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

[bajac]

OK, but if you ever build one of these just give some thought about my last post. The Ferranti effect was the least of it. The point was to built-in capacitance and how it might be used to advantage.

Cheers

I still do not know what capacitance are you referring to and/or I do not see how said capacitance could help on the power performance of the generator. If your are proposing an idea or concept, please, take the time to develop and elaborate your idea. For example, it took me several weeks to prepare my concept for diminishing torque when using ironless induced coil in generators. It is not fair for others when a person proposes something that only he/she understands and then let others the work to figure it out. Otherwise, we will be killing the purpose and goal of the forum, which is to contribute and provide understanding.

[bajac]

Bajac,

Firstly, english is not my language and sorry for any miscommunication. This is my first post here

My intention here is to tell you Bajac that I think you're on the right track. I cannot agree more with you about the ironless core..
I hypothesized months ago when you were off of the forum that the only secret about Figuera generator is the coreless armature or output coil, but I had no time to prove it because I was completing my engineering degree. Now I am graduated and have a lot of free time (and still jobless lol)..
I have built an extremely simple device the components of which I believe all of you guys already have them. If my measurement with a cheap multimeter is sufficiently accurate, then I can say that the hypothesis is valid. Before building it, I simulated the device in FEMM 4.2 and the result of my experiment agreed with the simulation.

I am sure that I don't fully understand it, but this is the concept I use to describe the mechanism:
We have to refresh our old lesson
-------------
Properties    Electric          Magnetic
Force            V (volt)            NI (ampere turn)
Flow             I (ampere)    Flux (weber)
Impedance   Z (ohm)        S (AT/wb)
-------------
Flux linking: V = d(flux)/dt ----> I tried to replicate 1908 patent so no flux cutting
-------------
A coil with a higher permeability core means that with the same magneto motive force/MMF (and with relatively the same power if hysteresis and eddy losses kept minimum) more flux will be created (more flow). Doesn't it sound that we get "free flux"? This is what contributes to overunity when it is coupled with an output coil with low permeability core or coreless.
In a conventional transformer while operating, both the primary coil and the secondary one have the same MMF, more turns less current, less turns more current. Since they are wound in the same core material and in a closed magnetic circuit, they will also have the same amount of flux. In other words, the primary is "armed" with high permeability core to induce a voltage in the secondary and unfortunately the secondary is also "armed" so that it can fight back. The counter attack from the secondary will reduce the self inductance of the primary (lower inductance L), therefore more current will flow in the primary which means more power dissipated to heat. That event is (in my opinion) mistakenly explained that the power of the secondary is coming from the primary.

Back to Figuera's generator 1908. It very similarly appears like a transformer. But here, we "arm" only the primary with a high permeability core and we keep the secondary "unarmed". With that arrangement, the primary is still able to induce a voltage in the secondary (although lower because of high reluctance and less flux) and the secondary with its induced voltage cannot fight back the flux applied to it, it needs a lot of current to fight the primary flux back. Therefore, the self inductance of the primary will be relatively constant and no more power will be drawn and we can say that the only factor which limits the output power is the resistance and strength of the conductor to carry the current. Less resistance will help to release more power.

Here are some results of my experiment (all in rms):
Vin = 220 V 50 hz (sinusoidal from line)
R primary coil = 6 ohms
D primary = ??
R secondary coil = 0.2 ohms
D secondary = 0.8 mm

Open-secondary:
Vout = 5 V
Iin = 1.52 A (magnetizing current)

Closed:
(I)
R secondary coil + load = 1.2 ohms (I used connector wire as a load lol)
Iout = 3.8 A
Iin = 1.53 A (insignificant increase)
(II)
R secondary coil + load = 0.6 ohms (more connector wire)
Iout = 7.9 A
Iin = 1.54 A (still insignificant increase)

I did the Closed I & II test no more than 10 s because the connector wire got really hot. You can calculate the COP by yourselves. I plan to do a self loop test but many things need to be calculated. I'll get a job first lol.


Good luck

You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.


You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.

Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.


Bajac

[forest]

Could you provide the specific page numbers showing the information?

Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm

[bajac]

Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm

No progress. Page 66 is missing. Could you summarize it?

I have a hunch. Before the electrical system was established there existed the big energy companies that provided fuel for the gas lamps, boilers for heating and steam engines, etc. I suspect that these companies bought most of the shares of the earlier electrical companies such as Ferranti, Mordey, Siemens, etc. and set the rules for what technology was supposed to move forward. A key investigation would be to identify all share holders of the earlier electrical companies and identify any conflict of interest of these people. The interest or benefit is the greatest motivator.

[poorpluto]

You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.


You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.

Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.


Bajac

I was aware that the software wouldn't calculate an overunity condition, I just wanted to estimate how much flux generated and the experiment result is the ultimate truth although the explanation is very often unknown.

Below I attach a picture showing my set up which is very simple to replicate. The dimension is 8x9x10 cm and between 3-4 kg's weight. I hope somebody here would replicate and then do a more accurate COP measurement, better yet make a self-running set up which will show obviously its overunity.

I did some more tests today and got slightly different results. Here are some of them:

SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A        Rin : 6.3 ohm        Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A      Rout : 0.5 ohm     Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W

My set up is very loose and vibrating violently so I guess that's why the result differed from what I posted here http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871 ..
If the reactance of the primary inductance is neutralized by using capacitor, Vin will need only around 11 Vac rms (for consideration when designing self-running set up)..

Good luck