Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[citfta]

Let's back up to the beginning. As I understand it from reading most of this thread the Figuera device is NOT supposed to be a transformer. The theory is that by moving a strong magnetic field back and forth across the secondary coils power will be generated in those coils.

If that is true and I am not saying just yet that it isn't, then the normal relationship of primary turns to secondary turns should not apply. We only need two strong fields opposing each other and having those fields being varied in step with one another at 180 degrees difference between them. We have seen in a video posted on this thread of someone moving a coil back and forth between two opposing magnets and generating current this way. This certainly seems to confirm the theory.

So we only need two strong fields and a way to control them. We can easily get these fields by making the primaries of smaller gauge wire that is several times longer than the wire currently being used. That greatly lowers the current needed and simplifies the control of the current. It will also make it much easier to make a self powering unit if the input side current is lowered.

I don't buy at all the idea of bouncing the current back and forth between the primaries and part G. There is nothing in the patent that even hints of that being what is going on.

As soon as I get done with several other projects I am working on I will build a Figuera device using some real principles of how things work instead of fantasy ideas.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[Cadman]

hanon, you are wasting your time. Until the so called builders take the time to actually learn something you will never convince them of the proper way of doing something. As your formula clearly shows the magnetic strength comes from the ampere turns. That clearly means you can have a lot of turns and few amps and get just as much magnetic force as from a few turns and a lot of amps. I wound a coil just a couple of days ago from #30 gauge wire. Using only 450 milliamps it is a very strong magnet. Of course I had several hundred feet of wire in order to get a strong magnet but that saved me a lot of amps to get the same result as a shorter heavier gauge wire.

Why so many blindly follow someone without doing a little research on their own is amazing. Our society in the U.S. has been so dumbed down by our media and so called entertainment industry that very few seem to be able to think for themselves.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Now who's being insulting?
One of the tricks with this Figuera gizmo is to get the field coils to build the magnetic field to the practical max of the core material and then reduce it to the core remanence in a controlled manner 50 to 60 times per second without reversing the electrical polarity. Time constant of electromagnets. Do you, any of you, have any suggestions for accomplishing that without expensive or exotic cores?

Hi CM,

I am just wondering how you get a 3 VDC input using a 12 V car battery. Also on the partial quote above last paragraph, it sounds like you were able to vary the input voltage. How did you do that using the car battery?

Thanks for posting results.

bi

Added resistance of course. A hand wound resistor of 0.032 nichrome at the negative lead from the battery. I simply hook the neg lead to whatever loop I want.

@ Cadman; . If your values "18 watts in, 13.75 watts out." are correct I have to say that your efficiency 76% is very very good. Much better than I have ever expected.

The numbers are correct. Why are you surprised?

Your disappointment "... I will mark this build as another fail." comes of course from that you didn't comes closer or above to 100%.

Don't jump the gun. I haven't reached the point of declaring this a failure just yet.

But with your config. 4 segment toroid "output unit" I have to remind you of what you wrote to me in post #1515 : "If you build a transformer, you have a transformer, not a generator." I wish you best luck anyhow!

Touché. Believe me, I was aware that I might be building an oddball transformer. However, it does not exhibit all the characteristics of a transformer, nor does it exhibit all the characteristics of a generator. For example, turns ratio does not apply.

Can you describe or show your output waveform?

No, unfortunately, and I really need that info. I was gifted a scope by my dear wife at Christmas, bless her heart, but it's a PC scope and I don't have a spare computer I can risk for the garage yet. That and it's too cold for a PC in an unheated area right now. I'm working on that.

What you guys should realize is, the main purpose of my first build is to test and verify or disprove some claims made by others as well as a few of my own ideas.

In that respect it has been a total success.

Regards,
Cadman

[bistander]

Resistor voltage control

Added resistance of course. A hand wound resistor of 0.032 nichrome at the negative lead from the battery. I simply hook the neg lead to whatever loop I want.

Thanks. Ought to warm your garage a bit.

bi

[Cadman]

Thanks. Ought to warm your garage a bit.

bi

Nah, you can rest your fingers on it at 6A. Crank the amps up and then it will scorch the wood under it but the lumens are lousy until the flames get big.

CM

[Cadman]

...
As soon as I get done with several other projects I am working on I will build a Figuera device using some real principles of how things work instead of fantasy ideas.

Respectfully,
Carroll

That will be great! Your input will be very welcome!

Respectfully,
Cadman

[marathonman]

Crash and burn

Can't wait to see that CRASH AND BURN to the ground.
Please bless us your with your superior intellect your Highness.

I can't wait.
Sorry, i couldn't resist the temptation, i am still laughing.

the power from the primaries is not bounced back and forth between the primaries and Part G (that is just crazy). if you would open your closed mind and ears as to what was said you would realize the power is recycled or reinjected back into part G around the system along with the partial from the secondary. at NO time is the power shuffled between part G and the primaries it is recycled through the rest of the system. really simple for open minded people that don't live in a box but you wouldn't know anything about that now would ya.

MM

[hanon1492]

If part G is not controlling the currant in your present build then your part G is wired wrong plain and simple and not enough self inductance is present. Doug's part G has substantially more winding's on it then when i first thought and after reviewing my notes i have concluded that this is the problem with the tests the builders have posted so far. i have had an influence on that mistake and for that i am truly sorry but this is my findings after reading all of my notes staying up most of the night rereading and studying every detail.

What about when your "notes" said to use very few turns and wind it with thick copper bars ??

Does your "notes" also suggest to create weak electromagnets with few turns? Well, maybe in the next 2 months your notes will change again...

We only have one reference, the one included in one Buforn's patent where he said to have used 100 volts and 1 ampere in the electromagnets. For me this a high impedance device ( Z = V / I = 100 ohms ). And if he used just 1 ampere , as average value, then his electromagnets must have had many turns. Electromagnet Force ~ ( N•I )^2

The impedance of the whole system (regulator + electromagnets) is what control the current. And both parts must have a part of the total impedance. If electromagnets have very small impedance then current will skyrocket when the regulator connects directly with each of them.And it will go to zero when moving far away from one and approch the other electromagnet. Just apply Ohm's Law and you will see what happen when impedance in each electromagnet is almost negligible compared with the impedance in the regulator (whether resistors or inductors). Both parts, electromagnets and regulator, must have a balanced impedance.

[seaad]

MM starts swinging like a weather vane now.
Perhaps it is time for us to add some more windings on the part-G as God did . ""... more winding's on it then i first thought; and after reviewing my notes i have concluded; that this is the problem with the tests the builders have posted so far.""

hanon maybe it is time to start up / re-inventing-wheel-part 2 (serious-tinker-only ) / and stipulate some rules.
Regards / Arne

[bistander]

More MM contradictions

...

the power from the primaries is not bounced back and forth between the primaries and Part G (that is just crazy). if you would open your closed mind and ears as to what was said you would realize the power is recycled or reinjected back into part G around the system along with the partial from the secondary. at NO time is the power shuffled between part G and the primaries ...
MM

this zone between the two north facing field is a null zone that is used to inject the power into part G from the reducing primary

This quote from you a few days ago appears to be a contradiction compared to your quote of today.

bi

[citfta]

the power from the primaries is not bounced back and forth between the primaries and Part G (that is just crazy). if you would open your closed mind and ears as to what was said you would realize the power is recycled or reinjected back into part G around the system along with the partial from the secondary. at NO time is the power shuffled between part G and the primaries it is recycled through the rest of the system. really simple for open minded people that don't live in a box but you wouldn't know anything about that now would ya.

MM

I think MM needs to read what he writes before he posts it. He writes that the power doesn't bounce back and forth between the primaries and part G but then he says the power is recycled or reinjected back into part G. Then he writes that at no time is the power shuffled between part G and the primaries it is recycled through the rest of the system. What rest of the system is he talking about? There are only the primaries and part G for the power to move back and forth between if his claims are correct about how this device operates. He is so far off in his ideas he even has himself confused now about what is supposed to take place.

Bouncing back and forth and recycling and shuffling are all saying the same thing.

Carroll

[hanon1492]

Even if MM were right with the energy recycling idea, let´s see how many kilowatts of energy can store an inductor....

Calculating the inductance of a toroid with the typical sizes that we have seen in the pictures the resulting inductance should be between 0.020 H and 0.040 H (assuming 35 turns in the toroid and relative permeability of 4000). Link to calculator.



Being optimistism we can take 0.040 H and an average current to feed the electromagnets around 6 amperes:

E = 1/2·L·I^2 = ....= 0.72 joules

Taking into account that this process is repeated at 50 Hz (50 times each second) then the final energy is 0.72 * 50 = 36 watts !!

Conclusion: the toroid can be great to reduce the heat losses in the resistors, but it can not store big amounts of energy.

Anyhow I do not buy the idea of the energy recycling in the toroid. If the energy were sent back to the toroid then the current would reverse and the system will suffer a polarity reversal, which is a capital sin in this device. Besides, the patents never mention any energy recycling mechanism.

[hanon1492]

Analyzing the impendance in the whole system with the Ohm´s Law ( Voltage = Impedance · Current ) we have that the condition for maximum and minimum current is found when the battery is connected directly to one row of electromagnets and the other path for current has to transverse the regulator and the other row of electromagnets:



Z_regulator : impedance in the regulator ( whether resistance or inductive reactance )

Z_electromagnets: impedance in each row of electromagnets


Maximum current: I_max = Voltage / Z_electromagnet

Minimum current: I_min = Voltage / ( Z_regulator + Z_electromagnets)


Then the achievable ratio of currents is:

I_max / I_min = ( Z_regulator + Z_electromagnets ) / Z_electromagnets



If Z_reg = Z_elec then I_max/I_min = 2

If Z_reg = 2·Z_elec then I_max/I_min = 3

If Z_reg = 4·Z_elec then I_max/I_min = 5

If Z_elec approach to zero then I_max/I_min goes to a very high value. Not good. (Besides when Z_elec tend toward zero then you have very few turns and your electromagnets are very weak)

The impedances in each part should keep a balance. You should match those impedances to the needed value of current ratio that you need according to your geometry (coils length ratio), etc... You may find this spreadsheet useful to estimate your set of values.

[citfta]

Thank you Hanon.

Your calculations make it very clear why so many people are having problems with getting part G to control the current.

Your calculations also explain clearly why UFO's commutator is arcing every 180 degrees.

Good job explaining that.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[seaad]

Compare

Compare this to Hanon example above: Here below a pic showing my simulator values at 1000 Hz giving a sinusoidal curve out. N.B. A normal transformer used for N-y-S! The Ohm values in pic are the internal copper wire resistanses, just estimated. N=66% Part-G is splitted into two part-G cores here!

XL 5 mH @ 1000 Hz = about 33 Ohm
XL 100 mH @ 50 Hz = about 33 Ohm

Regards / Arne

[seaad]

Thank you Hanon.
Your calculations make it very clear why so many people are having problems with getting part G to control the current.
Carroll

And that is anyhow the easy part!
Then they (we) have to figure out how to make OU
Regards / Arne