Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[john_g]

thanks for the suggestion John
Note that my doubts originate in the way the diodes D2 andD3 are oriented, contrary to direction of theoretic current flow
It reminds me the same as seen in the Ufopolitics boost converter
nevertheless I`ll try with a cap (non polarized?)
cheers
Alvaro

Hi Alvaro
Yes a non polarized small cap. I think the diodes were correct, the inductor becomes the source on discharge. Re the timing I was thinking about timing filling up the output cap, so you could see if there was any difference, so no load attached.

Regards

John

[hanon1492]

Hi all,

I have done some testing with a similar winding to the one posted for the 1902 patent No. 30378. As you can see I did not get any output result ( 0 volts) . The output I got with irregular (manual) pulses were a measurement error dued to the voltmeter. But with AC (and also tested with intermittent DC current) I did get 0 volts. I first tested with two identical coils and later I tested with different coils (internal coil:150 turns, copper wire of 0.4 mm diameter; external coil: 900 turns, copper wire 0.4 mm diameter)

Video 1

Video 2patent 30376patent 30378two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, ..." Why did Figuera remark that it was arranged in two sets of electromagnets? ...

[JohnStone]

...
One detail about patent 30378: reading the text seems to indicate that all the electromagnets are conected to the same inducer signal. But reading carefully: " this generator whose form and arrangement are shown in the attached drawings, warning that, in them, and for clarity are sketched only eight electromagnets, or two sets of four excitatory electromagnets in each, ..." Why did Figuera remark that it was arranged in two sets of electromagnets? ...

Maybe because there is one set inner electromagnets and one set outer ones. They talk about before.

Conclusion for MEG: Either it is a hoax / error or we neeed a new idea for winding.
The magic seems to be in the magnetic field being a vortex. (outside my imagination just now) Dealing with this nature Howard Johnson built a magentic gate where the magent was attracted when entering and repelled when leaving.
Obviously the field is colinear in the gap "c" where the induced coil lives somehow - but the field of the induced coil whirls in a vortex as reaction from current flowing.

Can anybody get a clue from this idea? It must be a stange winding scheme (strange for our educated mind) that works but is hidden.
JS

[Duncan]

Lead acid battery maximiserA MythBuster's Glass Shattering Montage - YouTubeGlass is an amorphous solid that is created without any type of regular periodic bonding.

Crystal is a structured lattice of atoms or molecules that forms a regular periodic bonding pattern.

I have pasted that from this web page
What's the difference between GLASS and CRYSTAL? - Yahoo! AnswersVideo 1 - YouTubeTV-part II - YouTube

The magnetic matching which Dan refers to here having little impact on the secondary is really the same state you are searching for regarding Clemente Figuera's machine. That seperatrion of the cores is rather akin to an opto coupler or buffer amp in electronics. I further add here that you are tuning to series resonance and that of course is indicative of the linear wave which is not supposed to exist. But of course we all know it does.
So just to re- cap IMHO you are principally designing to the lead acid battery and its resonant cascade . Every battery is different and the resonant point obviously alters with load (hence the adjustable winding)
quite a lot of this will become apparent regarding the magnetics and engineering of principles the transverter John. It seems most of the hard work that dedicated group did is being rapidly erased from the www still here's a copy of the first two lecturers .. basic and advanced and a link to some more of the relevant video's for you

http://dnp.s3.amazonaws.com/b/b5/RE-OU-v6.1.pdf

and the rather more advanced

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FRV%2FTexts%2FAdvanced%2520RV%2520Research%2520and%2520development.pdf&ei=YJk4Utb7EoGVhQfaq4HYDw&usg=AFQjCNGKf0NwGyh3XRJ52fS0lGkm9XLhpA&sig2=gwTxWhZ6KADh-8CmMwueIg

It is when these guys started looping the system that all the murder's burning and intimidation started John as is out lined here.

Rotoverter Technology was OU before ORBO one.

There is a lot more video and research work that has survived regarding this branch of work
here

TransVerter / Part 1 - YouTubeMarcus Reid Crystal Converter Battery - Casimir Effect - Part 1 - YouTube

however here's a basic map of the resonant battery circuit

http://dnp.s3.amazonaws.com/b/b5/battery resonance.pdf

Here are some magnetic videos which also in my opinion pertain and you may well find them interesting any way

MAGNETIC VORTEX SPIN DISCOVERY, Sept 2011(Uploading due to his Channel being taken off) - YouTube

Experiment on the Linear Increase in Efficiency with Multiple Moving Magnets over Pulsed Inductors - YouTube

[Duncan]

the stupidest circuit - YouTube

Oliver Heavisideengineered

[hanon1492]

Hi all,

I have updated my post #439 to include some corrections in the circuit designed by Patrick Kelly to generate the two unphased signals required in 1908 patent. It has a small mistake that he will shortly update in his ebook Chapter 3. Here it is the link to that post:

Link to post #439 with the circuit to generate two unphased signals

Regards

[hanon1492]

Patent US3368141 in pdf

Video 1

Video 2



Carlos Subieta Garron literally writes in his patent: "The assembly will not work as an annular magnet, there should be a small air gap between the core member and the shoe poles"

[hanon1492]

Air gap function

I have been looking for another patent that I saw time ago with an air gap to achieve overunity in a MEG. I have found some references. It seems that the "air gap" has a clear function to get a minimization of the Lenz Effect over the inducer coils. Just for the record these are the overunity references to air gaps in transformers:

A truly overunity transformer

Curious OU transformer

Aspden energy anomaly with air gap

Improvement over Thane Heins transformer adding an air gap

Flynn patent US6246561 (see figures 1 to 16)

We should give a greater importance to the air gaps as elements to minimize the Lenz Effect by redirecting the induced magnetic flux along others paths different than the inducer coil.



Regards

[Cadman]

Hi everyone,

I hope I am not distracting the thread here. I thought I would share some interesting (to me) findings with my toy 1908 setup.

Sorry, it's a long story.

I replaced my 3 tiny .07 ohm coils with some bigger 0.15 ohm coils (from 120vac ice-cube relays) in an attempt to produce more volts and current. A new slip-fit core was made from mild hot-roll steel and this one also extends half-way into the two outer coils. Also found a used 300 watt 12vdc PC power supply and ran it through a fwbr to power the coils with, but as it turns out this power supply only produces 40ma current @ 10.8vdc rectified. I am still using the same arduino, 9vdc bat for the ardino, and circuit layout as before, and I use two different meters for all measurements.

The first run only produced a disappointing 1.8vac from the center coil. I did not know the PC power supply was defective at that time so I started checking for blown circuit components, and found no problem. Then I pulled the power wires from the PS to see what the arduino pulses were sending to the circuit. Checking between the arduino outputs and board ground showed 2.6v. Check from each outer coil wire to the board ground showed 0.6v. Then I reconnected the PS and checked each outer coil wire to board and found 18.8vac on 3 of them and 7.9vac on the fourth. These are supposed to be the inducing coils, not the induced. So I thought it was probably back emf.

I disconnected the PS, rechecked the readings and found the same original volts, 2.6 and 0.6 volts. Checked the rectified PS and found the 10.8vdc. Rechecked every component twice just to be sure.

Reconnected the PS and the outer coils had 19.6vac on 3 wires. 0.8vac more, ignoring the fourth wire. While pondering this I left the rig running for about 10 minutes then turned everything off to save the 9 volt battery and disconnected the PS from the board.

This is where it got interesting. A few minutes later I turned it back on. Checking the outer coil wires again, they were now up to 20.8vac with the 4th at 17.2vac. Even higher than last time. Then I went to disconnect the PS and discovered that I forgot to connect it to the board! Everything was now running only from the pulsed 2.6vdc (5vdc max) from the arduino, the exact same setup that originally produced 0.6 volts at the outer coils.

Then I hooked + & - wires from the breadboard where the outer coils were connected and ran it through a fwbr. This run showed 20.8vdc after the fwbr, and 20.8vac at the +/- breadboard connection before the fwbr. That in itself is odd because there is supposed to be a 1.5 volt loss through the fwbr. Once again the PS was not connected.

Just for fun I took out the fwbr and hooked the +/- wires to a 2200uf 25v non-polarized cap. It charges the cap to over 13 volts in a few minutes, and will keep slowly climbing, while still running without the PS.

Why did this setup suddenly produce over 20 volts from the outer coils without the PS when at first it would only show 0.6vac? Did letting it run that one time for 10 minutes do something to the core or coils?

Regards

[a.king21]

Cadman -Interesting:
It could be that you have discovered a new phenomenon, namely inductor conditioning.
We know that repeated pulsing of an electrolytic capacitor gives a temporary electret effect. i myself have seen this and know a lot about it.

I notice you have a magnetizeable core. You could have achieved a Searle effect.
The experiment would have to be repeatable of course.
Good luck.

PS You could try changing the core, and see if it is indeed a magnetic effect.

[hanon1492]

in oppositon to each other. Therefore the decrease in induced coil strength as consequence of the first induced field is compensated by the increase in that coil strength done by the second magnetic field. Thus, a minimization of the Lenz effect in each inducer coil could be obtained.

Could these proposal be right? Please comment. (Note: Remember that there was another proposal done by another user for this patent winding that you can find here: Link )

Regards

[Hrothgar]

Let Neo Handle It

just space the feed gap with a small K&J Magnetics - Products wrapped in tape for instance, it should act like a magnetic version of a diode .

[hanon1492]

Hi all,

About the concept that I referred in my last post to achieve two induced magnetic flows in opposition (which cancel each other) I have found some links where this concept is applied. It is called the "F-machine" or "F-Transformer" and it resembles slightly to the Gramme machine:

Link 1

As you could note in the next link this device also needs an air gap to avoid the return of the induced field into the primary coil:

Link 2

[marxist]

I would like to reaffirm the concept I presented in my older post http://www.energeticforum.com/238314-post455.html
and to illustrate it with the attached image.

The image is based on a patent drawing provided by hanon in Reply #216 here:
Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

According to this drawing each "coil-and-core assembly" of a Figuera transformer must be aligned with the earth magnetic field.

When the current in two primaries is at maximum, they are energized. Consequently the core of this assembly is polarized in opposition to the earth magnetic field, as depicted on the left side of the attached image.

When the primaries are not energized - when current in the primaries is at minimum as depicted on left side of image - the core's polarization gets reversed by the earth magnetic field.
The electric energy that is output during this reversal is free.

[Beamgate]

@marxist:

When the current in two primaries is at maximum, they are energized.

This statement appears to contrast the intent (at least as I interpret it) of the Patent design (the purpose of the 'switched resistor array' is to induce our modern-day version of a sine wave induction current upon opposing-wound primaries CW/CCW - highest for one, lowest for the other, inverting the flux with each cycle).

Figuera's concept of 'primaryBank-1-high vs primaryBank-2-low' (the intended flux control mechanism) seems to be dismissed with this sudden notion of 'earthly polar alignment'.

Have you had any luck with the patent as-designed?

Note: I'm about to implement (attempt ) an initial single 'stage' version of this transformer (as @Woopy has demonstrated early in this thread) as the output stage of a larger project - once I convert some 'salvaged' silicon-steel E-cores to suitable C-core's for an attempt.

So, before I blow through 6 or more metal scroll-saw blades to attempt this, i'm wondering: why the sudden switch in strategy?

Resonance for All!