Vidbid Generator

[vidbid]

B-Field Directed Wire



Take 2



Regards,

VIDBID

[Ufopolitics]

Free CAD

Thanks UFOpolitics.

Sorry about that.

I should have thought of that.

I guess if you took a piece of wire and cut it in half and looked at one of the the ends where you cut it (the wire), then I guess that is what I meant.

I guess I should have been more precise.

Sorry, my bad.

Something like this, I think.



Regards,

VIDBID

My pleasure Vid,

In 3D CAD there are only Four Main Default Views, Top, Front, Side and Perspective.
In 2D CAD also, except there is no Perspective but ISO or Isometric, as we could add Sectional Cut and Exploded Views for complex machinery in order to see all components.

We could create all kind of Cameras Views and record/print from them as also name them as we like.

What is important here is that we use same "language" for a good communication.

Now, according to your explanation the Rotor should turn like this:

[IMG][/IMG]

And according to what I said in previews post, this rotation will cancel Magnetic Fields through its Spatial displacement, I have represented the two inner magnetic fields meeting at top (12 O'clock) but when at high speeds they will blend/fuse/cancel, taking the whole Space Ring Volume of a canceled or no field area.

For N-Machines, Magnets or Electromagnets must be configured in a Geometry, that Poles rotate around their own INDEPENDENT SPACES, without "crossing" or intersecting within same space.

PS: Doesn't anybody know of a free and easy to use CAD program? I'm currently using Windows Paint and CompactDRAW.

DraftSight - Free* CAD software for your DWG files - Dassault Systèmes

We have used this Software in My Machines Thread, it outputs in DWG and other Native AUTOCAD Formats...as well as Turbo CAD.

Based on this Software , I made the CAD for Cornboy555 MAG3 Rotor Laminates in order for him to get them made at the Waterjet Shop...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[vidbid]

The Flux is contained only within the B-Field Directed Wire

..am lost as where is the center of rotation?

Hi Ufopolitics.

My bad. This is what I meant:



Regards,

VIDBID

[shylo]

over my head

Hi vidbid, This is sort of what I'm working on.
In post 61 , the top hand-drawn pic , If you place magnets at 90 deg. Where B is drawn and its mirror image (the bottom).
I'm using E-cores behind coils , in front of a magnet rotor.
I place magnets inside the E with the coils, A n & s facing n & s ,on the end of the coils, A n & s facing e & w , at the bottom of the E.
If the right end of the coil is a n then the right end of the bottom has to be south.
By adding the magnets to the core ,it doubles the output.
I'm not sure if any of this even applies, since this over my head.
Just was quite similar.
artv

[vidbid]

Hi vidbid, This is sort of what I'm working on.
In post 61 , the top hand-drawn pic , If you place magnets at 90 deg. Where B is drawn and its mirror image (the bottom).
I'm using E-cores behind coils , in front of a magnet rotor.
I place magnets inside the E with the coils, A n & s facing n & s ,on the end of the coils, A n & s facing e & w , at the bottom of the E.
If the right end of the coil is a n then the right end of the bottom has to be south.
By adding the magnets to the core ,it doubles the output.
I'm not sure if any of this even applies, since this over my head.
Just was quite similar.
artv

Hi artv

Would you mind posting a diagram of the generator you are designing?

Regards,

Vidbid

[hanon1492]

Hi all,

I think this is the proper thread to share this overunity patent I found months ago. It is very similar to your design:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post247629

There is a spanish patent about a overunity generator filed in 1955 by David Hogan and carlos Ludovik Jakovlewich (patent ES225316) which is curiously very very similar to the Figuera patent No. 303376 , the one with the rotary drum coil. In this patent the coil is stationary and the magnets are mounted over some rotating discs.

I have translated the claims of this patent:


---------------------
CLAIMS SPANISH PATENT ES225316

The authors claim in this patent:

1) New electric generator characterized by the existence of series of discs, variable in number and in dimension, susceptible to host "magnets".

2) New electric generator according to claim 1 characterized in that the series of discs are mounted on a shaft in parallel arrangement ; the shaft rests on its sides over bearings. This arrangement of supporting bearings allow its intermediate extension if required.

3 ) New electric generator according to claims 1 and 2,wherein the " magnets " located in the discs must be placed parallely on the shaft. These discs, spaced, will allow that the poles of the magnets ( magnetos) of each disc are facing " north-south " (opposition of poles).

4) New electric generator according to claims 1 to 3, characterized in that between the discs (series of two) a stationary or fixed screen or sieve (grids) of copper wire or any electroconductive material glazed and covered with insulation is placed.

----------------------------------
In the description it is clearly stated that the authors are describing an overunity generator where a part of the energy produced could be used to power the machine and the rest could be used externally for other uses.

[hanon1492]

Link to the patent (pdf)

Regards

[Ufopolitics]

Design Difference...

Link to the patent (pdf)

Regards

Hello Hanon1492,

Hanon, the N-Machines are completely different CONCEPT than Figuera's and the other one you have shown...

In the N-Machines or Homopolar Generators there are NO STATORS at all...no fixed parts...no static parts, except brushes collecting output.

Yes, that is right...it is just a Rotor spinning and the generator effects comes in through slip ring/brushes...

Figuera's and the Second one you showed, are classified within the typical "TWO PART GENERATORS" that we all have up to now.

Regards


Ufopolitics

[vidbid]

it is just a Rotor spinning and the generator effects comes in through slip ring

The implications of the homopolar generator is truly remarkable.

I wonder if the inverse of that function is propulsion.

Regards,

VIDBID

[Allcanadian]

@UFO

Yes, that is right...it is just a Rotor spinning and the generator effects comes in through slip ring/brushes...

Lol, all these years and I finally meet someone who gets it, thank you.

Faraday said the field must move relative to the conductor or the conductor relative to the field however the "conductor" is simply a 'path" the current follows. If the "Path" moves even if the path is through a solid block of copper between two brushes then this constitutes a "moving conductor". The brushes simply move the path of least resistance the current must follow relative to the fixed magnetic field.

It is so simple and obvious it is amazing so few could understand such a thing. Imagine all those experts over all these years unable to understand such a simple concept simply because it is a little different. They are no experts because if they were they would understand this is Faraday's Law.

I found it amazing that they did not actually understand Faraday's Law well enough to know it when it was right in front of them. Faraday said the field or the conductor(conductive path) must move however ....... he did not say how nor why only that they do.

To be honest I really didn't think anyone would get it and I am in the middle of writing a paper on the process.
Again, thank you UFO for renewing my confidence in humanity, there is much more here than meets the eye.

AC

[wrtner]

In the N-Machines or Homopolar Generators there are NO STATORS at all...no fixed parts...no static parts, except brushes collecting output.

Yes, that is right...it is just a Rotor spinning and the generator effects comes in through slip ring/brushes.

Were these effects overunity or interesting in anyway?
.

[gene gene]

More N-Machine INFO

Hi vidbid,
If you or anyone else here wish to study more on the homopolar disc, N-machine. I would suggest a visit here- N-Machine

You will find @ about the middle of this page a short video teaser for his DVD of Bruce speaking on the N-machine and he reads Tesla's writings about his thoughts on this generator. Quite interesting!!

I did quite a lot of research and study of this some 4 or 5 years ago, but have since lost most of my links. I even built a small crude machine that I spun up in my drill press just to see for myself.

Thanks for this thread, Gene

I forgot to mention a most interesting man in India (Paramahamsa Tewari) who has built a machine he calls (SPG) Space Power Generator, That with 5 kilowatts total power input it is reportedly yielding 30 kilowatts of electrical power output. There is a Link to his home page also.

[Ufopolitics]

Yes They were OU...Not "balanced" though.

Were these effects overunity or interesting in anyway?
.

Yes Wrtner, they were OU...Only problem was Voltage versus Amperage ratios were too unbalanced...talking about 2.0 Volts versus 1600 Amps.

See that is what I meant before about thinking only on reaching OU...Theyy did...so what?

It is the "QUALITY" you reach there...and the utility/application of your Machines what counts.

For "Proving a Concept"...They did its job ok...but need to make them better balanced outputs.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

@UFO

Yes, that is right...it is just a Rotor spinning and the generator effects comes in through slip ring/brushes...

Lol, all these years and I finally meet someone who gets it, thank you.

Faraday said the field must move relative to the conductor or the conductor relative to the field however the "conductor" is simply a 'path" the current follows. If the "Path" moves even if the path is through a solid block of copper between two brushes then this constitutes a "moving conductor". The brushes simply move the path of least resistance the current must follow relative to the fixed magnetic field.

It is so simple and obvious it is amazing so few could understand such a thing. Imagine all those experts over all these years unable to understand such a simple concept simply because it is a little different. They are no experts because if they were they would understand this is Faraday's Law.

I found it amazing that they did not actually understand Faraday's Law well enough to know it when it was right in front of them. Faraday said the field or the conductor(conductive path) must move however ....... he did not say how nor why only that they do.

To be honest I really didn't think anyone would get it and I am in the middle of writing a paper on the process.
Again, thank you UFO for renewing my confidence in humanity, there is much more here than meets the eye.

AC

@AC,

Lol...I am glad I have renewed your confidence in humanity, it is all my pleasure...

So, that could be a reason why...when the meters were mounted on board of rotating frame...no reading was developed in a previously outputting through brushes working machine...Uh?...

There is a saying..."The simplest things sometimes...are the harder to notice.."

One interesting thing was not clear to me...and of course the "classical" explanation was not digested either ...was:

Why, when Faraday rotated the "U" shaped magnet (second experiment on my Thread) around a STATIC Copper Disc ...and connected to brushes...there was no effect, no output whatsoever...when other two choices did work...1-Moving Disc/Static Magnet...and 2-All rotating together (N-Machines)

According to Faraday Theory...either one...Magnet or Conductor...should be static...While ANY of the two moves...and this works excellent, for the simpler technology Humanity choose to develop up to now...meaning, the Two Part Generator (Rotating Static Fields/Static Induced Fields, or Static Fields/Rotating Induced Fields Generators)...BUT, why it does not work for the Homopolar Generator arrangement?



To me this "Apparently Failed" experiment was the one that really unveiled the "Spatial" Magnetic Field dilemma about Static or Rotating Fields...in Homopolar Concepts.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Cadman]

One interesting thing was not clear to me...and of course the "classical" explanation was not digested either ...was:

Why, when Faraday rotated the "U" shaped magnet (second experiment on my Thread) around a STATIC Copper Disc ...and connected to brushes...there was no effect, no output whatsoever...when other two choices did work...1-Moving Disc/Static Magnet...and 2-All rotating together (N-Machines)