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

[antijon]

Hey Hanon, thanks for letting me know about the gif. This is it in a zip, but please note: This only shows the action of the driving circuit. If there was a load attached, the center coil would produce an opposing field each time a driving coil increased. Thanks for the formula and diagram. It's funny that I can understand just about any machine by looking at it, but I have a serious mental block with math. haha

Hey guys, in doing some tests with my 2-phase setup, I'm starting to see some strange things happening. And I think I see why the Figuera generator can produce more power than is consumed. If anyone is familiar with motor back-emf, please correct me if I'm wrong, but feeding a device like this 2-phase power, even with Figuera's 2-phase DC, creates a back voltage that reduces the incoming current. After all, the driving circuit can create a rotating field, just as Figuera described.

If anyone wants to try this, you can use two transformers instead of a dual-primary transformer. If you look at my 2-phase circuit, simply connect two transformers in series, then attach one side to the capacitor, the opposite transformer to the resistor, and then connect the two center transformer leads to the other AC input. Connect the two outputs in series, and to the load.

Interesting things that I've noticed: Loading the output increases the voltage on the supply side. I don't have any power meters, but this suggests that the current input is reduced, similar to a motor back-emf.

[antijon]

Guys, this is an improvement to my last schematic. The two transformers can be shorted.

If we compare this schematic to a "permanent split capacitor" motor:
The transformer connected to the capacitor represents the "start" winding.
The transformer connected to line through the resistor represents the "run" winding.
The two transformer secondaries represent the rotor.

When the two secondary coils are wired in series, and shorted, this is like the motor running with no load. It creates a back-emf that cancels the incoming line voltage, and reduces current drawn from the line.


But still, I want to point out that the locked- rotor amps, or LRA, represents the current consumed by a motor when the rotor can't turn. This is normally near or more than 100 amps, in my line of work. This means that the motor is behaving exactly like a transformer with a shorted secondary. There is no back-emf being created, and all the current is being taken from line... which is exactly like what we do when we power a simple transformer from line. Think about it like this: motors actually do produce overunity. I say that because the electrical energy in the rotor never changes. So, we have a transformer with a shorted secondary that pulls 100 amps from the line, but by spinning the secondary, we can generate our own energy and reduce the line current to a mere 1/10 of what it was. So, a typical transformer with a shorted secondary that once drew 100 amps, now only draws 10, yet the energy in the rotor remains the same. However, we never realized this because we've never tapped the rotor current of an induction motor.

Anyway, this is all theoretical, but if someone has accurate power reading tools, and want's to try this simple circuit, I'd really appreciate any info. Thanks guys

[bajac]

A colleague of mine was very impressed when he learned about the absence of a governor mechanisms in the Ferranti's disk armature alternators. He did not believe it and he proposed that it might be due to the inertia of the large diameter armature. I discussed this possibility and explained that the ironless coils make the armature less massive. I also indicated that if the armature coils were filled with iron, it will be heavier with greater momentum but the augmented reaction field will create a counter force thousands of times larger (as explained in the published paper) and without a governor, it will just bring the armature to a stop.

I then decided to search the historical records for any information related to the inertia of the armature disk of the Ferranti copper disk alternators.  Certainly, I found a lecture in THE ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, OCTOBER 14, 1982 from Professor George Forbes in which he explains the reasons why some alternating-current dynamos can function as motors very efficiently. In the first column on page 385, Mr. Forbes wrote:

"The only difference between the Siemens or Ferranti alternator and the Mordey alternator is that, in the one case, the armature revolves, and in the other case the field magnets revolve; otherwise they are practically identical, from an electrical point of view. Yet the Mordey alternator acts most admirably as a motor, and the Siemens or Ferranti machine does not work as a motor. The reason is simply this, that the power which is being given to an alternating motor is of course of a pulsating character, like the current; and there are moments when no power is given to the motor at all. If, then, the motor is doing work, it requires to have a considerable momentum to get over those dead centres, and to be able to continue doing the work, and to get pass those dead centres when the generator is given out no power whatever. Now, the Mordey alternator, in which the field magnets rotate, has an enormous momentum; but the Siemens or Ferranti alternator, where the armature rotates, has very little momentum indeed; and the consequence is that while the Mordey alternator works admirably as a motor, the Siemens or Ferranti alternator does not."

The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.

Bajac

[jdavidcv]

Ferranti useful information.


JD

[Cadman]

... The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.

This may have a bearing on the subject, or may not.

The Ferranti coils are wound like capacitors and there is evidence that they had a more than average effect in his alternators. Ever hear of the Ferranti Effect? It's a phenomenon that became apparent after his alternators were installed at Deptford.

Also, alternators with windings that have capacitance can produce a motor effect. And we all know about the Tesla coil for electromagnets that demonstrate the affect capacitance has on coil windings.

Info on the motor effect can be found on pages 33-35 of the seventh edition of  Dynamo-electric machinery. Here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=p4TTAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR10-IA1&lpg=PR10-IA1&dq=%22Dynamo-electric+Machinery%22+Seventh+Edition&source=bl&ots=k5uEpzPlNH&sig=UNAvJT-5lWhdFE_uKtY2sCaUHlo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4lotVI3jC8T9yQS94YCIBQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22Dynamo-electric%20Machinery%22%20Seventh%20Edition&f=false

Cadman