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

[bajac]

Where is the formula and/or mathematical model telling you that B=XX (Gauss) with an energy density of E=YY (Jules/CM3) can induce a power ZZ (Watts) in a secondary coil having a connected load?
Books teach you only the Faraday's induction law, that is, B=XX (Gauss) induces a voltage V in a secondary coil with N turns. And, the engineering books describe only the power in and power out in a transformer (bypassing any energy/power flow due to the magnetic field.)
I consider this omission to be intentional. If you start digging into this area, you will soon conclude (like me) that the power and/or work between two coils are not the result of the magnetic field energy flowing into the coils. Again, refer to the transformers; the power output can increase order of magnitudes while the magnetic flux/density stays about the same. In other words, the energy density of the magnetic field stays constant and unaffected by whatever is connected to the secondary coils. Of course, there are interactions between these magnetic fields because of the core construction, but still the intensity of the net magnetic field is about constant.
I am not trying to convince anyone and I respect your conviction. However, I disagree with it. On my part, I will not discuss this issue any further.

[dieter]

Bajac, what you said can easily be verified: take a little neodym magnet and hold it close to a core, you'll feel the vibration, eg. 50 hz. While holding the magnet, turn on the load, you should feel the diffrence.


You can also hear it, btw. If the diffrence is linear to the increase of load, I don't know.
(EDIT actually, I've noticed they can get more silent with a higher load, maybe that means the b field is there without a load, but gets "absorbed" and turned into output current before it can manifest magnetism  when the output can flow ?)

NRamaswami, like you I don't know what Airgaps in Cores are for, but they are  very common, although only in the inner core and engineers use precise calculations to get the right gap size.


Unlike your explanation of air cooling, I have an other theory: they may act as the magnetic equivalent of a sparkgap. They stop small flux density, but let pass strong pulses and therefor cause  more immediate chanches in polarity and or flux density, resulting in higher power output. But it's just an idea.


EDIT2, everything about air gaps:
www.encyclopedia-magnetica.com/wiki/Air_gap

[marathonman]

Hi Marathonman:

It is most unlikely that any information about a self sustaining generator will be made available. Even if it is available, it may not be manufactured by any one and sold.

1. Science today teaches us that there can not be a device that has greater output than input. Scientists are very conservative like relgious minded people and would not say or accept any thing that is sacrilageous. If they do accept such new concepts, historically scientists were persecuted and no one would dare say any thing against what would be against the policy of the institution.

2. Businesses will not manufacture such devices even if they have the technology. Reason is common sense. Every business wants to make people buy from them again, again and again. Or set up a unit and keep charging their customers say for example cell phone companies. Electricity generation is similar.

This product is a one time sale and businesses after some time would have to close. Investment made in Electricity generation would suffer. So no bank would finance such industries either.

This is the practical reality.

what the heck was this all about other than you running the mouth about God knows what i dont know. it sure wasn't about any thing i was talking about. i don't want to sound mean but r u on crack or what. skip the speeches next time please. i was born 50 years ago not yesterday, thank you

[marathonman]

@ Anyone working with the 1908 Buforn patents.

Last summer I built a successful proof of concept of this device. The details were posted to this same topic over at energetic forum, starting around page 16 for those interested. It produced 9.2 vac, 13.0 volt peak, not rectified, with 12vdc input from a 500ma wall transformer. It only had 3 very small coils. The coils were identical, taken from small 12 volt DPDT relays. Input was controlled through an Arduino and transistor circuit, only because I did not have the means to build the commutator / resistor combination shown in the patent.

One of the most important things I learned from this build was the core/coil relation. It is exactly as the Buforn patent drawing shows. One center core, with each end inserted about 45% into each outer coil. There is a small gap between the three coils due to the coil bobbin ends in my build. The inducer coils were N-S N-S and the center coil was S-N.

Another very important point. Plotting the voltage/time curve of the Buforn commutator design shows an increase in brush dwell time every 180 degrees of rotation. This was confirmed in my build as it increased the output by approximately 84% when I added 40ms of dwell at these points. I suspect this allowed the one inducer coil time to build up it's magnetic field as the applied voltage reached it's peak. Also, the brush maintains contact with two tabs of the commutator at all times. Hitting the coils with a square wave gave very poor results, even with the added dwell.

Considering the inducer coils, they are no different than a solenoid coil in construction. The maximum gauss is at the center of those coils. In my opinion that is used to manipulate the flux of the centered core to create the output current, and that is why the center core is partly inside the outer coils. After a lot of study I am 100% certain the Buforn device uses a DC supply that steps the inducer coil current up and down in a percentage of the total current, split between the N-S inducers. This applies an almost constant total gauss to the center coil, unlike ordinary generators where the armature coils move through a magnetic field of less and more gauss.

Other advantages of this setup are:
No mechanical input other than the tiny motor to turn the commutator.
No hysteresis loss, normally caused by the core pole reversals, as there are none.

Keep in mind that the Buforn device is an improved generator / dynamo that is essentially like an old fashioned automobile generator, which has two outer field coils and an armature with many induced coils wound on it. One set of coils in Buforn's device, two inducers with one induced, is not going to develop significant output. That would be like removing all of the armature windings, except one, in the old car generator and expecting it to still work properly.

There is no mystery to the Buforn device and nothing significant is hidden in the patent. That's my opinion, based on my results and study. It is an improved generator, and correctly constructed (coil size / wire gauge, quantity of coils, and connection wiring) it will sustain itself and produce usable power.

All this being said, I hope it does not discourage research into the different devices currently being investigated here.

Regards

Cadman i just spent all day on the energetic forum reading most of the post and watching Eric Dollard Videos......good god that man is smart!.  i was very intrigued with your design and the striking resemblance to Figueras design but mostly at your results from a very unoptimized set up. the Dwell is very interesting in your observations and they are sound. i have two set ups i am working on and i think i will be incorporation your style in one of them.. i will be following your progress and will advise on output. is this the set up you are talking about as i cant see the post pics as i am not a member of energetic.

[NRamaswami]

Bajac, Farmhand:

I saw the interesting discussion.. I have one doubt. Please note that I'm not a trained person and do not know theory.

1. When a permanent magnet is stagnent it has no current.

2. When a permanent magnet rotats let me state my understanding as per books. Let Farmhand say if I'm right or wrong.

current theory as I understand it..Let Farmhand say if I my understanding of the theory is a mistake..

Dynamos or Alternators or Large turbines in Nuclear, Thermal or Hydro-electric plants, wind turbines all work on the same principle. The principle is simple. When a magnet surrounded by coils is rotated it creates a rotating magnetic field. The coils cut the rotating magnetic field and current is induced in the coils. The current produced in the coils due to this Electromagnetic Induction opposes the rotation of the magnet. Therefore to continue to rotate the magnet, mechanical energy needs to be applied. The applied mechanical energy must not only be used to rotate the magnet but also overcome the opposing force of the induced current. For this reason, the input of the generators in the form of mechanical energy is always higher than the output of the generator or dynamos or alternators.  More energy is spent in the transformation of mechanical energy in to electrical energy and this energy loss is the cause of the poIr crisis all over the world. These principles of Electromagnetic Induction Ire invented by Micheal Faraday and they remain valid to this date.
This principle is used in induction motors by using the repulsive forces of the similar poles of magnets by supplying current to coils to the stator of an induction motor. HoIver the rotor of an induction motor rotates at a speed lesser than the rotating magnetic field created by the coils. Therefore current needs to be continuously supplied to rotate the rotor.
Similarly to generator electricity large turbines first provide current to an induction motor and then apply mechanical force to the rotor which then starts rotating faster than the rotating magnetic field of the stator current. When the revolutions per minute of the rotor due to applied mechanical energy exceeds the rotating speed of the rotating magnetic field, the induction motor starts working as a generator.  Again mechanical energy is needed to be supplied to the generator to a level which can overcome the opposing current now induced.
The opposing current is produced due to a Lenz law. These laws are regularly measured and are considered a part of the natural laws now.  There is no machine that has overcome the forces of the lenz law which are in commercial use today.
Transformers also suffer from lenz law. The current supplied to the primary of the transformer is opposed by the current induced in the secondary of the transformer. Therefore though there is no mechanical motion, the input current to primary is always higher than the output current produced in the secondary.
In both transformers and Dynamo Electric machines the greater the poIr of the magnet, or the greater the magnetic field strength, greater would be the poIr produced. Therefore large cores of magnets are needed to produce currents. This is the reason for building dams, Nuclear plants, steam turbines etc.

Is my above understanding is right or wrong as per theory taught in books. Please answer this Farmhand.