Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[marathonman]

Prayer

Amen brother. i have sought the light and it shines so bright on thou face.

MM

[Ufopolitics]

Does that sound familiar or what.?? part G operates as i have said from the start but that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it. i don't need any verification of my own research to tell me part G works as i said it did.

MM

MM, please relax Friend,

Part G works just as You said it would...and I will also be verifying it very soon with a detailed video about my whole set up...

What we all would be trying here...is to reach a Logical Explanation...in order to see if "Part G behavior" is "Compatible" to any existing Classic Laws related to Currents Calculations plus Distributions..and then, some magnetism...in any open reference Books out there as would be required.

The reason I have posted here about this discussion...first, is not to populate Your Thread with Theoretical questions...plus having knowledgeable people on this Forum to participate.

Your Thread Main Purpose is to Show Proof about your Part G and Figuera development, plus sharing the way we all did it...through experiments after experiments from Top Notch Builders here.

Now, about N><N...that is one of the main reasons why I got fully involved on this project, and so, believed in You since day one I started reading your posts...like I have written before on this Forum...I have built a Generator which works based on this same exact principle...ever since, this fact has opened -and therefore changed- my mind like there is no tomorrow...but unfortunately...many people, even those "Skilled in the Art"...will not accept it...nor understand it...since not written in any contemporary Text EE Books...except, maybe back to the late 1800's...to just get a glimpse about this fact.


Kind regards Friend.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Yes, Thank You!

Hi Ufo,

It would appear you think a node and a loop are the same. Not so. I mentioned before that you would benefit from basic electric circuit analysis. I'll try a little.

The basic circuit consists of nodes and branches. A branch (sometimes called an element) has a node at each end. When two branches join, the common point becomes a single node (aka junction). A loop is a combination of branches and nodes making a single path ending on itself. The loop has a single current circulating in a single direction at any given time.

Reference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirc...s_circuit_laws

Hanon says current always flows towards a lower potential site. A site must be a point or node on a circuit if current is "flowing". All the current flowing towards any point (node) in the circuit also flows away from it. So his statement, while not untrue, doesn't make any sense.

Please take a look at that reference above or some other instructional on basic electric circuits.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Yes, I got it now, thanks very much...(about time right?...)

I did read that page related to Kirchhoff 1 & 2nd Laws (KCL, KVL)

Interestingly there is a Closed Circuit (on the EXAMPLES part) based on Three Resistors (R1,R2,R3) and Two Batteries (E1,E2), this generates Three Currents, (I1, I2, I3)...And if you look again at that particular circuit, but take off Battery or Power Source E2...We will have exactly Part G as R2 (Center) plus the Two Primaries properly connected there as R1, R3...

By taking off E2 still I3 would be a negative current, connected to negative end of E1...and so, we should still have both Loops (closed circuits) S1, S2...correct?

So, further on, could we apply KCL to that new circuit without E2, since it is identical to all three Components (Part G, Primary 1, Primary 2) from Figuera?

Also another issue to have in mind about KCL...:

LIMITATIONS:

...Significant violations of KCL can occur even at 60 Hz, which is not a very high frequency....

And so...knowing that we are working exactly within those Hertz Frequencies...not AC...but only Positive DC...still Frequency (Fluctuations) is what I think could violate KCL within that particular Figuera circuit.

Thanks for all your time in responding here Bistander.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Idiocy at it's finest.

I LAUGH IN YOUR FACES OF STUPIDITY, HA, HA, HA !

no matter how smart you people seem to think you are you still got schooled like no tomorrow on the Figuera device. when my final build is finished and running i will still be laughing in your face as i am now.

last time i checked this was an open thread, it must be if people like you are here.

if you self proclaimed geniuses are so smart then buid it and prove me wrong, oh that's right, YOU CAN'T.

have a nice day, just not with the Figuera device, EVER. ha, ha, ha.

MM

[Allcanadian]

@bistander
There is something neat about the Gramme machine and thank you for posting those old diagrams. I love those old books with diagrams and simple explanations much more than the newer literature which does nothing for me.

AC

[Allcanadian]

@MM

Does that sound familiar or what.?? part G operates as i have said from the start but that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it. i don't need any verification of my own research to tell me part G works as i said it did.

If you are right then why do you feel compelled to pollute every thread here with your rhetoric over and over like a parrot?. Okay we believe you now if you could just let everyone else hold a conversation in the other threads without jumping in and parroting over and over that would be nice.

Would you like everyone else to pollute your threads with off topic nonsense?. Would you like me to jump into your thread and post off topic nonsense every second post?. It's not a problem and you might actually clue in that most don't give a **** about your part G.

AC

[bistander]

... that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it.
...

I don't know about that. I stopped because I don't want to argue with you.

currant runs from negative to positive or each the opposite direction therefore when part G supplies currant to the primaries but because of the N><N in part G the currant runs the out side track to the primaries feeding them, then the low primary feeding part G. it is basically all about high and low pressures in part G with blocking NN fields.

What is the N><N in part G? ahhh, nevermind. All you have is nonsense like that paragraph.

Ufo and I attempted to leave you out of this. Yet you feel the need to come over to this thread to insult and boast. Feel better? It's amazing to me because you have nothing to show. This isn't my thread and I can easily ignore you, but it would be nice if you stayed out of the discussion between Ufo and myself.

bi

[marathonman]

Amazing

Hi Ufo,

I did look at the circuit analysis for partG and posted an observation from that which was immediately ridiculed.

Does that sound familiar or what.?? part G operates as i have said from the start but that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it. i don't need any verification of my own research to tell me part G works as i said it did.

currant runs from negative to positive or each the opposite direction therefore when part G supplies currant to the primaries but because of the N><N in part G the currant runs the out side track to the primaries feeding them, then the low primary feeding part G. it is basically all about high and low pressures in part G with blocking NN fields.

if it wasn't for me EVERYONE would be in the stone ages about the Figuera device. ....your welcome.
and of course some will NEVER understand the Figuera device.

open eyes see more clearly.

MM

[bistander]

Part G

Hi Ufo,

I did look at the circuit analysis for partG and posted an observation from that which was immediately ridiculed. Since then I haven't paid much attention to it. I'll look at it again if you'll look at that circuit analysis reference so we can talk the same language.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Circuit analysis

Hello Bistander,

On the Figuera (Part 1) Thread you have wrote these two posts below, related to a question that Hanon have posted..and the reason to post it here is just because I do not want to interfere there...so, if it is ok with you, I would like to discuss this topic a bit further...





As per what you have written above, in my understanding is that...current is a constant "Through" or "Thru" flow ...meaning it is always running within loops or nodes...and current in values versus current out are same values so it adds to zero.

So, therefore we can not say that current runs to either lower or higher potentials...just because it goes both ways within loop or node.

Hope I am correct so far...

Hi Ufo,

It would appear you think a node and a loop are the same. Not so. I mentioned before that you would benefit from basic electric circuit analysis. I'll try a little.

The basic circuit consists of nodes and branches. A branch (sometimes called an element) has a node at each end. When two branches join, the common point becomes a single node (aka junction). A loop is a combination of branches and nodes making a single path ending on itself. The loop has a single current circulating in a single direction at any given time.

Reference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirc...s_circuit_laws

Hanon says current always flows towards a lower potential site. A site must be a point or node on a circuit if current is "flowing". All the current flowing towards any point (node) in the circuit also flows away from it. So his statement, while not untrue, doesn't make any sense.

Please take a look at that reference above or some other instructional on basic electric circuits.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

@Bistander

Hello Bistander,

On the Figuera (Part 1) Thread you have written these two posts below, related to a question that Hanon have posted..and the reason to post it here is just because I do not want to interfere there...so, if it is ok with you, I would like to discuss this topic a bit further...

Hi hanon,

I saw this on the other thread. I guess they don't want me to post there. So I'll give it a go here.

Your premise is flawed. Current flows in circuits or loops. So yes, current always flows towards lower potential points (called nodes) but it always flows towards the higher potential nodes, as well as always flowing away from lower potentials.

Regards,

bi

Simple. The net current into a node is zero. Therefore, current into a node (or point on a circuit) is equal to the current out. Current is a "thru" variable, which means what goes in comes out and vice verse.

Regards,

bi

As per what you have written above, in my understanding is that...current is a constant "Through" or "Thru" flow ...meaning it is always running within loops or nodes...and current in values versus current out are same values so it adds to zero.

So, therefore we can not say that current runs to either lower or higher potentials...just because it goes both ways within loop or node

[Ufopolitics]

Thanks!

Thanks Bistander!

I can see that in order to answer my questions -in majority- you are referring to the Prime Mover (Mech Shaft) from ICE...And I know, that if shaft stops everything will collapse there...no doubt -at all- about that.


Regards and thanks again


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Generator stuff

Hi Ufo,

Been a while. I got tied up with some other crap most of it unpleasant. I'll spend a few minutes now and attempt to address your questions.

Hello Bistander,

Yes, big help, thanks!...that was a priority I had for a while...and I was just waiting to have the time to make the small farting engine to run properly...

Below is the final Diagram Meters connections:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now related to a brief analysis of that Generator Head Self Exciter System...:

It consumes around a ten percent of the total generator output power...and we could say a bit less once machine is warmed up, amps drop down like 0.5 amps (to 2.0A X175V=350 W) plus output is 4400 and not 4000 even...correct?

You are throwing around nominal rated numbers, so don't take anything specific to the bank. Usually the rated generator output is the Volt Ampere (VA) to which you can load it electrically and have your machine still operate within specifications. In your case if this 4400 VA electrical output, it needs 350 W to power the field and probably another, say 100 Watts to cover rotational losses. So total input power needs to be 4850 W coming from the shaft. That would need 9.50 pound feet of torque at 3600 RPM. All the power converted in the generator comes from the prime mover via the mechancial shaft.

I love this particular Exciting System because I consider it does some kind of OU right in front of our noses...if we analyze it separated from the Prime Mover...which only provides the mechanical spinning at 3600 or 60 Hertz of moving its self excited fields inducing also the Mains Fields.

No OU. All the power comes from electromechanical conversion from the prime mover.

What I am trying to write here...is that besides being "Electrically Self Sustained" as it don't require any External Input, but some starting magnetic reminiscence...which allows it to "Shares" it's -obviously- Bigger and Stronger Magnetic Field in order to Induce 4400 Watts on the Main Output.

Incorrect, it derives that power by converting the mechanical power to electrical power, afterall, that's what generators do.

So, analyzing its spec's, it constantly sustains a Magnetic Field which exceeds its own closed "Mutual Induction" relationship (to call it something even not being the correct name) generating an output on the Main Secondaries which is 10 to 11 times bigger than its own.

Yep, that's the idea of the exciter..... to provide the rotating field for both itself and the main generator. The 10 to 11 factor is typical of field to armature power levels of machinery this size.

Concluding that the Self Exciting System outputs a Magnetic Field, which is obviously greater than its own operating spec's with such a small amount of energy, which is only spent at start up, and after, it keeps recycling or renewing a "perfectly balanced" self mutual conversion exchange.

Nope, that exciter field must be present the entire time the generator operates. All the time it is converting the 350W from mech to elect power for the field coils.

I have another question Bistander...which equipment do you use to check the Magnetic Field direction or B Field Vector?...and is it highly responsive to field reversals...or just works for stationary(steady) magnetic fields?

My right hand. Once you have the understanding of magnetic circuits it is easy to keep track of the vector. And, like I've said before, I don't have much use for N and S labels. I think the tool which has helped me the most is Apmere's Law.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

You're welcome for the thank-you on the generator calc. Anytime.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Yes, big help, thanks!...that was a priority I had for a while...and I was just waiting to have the time to make the small farting engine to run properly...

Below is the final Diagram Meters connections:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now related to a brief analysis of that Generator Head Self Exciter System...:

It consumes around a ten percent of the total generator output power...and we could say a bit less once machine is warmed up, amps drop down like 0.5 amps (to 2.0A X175V=350 W) plus output is 4400 and not 4000 even...correct?

I love this particular Exciting System because I consider it does some kind of OU right in front of our noses...if we analyze it separated from the Prime Mover...which only provides the mechanical spinning at 3600 or 60 Hertz of moving its self excited fields inducing also the Mains Fields.

What I am trying to write here...is that besides being "Electrically Self Sustained" as it don't require any External Input, but some starting magnetic reminiscence...which allows it to "Shares" it's -obviously- Bigger and Stronger Magnetic Field in order to Induce 4400 Watts on the Main Output.

So, analyzing its spec's, it constantly sustains a Magnetic Field which exceeds its own closed "Mutual Induction" relationship (to call it something even not being the correct name) generating an output on the Main Secondaries which is 10 to 11 times bigger than its own.

Concluding that the Self Exciting System outputs a Magnetic Field, which is obviously greater than its own operating spec's with such a small amount of energy, which is only spent at start up, and after, it keeps recycling or renewing a "perfectly balanced" self mutual conversion exchange.

Hope you understand my point of view.

I have not conducted yet a reading test under a heavy load...eventually I will, however, I assume all will remain about the same VA readings...since all ICE from Gen does... is to accelerate the RPM's to maintain the same rotation speed as when it was at idling speed, compensating for the Lenz forces.

In the new type of Home Generators Heads which are the Brushless kind...I would not have being able to conduct such VA tests that easy, since they are not directly connected anymore in between...

I have another question Bistander...which equipment do you use to check the Magnetic Field direction or B Field Vector?...and is it highly responsive to field reversals...or just works for stationary(steady) magnetic fields?


Thanks in advance and Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Old books

Bistander,

By the way, thanks a lot for the help on measuring the Exciter Circuit Amps on Generator...it worked out fine based on last diagram, I am making a video of it with full diagram. The total running amperage was at start of like 2.5 and as machine warms up (stabilize speed and electromagnetics) became 2.0 amps...which actually delivers about same 400 VA (Watts) you were talking about on the whole small gen exciter system within the big one of 4400 Watts.

About your above comments related to Thompson and the Gramme Ring part on that earlier edition book...I would not be so "finally conclusive"...

DYNAMO-ELECTRIC MACHINERY 1903 Fifth Edition

I recommend you read now his 1903 Fifth Edition, (Now he had enough time to review Ampere's Laws pretty well, don't you think?)...However, still maintains the same exact position on his writings about double poles on continuous Ring (Toroidal) Rotor...and this time he goes even further on this Chapter...to a very interesting comparison to Drum Armatures versus Toroidal ones...start from Page 74 on Google Book...and 70 on direct book mark link above.

Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

You're welcome for the thank-you on the generator calc. Anytime. And thank you for the new book (cicra 1903). I like reading those old books with the great drawings. I did read about 30-40 pages around that section on the Gramme ring armature.

In the other book he barely mentions the Gramme ring dynamo. He does say that at a Paris exposition one of the company's reps misconnected a dynamo to a generator source instead of a load. I guess until then, it was unknown the Gramme ring would run as a motor. In that 5th edition he does spend a lot more time on Gramme ring armatures. However, I do not see any mention (yet) of ring or toroid shaped inductors or transformer cores.

A toroid inductor cannot be analysed as a Gramme ring armature or vice verse. Yes, in the gramme ring armature core there will exist multiple flux paths and magnetic poles where that flux cuts the ring surface. We were discussing toroidal inductors, so Gramme ring armatures are out of context.

Regards,

bi