Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[citfta]

OK, here is a formula that might help some of you understand better what is going on with your part G.

XL = 2pfl

XL is inductive reactance

p is pi

f is frequency in Hertz (not the car rental place)

l is inductance in Henries

I hope everyone involved in this project has at least a meter for measuring inductance. If not, maybe some of you with similar builds can share what you find with your build. You can use this same formula to check for the inductive reactance of your primary coils also to help you see what you need to do to get things in balance.

Carroll

PS: One thing to remember is that this formula is for an AC signal that is actually changing polarity. Since the signals you are working with are only varying the DC level the actual reactance values will probably be less. But as long as you can come close between the part G and the primaries the actual value should not be that critical.

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

I just have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously don't understand Ampere's Law. And it looks like I am unable to change that. I was reluctant to try again here bit gave it another shot. As to that last part, I don't understand the question if there is one.

Regards,

bi

Bistander,

Please let's forget about "Laws" and let's use a simple Black and White example.

Say we have a Coil-Core which wire gauge and number of turns configuration allows a Max Input rating of 175V and 2 Amps during operation ...and so it produces a measurable X Magnetic Field...and so based on what Hanon and you are saying...is that since only Amperage (Current) is what generates the Magnetic Field Strength (understood Volume as well) and not Voltage whatsoever...

Resuming, what you two are saying is that the same Coil above...just using 12 Volts and the same current (2 Amps) would produce exactly the same "X" field strength and volume as when it was fed by 120V/2 Amps?

And yes, we are talking about straight DC here...no pulsed DC, no AC.

Is that what you are saying Bistander, by backing up whatever Hanon wrote?

About previous question...just forget about it...you will see soon what I meant.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

No idea

Yeah, right Bistander...and also depending on the A/T remember?...but what does Amps Turns actually means?...Voltage remember?



Bistander, the changes according to temperature in a coil related to resistance increase, therefore voltage increase are completely insignificant compared to what we are talking about here.



Yes, Bistander, but I was not referring to what you are writing above which is EMF as a resulting voltage...nope, not referring to that relationship as a result...but as the voltage required to drive X Amps on a given coil from the Input point of view to the coil.

So...You do not think there could be a Static Coil "Assembly" (assembly meaning two or more coils within same core) driven by DC...where we could have a "Changing Magnetic Field"...without changing the feeding Current...nor any other Input Parameter to Coil Assembly like Resistance nor Voltage?


Regards


Ufopolitics

Ufo,

I just have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously don't understand Ampere's Law. And it looks like I am unable to change that. I was reluctant to try again here bit gave it another shot. As to that last part, I don't understand the question if there is one.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

I know that. I have tried many combinations according to the pic below and similar, both thru and over material-mass/ output coil(s). Different signals 90o , 180o , NN, NS half sinus (rectified) signals. Step I then II or sliding I to II. With DC-bias and without. Open rod(s) and closed cores. Best result N=60%-80%. (As an ordinary transformer closed core >= 90%.) But in all cases/combinations I see all the familar behavoir of a transformer, including that the secondary always affects the primaries.

Regards / Arne

Ok, let's say you have a "slight" idea on what I am referring to...but still far away.

See your S1 and S2 as your N1 and N2 are identical GEOMETRIES...Not good....and that was one...second, by placing then one after the other...you are just reinforcing field strength when you turn on all four...to then turning just one pair...the only problem is that by coils having same topology...they form N/S-N/S Chains between them...not good, because it interferes with the Repulsive Field...meaning if you had a N<>N then right in between you turn on a S/N-S/N<>N/S-N/S...then the Repulsion Field looses strength.

You are lacking to Visualize the Magnetic Field but concentrating on the coils positioning...all coils could be within same space Volume...and still Field would move...

Keep trying to "guess"...maybe one day you will hit it...

In a temperature ratings scale to getting closer to what am talking about being "hot"...you are still very cold...ok, let me be nicer...say a bit, but just a bit warm...



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hi guys,

I've been through this before with Ufo. The magnetic field is independent of voltage. The mmf depends only on the net current passing through the surface (area) enclosed by the flux per Ampere's Law.

Yeah, right Bistander...and also depending on the A/T remember?...but what does Amps Turns actually means?...Voltage remember?

Yes, in the non-superconductoring world, the current in a coil which produces the mmf is dependent on the voltage applied to the coil per Ohm's Law. However the voltage to mmf or flux relationship is purely coencenedence. Easy proof is to maintain constant current in the coil as it heats up. You must increase applied voltage as the resistivity of the copper increases. But the field remains unchanged with this voltage change.

Bistander, the changes according to temperature in a coil related to resistance increase, therefore voltage increase are completely insignificant compared to what we are talking about here.

Note in the Ufo quote above that he includes "field changes" which further confuses the subject by mixing a statement about a static field with a condition of a changing field. And yes Ufo, a changing magnetic field defines a voltage, or in other words, there is dependence of voltage on field change. But that is not the same as the static field dependence on only current and not voltage.

Regards,

bi

Yes, Bistander, but I was not referring to what you are writing above which is EMF as a resulting voltage...nope, not referring to that relationship as a result...but as the voltage required to drive X Amps on a given coil from the Input point of view to the coil.

So...You do not think there could be a Static Coil "Assembly" (assembly meaning two or more coils within same core) driven by DC...where we could have a "Changing Magnetic Field"...without changing the feeding Current...nor any other Input Parameter to Coil Assembly like Resistance nor Voltage?


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Negative, electromagnet's magnetic force just depends on current. The current which transverse its windings. The voltage is just the driving force to push that current along the electromagnets, but the electromagnet does not care if you use 12 volts or 100 volts as long as you could move the same current.

Just tried to help.

I am sorry but you are NOT helping here if You are not using your logic at all, as you keep contradicting yourself above.

What I really do not understand is that you are even writing everything above to come up with the right Logical Conclusion...and still you deny it to your own self

It is NOT absolutely the same to have 12V driving 10 amps...as having 120 Volts driving same 10 amps!!

And basically to what I am referring here is to the Magnetic Field strength value. However, this basic knowledge applies to every single application out there.

Using your water and pipe analogy...You could have compressed in a HORIZONTAL pipe (so Gravity does not act upon water directly based on column weight) a very high volume of compressed water (high amperage)...and If You don't get the right amount of DRIVING FORCE (Voltage) to propel that water to the required distance along the contiguous empty pipe....it absolutely, would NEVER happen.

If you are interested I have never used a PSU. Figuera never used those. He played with batteries.

I knew that...that is the main reason why all your writings are only based on airy (inflated) mathematics...since your practical experience bolts down to zero...Oh, excuse moi...I forgot about the moving piece of clear paper...and the Variac and two bulbs deal...

And If Figuera would have had access to a PSU...plus just a couple Diodes...am very sure he wouldn't have used a commutator to convert AC to DC, nor a battery...to self sustain his machine...


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

B vs V

Negative, current AND Voltage, BOTH makes Magnetic Field Changes, and NOT only Current.

Negative, electromagnet's magnetic force just depends on current. The current which transverse its windings. The voltage is just the driving force to push that current along the electromagnets, but the electromagnet does not care if you use 12 volts or 100 volts as long as you could move the same current.

Hi guys,

I've been through this before with Ufo. The magnetic field is independent of voltage. The mmf depends only on the net current passing through the surface (area) enclosed by the flux per Ampere's Law.

Yes, in the non-superconductoring world, the current in a coil which produces the mmf is dependent on the voltage applied to the coil per Ohm's Law. However the voltage to mmf or flux relationship is purely coencenedence. Easy proof is to maintain constant current in the coil as it heats up. You must increase applied voltage as the resistivity of the copper increases. But the field remains unchanged with this voltage change.

Note in the Ufo quote above that he includes "field changes" which further confuses the subject by mixing a statement about a static field with a condition of a changing field. And yes Ufo, a changing magnetic field defines a voltage, or in other words, there is dependence of voltage on field change. But that is not the same as the static field dependence on only current and not voltage.

Regards,

bi

[seaad]

You do not need to "move" absolutely any physical mass of any kind at all.
All we need... is to move the "Non Physical Field" over Material Mass.
Ufopolitics

I know that. I have tried many combinations according to the pic below and similar, both thru and over material-mass/ output coil(s). Different signals 90o , 180o , NN, NS half sinus (rectified) signals. Step I then II or sliding I to II. With DC-bias and without. Open rod(s) and closed cores. Best result N=60%-80%. (As an ordinary transformer closed core >= 90%.) But in all cases/combinations I see all the familar behavoir of a transformer, including that the secondary always affects the primaries.

Regards / Arne

[hanon1492]

Negative, current AND Voltage, BOTH makes Magnetic Field Changes, and NOT only Current.

Negative, electromagnet's magnetic force just depends on current. The current which transverse its windings. The voltage is just the driving force to push that current along the electromagnets, but the electromagnet does not care if you use 12 volts or 100 volts as long as you could move the same current.

Just tried to help.

If you are interested I have never used a PSU. Figuera never used those. He played with batteries.

[Ufopolitics]

UFOP; This is not an attemt to step on your toes, Just come to think of it.

It seems that the entire coil (atoms) needs to be moved ( or core w. magnets) to induce voltage. Am I right? See pic.
Arne

Negative Seaad,

You do not need to "move" absolutely any physical mass of any kind at all.

All we need... is to move the "Non Physical Field" over Material Mass.

All efforts to alter/change the feeding Electromagnet Parameters (V&A) which projects the Spatial Magnetic Field have not worked out so far.

Which translated in plain English tells me we can not either "Weaken" nor "Strengthen" Field to reach OU...thinking or "expecting" it would give us the same exact "effects" as takes place by moving a steadily ON Field, same field...in the exciter system Rotor of any generator.

And do not take me wrong above, I meant successfully work out in order to reach OU...but we got demonstrated that Induction is possible even with weird Field Changes of any kind...but it is not an "organized" way...therefore it (induction) can not grow in an organized pattern above certain point of Induced Output.

We are almost there...patience please...we will crack that code...


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

If you connect a pipe to an elevated water tank or to the water network you will get a constant inlet pressure (voltage). The flowrate (current) is controlled by changing the resistance to the flow by opening or closing a valve (impedance).

Hanon,

By using your example above (an Elevated water tank), you are getting a Fourth Parameter at game...Gravity...why complicate things that much?

current is the the only parameter of those three with influence in the electromagnet force

Negative, current AND Voltage, BOTH makes Magnetic Field Changes, and NOT only Current.

What Do You think "N" or Number Of Turns do to Voltage?...The higher number of turns is in relation to higher voltage...and so the opposite.

Could You just forget about Math Formulas and base it on REALITY AND FACTS?

FACT IS that NONE of Us can manipulate Current by dialing our PSU's Amp Dial ALONE, without affecting by dropping or rising voltage, can you understand that fact?

If we all could do that...it would be another the "case"...but it is NOT POSSIBLE.

Have you ever played with a PSU?

Everyone should take into account also that electromagnets create a filter to the input signal ( time constant = L/R ) and therefore the real output signal going along them is filtered and softened. A filter with a high time constant could eliminate partially the inlet signal waveform. And we are interested in the resulting outlet signal which is the one that will get the magnetism into the electromagnets.

Electromagnets are just a Spatial Projector of a Magnetic Field.

And so, a given V & A Render a specific Spatial Magnetic Field...and the minute you alter either one, the other would change as well, no matter how much...the point here is that by changing any of those two parameters would give Us ANOTHER Magnetic Field of different characteristics/properties.

Generators Principle as Figuera's Main Idea which lead him to build his machine were based on using the SAME MAGNETIC FIELD, just closer and further away...BUT NOT about different Fields.


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

Move

UFOP; This is not an attemt to step on your toes, Just come to think of it.

It seems that the entire coil (atoms) needs to be moved ( or core w. magnets) to induce voltage. Am I right? See pic.
Arne

[hanon1492]

[hanon1492]

Current can not be varied without altering voltage at some point, that is completely nonsense. Look at Ohms Law Equation...ALL Three Parameters are in complete DEPENDENCE upon each others, whether directly or indirectly proportional. Bottom line is that each parameter is in total function of the other two.

[Ufopolitics]

The Figuera &quot;Secret&quot;...or &quot;legacy&quot;?

Hello to All,

After doing all my work related to all Figuera descriptions...I realized the BEST PART of the whole 1908 Patent relies on the preliminary understanding of his approach or could say "his idea" about "Mimicking" the Close, the Aligned and the Far Field.

And so all the "means" he uses, basically by Fluctuating the Currents, are all pure examples in order to "justify" his work...but in reality, NONE work as expected in reality.

If we vary currents by ANY means, the Voltage would be altered as well...and that is not good...it won't work.

Current can not be varied without altering voltage at some point, that is completely nonsense. Look at Ohms Law Equation...ALL Three Parameters are in complete DEPENDENCE upon each others, whether directly or indirectly proportional. Bottom line is that each parameter is in total function of the other two.

At low values this differences are almost not noticeable, however, when we try to increase speed over a current controlling path of any kind (whether by resistance or inductance) then impedance limits our Field Variation Scope, not allowing it to fully develop like Field does at low speeds....not good.

If we analyze a typical generator, the Exciting Magnetic Field is ON at all times, no variation of any of these three parameters (V, I, R) at all during operation, they are completely constant. All that changes is the displacement over time, or Space/Time.

And we all could do just the same thing with stationary coils...while keeping all three parameters constant.

All we need to change is each Coil Geometry and turn them on in a sequential way, back and forth.

Say we have 600 feet of a specific wire gauge...which have a fixed resistance...now, we could wind that wire in many shapes relating to geometrical volume, and using same iron core. Basically if we play with the Coil Length and Thickness, we will have different Magnetic Field Shapes, all wound same direction, meaning all same polarization...for different volumes...and this variation could only be a 10 mm difference and would radically change the Field shape projection, setting either closer or further away.

Anyways...This is what am working on now...and all preliminary testing have given me very positive results...and would be testing a full Model soon.


Regards


Ufopolitics