Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

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

  • Part G

    Solarlab;

    The energy is transferred back and forth between the primaries and part G while (Recycling) using a small amount from the second secondary to replace heat, core and wire losses that are very little.
    so i honestly i don't believe excess energy is coming in externally in part G. the duel independent primaries together have a 100 % E field, no other standard generator in the world can achieve this.
    this device does not waste nor want after initial start up.

    another thing i find hard is why are people having such a hard time with Hooper's work and Figuera's device. if you take one primary and switch it like figuera, up and down you will get output, small though but more then magnet. do the same with a magnet in and out from the wire making the field stronger or weaker and the same small output will appear. now do the same as before but add the second primary or magnet up and down or in and out for the magnets but opposite as the first. as one is increasing or in with the magnet while the second is decreasing or going out with the magnet, the BxV field will be double the output as before just as Hopper's experiment and as does the figuers device produce a pure BV field as in 100 % E field.
    since Walter Russell states we wind our coils wrong loosing 50 % E field to magnetism adding a second primary adds that lost part back to the E field making it a 100 % pure BxV field again.
    if you take the primaries down to far or the magnets out to far from the wire, induction will fall to half to the rising primary or incoming magnet.
    in both cases above spin directions are in the same direction whether through a core or through air.

    MM
    Last edited by marathonman; 09-28-2016, 04:17 AM.

    Comment


    • Linear versus Differential Equation

      F. Y. I.

      MM Thanks for your comments.

      Note: my point was simply there is a big (huge) difference between a LINEAR and a DIFFERENTIAL equation. Especially when considering Potential and Kinetic Energy, with respect to Electron Acceleration.

      The broader implications are well beyond the scope of this comment as those who are skilled-in-the-art will certainly appreciate.

      FIN

      Comment


      • The magic of the Figuera generator is that makes possible to convert two variable magnetic fields in time in the electromagnets (dB/dt) into a motional magnetic field in space (in the induced coil), v•B , as in all generators, moving back and forth the magnetic lines.

        Last edited by hanon1492; 09-28-2016, 11:26 PM.

        Comment


        • Cores

          the pic is just one of many ways to acquire core. broke welding machine, tossed out transformers, even local scrap yard will call you if some money for a phone call is involved. being creative on a budget will get you there.



          MM

          Comment


          • questions

            Hi Solarlab,

            Originally posted by Solarlab View Post
            A simple thought: consider a linear equation (E=v x B) versus a differential equation (E=dB/dt) [change in B divided by change in time];
            In the first equation, v is velocity which is the time based derivative of position, X. So that equation could be written; E = (dX/dt) x B, which then very much looks like your second equation (E=dB/dt). So I don't understand your point. Can you elaborate?

            Originally posted by Solarlab View Post
            also consider the "G" {stepping staircase commutator}; amongst other things... e.g. why a precision German built (high speed?) commutator circa 1900's {the "dt" part}?
            And again, what is it you are questioning?

            Originally posted by Solarlab View Post
            Does an ounce of lead accelerated to 1000 feet per second [(same thing as) dB/dt] contain (or generate) more energy than an ounce of lead accelerated to 2 feet per second [dB/dt]?
            And lastly, what is your answer to your question? You are comparing dropping a fishing line weight a few inches into your lap to taking a 45 caliber gunshot to the gut.

            Sorry, I don't understand what you're talking about. Please give me explanations.

            Regards,

            bi

            Comment


            • @Solarlab
              Did Fugeura "discover" an excess of energy while attempting to eliminate the mechanical parts of a generator. Maybe simplified but stranger things have happened!
              In history the time lines are generally always the same and this is no exception.

              Follow the patent timelines, Figuera was building a better mechanical generator then a better controller for his generator. He found the controller was producing the majority of effects not so much the generator itself. He modified the mechanical generator again then deduced the generator could generate while stationary while still retaining the same properties. He continued to expand on this theme through many variations of stationary generators and patents however as we can see the controller remained.

              This is not exceptional it is in fact quite normal if you follow the time lines of all the inventors who have ever built motionless generators. The real trick here is understanding when the real discovery was actually made and what they were doing at the time. Do you know when he made his great discovery?... obviously just before his patents started including the controller you call part G which is why it was included and remained through all the future patents.

              I thought this was obvious to everyone?. He actually tells you what he was hoping to accomplish with his switching apparatus if you had bothered to read all of the patents in detail and formulate timelines. Figuera didn't just stumble onto anything, that is our own personal flavor of pipedream of what happens. He used a slow, methodical, logical and scientific approach to a goal which took Figurea decades to achieve... that's how it happens.

              AC
              Last edited by Allcanadian; 09-29-2016, 08:21 PM.

              Comment


              • questions

                F.Y.I.

                An attempt to address your comments/concerns in depth is beyond my capabilities; but let me refer you to the following briefs. These are, for me at least, educational in a quest to discover how and why these devices might function.

                Since conventional physics and engineering theory appears to fall [a bit] short; the only remedy is to look further. Of course some may already know the exact detailed formulas, methods and techniques; but, as yet, I have not encountered them!

                "Paradoxes" electromagnetic induction
                https://translate.googleusercontent....dz6325wqaukyNQ

                "Two-faced" induction
                https://translate.googleusercontent....wBHZff2FDdaXRQ

                Magnetic field: properties and "paradoxes"
                https://translate.googleusercontent....sTlJf3sBpxpx-w

                The vortex electric field
                https://translate.google.com/transla...ric-field.html

                ========

                The equivalence of magnetic and kinetic energy
                The equivalence of magnetic and kinetic energy | ?From Paradox to Paradigm?

                Discussion on magnetic and kinetic energy
                http://www.paradox-paradigm.nl/?page_id=327

                With respect to the "G" Commutator - wild speculation but to "leave no stone un-turned:" A rapid sharp change in voltage {step} creates an very quick electron acceleration {dv/dt} which, in turn, yields excess kinetic energy via "velocity modulation???" ((- prove me wrong! ))

                FIN

                Comment


                • Figuera in general

                  Allcanadian;

                  "I thought this was obvious to everyone?. He actually tells you what he was hoping to accomplish with his switching apparatus if you had bothered to read all of the patents in detail and formulate timelines. Figuera didn't just stumble onto anything, that is our own personal flavor of pipedream of what happens. He used a slow, methodical, logical and scientific approach to a goal which took Figurea decades to achieve... that's how it happens."

                  I whole heartedly agree, Mr. Figuera was a very quiet person in my book and did completely think this device through and through.

                  Solarlab;

                  "With respect to the "G" Commutator - wild speculation but to "leave no stone un-turned:" A rapid sharp change in voltage {step} creates an very quick electron acceleration {dv/dt} which, in turn, yields excess kinetic energy via "velocity modulation???" ((- prove me wrong! ))"

                  Referring to the brush approaching set N i am assuming and negative velocity for set S via magnetic manipulation as any time a magnetic field is involved kinetic energy is slowed immensely.


                  ps. arguing will get you and us no where fast. i'm not upset but could you both move this to general discussion. had enough on OU. to last me a life time.

                  it's all good though.

                  MM

                  Comment


                  • paper-clip

                    hanon1492:

                    The graph you posted at 973 is exactly the same as I get on my dual-trace scope.
                    Always positive going and never reaching zero.
                    Both coils are being pulsed in unison in increments of 1/2 amp for 8 separate pulses
                    and then reverses.
                    Coil A : from 8 amps down to 4 amps: Coil B: from 4 amps to 8 amps.
                    Primaries are 1.5" cores with 340 turns each. 2.75" long.
                    Just using 12 volts for one unit for proof of concept.

                    Before winding my secondary, I thought I'd try the "paper clip" test first
                    to get an idea on how wide it should be. Coils are 1.5" apart and with the clip at the
                    exact center where my secondary will be, the clip only wobbles back & forth by 3/4",
                    telling me it's much too narrow for a decent secondary.
                    So guess I need to change things to get a stronger magnetic field.
                    I'd just like to know. Am I on the right track or is there something I'm doing wrong?

                    Comment


                    • Hi Elcheapo,

                      Sounds like you're making good progress. What did you use for switching, pulsing, or part G? Love to see some photos... hint...hint.

                      bi

                      Comment


                      • current control

                        Originally posted by bistander View Post
                        Hi Elcheapo,

                        Sounds like you're making good progress. What did you use for switching, pulsing, or part G? Love to see some photos... hint...hint.

                        bi
                        Hi bistander:
                        My control circuit is solid state as I described in post 908.
                        No need for resistors or commutators, as just 2 power fets controls the current
                        going to the 2 primaries. I had to add lots of switching circuits to isolate the
                        different sets of pulses.
                        Not something just anyone would want to build as lots of parts involved.
                        A picture wouldn't tell you too much. Just a rat's nest
                        If you're still interested I could hand-copy a schematic and post it for you.

                        Comment


                        • F.Y.I.

                          Before moving on (as requested) please review the information contained in the post below [another thread on this site]:

                          NEW (recent*) DISCOVERIES IN ELECTRODYNAMICS AND ELECTROMAGNETICS
                          (Including practical, easily performed, experimental proofs)
                          * It appears Tesla knew of, and exploited, these phenomena long ago!

                          http://www.energeticforum.com/293040-post10820.html

                          NOTE: I do not "promote" any of the theories nor information presented in my posts {F.Y.I. only}. They are simply given in an educational sense to generate "food for thought," and, as with all things "internet" [or in real life for that matter], analyze carefully for added value and truth. Just because someone, no matter how credible (or forceful) they may appear, - "says it is so" - it may not be! Also, as we have seen here, even "experimental proofs" require due diligence and scrutiny.

                          FIN

                          Comment


                          • Proof Possitive

                            Yes, just because some idiot suggest something, do not take all as word.
                            some people on this site are totally full of **** and others really know the Figuera device. so i would take all the wonderful information and build it, and judge for yourself.
                            any idiot that thinks they know the figuera that runs there mouth frequently should actually study all the patents in depth before they run there mouths.

                            running your mouth and building a prototype are two different things, imagine that.


                            build it .

                            Elcheap0;
                            have never tried single circuitry, good luck. please enlighten the forum.


                            MM
                            Last edited by marathonman; 10-02-2016, 04:03 AM.

                            Comment


                            • My advice, be diligent

                              Originally posted by Elcheapo View Post
                              I'd just like to know. Am I on the right track or is there something I'm doing wrong?
                              Elcheapo,

                              Not knowing the details of your setup, I offer this as general information to you, and everyone else.

                              If you are using PWM, then speaking from experience pulse wave modulation of current did not work for me. Why? I have a theory and that theory is that PWM is not at all the same input as constant DC current at a certain value. Just look at the PWM scope trace in the ms range. Figuera and Buforn did not use hundreds of full current pulses spaced with 0 current to feed the coils.

                              Also speaking from experience, and also from analyzing the patents, breaking the input into equal time slices for each current level does not duplicate the signal that the commutator of part G delivers. It does not look like the usual AC sine wave. Draw the commutator out with the jumpers shown in the 1914 patents. Each commutator segment is a time slice. Graph it out yourself with the brush always in contact with two segments, as per the patent, and you will see. Even the size of the brush makes a difference. Using the proper time values made a HUGE difference in my early build even with PWM.

                              If you are attempting a build then build it as exactly as the patent shows as possible. Weigh any advice or theory you read on the forums against the patents and judge accordingly.

                              CM

                              Comment


                              • pwm

                                Originally posted by Cadman View Post
                                Elcheapo,

                                Not knowing the details of your setup, I offer this as general information to you, and everyone else.

                                If you are using PWM, then speaking from experience pulse wave modulation of current did not work for me. Why? I have a theory and that theory is that PWM is not at all the same input as constant DC current at a certain value. Just look at the PWM scope trace in the ms range. Figuera and Buforn did not use hundreds of full current pulses spaced with 0 current to feed the coils.

                                Also speaking from experience, and also from analyzing the patents, breaking the input into equal time slices for each current level does not duplicate the signal that the commutator of part G delivers. It does not look like the usual AC sine wave. Draw the commutator out with the jumpers shown in the 1914 patents. Each commutator segment is a time slice. Graph it out yourself with the brush always in contact with two segments, as per the patent, and you will see. Even the size of the brush makes a difference. Using the proper time values made a HUGE difference in my early build even with PWM.

                                If you are attempting a build then build it as exactly as the patent shows as possible. Weigh any advice or theory you read on the forums against the patents and judge accordingly.

                                CM
                                Thanks for the info Cadman.
                                No, I'm not using pwm. My coils are pulsed only with positive going dc pulses
                                derived from a 12 volt power supply with a 500 ohm pot that sets the current
                                level for each of the 8 sets. That's 16 small pots to bias the pwr fets.
                                Tried explaining my setup in a previous post.
                                Most people on this thread who are using the resistor/commutator method.
                                all seem to fail, except for MM. So just thought I'd try something different.
                                I'm sure CF's setup would have been completely different if he had what we
                                have today.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X