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

[john-g]

Hi Antijon

I would tend to think that only one control is needed unless you are pull/pushing a field from both sides.  In your example above, why not have a greater depth to the top material with the pick up inductors placed in the lower portion of the airgap, then the control coil field is purely pushing against the main field.   But I believe you are correct in that the control field can be inline or across the main field.

Rds

John

[antijon]

Hey John.. You're right that only one control is really needed. I was just thinking that after the induced builds up current and resists the movement of flux, the two controls would have more of an effect. The image I made is really out of scale. Kind of a rough idea. haha, I guess the only point I was trying to make is that it's possible to alter the primary magnetic field without creating a secondary, low reluctance path. I mean, the main field can only cross the air gap, because the two controls don't connect across it.

Doug, I was going over what you said about the multiple taps. If I understand correctly, it's really a brilliant idea. I imagine a transformer with multiple taps on the primary, all connected to the commutator. As the commutator moves, the resistance, and turns ratio, of the primary changes. So a single DC voltage can produce a varying voltage on the secondary. But this would only work if they were all wound on the same inductor. And if they aren't, and there's multiple secondaries, then you couldn't wire them in series or parallel.

Why do you suggest that the device is different from the patent image? The point of a patent is to copyright an exact device. They have to be very specific.

In order to privilege the application  to the production of large industrial
electrical currents, on the principle  that says that "there is production of
induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of
force through the induced circuit," seems that it is enough with the previously
exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there
is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application
of said principle.

Figuera can't copyright an idea, because as he describes it, well that's every electromagnetic device in history. If the working model was in any way different from the patent, then he could never claim in court that someone copied his idea. He could never claim infringement, and he could never claim royalties. So in my opinion, the commutator and multiple-tapped resistor are real, and as I have already proven with a battery, variable resistor, and dual primary transformer, the device he drew can produce an AC current.

[Doug1]

Antijon

The 08 pat says "This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of
induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to
privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large
industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but
transforming mechanical work into electricity.
Let's therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior
principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is
the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on
this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form
and way that has been used to make the application.

He is asking for a patent on the principal and follows with a description of a machine based on it. Not his ultimate finish product nor a actual machine. He does not use terms like "he uses to secure an effect in his machine". The principal can be applied to any type of machine or a number of designs. So I guess he was looking for something more then a plant patent of a specific design related to one machine.

[Doug1]

The taps are powered sequentially. the order is left to experiment with. Different core types and materials behave differently. I still have not tried one pattern which will be hard to explain. I will try. If the first connection is on all the time with a week voltage and the remaining taps are fired one only one at a time on both inducers as if to push the steady state field left and right it would give some physical pressure to the field being swung left and right. So more lines of flux are trapped inside the moving bubble which crosses over the output coil situated in between the inducers. The required commutator would then be made from a barrel type with conductors traveling from the shaft on one end on an angle down the side of the barrel to the opposite shaft. So then the contacts would all be set in a straight line outside the barrel. as the barrel is turned the conductor being angled would only be making contact with one brush at a time or maybe two so the field would not have a chance to retard in strength as it is shifted. I made some pretty crazy commutators out of very expensive fans. It was a challenge to fine fans that had the right rpm and enough strength to over come the drag from the contacts. I would much rather use something that does not cost 3 to 4 hundred bucks for a commutator. Im leaning more toward free to maintain it being free all across the spectrum of arguments.
  Now keep in mind I still hold fast to the inducers being NN SS. It may work both ways but it will be easier for me to move a bloch wall back and forth an inch or two compared to reversing the poles on my set up and my opinion. The relative motion of the field and it's frame of reference compared to the output coil is what counts in induction.

[bajac]

I was aware that the software wouldn't calculate an overunity condition, I just wanted to estimate how much flux generated and the experiment result is the ultimate truth although the explanation is very often unknown.

Below I attach a picture showing my set up which is very simple to replicate. The dimension is 8x9x10 cm and between 3-4 kg's weight. I hope somebody here would replicate and then do a more accurate COP measurement, better yet make a self-running set up which will show obviously its overunity.

I did some more tests today and got slightly different results. Here are some of them:

SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A        Rin : 6.3 ohm        Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A      Rout : 0.5 ohm     Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W

My set up is very loose and vibrating violently so I guess that's why the result differed from what I posted here http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871 ..
If the reactance of the primary inductance is neutralized by using capacitor, Vin will need only around 11 Vac rms (for consideration when designing self-running set up)..

Good luck

Poorpluto,

The device you showed in your reply #1637 on page 110 could work on the principle that Figuera disclosed in his 1902 patent (motionless device.) If you follow the teachings of this patent, you can improve on your device. Note that, a) the conductors of the coils are placed in air gaps, and b) each coil turn is cut by two magnetic fields of additive polarities, that is, the induced voltages does not cancell each other.