Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[seaad]

-->hanon
Sending you pics tomorrow. ""I see that you prefer posting bad results as a final conclusion."" Prefer is wrong word. Truly, I want Figuera OU but we have to find the right way.
Regards / Arne

[hanon1492]

Seead, Revising your sketch I think your DC bias input must not be connected to the ground.

Try this scheme:

[seaad]

Reply 1

--> hanon, All
Clarified and new pictures

Scope shots are from input points V AC
350 Hz with output about 0.5 V no load.
(DC mean have a minor reading fault! Some 0.1V )

In bucking mode it's not hard to achieve 0.2mV output! It's only to slide one of the primarys some mm to or from the Y-coil.

1) Clarified picture, 2) Scope shot Ground level, 3) V AC no DC, 4) V AC with DC

Arne

[Ufopolitics]

Ant Brain...

--> hanon, All




Hello! I have made some tests again, in our real world, to check the above statement and more.

Test set up according to picture 'Figuera 1 D' and 'CIMG1447' below.

(I have assumed that the middle coil (y) (dotted points) in the hanon 'film' is a normal helix coil)



1) Normal transformer N-y-S coils: NS-y-NS OUTPUT: ~ 0.5 Volt

2) Normal transformer with DC input making AC go above zero N-y-S coils: NS-y-NS OUTPUT: ~ 0.5 Volt

3)Bucked transformer (as the hanon "film") N-y-S coils: SN-y-NS OUTPUT: ~ 2 milli Volt

4)Bucked transformer with DC input making AC go above zero (as the hanon "film") N-y-S coils: SN-y-NS OUTPUT: ~ 2 milli Volt


Now it is just to spit in our fists and make new studies and tests to achieve OU with the Figuera concept!

But anyhow a BIG THANKS to hanon for his research and documentation!

Regards
Arne (the ant )

Hello ant,

Please, allow me to show you a zoomed detail from Figuera Patent 1908...Primaries-Secondaries-Primaries Relationship...:

[IMG][/IMG]

And after you look at it AGAIN...let me ask you...:

Do You see there ANY, BUT I MEAN ANY CONNECTIONS AT ALL, between Primaries and Secondary??!!...But a freaking and clearly shown AIR AND BLANK GAP??!!

Do You see there...ANY COMMON CORE BETWEEN the 3 Components?!

Then may I ask...why did you have the so intelligent and "smart" idea...to add a SUPER LONG AND COMMON CORE between all three components?

[IMG][/IMG]

Which happens to EVEN STICK OUT SO MUCH BEYOND Primaries LIMITS??!!

Just like Cadman wrote...but not only related to "deaf ears"...now we are seeing here "deaf eyes"...

NOW...Besides all this WRONG approach...

Do You realize that Figuera RELIES SOLELY ON MAGNETIC FIELDS STRENGTH??

In order to penetrate the Secondary Coil+IRON Core...

Then, let me ask you...what kind of "Super Duper Magnetic Field" do you think you would be generating by using in your WRONG SET UP...SUCH SMALL VOLTAGE...of 0.5V??!!

How many "MilliAmps" would 0.5 Volts be driving?

What kind of field do you think would be generated?

Very Strong?



I really can NOT understand why People are so BAD, when it comes to follow SO SIMPLE GUIDELINES.



Ufopolitics

[seaad]

LT spice XVII (+ plus)

Here you can see the relationship between DC and AC-signals.
To improve the efficiency and output power two G-parts (not closed wiring) have been used! /Arne

[Ufopolitics]

BTW, this is one of my test devices



Two set of three identical coils. 90 mm diameter and 50 mm thickness. 300 turns. Wire 1 mm diameter.

I will not share any further pictures because all it is represented in the previous one. I already posted some pics and results in OU dot com forum some months ago.

This is just to show that there are more builders than those who proclaims themselves as builders, one of them without even showing yet any picture of a coil.

Hanon,

Please allow me...just some Constructive Criticism...

Your Primaries...can't they be ANY FLATTER?...I mean, by now they look like Flying Discs?

Your Ratio of Thickness Versus Length...should be like 3 Diameter X 0.5 Length...

Do you realize the HUGE SPATIAL MAGNETIC FIELD LOSSES BETWEEN THEIR OWN POLES you are having there...just between those Two Primaries shown above?

The Ratio of a well designed Electromagnet should be anywhere around 3 Units of Length X 1 Unit Thickness...

And so it means that The Further Apart the Poles are...the much less "SELF LEAKAGE" Magnetic Field would suffer...

I honestly doubt...you will have any good results there...


Sincerely


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

--> UFO #1529
Please land your UFO and calm down!
This was a fundamental test normal/ bucking. I responded to hanon proposal #1510 and told my results only. /seaad

[Ufopolitics]

--> UFO #1529
Please land your UFO and calm down!
This was a fundamental test normal/ bucking. I responded to hanon proposal #1510 and told my results only. /saeed

Little Ant,



If I land my UFO...you must run and hide...or would be blown away or be abducted (meant crispy burnt for an Ant) under the high antigravity beam...

Now I went to Hanon Post #1510

Plus I will quote it here:

This is an explanation for the Figuera generator. A motionless generator creating virtual motion by moving two opposing repulsive magnetic fields in unison.

https://vimeo.com/155371840

No motion = No dragging

No dragging = No need for the equivalence of mechanical work to electricity


For further details just read and study the patent filed in 1908.

And, yes, I watched video (many times)

Now, could You tell me where he "proposes" to use a single core?

Plus sticking Core like four times out of primaries?

Plus using MilliVolts and Milli Amps to drive Primaries?

The more I read...the less I can find this "Hanon Proposal" that you are referring to...and have tested?...

Please "Enlighten Me"...


Ufopolitics

Edit 1...btw, you signed Saeed?...is it Seaad or is it Saeed...?...which one should be used?

[vidbid]

yes, here they are for instance at the European Patent Office, they also have free machine translating service if you click on the "Description" menu point on the left column:
1) https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publ...0243635A&KC=A#
2) https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publ...1150938A&KC=A#

Gyula

PS for qwekw: thanks for your post above with the patent details.

Thank you, Gyula, for posting those.

Much appreciated.

[marathonman]

Breath

UFOP;

I would not waist one second more of breath on this approach to insanity. let them be, let them waste all they're time and effort to the point of giving up. then and only then will they decide if what i have been bringing to the table is a reasonable,viable alternative to they're insanity approach.

good luck seaad, all, but unfortunately even lady luck won't be by your side.

off toppic post can kill a thread. look at OU..... dead as hell.

MM

[Ufopolitics]

UFOP;

I would not waist one second more of breath on this approach to insanity. let them be, let them waste all they're time and effort to the point of giving up. then and only then will they decide if what i have been bringing to the table is a reasonable,viable alternative to they're insanity approach.

good luck seaad, all, but unfortunately even lady luck won't be by your side.

off toppic post can kill a thread. look at OU..... dead as hell.

MM

MM,

You're right!

It would be just like trying to teach a deaf and blind person...where no matters how state of the art Audio-Visuals are utilized...nothing at ALL would be captured...

It is a shame though, honestly.

I've got a LOT to do and MAKE...to waste time here...


Au revoir...




Ufopolitics

[seaad]

Reply 2

--> hanon, All, (not MM, UFOp)

A new picture showing the difference of magnetism from test with DC OR signals containing DC above zero level at poles between N-y-S when operating in normal or bucking mode.

N-N or S-S at normal mode
N-S or S-N at bucking mode

Here comes my always bad answer ; In normal mode WITH OUTPUT = YES the sad thing is that we have back-kick affecting the primaries. The magnetism reflects back from y to S+N (magnetic coupling).

PS: And worse! We have to add the DC-power keeping the AC above zero.level !!

Arne

[seaad]

HOPE and Suggestion

In post 1525 hanon send me (us) a video; This what happens with two fields in repulsion when moving the fields https://vimeo.com/155371838

That video shows one principle to produce voltage.
Another principle can be seen in my picture below; 'Fig Induction'
From that (x) principle I have made a suggestion of a Figuera scenario, se my picture; 'Figuera Principle 1'

In this picture the green and blue rectangels are representing the Figuera N and S coils. Here they are used as modulating coils, weakening and strengthen the magnetic flux from the permanent magnets making movement, Orange arrows, of the magnetic fluxlines, Violet lines.
No DC power needed!!
Now induction occurs in the y-coil, BUT the fluxlines from that, Red arrows goes perpendicular to the incomming modulated fluxlines! And that is my hope to produce power without disturbing the primary coils.
(Don't kill the dipole!)

Regards /Arne

[hanon1492]

The details releases in the latest 1914 patent by Buforn invalidate your proposal and reinforce the use of straight cores.

I always tend to follow the patents guidelines.

I agree with Ufo that probably the three cores are separated by a small gap or an insulator/aislant. Maybe just to define the permanent location of the electromagnets poles, which act as permanent exciter elements and they must not be "mixed up" with the induction achieved in the induced coil, which is changing polarity in each half cycle. I already posted that months ago.


Quote from Buforn´s 1914 patent:

If you want even greater production you can place the inducers and the induced one after the other forming a single series in the next way: you place first an electromagnet N, for example, next another electromagnet S, and between their poles and properly placed you put the corresponding induced, with this we will have formed a group of battery as explained before, but now (instead of forming as many identical groups to the first one as number of induced coils needed) you can place, following the last electromagnet S, another induced and, after this last induced you can place an inducer N, following this inducer by another induced, and then by another S, and so on until having placed all the inducers which form the series of electromagnet N and S.

With this we will have succeeded in using the two poles of all inducers except the first and the last one of which we will have only used one pole and, therefore we will have as many inducers as induced minus one, this is, if “m” is for example the number of inducers, then the number of induced will be “m – 1”, which determine a considerable increase in the production of the induced current with the same expenditure of force.

Note that Buforn neither uses any internal energy recycling device..: He just uses a fraction of the energy output to excite the electromagnets continuously. This is what is written in the patents. The rest are just our interpretations.

Another advantage is that in the sinus of the core of the induced electromagnets we can put another small size induced electromagnet with equal or greater core length than the large induced one. In these second group of induced an electric current will be produced, as in the first group of induced, and this produced current will be sufficient for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine, being completely free all the other current produced by the first induced electromagnets in order to use it in all purposes you want.

[seaad]

""The details releases in the latest 1914 patent by Buforn invalidate your proposal and reinforce the use of straight cores.""

I was thinking of that also when I made my proposal.
Gaps "mostly" reduces the power factor, but not always. As in my ' 100%+ test' with space between primary coils and inner rod with secondary.

Follow your path as you wish, that was only a suggestion.
I do not care how to make OU the only main thing is to make it!

Regards / Arne