Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[iflewmyown]

artoj, You have made a wonderful drawing, Thank you
Garry

[artoj]

Thanks Garry, I have updated the file so the schematic is more accurate, Regards Arto.

[hanon1492]

Figuera´s letters in the newspapers

Hi all,

Here I have traslated some letters that Clemente Figuera sent in 1902 to the newspapers. You can follow cronologically the sequence of events prior to the filing of the 4 patents in September 1902. Before filing the patents there are some references in the newspaper (in april- may - june 1902) . Later he filed the patents in the 20th of september 1902, and, four days later he signed the sale of the patents to an international banker union. Later... all is silence ... until the 1908 patent few days before his death.

It is curious to note that Mr. Figuera said many times that the principle os his invention is very simple.

Letters in the newspapers

Regards

[Ufopolitics]

Yes, exactly...

Hi all,

Here I have traslated some letters that Clemente Figuera sent in 1902 to the newspapers. You can follow cronologically the sequence of events prior to the filing of the 4 patents in September 1902. Before filing the patents there are some references in the newspaper (in april- may - june 1902) . Later he filed the patents in the 20th of september 1902, and, four days later he signed the sale of the patents to an international banker union. Later... all is silence ... until the 1908 patent few days before his death.

It is curious to note that Mr. Figuera said many times that the principle os his invention is very simple.

Letters in the newspapers

Regards

Thanks Hanon1492,

And...yes completely right, and excellent work you are doing here!

MR. Figuera states very often..."The honors that so many credit me with...I do NOT deserve them...as it is NOT MINE...this is based on older Concepts ..."

As we could read on his patents, he refers continuously to Faraday's Laws of Induction...

In my opinion...the "simplicity" of an Invention, as seen by its own inventor...must of times is "not that simple at all" as seen by the majority of people... The Inventor sees all the relations, confirms all "previous studies and calculations"... when finally "finds" the key for it to work perfect, after years of testing, research and development ...as also many frustrations...However, the inventor sees it very "simple"...as He finds the "Final Connections"...

In ALL His explanations, He states the VERY Basic Faraday's Principle that "RULES" Induction...He "dissect it" to "His Benefit" to see that it "really works" like was stated.

Faraday states that "A CONDUCTOR", and let's pause here, "a conductor" meaning a simple Copper Enameled Wire...Faraday NEVER Mentions/Cites that "Conductor MUST BE wrapped around a Massive Steel Core...

Later Figuera cites "Another fraction" of the Faraday's Law...that is "convenient" for Him to "stand/support" his particular findings...

"..A conductor passes through Magnetic Field Changes..."

As Conductor start leaving the magnetic field, it suffers "a change", as also when it "Enters" that magnetic field...

Figuera then "realizes" that using an AC Sine-wave or an "Intermittent/Pulsed Signal" on a coil feed, will "simulate" that effect of entering/leaving (when sine goes at high peak=approach/ and when sine starts looping down=conductor leaving field...

He then uses Resistors to "simulate" a smooth "leave" or an "approach" without moving absolutely "nada" (nothing)...all has been "simulated", however, based on "REAL FACTS" about Faraday's Laws...

He, then concludes..."It so simple...to the point I ask myself...why?...someone before Me, never came up with this invention/method?...

Like I wrote above...Once it works...it seems "very simple"...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

Thanks Ufo for your inspiring and encouraging posts. For you and for other people who may read spanish texts there is a new pdf document in the webpage where you can find many more newspapers clippings about Clemente Figuera. I have just translated some of them, but spanish readers will enjoy for sure reading all those documents. --> search for Newspaper report II at the bottom side of the page.

Clemente Figuera Webpage

Regards

[john_g]

Hi All

I’m just wondering in trying to crack this machine are we overlooking the obvious. I must admit I think permanent magnets were used within some of the devices. For induction to take place we need to have the flux lines of force cutting the wires picking up the induced currents. For example if we take two magnets (attracting each other) with wires sandwiched between them the lines of force will remain static and there is no induction. To create induction we need to move the lines of force, which we can do by increasing or decreasing the strength of the magnets flux, say by having a coil wound over the magnet(s) and the coil either pulsed with DC or fed with AC (varying current) which will cause more or less lines of force. Packing in more lines of force into the magnet will cause the existing permanent magnet lines of force to move (as they will repel each other as more are packed in) thus causing induction to take place.

The electro magnet causing the movement of the static field of the permanent magnet would not necessarily need to be wound over the magnet, but could be at 90 deg to the side pushing the lines in towards the core or out. Maybe it would be better to have the electromagnet within the core of the PM?

If a row of PM are used, placed tightly together, the lines of force in each magnet, I suspect will be reshaped and squeezed towards the core, thus intensifying the local field.

My scope seem to have died at the moment, but below a pic of my set-ups. I will post up some data when it’s working again.

Regards

John

[Ufopolitics]

Saw Tooth Wave...

Hello to All,

On this Diagram below:

[IMG][/IMG]

We have a copper conductor (seen from top), passing through a Static Magnetic Field Lines created by N-S Poles.

I have broken it into Five Simple Steps...

Now, the "Strongest" Induction stage would be between 2 to 4, while "Prior" and "Post" Magnetic Field...would be represented by a "smooth line" dropping or ascending.

I, particularly, after conducting this brief study...came to the conclusion that a "Saw Tooth Wave" would be the more suitable to represent this stages that Copper Conductor passes by when getting induced by magnetic fields.

I chose it above an AC Sine Wave...or a Steep Square Wave...Why?

[IMG][/IMG]

Well, an AC Sine Wave (Green) would never have a straight horizontal and steady Induction Period (2-4) like in reality occurs...

And a Steep Square Wave (Blue) , even though, it does have a Flat, straight/horizontal Period...the Pre and Post Stages would be VERY ABRUPT (Steep) to ZERO...which does NOT occur like that either...in reality.

We all know Magnetic Field Flux Lines "expands/fades" away "smoothly" from the physical bodies of the Magnets/Electromagnets, as they become weaker as further away from their center originating cores...

My Conclusion:

If I were to "simulate" electronically, the "Changing Magnetic Fields"...I would rather use a Saw Tooth Wave Design, to "Excite" those Coils...as Conductors and Stators would be "Physically Static"...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

Hi guys,

I need your help to solve a doubt I have since a long time. Continuing with the previous post by Ufo: if you want to generate an induced electric field, E, you have to move a wire of length, l, at right angles of the magnetic field, B, at certain velocity, v. sin(alpha)=sin(90ş) =1

E = v·B·l·sin(alpha)

Ok, this equation for the induction in a wire is clear.

In the case of the 1902 patent No. 30378 about the Figuera´s Generator (static coils and variable electromagnets) we are discussing that some wiring schemes are those that the wire is set close to the electromagnet, and the magnetic field, B, increases and decreases and the wire is motionless. This is the same as approaching and moving away the wire from the electromagnets. In this case the relative movement is not at right angles of the magnetic field but it is in the same direction --> sin(alpha) = sin(0ş) = 0 ==> E = 0 ??

Therefore, this is my doubt: how can we get induction in this situation? Am I misunderstanding anything? I am refering to the case of a single wire; not the case of a coil where E = N·A·(dB/dt) , and induction happens.

Of course this is not the case in the patent 30376 with a spining wire which ,in this case, is moved at right angles of the fixed magnetic field, and the induction is easy to get. How could Figuera get a similar situation in patent No. 30378 using a variable magnetic field to the one obtained in No. 30376 using a moving wire ????

Regards

[Ufopolitics]

Seeing A Magnetic Field...

Hi guys,

I need your help to solve a doubt I have since a long time. Continuing with the previous post by Ufo: if you want to generate an induced electric field, E, you have to move a wire of length, l, at right angles of the magnetic field, B, at certain velocity, v. sin(alpha)=sin(90ş) =1

E = v·B·l·sin(alpha)

Ok, this equation for the induction in a wire is clear.

In the case of the 1902 patent No. 30378 about the Figuera´s Generator (static coils and variable electromagnets) we are discussing that some wiring schemes are those that the wire is set close to the electromagnet, and the magnetic field, B, increases and decreases and the wire is motionless. This is the same as approaching and moving away the wire from the electromagnets. In this case the relative movement is not at right angles of the magnetic field but it is in the same direction --> sin(alpha) = sin(0ş) = 0 ==> E = 0 ??

Therefore, this is my doubt: how can we get induction in this situation? Am I misunderstanding anything? I am refering to the case of a single wire; not the case of a coil where E = N·A·(dB/dt) , and induction happens.

Of course this is not the case in the patent 30376 with a spining wire which ,in this case, is moved at right angles of the fixed magnetic field, and the induction is easy to get. How could Figuera get a similar situation in patent No. 30378 using a variable magnetic field to the one obtained in No. 30376 using a moving wire ????

Regards

Hello Hanon1492,

Yes, this is the "common" doubt that have not allow Us to "see" what Figuera, Tesla and many more did see...

The problem lies in a very simple issue...You are NOT "interpreting" all this from the Magnetic Field "side"...

And you MUST, "See in the Unseen"...my dear friend...
Magnetic Fields are completely "Invisible" to Human Eyes...We only could relate to them based on the diagrams from a Spectrum, whether from steel powder...or in $ophisticated equipment$...And still...we will "see" only a Two Dimensional Spectrum.

The cheapest way...is to "feel" them...basically at repulsion stages (same polarities)...and press them while rotating each others surfaces...feeling strongest and weaker points...then constructing an "Image"...a Picture in 3D of what they look like...

When You excite a Coil...it "projects" out to a 3D Space a Magnetic Field....Just like a Holographic 360ş Projector would do when turned on...and the Projector Light Bulb...is your Coil...if you turn it off...all the 3D Projection will collapse.

What Figuera is doing in the Static Patent...is "Moving the Magnetic Fields"...

And the example I posted above...when coil starts getting excited from 1 to 2, it is an "ascending" feed (in crescendo), magnetic field will start weak...and progressing to stronger levels till it reaches a "peak" at 2...which starts a "Full (Flat-Line) Feed" till reaching 4...and from there to 5 it starts decreasing...

Now "picture" from 1 to 5... what effect the Induced Coils will "receive"?

I will tell you...

Induced coils will "feel" an "approaching" MAGNETIC FIELD [From Weak to Stronger](1-2)...A Very Strong and CLOSER MAGNETIC FIELD (2-4)...and a "leaving" MAGNETIC FIELD [from Strong to Weaker](4-5). Even though all the "Light Bulbs"(Coils) are seating and not moving at all...

About the Angles, you are wrong in second analysis...Angles do NOT vary...at static "simulation"...still is 90ş related to vertical conductors and magnetic field flux.

It is ABSOLUTELY NOT about the Angles involved in the Physical Rotation...but about the FADING and INCOMING STRENGTH OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD(S) what produces those "Changes" Figuera referred/interpreted about and derived from Faraday's Law.


Hope this explanation will help You to understand this better...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[john_g]

The way I'm seeing this device is that we are trying to move the lines of force to create the induction and maybe keep the magnetic circuits interacting but not joined:

[Cornboy 555]

Commonsense.

Hello, UFO, John_g, and Hannon, you guys will have the static device nutted in no time, the way you are going.

I am only a learner with electronics, with no formal training, but i see some real life, commonsense, taking place here.

Thanks to you all, Warm Regards Cornboy.

[hanon1492]

The way I'm seeing this device is that we are trying to move the lines of force to create the induction and maybe keep the magnetic circuits interacting but not joined:

Hi John_g,

You proposal make senses. You idea is very smart. I have seen a similar approach into this patent US7830065, where magnetic lines are manipulated to cross the wires. I am not sure if what you propose was the idea behind the Figuera´s devices, in such case, it was completely hidden in the patents, so hidden that the patents were not reflecting the whole system.

Thanks Ufo for your aclaration. I have done a sketch to show clearly my doubt (which, by the way, is consistent with the design proposed by john_g of squeezing/pushing the lines of force with an external field so that those lines cut laterally the conductors.)



Please comment if you see any inconsistency or error in my sketch. Maybe we are trying to explain it with the equation E = v·B·l·sin(alpha) ,and we should look for any other equation which fits better this phenomenon.

Another doubt that I have is why this equation does not work by approacing o moving away a single conductor from a magnet, while the common Faraday equation E = N·A·(dB/dt) works perfectly with a coil approaching or moving away from a magnet. Why the area (A) is included into this equation if the central lines of forces (inside the area) do not "touch" the surrounding conductor?? For me it would make more sense to use the perimeter instead the area, don´t you?.... I think we still have some misteries to solve around Magnetism !!!

Regards

[Ufopolitics]

Hello Hanon1492

Hi John_g,

You proposal make senses. You idea is very smart. I have seen a similar approach into this patent US7830065, where magnetic lines are manipulated to cross the wires. I am not sure if what you propose was the idea behind the Figuera´s devices, in such case, it was completely hidden in the patents, so hidden that the patents were not reflecting the whole system.

Thanks Ufo for your aclaration. I have done a sketch to show clearly my doubt (which, by the way, is consistent with the design proposed by john_g of squeezing/pushing the lines of force with an external field so that those lines cut laterally the conductors.)



Please comment if you see any inconsistency or error in my sketch. Maybe we are trying to explain it with the equation E = v·B·l·sin(alpha) ,and we should look for any other equation which fits better this phenomenon.

Hello Hanon1492,

Well the drawings are correct as now I can see what you meant before...

And yes it is correct, if either conductor or Field moves PARALLEL to each others, meaning angle=0, yes, absolutely, there would be NO Induction. Your Pic 3 shows it clearly, conductor is moving ALONG/PARALLEL to the Field Lines...No Induction.

The Main Concept recites...Conductor (Understanding also "Conductor Traveling Path") MUST CUT the Magnetic Field Lines Perpendicularly...and the best way to portrait this is by 3D Geometrical Planes...and volumes...

[IMG][/IMG]

Another doubt that I have is why this equation does not work by approaching o moving away a single conductor from a magnet, while the common Faraday equation E = N·A·(dB/dt) works perfectly with a coil approaching or moving away from a magnet. Why the area (A) is included into this equation if the central lines of forces (inside the area) do not "touch" the surrounding conductor?? For me it would make more sense to use the perimeter instead the area, don´t you?.... I think we still have some mysteries to solve around Magnetism !!!

Regards

Hanon, the Area is given by the "HIGHER DENSITY AREA" of the FIELD, AND INTERSECTION of Conductors or Coils through IT. In the Diagram above I used the WHITE RECTANGLE as the AREA where "DENSITY" of the Magnetic Field is STRONGER for the Conductor Traveling Path.

Speaking In Geometry...

The Middle CUBE between the Two Magnetic Poles Rectangles, represents the HIGHER DENSITY SECTION of those Two Magnetic Poles Fields, now picture the Conductor PATH leaves a "TRACE/GHOSTING IMAGE"...Creating a Plane (Light Brown Plane)...Now, when that plane CUTS right at the Center of Middle Cube, it creates a COMMON AREA, shown by that White Rectangle WITHIN Conductor Traveling Plane.

Above Diagram in 2D, is the same as the one I showed on my previous post, except that conductor movement/Time are opposite here (from Right to Left)...However, I show "Reference Lines" (intermittent lines) matching Conductor Stages...1,2,3,4 and 5 from 3D to 2D Diagrams.


Hope it helps You to see it better.


Warm Regards


Ufopolitics

[john_g]

Hi Hannon

Thanks for your comments. I have seen the patent you referred to - same sort of idea, and of note that his units can be stacked. I just wonder if the permanent magnets he used also has an iron circuit with them? although not shown. I'm ordering some cut mild steel today, so hopefully in a few days will have some results, I do think its key to keep the circuits separated although interacting.


The fundamental discovery of Faraday may be summed up in the following words :

"If the magnetic induction through any circuit be varied by any means, an electromotive force is set up in that circuit proportional at any instant to the rate of change of the magnetic induction at that instant.”

Lets hold the faith!

Regards
John

[hanon1492]

Hi all,

For those interested in and interesting fact about the Induction Law here I link a file which explains that two different formulations seem to exist for the same phenomenon : one, the Faraday Unipolar generator: E = (v · B) , other the Maxwell 2nd Law : rot E = -dB/dt, which are two different formulations for the same law !!! Faraday-or-Maxwell by Meyl (read page 5 and next of the file). Meyl proposes a theory to take into account the longitudinal waves which were predicted by Tesla in his wireless power transmission system.



An interesting point which Eric Dollard comments in an old presentation (Youtube video) is that in the secondary of transformers the induced current is produced in the wiring WITHOUT being cut by the magnetic field. Most of the magnetism is supposed to be enclosed into the iron magnetic circuit and therefore no magnetism should cut the secondary winding, which is external to the iron and only encircles the iron. Can anyone explain it to me???

Regards