Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[citfta]

To Cadman and Marathonman,

This thread is for the discussion of projects on this forum. I started this thread because some builders did not want "THEIR" thread polluted by people asking technical questions they couldn't answer. This thread is for technical discussion. If you don't like it then take a hike. No one asked you to come here and rant because you can't handle technical discussion about your pet project. UFO has started taking part in this discussion and I hope we have been able to help him somewhat. As I said earlier, build the device and then we will see who is right and who is wrong about how part G operates. The technical discussions WILL continue for anyone that wants to take part in those discussions. That includes the discussion about the Figuera device and any other projects anyone wants to discuss.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[bistander]

Prove me wrong

Mr Cadman;
Quote;
"It's obvious that Bistander doesn't have a clue when it comes to the part G of Figuera"

This is totally obvious and i have been saying that for months. he don't know jack S**T when it comes to figuera. Who cares what the heck about what you built in the past or what you think you know. you have never built the device and know nothing about it so do this forum a favor and shut your big ass mouth for a change.
i'm sick of your wining and arguing and SO IS EVERYONE ELSE.
what a sad little man and life you have.

MM

I actually think I know more about toroid inductors than CM and MM and Ufo combined. I read the patent and do not see where he uses a toroid for part G. He says cylinder of insulating material. Further he describes features of a commutator. It is a giant stretch of reading between the lines to conclude he's talking about a toroid. But I don't care. Use it if you want. But the burden of proof resides with you, not me. Don't tell me to build it. You build it and prove me wrong. I dare you. You can't, can you. Hell, seaad showed you a simple test. Bother to run that? I didn't think so.

And why did you guys come over here to citfta's thread to bother me. You told me to leave the other thread and I did. Carroll invited me here to discuss whatever.

When you have no facts, no data, no proof, what's left besides hate and name calling. Just build it, test it and prove me wrong, please.

bi

[marathonman]

I don't have to prove crap to you, you failed yourself not me.i don't care what you think you know. who cares !

don't come to the Figuera thread to argue. i'll stay off this one, you stay off that one.

Arguing is over, please don't come looking for it little man, leave it alone.

MM

[Ufopolitics]

Peace and Love!!



PEACE PLEASE!

[Cadman]

Currents traveling in opposite directions from wires attached at 180 degrees in the same winding toward an intermediate wire completing their circuit creates magnetic fields of opposite polarities to each other. If those are opposed N-N polarities then they will have consequent S-S poles. The old right hand rule, you know?

CM

WOW! I must have poked a real sore spot with that insulting rant.

You got it ace, I'm gone.

[Ufopolitics]

Field Testing

@Citfta and Bistander,

I am done with exciter circuit VA testing...but I have milliamps at all meters reading current.

Photobucket is on maintenance now, so no pic.

But based on same existing exciter circuit here that I drew, I just cut Cap positive wire and ran both terminals to amp meter.

The real way this very thin wires are connected is as follows.

From the Stator Two series coils run two yellow and very fine wires that go to AC Bridge Diode pins, and from the +/- of bridge diode goes to brushes with two red-black wires, also very fine, and from brushes they continue to the cap legs.

So, all I did was cut Cap positive leg and extend two wires from them to an in line amp meter.

From one end of amp meter terminal (+) and brush negative I added the V Meter, which measures 174V DC.

Everything else measures perfect, Mains are at 129V AC,

Energy Meter connected to a Running AC Fan shows 60 hertz, 78 watts, 120V

But Field Amps are very, very low in DC Mode.


Regards


Ufopolitics

EDIT: Was able to load new diagram as an attachment here

[bistander]

@Citfta and Bistander,

I am done with exciter circuit VA testing...but I have milliamps at all meters reading current.

Photobucket is on maintenance now, so no pic.

But based on same existing exciter circuit here that I drew, I just cut Cap positive wire and ran both terminals to amp meter.

The real way this very thin wires are connected is as follows.

From the Stator Two series coils run two yellow and very fine wires that go to AC Bridge Diode pins, and from the +/- of bridge diode goes to brushes with two red-black wires, also very fine, and from brushes they continue to the cap legs.

So, all I did was cut Cap positive leg and extend two wires from them to an in line amp meter.

From one end of amp meter terminal (+) and brush negative I added the V Meter, which measures 174V DC.

Everything else measures perfect, Mains are at 129V AC,

Energy Meter connected to a Running AC Fan shows 60 hertz, 78 watts, 120V

But Field Amps are very, very low in DC Mode.


Regards


Ufopolitics

EDIT: Was able to load new diagram as an attachment here

Hi Ufo,

The position of the ammeter is such that it is reading only capacitor current (probably rms ripple) which I'd expect to low.

You need to take the red wire from the brush and move it to the + cap terminal. That way all the field current goes thru the ammeter.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

The position of the ammeter is such that it is reading only capacitor current (probably rms ripple) which I'd expect to low.

You need to take the red wire from the brush and move it to the + cap terminal. That way all the field current goes thru the ammeter.

bi

Thanks Bistander,


That is what I thought.

So, need to run the red wire coming out from the + diode bridge and take it directly to the + cap terminal like it shows on attachment (instead of running to brush positive as previous drawing).

Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

magnetic circuit

Currents traveling in opposite directions from wires attached at 180 degrees in the same winding toward an intermediate wire completing their circuit creates magnetic fields of opposite polarities to each other.

CM

That is not correct. The currents in the turns of the coil produce a magnetomotive force (mmf) according to Ampere's Law. The resultant flux in the magnetic path is equal to this mmf divided by the reluctance of the path.

This relationship is referred to as Ohm's Law for magnetic circuits. Look it up.

See the circuit diagrams below. You could not have flux in both directions at once just like you can't have current in both directions at once. One path means a single flux (field) just like a single path electric circuit means a single current.



bi

{edit} Of course the right hand rule applies and will indicate the flux direction in the core. But it is applied only once. When there are multiple excitations on the core with opposing directions, sum those mmf's and use the polarity of the resulting Ampere-turns.

The reference noted in my attachment has an example of analysis of multiple excited circuit.

[RAMSET]

very nice to see

some things just need acknowledgement , I know there are still bumps in the road here ,and maybe even bigger obstacles at times ....but this is truly nice to see .


sorry for the intrusion .

respectfully
Chet K

[bistander]

toroids and Gramme rings

The guys are busy over on the Figuera build threads (yep, they just started a new one) having fun and seemingly not accomplishing much "build". Not that I mind, but CM did post something interesting.



From the book: The Electromagnet and Electromagnetic Mechanism by Silvanus P Thompson, pg 55 & 56.

I was wondering where he had come up with consequent poles. I have in the past used the consequent pole technique with motors. Works very well. Looking up the definition I see where it can also apply to internal magnet poles. Although I disagree with the definition because I contend that a magnet pole needs to be at the surface, the definition is out there.

Now, the figure in the attachment from Mr. Thompson's book, as a stand-alone object, meaning not under the influence of any significant external magnetic flux fields, I don't believe has the internal fields and poles shown and described. Mr. Thompson calls the internal poles consequent poles. He may as well called them imaginary poles. I guess it is possible that some flux leakage could exist and cause a very weak pole on the surface of the toroid at or near the brushes. But toroids constructed of good material in proper portions have very little leakage and is considered negligible. I base my opinions on my understanding of Ampere's Law.

Electrostatics

On the cover of the book is the date 1888. Maxwell published Ampere's Law in his equation circa 1860. I clicked my way through Mr. Thompson's book today. Like 3-400 pages. Read some, skipped a lot. I did not see the mention of Ampere's Law anywhere. One spot talks of units for current being the Ampere, recently changed from the Weber. It may have been that Mr. Thompson was unfamiliar with Ampere's Law, or disagreed with it. But the book was written when all this electromagnetic stuff was very new. I also noted only one other place in the book where a toroid shape was found. Search for toroid, toroidal, torus found nothing. I'm thinking the author didn't care much at all about the thing.

I am aware of the Gramme ring motor. I have designed and built several. And the Gramme ring armature does resemble the continuous wound toroid inductor being discussed for use as part G on the Figuera generator. However there is a huge difference. The toroid inductor is a stand-alone device meant to be void of external fields. Typical leakage of 1% means essentially all the flux (or magnetic field) is produced inside the toroid core and stays there.

To the contrary, the Gramme ring armature is made to operate in an external magnetic field. Like this:


vs the toroidal inductor:


The inductor is intended to operate in the absence of external magnetic fields.

The Gramme ring armature for that 2 pole dynamo has 2 parallel magnetic circuits and has flux cutting the surface of the core. The inductor has a single loop path and no flux cutting the core surface. These are very big differences in the circuit analysis.

People can imagine all sorts of things going on with magnetics. I'm telling you the way I see it and the way I was taught and what has worked for me many years and what agrees with mainstream science. Just go on with inductor design. Don't let the facts get in your way.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

The guys are busy over on the Figuera build threads (yep, they just started a new one) having fun and seemingly not accomplishing much "build". Not that I mind, but CM did post something interesting.



From the book: The Electromagnet and Electromagnetic Mechanism by Silvanus P Thompson, pg 55 & 56.

I was wondering where he had come up with consequent poles. I have in the past used the consequent pole technique with motors. Works very well. Looking up the definition I see where it can also apply to internal magnet poles. Although I disagree with the definition because I contend that a magnet pole needs to be at the surface, the definition is out there.

Now, the figure in the attachment from Mr. Thompson's book, as a stand-alone object, meaning not under the influence of any significant external magnetic flux fields, I don't believe has the internal fields and poles shown and described. Mr. Thompson calls the internal poles consequent poles. He may as well called them imaginary poles. I guess it is possible that some flux leakage could exist and cause a very weak pole on the surface of the toroid at or near the brushes. But toroids constructed of good material in proper portions have very little leakage and is considered negligible. I base my opinions on my understanding of Ampere's Law.

Electrostatics

On the cover of the book is the date 1888. Maxwell published Ampere's Law in his equation circa 1860. I clicked my way through Mr. Thompson's book today. Like 3-400 pages. Read some, skipped a lot. I did not see the mention of Ampere's Law anywhere. One spot talks of units for current being the Ampere, recently changed from the Weber. It may have been that Mr. Thompson was unfamiliar with Ampere's Law, or disagreed with it. But the book was written when all this electromagnetic stuff was very new. I also noted only one other place in the book where a toroid shape was found. Search for toroid, toroidal, torus found nothing. I'm thinking the author didn't care much at all about the thing.

I am aware of the Gramme ring motor. I have designed and built several. And the Gramme ring armature does resemble the continuous wound toroid inductor being discussed for use as part G on the Figuera generator. However there is a huge difference. The toroid inductor is a stand-alone device meant to be void of external fields. Typical leakage of 1% means essentially all the flux (or magnetic field) is produced inside the toroid core and stays there.

To the contrary, the Gramme ring armature is made to operate in an external magnetic field. Like this:


vs the toroidal inductor:


The inductor is intended to operate in the absence of external magnetic fields.

The Gramme ring armature for that 2 pole dynamo has 2 parallel magnetic circuits and has flux cutting the surface of the core. The inductor has a single loop path and no flux cutting the core surface. These are very big differences in the circuit analysis.

People can imagine all sorts of things going on with magnetics. I'm telling you the way I see it and the way I was taught and what has worked for me many years and what agrees with mainstream science. Just go on with inductor design. Don't let the facts get in your way.

Regards,

bi

Bistander,

By the way, thanks a lot for the help on measuring the Exciter Circuit Amps on Generator...it worked out fine based on last diagram, I am making a video of it with full diagram. The total running amperage was at start of like 2.5 and as machine warms up (stabilize speed and electromagnetics) became 2.0 amps...which actually delivers about same 400 VA (Watts) you were talking about on the whole small gen exciter system within the big one of 4400 Watts.

About your above comments related to Thompson and the Gramme Ring part on that earlier edition book...I would not be so "finally conclusive"...

DYNAMO-ELECTRIC MACHINERY 1903 Fifth Edition

I recommend you read now his 1903 Fifth Edition, (Now he had enough time to review Ampere's Laws pretty well, don't you think?)...However, still maintains the same exact position on his writings about double poles on continuous Ring (Toroidal) Rotor...and this time he goes even further on this Chapter...to a very interesting comparison to Drum Armatures versus Toroidal ones...start from Page 74 on Google Book...and 70 on direct book mark link above.

Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Old books

Bistander,

By the way, thanks a lot for the help on measuring the Exciter Circuit Amps on Generator...it worked out fine based on last diagram, I am making a video of it with full diagram. The total running amperage was at start of like 2.5 and as machine warms up (stabilize speed and electromagnetics) became 2.0 amps...which actually delivers about same 400 VA (Watts) you were talking about on the whole small gen exciter system within the big one of 4400 Watts.

About your above comments related to Thompson and the Gramme Ring part on that earlier edition book...I would not be so "finally conclusive"...

DYNAMO-ELECTRIC MACHINERY 1903 Fifth Edition

I recommend you read now his 1903 Fifth Edition, (Now he had enough time to review Ampere's Laws pretty well, don't you think?)...However, still maintains the same exact position on his writings about double poles on continuous Ring (Toroidal) Rotor...and this time he goes even further on this Chapter...to a very interesting comparison to Drum Armatures versus Toroidal ones...start from Page 74 on Google Book...and 70 on direct book mark link above.

Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

You're welcome for the thank-you on the generator calc. Anytime. And thank you for the new book (cicra 1903). I like reading those old books with the great drawings. I did read about 30-40 pages around that section on the Gramme ring armature.

In the other book he barely mentions the Gramme ring dynamo. He does say that at a Paris exposition one of the company's reps misconnected a dynamo to a generator source instead of a load. I guess until then, it was unknown the Gramme ring would run as a motor. In that 5th edition he does spend a lot more time on Gramme ring armatures. However, I do not see any mention (yet) of ring or toroid shaped inductors or transformer cores.

A toroid inductor cannot be analysed as a Gramme ring armature or vice verse. Yes, in the gramme ring armature core there will exist multiple flux paths and magnetic poles where that flux cuts the ring surface. We were discussing toroidal inductors, so Gramme ring armatures are out of context.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

You're welcome for the thank-you on the generator calc. Anytime.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Yes, big help, thanks!...that was a priority I had for a while...and I was just waiting to have the time to make the small farting engine to run properly...

Below is the final Diagram Meters connections:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now related to a brief analysis of that Generator Head Self Exciter System...:

It consumes around a ten percent of the total generator output power...and we could say a bit less once machine is warmed up, amps drop down like 0.5 amps (to 2.0A X175V=350 W) plus output is 4400 and not 4000 even...correct?

I love this particular Exciting System because I consider it does some kind of OU right in front of our noses...if we analyze it separated from the Prime Mover...which only provides the mechanical spinning at 3600 or 60 Hertz of moving its self excited fields inducing also the Mains Fields.

What I am trying to write here...is that besides being "Electrically Self Sustained" as it don't require any External Input, but some starting magnetic reminiscence...which allows it to "Shares" it's -obviously- Bigger and Stronger Magnetic Field in order to Induce 4400 Watts on the Main Output.

So, analyzing its spec's, it constantly sustains a Magnetic Field which exceeds its own closed "Mutual Induction" relationship (to call it something even not being the correct name) generating an output on the Main Secondaries which is 10 to 11 times bigger than its own.

Concluding that the Self Exciting System outputs a Magnetic Field, which is obviously greater than its own operating spec's with such a small amount of energy, which is only spent at start up, and after, it keeps recycling or renewing a "perfectly balanced" self mutual conversion exchange.

Hope you understand my point of view.

I have not conducted yet a reading test under a heavy load...eventually I will, however, I assume all will remain about the same VA readings...since all ICE from Gen does... is to accelerate the RPM's to maintain the same rotation speed as when it was at idling speed, compensating for the Lenz forces.

In the new type of Home Generators Heads which are the Brushless kind...I would not have being able to conduct such VA tests that easy, since they are not directly connected anymore in between...

I have another question Bistander...which equipment do you use to check the Magnetic Field direction or B Field Vector?...and is it highly responsive to field reversals...or just works for stationary(steady) magnetic fields?


Thanks in advance and Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Generator stuff

Hi Ufo,

Been a while. I got tied up with some other crap most of it unpleasant. I'll spend a few minutes now and attempt to address your questions.

Hello Bistander,

Yes, big help, thanks!...that was a priority I had for a while...and I was just waiting to have the time to make the small farting engine to run properly...

Below is the final Diagram Meters connections:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now related to a brief analysis of that Generator Head Self Exciter System...:

It consumes around a ten percent of the total generator output power...and we could say a bit less once machine is warmed up, amps drop down like 0.5 amps (to 2.0A X175V=350 W) plus output is 4400 and not 4000 even...correct?

You are throwing around nominal rated numbers, so don't take anything specific to the bank. Usually the rated generator output is the Volt Ampere (VA) to which you can load it electrically and have your machine still operate within specifications. In your case if this 4400 VA electrical output, it needs 350 W to power the field and probably another, say 100 Watts to cover rotational losses. So total input power needs to be 4850 W coming from the shaft. That would need 9.50 pound feet of torque at 3600 RPM. All the power converted in the generator comes from the prime mover via the mechancial shaft.

I love this particular Exciting System because I consider it does some kind of OU right in front of our noses...if we analyze it separated from the Prime Mover...which only provides the mechanical spinning at 3600 or 60 Hertz of moving its self excited fields inducing also the Mains Fields.

No OU. All the power comes from electromechanical conversion from the prime mover.

What I am trying to write here...is that besides being "Electrically Self Sustained" as it don't require any External Input, but some starting magnetic reminiscence...which allows it to "Shares" it's -obviously- Bigger and Stronger Magnetic Field in order to Induce 4400 Watts on the Main Output.

Incorrect, it derives that power by converting the mechanical power to electrical power, afterall, that's what generators do.

So, analyzing its spec's, it constantly sustains a Magnetic Field which exceeds its own closed "Mutual Induction" relationship (to call it something even not being the correct name) generating an output on the Main Secondaries which is 10 to 11 times bigger than its own.

Yep, that's the idea of the exciter..... to provide the rotating field for both itself and the main generator. The 10 to 11 factor is typical of field to armature power levels of machinery this size.

Concluding that the Self Exciting System outputs a Magnetic Field, which is obviously greater than its own operating spec's with such a small amount of energy, which is only spent at start up, and after, it keeps recycling or renewing a "perfectly balanced" self mutual conversion exchange.

Nope, that exciter field must be present the entire time the generator operates. All the time it is converting the 350W from mech to elect power for the field coils.

I have another question Bistander...which equipment do you use to check the Magnetic Field direction or B Field Vector?...and is it highly responsive to field reversals...or just works for stationary(steady) magnetic fields?

My right hand. Once you have the understanding of magnetic circuits it is easy to keep track of the vector. And, like I've said before, I don't have much use for N and S labels. I think the tool which has helped me the most is Apmere's Law.

Regards,

bi