Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[bistander]

CW/CCW wound core

I can. I'm almost as self-confident as MM
With CW and CCW on a toroid or that fat E-core
Regards / Arne

OK seaad,

But I don't see anybody winding a core like that to give it a test. Too bad. I think you'd be surprised at the outcome.

Regards,

bi

[seaad]

Hi Ufo,
I don't see a "self commutated" part G as a viable reactive solution. Possibly resistive, but not using reactance as shown on the toroid core.
bi

I can. I'm almost as self-confident as MM
With CW and CCW on a toroid or that fat E-core

PS. The E-core is my choice because I think it delivers a more sinus alike curve depending on that the brush lingers around the N and S points. Fewer turns per time periode. And you don't need a lathe. Only a flat sanding area.

Regards / Arne

[Ufopolitics]

UFO; Is it possible for you to estimate the relationship between Input power and Output power here, in percent?

Nope...Not yet.

At this point I am making elementary testing...basically what you are saying above...but power in would be around 40-50V and like 3-4 amps max. But the reason is that when higher speed takes place, amperage reduces like by one amp.

A question: Take the darkest blue input coil for instanse. It has a white dotted line in the middle. Does this coil comprise of two opposite bucking coils? And the green star representing the mid colliding magnetic point?

Arne

Nope, it is just One Coil, several layers, all CW, the white line refers to its equatorial plane (Dielectric Field), and the Star means Dielectric displacement in both directions, back and forth on this case.

Resuming your question, they are each Primary chains of S/N>S/N>S/N>S/N and on the opposing primary (S)= N/S<N/S<N/S<N/S

This acts like a linear DC Stator Motor...where each coil turns on in a sequence 1,3,5,7 >< 7,5,3,1 and 2,4,6,8 >< 8, 6, 4, 2 , and so displacement direction is relative to pins connection order.

When I get to leave a reminiscence of each turned off coil, then they will all add up to strengthen the On ones, which are "leading the sequence" resulting in a higher induction.




Regards


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

And no, when loaded same thing as the rest of induced coils...nothing happens -not affected- to feeding currents nor voltage to the exciting system.

Ufopolitics

UFO; Is it possible for you to estimate the relationship between Input power and Output power here, in percent?

A question: Take the darkest blue input coil for instanse. It has a white dotted line in the middle. Does this coil comprise of two opposite bucking coils? And the green star representing the mid colliding magnetic point?

Arne

[bistander]

Part G

But then again Bistander...you are analyzing this scenario in a "pause" meaning static fashion...therefore you are only seeing "static resistance" (which is nada) but what happens to the Inductance that has been developing from previous run...plus continuing after passing N Contact?

Will it just vanish or drops zero when contacting N?

Or would it continue its path?

IMHO this is a Dynamic Component...so we must consider its dynamic parameters...

So, according to you, more turns and finer gauge would do better on Part G?

Hi Ufo,

The frequency is too low for the inductane to play a significant role. Adding turns will increase inductance and lower required frequency but I see other issues which will prevent the behavior you're expecting. I don't see a "self commutated" part G as a viable reactive solution. Possibly resistive, but not using reactance as shown on the toroid core.

Hey. I've never tried it. I'm not 100% certain. Looking forward to seeing some tests.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Adding more Induced Coils...

Hello,

I forgot to write that I have also added Secondaries wrapping both Primaries...and they do excellent Induction as well:

[IMG][/IMG]

Like shown above y4 & y5.

And no, when loaded same thing as the rest of induced coils...nothing happens -not affected- to feeding currents nor voltage to the exciting system.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Ufop; "I would like to add a Cap at each coil on the Primaries of very low capacitance value, but rated for the correct amperage and voltage...what I am trying is for the Magnetic field NOT TO COLLAPSE in FULL, when Coil is disconnected.."

See pic! Arne

Hello Seaad,

Yeap, thanks!...think that should work, smooth decay plus diode will prevent back spike.


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

UFO Only

Ufop; "I would like to add a Cap at each coil on the Primaries of very low capacitance value, but rated for the correct amperage and voltage...what I am trying is for the Magnetic field NOT TO COLLAPSE in FULL, when Coil is disconnected.."

See pic! Arne

[bistander]

Bias

Hello Bistander and Citfta,

After You guys review my design above...which I have tested and it works (and yes, I also feel that "motoring force".....however, I am still not happy with it.

I would like to add a Cap at each coil on the Primaries of very low capacitance value, but rated for the correct amperage and voltage...what I am trying is for the Magnetic field NOT TO COLLAPSE in FULL, when Coil is disconnected...but just keeping a reminiscence of a weaker field on core...I know I will be creating a "Tank" LC Circuit There...but since the capacitance is low, it should not have any conflicts with the constant driving Currents and voltages...

Like I wrote before...all I want is for a weak field to still remain ON when Coils are off in the sequence...

I was thinking an Electrolytic Cap...but then I thought about an AC Cap, so it also attenuates the back spike from going to commutator or source...


Am I going the right way here?


Thanks in advance


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

To me it sounds like you want to bias all the 8 primary coils with a low DC. You may be able to do that with capacitors but I'd start by using the existing DC source and adding circuits. This way you can control the bias and keep it steady for experimentation. Later, once you get the level you need, look at replacing with caps.

I'd use a single pot or variable resistor off source positive. Then slpit the reduced voltage 8 ways, one lead to each primary coil thru a diode. Keep your main coil feed (from the comm) between the coil and diode so it doesn't backfeed.

Using the pot you should be able to bias all the coils equally at a percentage of the full switched current.

That would be my first attempt were I building the thing.

Good luck.

bi

ps. Of course I disagree with you about spinning fields, but we all are entitled to our own imaginations.

[Ufopolitics]

At that position of the brush I contend there are 2 equal but opposite paths to coil S. Therefore part G inductance cancels and part G equivalent resistance (which is 1/4th total G winding R) is all that part G will contribute to limit current to S. Not much.

But then again Bistander...you are analyzing this scenario in a "pause" meaning static fashion...therefore you are only seeing "static resistance" (which is nada) but what happens to the Inductance that has been developing from previous run...plus continuing after passing N Contact?

Will it just vanish or drops zero when contacting N?

Or would it continue its path?

IMHO this is a Dynamic Component...so we must consider its dynamic parameters...

So, according to you, more turns and finer gauge would do better on Part G?


Regards and please whenever have a chance, take a look at previous drawing.


Thanks


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

S current

Yes, agree at this point no inductance is acting -into Primary N- as it is a straight contact to it...logical....but it IS Acting on Primary S.

At that position of the brush I contend there are 2 equal but opposite paths to coil S. Therefore part G inductance cancels and part G equivalent resistance (which is 1/4th total G winding R) is all that part G will contribute to limit current to S. Not much.

[Ufopolitics]

@ Bistander or Citfta ONLY.

Hello Bistander and Citfta,

After You guys review my design above...which I have tested and it works (and yes, I also feel that "motoring force".....however, I am still not happy with it.

I would like to add a Cap at each coil on the Primaries of very low capacitance value, but rated for the correct amperage and voltage...what I am trying is for the Magnetic field NOT TO COLLAPSE in FULL, when Coil is disconnected...but just keeping a reminiscence of a weaker field on core...I know I will be creating a "Tank" LC Circuit There...but since the capacitance is low, it should not have any conflicts with the constant driving Currents and voltages...

Like I wrote before...all I want is for a weak field to still remain ON when Coils are off in the sequence...

I was thinking an Electrolytic Cap...but then I thought about an AC Cap, so it also attenuates the back spike from going to commutator or source...


Am I going the right way here?


Thanks in advance


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Another simple discovery related to Magnetic Fields...

Hello to All,

The more I do development of Magnetic Fields Interactions and Influences...the more I see how right Ken Wheeler's Book is sooo Freaking Right...

For example...a known North Pole...whenever is RETRACTING, spins exactly like a South Pole, not only that...but it induces as a South Pole does...

And so the opposite applies...when a South Pole is retracting is generating a North Pole Spin and influencing as North the Induced Coils...

Actually there are "no magnetic poles"...just in our imagination...all magnetic force spins in only one way...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

Repeat

Thank you Hanon.
Your calculations make it very clear why so many people are having problems with getting part G to control the current.
Respectfully,Carroll

And that is anyhow the easy part! (part-G)

Then they (we) have to figure out how to make OU

Hello guys/ tinkers please go and buy yourself an inductance meter!

Then you can use a "Frequency - Reactance Nomograph" see pic!

Regards / Arne A

[Ufopolitics]

What I am working on right now...

Hello to All,

This is what I am working on now...:

[IMG][/IMG]

Having Four (4) Coils of identical configuration (shown in blue shades) as is resistance (12.5 Ohms) as identical AT, as same awg (23) each, mounted on a common cylinder iron core of 4 inches long by 1 1/2 inches in thickness...and so, each coil is about One (1) inch in length.

I am able to turn them ON as I please related to sequence directions...on this set above, I am making connections do same back-forth movement as Figuera, except I am not altering either V or A...since all coils are exactly same spec's.

But I can also have all Vectors follow same continuous direction flow to either ways.

I have also alternated each element to diverge to different primaries, like 1 belongs to N and 2 belongs to S...preventing from two coils on same circuit to be contacted by brush, but simultaneously both primaries at same run.

As You can notice all coils are in Parallel, all wound CW...all positioned exactly following a SERIES MAGNETIC FIELD VECTOR DISPLACEMENT.

Installing Three (3) Induced Coils y1, y2, y3 and connecting them in series -of course- increases output. Even though y1 would be generating more than y2, y3...since there are no cross magnetic vectors acting but just one on y2, y3.

With CRT Line display we could see fluctuations are great. Plus with Viewing Film we could see clearly the Center Lighter Line from each Coil displacing following red arrows vectors.

If we move this same configuration into a toroidal geometry, then add two more primaries N2 and S2 at 180...then y2, y3 will be receiving cross magnetic vectors, therefore, increasing their output, plus a fourth (y4) also sandwiched between N2 & S2.

So far I am having very good results.


Regards


Ufopolitics