Self Sustaining Electricity Generator

[darediamond]

 OK.
In the single solenoid lensless TrafoGen, if I need 2 secondaries, then 3 primaries must be wound. Now what should be the direction of the Second Secondary when wounding over the second Primary? What also should be the direction of the third primary when winding it over the second Secondary?
Can Spiral Winding be used to make the needed Primaries and Secodaries in this Set-up?

Core:

I have cameras and can take videos and have no problem posting them. But please see my devices are assembled and then disassembled and I need people to come to work for me to do replicate the device.

All punches are welcome here.. All ideas are welcome..Nothing excluded..No problems..You set the rule for determining the OU..How it is to be proved...As far as I'm concerned I think it should be Ok if I use a computer UPS to power about 8000 watts for more than the time the UPS can power them. UPS is 1.1 kilowatt UPS. If I produce from the input of the UPS more than 1100 watts which is not possible for the UPS to be performed you need to agree. Is it fair?  Video yes,..No problems..I do not want to show the construction etc Videos but we will assemble the device and then show the Device powering all 40x200 watts lamps..I think it should satisfy you or any one else. We will check what is the input watts and what is the output watts.

Please let me know how many here have built Magnetic core devices where the core weighs 150 kgms..All seem to play with Electronics..Not Electromagnetics..which is what I have done.

Hanon is correct.. Direction of rotation of current determines the polarity. whether it is AC or DC or Pulsed DC.. In the device tested current rotates in the same direction in the primaries.

I think Marathonman is on record that a working device for 5 kW is already done and is working for one year now. I cannot claim that.

Dare Diamond..Sir..

A multifilar Primary wire on one Electromagnet has to be connected in serial first to make the single primary coil. Let us say it is P1.

You wind separate P1, P2.P3 etc..These primaries are connected in parallel. I think you would need four Primaries. Try to see that the following is ensured.

Four Primaries

Three secondaries.

Secondaries are 2/3rd the length and diameter of the primary. Secondary wire is wound just to cover the core of the primary.

Magnetism in Each Primary core must be in the region of 0.3 to 0.4 Tesla. Not more. Secondary will have higher Magnetism.

Do not put any wire under the Primary coil. Let us check the Figuera design first.

Each Primary has double the Weight of the core of the secondary.

In Each Primary Current either moves towards the central secondary placed in between or moves away simultanously.

The arrangment will be like this..

P1----->S1<------P2----S2-----P3------>S3<--------

followed by

P1<-----S1------>P2-----S2-----P3<------S3-------->

Here S2 is placed in between the poles of the P2 and P3. S2 is the bonus secondary coil..

Secondaries are connected in series.

Primary turns are same.. We have seen best output is produced in the secondary when both the primaries are equal in power.

Regarding the Russian Scientist claim..Who are we honor..Prof. Figuera or the Russian Scientist..I think all who show an innovative spirit and take a move to take the one step forward are to be honored. I think a similar statement was made about an American Author who wrote the Healing is Voltage Book. He indicates that same wave patterns were used in devices made in US much before he or the Russian Scientist made them..So what do we know..Incidentally so far from 2013 no one has given us this information..Language barrier you see...

My Problem is that this is not a regular work for me and we do the experiments once in a month or fortnight. Any one can test the device and let us know what is the result..what is the problem...

The purpose of our providing the information open source is to make others benefit..Only when it is done this work would become useful..I would suggest that let others build the device as indicated and then come back and bomb me after that if they are not able to replicate.

[NRamaswami]

Sir:

It is fairly simple. All wires rotate in the same direction. Primary and secondary. If you want to use three primaries You can send the current from inside to outside. First primary should be wound from top to bottom, second primary from bottom to top and third from top to bottom. Secondary is placed inside the two primaries and connected in series. Primaries are connected in parallel.

You need to realize that closer the secondary is to the core more amperage is generated. While the number of turns of secondary would determine the voltage. Therefore the design is like a Long train. Higher output comes only when the voltage increases in the secondary.

You can use single helical coils for primary. However the number of turns must be high and the impedance sufficiently strong enough to draw low amperage at 220 volts or higher voltage. Primary should be thin wires and secondary should be thick wires. Thick wires have lower AWG or SWG numbers and thin wires have higher numbers.

The purpose is to use a Large Primary magnetic core with a small input. The large electromagnets then move the magnetic field towards the secondary at the same time. Secondary is 1/4th the size of the combined primary weight. Therefore the magnetic field strength in the middle secondary increases by at least four times. When you put the four primaries in the way I indicated you get three secondaries and magnetic field strength increases and decreases in the secondaries. When it increases in S1 and S3, it decreases in S2 and when it decreases in S1 and S3 it increases in S2. Since secondary is in series there is no collapsing of current in secondary at any time. Secondary is always powered.

Backemf is not supposed to come if you magnetic field strength never collapses to zero. Since the coils are continuous it is achieved here without the use of permanent magnets. However if we place steel rods which are once magnetized always remain magnetized in the secondary cores alone it should also benefit.  This I have not tested.

You will need to use thick wires in secondary and wind not more than five layers I guess. Secondary Magnetic field strength should not exceed 1.2 Tesla for the magnetic core of the device not to be heated.

All primaries are in parallel, It is quite difficult for us to use single helical coils to draw low amperage at high voltage unless high frequency is used. High Frequency on the other hand causes the iron core to be heated on its own. Figuera might have used resistors only for that purpose. We have run devices at very high saturation levels but probably because the device core is made up of iron rods with lot of air gap present and is not a single bar we did not suffer from heat problems. Very inefficient construction really but low cost, low tech any one can do construction.

You better do the large iron core construction device indicated. It is safe and you can get good output. We have seen that only up to 9 layers from the core the secondary produces good amperage and up to 12 layers good voltage also comes. But from 12 layers to 16 layers though we have a lot of turns amperage increase is very low and voltage increase is also low. So it is better to use more iron and less wire to achieve a sustainable long lasting device.

If you manage to reach 300 volts plus in secondary you are likely to reach the COP>1. It is quite difficult to achieve it at the low voltages that we did. Some trickery has to be done to deceive the Lenz effect at low voltage levels. We wound the secondary coil on P1 and P2 along with the primary coil itself and so adjacent turns of the secondary were well separated and were not acting against each other. closely wound coils will have one turn trying to cancel the magnetic effect of the next turn and vice versa. This is where thick insulation helps.

There is no fancy stuff here. It is so very simple. But it is expensive to build because of the iron core size and the coils needed. Secondly it is all done manually and no winding machines are used by us as on date. So it is a labor intensive process.

If you connect the ends of the secondary wire to two different earth points placed at significant distance higher amperage comes but why it comes is not known to any while theories are dished out..Even earth based batteries that provided an equal voltage and amperage were built as far back as 1893 but were quickly some how ignored or forgotten.

[norman6538]

I have studied 40 pages of the previous Figuera forum and made notes and now
I would like to substantiate some of the underling principles before I proceed.

1. flux going through a coil and back will give 4 pulses of current unlike a magnet passing
    a coil gives 2 pulses - AC one hump up and one down.
   I have tested this with a coreless coil and a magnet and its correct.
  I picture the flux going through the coil/core like a shuttlecock in a loom
  going back and forth thus entering/leaving the threads and then
  entering and leaving going back again.

2. Does the like poles repel give more induced coil output as the youtube
    demo said it would? I want to do this myself to make sure it was not
    an error in the testing.
  see this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvVbDQ-z66o&feature=youtu.be
attracting vs repeling magnets with coil between...
N S max 1.48 volts  S S 8.99.x volts  6 times better

3. Intuitively we reduce the input of a second set because we use the flux out
    of the 2nd primary to feed the 2nd set secondary.

If all 3 are valid then 2 x 2 x 6 gives a coil performance multiplier of 24 or more.

I am working on testing/verifiying 2 above.

4. And many have said that coil geometry will also give additional multipliers
Does anyone have youtubes to verify this?

If these are all valid then I'm ready to build.....

Norman

[norman6538]

The repel test is valid. much more current output with the
repeling magnets at the ends of the core.


THANKS TO ALL who have contributed so much towards understanding
the Figuera secret......

Norman

this is the test I refer to.

2. Does the like poles repel give more induced coil output as the youtube
    demo said it would? I want to do this myself to make sure it was not
    an error in the testing.
  see this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvVbDQ-z66o&feature=youtu.be
attracting vs repeling magnets with coil between...
N S max 1.48 volts  S S 8.99.x volts  6 times better

[norman6538]

Hi Norman,

I am not much of an electrical person,, but I do like mechanical things and I do play with magnets and coils,, and I have played with the setup that was shown in the video.

Yes there is more out,, but there is also a much larger mechanical cost,, the force to move the magnets goes up.

But you missed one of the main points of the patent - no motion and no Lenz
counter to motion force is fighting you. That is a BIG DEAL.

Norman


I have used this effect to drive a motor.