understand the statements of Bajac on this point. If the number of times the magnetic field is increased or frequency is increased the induced emf or voltage in the secondary would be increased. The air gap effectively will eliminate this relationship if the straight core is absent.

I also looked at the explanation given by Bajac to BITT transformer and the straight core. There is no connection. The BITT is a closed magnetic core in all forms it is indicated and even in 1910 it was known that a straight bar is better than a closed magnetic core. So the comparision itself is wrong. A better and more straight forward comparision would have been the 1908 bar of Figuera with gaps and 1914 BuForn patent with the straight bar. We have already found that the 1914 straight bar is the most effective way of obtaining maximum output using minimum amount of core. We have also seen that AC requires less iron, less wires and provides a better effect than a FW diode bridge driven unidirectional full positive sine wave pulsating DC type of current. The air gap will break not only the magnetic field but also the effect due to frequency will be significantly reduced.

One very knowledgeable person indicated an air gap of 0.2 mm in transformers can be considered. That is almost as thin as a paper I think. How do we avoid the attracting iron core from tearing it off. More than this distance the magnetism will be adversely affected. I do not know how such a thing can be done. if use copper film with holes, we will only create more hystersis losses. A plastic material would stand only up to certain temperatures. A very thin, heat resistant, non magnetic film that will be able to withstand the attractive forces would be needed. Honestly I do not think it was available in 1908. A straight NS-NS-NS core on the other hand works fine. It does not look like our transformers do but it is certainly the best mode. If a coolant mechanism can be devised for that Lenz law free output can be easily produced from such straight bars. While I'm saying this from my first hand experimental experience Mack has shown the 1910 book and cited it to avoid creating any controversy. Another friend has given me a 1842 book. I have to complete the reading of these two books. These books do not ask us to assume a closed system as current books do.

I request guidance from other Learned friends on this point as well.

[RandyFL]

Rams,
I would use Electrical insulation paper... comes in many thicknesses and spray it with high heat or non flammable paint. I would use a thickness of .1 mm with many coating of non flammable paint...

Or ceramic shims...
the space shuttle used ceramic tiles... but I would imagine they are expensive...

Lastly... I would also imagine the bigger iron pieces you have the easier the job gets...

All the Best

PS if you were to use PVC it is a non flammable plastic and you could cut your own sizes

[Doug1]

NRamaswami
  I dont know when or why you got on the idea of using permanent magnets. Old school dynamos the ones that actually became useful did not. It did not take long for them to figure out that a stronger controlled magnetic field could be made using current over a static permanent magnet. To answer your question though ,exposing a permanent magnet to an alternating field is not why a magnet used that way would lose it's magnetism. The heat will cause it or not being kept in a state where the field is locked with a keeper but it takes a long time for the second one to happen. Over powering a perm magnet dose not actually happen.It makes a bubble inside the stronger field .if it is struck while inside another field it will reverse polarity. It wont completely demagnetize until it is heated to the curie temp for material.

  I think Core might be confusing himself over the commutator/distributor. It is a circle with bars that lay across to make it easier to have a revolving contact that can be operated by a motor. Effectively reducing the motor speed required by having two halves.Each half is a full wave of function to the inducers as the contact reaches around the other half it repeats the cycle. That way he only needed an 1800 rpm motor if directly attached to the motor shaft. Or an even slower motor if it was geared by some method. The contact was placed on a shaft that extended up through the center of the comm. To it was attached and arm and a wheel on the end for it to ride around the outside of the contraption. the contact itself was the arm that lay across the top surface. If it was bent slightly in a curve to make contact with two bars or he used brushes is not explained. I guess that is a mater of personal preference. The term make before break is correct. The advantage is that you can easily scale this contraption to handle a large amount of voltage and amperage and operate it at any rate up to the maximum of what it can made to handle. The truck motor starters I eluded to way back have bars for the rotor not round wire wound many times like a ac motor. Those starters are rated for 5kw. The guy who did a video ,I think his name was woopy he sounds like a TV announcer from a Spanish channel  made a gizmo that was tiny and did it wrong by spinning the brush around a motor using only one brush. There is a certain period of time when the brush is only in contact with one contact point or segment as the brush is made that way. My opinion is he did it wrong. "Always in contact with two"has no exception in it. I had to take apart a motor and turn it by hand to find why it did not work. It seems a bit over done anyway just to test the idea of the contacts.
   As for mag amp theory and practice it is well worth learning just to pick up other ideas to solve later problems. On a small scale they're actually fun to play with. They were replaced with vacuum tubes which were fine for smaller applications and then came IC's which are fine for even smaller applications. I will be of no help with IC's or the like. I do not feel they are an improvement except to make a few people a little richer at the expense of everyone ells. In itself that is not to bad unless it causes people to lose creativity or knowledge.

[NRamaswami]

Doug:

I actually got the idea from you and Alvaro. You have referred to the current being undulated DC. Does not iron subjected to DC become a permanent magnet. Let us say a DC electromagnet only but the one in the center will become a permanent magnet right and it is placed in a focused area.

We have already built the commutator and we have made it to touch three points. If you make it touch two at a time, half of the time it touches only one and half of the time it touches two and so it is better to make it touch three so it will always touch two. The brushes had to be rounded and made to run slower. If we have a number of contacts a one cycle per second slow revolution itself can result in 50 Hz I think. It is not difficult to do and I showed a video of it when you questioned me why should you replicate the old device?

Looking at the principle itself that the N and S magnets must be alternately made strong and weak can be done with 50 Hz or 60 Hz currents very easily as what is 1/50th of a second. Secondly if you keep several magnets in the way the 1908 showed it will continously circulate one way and then reverse and alternately making them stronger and weaker. So I'm still not able to understand the complexity that is needed if we have access to AC to start the device.

The feedback mechanism discussed in the last patent is still not clear to me. If you know about it please enlighten me.

[SolarLab]

F.Y.I.

Space-Time and Asymmetrical Potential Interaction

NOTE: Law of the "Conservation of Energy" assumes a symmetrical closed system; that is, space and time are symmetrical - everything happens at exactly the same time and is confined within the same space, or very closely so; but what happens if these criteria skew and the space or time or both become asymmetrical and do not exactly align or become non phase coherent, or do not occupy the exact same space.

"The Application of Potential Energy for Creation of Power" by Alexander V. Frolov

http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/apply.pdf

Spacial superposition and/or change of polarity (pulsed mode operation); so to speak!

Food for thought:  For example; consider an electron, with it's associated energy (kinetic and potential), is accelerating or decelerating; at any instant in space and time the electron's energy will be in a state of changing it's form. The faster it goes, the more the state-of-change. Or, consider the electron's influence moves beyond it's immediate environment and this influence then becomes asymmetrical. 
Many examples might be cited however the above referenced paper by Frolov should suffice.

Hint; one approach to Figuera might be to "skew" the "resistor control slip-ring (?)." See figures 1 and 2 in Frolov's paper. Having not followed this thread beyond the occasional glance, my apologies if this approach has already been investigated, experimentally analyzed and documented.

Just as a side note; either Volta or Ampere (I don't recall off hand) viewed "electricity" as simply "Potential Difference" => current => magnetics, and conversely, magnetics => current =>  "Potential Difference"; and I believe it was Volta who quoted something like "forget the magnetics, it will most likely just lead to great confusion!"