Figuera Device, Part G Continuum.( Serious Builders Only)

[Ufopolitics]

OK, will do. I can't tonight but will try to get it done tomorrow night.

BTW, the baseline figure I gave earlier is the Figuera setup with all the jumpers etc.

Regards,
Cadman

Ok, but the Base Line Input is different in V &A from the Test V&A ?

You should use same Input for all tests, as same speed.

Anyways, that is why I mentioned it again...


Thanks


Ufopolitics

[Cadman]

OK, will do. I can't tonight but will try to get it done tomorrow night.

BTW, the baseline figure I gave earlier is the Figuera setup with all the jumpers etc.

Regards,
Cadman

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

I need you to clarify.
Using your illustrations above, which commutator segment numbers(s) do you want attached to which toroid segment number?

Regards,
Cadman

Sure can:

[IMG][/IMG]

It don't need to be exactly as shown...as it depends on how many winds you've got on Toroid Core...so, space them apart as best as you could.

Please remember to use same conditions as previous test on everything.

Basically exact same Input as exact same RPM's...

Then if you could... when you put it all back together like Figuera in the connections, with jumpers etc,etc...then test with same Input and same speed.


Thanks Friend


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

UFOP;

Very interesting Inductance displacement concept. i did not know a motor would do that by changing the com to a smaller one. it does sound very reasonable and does fit the outcome you guys are experiencing. thus the comm being to small the field is shrinking instead of growing larger as it should and is actually reducing induction instead of increasing it or at the very least it is out of sink.

Thanks MM,

Yes, and I have tested this same rotary switch with other set up which do not use a Part G...same thing.

This Figuera design with the jumpers is a very interesting, but when we try making it on a commutator... the On timing displacement are too short related to the travel distance on Part G and so to each primary as well.

Remember that in the Figuera patent He does mention a "Commutator" but was only to convert AC to DC from second secondary to self sustain system...but when he writes about the single positive brush...then he refers as running inside "A Cylinder" where Brush sweeps from in-center-outwards, which is a completely different concept as a commutator. Then he literally mentions about "encrusting pieces of the resistors within this Cylinder Inner walls which were made of an insulated material...

Why would Figuera had to go through all this trouble on his long and detailed explanation on the rotary switch structure when he could have just written "A Commutator and Brush with jumped wires" as it would do the job as well?

so it must be concluded that a direct brush to wire contact would not experience this outcome of the comm as the radius is quite larger and thus both are in sink.

Mm

Not only they are in sync...but the actual positive input feed is injected directly to each windings in a smoother way than jumping from segments of windings...so there would be plenty of time for Inductance to develop without being interrupted, jumping from tap to tap.

What happens to Inductance and mmf force in the "in between" of two taps?

Definitively, since it is kind of a "no input" or an "idle stage" there...it should be a decay on power to then suddenly rise up...not smooth at all.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Cadman]

Ufo,

I need you to clarify.
Using your illustrations above, which commutator segment numbers(s) do you want attached to which toroid segment number?

Regards,
Cadman

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

Base line setup:
Input 3V, 3A
Output: 8.45V, 0.55A DC rectified
9 watts in, 4.6 watts out

Using the above wiring configuration:
Input: 5.7V, 2A
Output: 7.5V, 0.40A DC rectified
11.4 watts in, 3 watts out.

No changes were made on my input resistance on the neg lead from the battery. The change in input volts and amps were due entirely to the changed wiring connections.

Regards,
Cadman

Hello Cadman,

Thanks for making this primary suggested test!

The point here is not about reaching OU, but being able to compare our output when we have taken off all jumpers, plus having each adjacent element attached, resulting in five...which actually what is doing is expanding to ON Time of brush.

Now, please Cadman, could you do same test without jumpers, but now having single elements at commutator.(not attached)..resulting in eight total terminals (including the two outputs)

Intended to use same running speed as same tested conditions as in previous test you did.


Thanks friend!


Regards


Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Part G

I personally would test what you have and go from there. Figuera or Doug never mentioned another winding on the core so i don't think it would be a good idea.
once when i spoke to Doug he mentioned having to move the connection around a little to balance the output to the primaries that is why i chose bare wire and coating just the sides for no shorting between winding's allows me to move a connection point if i have to even though i have it bolted together it can still be modified as i have more wire.
the weather is keeping me from working on a house so this in turn is delaying the parts i need for testing.
Also bringing part G close to saturation would not be a good idea as any part brought close to saturation will start to behave erratically. the extra headroom i have spoke about in part G is just for this purpose, no saturation.

Quote;
"So thinking on this further, using a ring distributer G, connected to low resistance primaries, on my setup the resistance of the exciter circuit will be almost non existent, which i believe is the way to go for instant hard hitting induction with just a small fluctuation of the split positive feed from G."

i completely agree but please keep in mind the what ever your output is of your secondaries the primaries split that load so each primary is accountable for half the flux required for your secondary output with part G dropping the currant less than half way down just enough to fluctuate the field between the primaries to clear the secondary of the low primary.

just my two cents worth.

PS. i would not put to much faith in a simulation, real world tests are the way to go.

MM

[Cornboy 555]

Thanks MM, bistander, interdesign, and seaad, my very bad.

I got confused between the commutator connections and the toroid connections.

Yes commutation on the inside should be good and hopefully easy to machine.

Seaad's comments, about not enough induction in the toroid core to control the current, have me concerned. Also the results from other builders in this regard.

So thinking on this further, using a ring distributer G, connected to low resistance primaries, on my setup the resistance of the exciter circuit will be almost non existent, which i believe is the way to go for instant hard hitting induction with just a small fluctuation of the split positive feed from G.

Maybe what we need is a fine wire preliminary winding on the toroid, a winding that will take the core right to saturation, and be adjustable with a Dc feed from a PSU, this could also help tune the self sustaining feed from the secondary after start up.

Then wire the heavy G splitter winding over the high resistance high induction winding, similar to a MAG AMP.

Do you guys think this is a viable way to control the current in this device?

If so, i am sure Simulation Seaad could work out, in a flash, what gauge and number of turns would be required to take our individual cores to almost saturation, and adjustable back to 0 saturation and what current would be needed to achieve it.

Just some thoughts, what do you guy's think?.

Please respect MM's wishes, and only answer here if you are a builder.

Best Regards Cornboy.

[Cadman]

Hello to All,

I would like to address primarily to all Active Builders at this time...and what I mean is relating to those who have already a built model and can run just a simple test...like Netica, Cadman, Pmazz850 and so maybe Shadow119 who I believe should have his rotary switch finished...maybe I am forgetting someone...but I know Cornboy is still not finished with his primaries yet (meaning, I did not forget about you my friend...)

The test is very simple...I just want you to remove all your jumping connections at Commutator like it is shown at Figuera drawing, EXCEPT for the two outputs (on the patent drawing would be 1-16 and 8-9)

And if you have the 16 elements commutator, please join every other adjacent two elements, in order to have only five (5) contacts, including the two joint outputs, at either upper or southern hemisphere.

All you have to do is wire just the Five (5) bottom or Southern Comm hemisphere elements to your part G spaced apart Taps.

And by doing this, your signal will be traveling only in one direction at all times (meaning no return done by commutator), since you have disconnected all jumper wires between upper-lower elements.

Your Positive signal would only go like this: Out N>>>>Out S following the Motor rotation >>>>, so one primary would be ALWAYS like >>> and the other also like >>>, and both primaries and part y : Primary N>>>Y>>>Primary S

Please check what Output you are showing on Secondary.

Could you test that option and then get back to Us here?

The reason why I am asking this test is just because I have noticed that if we remove the shorting contacts at commutator...the Induction grows a lot, and even with just one primary On...and the very interesting thing is...that even those elements not connected...if I jump them with just a screwdriver like the way is shown on Patent...induction decreases.

I made a quick diagram showing the way I meant above...:

[IMG][/IMG]

Thanks much and regards


Ufopolitics

Ufo,

Base line setup:
Input 3V, 3A
Output: 8.45V, 0.55A DC rectified
9 watts in, 4.6 watts out

Using the above wiring configuration:
Input: 5.7V, 2A
Output: 7.5V, 0.40A DC rectified
11.4 watts in, 3 watts out.

No changes were made on my input resistance on the neg lead from the battery. The change in input volts and amps were due entirely to the changed wiring connections.

Regards,
Cadman

[marathonman]

Part G

UFOP;

Very interesting Inductance displacement concept. i did not know a motor would do that by changing the com to a smaller one. it does sound very reasonable and does fit the outcome you guys are experiencing. thus the comm being to small the field is shrinking instead of growing larger as it should and is actually reducing induction instead of increasing it or at the very least it is out of sink.

so it must be concluded that a direct brush to wire contact would not experience this outcome of the comm as the radius is quite larger and thus both are in sink.

Cornboy;

Your part G looks great and the inside brush is the best place place to put the brush in your set up. that plug idea is great and will come in really handy. one thing i am very confused by is your addition of jumpers. would that not be detrimental to the induction of part G. Doug used no jumpers on his part G and it worked fine so i am curious as to your motive for them.
Figuera also used an inside brush and is the most logical place to put it so i am sure your performance will be great. i must add that the jumpers Figuera is describing are actual winding's around his cylinder and his description is in it's most elementary form thus the wording is geared towards explaining this elementary form not it's higher form so caution must be taken to not interpret it as literal. that and the fact that Figuera was very, very cautious in his wording to expose as little as possible to get the patent and that is all.

One thing to note; Doug had said he ground his part G with a surface grinder at the speed in which part G was to operate at, 3600 rpm. thus the outcome was supper smooth operation with incredibly low brush wear and no sparking.

Looks very good.

Very good info on brush wear. Gulf Electroquip - GE 752 Drilling Motors, AC Generators, Motor Blowers, Bug Blowers, Spark Arrestors

Mm

[Cornboy 555]

Hi Everyone, had a few spare moments today, so went with 32 bars[ of course, was just testing ].

Decided on internal commutation, so made up very tight fitting 30mm thick plug which will also act as bottom bearing for brush holder.

Almost ready to epoxy,and skim the bars, very gently, just got to finish all the outside jumper connections.





Cheers Cornboy.

[Ufopolitics]

Sync Issues...

Doing that will drop induction to an all time low but that is of course your test unless i am misunderstanding you.

Quote;
"Your Positive signal would only go like this: Out N>>>>Out S following the Motor rotation >>>>, so one primary would be ALWAYS like >>> and the other also like >>>, and both primaries and part y : Primary N>>>Y>>>Primary S"

sounds like the pressure between the two primaries will be non existent and if that is the case the device will be rendered useless.

Just my point of view unless again i misunderstood you.


MM.

Hello MM,


This is just a test...to observe output at secondary.

However, one thing I have noticed on our set up...is the fact that the commutator diameter, which of course dictates the brush sweeping circumference is too short, related to the Inductance displacement of the diameter of Part G traveling path...don't know if you understand what I am trying to explain here.

And so, this huge difference is not noticeable at low speeds...but when we start accelerating towards operating RPM's...the brush gets way ahead of the Part G traveling circumference.

It is a completely mechanical issue here, and what happens is that this results in the Collapsing (or could say huge decreasing) of the Exciting Field sweep at the operating speeds.

Other words, Part G can not keep up with the brush-contact speed ratio.

This is easily observed with the B&W CRT and the Horizontal line deflection travel...we see the displacement angle shrinks the higher we go...and a perfect, ideal generating exciting field, the opposite is supposed to happen, meaning as we accelerate this angle should expand and expand which directly means -as we could also observe- that Induction grows higher and higher.

Before Citfta was mentioning a possible current restriction based on Impedance on Part G circuit...but I completely disregarded that, since I have tested another completely different than Part G scenario...and it does exactly the same thing...same "shrinking" of the exciting field at higher speeds.

And here, I believe is the reason why Doug's device function as expected, because he was using EXACTLY the same circumference of part G and Brush sweeping circumference were exactly the same.

So, a mechanical defect, which resumes in a lack of synchronization between sweeping brush travel and Inductance displacement on Part G.

And if we look carefully about the commutator connections with the jumpers and brush sweep, we realize that sweep is divided in two cycles, one cycle goes forward as the other goes reverse at the same exact timing. Now, picture this electrical swinging at 3600 RPM's...

I can only compare this scenario with a DC brushed motor...that we take off the OEM Commutator and install a much smaller diameter one, still same number of elements and a suitable brush as well, of course...to displace the same Fields length (arc distance) at rotor...it would be completely "out of timing"...and so, it will not run properly...if it ever get to start.

But not even a motor will cover up this back-forth movement at same timing...can't even be done with just one rotor...so it is not easy to compare.

In that test, by taking off the jumpers at comm and just doing a forward movement of brush, it provides a closer sync to Part G displacement since the reverse cycle has been taken off.

Related to Induction...it would still generate an induction even with just one primary...and system would not run "low" but one primary would always be high (N in this case related to Diagram) as the other (S) in low, about pressures...they will maintain equal but will flow in just one direction...so the induced signal would always be either positive or negative related to y positioning winding direction related to primaries flow.


Anyways...this is just my interpretation that I have observed based on all my testing.


Regards



Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Part G

Doing that will drop induction to an all time low but that is of course your test unless i am misunderstanding you.

Quote;
"Your Positive signal would only go like this: Out N>>>>Out S following the Motor rotation >>>>, so one primary would be ALWAYS like >>> and the other also like >>>, and both primaries and part y : Primary N>>>Y>>>Primary S"

sounds like the pressure between the two primaries will be non existent and if that is the case the device will be rendered useless.

Just my point of view unless again i misunderstood you.


MM.

[Ufopolitics]

Just a Test...

Hello to All,

I would like to address primarily to all Active Builders at this time...and what I mean is relating to those who have already a built model and can run just a simple test...like Netica, Cadman, Pmazz850 and so maybe Shadow119 who I believe should have his rotary switch finished...maybe I am forgetting someone...but I know Cornboy is still not finished with his primaries yet (meaning, I did not forget about you my friend...)

The test is very simple...I just want you to remove all your jumping connections at Commutator like it is shown at Figuera drawing, EXCEPT for the two outputs (on the patent drawing would be 1-16 and 8-9)

And if you have the 16 elements commutator, please join every other adjacent two elements, in order to have only five (5) contacts, including the two joint outputs, at either upper or southern hemisphere.

All you have to do is wire just the Five (5) bottom or Southern Comm hemisphere elements to your part G spaced apart Taps.

And by doing this, your signal will be traveling only in one direction at all times (meaning no return done by commutator), since you have disconnected all jumper wires between upper-lower elements.

Your Positive signal would only go like this: Out N>>>>Out S following the Motor rotation >>>>, so one primary would be ALWAYS like >>> and the other also like >>>, and both primaries and part y : Primary N>>>Y>>>Primary S

Please check what Output you are showing on Secondary.

Could you test that option and then get back to Us here?

The reason why I am asking this test is just because I have noticed that if we remove the shorting contacts at commutator...the Induction grows a lot, and even with just one primary On...and the very interesting thing is...that even those elements not connected...if I jump them with just a screwdriver like the way is shown on Patent...induction decreases.

I made a quick diagram showing the way I meant above...:

[IMG][/IMG]

Thanks much and regards


Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Part G

Here is something to think about when building part G. if part G is controlling the currant then why in the world would someone wind their primaries with a lot of resistance. not only does that sound stupid but is stupid and would lead to higher losses. since part G is suppose to control the currant then why not wind the primaries with as little resistance as possible for not only less losses, less heat and the biggest bang for the buck with the fastest response. to many people are stuck with present day dogma taught BS to get out of the trench they were taught to walk in.
If part G is not controlling the currant in your present build then your part G is wired wrong plain and simple and not enough self inductance is present. Doug's part G has substantially more winding's on it then when i first thought and after reviewing my notes i have concluded that this is the problem with the tests the builders have posted so far. i have had an influence on that mistake and for that i am truly sorry but this is my findings after reading all of my notes staying up most of the night rereading and studying every detail.

The original design from him works and is one continuous wind on a alternator core but he also stated it was a slight pain to balance. just because he used an alternator core does not mean a toroid can't be used. yes i think the jump in winding's using the comm is effecting the currant transition slightly and possibley accounting for some of the behavior but i do not think that is the only problem occurring or reason.

builders are experiencing no currant fluctuations and that is a direct indication of the lack of self induction plain and simple so if you wind your primaries to control the currant then you are building two devices to control the currant and not one that is specifically build to do just that, PART G MY FRIENDS and the primaries are designed to be specifically ELECTROMAGNETS MY FRIENDS.

I will conduct two test in the near future, the first one is my present part G wind and pending that outcome will dictate the second test with Slightly smaller wire. if the outcome of the second test is still a no go then i will wire specifically for a direct brush to wire contact with and forgo the comm completely. it will be encased in resin and ground down with a surface grinder for complete precision for a non sparking scenario. this set up can and will be wound on my present Part G core.

another thing i would like to add is i am getting great magnetic fields from my primaries at low amperages with the way i wound them being very low resistance.

I basically believe that the Figuera device is a motion machine as electricity is basically motion as is magnetism. part G imparts motion in the primaries and the primaries impart motion in part G and the secondaries. then a portion of the motion produced in the secondary/load is looped back to replace the motion lost in our inferior material handling of the motion. it is all about setting up endless series of high and low pressure conditions which are ever interchanging in their constant attempt to equalize which never takes place thus the machine will run forever if allowed in a constant unbalanced state seeking equilibrium.

MM