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

[marathonman]

Marathonman

  I cant get the E core to model up at all to work with the idea of having the same inducer fields pushing the induced to behave like a rotating magnetic field. The collapse time on the inducer fields would have to go completely off and allow the field to dissipate to zero.That would not work with the idea of having the the magnet going up in field strength pushing the collapse magnet back emf around to add to the one increasing. It also doesn't even allow for the notion of keeping the cores partially on to maintain a pressure between the fields even after correcting the pole orientations of the inducers. If you get an LED to run of it you should consider yourself doing well. The flux will want to travel around the outside of the core if you orient it nsnsns and totally avoid the center leg of the core and if put it in nnnsss there wont be any difference in flux in the middle as each side turns off or on. If it was a square then maybe if it is not too leaky. Use bobbins just in case it turns out Im right. So your dont  risking wasting your wire.

Doug;
putting your cores in these orientations will get you absolutely no where. ( NN/NS/SS or NS/NS/NS)
it will have to be NS/y/SN the whole idea is to reverse the secondary core only. keeping the primary orientation the same uses less power also. in your set up this will not take place. i think the whole idea is that the reversing poles meet in the secondary core  though you are right the flux will not rotate buy they don't have to just reverse.
This is what is happening in the secondary core each 90* out of phase high primary. N/S N being left c core and S/N S being right c core.

when the cores are hit with current (90 * out of phase) this causes the ZPE to separate and the poles collide in the Secondary Core and expand outward engulfing the secondaries. (Expansion and Contraction)
Tesla did the same thing above in your post but with a Toroid .

[NoMoreSlave]

Hallo,
PLEASE give your opinion about the attached file.
Best Regards,
NMS

[NoMoreSlave]

Bajac Version = John Ecklin's SAG 6(with correction!) = Don Smith rotary generator
Please Please experiment with Bajac CIC version, use a simple inverter circuit to excite the primaries (with center tape).

to read more about John Ecklin's SAG 6 and the correction:
http://montalk.net/science/72/john-ecklins-sag-6

[dieter]

NoMoreSlave


I've been reading the pdf. Having problems to understand the symbols, lack of description.


Thought the UDT transformer of paul raymond  jensen pretty interesting since it sounds as if the guy really did it.
Surprisingly youtube has nothing about it, was it never duplicated?


However, like a red thread there is something going trough alll of these "lenz less" transformers, be it the bitorroid, this one, figueras ... and that's the redirection of the back mmf (magnetomotive force,  floyd sweet terminology) that normally draws energy by the primary when a load is connected to the secondary. Whether or not the figuera design has 2 primaries and one secondary (compared to two secondaries and one primsry in thane heines bi-torroid, jensens UDT etc.), may be insignificant, since I explained earlier how figueras design does the same, redirecting the back mmf away from the originating primary (actually to the other primary that features reverse polarity, thus being a very easy path for the back mmf). Anyway, if the setup is built, we can try both. Tho, due to logic, with 1 primary you need only one pulse, contrary to the flipflop pulse of the classic figuera design.


Remember my test, where I was getting 25 Volts on the Y coil with only about 1.5 v on the primaries, withe a turns ratio that should have given 3 Volts and not 25. Even tho the overall efficiency was not OU, it was by far the best efficiency I was getting in any transformer I ever built and the analogue amp meter used to hit the upper end of the meter range with brute force... When I connected a 12 to 230 vac inverter to the output, it really started up, but then kept on rebooting, nonetheless impressive for such a tiny source of probably 2.5 watt dissipation.


I probably wil do some more tests with it, since all my other test cores have much weaker efficiency. Recently I even discovered how to increase the output of this double E ferrite core with some permanent magnets attached. Additionally, with some simple rewiring I can also test the jensen UDT with it (with the addition of a "feedback coil" winding ontop of the Y coil :  www.hyiq.org/Research/Details?Name=A%20Free-Energy%20Device  )


So, to all of  us, let's not give up so quickly. Edison tried a Thousand materials until he had a working lightbulb (when Tesla already had neon lights, but anyway  )

[dieter]

Here's some more thoughts about the figuera design. I am refering to the classic double C design: (|).


The airgaps, demystified! Imagine a pulse on a primary 1. With no airgaps it may just go trough primary 2, bypassing the Y core, at least partiallly. But with gaps... the pulse would have to go over two gaps to do that, but only over 1 gap to go trough the Y coil!


Then, when current is drawn by a load at the Y coil, as we know the flowing current in Y self-induces the back mmf. Up to this point we did not use any energy from the source. But as the back mmf would normally flow back to the primary, it would force the primary to start dissipating real energy. But in the figuera design, the back mmf will face two airgaps and see the reluctance of the C cores behind them. One will be opposing, the other one, due to figueras commutator, near zero and most likely in the same polarity as the back mmf, just like a friendly invitation.
So theoreticly there would be zero  energy consumption. As if a transformer were running without a load.


Great care must be taken in the construction of the air gaps, 0.01mm more or less is like a double size core. Adjustable gaps may be useful, with brass screws. They need to be small , eg. 0.1mm and exactly the same.