Dear Friends, Bajac, nice to see the topic opener revisiting, unfort. I have some bad news.


Although in plan operation mode without any spark elements, my coil has interesting features like near 100% efficiency (most likely between 90 and 110), I have to inform you about the spark voltage is not what I thought,


I've built a sparky connector, consisting of a small rotating metaldisc with two wires slightly touching it. I used the wire that is inside a piezo lighter, assuming this would be heatresistant. It worked pretty well, I had fluctuating voltage around 100 vdc. I was even able to squeeze 200v out sometimes. Then I notized that the resistor remained cold and amp measurement showed only 6 mA. I realized that these two tiny wire end  electrodes were connected only for microseconds in random intervals and therefor only tiny anounts of current could flow. It may be surprising that there were 6 mA at all.


However, when real brushes are used, there may be much more simultanous connections between individual parts of the brushes and the rotor. The efficiency of such a setup is yet to be tested.


I apologize for my error. I take this seriously and at least I got the integrity to tell you about my errors as well.


Some questions to be answered:
the 2 caps are not connected, they were used in the 90 deg. setup, two electrolyticsls in AC, +--+ connected, each one 470uF. The resistor is a 27 Ohm power resistor, just to make sure total powetr dissipation is not too high for the supply. Instead of this resistor I could as well use 12 additional coils instead.  The cap after the rectifier has 1 uF only.


Ok, back to work.

Quote from: bajac on March 05, 2014, 09:06:40 PM
@ Hanon,
Thank you very much for the information you posted about the sequence of patents published by Buforn.
I would like to ask you, when were those patents made available in the internet? About three years ago, I remember searching the internet for any information about Clemente Figuera and I was only able to get one sketch (in bad shape) from one of Figuera's patent. The sketch is the one I showed in the paper that I posted in this thread.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I STARTED READING BUFORN'S PATENTS (124 PAGES DOCUMENT) AND I WAS REALLY AMAZED TO SEE THE SAME STATEMENTS THAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG. I HAVE READ THE FIRST FIVE PAGES (IN SPANISH) AND THERE WAS A PARAGRAPH THAT CALLED MY ATTENTION VERY DEEPLY. THE PARAGRAPH IS THE SECOND FOUND ON PAGE 6 OF THE PDF (PAGE 5 OF THE DOCUMENT) AND IT READS SOMETHING LIKE:
"IT IS THEREFORE DEMONSTRATED THAT A DYNAMO (ACTION) IS NOT A CONVERSION OF MECHANICAL WORK INTO ELECTRICITY: THEN, WHERE IS THE ELECTRIC CURRENT COMING FROM? THE CURRENT OF THESE GENERATORS MIGHT BE PRODUCED BY AN UNKNOWN PARTICULAR MOVEMENT OF THE MOLECULES WITHIN THE MASS."

THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS A SCIENTIFIC HERESY THAT I HAVE SUPPORTED FOR SOME TIME. I WILL GIVE YOU THE FOLLOWING TWO CONDITIONS TO THINK ABOUT:

1.       AS I STATED IN THE PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS, THE STANDARD TRANSFORMERS MAINTAIN A CONSTANT Φm AT NO LOAD AND AT 100% LOAD DUE TO THE AUTO REGULATION MECHANISM OF THESE CLOSED IRON CORE TRANSFORMERS. THE CONSTANT Φm IS ACKNOWLEDGE BY THE MAINSTREAM ENGINEERING BOOKS AND CAN BE VERIFIED BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE TRANSFORMER'S OUTPUT VOLTAGE REMAINS ABOUT THE SAME DURING THE LOADING PROCESS. THEN, IF THE ENERGY OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD DOES NOT CHANGE NOTABLY AT ZERO AND FULL LOAD, WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE ENERGY IS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED THROUGH THE MAGNETIC FIELD. IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INDUCES A VOLTAGE IN THE SECONDARY COIL BUT NOT THE ENERGY AND/OR POWER BEING DELIVERED TO A LOAD. THE INEFFICIENCY RELATIONSHIP OF THE INPUT/OUTPUT POWER IN STANDARD TRANSFORMERS IS DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF CLOSED CORES, BUT IT IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE. AND,

2.       YET, I HAVE NOT FOUND A MATHEMATICAL MODEL DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ENERGY OF A GIVEN MAGNETIC FIELD AND THE POWER PRODUCED BY A COIL DUE TO A VOLTAGE INDUCED BY SAID FIELD.

SUCH STATEMENT IN THE PATENT IS VERY PROFOUND! AND IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!

BAJAC.

Bajac, as explained in this document about Power Transformers and applies to power transformers "mainly" not flybacks and so forth. - http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm
So it doesn't relate much to this kind of setup but it does explain the role of the flux in a regular transformer and shows why the Figuera setup does not work like a transformer as such.

When my "Coil groups" secondary is loaded there is less energy to recover from the magnetic field collapse of the primaries to the second battery than when the secondary is not loaded, this shows me that the primary flux is reduced by the loading of the secondary.

QuotePreface
One thing that obviously confuses many people is the idea of flux density within the transformer core. While this is covered in more detail in Section 2, it is important that this section's information is remembered at every stage of your reading through this article. For any power transformer, the maximum flux density in the core is obtained when the transformer is idle. I will reiterate this, as it is very important ...

For any power transformer, the maximum flux density is obtained when the transformer is idle.

The idea is counter-intuitive, it even verges on not making sense. Be that as it may, it's a fact, and missing it will ruin your understanding of transformers. At idle, the transformer back-EMF almost exactly cancels out the applied voltage. The small current that flows maintains the flux density at the maximum allowed value, and represents iron loss (see Section 2). As current is drawn from the secondary, the flux falls slightly, and allows more primary current to flow to provide the output current.

It is not important that you understand the reasons for this right from the beginning, but it is important that you remember that for any power transformer, the maximum flux density is obtained when the transformer is idle. Please don't forget this .

   Elsewhere on the Net you will find claims that the maximum power available from a transformer is limited by saturation of the core - this is unmitigated drivel, is completely false and must be ignored or you will never understand transformers properly!

The information provided here is accurate and correct, and anyone who claims different is wrong! That might sound harsh, but it's true nonetheless.

The document says the flux is maximum a idle and only falls slightly when the secondary is loaded, the energy I assume is transferred directly from primary to secondary in a power transformer because it does not come from the flux which remains almost the same.

QuoteWhen you apply a load to the output (secondary) winding, a current is drawn by the load, and this is reflected through the transformer to the primary. As a result, the primary must now draw more current from the mains. Somewhat intriguingly perhaps, the more current that is drawn from the secondary, the original 90 degree phase shift becomes less and less as the transformer approaches full power. The power factor of an unloaded transformer is very low, meaning that although there are volts and amps, there is relatively little power. The power factor improves as loading increases, and at full load will be close to unity (the ideal).

When the secondary is loaded the counter emf (Back emf) is reduced and this causes more current to flow in the primary to transfer energy through the secondary to the load, just as Tesla describes in the book about his motors. A motor being a generator in reverse in most cases.

I think the transfer of energy through a power transformer is not via the flux but the flux allows the transformer to work as it does, the primary is always working to keep the flux at max and supply the secondary if loaded.

With coils on separate cores there is no real transformer action directly from primary to secondary, in this case the transfer of energy can only be done by variations in the intensity of the magnetic fields or by the magnetic field collapsing through the secondary. This restricts the power to the amount of magnetism the primary induces in the core and then transfers to the secondary.

In a power transformer the output power is not limited by saturation in the same way as other transformer or generator configurations I don't think.

Maybe why the Figuera primary cores are larger to avoid saturation !

None the less if there is an effect then we should be able to see it at lower powers as well with smaller setups.

As I said this reminds me of switching the flux of a permanent magnet through a core by using saturating "control coils" to redirect the flux, just that this setup uses electro-magnets that are switched easily and it varies the flux.

Cheers

P.S. My Tests did show an unexpected result in that when the secondary was tuned by a capacitor the amplitude of the wave form increased but the input reduced, which is different to most other setups I have tested, when the activity in the secondary "tank" created by the capacitor is increased the input usually rises due to increased losses from more current through the resistance of the tank.

Addendum. In the case in my P.S. I think the extra activity in the secondary caused a counter emf in the primaries and reduced the input that way. I'm very busy organizing a trip to Brisbane for a visit with a neurosurgeon, but when I get the chance I will make a video clip to show anything i think of interest which might help.

..

..

Bajac,

The Buforn patents are available by direct email request to the Historical Archive of the Spanish Patent Office previous payment of a fee for each page of the document. Alpoma and me paid around 100 € for the 124 pages. The problem to get the 1902 Figuera were that as those documents were in bad condition, they didn´t want to scan them and send them by email, so I had to go the Office to look for them and take pictures (I had to do it in secret because they told me not to open the damaged booklets with the patent texts (each patent were forming a kind of booklet with all their sheets folded in half). But I open it...and photographed it

I did some research to verify if Figuera or Buforn had more patent in some countries as France, Germany, UK but I could not find anything (but I am not completely sure if it is so or that I could not find them: patents from those years are not included in current databases, and you are force to search them into the historical database). Anyway, you could see the filing data of those Spanish patents in the Spanish historical data base: www.oepm.es --> Archivo Historico y Museo (in the bottom right side of the page)  --> Archivo Historico à Patentes (1878-1940) --> Acceder al formulario de busqueda

Quote from: dieter on March 05, 2014, 09:58:45 PM

....

Some questions to be answered:
the 2 caps are not connected, they were used in the 90 deg. setup, two electrolyticsls in AC, +--+ connected, each one 470uF. The resistor is a 27 Ohm power resistor, just to make sure total power dissipation is not too high for the supply. Instead of this resistor I could as well use 12 additional coils instead.  The cap after the rectifier has 1 uF only.

....

Hi Dieter,

Any time you have electrolytic capacitors and you wish to use them in AC circuits, a possible and good solution is the following circuit assembly, though it needs two electrolytic capacitors and two diodes.

Connect two electrolytic capacitors back to back (it does not matter which polarity will be the common in the middle connection point, just mind for the diodes polarity). The resulting peak  AC voltage rating of the assembly will be defined by the smallest rated individual DC data of the capacitors  (i.e. 63V DC rating gives 63V AC peak rating). To minimize any significant reverse voltage across the capacitors, add a pair of diodes, each one is in reverse parallel with its capacitor, shunting the peak AC voltage for it whenever the AC wave would reverse bias the electrolytic:
           
                    1N4001 to 4007 diodes
               ----|>|------------|<|-----
               |                |                 |
               |   -     +     |     +    -    |
         o--------)|-------------|(-----------o
                 2200 uF      2200 uF
                    63 V            63 V

This way you can get a non-polar capacitor with 2200 uF value, rated to 63V peak AC.  Up to some hundred Hz the 1N4000 diode series are ok but for higher frequencies than that the fast and ultra fast types are preferred like the UF4000 series or similar.

Using twelve more additional coils in series instead of the 27 Ohm resistor is a good step, and in this case the 8mA 'small' current may go up to a higher value too (using the same 'switching speed' i.e. duty cyle).

Gyula

Quote from: Farmhand on March 06, 2014, 12:19:13 AM
Bajac, as explained in this document about Power Transformers and applies to power transformers "mainly" not flybacks and so forth. - http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm

Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the article do not answer the question for the cases I refer to.