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

[bajac]

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

Randy,


I think for people who has no experience with electrical/electronics devices, the device shown in the patent #30378 should be their first choice. This 1902 generator works like an overunity transformer without any moving parts, switching elements, etc. Furthermore, the historical records indicate that Figuera built more than one working prototype of the 1902 device when his work showed up in all newspapers around the world. I have not records that Figuera ever built the 1908 device patent #44267. Though, I am convinced that Figuera built a working prototype for the 1908 because by that time it was required for any patent application.


It is my opinion that the 1908 should have the higher energy density of all Figuera's generators. If you think about it, Figuera first invented a rotary generator in 1902 and in the same year he also applied for the motionless generator, which can be considered superior to the rotary one. The two 1902 inventions minimize the Lenz's effect in a "passive mode." That is, the low self-inductance of the induced coils do not produce strong counter magnetic field (Lenz's law) that tend to cancel the inducing magnetic field. Because of the closed core construction of today's transformers, the counter magnetic field of the secondary opposes the primary almost in a 1:1 ratio. It is why the primary current of the standard transformers increases to compensate for the flux cancellation and maintain the Volts/turn ratio established by the primary voltage.


On the other hand, the 1908 device minimizes the Lenz's effect in an "active mode." This time, the induced coils have a much higher self-inductance because they are wound around an iron core and therefore, much higher induced magnetic fields to counteract the primaries. However, Figuera utilizes two out of phase primary voltages to deviate the induced magnetic field away from the primary field in an efficient manner, which minimize the Lenz's effects. I am working on the 1908 device but would like to see others working on the 1902 invention.


I also wanted to say that there are persons who are eager to criticize the construction work from dedicated researchers. I would just close my ears and don't bother. The work you are doing is hard work and it is important. In my case it is a slow and costly process. The three iron cores that I ordered cost $100 US dollars. But that is in addition to the cost of two patents that were awarded to me this year. I have more than 5 patents and I have not been able to build a prototype because I have been performing research on the FE technologies such as Figuera's. If you have been in a patent process, you should know how expensive it is.


Thanks,
Bajac

[RandyFL]

Bajac,
I was a little taken back when Patrick took down the information from His website. I know the cost of buying materials and the cost of iron. I believe Rams when He stated how much money He put into His work. I can only imagine the cost and time you have put into patents. I would encourage you to continue with which you have invested your time, money and energy in trying to replicate the " Figuera "...just remember ... Clemente only got to achieve and then He disappeared into the ether permanently...

I have my challenges ( as everybody else does ) and have been putting things off ( and now I have to do them ) so I have limited time with which to experiment with...

Lastly... I will be waiting patiently for news from the " Author " of this thread...........

All the Best

[NRamaswami]

@Truthhunter:

Thanks for your post and good wishes.

I do not have much of technical knowledge of electricity and magnetism. I understand that if higher frequencies are used lower size is possible but I have no direct knowledge so I cannot answer that. However I have seen that increasing the input voltage to 250 volts raises the output (again I do not know why).

As far as the device is concerned, it is fairly simple.

1. Wind 9 layers of single wire on S1, 7 layers on S5 and 9 layers on S2 and connect them in the order S1-S5-S2.  In terms of number of turns it would come to about 765 turns for S1, 765 turns for S2 and 420 turns for S5. Approximately for me and the wires used by me.

2. S5 coils must cut the magnetic flux between P1 and P2 iron core. The should be slightly above the hollow of the P1 and P2 and should not enter them but not more than that should be wound. 

3. The Central secondary must be half the size and half the diameter of the Primary cores. 

4. Regarding saturation the secondary on the primary coils some how provides some kind of impedance and so the primary coils would not be saturated.

5. The central coil appears to have higher magnetic strength from the sound made but I have not measured with a gauss meter.

6. I cannot say about winding the secondary in parallel for I have not tested it. I do not think it would work for the secondary develops amperage based on the voltage. Higher the voltage of the secondary higher the amperage. So a single coil but higher number of turns is better but as always experiment must tell the facts.

7. You can use S1, S2,S3,S4,S5 coils all as indicated but the outer coils requires longer wire because of increased diameter and I have suggested increasing the number of the smaller secondaries to reduce the cost and reduce the complexity of the voltages not combining. For me combining the voltages is the issue. Why they combine some times and why they would not some time?

8. Number of turns decides the voltages. Higher the voltage higher the amperage developed.

9. I have tried the Figuera method of putting the secondary alone in between primaries. It works but requires a lot of turns and coils. And lot of iron.  Advantage is it is totally Lenz law free. Disadvantage is that it ignores the magnetic flux available in the two primaries. I used AC to power the primaries of course. You need a lot of iron cores and the middle core must be fairly large to generate significant voltage and amperage in a single unit. Making many small units does not work. If you develop 180 volts in a small unit using small wires the amperage developed is different. If you make the same 180 volts in a large device with large wires the amperage developed is way too different. No comparison. But the iron mass goes bigger with higher amperages to avoid saturation.

I'm unable to answer the technical questions. This is what worked for me. I will try to rebuild that device and post pictures and give number of turns.

I understand increasing the input voltage and frequency can have a major role on output. But I have zero knowledge on that here. How can I comment on them without knowing any thing. I can only tell you what I have done and what I have observed. I do not have that much of knowledge.

We ended up doing the central cores alone first and then we realized oh we are missing the available power in primary and so wind coils on primary above and below the primary to reduce the Lenz law effect. This is how the S1 to S5 coils came about.

But the confusing thing for me is still this.. Why voltages in all five secondaries combine some time and why they would not combine some time. Not clear to me but I'm sure that it is an easy thing for people skilled in the art. If voltages combine then it is a COP>8 device for sure when connected to Earth. I'm unable to do much here at this time due my pre-occupations. I apologize.

It is a very expensive process. That is the problem. To avoid saturation you need to make the device bigger and how to reduce the size is not clear to me.

I have attempted to check the 1902 patent. Certain things are not clear there. If you put the wire between two irons, wire tends to get heated and so a small insulator needs to be put between the opposing electromagnets and wire to avoid heating. (may be this is the gap Hanon was talking about) Or very thick insulation with window like gaps to let the magnetic waves flow and hit the coils. Do the coils need to have their own separate magnetic core.. Not clear. What should be the direction of winding and how the coils should be placed. Not clear. So it is not as if 1902 device is a cake walk either.

This is a simple design no doubt but very very expensive and all would need to be done manually for prototypes.

The 1910 report shows that the only practical device tested before the Spanish patent office is the 1908 device. But it is not clear to me why we have resistors and a rotary device when simple AC input could have done the same thing. Where is the need for all this complexity? That is some thing I'm not able to understand. Those reports are not available for the 1902 patents filed.

[ALVARO_CS]

@Truthhunter:


The 1910 report shows that the only practical device tested before the Spanish patent office is the 1908 device. But it is not clear to me why we have resistors and a rotary device when simple AC input could have done the same thing. Where is the need for all this complexity? That is some thing I'm not able to understand. Those reports are not available for the 1902 patents filed.

Hello Rams
I think that the goal for Figuera was to have a generator not dependent of any grid. Remember that in Spain in 1902-1910 the generation of AC was not so extended as today, it barely was in its early days, and therefore not available in most locations (and non existent in small villages)
So this device could be feed with batteries for starting, and then self-feeding after start.
IMHO that´s the reason of not using AC, there was no AC to plug in !!
cheers
Alvaro

[NRamaswami]

Alvaro:

You are correct. There is another advantage. A part of the output can be directed to the feeding coil through a phase correction capacitor or even without it as the initial current is unidirectional. I have been saying from the beginning that the primaries in the 1908 device went to Earth to avoid run away current but it is not accepted to this date. But I do not understand yet why Prof. Figuera needed the rotary device producing two signals going in opposite directions at the same time and then the resistor array. This is a device which if replicated can enable us to produce electricity from any point on earth in any amount desired without relying on Grid.

But it is very expensive to build. There is no gain without pain. Similarly valuable things do not come out without significant investment in time, effort and money and man power. I think the whole purpose was to somehow do what AC is able to do today. But the system had the advantage of a unidirectional current which AC does not have. But the half wave or full wave pulsating dc device or pulsed DC would have required massive amount of iron and wire. I have asked some of my clients to help in replication of the old device but their electrical engineers laughed it away. That is a problem today. No one will give credibility to this type of devices. Because of the promise and the dire situation in India I attempted to do it. Neither unsuccessful for a beginner nor successful totally to this date.

I do have a deep suspicion that giving the high voltage to two different earth points made all the difference in my case. It is considered a shunted coil by the High Voltage lab which refuses to accept the voltage. but we will know that when we test again may be next month because of this appeal problem. Sorry about the delay.