Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[hanon1492]

[bistander]

Quote questions


What were the honours, praises and distinguishments bestowed upon Mr. Figuera over a century ago which so rapidly slipped into obscurity such that I'd never heard his name until the likes of this thread? And where are the huge consequences of his invention? Certainly no enormous industrial revolution happened.

He implies, no, he states it is based on a simple principle. Most things are. He is surprised no other has done what he had achieved. What was his achievement? What is that simple principle?

Is there a reference in English where I can read the context from which the subject quote was lifted?

Thanks,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Figuera's Short Fame...

What were the honours, praises and distinguishments bestowed upon Mr. Figuera over a century ago which so rapidly slipped into obscurity such that I'd never heard his name until the likes of this thread? And where are the huge consequences of his invention? Certainly no enormous industrial revolution happened.

He implies, no, he states it is based on a simple principle. Most things are. He is surprised no other has done what he had achieved. What was his achievement? What is that simple principle?

Is there a reference in English where I can read the context from which the subject quote was lifted?

Thanks,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Yes, there are several old copies from many different newspapers...Electric Magazines, Edu notes, etc,etc.

California Digital Paper Collection

The New Education

Western Electrician

Papers Past

Also an Industrial Engineer :J.M Bolibar tested the Device (1907, at Buforn request) and wrote its conformity with Industrial Property Law...Here

Below is the report:

Test of Prototype Spanish Patent # 47706

Photocopies from the Original Documents from the testing

More Articles from Magazines and News...

An Interview To Figuera:

Very Interesting and FULL Text Related to Clemente Figueras here

It is in Spanish at the beginning but it is translated as you scroll down, well, not all of it...unfortunately...and there is what Hanon posted above.


Unfortunately Figuera died right after signing the cited papers with Bankers (probably J.P Morgan, Rockefeller and some)...and Buforn was just a Clown, who did not know absolutely nothing from the original device, he kept copycatting into other patents on His name.


Take care


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

References

Thanks Ufo,

Only had time to skim through those references. Look interesting. I'll take more time later. The main thing, most important thing is no quantitative test or analysis. Only a mention of a device having been observed running in Mr. Figuera's home without testament of by whom or any specific operating conditions concerning the device.

I just see a lot of talk and no substance. Except for 100 years, what's the difference between Figuera and Keshe?

Regards,

bi

[hanon1492]

Come on Bistander!!! You can not compare Figuera with that felow... I really thought you were developing some affection toward Figuera.

If you want a more organized summary you can read this next link. Also read the page "Timeline" into this link for more newpaper clippings and interviews done in 1902: https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/history/

[hanon1492]

really disgusting especially since that person knows absolutely NOTHING about the Figuera device but is so unintelligent to even understand a patent.

the funny thing is through a program i have, i have found out where the prick lives down to the street address. maybe a person to person visit is in order in the future
i would thoroughly enjoy the expression on his face as i showed my gratitude for all the aggravation.

MM

How can I define you better than what you are showing day by day?



My only aim here is to defend the patent teachings and promote this device. You are the one who want to distort it saying that just your design will work. I kept the original spanish text together with the english translation to keep every detail from the original, and be sure that in the future any person may read the original words, and now you come "reading between lines" and inventing a bunch of restrictions. Come on!!!

Your theory in a nutshell: What it is written in the patent does not work. Nobody understand the patent but myself. The only thing that work is my design. My design is not described in the patent, and I am building it right now.

I just say that your design will work because it moves the fields. But there are other possibilities to move the fields.Open your mind. Is it so hard to digest it? I told you that you lied because you said 3 months ago that your COP 3 device, that you said you sold it later, used resistance wire and now you say that resistors wont work and just your toroid may work. I do not want to waste my time looking for that quotes but maybe I should do it.

PS. The buyer of your old COP 3 device with resistors may ask you for a refund if the device does not work with those resistors...

[bistander]

Come on Bistander!!! You can not compare Figuera with that felow... I really thought you were developing some affection toward Figuera.

If you want a more organized summary you can read this next link. Also read the page "Timeline" into this link for more newpaper clippings and interviews done in 1902: https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/history/

Why has nobody done it since his one and only working device? 115 years ago.

Moving magnetic fields are not uncommon in stationary machinery having coils within those fields. Yet there is no evidence of power in excess of that predicted using conventional methods and theory. For example; a stalled 3-phase wound rotor induction motor. And polyphase linear motors would see this condition frequently. If such Figuera phenomena existed, you'd think the driving electronics for those linear actuators would be blowing up left and right.

I'm not sold on the idea by a long shot. Doesn't mean I'm not interested. And I'd really like to see you guys give it your best shot. That's why I try to give some helpful hints. I have an extensive background in electric machinery, both theoretical and hands-on. Nothing would please me more than a verifiable successful prototype.

bi

[hanon1492]

For 103 years the patent from 1908 was buried into the patent archives.

As I do not believe in witches I do not go into witches forums to post there.

I can not understand why you dedicate your time here if you do not believe in any device. What do you expect here? A theory full of integrals, differential equations and dark matter particules which may convice you to believe that maybe current models are not complete from the time that Einstein buried the problem to fit the homopolar generators into current version of Maxwell equations with a patch theory??

Good luck then

[Elcheapo]

fets

To Uf0;

"So far we only have TWO Choices to FLUCTUATE CURRENTS:

1- By Resistance.

2- By Inductance/Reluctance."


Just had to get on here to disagree with your post.
The 3rd and BEST way for varying current is to use fets.
I'm sure you are quite familiar with fets, unless you've been
living under a rock all these years!
I have never attempted the use of power hungry resistors.
My system is just 2 npn power fets driven in unison with
6 to 12 volts for the hi and 4 to 6 volts for the low.
With just 10 or 12 volts you can get a coil current of 10-11 amps.
Some of these fets can supply hundreds of amps. So What's the problem?

I said it before, but I'll say it again. It's the TOTAL current going
to the 2 primaries that eliminates BEMF.

eg: coil A gets 8 amps on hi while coil B gets 2 amps on low. Total current= 10 amps.
On next pulse: coil A gets 2 amps while coil B gets 8 amps. So still only 10 amps of total current consumption.
With no change in current there'll be no change in emf.
With no change in emf, THERE WILL BE NO BEMF.
Read the patent which says " the current is CONSTANT".
Figueras uses the word "simple".
Well it can't get any simpler than this!

I have to agree with Patrick Kelly when he says that it's the use of the 2 primaries that cuts out Lenz.

Some will say that any coil with a changing current will always produce a bemf.
This is only true when using just one coil. Does not apply for 2 properly balanced primaries.

BTW: At post #151, Satchid suggests a very similiar system to yours.

[hanon1492]

Marathonman,

Quote from patent 57955 (Buforn, 1914) in page 12




What I see is that while the change in the current will be continuous and organized (you call it "in unison") the main objective is accomplished. The key feature is to get those two requirements. Yo can do it with resistance, with inductance, with electronics, with a magnetic amplifier,...

[hanon1492]

Marathonman,

When I said you lied I meant this:

On the 10th of september you posted your COP 3 device parameters (I just added the red color to highlight the important part):

....
input was 50 volts @ 2 amp.

output was 40 volts per core series to 80 volts @ 3.75 amp.

wire used for resistance was Nichrome wire either 60 or 80, but can't make out the rest.

it is easy to calculate with Ohm calculator like ...

Currently you are posting:

4. the secondaries will never put out more then the primary induction thus the loop back feature Figuera designed into his device allows the power to be reused or recycled throughout the system. without part G's core/ inductor features and the second secondary loop back this device will never be self sustaining no matter how hard you try.

Whether you like it or not, both statement can no be true at the same time. In which one are you including false information? Supposedly your COP 3 device was a real device built with resistive wire and tested by you...

[seaad]

About the MM COP 3 Unit:

Turion question: http://www.energeticforum.com/292320-post923.html

MM answer: http://www.energeticforum.com/292324-post926.html

MM: "300 watts out with 100 in - not self sustaining" . . Why not self sustaining?? .Why??

MM: "i sold it to someone" . . If I was totally broke I should NEVER sell my first WORKING OU DEVICE !!


I wrote before:
Meanwhile we are waiting for the minute of truth to be reached in the forbidden thread we others have to search what is causing OU in the Figuera concept.

If MM gets economical funds enough to build:
A WORKING OU UNIT should just POP UP easily. Because MM already knows the concept from the COP 3 unit test!
IF he fails then we can ask the question about the MM COP 3 Unit again.


I think UFOpolitics is right in this: "..and Buforn was just a Clown, who did not know absolutely nothing from the original device, he kept copycatting into other patents on His name." so I think all /Buforn/ patents younger than PATENTE DE CLEMENTE FIGUERA (1908) No. 44267 can be left out when we are trying to find the solution.

AND I know that simulations belongs to "This wold" / Arne

[Ufopolitics]

To Uf0;

"So far we only have TWO Choices to FLUCTUATE CURRENTS:

1- By Resistance.

2- By Inductance/Reluctance."


Just had to get on here to disagree with your post.
The 3rd and BEST way for varying current is to use fets.
I'm sure you are quite familiar with fets, unless you've been
living under a rock all these years!

To ElCheapo,

I am quite familiar with FET's...and I have done many Motor Controllers, Voltage Regulators, SEPIC and regular Buck, Boost Converters, etc,etc... which are based on Ultra high Switching FET's with very low Rds On...and several FET's blocks with very nice heat sinks...

I have displayed here many times, many of those devices that range from 555 timers all the way to Monster Pulsers...and that was back four years ago...

So, if you never watch them...then it was you living under a rock...

I have never attempted the use of power hungry resistors.

This is a point about this Thread that I can not really understand at all.

Resistors IS THE BASIC EXAMPLE to fluctuate currents as stated by Figuera, and so far I have not seen, not even one set up which has been produced here showing an organized HIGH WATTAGE resistor set at work...

If someone would have proven by resistors the MAIN PRINCIPLE HERE, long time ago...it would have avoided many, but I mean many arguments related to which one works fine or not!!

Resistors would definitively show (even being a primitive method) that MAIN PRINCIPLE WORKS, A PROOF OF MAIN CONCEPT HERE, whether it can self sustain or not...it would prove very simple that fluctuating both fields over secondaries will generate a STRONG INDUCED EMF at Secondaries.

And by using LOW RESISTANCE PRIMARIES along with High Power resistors, properly heat sunk, ventilated with cheap, very cheap brushless fans, which consume nickel and dimes in power...will absorb most of the HEAT on the Circuit, so working with Low Resistance Primaries will NOT get Hot during a long period of testing.

My system is just 2 npn power fets driven in unison with
6 to 12 volts for the hi and 4 to 6 volts for the low.
With just 10 or 12 volts you can get a coil current of 10-11 amps.
Some of these fets can supply hundreds of amps. So What's the problem?

The problem?...I will tell you up front:

First, NPN will not work, this is about switching the HIGH SIDE, meaning Positive, N-CHANEL FET's will pulse negative (LOW) Side.

Need PNP FET's, High Side, P-Chanel.

Second, Only Two FET's will not do it either, (even being PNP), all you have there is a very poor and radical, steep, "Push-Pull" wave based on Two Alternated On-Off, FET's need to be STEPPED in the Wave Ladder Sequence through TIME, and may need a block of FET;s per step.

You may obtain a "Triangle Wave" by using some short delay over time (Eg:resistors, caps or whatever else) on rise-fall times, but that will not work, each step UP and DOWN needs to be STRONG SWITCHING of different levels of POWER SENT, maintaining SAME FORCE Up and Down on the Fluctuating Fields, and not falling or rising based on delay inertia over time. This is not just about reaching a Top Peak then free fall to a Bottom Peak...

Third, Transistor Switching alone IS NOT ALL, FET's are just electronic Switching relays, meaning either ON or OFF, period. Their rise-fall Times are abrupt, steep, radical.
You need to consider adding the FET Driving IC which Generates the SMOOTH but STRONG WAVE SEQUENCE To different FET's Arrays.

Fourth, Using that Low Voltage will NOT work, no matter how many more amps you add. A Higher VA, which will build the strong Spatial Magnetic Field with ROBUST Primaries is required for this Device, I wrote it before, there is a minimal VA Required to achieve strong fluctuations which generate the required EMF at Secondaries.

There is a HUGE, RADICAL SWITCHING DIFFERENCE, when using Commutator Plates contacting Carbon Brush in a SOLID, ROBUST WAY, RISING UP and DOWN FALL (meaning at ALL Times) no matter if Resistance or Inductance is used to achieve the POWER SCALE UP-DOWN.

I said it before, but I'll say it again. It's the TOTAL current going
to the 2 primaries that eliminates BEMF.

Do not agree above either, only current will NOT do it alone, You need the SUITABLE Voltage to DRIVE those Currents.

eg: coil A gets 8 amps on hi while coil B gets 2 amps on low. Total current= 10 amps.
On next pulse: coil A gets 2 amps while coil B gets 8 amps. So still only 10 amps of total current consumption.
With no change in current there'll be no change in emf.
With no change in emf, THERE WILL BE NO BEMF.
Read the patent which says " the current is CONSTANT".
Figueras uses the word "simple".
Well it can't get any simpler than this!

Wrong again...the drop is ABOVE 50% NO LESS on the Low Primary, IF NOT, the too low driven primary will loose magnetic pressure, and the High will be PREVAILING, creating a "rushed advance" over the low one, then Induction will collapse.

I have to agree with Patrick Kelly when he says that it's the use of the 2 primaries that cuts out Lenz.

Some will say that any coil with a changing current will always produce a bemf.
This is only true when using just one coil. Does not apply for 2 properly balanced primaries.

BTW: At post #151, Satchid suggests a very similiar system to yours.

Agree, Two Primaries will form a higher pressurized magnetic field from both ends to a common centered volume, no BEMF could ever fight this way.

Have no idea what you are talking about on Satchid and "my system"...which system?



Take care



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Why has nobody done it since his one and only working device? 115 years ago.

Because of the way most People "handle" the "REPLICATION" of a Patent, for example, if you look at the post#151 here, then keep scrolling down...you will notice how they start "corrupting" the Original Idea on Patent...because "bunch of resistors are non sense"...then..." why seven primaries?...Then... "I will use Transformers"...or..." I will use an LC Circuit", or "I will use transistor simple switching instead of a Small Motor and Commutator"...and so on and on they end up with a completely different set up as it was meant to be...

Then LOGICALLY FAIL all this time to be able to REPLICATE the Main Patent Principle.

All of this by NOT LOOKING at the MAIN, INVISIBLE FACT taking place here...which are based on Moving the Magnetic Fields ALONE over the Secondaries with THE SAME PRESSURES.

I agree that it could be done in many other ways...BUT, WITHOUT REALLY Understanding the Main Principle it absolutely WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Moving magnetic fields are not uncommon in stationary machinery having coils within those fields. Yet there is no evidence of power in excess of that predicted using conventional methods and theory. For example; a stalled 3-phase wound rotor induction motor. And polyphase linear motors would see this condition frequently. If such Figuera phenomena existed, you'd think the driving electronics for those linear actuators would be blowing up left and right.

I honestly can not see your logic above...

Could You please explain, how would a stalled 3 Phase wound rotor would "see" this same principle??!!

Or a linear Polyphase Motor?

All this things you have mentioned are using AC Sinewave...this is about a DC always Positive Exciting signal.

Any of those machines you have mentioned above, just by stalling... would do that?...please explain.

I'm not sold on the idea by a long shot. Doesn't mean I'm not interested. And I'd really like to see you guys give it your best shot. That's why I try to give some helpful hints. I have an extensive background in electric machinery, both theoretical and hands-on. Nothing would please me more than a verifiable successful prototype.

bi

I will "sell" you the idea......But Do You have the Money to buy it??!!......and it is great you will be able to help us with your expertise.



Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

And YES...

Hello to All,


And so...YES, I have tested MM Toroid and it works excellent!!...beyond expectations!!. and it is MUCH BETTER SYSTEM than Resistors alone, while it does NOT deform the MAIN SIGNAL WAVE.

I am only having Issues with the piece of crap PSU I've got, which can not drive such low resistance with Full VA Power, reason why I am stuck with Toroid Concept, since I am unable to test different windings and contacts separations (taps)...but do not worry, I will solve that issue soon.

The reason why I am doing Resistors as well is just to PROVE MAIN CONCEPT...Something that should have been done years back...but hey, someone has to do it...and so, like I said before, I got a good deal on High Power EBG Resistors of 10 ohms each at 300 Watts...so I will just use like 9 resistors to test system with crappy PSU...This way I would be able to test very LOW RESISTANCE HIGH CURRENTS AND VOLTAGE Primaries in an extended time.

I tested before with low power resistors and same PSU and I verified IT DOES WORK PERFECTLY WELL...just that they started smoking and had to stop test...So I could not make a longer video showing it.

Outside of this Forum...typical People would be completely lost by showing a very complex switching-fluctuating currents and magnetic fields development Setup...out of which, no one would be able to understand by showing original drawing on Patent...so, a very close system to that described ON PATENT DRAWING originally in 1908 MUST BE DONE FIRST, in order just to START PROVING CONCEPT....That it is not reliable?...True...but after all it was just cited as an EXAMPLE on Patent.

And so THE EXAMPLE shows Principle on Patent WORKS.

This way- As I understand it- IS THE WAY Science Developments Works......and NOT jumping the Gun at all times.

This is my Progress Status so far...plus Holidays time will kill me with mail orders.


Ufopolitics