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

[bajac]

Do you mean a set up like what Cadman suggested in post #1637?

Yes! It was what I was referring to. I also think that the problem might be the design of the exciting circuit. Have you test the magnetic field in the air gaps? It is very important to get this number right. Designing magnetic circuits with large air gaps is a challenge. That is why now I am using coils with much more turns and intermediate taps with thinner gauge wires.

I did some similar journal search as you did and sadly found out that a coreless permanent generator (for example a wind turbine of NGenTec Ltd company) have a mechanical-to-electrical efficiency of under unity (95% max).

We do not have to feel sad for finding out the truth. That is the main goal for this forum. I would encourage you, and anyone in this forum, to post the links to these articles. I would be more than eager to review them.   

Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation? Does the Lorentz force still act on the copper wire (F=BIL) to counter the rotation?

The Lorentz force should always be present but the electric field force can be considered negligible.

But why did Figuera state in pat#30376 that if we only rotate the copper wire, it would not suffer any drag which result in overunity? Who's right? There must be one of them only.

That is the million dollars question that we are trying to answer. Please, note that we may find literatures displaying low numbers for the efficiency of the ironless coils but I would always be cautious about it. I would check the testing procedures and assumptions for getting these results very carefully. Why? Well, the concept explained for having considerable lower torques when one of the coils have non-magnetic materials is simple enough and seems to make sense. Until someone reviews the theory and publishes what is wrong with the proposed approach, I would be kind of skeptical. And up to this point, I have been able to find questionable assumptions and calculations when estimating the efficiencies of these machines.

By the way, how is your progress building the motionless generator doing? Did you already build it and post a sketch or picture of it?

It is going slow for me. Presently, I have a schedule to have a testing unit by the end of this year. The reason for the delays is the same as anyone else, funding! I am prioritizing my limited resources in other personal businesses that have nothing to do with overunity devices.

I really want to know because I want to propose another theory of operation...

If you or anyone else have a different concept for the operation of these devices, please, post them in this forum. We can always learn from them through discussions.

- Varying MMF with one exciter coil or more with only 1 phase like in my set up would result in **transformer induction** (EMF generated by A-Vector Potential). That may be the cause why Cadman and I got a weak EMF in set up similar to what you suggested.

As I explained above, designing for these large air gaps is nothing easy. One of the reasons used by Ferranti's competitors to phase out the disc armature alternators was that increasing the power or making them three phase generators require a considerable increase of the air gaps resulting in higher electrical losses due to larger electromagnets. The issue of power versus air gaps was addressed by Figuera in his 1908 device.

- BUT, varying MMF with at least 2 coils having certain deg phase shift (depend on the input waveform) placed perpendicularly would cause the B field to rotate physically (like a lot of tiny magnets inside the core are turning round their axes) and generate **motional induction**.

It seems an interesting concept but I still do not understand completely. You can make a better argument if you provide all details how the signals are injected, what to expect in the induced coils, and why it is overunity. For example, the stepper motors use two signals shifted 90 degrees only. The signal you showed have an (absolute) time shifting of 180 degrees approx. Why do you think there will be a rotating resultant magnetic field? How will the resultant magnetic field produce overunity? Can you show a sketch with the sequence of operation expected for this device?

I had to fix the above quotes. Couple of them were messed up.

Bajac
   

[hanon]

Hi all,

Figuera used a conmutator composed by 7 incremental steps (contacts) in order to create a sinusoidal-type wave. Maybe just for having an AC type output. I think that a simplified version of this conmutator can also be created with just two contacts, creating two square wave signals: when one is HIGH the other is LOW and then the contrary. With this type of simplified commutator I think that we could also get the swinging motion back and forth of the magnetic fields.

[Doug1]

Hannon
It would be a pure sign wave. If you redraw the wave form or graph and slice each cycle into 14 segments. 7 up and 7 down you can calculate the rate each section of coil has to be powered on. Looking at single inducer by itself you have a measure from neg to any one of the taps all with different values depending on the collective value. From pos 1 to neg from pos 2 plus 1 to neg. from pos 3,2,1 to neg.
Each segment of coil receiving the same voltage and amperage adds incrementally to the flux in the core. The incremental additions will reach a value equal to the voltage by half. of the output voltage. If you want to run coils off 12 volt and have an output of 120 volt you have to find the taps equal to 60 volts in the 12 volt additions. Which would be tap number 5 on both N and S coils to complete the loop. I can make it more complicated if you need it to be and even throw in some made up verbage.
Remember who told you.I only have one name,the one I use.

[hanon]

A user in the spanish forum recommends to use an old motor commutator. You can rotate a brush around the commutator, which will be now static. It doesn't matter if this device has 12, 14, 18 ... contacts.

Those commutators can be easily found into a car junkyard from any car fan motor.

I think it is a good idea to make easier the contruction of our Figuera commutator

[bajac]

I was just informed by one of the forum members that a prestigious professor with a PhD degree has agreed to review the document I posted explaining the principle of operation of the ironless armature coils.

This is all for the good! We need once and for all find out the truth! It is a good idea to forward these documents to college professors for consideration. For example, do you know if any professor from a high educational institution have ever reviewed the first paper I posted explaining the principle of operation of standard transformers?

The importance of taking the above approach is that these intellectuals do not believe in free energy devices even when watching a video or witnessing a presentation. They will always claim that it is a trick.

I think the higher educational institutions have the largest share of responsibility for the present state of the technology. These institutions are playing the same role played by the church during the dark ages.

These persons can be better persuaded by speaking their language, a language based on physics and mathematical analysis. That is why I always strive to figure out the operation from an engineering point of view. If these principles were explained using clear steps and using the classical science approach where possible, then, these devices will have a much better chance of being accepted.

A few years ago, the major issue I noticed when I started to think about the possibility of free energy devices was that none of the explanations given by their inventors for how these devices work made sense. And as I have said, if you cannot explain it in simple terms, then you do not understand it! It is the worst publicity!