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

[hanon]

Maybe reading this page will clarify some aspects:


https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/

[allcanadian]

@Hanon

Maybe reading this page will clarify some aspects:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/

In my opinion that was an excellent presentation and I would agree that any normal transformer action should be avoided. We know it cannot work as we want therefore it must be something else at work here. I would agree the Figuera patents are misleading and he was one very clever individual.

AC

[marathonman]

While i agree it is a good presentation, you lack the subtle detail of each device. you have had that information for quite a while and i have fed you quite a lot of info personaly but yet have not advanced any farther with the info. it's like your refusing to think each process in depth ignoring subtle details that are needed to get the device operational.

it's like you were handed a screwdriver and a screw but refuse or lack the knowledge to screw the screw into the wood. all i can say is you need to learn to use the tools in front of you or find a new hobby or profession because staring at it for years and posting the same information accomplishes NOTHING.

if the people of this forum don't take the time to completely study each piece of Figuera's device,  then there is no hope of this forum of ever building a working Figuera device.
i  on the other hand have taken the info i have gathered, (from different sources) studied each piece separately and taken that info to a whole other level. the difference is i didn't sit on the information and go no where with it. i studied it intensely every waking hour trying to visualize what is actually happening in the primary/secondary relationship and acknowledging the fact that part G has a magnetic field being shifted each half turn and that the winding's on the core are the actual resistor the patent is describing in the form of two opposing magnetic fields.
if you take a core and put 20 wraps of wire on it,  connect a light bulb to each end then a power supply negative to each light bulb. touch the positive side at different intervals, the light bulb's will light at different intensities as the positive wire is moved from left to right on the  wire wraps. well how did it do that, well there are two opposing fields created as the currant enters the coil of wire and are varied as more or less winding's are involved. this is exactly the process of part G as the brush is rotated on a continuous basis.

i would  suggest every one on this forum try this at home for your own sake. this will bring you to the next level of your understanding of part G.

[hanon]

While i agree it is a good presentation, you lack the subtle detail of each device. you have had that information for quite a while and i have fed you quite a lot of info personaly but yet have not advanced any farther with the info. it's like your refusing to think each process in depth ignoring subtle details that are needed to get the device operational.

it's like you were handed a screwdriver and a screw but refuse or lack the knowledge to screw the screw into the wood. all i can say is you need to learn to use the tools in front of you or find a new hobby or profession because staring at it for years and posting the same information accomplishes NOTHING.

if the people of this forum don't take the time to completely study each piece of Figuera's device,  then there is no hope of this forum of ever building a working Figuera device.

Said that, all that I can say is that I do not have a workshop, I do not have much free time, I do not have skills nor instruction into the electric area,  and I do not have the commitment to invest the amount of money required for a brand new gadget from a workshop. Call me lazy or miserly, if you wish.

Said that, all that I can say is that my only merit here was to have translated the patents into english, do research and expose openly and clearly what I guess is the right design in order everyone may have access to it. My merit was to be here for more that 3 years and keep this thread alive. I felt I was doing a good thing to people and society.

Said that, all I can say is that the only word used by Figuera in his 1908 for his current splitter device was "resistencia" which can be translated as "resistor" in electric terminology, or as "resistance" in general terminology. I just expose what is written in the patent. The rest are add-ons not described in the patent. While resistors are a wasteful mean to regulate the current, they accomplish that task and it is what Figuera described.Period. If you have a more optimized method to split the current you are free to do it. It may work, or it may be the key part. Or not.But Figuera never wrote about reluctance, toroids, or storing energy as magnetic flux in the toroid in his 1908 patent. And this is the true. Do not state that the patent says what is not said. For example in PJK ebook into the Figuera section is included your "part G" design as if it was described into the patent itself. I would have liked to keep separated what is written in the patent from what is our interpretation. I told that to PJK but he refused my idea, he deleted the patent translation in his last revision to Figuera section and he kept you part G as a key part of the machine. I hope you are right because if not maybe future users may try to replicate a device which is not the one literally described in the patent. I you see my site you will see that I kept separated the translations from the interpretations. I know this is a good practice. Suppose a monk in the Middle Age translating a book by Plato and inserting in the book his own interpretations. Now we could not know which the original ideas of Plato were or not.

Summary: Figuera just described a method to split the current to one or other set of electromagnets. This is the fact included in the patent description and claims (translation)

And now my interpretation: Figuera just wanted to move the two opposing magnetic fields to create motional induction in the central coil, aka flux cutting induction. I guess he does not need anymore than that to get his generator working. Nor in Magnacoaster, neither in the VTA are required a toroidal "part G" to work. Those devices just distorted the two magnetic field between two NN poles to get induction in their central coil, as Figuera did. Figuera did it in a more ordered and optimized sequence than those, but I think (my interpretation) they all rely on the same basic principle: getting motional induction without moving the magnets but just moving the magnetic lines.

Said that, all I can say bye bye forever. I am fed up. Good summer, good life and good luck

[cliff33]

Back to basics.


For those who really want to replicate this thing,just study Patrick Kelly's comments.
He says " Because of the splitting of the primary into two parts, Lenz's law
has been abolished for this design, allowing a spectacular performance where
the current drawn from the secondary winding has no effect on the current flowing
in the two halves of the primary winding. There is also no back -EMF as current
flows continuously in both halves of the primary winding."


In spite of the varying magnetic field the "current flows CONTINUOUSLY"
How is this possible?


Well here is an example:
Lets say we decide to use 11 amps as the total primary current for both halves.


We could set coil A at 9 amps and coil B at 2 amps
Next G position:  A at 8 amps and coil B at 3 amps
Next G position:  A at 7 amps and coil B at 4 amps
Next G position:  A at 6 amps and coil B at 5 amps
Next G position:  A at 5 amps and coil B at 6 amps
Next G position:  A at 4 amps and coil B at 7 amps
Next G position:  A at 3 amps and coil B at 8 amps
Next G position:  A at 2 amps and coil B at 9 amps


So now you can see that the sum total of current through both primaries is ALWAYS 11 amps!
With no change in current, we have no change in voltage. Both Lenz and BEMF is gone.


I'm working on a circuit to work this way but being 83 years old my shaky hands cut down
on my fine soldering skills.


Of course for anyone attempting the original design this basic principle would also apply.
The simple sketch of CF's circuit is not that simple at all.He had to do some fancy calculating
to get the exact ohmic value of those seven resistors just right.
If you're building just one unit then you will need nine resistors to prevent
excessive current flow at both ends.