Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Crazy

    "path to follow according to their skills."
    so the real reason comes to the surface. you don't have the skills or are afraid of part G. nothing wrong with that Hanon, just holding back this thread that's all. just because you don't have certain skills is no reason to post the low road distraction game.

    NO you can't do that with a device like part G, that's plane ridiculous.
    that's like building a Rolex using Mickey Mouse parts, no one would do that.

    just because you don't see what UFOP and I do is no reason to sidetrack the real patent part G device.
    it might be good advice to choose an easier device for you to build Hanon,or find a person to help you, just saying. when i tell people about this device most say they would love to help, just ask someone.
    "I just can assure that at high rpm the moving brush revolving around a normal commutator will loose contact because of the centrifugal force."
    last time i checked there is nothing normal about the figuera device at all. since brush will be on top that wont be a problem.

    Cademan;

    wow ! that's a big core, might want to use only one core but the rest sounds great.
    how many volts. ??
    also a good idea is the paper clip on a straw. shows where the fields are in relation to the secondary. (thanks D)


    MM
    Last edited by marathonman; 09-19-2016, 04:39 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by hanon1492 View Post
      I have no idea. A possibility: I just can assure that at high rpm the moving brush revolving around a normalcommutator will loose contact because of the centrifugal force.
      Hanon,

      That answer "sounds" exactly what I have said on my video...as on my posts about my rotary switch and the brushes I have designed for it...

      For that reason I posted a proposal for a static brush with a rotating commutator and 7 slip rings to avoid that problem
      And how many Horse Power motor you need to spin that "device"?

      That's an awful dragging galore device friend!!

      Originally posted by hanon1492 View Post
      I guess that by mistake you wanted to say "milliwatts" not milliamps. Current (intensity) is maintained, but voltage decreases, and less useful power may be exteacted. If you introduce 1 A you will return 1 A , but at near zero voltage
      Negative, no mistake, Current (I) Intensity will continue to be the same (non variant) as long as Source (in this case "Exterior Generator") would keep maintaining the supply-demand "on time".

      ,
      Originally posted by hanon1492 View Post
      Figuera describes that the machine needs a part of the produced power for the continuous excitation of the machine. I do not know if that was a big amount or a low amount...
      Como se ve en el dibujo la corriente una vez ha hecho su oficio en los diferentes electroimanes vuelve al generador de donde se ha tomado; naturalmente que en cada revolución de la escobilla habrá un cambio de signo en la corriente inducida; pero un conmutador la hará continua si así se desea. De esta corriente se deriva una pequeña parte y con ella se excita la máquina convirtiéndola en auto excitadora y se acciona el pequeño motor que hace girar la escobilla y el conmutador; se retira la corriente extraña o de cebo y la máquina continua su misión sin necesidad de que le presten ayuda ninguna para suministrarla indefinidamente.
      ..."Se deriva una pequeña parte"...(it derives a small part)

      Well...in fact I have a home heater with 2000 watts power and using around 10 A at 220 volts. I do not understand your point , a common 100 watts incandescent light bulb at the voltage in USA uses exactly 1A
      220VX10A = 2200 Watts, not 2000 Watts...

      In US AC is 120V...so a 1A Bulb would be 120 Watts

      There are some references in this thread that with resistors and 100 watts input then an output of 300 watts was measured. So it seems resistors may get COP > 1 unless that those resultls were not acurrately measured.


      Really and honestly I would love that toroidal part G would be a part of the whole generator because it has many advantages over resistors, but I read the patent and I do not see that described in the patent. But this what I interpret reading the patent. And I have always tried to promote replications as close as posible to those described in the patent. The patent just use the spanish word "resistencia" that I translated in general mean as "resistance" instead of using terms related to the electricity and electronic field "resistor". I think it is good to know that when I translated that in 2012 I was a newbie into electricity field, I did not even have a multimeter, so it is normal to use a general translation for that word when you are not into this specific field. If a person dealing with this field would have been translated the patent maybe he had used the specific term into this field.

      You may think of myself whatever you want but I just try to be honest and follow the patent principles. I already posted that patent must have sufficiency of disclosure to be valid.
      You translated it perfectly well back then..."Resistencia" is Resistance as Figuera refers to "quantity" that opposes current.

      In English, Resistor is the name of the component itself...In Spanish both terms (resistencia) are utilized for two (or a hundred more) different meanings..."La resistencia total del alambrado es de 20 ohms"..."La Resistencia de 10 ohms se quemó"..."La Resistencia del Pueblo contra la Tiranía ha aumentado..."...and so on and on...


      But yes you are right, let´s move on


      Regards


      Ufopolitics
      Last edited by Ufopolitics; 09-19-2016, 05:21 PM.
      Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

      Comment


      • "But yes you are right, let´s move on"

        yes i agree. i'm also tired of the incorrect resistor thing.

        UFOP;

        one thing i would like to bring up is commutator bars. now why in the world would Figuera imbed thick bars in a cylinder then connect it with thin wires.? that would be plum crazy and a waste of money. Figuera would not do this impractical thing or for any engineer for that matter. using thick commutator bares for 100 volts 1 amp draw is like buying a jet to go to the corner store.....totally nutz i know.
        so i think Figuera was using more than 1 amp and the so called commutator bars are just thick wire wound on the core.

        that's my story and i'm a sticken to it.


        MM
        Last edited by marathonman; 09-19-2016, 05:11 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by marathonman View Post
          wow ! that's a big core, might want to use only one core but the rest sounds great.
          how many volts. ??
          Nah, not that big really. Two #90's that I had laying around.
          Dial calipers say 4.538 OD x 2.58 ID x 1.688 height, with epoxy coating.
          Standard rating is 824 VA each.

          24 volt and I can go to 34.5 rectified.

          CM

          Comment


          • Cores

            I was referring to va rating not girth.

            at 24 volts @ 2.5 high and 1.5 low that's only 96 watts. that is way overkill and you might have problems.??? i guess we will find out.


            MM

            Comment


            • UFO,
              You have become a master at posting misleading and confusing statements. Just look at the excerpt from one of your posts.

              Figuera wrote that after the current has done its job it returns to the source or generator. Now look at what you replied.

              Originally posted by Ufopolitics View Post
              This whole sentence above... I find it completely wrong, nonsensical and absurd ...the current, once that it passes through all resistors, then through all electromagnets in his drawing...never, just "returns" back to the generator.

              That specific current, in just a full cycle running through those 13 resistors and 14 electromagnets, never, but I mean never, ever, could just "return back" to generator, like if there were no losses at all..

              Figuera, who was an Electric Engineer must have been "very" aware that current when passing by such high number of resistive components, is going to be wasted, converted in heat basically in a majority of it...and whatever "returns" to generator....would be literally "nickel and dimes"...milliamps if something is left.

              In reality, current never "returns", and contrary to that there would be a very high demand from "where it was taken from" (generator, external source)...instead of any return at all.

              So, Figuera speaks about currents on his device as if there would be absolutely zero losses, and as a matter of fact, he refers to currents as "llenándose" ó "vaciándose" ("filling up" or "emptying out"), treating currents as "a reusable liquid"...while the only requirement (sin "más complicaciones"- without "much complications") is just the turning of that positive brush-small motor...seen on his paragraph below:

              Regards


              Ufopolitics
              Do you not understand even the basics of electrical circuits? The current doesn't change, the voltage does. However much current leaves the source has to return to the source. Only the voltage drops as it is applied across the load. You can put an ammeter on any circuit you want at the output of the source of power and another meter at the return back to that source and they will always match.

              Please don't try to tell me you meant voltage because you clearly quoted Figuera as he wrote about current and you used current several times where you claimed he was wrong. You even used milliamps to describe what you thought would be going back to the source.

              Carroll
              Just because someone disagrees with you does NOT make them your enemy. We can disagree without attacking someone. This means YOU especially BroMikey.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by marathonman View Post
                I was referring to va rating not girth.

                at 24 volts @ 2.5 high and 1.5 low that's only 96 watts. that is way overkill and you might have problems.??? i guess we will find out.


                MM
                Yeah, about 600% overkill
                Original calcs were made based on normal load limited current, 6 coil sets and 120 vac rectified to 172.8 DC, so about 28 volts per set.
                Since this is just for test purposes with 1 set of coils and I already have a 24 vac trafo to use and a bunch of 18 GA wire ... well...

                Yeah I hope we will find out .. . something


                CM
                Last edited by Cadman; 09-19-2016, 08:01 PM.

                Comment


                • Just an interesting post done by me in 2013, linked below. For those who want to know my commitment with what it is written in the patent : I knew that common auto-transformers just run with AC, so I discarded the concept explained in that post because I did not know how to operate ,as the patent states, with DC, problem that seem to be solved with the design of part G proposed now. I really hope so. It would be nice to increase even further the performance of this generator. I have always said that the key is to move the two fields in repulsion no matter how to do it. , therefore, let's do it in the better way possible.

                  This is just to show that in that time I was screening all possible options. And I just kept those which, in my understanding, were fitting the patent text.

                  http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post222640

                  .
                  Last edited by hanon1492; 09-19-2016, 10:00 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by citfta View Post
                    UFO,
                    You have become a master at posting misleading and confusing statements. Just look at the excerpt from one of your posts.

                    Figuera wrote that after the current has done its job it returns to the source or generator. Now look at what you replied.
                    I am completely basing all my statements, on what is very clear written on Original Patent which happens to be on My Native Language.

                    Figuera uses EXACTLY WORDING the Variation of Currents Intensity, AND NOT VOLTAGE, which is clearly written as TENSIÓN in Spanish, at each one of his inducing-exciting electromagnets by the use of resistors set in the order displayed on his drawing.
                    By doing this He is changing-varying the Flux Intensity of each electromagnet in a push-pull unison way.

                    He absolutely never mentions there that he is dropping the "Tension" (voltage)...as a matter of fact he uses the word Tensión maybe a couple of times in the whole patent.

                    Aquí, lo que cambia constantemente es la intensidad de la corriente excitadora que imanta los electroimanes
                    excitadores y esto se consigue valiéndose de una resistencia a través de la que, una corriente apropiada, que se toma de un origen exterior cualquiera imanta uno o varios electroimanes, y, conforme la resistencia va siendo mayor o menor, la imantación de los
                    electroimanes va aminorando o aumentando y variando, por lo tanto, la intensidad del campo magnético, o sea del flujo que atraviesa al circuito inducido.
                    MY LITERALLY PERFECT TRANSLATION:

                    Here what changes constantly is the Intensity of the Exciting Currents that magnetizes the exciting electromagnets, and this is achieved based on a resistance through which, a suitable current, that has been taken from an external originating source magnetizes one or several electromagnets, and, as resistance becomes higher or lesser, the magnetization of the electromagnets would decrease or increase which means varying, and based on that, also the Intensity of the Magnetic Field, meaning the flux that goes through the induced circuit
                    Then it is VERY freaking Obvious that the Intensity of such Currents are varying throughout the whole darn Figuera's Circuit, from the beginning to the end.

                    Originally posted by citfta View Post
                    Do you not understand even the basics of electrical circuits? The current doesn't change, the voltage does. However much current leaves the source has to return to the source. Only the voltage drops as it is applied across the load. You can put an ammeter on any circuit you want at the output of the source of power and another meter at the return back to that source and they will always match.
                    But of course!!...if the Supply keeps up with the Demand of Currents they would be identical.

                    You are talking about a circuit which runs stabilized based on source-demand of currents spending goes...the following example in Automotive below is NOT, so, every time we start our vehicles, the current drop is huge at battery, while voltage drop is just Millivolts and as we run down the car, it re-charges back the battery as it takes over majority of vehicle electrical spending.

                    So, I will put a basic and simple example:

                    Say you have a Diesel Truck, eight cylinders, which have approx about 900- 1200 psi of pressure on each cylinder...you need to "crank it" to start it up, but it do not starts...now your battery may show a full 12V with a regular V meter, NOT a LOADING Battery Meter to check load!!...but at the time to start the starter motor won't do it...it just do not have the "JUICES" which are called Amps, or Currents, Or Intensity to be able to crank those Eight Pistons at 1200 psi each...which means it have exactly the required V but not the amperage to do the job.

                    Say Battery was supposed to have 1200 Cranking Amps...but it only have half...600...so can not do it, unless the guy get a parallel boost or charge it overnight.

                    However, if everything would be fine, the truck driver would turn key and go, start up...at that precise moment of start up the Battery is VOMITING very close to those 1200 Amps, say 900 to 1000. And where did they go?...now tell me they "just" returned "intact" back to battery...because if so...they would never require a whole AND full Battery re-charging system installed "full time" in every vehicle....What did that Heavy Duty Starter Motor cranking those eight cylinders burnt in High Mechanical Torque, plus heat?

                    Did it loose just Volts?...really?

                    Then why this Diesel Truck Alternator needs to be such A BIG HIGH AMPERAGE HOG?...and trying to replace it with a 4 cylinder small VW Golf Alternator will never do that job?...BOTH ALTERNATORS GENERATE 12VOLTS...SO WHY CITFTA?


                    Originally posted by citfta View Post
                    Please don't try to tell me you meant voltage because you clearly quoted Figuera as he wrote about current and you used current several times where you claimed he was wrong. You even used milliamps to describe what you thought would be going back to the source.

                    Carroll
                    NOPE, I WON'T, I meant exactly what I WROTE,... AMPERAGE, CURRENTS, INTENSITY.

                    And do NOT come here talking about "WATTS"!!


                    Ufopolitics
                    Last edited by Ufopolitics; 09-19-2016, 11:06 PM.
                    Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

                    Comment


                    • Citfta was right. The current is mantained along any circuit. What you loose is voltage. There is no sense to state that after some resistors and coils the initial current will be reduced to milliamps as stated in your post. The current (intensity) is constant even after transversing many electrical elements. It is like the water in a hose: it is the same flow (current intensity) along the whole hose, what it is reduced is the pressure (voltage). I think that or it is a miscommunication or a misunderstanding of the concept. Figuera changed the intensity in each instant, but intensity is not dissipated crossing different elements, as opening and closing the tap on the hose.


                      Figuera, who was an Electric Engineer must have been "very" aware that current when passing by such high number of resistive components, is going to be wasted, converted in heat basically in a majority of it...and whatever "returns" to generator....would be literally "nickel and dimes"...milliamps if something is left.

                      In reality, current never "returns", and contrary to that there would be a very high demand from "where it was taken from" (generator, external source)...instead of any return at all.
                      Figuera uses EXACTLY WORDING
                      Well...in this case he used exact words...

                      Returning to our main subject, in this page I summarized all the methods I see nowadays to modulate the intensity to achive our goal: MOVE THE FIELDS BACK AND FORTH !!

                      https://figueragenerator.wordpress.c...iving-signals/

                      .
                      Last edited by hanon1492; 09-19-2016, 11:08 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Cadman;
                        "6 coil sets and 120 vac rectified to 172.8 DC, so about 28 volts per set."

                        why are you dividing 6 into 172.8 ??
                        are you wiring coils in series or parallel ?

                        for your test rig it's 3400 % overkill, Duh ! for your final it's 530 % at 172.8 @ 4 a. ??? hope it works.

                        i have a variac i will be using as my 100 volt supply but it can only do 5 or so amps so i am thinking of building one myself.

                        can you gather the equations together you used and send them to me. i would like to see how mine fared.???

                        Hanon;

                        "I have always said that the key is to move the two fields in repulsion no matter how to do it"

                        Right and wrong, the key is in repulsion "IN UNISON" or induction will fall to 1/2 of output. but i do get your drift.

                        UFOP;

                        i bet your as sick as i am of having to defend your actions, words and path taken every time you turn around. and i am sick to the bone hearing about resistors. so i know how you feel. try hearing about every few post for the last almost year knowing what i know.


                        MM
                        Last edited by marathonman; 09-20-2016, 12:52 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Amper Chart

                          Don't know if everyone has one or not. the reason i like this one is it has amperage usage for chassis wiring also not just AC distribution, good for coils. although coating on wire not included in figures. add about .0028 to .0030 to those figures for coating.






                          MM
                          Last edited by marathonman; 09-20-2016, 03:31 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Wire size on the negative side

                            Originally posted by marathonman View Post

                            UFOP;

                            i bet your as sick as i am of having to defend your actions, words and path taken every time you turn around. and i am sick to the bone hearing about resistors. so i know how you feel. try hearing about every few post for the last almost year knowing what i know.

                            MM
                            Originally posted by marathonman View Post
                            Don't know if everyone has one or not. the reason i like this one is it has amperage usage for chassis wiring...

                            MM
                            Hi MM,

                            So are you at peace with Ufo's comprehension of current in electric circuits? If so, you can use a lot smaller gauge wire on the negative side of part G, or generator, or battery because all that current gets burned up in the resistance and coils, right?

                            And you wonder why he has to defend this stuff, or do you actually buy into it?

                            And I was comparing your method to the other MM. You said you had a working model but sold it. Did you get any photos or videos?

                            Hey, I hope the thing works. I've got a lot of experience with electric machinery and coils. I'll help where I can.

                            Regards,

                            bistander

                            Comment


                            • Not really

                              Originally posted by bistander View Post
                              Hi MM,

                              So are you at peace with Ufo's comprehension of current in electric circuits? If so, you can use a lot smaller gauge wire on the negative side of part G, or generator, or battery because all that current gets burned up in the resistance and coils, right?

                              And you wonder why he has to defend this stuff, or do you actually buy into it?

                              And I was comparing your method to the other MM. You said you had a working model but sold it. Did you get any photos or videos?

                              Hey, I hope the thing works. I've got a lot of experience with electric machinery and coils. I'll help where I can.

                              Regards,

                              bistander
                              No i don't really but a lot of what he says makes sense and some don't.

                              some things he is good at and some he's not, just like every human on this earth.
                              the only thing that makes me mad is when people like us make trivial mistakes or the information we post is beyond they're comprehension, we are nailed to the cross and attempts to shame us in front of our peers kind like what Hanon did to me and others to UFOP.

                              just because a person can't see what i see or what you see is no humanly reason to belittle that person in public. UFOP sees what you people don't see in part G. as i see a magnificent magnetic device varying the currant, everyone else sees resistors. to bad because i see through the patent and most see words.

                              contrary what has been put on this forums table, i know more about this figuera devise than most of you together, aside from my mentor that does not post here. on top of all this i stand tall and post freely with my heart in hope i can change this F-ed up world.

                              the little device i built was good little model that proved Figuera device and Hooper's BxV field is a reality. no i didn't even own a camera at the time so it is what it is.

                              i know what i am talking about as my mentor has a 5 kilowatt device running for two years. no i have not seen it but i know from what was passed to me, it's the real deal. every conversation we had i saved and studied each night till my eyed darn near bled.
                              yes ! the device is real.

                              Please do help Bistander as much as you can. read my synopsis, the patents and all the good info since i started posting. your mind will open up to the world of Figuera and his wonderful device.

                              PS. who the hell is madmack.???


                              MM
                              Last edited by marathonman; 09-20-2016, 08:06 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Earth Inductor

                                Hi

                                Not meaning to muddle the waters re current / voltage, but Buforn talks about atmospheric electricity. The results from the earth inductor experiment (scanned below) I thought interesting, in that the same charge flows what ever the speed of rotation. Book scanned - 1942, A practical course in magnetism, electricity and radio, Charlesby and Perkins.

                                Kind regards

                                John
                                Attached Files

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X