Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[seaad]

UFOpolitics;
Goes really BOTH V and A up simultaneously on the PSU? Not only the Voltage and A the same? / Arne

[Ufopolitics]

My Figuera Resistors Test 2...

Hello to All,

I have been conducting several tests with my 300W Resistors...and last night I was able to kind of stabilize the whole system...and I want to share here my results...as later on I will be loading a short video where I show what I am talking about described below.

I am using my Switching PSU to power up the Exciter System...since there are resistors it works fine up to a point, and so still limited not to deliver its full Max Output (600W)...However, enough power to experience a great knowledge on this device.

And if any of you have the possibility to make this tests, I really encourage you to do them...you will be amazed by the experience.

I have so far the same set of Two Primaries and one Secondary, resistors are nine (9) and primaries are wound with 16 awg, four layers...0.4 ohms each. and since electromagnets are so low resistance I had sparks at commutator due to coils kick back...so, I tried reversed Diodes at each coil terminal and sparks were gone, but Induction decreased...so, last night I tested another option...:

[IMG][/IMG]

I installed diodes as seen above (paralleled to both end resistors)...they are heat sink diodes from an old generator I had taken apart...and by being there, they prevent the "jump" when cycles restarts another 180º (sparks take place exactly when switching from full contact back to resistance path)...and Induction is not reduced... even noticing that current travel in return mode is reduced to a shorter path for the positive flow.

At this point I am experiencing Over Unity at Secondary Output, according to Scope Signals, (one probe connected at one primary terminal and second channel to output)which is seen clearly even at very low RPM´s of rotary switch.

Both Scope Probes are set at 10X Attenuation Mode (which means we have to multiply times 10 the V Max Values), in order to capture entire signal within screen... both probes with same V and timing settings.

But the OU result is not what capture my attention...

I have set a Diode Bridge at Secondary Output and have a V meter connected to the -/+ terminals...to demonstrate that as I increase speed (RPM's at Rotary Switch) and NOT touching PSU feeding primaries...the Meter increases its Voltage display...but that is not it...the Switching PSU kind of "automatically" starts rising up Voltage and Amperage....to a point of acceleration where huge sparks start appearing at commutator.

And it was very interesting as funny to see that the more I speed up the small motor...the higher PSU will display its V&A...just like if I would be dialing it up with myself...and I laugh...because I said..."this way for sure I will never show OU comparing to Source"...the PSU was always higher than V Meter at output bridge. But Not at Scope!!...Scope was still showing OU, based on signals peak levels, plus at V Max readings at 10X between both channels.

And my final conclusion is that Both Primaries are generating back also an output, which is greater than the input they are originally taking from PSU.

The way I see this... is that resistors can not store/retain that excess power received back from Primaries like Part G would...so this excess power is sent back to PSU...which at this point serves as an Output Meter on V & A based on the difference from the original Output settings.

And I understand that this phenomena have to be observed on a video -for you all to believe me-...plus, so you see with your own eyes...

Resistors do not get hot...they are on heat sink...but still not even warm...what is getting hot is the small motor by running at high speeds...but I will eventually add either a small two phase BLDC Fan...or take it apart and install a plastic fan at rotor...later on...not now, since I will have to re-align motor which is a pain in the neck...small fan would come in first...they spend nickel and dimes of energy.

I am building another set of primaries and secondaries at this point...but the way I see things with resistors...the more the primaries at the exciting system...the more power I will get back to PSU...so it will become a "never ending saga..."

My conclusions is that even being a resistors simple test...it yielded very positive results...as a great learning experience about the main components behavior on Figuera's device.


Regards to All.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Figuera MPM

Hi Ufo,

It's not a scam. In generators (and motors) we are interested in generated voltage and that is maximized by orienting the most armature conductors in the moving field (in the proper direction). This happens to be 90°e from the armature-main field alignment which would yield maximum flux linkage resulting in the highest induction, which is not the purpose of the generator (or motor). Transformers are used for that purpose (inducing voltage in the secondary).

Hello Bistander,

I am sorry to disagree on the bold and specifically underlined statement...and the problem is that so far it has not been able to be demonstrated with a simple experiment.

As Figuera writes...Max Induction takes place when the Magnetized Exciters Cores line up with the Induced ones, it is exactly at that point-line when the magnetized core magnetizes the induced core ...there are many sites out there which coincides with this concept...but hey...it is ok to disagree.

I see no scam. If you want inducton, use a transformer. Use a generator if you want voltage generated from motion.

Both (Transformers and Generators) Induce an EMF...different methods...but bolts down to the same effect..."varying the Magnetic Field"...Faraday 1st Law...One uses AC, the second one (Generator) uses DC and variation occurs over Space/Time.

I do realize this thread is about an apparatus claiming to generate voltage (and deliver power) without physical motion at power levels in excess of what can be attributed to induction. The mechanism or process for this feat is not yet identified and understood. The best you can do is use the hints left behind by CF, build it and test it. I'll worry about using it as a motor once it has been demonstrated.

I am working on that......and it does work...as you wrote...the best way is to build it then test it and verify with your own eyes it performs exactly as predicted by Figuera.

Electric generators (and motors) are considered energy conversion devices. Transformers are electric power conditioning devices. I'm not sure where this Figuera apparatus would fit, but, WTF, if it actually works, it'll deserve its own class.

Regards,

bi

Yes, for sure it deserves its own class...Motion Perpetual Generator...Motionless Generator...Free Energy Machine...and all the works around that fact...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Generator fields

...

Classic Scam, considers Maximum Induction takes place when Magnetic Field Center of action (B-FIELD, Lorentz BS) is EXACTLY sweeping MAJORITY OF CONDUCTORS on the Induced Core-Coil Assy. Which means at 90º (Electrical Angle BS) in a Rotary Arrangement away from cores center....MEANING WHEN CORES ARE NOT ALIGNED!!
...

Hi Ufo,

It's not a scam. In generators (and motors) we are interested in generated voltage and that is maximized by orienting the most armature conductors in the moving field (in the proper direction). This happens to be 90°e from the armature-main field alignment which would yield maximum flux linkage resulting in the highest induction, which is not the purpose of the generator (or motor). Transformers are used for that purpose (inducing voltage in the secondary).

I see no scam. If you want inducton, use a transformer. Use a generator if you want voltage generated from motion.

I do realize this thread is about an apparatus claiming to generate voltage (and deliver power) without physical motion at power levels in excess of what can be attributed to induction. The mechanism or process for this feat is not yet identified and understood. The best you can do is use the hints left behind by CF, build it and test it. I'll worry about using it as a motor once it has been demonstrated.

Electric generators (and motors) are considered energy conversion devices. Transformers are electric power conditioning devices. I'm not sure where this Figuera apparatus would fit, but, WTF, if it actually works, it'll deserve its own class.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Want to do the test

...

I'm taking a break to recharge as i am completely drained.

MM

Hey MM, before you go, as you so often tell us to do the tests, would you please answer my post:

Hi MM,

Thanks for the reply. LCR meters do supply a reasonable current for the test. I feel confident in seaad's test. But I would like to duplicate the test you describe and claim to have conducted yourself. Please elaborate as how you were able to measure "currant drop as currant is introduces to the wire".

Thanks in advance,

bi

Thanks,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

OK Ufo, let's use that single phase generator of yours. The DC "exciting fields" is the "field" of the 2-pole generator; a pole pair; one north (N) & one south (S). The stator is the armature. It is wound such that when the field (created by the rotor) is present, there are two armature poles. These armature poles point (or are oriented) midway between the field ploes. So, when there is armature current, half of each pole is attracted to the pole half directly across the air gap from it and the other half of each pole is repulsed by the the pole half directly across the air gap from it.

Your classic generator runs half in attraction and half in repulsion.

Hello Bistander,

Yes, I know all the above...but I was strictly referring to having a Generator, where the Exciter's Fields are based on N/N and not N/S like you've cited above...it would be very simple to do that...if we have two coils at rotor field, we , instead of winding it all continuously...we wind one CW and the other CCW...then we would have coil 1 being N/S and next a S/N Coil, so we will have both rotor outer faces being North when we join both coils and axis at center like: N/S<axis>S/N...understand now?

No such thing Uh?

I don't think you ever agreed with me as I've said it before: There is no difference between generators and motors.

Of course not!!...Now tell me...we get Figuera Motionless Generator working...then tell me...is that A MOTOR??!!

Of course not!

So with that in mind, there are repulsion motors. As such, running one of those as a generator wound be a "repulsion" generator. I've never worked directly with those types of machines and don't really want to now, but a study of them might provide some insight to Figuera.

You have cited the completely different and wrong arrangement...a Repulsion Motor, is a Single Phase Motor, that its Stator works with AC...then induces a Reversed field produced by Lenz Law to Rotor Field...arranged wiring's through brushes in order to face the like pole on the other side...so it is a "Repulsion" Motor.

If You try to use this set as a Generator...it could never, ever being even slightly compared to Figuera's Machine Concept.

Anyway, I think we stray off topic. I can see some "explanation" value in the sliding paper diagram, but also see where it does misrepresent the phenomena to some degree. Don't see where it's worth the time arguing about.

Regards,

bi

Ok...I do not see it off topic at all...but then again, different views.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Arguing

Cadman;
Quote;
"It doesn't matter whether there is a double E field at play or whether flat wire is better than round, ad nauseam. So how about we stop the endless debating and poking each other with sticks and get busy producing some real empirical results. The first two goals above would be a good place to start."

I completely agree.

Hanon;
Quote;
"I also see pointless to keep arguing about that animation."

"All i can say is, How does it feel???"

Try 5 or 6 people crying every time you post something not according to Classical Electrodynamics BS.

Sorry but reality is this device is NOT ACCORDING TO CLASSICAL ELECTRODYNAMICS so get use to it, ALL OF YOU.
everyone on this thread needs to quit crying like babies and GET BUILDING at least something. whether it is right or wrong sitting on your butts whining does NOTHING to advance this device AT ALL.


I have done more in a few months then ALL OF YOU PUT TOGETHER in the last 4 years but do you see me complaining or crying like a baby about it ?????
NO YOU DON'T i just keep charging forward taking all the BS.

I have an idea, try holding the mouths (AS IN EVERYONE) for a little while so we can all work together to complete this device. working together will be much more pleasant then hearing all the whining and having everyone at each other's throats and beating each other with sticks.

JUST A THOUGHT, TAKE IT AS YOU WANT.

I'm taking a break to recharge as i am completely drained.

MM

[Ufopolitics]

Figuera's Center Line Alignment

Bistander, Hanon,

Let me put it to you two...in a simple graphic...:

Figuera's Choice versus Classic Electric Generator Electromagnetic Induction Concepts.

[IMG][/IMG]

Figuera considers and expresses very clearly on ALL his Patents (very accurately and very correct by the way) that MAX INDUCTION takes place exactly when Inducing Electromagnet Center Core are FULLY ALIGNED with Induced Core DEAD Center.

Classic Scam, considers Maximum Induction takes place when Magnetic Field Center of action (B-FIELD, Lorentz BS) is EXACTLY sweeping MAJORITY OF CONDUCTORS on the Induced Core-Coil Assy. Which means at 90º (Electrical Angle BS) in a Rotary Arrangement away from cores center....MEANING WHEN CORES ARE NOT ALIGNED!!

Now, if we take ROTARY INTO LINEAR Geometry, we will have EXACTLY the way I have represented on above Classic Image.

And You all could take your time, and test Top Image 1 (Figuera set up) versus Bottom Image 2 (Classic set up) in REAL EXPERIMENTING then tell ME, EVEN with DOUBLE THE EXCITERS (FOUR(4))...IF, the Classic BS would render a Higher Output than Center Line Alignment with just TWO EXCITERS!!.

If Figuera would have adopted the Classic BS 90º "Electric Angle"...His Machine would have never, ever, output enough to even self sustain.

And of course this is ALL "Topic Related" aspects to start looking at in order that YOU ALL WAKE UP!!.

Hanon, en realidad me molesta que hablando español, el lenguaje NATAL de Figuera, trates de usar los Conceptos Clásicos para justificar la Máquina de Figuera!!

Hanon, it really bothers me, that You, even speaking Figuera's NATIVE language, try to use Classic Concepts to justify Figuera's Device!!

It is just like trying to justify Evil Actions by God's will...

@Bistander: You and I had this discussion before on my Enlightenment Magnetism Thread...so, I don't think we need to "revive it" here again...


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

The concepts on my visual animation are proven here on a real very instructive test:

https://vimeo.com/155371838
This video is not mine, but it is wonderful to show induction with two fields in repulsion moving in unison.

Figuera instead of moving the coils just moved the field lines or bloch wall whatever you call it, one increasing the other decreasing.

I also see pointless to keep arguing about that animation

[bistander]

Generator

...

It is simple...I was referring as the Exciting Fields having either ALL North or ALL South Poles Facing the Generating Static Fields.

A simple example would be a Generator Head from a House Gen...the exciting fields are DC, and its Coil is based on a simple N-S Rotor, where it could be either a single coil, or two coils in series, however, the result is always the same at the end having two alike polarities N & S.
...

OK Ufo, let's use that single phase generator of yours. The DC "exciting fields" is the "field" of the 2-pole generator; a pole pair; one north (N) & one south (S). The stator is the armature. It is wound such that when the field (created by the rotor) is present, there are two armature poles. These armature poles point (or are oriented) midway between the field ploes. So, when there is armature current, half of each pole is attracted to the pole half directly across the air gap from it and the other half of each pole is repulsed by the the pole half directly across the air gap from it.

Your classic generator runs half in attraction and half in repulsion.

I don't think you ever agreed with me as I've said it before: There is no difference between generators and motors. So with that in mind, there are repulsion motors. As such, running one of those as a generator wound be a "repulsion" generator. I've never worked directly with those types of machines and don't really want to now, but a study of them might provide some insight to Figuera.

Anyway, I think we stray off topic. I can see some "explanation" value in the sliding paper diagram, but also see where it does misrepresent the phenomena to some degree. Don't see where it's worth the time arguing about.

Regards,

bi

[hanon1492]

My simple animation represent many physical concepts but its main objective is to transmit visually the core of this device in a quick view. One image is worth more than a thousand words.

Think why one centered transversed coil will not induce anything in this device. It is really simple. No new theories are needed.

If I quoted a sentence from Figuera was to show that Figuera was thinking in lines of force and how to move them.



PS. Translation done in 2013. As an improvement please substitute the word "core" for "armature" or "rotor" which are more suitable for electric machinery

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

I know you have been saying this for a long time. I still do not understand what you mean. The exciting field in a generator operates in quadrature with the armature field. The vectors are oriented at right angles or 90° (in terms of electrical angular position). Therefore, looking at a single pole, half of it would see a torque due to attraction pulling the rotor in the direction to slow rotation and the other half of that pole experiences a torque due to repulsion acting to prevent the rotor from motion in the direction it is being driven by the prime mover. Attraction and repulsion are rarely used terms with rotary dynamos; torque is the primary principle.

Regards & happy new year,

bi

Hello Bistander and Happy New Year,

It is simple...I was referring as the Exciting Fields having either ALL North or ALL South Poles Facing the Generating Static Fields.

A simple example would be a Generator Head from a House Gen...the exciting fields are DC, and its Coil is based on a simple N-S Rotor, where it could be either a single coil, or two coils in series, however, the result is always the same at the end having two alike polarities N & S.

And I understand the whole deal about it...so, you don't need to...as North produces the Positive sine as South the negative one...I know that.

I know attract and repulse are not common terms in Books and EE Fields...but in reality and basically here (on this Forum) we do talk about DC magnetic polarities on a generator exciting fields very often.

By now you should be familiar with Figuera...and basically after seeing Hanon's video so many times......I believe you could see the differences used by Figuera on Repulsion Exciting Fields or ALL Like Poles...and still obtaining an AC sine wave at output...

Still I would play it once again for you...just in case:



And this is exactly what I am referring to on your quoted text.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Repulsion

...
There is absolutely not one "Officially Recognized" by Classic Electrodynamics electric generator out there which operates their exciting fields based on Repulsion Fields...
...

Hi Ufo,

I know you have been saying this for a long time. I still do not understand what you mean. The exciting field in a generator operates in quadrature with the armature field. The vectors are oriented at right angles or 90° (in terms of electrical angular position). Therefore, looking at a single pole, half of it would see a torque due to attraction pulling the rotor in the direction to slow rotation and the other half of that pole experiences a torque due to repulsion acting to prevent the rotor from motion in the direction it is being driven by the prime mover. Attraction and repulsion are rarely used terms with rotary dynamos; torque is the primary principle.

Regards & happy new year,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

What I see clearly it is that you do not understand my video.

Oh Hanon!! You are completely right!!...I just can not cope with so many complicated 3D Animations...such amount of different colors and shades...as so clever Geometries...My head spins...

The problem is not with the principles shown in the video.

OH Not with the principles shown on such incredible video??

So, even after I fry my brains trying to understand such clever video...what else should We all do then??...OMG, this is so complicated!!!

If you do not understand it you are not able to judge it. Sometimes it is better to understand things before saying that they are wrong.

For sure it will take me years to be able to understand your video...

If you had understood some old posts also you will know now why one trasversed coil, at 90°, will not show induction in this device. The problem is not current theory, but a much much simple answer. Good luck.

Oh Yeah?...which posts?...the ones that talk about Donald Smith...Dr Moray...and Steven Marks?...on their devices using N><N Magnetic Interactions??

The problem is that Classic Magnetism uses N>>S Attract Fields...and NOT N><N or S<>S Repulsion...

There is absolutely not even one, "Officially Recognized" by Classic Electrodynamics electric generator out there which operates their exciting fields based on Repulsion Fields...

BUT NOW Mr Hanon 1492 is trying to do so...teaching all of Us here...that by understanding his GIF video...everything would then be-all the sudden- perfectly clear as water... after almost two hundred years of being in the darkness...

You are sooo smart Hanon!...I just hope that one day...when I grow up...I just be as smart as you!!




Good luck Hanon!!



Ufopolitics

PD: I really believe your video have such powers...that even Bistander and Citfta are starting to become loyal believers on this fact!!

[hanon1492]

What I see clearly it is that you do not understand my video. The problem is not with the principles shown in the video. If you do not understand it you are not able to judge it. Sometimes it is better to understand things before saying that they are wrong.



If you had understood some old posts also you will know now why one trasversed coil, at 90°, will not show induction in this device. The problem is not current theory, but a much much simple answer. Good luck.