Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1891  
Old 01-03-2017, 07:29 PM
Matu Matu is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 12
Traductor...

Hola:

Perdona Ufo, es cierto, quizás me he precipitado pero he creído que esto podía confirmar tus experiencias, de todas formas comprobaré también con fuente externa, no obstante por si quieres comprobarlo, alimentando con baterías y teniendo todo en marcha sin carga en la inducida, mis baterías aumentan su voltaje, aunque no tengo colocados diodos.

MI parte G está hecha con hilo nicrom (barbacoa... ) 25 ohm y primarias de 2,3 ohm, pero también tengo otro con toroide de fleje de hierro de 45 vueltas de hilo de 1,2 milimetros, aunque en este caso el consumo se dispara hasta los 13 Amp.

Gracias por tu gran aportación al generador Figuera.

Saludos
__________________
 

Last edited by Matu; 01-03-2017 at 07:45 PM.
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #1892  
Old 01-03-2017, 07:45 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Resistors and Diodes Test Video...

Hello to All,

And like I have promised before the short video on the testing...



RESISTORS TEST WITH DIODES

And we have to understand the current flow is going at two different and opposite roads as passing through different resistance values, so it is understood amperage would fluctuate as well, I mean, that´s the point here.

What I find interesting is that at Low speeds amperage climbs up...as it does at very high speeds as well...as I show close to video's end...and like I said on video, it may be a failure from PSU, on its read out screen by being fooled by so fast changing currents directions plus stepping through different resistors values...PSU Signal Processor can not keep up with signals...but honestly can not tell for sure what´s going on here but speculation.

As when I put an Incandescent Bulb at output, Input nor motor speed change not even a bit...which is absolutely great...

I am definitively going to finish building another set or maybe two more, then connecting in series to this one...primaries and secondaries...and testing again...


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-03-2017 at 09:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1893  
Old 01-03-2017, 08:01 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matu View Post
Hola:

Perdona Ufo, es cierto, quizás me he precipitado pero he creído que esto podía confirmar tus experiencias, de todas formas comprobaré también con fuente externa, no obstante por si quieres comprobarlo, alimentando con baterías y teniendo todo en marcha sin carga en la inducida, mis baterías aumentan su voltaje, aunque no tengo colocados diodos.
Matu,

Con baterias no me ha funcionado, sencillamente porque en un sistema de baja resistencia como este, las baterías arrojan todo su amperaje y esto no es bueno.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matu View Post
MI parte G está hecha con hilo nicrom (barbacoa... ) 25 ohm y primarias de 2,3 ohm, pero también tengo otro con toroide de fleje de hierro de 45 vueltas de hilo de 1,2 milimetros, aunque en este caso el consumo se dispara hasta los 13 Amp.

Gracias por tu gran aportación al generador Figuera.

Saludos
A eso precisamente me refiero...ese amperaje es demasiado alto debido a la baja resistencia ...y lo que pasa es que los núcleos de hierro se sobre saturan y entonces el campo magnético de repulsión deja de hacer su función inductora.

Tienes que regular el amperaje a mucho menos, como 6 o 7 amperes máximo...y eso solo lo consigues con una fuente reguladora LINEAL, no Pulsada...ésta última no funciona...como la que muestro en el video arriba sólo funciona bien con resistores sin parte G...


Saludos


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-03-2017 at 08:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1894  
Old 01-04-2017, 12:42 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Feynman speaking about two different phenomena in induction. Pay attention to the linked video.

One is manifested in transformers (flux changes: emf = A•dB/dt ) and other is manifested in generators (circuit moves: emf = v•B )

Feynman about two different phenomena in induction on Vimeo

From Richard Feyman, Nobel Prize Winner 1965, in his lectures Vol.2 Chapter 17:


"So the “flux rule”—that the emf in a circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit—applies whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the circuit moves (or both). The two possibilities—“circuit moves” or “field changes”—are not distinguished in the statement of the rule. Yet in our explanation of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases—v×B for “circuit moves” and ∇×E=−∂B/∂t for “field changes.”
We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena. Usually such a beautiful generalization is found to stem from a single deep underlying principle. Nevertheless, in this case there does not appear to be any such profound implication. We have to understand the “rule” as the combined effects of two quite separate phenomena."


And now my view: In transformers Lenz is manifested as an opposed field to the inducer field. In generators Lenz is manifested, not as an opposed field to the inducer electromagnets, but as a dragging in the moving armature which has to be overcomed with more mechanical energy. If nothing moves...
__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 01-10-2017 at 10:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1895  
Old 01-04-2017, 02:13 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
The Same, Exact Thing...different "Colors"...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
Feynman speaking about two different phenomena in induction. Pay attention to the linked video.

One is manifested in transformers (flux changes: emf = A•dB/dt ) and other is manifested in generators (circuit moves: emf = v•B )

Feynman about two different phenomena in induction on Vimeo
Do not agree with the above AT ALL!!...:

NOT TWO DIFFERENT "PHENOMENA"...BUT JUST THE SAME, EXACT EFFECT!!

There are absolutely NOT TWO different phenomena there at all...BUT JUST ONE!!...BOTH, bolts down to the same, identical effect.

In BOTH there is a CONSTANT, COMMON FACTOR which is simply DEFINED AS: FIELD CHANGES, as stated in Faraday First Law to obtain an Induced EMF.

And so, WHATEVER MEANS we use to generate A FIELD CHANGE will produce an EMF.

We can generate FIELD CHANGES by variations from its source, like a Transformer which works only on AC Source, since AC is ALWAYS CHANGING.

OR, Like Figuera...Who discovered a NEW way to CHANGE FIELD by developing a NEW CHANGING SOURCE derived from a DC SUPPLY...


We can generate FIELD CHANGES by variations through SPACE/TIME like Generator does.


And there should be MANY OTHER WAYS to achieve a CHANGING FIELD...which We still have no idea could be possible...just because We have not discover them yet..

And by FRAGMENTING this SINGLE PHENOMENA into TWO...AS considering BOTH ARE DIFFERENT...ALL We are doing is LIMITING OURSELVES for ACCEPTING other new forms which could be discovered.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
And now my view: In transformers Lenz is manifested as an opposed field to the inducer field. In generators Lenz is manifested, not as an opposed field to the inducer electromagnets, but as a dragging in the moving armature which has to be overcomed with more mechanical energy. If nothing moves...
Your "view" above is just a CONSEQUENCE from the first statement you posted, and obviously agree with..."Two Different Things"...when BOTH are EXACTLY THE SAME DEAL...WITH DIFFERENT "COLORS".

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
In transformers Lenz is manifested as an opposed field to the inducer field.
Then You write:

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
If nothing moves...
In Transforner "nothing moves"...In Figuera "nothing moves"...then what makes you think that in Figuera, Lenz would not be manifested as it does in Transformers??!!

Then You write:

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
In generators Lenz is manifested, not as an opposed field to the inducer electromagnets, but as a dragging in the moving armature...
Your above statement is completely DEAD WRONG!!

In Generator Lenz IS manifested EXACTLY as TWO OPPOSED FIELDS, which CAUSES/RESULTS AS A Magnetic-Mechanical DRAG...

1- When Field Rotor (Inducer) IS MOVING AWAY from Induced Field, Lenz creates an OPPOSED MAGNETIC ATTRACTION, which opposes to the Rotor Movement.

2- When Field Rotor (Inducer) is APPROACHING to Induced Field , Lenz generates a MAGNETIC REPULSION FIELD, which OPPOSES to Rotor approaching movement.

In Generators, Lenz becomes TWO OPPOSED FIELDS/FORCES which Oppose to Rotor Mechanical Spin...

This is SO SIMPLE...BUT You COMPLICATE IT so much, just because of your completely OFF, then WRONG Conclusions...

BUT DO NOT FEEL BAD...THIS IS THE WAY IT HAS BEEN DONE FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY...

BOTH EFFECTS ARE IDENTICAL, SAME NATURE...SAME ORIGINS...JUST DIFFERENT MANIFESTATIONS THROUGH DIFFERENT PARAMETERS.

AND SO, OF COURSE, SINCE DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ARE INVOLVED, THEN DIFFERENT MATHEMATICAL EQUATIONS MUST BE APPLIED...TO CALCULATE THE SAME EXACT EFFECT...A FIELD CHANGE TO OBTAIN AN EMF...SIMPLE.



Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-04-2017 at 06:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1896  
Old 01-04-2017, 02:31 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
Fields

G'morning Ufo,

If they are the same thing, why then is maximun induced voltage seen with primary field-secondary field alignment in a transformer and maximun generated voltage seen when main field-armature field is in quadrature in the generator?

Motion is the difference.

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1897  
Old 01-04-2017, 03:02 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by bistander View Post
G'morning Ufo,

If they are the same thing, why then is maximun induced voltage seen with primary field-secondary field alignment in a transformer and maximun generated voltage seen when main field-armature field is in quadrature in the generator?

Motion is the difference.

bi

Good Morning Bistander,

Well, like I wrote before in my last statement on my last post...:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics View Post

BOTH EFFECTS ARE IDENTICAL, SAME NATURE...SAME ORIGINS...JUST DIFFERENT MANIFESTATIONS THROUGH DIFFERENT PARAMETERS.

AND SO, OF COURSE, SINCE DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ARE INVOLVED, THEN DIFFERENT MATHEMATICAL EQUATIONS MUST BE APPLIED...TO CALCULATE THE SAME EXACT EFFECT...A FIELD CHANGE TO OBTAIN AN EMF...SIMPLE.
Meaning FIELD CHANGES are simply originated by different Factors in your both cited examples above...and so, they Generate differently the resulting EMF.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bistander View Post
Motion is the difference.
Of course...and "Motion" means a Variation through Space/Time...which are different Parameters as the ones involved in Transformers.

However, this is an "apparent" difference...since in Transformers, the Time Parameter is dictated by a fixed frequency from the AC sine E.G: Sixty (60) cycles per second.

While in a Generator, the "right motion" is only achieved when rotor reaches a specific speed...3600 RPM's which derives in exactly same given example as above...60 Cycles per second.

What we are changing are the Parameters to obtain the same thing...the Field Change, which in turns generates the EMF...and so, different parameters to Change Field will result in different forms of EMF manifestations.

When I was carefully observing the waves obtained by my Figuera Set up on my Scope...I realized that the Signal obtained at output is just a "Mixed Result" from both simultaneously signals generated by both Primaries Inductors...and so, this output signal is completely different from the one generated by either an AC Transformer or an Electric Generator....that we could "smooth" it out and make it "appear" just like both devices mentioned?...of course we could...You and I know very well we could "modify" signal and make them all look the same way.

Let me try to put it in a more simple way...

The Field Changes or Field Variations (no matter the source is producing it) establish a Pattern, which Pattern in turn is "reproduced" on the Induced or Secondaries just like an "Echo"...or a Magnetic Resonance, which produces an EMF we can work with directly...meaning it is the "tangible" result...from an "Intangible Pattern" which is derived from the varying-changing magnetic field...

Hope it is better explained now...

Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-04-2017 at 05:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1898  
Old 01-04-2017, 03:23 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
Fields

Ufo,

You put forth an argument but appear to agree. The motion generated voltage needs to be treated differently than the stationary induced emf. I agree both use a magnetic field and result in an emf.

Thought we tabled this.

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1899  
Old 01-04-2017, 03:57 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Let's start opening Horizons...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bistander View Post
Ufo,

You put forth an argument but appear to agree. The motion generated voltage needs to be treated differently than the stationary induced emf. I agree both use a magnetic field and result in an emf.

Thought we tabled this.

bi
Great Bistander!!

So, let's "Table" this for real...glad we reach an agreement!!

[IMG][/IMG]

By the way...I should have called the Graph above not "Simplify" but "Generalize" the Induced EMF Process...

And of course, we could "complicate" the above graph...by adding Parameters Involved, Math Formulas, etc,etc..However, it will not change the Main View Order.

And please...if you do not agree with something on the above Graphic...even the colors...please let me know and I -for sure- will change it...


Regards



Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-04-2017 at 04:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1900  
Old 01-04-2017, 04:33 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
New Simplified Table

Quote:
Originally Posted by bistander View Post
Change "Rotary" to motion. There are linear generators (and motors).
Agree...done deal!!

[IMG][/IMG]
I also changed the title...just a bit.


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-04-2017 at 08:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1901  
Old 01-04-2017, 09:29 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
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 variable magnetic field in space (in the induced coils), as happens in all generators ( emf = v • B ) moving back and forth the magnetic lines to create a relative velocity (v) between the lines and the wires, and, therefore creating induction by flux cutting the wires.

__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1902  
Old 01-05-2017, 04:52 PM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 184
Not very impressive

Two 1-1/2" dia x 4" coils with 1-1/2" dia x 2" induced core between them.
Coils have 248 turns each. Permeability set to SI steel.
North poles opposing.




1 amp in left coil, 2 amp in right coil.




2 amps in each coil.



2 amps in left coil, 1 amp in right coil.


Cheers
Cadman
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1903  
Old 01-05-2017, 05:02 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadman View Post
Two 1-1/2" dia x 4" coils with 1-1/2" dia x 2" induced core between them.
Coils have 248 turns each. Permeability set to SI steel.
North poles opposing.




1 amp in left coil, 2 amp in right coil.




2 amps in each coil.



2 amps in left coil, 1 amp in right coil.


Cheers
Cadman

Hey Cadman!!

Fields look pretty well, sweeping length is perfect!!


Is that based on your real set up?...or just a simulation?

I am testing right now a very similar spec set, primaries are identical and secondary is just 1/2 inch longer...what voltage are you using with those amps?

And are U using Part G?

Could you please give some info?


Thanks Friend!!


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-05-2017 at 05:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1904  
Old 01-05-2017, 05:37 PM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 184
Hi Ufo

It's a simulation I ran to test the idea of the induced core swapping polarities, which this confirms.

The software uses amp turns only. V=I*R and I=V/R you know.

Yes I am using part G in real life.

However you might be surprised to know this sim convinced me to NOT build this set up! The flux strength put through center core is rather pathetic due to excessive reluctance in the air path, and this is what I expected to see. Unless you or MM or someone shows otherwise I consider this set up to be a dead end.

Don't misunderstand, I am still continuing with my build.

Regards,
Cadman
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1905  
Old 01-05-2017, 05:42 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadman View Post
Two 1-1/2" dia x 4" coils with 1-1/2" dia x 2" induced core between them.
Coils have 248 turns each. Permeability set to SI steel.
North poles opposing.




1 amp in left coil, 2 amp in right coil.




2 amps in each coil.



2 amps in left coil, 1 amp in right coil.


Cheers
Cadman
Very nice CM. Well done.

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1906  
Old 01-05-2017, 05:56 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadman View Post
Hi Ufo

It's a simulation I ran to test the idea of the induced core swapping polarities, which this confirms.

The software uses amp turns only. V=I*R and I=V/R you know.

Yes I am using part G in real life.

However you might be surprised to know this sim convinced me to NOT build this set up! The flux strength put through center core is rather pathetic due to excessive reluctance in the air path, and this is what I expected to see. Unless you or MM or someone shows otherwise I consider this set up to be a dead end.

Don't misunderstand, I am still continuing with my build.

Regards,
Cadman
Hi CM,

I hear you. Not much of a magnetic circuit with so much path thru air and associated high reluctance. You might consider adding back iron. Thinking like an E core with center leg near middle coil and two end legs up against outside ends of primary cores. Use cross section area of E equal to that of coil cores. I think something like that could direct a lot of the dense flux (red area) thru the secondary wires.

Regards,

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1907  
Old 01-05-2017, 06:20 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadman View Post
Hi Ufo

It's a simulation I ran to test the idea of the induced core swapping polarities, which this confirms.

The software uses amp turns only. V=I*R and I=V/R you know.

Yes I am using part G in real life.

However you might be surprised to know this sim convinced me to NOT build this set up! The flux strength put through center core is rather pathetic due to excessive reluctance in the air path, and this is what I expected to see. Unless you or MM or someone shows otherwise I consider this set up to be a dead end.

Don't misunderstand, I am still continuing with my build.

Regards,
Cadman

Thanks Cadman,


Sorry to read you have got disappointed based on Software Results...

Problem I see is that there are absolutely No Software, No Scientific proven fact...which realizes that between those two North Poles is originated a High Pressurized Compressed Field (And I am calling "A Field" to this common pressurized area between Both Norths)...Unfortunately Science has not recognized that fact yet...but that Flux Density ONLY exists between N-S Poles...and that is simply not true!...I guarantee and I DO can prove that fact.

And related to My Real Set Up...I am having good induction no matter what software says...and not working with Part G yet...I got my Linear PSU running and ready to go....am just finding the best Primary-Secondary-Primary size ratios...

Then what are you gonna be building then?


Regards and wish you are much better, health wise.


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-05-2017 at 06:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1908  
Old 01-05-2017, 06:34 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Linear PSU Testing...

Hello to All,

I am conducting some tests stills with resistors...

But now that I am using my Linear PSU...I can confirm, for sure now, that the Voltage raise as Amps rise when accelerating-decelerating power switch shown on previous video with switching PSU...is very real, No PSU failure at all...and without touching the PSU dial buttons.

Which concludes that Primaries Constantly keep sending back power to source...and it is not reversed/negative power, but very positive increase.

And so, resistors can NOT do anything with this extra power...but send it back to source, while loosing some in heat, not much in my set up though....

Honestly it is not about a heat issue with resistors, these 300W Power Resistors with Heat sink I have barely gets even warm...but an Exciter System which could Recycle Power is what am talking about here AND THAT is definitively NEVER going to take place with resistors.

Which confirms what MM wrote once before to Hanon...that a resistor set up would NEVER, EVER be able to self sustain.

Therefore I am gonna proceed with Part G building and testing...with linear PSU.


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-05-2017 at 06:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1909  
Old 01-05-2017, 06:47 PM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by bistander View Post
Very nice CM. Well done.
Thank you sir.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics View Post
Thanks Cadman,


Sorry to read you have got disappointed based on Software Results...

Problem I see is that there are absolutely No Software, No Scientific proven fact...which realizes that between those two North Poles is originated a High Pressurized Compressed Field (And I am calling "A Field" to this common pressurized area between Both Norths...Unfortunately Science has not recognized that fact yet...but that Flux Density ONLY exists between N-S Poles...and that is simply not true!...I guarantee I DO can prove that fact.

And related to My Real Set Up...I am having good induction no matter what software says...and not working with Part G yet...I got my Linear PSU running and ready to go....am just finding the best Primary-Secondary-Primary size ratios...

Then what are you gonna be building then?


Regards and wish you are much better, health wise.


Ufopolitics
Thanks Ufo, I'm doing much better for now.

I do hope your theory is proven as you say. But software might not be useless for this, look at these. This what I AM building. It's a toroid cut into four pieces. Two coils, 248 turns, span 110 degrees each, two inducers at 70 degrees each.



1 amp each coil.

But look at this, dropping the current 0.01 amps to 0.99 amp on the left coil.



0.99 amp in left coil, 1 amp in right coil



dropping to 0.5 amp in left coil



and this is reversed with 1 amp left, 0.5 amp right.

Notice the flux direction?

That's all for now.

Regards
Cadman
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1910  
Old 01-05-2017, 07:09 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadman View Post
Thank you sir.



Thanks Ufo, I'm doing much better for now.

I do hope your theory is proven as you say. But software might not be useless for this, look at these. This what I AM building. It's a toroid cut into four pieces. Two coils, 248 turns, span 110 degrees each, two inducers at 70 degrees each.



1 amp each coil.

But look at this, dropping the current 0.01 amps to 0.99 amp on the left coil.



0.99 amp in left coil, 1 amp in right coil



dropping to 0.5 amp in left coil



and this is reversed with 1 amp left, 0.5 amp right.

Notice the flux direction?

That's all for now.

Regards
Cadman
Well, glad to see Software is good for that analysis on Toroid with repulsive poles...as it should be "instructed" that toroids have almost no magnetic losses...so can not just "vaporize" that flux right?...;D

I am also working on something similar Cadman...as I have posted before...I call it Figuera TPU...

Regards and am very glad you are well now!


Ufopolitics
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #1911  
Old 01-05-2017, 11:58 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics View Post
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...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics View Post
a resistor set up would NEVER, EVER be able to self sustain.
I think your interpretation of the result from your test is wrong. PSU show the output power in V and I which are delivering. Therefore if your test is increasing V and I in the PSU it is a sign that your device is cosuming more and more power, not the contrary as you are interpreting that power is send from the electromagnets to the PSU.

About MM statements he also manifested that with resistive wire and 100 watts input he got 300 watts in the induced coils. If you are interested I can look for the exact post and quote it again.
__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 01-06-2017 at 12:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1912  
Old 01-06-2017, 12:18 AM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by bistander View Post
Hi CM,

I hear you. Not much of a magnetic circuit with so much path thru air and associated high reluctance. You might consider adding back iron. Thinking like an E core with center leg near middle coil and two end legs up against outside ends of primary cores. Use cross section area of E equal to that of coil cores. I think something like that could direct a lot of the dense flux (red area) thru the secondary wires.

Regards,

bi
Bistander,

You are right that your proposal to reduce the path thru air will create a much powerful field. But I think that if you use one configuration as the one shown in the image below (which represents your proposal) you will have the same air path whether you move the magnetic lines closer or further from each electromagnets in its movement. In that case the reluctance (which is the main resistance to the magnetic flow) will be the same independently of the distance along the induced coil and the field lines will not move at all IMHO. We have two magnetic forces fighting. In order to move the colliding plane back and forth they need some variable reluctance to overcome. If that reluctance is always the same I think we wont get any field movement, no matter the current modulation that you use.


In this case I only see a possibility if the permeability of the induced core is smaller than the perneability of the two electromagnets core, maybe nickel, ferrite or other metal with lower permeability than soft iron or magnetic steel (used as electromagnet cores)

Maybe Figuera was forced to used a huge reluctance (air path) and thus his electromagnets were weak and he needed 7 groups in series to have a pretty good output. From my test I can say that even with weak electromagnets with huge air path a good induction can be achieved with this method
__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 01-06-2017 at 12:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1913  
Old 01-06-2017, 06:41 AM
seaad's Avatar
seaad seaad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 260
Good result; Figuera "Transformer" with open ends

I have got good results with a thin ferrite rod; Figuera "Transformer" with open ends but in the 5kHZ range. http://www.energeticforum.com/293596-post1326.html / Arne
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Test A open coils.jpg (243.6 KB, 24 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1914  
Old 01-06-2017, 02:32 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
Toroid fields

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadman View Post
... It's a toroid cut into four pieces. Two coils, 248 turns, span 110 degrees each, two inducers at 70 degrees each.



1 amp each coil.
...


Hi CM,

Notice similarity and difference between your simulation and iron powder pattern. One difference is the lack of iron powder inside the ring even though that is where the powder was dumped. But the simulation shows lines inside. Curious disagreement. I'll add the source vid for the iron pattern.

Regards,

bi

http://www.energeticforum.com/redire...%3D-2vAMmn2WzI
__________________
 

Last edited by bistander; 01-06-2017 at 02:35 PM. Reason: Added link
Reply With Quote
  #1915  
Old 01-06-2017, 02:38 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Wrong Again...Hanon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
I think your interpretation of the result from your test is wrong. PSU show the output power in V and I which are delivering. Therefore if your test is increasing V and I in the PSU it is a sign that your device is cosuming more and more power, not the contrary as you are interpreting that power is send from the electromagnets to the PSU.

About MM statements he also manifested that with resistive wire and 100 watts input he got 300 watts in the induced coils. If you are interested I can look for the exact post and quote it again.
Hanon,

You tend to run your mouth without really "engaging" it properly with your brain...which in your case is very small...Which causes your huge IGNORANCE...and ignorance is daring, blunt, most of times like in your case.

First Of ALL, REGULATED PSU's have something called A REGULATOR CIRCUIT

ANY REGULATED Power Supply NO matter if Linear or Switched have something called "Voltage Regulator", which means that whenever you reach that V Value with its potentiometers it creates what is called a LIMIT...and that LIMIT works for either Volts or Amps...and so, it is not allowed to "self increase randomly"...just like that, unless the regulator at PSU is damaged or malfunctioning...otherwise it would not be called "REGULATED POWER SUPPLY".

Second: POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE FEEDBACK CONTROL

MOST REGULATED PSU's have NEGATIVE FEEDBACK CONTROL, But NOT ALL HAVE POSITIVE FEEDBACK CONTROL.

Negative Feedback Control is required to prevent "Droops" on the system being tested...search for droop failures.
It occurs when the load being tested demands MORE from the Power Supply can feed...as PSU tries to keep up with load being tested until the OVERLOAD PROTECTION CIRCUIT is then triggered...and PSU shuts down to prevent further damage to itself and to equipment being tested.

Must PSU's do not have a Positive Feedback Control...and this is VERY SIMPLE to be tested:

Install a Brushed Motor to a PSU, no matter if switched or linear, and while it is ON...BUT with ALL Dial Knobs at Zero...meaning, showing exactly ZERO Volts and ZERO Amps, MEANING ZERO OUTPUT...Then start turning your motor shaft...do it faster...and faster....and you will notice the either digital or analog meters start to raise up...if you turn your motor one direction Volts will increase...and if you turn motor the opposite spin then amps will increase.

THAT MEANS YOUR PSU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO POSITIVE FEEDBACK CONTROL.

And like I wrote before, MOST PSU's do NOT have a Positive Feedback Control. Unless they are dedicated to power generation or power regeneration equipment.

One of the bigger problems you have...is your LACK OF EXPERIMENTING, which, of course, CONTRIBUTES to your complete LACK OF ANALYSIS, FEEDING YOUR IGNORANCE GALORE.

And then, on top of all the above...you dare to tell ME, I am wrong in my analysis...incredible!!

@Bistander or Citfta...Please guys, could you ILLUSTRATE Hanon about his wrong concepts?...appreciate it...that way He may believe what I have written above...many thanks in advance!!


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-06-2017 at 02:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1916  
Old 01-06-2017, 02:46 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
E-core

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
Bistander,

You are right that your proposal to reduce the path thru air will create a much powerful field. But I think that if you use one configuration as the one shown in the image below (which represents your proposal) you will have the same air path whether you move the magnetic lines closer or further from each electromagnets in its movement. In that case the reluctance (which is the main resistance to the magnetic flow) will be the same independently of the distance along the induced coil and the field lines will not move at all IMHO. We have two magnetic forces fighting. In order to move the colliding plane back and forth they need some variable reluctance to overcome. If that reluctance is always the same I think we wont get any field movement, no matter the current modulation that you use.


In this case I only see a possibility if the permeability of the induced core is smaller than the perneability of the two electromagnets core, maybe nickel, ferrite or other metal with lower permeability than soft iron or magnetic steel (used as electromagnet cores)

Maybe Figuera was forced to used a huge reluctance (air path) and thus his electromagnets were weak and he needed 7 groups in series to have a pretty good output. From my test I can say that even with weak electromagnets with huge air path a good induction can be achieved with this method
Hi hanon,

The tube you show is not what I had in mind with E-core. I'll try to get a diagram with better explanation. And I guess I don't understand your coments about variable reluctance. Typically that involves moving iron. Or saturation. Neither of which are evident in the work by CF.

Regards,

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1917  
Old 01-06-2017, 03:00 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Exclamation Wrong Move

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
Bistander,

You are right that your proposal to reduce the path thru air will create a much powerful field. But I think that if you use one configuration as the one shown in the image below (which represents your proposal) you will have the same air path whether you move the magnetic lines closer or further from each electromagnets in its movement. In that case the reluctance (which is the main resistance to the magnetic flow) will be the same independently of the distance along the induced coil and the field lines will not move at all IMHO. We have two magnetic forces fighting. In order to move the colliding plane back and forth they need some variable reluctance to overcome. If that reluctance is always the same I think we wont get any field movement, no matter the current modulation that you use.


In this case I only see a possibility if the permeability of the induced core is smaller than the perneability of the two electromagnets core, maybe nickel, ferrite or other metal with lower permeability than soft iron or magnetic steel (used as electromagnet cores)

Maybe Figuera was forced to used a huge reluctance (air path) and thus his electromagnets were weak and he needed 7 groups in series to have a pretty good output. From my test I can say that even with weak electromagnets with huge air path a good induction can be achieved with this method
Hanon;
Quote; "About MM statements he also manifested that with resistive wire and 100 watts input he got 300 watts in the induced coils. If you are interested I can look for the exact post and quote it again."
everyone is well aware of my post as you have repeatedly posted it numerous times. you still don't get it do you.????? with resistors it will never be self sustaining something you apparently can not grasp. Figuera's system is CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM.

NO DISRESPECT TO NO ONE BUT Sorry to spoil the lovely parade, the device above WILL NOT WORK.

Reason 1.
Primaries are way, way to small to even reach the middle of the secondary let a lone reach the opposite side. very little field strength will reach the end.

Reason 2.
the so called cylinder you plan on installing on the outside will magnetically ground themselves out.
electricity and magnetic fields always take the shortest or least path of resistance no mater how you roll the dice. so by you installing the cylinder on the out side you give the magnetic field from both electromagnets a SUPPER HIGHWAY HOME..... the quickest path to the South pole thus you will be loosing probably 3/4's of your magnetic field through that cylinder of magnetic death.

The whole reason Figuera used the open air design was restrict the change of currant between the primaries. see with the large air path it will have a higher degree of reluctance, resistance to change. so by restricting the change the field will be more easily controllable to currant fluctuations. that and the fact that two primaries add up to the secondary output..... remembering the output supply is split between them both.

the magnetic field will will still retain 80 to 90 % of it's intensity all while being moved from side to side with very little effort as the reluctance air path restricts the change so the primaries retain their magnetic field SEEING VERY LITTLE CHANGE.

Seaad;

While you may get some good results from your Ferrite core the amount of Ferrite you need for a reasonable output will be astronomical
compared to Iron or Lamination's. just saying, happy Figuering.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 01-06-2017 at 03:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1918  
Old 01-06-2017, 03:19 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanon1492 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post

NO DISRESPECT TO NO ONE BUT Sorry to spoil the lovely parade, the device above WILL NOT WORK.

Reason 1.
Primaries are way, way to small to even reach the middle of the secondary let a lone reach the opposite side. very little field strength will reach the end.

MM
Exactly MM, nail it down!!

But this FACT is stated in the 1908 Patent Drawing...however, Mr Bright Hanon...decided to change it to his own concept...

[IMG][/IMG]

In Figuera actually that "RATIO" bolts down to 2X on Primaries to 1X on Secondaries...it was written since 1908...:

[IMG][/IMG]


It is exactly like I wrote before...Hanon's Observation and Interpretations are down to Zero...

But Hanon will still argue with Us about him being right...

No wonder Hanon has not being able to show any working Figuera Device...in like how many years by now??!!


@MM, Glad you've got a good rest...batteries recharged...great!!


Ufopolitics
__________________
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

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 01-06-2017 at 03:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1919  
Old 01-06-2017, 04:11 PM
seaad's Avatar
seaad seaad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 260
MM quote:
Seaad;
While you may get some good results from your Ferrite core the amount of Ferrite you need for a reasonable output will be astronomical
compared to Iron or Lamination's. just saying, happy Figuering.


MM; My problem is not the size of ferrite. Think of the core size and wattage transfered in a TV HV-Transformer!
It is the lack of OU (max 104%)
But with silicon steel or similar, NO OU AT ALL! I got below 90% efficiency with iron.
Arne
__________________
 

Last edited by seaad; 01-06-2017 at 04:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1920  
Old 01-06-2017, 04:14 PM
bistander bistander is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,715
Psu

Hi Ufo,

I'm not getting into your argument with other members.

I often use a regulated power supply wired in series with a battery and resistor and set the curent regulation to hold a constant current value for the duration of the battery discharge. So obviously current from an external power source can go thru the PSU.

I hesitate to make a judgment on your test. It appeared as though you had the PSU set to 5A max. The load decreased so voltage on the PSU meter went up. But the current should have been maintained at max of 5A. The fact it went higher or cause is unknown; maybe due to noise. I wonder if putting a sizeable capacitor across the PSU would avoid the problem.

Regards,

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
clemente, figuera, re-inventing

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers