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

[Doug1]

Hanon

Sorry for the long delay im a little bit ill and it will be a few more days before this fever goes down. So while i said your rig looks nice that was just me being nice toward your effort and the clean appearance of the windings. The path of the flux in your E cores is not going avoid the short pah and take the long one through the y core and coil. It will just jump back and forth between the legs of the E in each core. It's curious why you used such a large Y winding. The E core primaries are already made for those E cores to run at mains voltage as a transformer. Wouldnt you think one of those windings would be better suited for a Y coil. If you can get enough flux to move back and forth over the already provided primary you should be able to figure out what size inducer coils you would need to do that. If not for the fact the E core will not work that way. Where are the I 's? For gods sake stop calling part G a commutator. It's a regulated splitter. I'll try to come up with a way to give you a image you can make in your head from something you might have on hand to watch  after I rehydrate so my head is not pounding.

[hanon]

Doug,
Thanks for making the effort in those conditions. Rest and cure that fever. I guess that you are saying that closing the magnetic circuit is bad for the flux moving along the Y coil, and that I should use a shorter induced core. As far as I understand your post is about not having a contrary pole near the one emitting the field. Your post is suggesting a design as the one in this post: http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg468602/#msg468602. I will try to discard those E cores and use just straight bar cores. My previous idea about the design is the one included in the sketch below, but I will try now with straight cores. I also tried time ago with shorter Y cores as the pic attached, but also with those E cores. Maybe I also should try with more than one set at the same time, and just straight cores. My other problem is the commutator, aka regulating splitter of current, that I use with electronic firing and without a proper scope I am not really sure what I am really feeding.I call it commutator following the words of Figuera, but I have clear in my mind that it splits the total current to one or other set of coils sequentially. It is not an on/off commutator, but a incremental current splitter.

[hanon]

Summaryzing the last recomendations I´ve received for building the device I post here a list of those features:


- Short induced core to make sure of the field crosses the whole length of the core


- No use of a closed magnetic circuit


- Use the primary winding of a MOT (microwave oven transformer) also as the winding for the induced coil  (thick wire in the secondary)


- Use of straight cores (instead of E cores) in order to avoid the inducer field from jumping to a near opposite pole


- Use of two or mor sets -instead of just one set- to enhance the output, and arrange the poles to have always the same pole toward the induced coil  (all north poles or all south poles)

[shylo]

I think the thin wire gives off more spikes, or vibrations.
Collection is the hard part ,because as it changes, so does the ways of doing it (collecting it that is).
Lenz, is just another form of the magnetic field.
Don't fight it, use it.
It's all in the switching, when to flip that field, It's field reversal where to collect.
artv

[Doug1]

- Short induced core to make sure of the field crosses the whole length of the core

   (yes but with enough flux to be productive without overheating. Core size is also a factor. For the best materials a max of 10k lines per centimeter square dont expect to get anywhere near that. The filed being generated will attract the adjacent core converting it's own field to match up with the direction of the more active field/ stronger of the two.

- No use of a closed magnetic circuit

  Maybe one day but that day is not this day and a closed path does not have to be completely closed one.

- Use the primary winding of a MOT (microwave oven transformer) also as the winding for the induced coil  (thick wire in the secondary)

  If that is source of reliable windings that are easy for you get in numbers and they are all are actually the same.Not a bunch of them from different mots for different size ovens. The two in your rig are not even the same size. If you end up needing 10 coils for the Y's combined up to reach a appreciable output they should be the same.

- Use of straight cores (instead of E cores) in order to avoid the inducer field from jumping to a near opposite pole

  I cant believe you asked that.

- Use of two or mor sets -instead of just one set- to enhance the output, and arrange the poles to have always the same pole toward the induced coil  (all north poles or all south poles)

   Well some what unbelievable question, Big cores are dangerous hard to make and hard to justify. You have the option to combine the output of lots of modest size cores.Even full scale power plants use a lot of smaller coil/core sets and combine them up. For you own use you can make them fairly small it's a balance of resources. If you want to be the next Con Ed utility I don't have anything nice to say to that. I would rather it be less to build then the cost of a couple months bills for the same service from the utilities.