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

[MadMack]

Hello everyone,

I'm new to this thread and after skimming the entire topic I have a few ideas I would like to present for your consideration, devoid of any talk about lens or other extraneous theories.

Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the later Buforn patents I would like to focus on those.

Firstly, the commutator and resistor as it's shown in the patents is simply a variable dc voltage divider. It splits the voltage between the north & south coils. It starts with full volts to the N coil and near 0 volts to the S coil. As it rotates the voltage is stepped down in the N coil at the same rate it is stepped up in the S coil until the N is near 0 and the S is at full volts. Then it reverses the stepping process. This repeats continuously. There is no other explanation. There also is no reason this can not be accomplished with a solid state circuit. Every step, up or down, is made before the previous step is disconnected. The advantage of this is a controlled stepping of the magnetic field of the coils. It never significantly collapses between steps, so this would rule out a PWM driver unless a smoothing cap is used.

I do think Mr. Ramaswami's device deserves further experimentation and development. Although I am impressed with Mr. Ramaswami's build I do not see it as a direct application of the patent, simply because it uses AC current. I believe the intent of the original invention is to provide power from DC input.

One of the members here posted a link to an old book on dynamo design that is very informative.  It has formulas and methods for building whatever type of dynamo you need from scratch. Working from a desired output of X volts at X amps at X rpm, the book describes how to calculate the amount of iron required for each coil as well as the number of amp turns for each coil, the length and gauge of wire, and the exciting voltage. The underlying theories for the calculations are also presented. This should all be directly applicable to the Figuera-Bufron devices. From what I have read in this forum topic I think Mr. Ramaswami is the only one using a sufficient amount of iron and wire to get any significant results. It takes a LOT of iron and wire for even a small generator.

Well, enough of my opinions for now. I would build this device if I could find a complete schematic with parts list that would allow me to assemble a solid state driver for it.

Thanks for listening.

[bajac]

Hello everyone,

I'm new to this thread and after skimming the entire topic I have a few ideas I would like to present for your consideration, devoid of any talk about lens or other extraneous theories.

Since everyone seems to be concentrating on the later Buforn patents I would like to focus on those.

Firstly, the commutator and resistor as it's shown in the patents is simply a variable dc voltage divider. It splits the voltage between the north & south coils. It starts with full volts to the N coil and near 0 volts to the S coil. As it rotates the voltage is stepped down in the N coil at the same rate it is stepped up in the S coil until the N is near 0 and the S is at full volts. Then it reverses the stepping process. This repeats continuously. There is no other explanation. There also is no reason this can not be accomplished with a solid state circuit. Every step, up or down, is made before the previous step is disconnected. The advantage of this is a controlled stepping of the magnetic field of the coils. It never significantly collapses between steps, so this would rule out a PWM driver unless a smoothing cap is used.

I do think Mr. Ramaswami's device deserves further experimentation and development. Although I am impressed with Mr. Ramaswami's build I do not see it as a direct application of the patent, simply because it uses AC current. I believe the intent of the original invention is to provide power from DC input.

One of the members here posted a link to an old book on dynamo design that is very informative.  It has formulas and methods for building whatever type of dynamo you need from scratch. Working from a desired output of X volts at X amps at X rpm, the book describes how to calculate the amount of iron required for each coil as well as the number of amp turns for each coil, the length and gauge of wire, and the exciting voltage. The underlying theories for the calculations are also presented. This should all be directly applicable to the Figuera-Bufron devices. From what I have read in this forum topic I think Mr. Ramaswami is the only one using a sufficient amount of iron and wire to get any significant results. It takes a LOT of iron and wire for even a small generator.

Well, enough of my opinions for now. I would build this device if I could find a complete schematic with parts list that would allow me to assemble a solid state driver for it.

Thanks for listening.

Thank you MadMack for your comment. It is always refreshing to see a new person with a different view.


Could you, please, provide the link to the information about the design of dynamos? Every week I search the internet for this type of info.


Regards,
Bajac

[MadMack]

Thank you MadMack for your comment. It is always refreshing to see a new person with a different view.


Could you, please, provide the link to the information about the design of dynamos? Every week I search the internet for this type of info.


Regards,
Bajac

My pleasure sir.

ELEMENTARY DYNAMO DESIGN W. BENISON HIRD, B.A., M.I.E.E.
https://ia802608.us.archive.org/24/items/elementarydynamo00hirdrich/elementarydynamo00hirdrich.pdf


This link also has quite a few books.
http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/browse?type=lcsubc&key=Hydroelectric%20generators%20--%20Design%20and%20construction&c=x

[NRamaswami]

@Forest...Ah.. You are asking me to disclose our trade secret.. Not possible. However let me give one simple explanation. Obfuscating some thing and disclosing it at the same time is very easy. See in the Ramaswami device we have described P1 and P2 as serially connected and the polarity is maintained as NS-NS-NS..

Please advise if this is clear or not. I will then tell you how to obfuscate. Say it now and then I will tell you.

Figuera went a step further and indicated that it is properly connected and the connection may be serial or parallel if I remember correctly.

Now I have a big advantage over the rest of Learned friends of the forum. What is that? I know well that I do not know any thing and so I have to test and learn. What I have learnt is that if some thing works in serial it need not work in parallel.

@Bajac; There is no ambuiguity in the patent. It is clear and it is written for Person skilled in the Art. Who is a Person Skilled in the Art? He does not exist. He is a fictitious person. But he knows every thing and reads every thing and can immediately understand every thing. So if different documents teach different concepts and those concepts have been combined for the first time in an invention, the patent application for that can be rejected because the Person skilled in the art can combine all the prior art literature and say it is so obvious to me. This is the Section 103 objection in USPTO and 50% of the patents refused are fefused under this section. Most of the time, once an examiner takes a 103 objection they would not relent and would refuse.

I beg to disagree with you in my humility. I would request you to read the patent again

This is quoted from the Alpoma net website..http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

I think the translation is done by Hanon but I do not know.
-----------Quote Begin--------------------
DESCRIPTION OF GENERATOR OF VARIABLE EXCITACION "FIGUERA"

The machine comprise a fixed inductor circuit, consisting of several electromagnets with soft iron cores exercising induction in the induced circuit, also fixed and motionless, composed of several reels or coils, properly placed.
-----------------Quote End-------------------------

There is a big difference between soft iron cores and laminated transformer cores. Soft iron is highly magnetisable and shows very considerable magnetism and high eddy currents immediately. When you reach a high voltage and high COP (not necessarily 1 even at COP=0.9 positions but at high voltage in the secondary coils the eddy currents disappear. We have tested with tester to see very strong eddy currents and when high voltage is applied the eddy currents are gone. This is in simple uninsulated soft iron rods.

Soft iron core as single block is very heavy. So it is normally manufactured as Rods or round shape or screw type. When you place them to make a core a gap between the rods is inevitable. When the core is heated the air from the environment will blow in to cool the rods and that creates a lot of ionised air. However for making Transformers for the same reason soft iron is not useful. Even with lower magnetic, insulated transformer cores we see transformers burning out under storm conditions and any transformer made up of soft iron core will experience very high current as the already charged air moves through the rods which will increase the current in the system. This is why we have ampere turns limit set for the transformers and they are built never to reach saturation. In spite of this if the ionisation of air is high, transformers are likely to blow out or circuit trippers will trip the system.

When I started I looked at soft iron cores and bought it. I checked for transformer core prices and they are well five times to six times the soft iron cost. I could not afford it.

If you used laminated transformer cores you did not follow the Figuera Patent. I received an advice that Figuera used large cores and lower turns to avoid saturation. If you have built it as per the patent this would have been immediately known to you.

Now how to obfuscate a patent in writing? Well as far as I know maintaining the same polarity and connecting in serial, there are  512 combinations of connections. In the Figuera Patent I estimate that there are 4096 combinations are possible. Is there any ambiguity in the patent. No. He has indicated it can be connected in serial or parallel. I'm sure you have conducted a tests of several other devices and you do know the time, manpower and resources needed to check one result. So how do you check the results of all. What works in serial connection does not work in parallel connection. I know this as we have tested. And what we learnt is simple. We do not know any thing about magnetism. How it would behave under certain conditions and how it would behave under certain other conditions. Unless we have properly documented all. If the inventor can come and connect and series and show the system to work, the patent does not suffer from any ambuiguity. It simply means that the person claiming to be skilled in the art is not adequately skilled. Enablement test requires that a person skilled in the art must be able to replicate the device without undue experimentation. These are new requirements that have come forth later and not in the periof of Figuera. We need not go in to History of Patent Law development. Only recently after the PCT Treaty all countries are following the same principles for grant of patent and even then it differs from country to country. India is very strict in granting patents and many patents granted in USPTO are rejected here. Any experiment done without using soft iron does not meet the conditions of the patent. Secondly I have a big doubt that in the earlier experiement that the polarities were shown as NS-SN-NS because every body was saying that the poles must be reversed for this to work and I had to point out that poles must follow the natural pattern for the device is shown as one single straight rod or many straight bars placed parallel to each other. So I have to apologize that your conclusions are not accurate. I have both transformer cores and soft iron cores and rods and we know under identical conditions what kind of magnetism is produced by both of them. Figuera Patent for its operations require high magnetisation short of saturation. But because it uses DC as most members of the forum say, it is liable to be immediately saturated and the air gaps in the soft iron core are intended to prevent that. If some one does not know it, he is not a person skilled in the art for he has not done the experiments.

@Madmock:  Sir..I thank you for your kind words. I do not know much. My mentor Patrick Kelly initially wanted me to build the Cater Hubbard device and when we built it to some specfication he received, there was no magnetism no electromagnet was formed. He was shocked but after a few days suddenly said he had a heart problem and he is going to retire and did not answer our mails. Prior to that he has taught us how to build permanent magnets using DC Power from batteries.  So we went on to learn how to build electromagnets on our own and when we asked for assistance we were laughed at and so we did all learning by studying and doing the tests and observing results and since pulsed DC as we then understood using the diode bridge rectifier required 4 times the iron and wire and we could not afford it we used AC. I justified AC on the ground that the primaries are alternately made stronger and weaker automatically by AC and so why do all the complex procedures.
My knowledge is very very limited and we learn by doing the experiments and observing and I believe that Magnetism has not been studied either properly or alternatively studies have been classified possibly. To this date I do not understand the magnet rotating in the center of the Dynamos. The outer field is a weak field. The rotating magnet must be placed outside and the collectors should be placed inside or magnets should rotate both outside and inside at the same time for maximum efficiency. This is some thing that we can see immediately in a solenoid based primary and secondary. May be it is more cumbersome to arrange it and so Figuera made use of motionless electromagnets that created rotating magnetic fields instead of rotating magnets. That is what we understand to this date. Thank you so much on the links and the old books and reading books from my experience does not teach us any thing and we will need to experiemnt and learn how things work under certain conditions and why they work and why things do not work under other conditions and what are the principles involved. That is a lof of work really. We can only acquire some theoretical knowledge but would need to experiment to learn these old technologies.

At the time the Patent for Figuera was filed the only requirement was that the working device must be brought to the patent office and demonstrated to the Examiner and if the device is large Examiner would have to visit the facility and verify that it works as claimed in the patent. Full and particular disclosure and enablment requirements came much later but today the demonstration of working device in the patent office is not insisted upon. Only if the device claimed violates the theories then the working model would be insisted upon. Any device that is claimed to work on its own or work in violation of law of conservation of energy is refused patent in most countries. USPTO however has granted COP>1 patents but EPO refuses to grant such patents. I do not know about other countries. 

Figuera Patent was very well written for the rules in force at the time it was written. It was valid for that time. The only exception in patents to disclose every thing in a perfect was supposed to be Tesla but he was working for Large corporations that controlled all and so he could disclose all without the fear of competition.

@Forest you have not your answer as to how to describe fully and particularly and how to also obfuscate. Can you just list out the 512 modes of the Ramaswami device. Can you tell me which one would work and which would not? If you cannot do that you are not a person skilled in the Art if Ramaswami comes and demonstrates connecting serially would make the device work.  Figuera has 4096 modes in my estimation. Many may work and only some may work. That is the problem.

I hope I have answered all questions. I sincerely apologize to Bajac in advance if any of my statements cause any hurt but I have no intention of hurting you or any other member of the forum.

[hanon]

 Hi all,

I have being modelling in Excel the commutator described in the 1908 patent. Quoting the patent:  " Let be "R" a resistor that is drawn in an elementary manner to facilitate the comprehension of the entire system.  "

I have done the simulation of the original commutator, as described in the patent, and also the simulation of an modified commutator consisting of two independent resistors. Using two independent resistor one for N-Coils and other for the S-coils (but both connected to the rotary brush device) it is easier to get two symmetrical signals for each array of inducers. With just one resistor the available values of resistances and impedance of the coils are more restricted to get a good output signal because the resistance of one array and the other array are mutually dependent. Using two resistors we get an extra degree of freedom and we may use more resistance values to get a better shape in the output signals. For those who use the Excel spreadsheet the input values to the simulation are the cells in green. 

I include here the simulation of both systems but, according to the patent quote, it won´t be difficult that Figuera just drawn it in such a way to make easier its understanding; but maybe he envisioned an optimized commutator to get a better signals to each inducer coil array (N and S).

Regards