Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[Listener192]

Power In Power Out

Hi UFO,

If your AC voltage is reducing when running a load on DC after the FWBR and cap, then I would say that there is some reactance in the AC output that is causing the voltage to rise when applying the load to the AC output.

Regards

L192

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,

If your AC voltage is reducing when running a load on DC after the FWBR and cap, then I would say that there is some reactance in the AC output that is causing the voltage to rise when applying the load to the AC output.

Regards

L192

Hello L192,

It was the same load applied to AC as the one to DC after Bridge Rectifiers, or the 12V 50W Halogen.

And of course, if I use a lower consuming current load (low amperage), like a 120V 40-50W regular house Bulb, then it would be understood that voltage will not drop as much in either way I connect it...AC or DC Output.

But anyways, I believe I've found out the reason why...The 100uF/200V Cap was connected to the DC Output, when I was connecting Halogen bulb on the AC (before FWBR) and so, I believe the reason why the AC Voltage OR the DC Output reading was not dropping Voltage off while bulb was connected to AC side...Voltage only dropped on DC side when bulb was connected there.....does that make sense to you?

Btw, this morning I ran a test I wanted to do a while back...to clear doubts about transformer effect taking place here...

I connected a pretty hefty Microwave Transformer instead of my coils, driven by the same set up and rotary switch... nothing took place, no induction at all...and I tested as Exciters BOTH sides, Primary and Secondary (heavy 14 awg few turns)...not even a full one (1) volt of EMF output...Of course, both transformer coils were too low in resistance, below one ohm...so could not apply much Voltage but high amperage...still, it should have shown some even low EMF...but it didn't.

I want to wrap the Outer 14 awg Coil...so I complete the full Field capturing on its Inner-Outer Space...then see results...believe I would have some readings together to show for next week.


Thanks and regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hello L192,

For the test that you are proposing (DC IN-OUT) which sounds very simple right?...well, I need to find the appropriated DC LOAD...one that fully runs, while being able to show meter read outs clearly.

Regards


Ufopolitics

Guess I have been so much involved on this project...that I completely missed out ... that the same "AC Drill"...or "AC Dremel Tool"...or "AC Saw"...or "AC Grinder", etc,etc...work based on Brushed UNIVERSAL Motors...

Which simply "means" that they ALL can work on either AC or DC...

Basically the simple kind where trigger controllers are just an on-off switch...like the drill or saw or grinder...

And so...by adding a mechanical load (which could be just my hand trying to hold it) they will increase amperage-reduce voltage BUT NOT that drastically, according to load FORCE applied.

Don't worry...I've got tough hands...

So, just need to finish Outer Coil, install New Meters and ready to re-test


Regards


Ufopolitics

[viomarmi22]

LCD Panel Monitor Power Meter Hz power factor https://www.aliexpress.com/item/6-IN...StoreLevelAB=0

[Listener192]

Iron Core

Hello L192,

Above is a previous post from Bistander at page 82, proposing a simple test with shunt at Input then at Output...(you could go back then watch all my questions-answers by Bistander, related to method) at that time I was still working on this new rotary system, where I reverse Fields...and since it tested out very successfully, I would be doing this tests with it, instead of the single positive only, brush driver.

Those tests above are in a "primarily order" still pending to be demonstrated by a video.

Now, I work based on "Trial-Error" basis...and so, successful tests keep refining until achieving Top results, unfortunately I do not have such high budget, where I could afford to keep all my previous Coils intact, then keep buying new ten pounders wire spools back and forth...I only wish I could do it that way...but can't.

Therefore, my way to go on this development, is by winding-unwinding previous coils geometries which did not work as expected, also recycling the tape I use on each, and so on and on...this is ok...only thing here that is consumed in huge amounts... is time...more time.

I decided to SPLIT Exciter Coil in TWO Parts...hoping it would perform better, since a split iron core worked better than a full one (and here, "theoretically speaking" I thought by generating Three Dielectric Fields involved in TWO Coils, instead of just ONE in a single full coil)...And so, unfortunately... NOPE, it did not worked as I expected, it did Induced EMF as well, but never like a full coil...then time to unwind...put them on empty spools...and prep a new mold to host the old full exciter coil type(so this time I could slide it in-out, where previously I couldn't)...then I decided to add more wire layers which allows me to dial higher voltages while limiting current to only 2 Amps...and so, right now, that's what am working on...testing different layers on top of the original set up which worked out fine...

I got the new meters last week, and have not had the time to even unpack them...as well as a new 14 awg ten pounder roll...also unpacked.

I want to reach first a pretty solid way to EXCITE STRONG Fields with adequate Higher Voltages which fully drive the 2Amps currents in REVERSE MODE properly at the operating speed/frequencies...and that takes time.

For that reason, after the diodes bridge DC rectification, basically voltage is dropping off too much with typical resistive loads like the 50 Watts Halogen Bulb, while amperage is still very high. This does not takes place with AC Output (Before diodes) with same bulb. And yes, I DO have the filtering cap of 100uF/200V.

For the test that you are proposing (DC IN-OUT) which sounds very simple right?...well, I need to find the appropriated DC LOAD...one that fully runs, while being able to show meter read outs clearly.

At the same token...I have found that an AIR CORE (No Iron Rod) works as well or EVEN BETTER, than iron cylinder Core...just copper coils...Iron works better whenever is NOT PLACED AT CENTER of Coils...and basically steel tubing will do better than solid rods.

It seems the FAST REVERSING FIELDS, can react/response MUCH FASTER in OPEN AIR, than having the restriction of iron molecules changing their polarization faster than they can handle to keep up with a completely VIRTUAL FIELD, which goes through iron like a sharp knife through a Butter Block...reason why core gets so extremely hot!!

One rule of thumb I have found out...is that IF the Iron core is not getting hot...then your Exciter Coil SPEC'S are NOT CORRECT, not reversing iron particles as fast, which normally causes internal friction/heat...Iron Core should get hot, while coil wire is just warm under some extended operating time.

As soon as I can show something...I will do so.


Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi UFO,

The hysteresis losses in plain carbon steel will be excessive and result in heating the metal. If you switch to silicon steel laminations, as a core that runs through the whole length of the exciter coil, you will see a large improvement. A compromise would be to use a steel or iron wire core, which would break up the eddy currents and reduce the losses due to heating.

Using a tube steel reduces the mass and hence heating losses but will reduce inductive coupling.

The results you are seeing by moving the solid core away from the center of the coils, are due to a balance between excessive hysteresis losses with the core centered, to reduced inductive coupling when you remove the core completely.

Regards
L192

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,

The hysteresis losses in plain carbon steel will be excessive and result in heating the metal. If you switch to silicon steel laminations, as a core that runs through the whole length of the exciter coil, you will see a large improvement. A compromise would be to use a steel or iron wire core, which would break up the eddy currents and reduce the losses due to heating.

Using a tube steel reduces the mass and hence heating losses but will reduce inductive coupling.

The results you are seeing by moving the solid core away from the center of the coils, are due to a balance between excessive hysteresis losses with the core centered, to reduced inductive coupling when you remove the core completely.

Regards
L192

Hello L192,

Yes you are completely right above, 100%.
Basically it manifests more on this design where Fields are reversing at a fast rate, so, it is noticed that induction works better at lower frequencies, as dialing up, there is a "lag" (a steady point where it will not increase anymore) to then start falling down as speed increases.

Have to find a silicon steel supplier who could sell strips of about same width.

A couple of questions...

I know I could use welding rods packed together...but how efficient are those?

And, how about a Steel Alloy wire like the one we use in Mig Welders... I believe it could be used as well, of course, not to be wound like a coil...but using short pieces along the length of core, and shaping it to a cylinder shape.

I know the best way to make this would be with square laminated cores, and a bit rounded edges...but I got them round by now...


Regards and thanks


Ufopolitics

[Listener192]

Steel Wire

Hi UFO,

I have tried steel galvanized wire used for fencing and that worked OK, less loss than solid steel. If you can obtain enough junk microwave oven transformers, the 'I' sections can be stacked and butted end to end. That would work better.

If you can obtain steel toroidal cores (just the cores) these could be rewound to the desired diameter and butted end to end. Those are made of M427 silicon steel and are really low loss.

Regards

L192

[boguslaw]

I think I spotted somewhere in Figuera patent that laminated core is not needed.

[Listener192]

Steel Cores

Hi Boguslaw,

Yes that is correct, in the Figuera patent, laminated cores were not required, as there were no flux polarity reversals, so minimal hysteresis losses.

UFO,s current build has flux reversals and his solid steel core is getting hot.

Regards

L192

[Ufopolitics]

Patent Specifications...plus..."Beyond Figuera"

I think I spotted somewhere in Figuera patent that laminated core is not needed.

Hello Boguslaw, Hello to All,

Happy Thanksgiving for all the US people!!

I just went over -again- the Figuera 1908 Patent...and in absolutely NO part, either in the original Spanish nor English translation, it is "specified" the way to build the cores...

All it says about Cores (Núcleos) is "Soft Iron" (Hierro Dulce)...and this refers only to the material utilized.

It has been "our assumptions" to use solid rods or laminated iron.

Now, for primarily and simple developing work, it is understood to start with cheaper solid rods...just to observe all the rest of Induction parameters as cited on Patent.

It don't matter if we reverse or not flux direction, always a laminated iron would transmit/transfer/amplify much better any magnetic field than a randomly disbursed solid piece of steel...this is very old knowledge about electromagnetism, that extends from motors, transformers to generators.

It is a way about REFINING our builds...to keep improving more and more on each component ONCE we have reached very successful results.

I started with the typical one (positive) brush-commutator design as Figuera stated...I have tried from resistors all the way to the "infamous Part G" Toroidal previously proposed by MM...From all this tests I have FILTERED the best side and make a compilation to reach where I am now...

I refined the driver to a much smaller, compact plus reversing the fields...SINCE with the one brush design, I noticed this device works as well with N-N as with S-S...Then why not use BOTH WAYS ALTERNATIVELY?

I refined and compacted the Coils Geometries, reducing it to just One Core per Module, having TWO Secondaries and just ONE Exciter.

And now...it is time to refine the Core structure.

I have done a lot of research related to core materials...and yes, L192 is very right...Silicon Steel is a much better material, cleaner way to harvest the magnetic fields in every way you look at it...plus using laminations avoids all the parasitic magnetic currents (Eddy Currents)which opposes to our directed flows...plus RETARDATION LOSSES (Hysteresis) on our fast switching drivers.

Even if you are using only one way flux...there are "Grain Oriented" Silicon Steel, which is completely DIRECTIONAL, making the Spatial projections much solid and compact.

What I have noticed on solid steel...is that it does generates Induction...but, the Induced signal fails to keep growing at higher operating speeds, very large amounts of voltage drops...while amperage keeps at high levels.

When looking at scope signals, we notice the Induced signal "peaks -as almost a sharp spike- to then fall abruptly", while the Inductor (Exciter Signal) remains driven at flat lines on either positive or negative sides...And so, IMO, this is the main reason why Voltage at output drops that much under load.

I already have both Output Coils wound...and when I connect them in series I get between 200-300V -no load- output, by just Inputting like 50-60V and two amps (100-120W)...I short outputs and I get like 2 A...HOWEVER, when a steady load of like 50W Incandescent bulb is attached Vout drops to like 6V while amps rise sky high...and that is completely abnormal.

Even if we use laminated carbon steel, we can see a difference compared to solid rods.

I have designed my build in a way that it can be taken apart completely (nothing glued, epoxied, etc,etc)...Coils and Cores will slide in-out very easy...in order to demonstrate different results with different configurations as different materials.

The point of that type of build...is to demonstrate easier on a video, making a nice and clean learning tool.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

. . the "infamous Part G" Toroidal . .

Infamous, are we sure of that?

https://vimeo.com/178144785

How about the working OU-effect then....?
I'm still trying.

Regards Arne

[Ufopolitics]

. . the "infamous Part G" Toroidal . .

Infamous, are we sure of that?

https://vimeo.com/178144785

How about the working OU-effect then....?
I'm still trying.

Regards Arne

I used "infamous" as a joke...since all the debates and chaos that brought here before...

But, bottom line is that by taking so much time into "fades" and "approaches" it fails to allow flat line field developments which are very required for a strong induction at the required frequencies...comprende?


Basically I do not want to generate "new" debates about all this past/old history, at least not me.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Listener192]

Induction at low frequencies

Hi UFO,

Square/pulsed waves are used in switching converters using ferrite as a core. The switch rise and fall times need to be as fast as possible to reduce power losses in the MOSFETS/IGBT's. This is OK as the ferrite responds fast to the rise and fall of magnetic flux and a high switching rate can be used, increasing the power transfer over time. The Dwell time at a static flux level is short compared with the switching period.

At low frequency using steel cores, a sine wave provides the most efficient transfer of power, as the current hence magnetic flux is continuously changing and induction only occurs while the flux is changing. With square waves induction only occurs on the rising or falling edges. In between the core is held at a certain static flux level, which does not contribute to induction.

Regards

L192

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,

Square/pulsed waves are used in switching converters using ferrite as a core. The switch rise and fall times need to be as fast as possible to reduce power losses in the MOSFETS/IGBT's. This is OK as the ferrite responds fast to the rise and fall of magnetic flux and a high switching rate can be used, increasing the power transfer over time. The Dwell time at a static flux level is short compared with the switching period.

Hello L192,

Right, however, ferrite cores are only good at High Frequencies operation, like you have said above..."need to be as fast as possible..."...in the Low frequency world (which is where most conventional electromagnetic machinery is) ferrite cores don't work due to their very low max field strength. (ferrite=0.4T versus steel=1.4T)

At low frequency using steel cores, a sine wave provides the most efficient transfer of power, as the current hence magnetic flux is continuously changing and induction only occurs while the flux is changing.

In the beginning I also thought so...besides providing that "smooth" shift/change which-I thought- Induced EMF and magnetic fields liked...and I was wrong.

An AC "Sine Wave" is just the result from an all time ON Field (no change) that when moving through space/time (changes) generates this type of Induced signal.

Other words, the sine wave is the FINAL result from a space/time field rotation Induction.

But it can not be applied backwards to keep obtaining more induction.

Same way, when you get an AC Sine wave and rectified through a Diode Bridge...you get as close to DC as possible...However, this process is not reversible...meaning, you can not obtain a sine wave from direct currents by passing back through the diode bridge.

With square waves induction only occurs on the rising or falling edges. In between the core is held at a certain static flux level, which does not contribute to induction.

In reality, at the operating speeds it is no longer that much of a flat on-time, but here talking about my set up...I would say that there is no time that flux would be really "static".

After we collapse previous field, we start the second -reversed one-...and it takes time for that field to develop and reach a max point to then collapse again...and so "repeat process".

Hope you understand what I meant here...

Regards

L192

Regards


Ufopolitics

[Listener192]

Induction

Hi UFO,

If the inductance of the driven coil is high enough, with respect to the period, then the current waveform for a bi polarity square wave voltage drive, will be triangular (assuming the flux variation is over the linear portion of the BH curve) and indicative of flux slowly rising and falling over the switching period.
The hysteresis losses will be much higher for a square wave compared to a sine wave.

If the inductance of the driven coil is low with respect to the period i.e. you remove the steel core, then the current wave form will be closer to a square wave and flux also will rise and fall fast over the switching period. The induction will also be reduced but the hysteresis losses will be absent.

Regards
L192