Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[Dwane]

Hi Guys,
Great video!!! The build is obviously using two components from different systems. The stator is interesting. Do we know how this is wound and where it comes from? The Armature, where did this come from? Also, this looks like it has been modified with the bluetac on it?

too many questions?

Regards

Dwane

[citfta]

Fake!!!

Dwane,

The video is a fake! UFO and I were just having fun making silly comments about it. Nothing as sloppily put together as that could possibly work like the video seems to claim.

To answer your questions though it appears the stator is from a multispeed induction motor similar to what is used in washing machines and dish washers. The armature looks similar to a universal motor such as used in power saws or vacuum cleaners.

Please don't waste any more time thinking about the video. It is like thousands of others that are posted to fool people that have no experience in electronics. The only purpose of the video is to try and get subscribers for his Youtube channel. The more subscribers he gets, the more money he gets from Youtube.

Carroll

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Guys,
Great video!!! The build is obviously using two components from different systems. The stator is interesting. Do we know how this is wound and where it comes from? The Armature, where did this come from? Also, this looks like it has been modified with the bluetac on it?

too many questions?

Regards

Dwane

Yes, excellent video right!!??

Oh!!..and we should also pay special attention to the type of wood utilized on such accurately built machine!!
IMHO the wood should have some kind of "specific" strength plus compactness which transmits properly all the frequencies involved...

Regards



Ufopolitics

[Dwane]

Hi Guys,
Are you sure this is fake? Is there not some sympathy with the devices we are talking about now? I must admit I have looked at some others last night. I particularly like this one, of which I posted a comment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2i6vywEcNY.

This one really sucked in the "unclean"!

What is really good are the props and method. Casual work ethic, tired looking soldering iron and well used dirty glue gun. Brilliant!! This guy is a genius! He would have showed Hubbard a thing or two.

Thanks for the heads up on the field coils, doubt if I will see any of those lying about for some time. Still I can start looking.

Edit: youtube pays for videos? Where have I been all these years?

Regards

Dwane

[Dwane]

Something on my mind!

Hi guys.
Dangerous territory. I have been thinking again!

1) Washing machine motor, with a single positive connection to the continuous winding of the armature, how does the alternate brush discriminate its 180degree phase with other brush?

2) Clemente's design is wasteful. Why have we not looked at primary oils wound on U shapes and then have two primaries cojoined with two secondary coils? Theoretical output times two?

3) have started reading William Hooper treatise on Motional electric fields. Not an easy grasp at first read! How would this fit in with Clemente's ideas?

Washing Machine motor hasn't arrived yet.

Regards

Dwane

[bistander]

Did you read this?

...
1) Washing machine motor, with a single positive connection to the continuous winding of the armature, how does the alternate brush discriminate its 180degree phase with other brush?
...

Hi Dwane,

I think Ufo's post and diagrams explain it nicely. What is it that you don't understand?

Hello to All,

Guess you all would be lost without my graphics...

Here is a quick drawing of Citfta's Part G:



OK, now you guys must realize that all coils in the armature of a Universal Motor (like in any other brushed motor) are "typically" OVERLAPPED, and not like represented on diagram above, I did it like that for purposes of clarity in the whole graphic.

Whole Armature is contained within the black circle.

On the center the gold smaller ring is the CONTINUOUS SLIP RING, where the Small Positive Brush is connected to Source Positive.

We could see a gold wire running from Slip Ring to just ONE ELEMENT of the Commutator, that I painted RED with a + sign within.

Commutator is based on a 16 elements as in Figuera's Patent from 1908, brushes are contacting Two Elements as also directed by Figuera, not allowing Field to Collapse.

Say we are rotating whole armature in a CW direction or as represented by "R"...Then, Primary 1 would start the short period of MAX ENERGIZING, while Primary 2 would be at it LOWEST ENERGIZING...

Advancing rotation 180º then the opposite will take effect, like seen below:



Hope is clearer now.


Regards


Ufopolitics

Regards,

bi

[seaad]

The above Will work.
Maximum total efficiency between 60 - 70% (anyhow < 100%) in/out. (My prediction)
Please prove me wrong and tell me/us how the/any OU occurs.

Regards Arne

[citfta]

The above Will work.
Maximum total efficiency between 60 - 70% (anyhow < 100%) in/out. (My prediction)
Please prove me wrong and tell me/us how the/any OU occurs.

Regards Arne

Hi seaad,

I am not even getting close to 50% out with the secondary and primary configurations I have tried. My part G is working fine at producing the opposing sine waves but the conversion between primary and secondary is very low. I have tried a couple of different coil arrangements and opposing as well as aiding magnetic fields. Have you found a way to get above the 60 - 70% you predicted?

Carroll

[Ufopolitics]

Hi seaad,

I am not even getting close to 50% out with the secondary and primary configurations I have tried. My part G is working fine at producing the opposing sine waves but the conversion between primary and secondary is very low. I have tried a couple of different coil arrangements and opposing as well as aiding magnetic fields. Have you found a way to get above the 60 - 70% you predicted?

Carroll

Hello Citfta,

Could you please share what your INPUT to Primaries Specs (Volts+Amps) are?

In general to ALL: Remember CF Generator is based on MULTIPLE MODULES of Primaries-Secondaries...so, do not expect to make it successfully w/ just one module.



Regards



Ufopolitics

[seaad]

Hi seaad,

I am not even getting close to 50% out with the secondary and primary configurations I have tried. My part G is working fine at producing the opposing sine waves but the conversion between primary and secondary is very low. I have tried a couple of different coil arrangements and opposing as well as aiding magnetic fields. Have you found a way to get above the 60 - 70% you predicted?

Carroll

Sorry citfta I made a minor fault. I made my predictions from a G-part similar to the pic added. With yours G-module it is somewhat below 60-70.

Should be interesting to see MM:s latest G.part (When finished) with both + and - sweeping around.
https://overunity.com/12794/re-inven...4515/#lastPost

Regards Arne

[dragon]

If one "module" doesn't provide the outcome needed then adding more won't help. The extraordinary claims of 100 watts in to 20kw out would lead one to believe each "module" would/should deliver a 200:1 outcome...with 10 units each using 10 watts in giving 2000 watts out. Adding more modules increases the overall outcome. So, if your not achieving the results with one then your probably not going to achieve it with 2, 10, 50, or 100 modules.

There is always going to be conversion/transformation losses from one energy to another. What mechanism would allow even 100% transfer (unity) let alone a 200:1 transformation? The extra energy, if any, must come from somewhere....

[Ufopolitics]

If one "module" doesn't provide the outcome needed then adding more won't help. The extraordinary claims of 100 watts in to 20kw out would lead one to believe each "module" would/should deliver a 200:1 outcome...with 10 units each using 10 watts in giving 2000 watts out. Adding more modules increases the overall outcome. So, if your not achieving the results with one then your probably not going to achieve it with 2, 10, 50, or 100 modules.

There is always going to be conversion/transformation losses from one energy to another. What mechanism would allow even 100% transfer (unity) let alone a 200:1 transformation? The extra energy, if any, must come from somewhere....

If We are gonna see each Module isolated (independently) from the rest (or just electrically connected in between through mere wires)...then of course...we must accomplish OU in just one.

But that's not the way it works...I mean common sense tells Us that "chaining" modules in a loop will result in 2 primaries for every 2 secondaries...

But MAIN adding in order to increase magnetic force/hence Output, would be when all independent modular magnetic fields ADD UP SPATIALLY because of the geometrical positioning in our design.

I have shown that before here...


Ufopolitics

[dragon]

If We are gonna see each Module isolated (independently) from the rest...then of course...we must accomplish OU in just one.

But that's not the way it works...I mean common sense tells Us that "chaining" modules in a loop will result in 2 primaries for every 2 secondaries...

But MAIN adding in order to increase magnetic force/hence Output, would be when all independent modular magnetic fields ADD UP SPATIALLY because of the geometrical positioning in our design.

I have shown that before here...


Ufopolitics

Excellent explanation... no offense intended simply my normal skepticism, unfortunately, it really doesn't help to explain the "extra" energy. Adding more secondaries simply requires more energy from the primaries to drive them so we are still at a loss in transformation ... how does one reduce the losses to achieve a unity ( or above ) outcome. Each one should exceed input thus adding to the total excess in output.

If we look at the diagram below, a generator patent from the late 1800's - series wound DC generator. In this case the armature coils would rotate inside the field coils. Current would begin upon rotation with either residual magnetism or another external initial excitation.

If we lock the armature in place and manipulate the field coils ( part G ) then we basically have a stationary generator. Now we have to create a force from the field coils equal to that of the force needed to rotate the armature through the original field. What we now have is a transformer. The field coils would operate with the lower voltage ( after the load ) with the current available dictated by the load. Using only the current available and the lower voltage provided after the load we need to transform the low voltage through the field coils to a higher voltage at the same amperage in the armature coils. How is that possible? As soon as we alter the voltage through the system the losses start showing up.

For instance if we have 100 watt bulb as a load and we're producing 120 volts at the armature but reducing the flow through the load to say 100 volts with 20 volts flowing through field coils we experience a major loss. We have .8 amps flowing through the circuit the bulb is absorbing 100 volts or 80 watts leaving us with 20 watts to manipulate the field coils. We need to take the 20 watts and manipulate it back into 120 watts to keep the cycle going....

There in lies my skepticism ....

[Ufopolitics]

Excellent explanation... no offense intended simply my normal skepticism, unfortunately, it really doesn't help to explain the "extra" energy. Adding more secondaries simply requires more energy from the primaries to drive them so we are still at a loss in transformation ... how does one reduce the losses to achieve a unity ( or above ) outcome. Each one should exceed input thus adding to the total excess in output.

If we look at the diagram below, a generator patent from the late 1800's - series wound DC generator. In this case the armature coils would rotate inside the field coils. Current would begin upon rotation with either residual magnetism or another external initial excitation.

If we lock the armature in place and manipulate the field coils ( part G ) then we basically have a stationary generator. Now we have to create a force from the field coils equal to that of the force needed to rotate the armature through the original field. What we now have is a transformer. The field coils would operate with the lower voltage ( after the load ) with the current available dictated by the load. Using only the current available and the lower voltage provided after the load we need to transform the low voltage through the field coils to a higher voltage at the same amperage in the armature coils. How is that possible? As soon as we alter the voltage through the system the losses start showing up.

For instance if we have 100 watt bulb as a load and we're producing 120 volts at the armature but reducing the flow through the load to say 100 volts with 20 volts flowing through field coils we experience a major loss. We have .8 amps flowing through the circuit the bulb is absorbing 100 volts or 80 watts leaving us with 20 watts to manipulate the field coils. We need to take the 20 watts and manipulate it back into 120 watts to keep the cycle going....

There in lies my skepticism ....

Well yes, I see your point, plus reason to be skeptic...and so am I.

I have been able to achieve a "hypothetical" OU with my set up...meaning if we read INDEPENDENTLY out Volts versus In Volts I get 50V IN versus 175V OUT...NOT LOADED.
And measuring (by shorting output with ampmeter) I get like 7-8 AMPS OUT using 2.0A at INPUT...no increase at INPUT.

Sounds wonderful right?

Well the issue is when LOADED Output (INCANDESCENT-HALOGEN BULB) Voltage DROPS way down too much...so like You wrote above: have to increase Input plus RPM at controller to satisfy load demand...but no longer OU.

I believe the issue I have is due to not having a closed core like a Toroid...I had OPEN CYLINDRICAL CORES on above test...so, I believe every cycle FIELD MUST RESTART from ZERO when output shorted by load...hence the V drop at load.

Interesting thing here is...that AMPERAGE remains the same at OU related to IN AMPS...versus OUT AMPS...with a FULL SHORT CIRCUIT from ampmeter.

All rotary generators have their field coils(INDUCED) enclosed within a Closed Core...so Field is not wasted in Space but remains within core...SO gets to a point where EXCITER is just moving EXISTING FIELD within core.


Regards



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Some general aspects on Figuera and Part G.

Part G is just a remote controller to obtain Two Signals Opposed ALTERNATIVELY PLUS at UNISON, at 180° apart.

But the way Patent shows all independently set two primaries and just one secondary in the middle and all set apart from the others...does NOT work.

For the same Input to Two Primaries We could Induce Two Secondaries, but only LOOPED ALL FOUR within a TOROID CORE....then we have ONE MODULE.

I still have to test that set up with TOROID CORE...


Regards


Ufopolitics