Hannon


Thank you for the clarification on the 1902 vs 1908 version!
I only had one resistor just like the drawing shows. Someone else had the two resistor idea.
I am recovering from trashing my 1800 Rpm 120V AC motor I was using to turn my
commutator.
Oh well............things happen.
As soon as I get things going I will let everyone know.

Quote from: ALVARO_CS on March 01, 2014, 12:27:33 PM

From Buforn patent No. 57955

Another advantage is that around the core of the induced electromagnets we can put
another small size induced electromagnet."

hola hanon

I´m intrigued by this "around", as he says electromagnet, not coil.
may u post the original text in spanish please ?
(I revised all your posts and could not find the spanish version)
thanks
Alvaro

Hi all,

All the files about Figuera are located in the bottom part of this page:

http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258

The 5 patents that Buform (Figuera´s partner) files after the death of Figuera are included in a pdf file (there are more thatn 100 pages and I have not translated into english...I don´t have time!. All those patents are copies of Figuera´s 1908 patent plus some minor improvement that he added.)

I want to manifest that the first step to rediscover the character of Clemente Figuera was done by the owner of this website (Thanks Alpoma!!) . He researched in the historical files and rescued Figuera from the darkness. He got a copy of the 1908 patent. Later I got the 1902 patents which were missing by visiting the Patent Office Archive and taking pictures of them. Latter I translated all of them into english. I uploaded all this documents into the Figuera website in order to have everything about him in the same place.

---------

Dieter, I think that you could improve your results if instead of using AC you use rectified AC . Figuera fed his device with a current above zero. He changed the current intensity but he never reversed it (no alternation of poles). Tell us if you have better results!!  Finally, which poles orientation are you using?

Hanon:

I am not really able to understand the Buforn drawing.

Current from resistors goes to the inductors on one end and current from the rotary device goes to the inductors at the other end. What does that mean? The secondaries appears to start from the bottom and then go up and then return back to the bottom to make the bottommost the secondary output coil. Now How are the other inductors connected in this straight line series? That is missing in the drawing..There is no connection to the two inductors S and N in the middle. How are they connected here.

In addition to all this confusion, the iron cores show a gap in the inductors. Every inductor has two iron cores and there is a gap between the two cores. The induced is placed on this common core betweenn two inductors. There is no common core for the entire core and the cores appear to be separate.

As seen on the drawing of Burforn, There are 6 inductors with the first and last having a single iron core. The middle inductors have two iron cores each. This iron core between the two inductors passes through an induced electromagnet. Only the first two and last two inductors are wires and the wiring sequence for the middle two inductors is not at all indicated. This is extremely confusing..Can any one explain this.. please..

A more careful look at the inductors appears to show that the inductors have the same poles and the induced are placed in the middle between the North and South poles of a magnet. But each inductor has a gap and each inductor appears to have the same pole on both sides and hence the air gap between the two cores within the inductor. Of course the one of the end inductors would be North and South.

So our discussions that the it is the induced that is placed between two opposite poles of the inductor magnets does not appear to be correct. the inductors in the middle are characterized by having same pole with an air gap between the two identical poles. So each inductor has a winding half of which is CW and half of which is CCW. Air gaps are present between the induced and inductors.

But our discussion has been that the it is induced that is placed between identical poles as in motors. Doug.. Please look in to this and comment please..How will affect the input consumption and output? Please clarify.


I have ordered the commutator for me and it is yet to come and until it comes I have sit quiet.

Hi Hanon


I was referring to:

Quotenaturally in every revolution of the brush will be a change of sign in the induced current;

Let me say that I am very thankful for the great work you have done in the recherche of this whole historical Phenomena. I mean, this is so thrilling, somebody could make a hollywood movie about it.  The generator, the banksters, the secrets... I really enjoy becoming part of it.


But concerning my prototype and what I wrote about it, I have to say you all don't really seem to have read it all, did you?


Figuera used a permutator to create AC because the machine needed AC. If he would have had an AC mains grid, he would have done exactly the same as I did. I can only repeat: he clearly explains two sinus or sawtheeth AC waves, whereof one is  shifted by 90deg. or 25% of a full AC cycle.   


The easiest way to get that is to use mains AC and and a cap in series with one of the primaries. The cap must be big, so it will not act as a resistor, but will only shift the phase. This might be in the milliFarad range for higher currents. (note: you can use electrolytic caps in AC when you use two, connected like -++-  or  +- -+, using just a single one may damage it after a while.)


I hope you don't mind but I am a little bit tired of repeating myself, please read my postings. All I say is the efficiency, considering the low quality of the coils is excellent, maybe already now OU. By approximate calculation there is 1.67 Watt input. On the output I have, after rectifing and adding a cap to smoothen the pulses, 15 VDC. When I measure the DCmA, the needles hits the end of the 250mA Scale _intensively_, I would estimate 500 to 1000 mA.


I plugged an inverter to the output, but it required 4 Watts for operation, so it rebooted constantly after 5 seconds.


I don't know exactly, if this is OU, but it is at least definitely  very close to unity.


I made an other version, with diodes, creating two positive waves (when you swap the poles of the negative sinus side, it magically becomes positive, as if there has never been any negative voltage, but only plus and ground...) , described earlier, but the max. output was 4 volts and 70mA.


I carefully read and thought about it, made many tests and I am now convinced that this setup is the real deal. I would really like to see somebody replicating it (I offer my help), or at least carefully read my reports. No offence tho. I am only a bit tired. Monday I'll get some millifarad caps.


My prototype is small as a matchbox, but imagine the size 5x5x5 times bigger would also mean 125 times more current etc.
The number of turns however should be higher, you can't run a 2.4 Ohm load at mains grid...
Ferrite turns out to be the perfect material for the core.
The poles, Hanon, as I said, can be anyhow, it does not matter, Primary 2 will be 90 deg behind or ahead, depending on connecting, both has the same effect.

NRamaswami, maybe we should stick to Figueras Patent. Buforn actually didn't manage to make the device popular, why?


Furthermore:  Airgaps may reduce the efficiency, esp when a coil has such a gap in the middle, The coil that is half CW and half CCW will most likely  neutralize any magnetic flux, which is the opposite of what we want, right?


The challenge is, to keep the flux in motion, but nevertheless obtain alternating polarity at the secondary. I suggest you watch my flux alternation diagram one or two pages back.  You have to drop the idea of poles because they change dynamicly.


At least that is my opinion.


Regards