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

[RandyFL]

Bajac,
How is your work progressing...
Whats your opinion on the diagram on patent 30378 as versus the diagram on 44267 any connection or two separate things?

IMHO the diagram in patent 30378 would give more bang for the buck...

All the Best

[bajac]

Bajac,
How is your work progressing...
Whats your opinion on the diagram on patent 30378 as versus the diagram on 44267 any connection or two separate things?

IMHO the diagram in patent 30378 would give more bang for the buck...

All the Best

I will show some photos within about two weeks. I will receive iron cores (12" x 1.5 x x 1.5") by next week.


I am attaching the document that I used to write the paper. I do not know if it is what you guys are looking for. I have to say that when I wrote the paper, I only had that sketch. I read the text of the patent after I had submitted the document found in post #1.


Thanks,
Bajac

[TruthHunter]

 RN:

Thank you for a detailed reply. It was mostly clear upon careful reading.   I hesitate to interact as it induces
you to spend precious time.

The concept is so simple and you do not need to follow me every step to replicate.

Agreed. This is why Figuera was able to make a working device more than 100 years ago.

If you have a 12 volt 16 amps transformer about three to five layers of that on P1 and p2 can act as primary.

Don't have one one of these transformers, I'd be still guessing. Small motors that I have disassembled seem to use 16 or 18 gauge(1 to 1.3 mm)

"3 to 5 layers" Multifilar presumably?...trifilar and pentafilar?

The secondary must have 7 layers under S1, seven layers in S2, 2 layers in S3, 2 layers in S4 and 7 layers in S5.

S1 now becomes as 7 layer winding instead of a single layer? How should I size the coil? S1 has 1800 ampere turns(20 X 90 turns. If one is using smaller
wire, more turns could maintain the same NI. Half the cross section = half the current or twice the turns and a different inductance.  Increase the turns in
S1 but divide into more layers wound like S5?

This results in less mass, but not necessarily less wire length.
The core  could be considerably smaller, depending on the configuration.(Later,  I see you propose a larger, presumably shorter core - 6")

As I understand, the core cross section needs to remain large.

connect like this. S1-S3-S5-S2-S4 and that will simplify the connections and use either single wire if possible. Wire should be insulated wire and we have stressed that or you need to put space between enamalled magnet wire and mild plastic sheet between layers..Do not understand where you got that idea of removing insulation..Just plain wrong.

The readily available 14/2 wire has 3 conductors, two insulated and an uninsulated ground wire within the outer jacket. I would use the ground wire too, but space it it between turns and layers. Do all the windings need to be spaced? Or just the primary?

I missed the discussion about the insulation when I wrote that about stripping the wire. I didn't see it in the pdf either... Spreading out the windings is contrary to accepted practice. B is proportional to 1/L, so maximizing B
isn't the answer. 

Dielectric of the insulation isn't the issue? Not immobilising either the core or the windings may be significant.


If you do not have adequate wires use only S1-S5-S2 in that case use 9 layers on S1 and 9 layers on S2 and 7 layers on S5.

This amounts to 35 layers total(P1,P2 5 layers each. 25 layers in Secondary...)  Less in wire mass, but not in length? Same turns per layer, just shorter
coil length?

  I made two small cores for a table top design I promised but I have a big problem. Lost a major case and have to prepare the appeal and so I will not be answering or posting here for some time. I have to make a living. And losing a case is a bad thing.

Very sorry to hear that. Especially as it seems to be an additional setback.

Most people interested in this field don't place a high priority on spiritual dimensions of life.
  I have observed that certain spiritual entities exact a high price. Also forces and counterforces contend. I am praying for you.

Please use the opposite poles of the primary magnets and place the middle coil to be lenz free. I believe with just a single transformer and by using a 6 inch dia plastic tubes as Primaries and 2 inch dia tube as central secondary by winding on all three you should be able to see COP>1 easily.

As I understand, the principles for success are:

1. Soft iron core divided to reduce eddies
2. Insulated or spaced windings
3?. 5000 ampere turns in primary (7 amps X 720 turns) or should that be NI/(unit of core area)?  (~63 NI per Cm^2) of core? ~21,600 NI in secondary!
Should we think in terms of B field per Cm^3, ie. volume unit?
4. Multifilar primary - 3 to 5 layers
5. Secondary surrounding  the primary, especially between the primary and core.
6. Part of secondary between the 2 cores as much as possible without eliminating connecting core between primary magnets? Some core needed
for maintaining inductance.
7. Sufficient mass of iron to avoid saturation
8. Wire diameter of secondary greater than primary
9. Secondary more than twice as many turns as primary. Trying to lower the number of turns and getting a lower output voltage doesn't work.

Did I miss anything?

Would 9. be circumvented if we kept the same number of turns but used 2-3 parallel windings?

60 Hz should require less iron than 50 Hz.  I remember reading that military used to use 400 Hz to reduce the size of transformers. Now mini-inverters
are used for all small devices, partly because it allows miniaturization. I don't believe we can use ferrite, but there might be other core configuration that
allow higher frequencies.

Increasing the frequency might allow smaller size unless it negates other operating
principles.

However, a simple,  purely electric generator now becomes an electronic device.

I hate to invest what amounts to a significant sum even  for a smaller device without some optimism for success.
. 

[TruthHunter]

As a point of curiosity for the Ramaswami coil,, would endplates on the end of the core increase coupling?


|0000000                 0000000|
|0000000  000000   0000000|
|====== 000000  ======|
|==================|
|====== 000000  ======|
|0000000  000000   0000000|
|0000000                 0000000|

I am only mildly interested in the Figuera/Buforn patents. There is too much  missing info. Figuring out what
is happening in related WORKING devices such as the Hubbard coil etc seems more fruitful to reach a theoretical understanding
of what is happening. With the right understanding, Figuera would be obvious... including the evasions.

Looking again at the 1908 patent drawing, I see 7 Ramaswami coils side by side with primaries series/parallel and the secondary in series. No wonder
"Reels and Reels" of wire were required.   If
Ramaswami's coil has higher gain, do you still want to pursue the older one?

I see two worthwhile goals. 1. Theoretical understanding  leading to: 2.  Optimised nonPM OU coil generator(least Kg/Kw, noise, heat, material, most
reliability, least  sensitivity to environmental variations, and least electro-magnetic pollution.)

In the 19th century, the telegraph drove research. Real world problems raised scientific questions that produced progress.
Today, Electronics is surprisingly conservative. Its amazing how much happens in design that is unexplained. Circuits are worked out
with a lot of experimentation, then copied or improved incrementally. 

As Yogi Berra said "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is."

I suggest creating a new thread for the Ramaswami coils and leave this thread for speculation.


Begin the thread with a synopsis
of description, results and pics. Let it be for discussion and replication.

BWDIK

(but, what do I know?)   

[RandyFL]

Figuring out what
is happening in related WORKING devices such as the Hubbard coil etc seems more fruitful to reach a theoretical understanding
of what is happening. With the right understanding, Figuera would be obvious... including the evasions.

The Figuera will eventually be figured out...( if it hasn't already been ) but the question remains if the person who does figure it out shares...
I for one have everything to gain if the Ramaswami approach works...and I don't think Rams minds if the Figuera is figured out... the only person that I think minded was marathonman ( I wish He would come back - if He hasn't started a new name )... We can even talk about the Hubbard coil... its all information we could/can use...

Lastly... the magnet is still attached to my refrigerator and probably will be for the life of the refrigerator or until I expire ( then I don't care :-)

All the Best

PS Bajac... you didn't answer all my questions lol