Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[Ufopolitics]

Thanks!

Thanks Bistander!

I can see that in order to answer my questions -in majority- you are referring to the Prime Mover (Mech Shaft) from ICE...And I know, that if shaft stops everything will collapse there...no doubt -at all- about that.


Regards and thanks again


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

@Bistander

Hello Bistander,

On the Figuera (Part 1) Thread you have written these two posts below, related to a question that Hanon have posted..and the reason to post it here is just because I do not want to interfere there...so, if it is ok with you, I would like to discuss this topic a bit further...

Hi hanon,

I saw this on the other thread. I guess they don't want me to post there. So I'll give it a go here.

Your premise is flawed. Current flows in circuits or loops. So yes, current always flows towards lower potential points (called nodes) but it always flows towards the higher potential nodes, as well as always flowing away from lower potentials.

Regards,

bi

Simple. The net current into a node is zero. Therefore, current into a node (or point on a circuit) is equal to the current out. Current is a "thru" variable, which means what goes in comes out and vice verse.

Regards,

bi

As per what you have written above, in my understanding is that...current is a constant "Through" or "Thru" flow ...meaning it is always running within loops or nodes...and current in values versus current out are same values so it adds to zero.

So, therefore we can not say that current runs to either lower or higher potentials...just because it goes both ways within loop or node.

Hope I am correct so far...

Now, related to Figuera and Part G......And so trying to answer Hanon's question there...

Now the way I see the whole circuit, plus applying your explanation... is as follows:

Hanon believes current form a receding primary must flow to Battery Negative and NOT to Part G Input which would be apart by 180º to the other Part G terminal which is sending currents to expanding Primary to Max values. And here you just explained about his statement to be flawed...plus reasons why...but did not go into detail related to Figuera Circuit.

Now, applying your explanation to answer myself...I would say that between primaries and Part G is formed a Loop, or a Node, where current flows, maybe forced by magnetic inductance variations at Part G ...meaning by path restrictions fluctuations between all three components (Primaries plus Toroid Part G)...

Concluding that current would be constantly looping between these three components instead of exhausting to battery negative, nor to Battery Positive...

Am I going the right path trying to see this whole operation?


Thanks in advance.


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Circuit analysis

Hello Bistander,

On the Figuera (Part 1) Thread you have wrote these two posts below, related to a question that Hanon have posted..and the reason to post it here is just because I do not want to interfere there...so, if it is ok with you, I would like to discuss this topic a bit further...





As per what you have written above, in my understanding is that...current is a constant "Through" or "Thru" flow ...meaning it is always running within loops or nodes...and current in values versus current out are same values so it adds to zero.

So, therefore we can not say that current runs to either lower or higher potentials...just because it goes both ways within loop or node.

Hope I am correct so far...

Hi Ufo,

It would appear you think a node and a loop are the same. Not so. I mentioned before that you would benefit from basic electric circuit analysis. I'll try a little.

The basic circuit consists of nodes and branches. A branch (sometimes called an element) has a node at each end. When two branches join, the common point becomes a single node (aka junction). A loop is a combination of branches and nodes making a single path ending on itself. The loop has a single current circulating in a single direction at any given time.

Reference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirc...s_circuit_laws

Hanon says current always flows towards a lower potential site. A site must be a point or node on a circuit if current is "flowing". All the current flowing towards any point (node) in the circuit also flows away from it. So his statement, while not untrue, doesn't make any sense.

Please take a look at that reference above or some other instructional on basic electric circuits.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Part G

Now, related to Figuera and Part G......And so trying to answer Hanon's question there...

Now the way I see the whole circuit, plus applying your explanation... is as follows:

Hanon believes current form a receding primary must flow to Battery Negative and NOT to Part G Input which would be apart by 180º to the other Part G terminal which is sending currents to expanding Primary to Max values. And here you just explained about his statement to be flawed...plus reasons why...but did not go into detail related to Figuera Circuit.

Now, applying your explanation to answer myself...I would say that between primaries and Part G is formed a Loop, or a Node, where current flows, maybe forced by magnetic inductance variations at Part G ...meaning by path restrictions fluctuations between all three components (Primaries plus Toroid Part G)...

Concluding that current would be constantly looping between these three components instead of exhausting to battery negative, nor to Battery Positive...

Am I going the right path trying to see this whole operation?

Hi Ufo,

I did look at the circuit analysis for partG and posted an observation from that which was immediately ridiculed. Since then I haven't paid much attention to it. I'll look at it again if you'll look at that circuit analysis reference so we can talk the same language.

Regards,

bi

[marathonman]

Amazing

Hi Ufo,

I did look at the circuit analysis for partG and posted an observation from that which was immediately ridiculed.

Does that sound familiar or what.?? part G operates as i have said from the start but that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it. i don't need any verification of my own research to tell me part G works as i said it did.

currant runs from negative to positive or each the opposite direction therefore when part G supplies currant to the primaries but because of the N><N in part G the currant runs the out side track to the primaries feeding them, then the low primary feeding part G. it is basically all about high and low pressures in part G with blocking NN fields.

if it wasn't for me EVERYONE would be in the stone ages about the Figuera device. ....your welcome.
and of course some will NEVER understand the Figuera device.

open eyes see more clearly.

MM

[bistander]

... that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it.
...

I don't know about that. I stopped because I don't want to argue with you.

currant runs from negative to positive or each the opposite direction therefore when part G supplies currant to the primaries but because of the N><N in part G the currant runs the out side track to the primaries feeding them, then the low primary feeding part G. it is basically all about high and low pressures in part G with blocking NN fields.

What is the N><N in part G? ahhh, nevermind. All you have is nonsense like that paragraph.

Ufo and I attempted to leave you out of this. Yet you feel the need to come over to this thread to insult and boast. Feel better? It's amazing to me because you have nothing to show. This isn't my thread and I can easily ignore you, but it would be nice if you stayed out of the discussion between Ufo and myself.

bi

[Allcanadian]

@MM

Does that sound familiar or what.?? part G operates as i have said from the start but that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it. i don't need any verification of my own research to tell me part G works as i said it did.

If you are right then why do you feel compelled to pollute every thread here with your rhetoric over and over like a parrot?. Okay we believe you now if you could just let everyone else hold a conversation in the other threads without jumping in and parroting over and over that would be nice.

Would you like everyone else to pollute your threads with off topic nonsense?. Would you like me to jump into your thread and post off topic nonsense every second post?. It's not a problem and you might actually clue in that most don't give a **** about your part G.

AC

[Allcanadian]

@bistander
There is something neat about the Gramme machine and thank you for posting those old diagrams. I love those old books with diagrams and simple explanations much more than the newer literature which does nothing for me.

AC

[marathonman]

Idiocy at it's finest.

I LAUGH IN YOUR FACES OF STUPIDITY, HA, HA, HA !

no matter how smart you people seem to think you are you still got schooled like no tomorrow on the Figuera device. when my final build is finished and running i will still be laughing in your face as i am now.

last time i checked this was an open thread, it must be if people like you are here.

if you self proclaimed geniuses are so smart then buid it and prove me wrong, oh that's right, YOU CAN'T.

have a nice day, just not with the Figuera device, EVER. ha, ha, ha.

MM

[Ufopolitics]

Yes, Thank You!

Hi Ufo,

It would appear you think a node and a loop are the same. Not so. I mentioned before that you would benefit from basic electric circuit analysis. I'll try a little.

The basic circuit consists of nodes and branches. A branch (sometimes called an element) has a node at each end. When two branches join, the common point becomes a single node (aka junction). A loop is a combination of branches and nodes making a single path ending on itself. The loop has a single current circulating in a single direction at any given time.

Reference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirc...s_circuit_laws

Hanon says current always flows towards a lower potential site. A site must be a point or node on a circuit if current is "flowing". All the current flowing towards any point (node) in the circuit also flows away from it. So his statement, while not untrue, doesn't make any sense.

Please take a look at that reference above or some other instructional on basic electric circuits.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Yes, I got it now, thanks very much...(about time right?...)

I did read that page related to Kirchhoff 1 & 2nd Laws (KCL, KVL)

Interestingly there is a Closed Circuit (on the EXAMPLES part) based on Three Resistors (R1,R2,R3) and Two Batteries (E1,E2), this generates Three Currents, (I1, I2, I3)...And if you look again at that particular circuit, but take off Battery or Power Source E2...We will have exactly Part G as R2 (Center) plus the Two Primaries properly connected there as R1, R3...

By taking off E2 still I3 would be a negative current, connected to negative end of E1...and so, we should still have both Loops (closed circuits) S1, S2...correct?

So, further on, could we apply KCL to that new circuit without E2, since it is identical to all three Components (Part G, Primary 1, Primary 2) from Figuera?

Also another issue to have in mind about KCL...:

LIMITATIONS:

...Significant violations of KCL can occur even at 60 Hz, which is not a very high frequency....

And so...knowing that we are working exactly within those Hertz Frequencies...not AC...but only Positive DC...still Frequency (Fluctuations) is what I think could violate KCL within that particular Figuera circuit.

Thanks for all your time in responding here Bistander.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Does that sound familiar or what.?? part G operates as i have said from the start but that sure didn't stop the "i know it all's" from running their mouths and abruptly stopped when netica verified it. i don't need any verification of my own research to tell me part G works as i said it did.

MM

MM, please relax Friend,

Part G works just as You said it would...and I will also be verifying it very soon with a detailed video about my whole set up...

What we all would be trying here...is to reach a Logical Explanation...in order to see if "Part G behavior" is "Compatible" to any existing Classic Laws related to Currents Calculations plus Distributions..and then, some magnetism...in any open reference Books out there as would be required.

The reason I have posted here about this discussion...first, is not to populate Your Thread with Theoretical questions...plus having knowledgeable people on this Forum to participate.

Your Thread Main Purpose is to Show Proof about your Part G and Figuera development, plus sharing the way we all did it...through experiments after experiments from Top Notch Builders here.

Now, about N><N...that is one of the main reasons why I got fully involved on this project, and so, believed in You since day one I started reading your posts...like I have written before on this Forum...I have built a Generator which works based on this same exact principle...ever since, this fact has opened -and therefore changed- my mind like there is no tomorrow...but unfortunately...many people, even those "Skilled in the Art"...will not accept it...nor understand it...since not written in any contemporary Text EE Books...except, maybe back to the late 1800's...to just get a glimpse about this fact.


Kind regards Friend.


Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Prayer

Amen brother. i have sought the light and it shines so bright on thou face.

MM

[bistander]

More part G

Hello Bistander,

Yes, I got it now, thanks very much...(about time right?...)

I did read that page related to Kirchhoff 1 & 2nd Laws (KCL, KVL)

Interestingly there is a Closed Circuit (on the EXAMPLES part) based on Three Resistors (R1,R2,R3) and Two Batteries (E1,E2), this generates Three Currents, (I1, I2, I3)...And if you look again at that particular circuit, but take off Battery or Power Source E2...We will have exactly Part G as R2 (Center) plus the Two Primaries properly connected there as R1, R3...

By taking off E2 still I3 would be a negative current, connected to negative end of E1...and so, we should still have both Loops (closed circuits) S1, S2...correct?

So, further on, could we apply KCL to that new circuit without E2, since it is identical to all three Components (Part G, Primary 1, Primary 2) from Figuera?

Hi Ufo,

I've been meaning to reply. I guess now is good since you have started testing your partG on the forbidden (to me) thread.

What you say above is true at certain points in the rotation of G. At other points, not so simple because R2 needs split as there will be two unequal paths in the toroid winding. However the similarity holds to my circuit analysis used for post#1322. Pasted below for easy reference.

Bistander,
...

Now about your comment above about Part G...

Can I ask You if you are considering -at all- the fact that Part G is not connected directly to negative supply terminal?

Sure Ufo, I considered the whole primary circuit including the supply. I'll post two of MM's images for easy reference.

But instead, its negative connection derives from both sets of primaries coils in series?

Yes, the negative connections go from the N and S primary coils to points 180º apart on the toroid winding (represented by 8 and 1 respectively).

Wouldn't the fact that Part G component is connected right between the two sets of coils, which also have a resistance as an impedance?

PartG is used as a voltage (or current) divider to proportion the current from the source to the primary coils N and S. It is desired to have a certain min/max relationship of current through N and S, where N is max when S is min and vice versa.

At 12:00 (point 8) on the toroid is where primary N connects, so when the brush (being at supply positive) is at point 8, maximum current goes to N. It is desired that at this point, minimum current will flow to primary S which is connected to point 1 on the toroid.

Current must flow through the toroid winding between point 8 and point 1 to have continuity to supply positive via the brush. There are two paths in the toroid winding between 8 and 1, the right side and the left side, which are in parallel with each other and of equal lengths and turns. So to figure the impedance of the toroid winding (8 to 1) we have 2 impedances in parallel, each with equal resistance and inductive reactance. Because the inductance of the 2 coils is linked, the mutual inductance must be considered. Because the current direction is opposite in the 2 halves of the toroid winding, that mutual inductance essentially cancels the inductive reactance for the equivalent impedance.

Therefore, the potential difference between point 8 and point 1 will for all practical purposes be zero. This means the current will not be a minimum in primary S as desired, but essentially maximum, the same as in primary N.

I only looked at this one position (brush at point 8) because this case has the 2 toroid winding halves equal and the parallel combination of 2 equal inductance coils with mutual inductance is easily calculated. Obviously the same is true for brush at point 1. All the other points in between I am unsure and not about to attempt those calculations.

I see the same results looking at it another way using the flux to figure inductance. I mentioned this to you before. When you have half of the toroid mmf CW and the other half equal and CCW, resulting flux is zero and therefore the inductance of the coils on the toroid is zero. As the brush rotates around the toroid, the potential changes and mmf (Ampere-turns) are unlikely to be equal and opposite so there may be inductance in the coils and impedance causing unequal currents in primary N and primary S.

My take anyway,

bi

edit: Weird thought. What if you wound the left half of the toroid backwards from the right side half? Mutual inductance would add instead of subtract.

Hope this helps some.

bi

[bistander]

And a few hours later

Hi UFO, marathonman, and all, ....

Remember when I first confirmed that the g core works I also said "although my windings are a little bit different in design"

I have also tested your method marathonman but so far found that it does not work.


Now to make it work this is what you do -
...

You may of already wound a continious coil around the toroid with the load connections at opposing sides.
Disconnect these two load connections.
Make a splite in the continious winding wherever you like, you will now have a beginning and end to the torroid winding.
Connect the load connections to each side of the this split.

Connect the wires from you commutator around the G core at intervals.
It will now work.
...

netica

Over on the forbidden thread, member netica posts the above which would appear (on the surface) to support my contentions about partG. His fix to the continuous wound toroid avoids the opposing Ampere-turns which I was saying would cause little or no flux in the toroid core essentially destroying winding inductance.

bi

[Ufopolitics]

A Question for Bistander or Citfta...

Hello Guys,


As you may know I recently bought a brand new PSU, which is the new kind based on Switching Mode, a piece of crap, I know...but my budget is low at this point...and the reason I got it was to run my Part G and Primaries...BUT needless to say it would not even add V when G was closed looped...Now it works...but it is still constrained as I am using very low ohms at all components...so can not "dial up" Voltage to its max potential output.

My question is:

Are these units "Regulated Switching Controls" or a "Protection" built in which is constrained directly based on Ohms or Kirchhoff Laws equations?

The reason why I am concluding this way...is because when I tested Figuera Device with resistors it did render its full output which is 600W (60VX10A)...all the way till resistors started smoking....and PSU started its automatic fan motor...

Now that I am using the low ohms Toroid winding...plus low Primaries as well...it only allows me to drive it up to a certain voltage which is far from Max V...while amps do reach max or 10A.

If it would be so...then I would have to just maintain on my circuit the required minimal resistance values...like for a real example:

My PSU is 60V and 10 Amps...which based on ohms law in order to fully drive it to max Wattage it must have at least a resistance of 6 ohms or above to play within its safety zone?

Calculating from Ohm's Law: R=V/I so 60V/10A = 6 Ohms

If it is so...then is just a piece of cake to wind my primaries and part g in order that they add up these resistance values...

I wish I would be correct...but am I?

Please let me know...and thanks in advance!!


Ufopolitics