Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



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

Started by bajac, October 07, 2012, 06:21:28 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 27 Guests are viewing this topic.

hanon

Hi all,

I have done some testing with a similar winding to the one posted for the 1902 patent No. 30378. As you can see I did not get any output result ( 0 volts) . The output I got with irregular (manual) pulses were a measurement error dued to the voltmeter. But with AC (and also tested with intermittent DC current) I did get 0 volts. I first tested with two identical coils and later I tested with different coils (internal coil:150 turns, copper wire of 0.4 mm diameter; external coil: 900 turns, copper wire 0.4 mm diameter)

Video 1

Video 2

I think that in this case the equation of the  induction over a wire of length "l" has to be applied. Changing the magnetic field over a static wire is the same as having a static B-field and move the wire closer and farer from the electromagnet sequentialy. In this case we can not apply the Faraday Law for the induction over a coil perpendicular to the B-field but the equation of the induction of a moving wire at speed "v":

E = l·B·v·sin (alpha) , being alpha the angle between the B-field and the velocity v

In the  case of patent 30378 (motionless generator)  the wire under a oscilatory B-field can be assimilated to move the wire in parallel to a static B-field so the angle  is sin(alpha) = sin (0º) = 0, and then the induced voltage is null. In case of the patent 30376 (where the winding is wound around a drum which rotates around some electromagnets in the center) the wire is moving at right angle of the B-field, so sin(alpha) = sin(90º) = 1 . Therefore I think that this winding proposal is fine for this patent with the moving coil (patent 30376), but it won´t work for the motionless generator (patent 30378).

In 1902 Figuera patented two different devices but maybe he just built one of them. I don´t know if he built both or he just built one and the other was a theoretical proposal. In the 1902 newspaper clippings is written that the Figuera device "consisted of a generator, a motor and a kind of governor or regulator". This description matches much better with the requirements for the the implementention of patent 30376 where a motor is needed to rotate the moving coil.

One detail about patent 30378: reading the text it seems to indicate that all the electromagnets are conected to the same inducer signal. But reading carefully: " this generator whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that, in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, ..." Why did Figuera  remark that it was arranged in two sets of electromagnets? ...

shadow119g

I am planning to replicate the Figuera device. As I am not that great on electronics, I am planning to build a mechanical switching device. I have a metal working skills and equipment. One question I have is, how many turns of wire are recommended for each primary and secondary windings? Online there in one builder using 150 turns on the primary's and 300 on the center secondary.
Thanks to all,

Shadow

shadow119g

Shadow
It seems that everyone may have given up on the stationary device. I have planned to make the commentator on my switching device able to either bridge two contacts (spark less) or not. I reasoned that since most all of Tesla's devices use a spark, maybe Clemente was trying to somehow conceal the way the way his machine really worked. Also, one experimenter got a better response when every time he manually touched the wire to complete the circuit. Anyway, I could still use a sparking device in other experiments!

Shadow

hanon

Hi all,

Shadow, wellcome to the forum!! I think Bajac sometime ago posted the proper number of turns for these coils. Search it into Bajac´s posts from some weeks (or months) ago.

Another subject: I posted a winding for the patent 30376, the one with the rotating coil but with static core, I made a mistake in the poles. Now I have calculated fine and with the rotation of the wire the intensity generated in both sides adds up.  (I don´t know how to edit my previous post. If someone knows please tell me how to do it)

Regards

ALVARO_CS

Hello everybody
I am testing the "concept" of the 1908 patent
As the commutator I am using one from an AC motor 10 poles
attached some pics, may be useful for replicators
Cheers
Alvaro