Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[Ufopolitics]

Liquid Magnetic Cores...

would mercury work as a core material? electricity flows through it effortlessly? sorry to interject for i post seldomly.

Thanks Onewsun,

It should be very interesting to run a "Liquid Mercury Core" on this set up...lowering temperatures below 4 Kelvin to achieve the right magnetization levels.

It really don't matter for a CONSTANT REVERSING Field Switching set, to have a Diamagnetic Material that works Opposite to Exciters Field Direction, it will still have to reverse, and actually I believe it would be even better because the output Coils would be responding to core changes which are opposite to direct excitement, therefore, loads responses would not be directly reacting to the excitation sequences, but to the core changes.

Above means that our Input would be even more ISOLATED from the Reaction caused by loads at Output.

Besides a Liquid Core could also be made of ferromagnetic powder diluted in a fast responsive liquid (not too viscous, not too thick) just like water mixed with some silicon or other light lubricant...This reactive movements -Due to Reversal Shifting- would give us a GEOMETRY OF DISPLACEMENT while being switched to Field reversals...this could help on achieving the right shape on a solid core geometry.

I did this ferromagnetic powder (also added some aluminum dust) with water+oil on a glass tube (replacing the solid iron core) to test my Repulsion Generator Demonstration...in order to establish differences between Attraction versus Repulsion Fields...and the PATTERNS for both Fields were completely different, which helped me to explain my positive results.

There is so much to be tested here...until finding the perfect choice....that denying ANY Possibility is DEFINITIVELY, the WRONG APPROACH!!


Regards


Ufopolitics

[onewsun]

mercury core suggestion

seead i thought of it as i have been trying to replicate tesla's patent 583953 for several years and i believe figurea may have used this patent as a basis for his invention. tesla used mercury for switches in some of his patents and schanunburger (sp) used it in his electric motors to power aircraft for the german govt during world war II--also a british scientist used it for his electric aircraft that supposedly took off and escaped earths atmosphere and lastly in the vedic texts mercury was used to help power vimanas--unless my memory fails me--so i know mercury is a perfect holder of electricty with no losses and i thought it might stop the hysterisis (sp) that ufo experienced with a solid metal core. there is a tale that the germans sent a submarine to japan that was lost in or around indonesia with gold but more importantly with several tons of mercury to help the japanese with the advanced crafts that the germans were reported to be developing--could be nonsense but sometimes a kernel of truth is hidden in tales. sorry to run to such length. by the way the switch in tesla's patent is very similar to the one figurea mentions--but ufo's switch is downright ingenious! thank you for the question. have a great day! onewsun

[seaad]

onewsun

Yes I agree there are similarities between the two patents except for the capacitors and claim/ possibilities of over unity in the Figuera pat.. Maybe some capacitors are integrated in the coils [flat wire] in Figura pat's. . .As UFO observed; nothining is described about the build of coils exept they can in this case also have a cubic form.

About commutators they have all the same principle but UFO:s twist is maybe unique.

Mercury is/ was used as wetted connection points in relays. And in olden days; Mercury was sealed within rocking glass capsules acting as transfer substance between up standing electrical poles (On- Off).

But as you say " a perfect holder of electricty with no losses " I can't agree to, when it comes to electikal performanses. As copper has a resisitivity of 1.72 Ohm x squ.mm / m and mercury =95.8 !!
But you maybe relates to the magnetic and "core"- specific characteristics only? About that; I know nothing! And a 4 Kelvin temperature is nothing for me
(and Clemente 1908) anyhow, as UFO mentions.


About to use or not use mercury is maybe not relevant or not needed at all as UFO wrote in post # 2620 and #2628 that he has solved the principle and achieved over unity.

Myself and anyhow Listener192 are waiting and interested to take part of the test results soon comming in from UFO.


Regards
Arne

[Ufopolitics]

About future tests status

Myself and anyhow Listener192 are waiting and interested to take part of the test results soon coming in from UFO.

Regards
Arne

Hello Seaad, L192 and All,

I am sorry since I wrote before I will be putting up some results in the Beginning of the Week...that time is gone by now but I am still here and working on it...

First I had problems with the meters I have ordered (the same type as the ones Luc showed on the Continuance of the 3BGS Tests, and I wrote a PM to Luc about my issues with them).

This meters don't need batteries, they take energy from the source to turn on, but they have a Voltage limit to turn on...therefore, they calculate Total Wattage(W) as Wh (Energy) results based on adding whatever they consume as well. Their differences compared with an EXTECH, $100.00 Meter, which uses a 9V Battery...is way different in Wattage results.

For example Extech was showing 9.5- 9.7 Watts -at Input- and these meters were showing 11.7 Watts, that's about a 3 Watts difference...and when dealing with not that big levels of Input, that is quite some difference.

Besides all that, their response to fast switching is very poor.

But then again, what can we expect?...they are very cheap at like $12.00 each...

So, I am going back to measure results with my old Four (4) EXTECH Meters (which was the original method that I observed my results all along) plus could go as far as 15 Amps as they could also show SURGE AMPS, by short circuiting directly to source or using a Shunt.

These meters can NOT do that (Short for Max Surge Amps), they will shut down the whole thing if shorted.

So sorry about the small delay guys...as I am also repairing my PC to upload a full video to You Tube, so you could watch the whole thing there as many times as you like plus pause it etc,etc...

Not a big deal at all, just more time to it...we will just have to do our own calculations of simple math multiplying Volts by Amps, no biggie...


Sorry for the inconvenience.



Regards



Ufopolitics

[Listener192]

Power In power out measurements

Hi UFO,

The current meter on your HP power supply has a +/-2% accuracy. There is an output capacitor that does smooth out the current from pulsed loads, so I would expect it is showing a reasonable average. I have attached a snippet from the HP manual that talks about connecting an external capacitor for pulsed loads.
https://literature.cdn.keysight.com/....pdf?id=734358

If you place your multi-meter in the connection between the power supply and a large external capacitor, you should get a good average current reading with minimal ripple.

This combined with using a rectified and smoothed DC output, should provide a reasonable set of figures.

You have mentioned that the input/output ratio is substantial, so a little measurement error is not of too much concern, as long as measurements are DC.

Regards

L192

[Listener192]

HP power supply manual link

https://www.keysight.com/en/pd-10000...3&cc=GB&lc=eng

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,

The current meter on your HP power supply has a +/-2% accuracy. There is an output capacitor that does smooth out the current from pulsed loads, so I would expect it is showing a reasonable average. I have attached a snippet from the HP manual that talks about connecting an external capacitor for pulsed loads.
https://literature.cdn.keysight.com/....pdf?id=734358

If you place your multi-meter in the connection between the power supply and a large external capacitor, you should get a good average current reading with minimal ripple.

This combined with using a rectified and smoothed DC output, should provide a reasonable set of figures.

You have mentioned that the input/output ratio is substantial, so a little measurement error is not of too much concern, as long as measurements are DC.

Regards

L192

Thanks L192,

Mine is a 6439B, which reaches 70V and 18A Max shown on Analog, needle gauges.

I did tested it with a 22,000 uF/75V Electrolytic Cap that I have (one left in good condition after blowing the other one trying to store HF Radiant..) and yes, it does output a finer straight DC with less ripple.

See, the way this type of Generators (like Figuera's) work is pretty simple...we start dialing up our driver and we notice how the Input Amps start lowering down as our Output Amps start to rise, so there is a "brake even point" where we notice they equal while output voltage is a bit higher while loaded...that is the "Unity Point" or close to 100% or 1/1...then after that point, if we keep increasing frequency or in my case speed the small motor, then we "should" start looking at OU...That takes place ONLY IF our device is perfectly tuned as the shifting magnetic fields are strong enough and will not decay when switching it faster...if it does decay, then we start loosing EMF Induction at output...Therefore, we can not allow that Input Amps falls too low.

This should be tuned to work up to 60Hz or around 3600RPM's, where the Machine would generate Max Output.

That's what we refer as the "OU Effect"...and I have seen it even with my previous setup with just one brush, Bifilar Exciting Coils and an LC Tank on second winding while just sending the always positive pulse to the other bifilar coil.
Right now I have to repair that driver, since a custom made adjusting screw for the brush tension spring went bad and have to make it now in stainless steel.

I have build a Cylindrical carbon steel laminated core from scratch, cutting laminations by hand, one by one, then stacking and grinding them (shaping)...as now I have to smooth them out and place insulating tape between each plate...not done with that yet, but even roughly grind, the performance over the solid steel core increases pretty much.

EDIT 1: Problem I have with that Linear PSU is that at low switching the amp gauge needle starts jumping up-down as I can hear the inner device also "bumping"...so I have ordered (today) a new 30V 5A digital switching PSU to run small motor driver, then use my other switched 60V15A PSU to run the Exciter(s).

Regards


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

I have build a Cylindrical carbon steel laminated core from scratch, cutting laminations by hand, one by one, then stacking and grinding them (shaping)...as now I have to smooth them out and place insulating tape between each plate...not done with that yet, but even roughly grind, the performance over the solid steel core increases pretty much.
Ufopolitics

Good! I have mentioned the importance of insulated core plates here before but got negative vots at that time. I got aware of that in one of my experiments when I squeezed "my core" and my readings fluctuated a lot.

Regards / Arne

[Ufopolitics]

Good! I have mentioned the importance of insulated core plates here before but got negative vots at that time. I got aware of that in one of my experiments when I squeezed "my core" and my readings fluctuated a lot.

Regards / Arne

Hello Seaad,

And...Have you ever tried to wire connect each plate, like from one end to next start, and so on...like in series connected, then reading its electrical output plus that signal on a Scope?

It is very interesting to compare scope signal between solid rod, laminated not insulated (all of them shorted out) and then compare with insulated NOT connected versus connected...

From those results above you could start a whole world of new ideas...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!

Hello to All,

I want to wish you ALL a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year!!

And may God allow Us all to fulfill all of our dreams for this 2018!!!


Regards to All


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Now, getting back to the Technical side...

Hello,

This post is directed basically to Listener192 and anyone else who may contribute with their thoughts about the following issue I had (yes, in the past now)

I have been kind of frustrated all these past weeks, just because ANY of ALL my Models (basically referring to Core-Coils Set Up) were no longer giving me -what I refer to as the "Effect"- or the acceleration of speed-frequency of switch will result in a GAIN at Output, while a Decrease at Input.

And so, I have been trying and trying with not good results...until just today.

I found the problem was a direct result from adding the 1000uf/200V Electrolytic Cap as a filter at Output,(as Listener192 recommended) right at the Diode Bridge DC Side...so, I've noticed that as soon as I disconnected it, the set up started making the "effect" of acceleration>increase of Output.

However, I wanted to keep using a Cap at Output to clean DC Output...so, what I have discovered is that if I add an AC Running Cap at the AC side of the Output Bridge...then, even leaving that 1000uf cap, it will increase output as I accelerated my rotary switch.

My question(s) is(are)...:

Would this AC running Cap connected to the AC side of Output Diode Bridge, would it "mess" the DC Output RESULT?

And secondly...I have noticed that these two caps must be as close in capacitance as possible, in order that this effect would show up very clear, but basically HIGHLY RESPONSIVE...Now, since a 1000uf AC Running Cap, is not available, and if it does, it should cost a fortune...then, question is:

Can I lower the 1000uf DC Cap in order to match the AC Cap at Output?...say from 40 to 70-100uf?, I know it will definitively show some "ripple" at Output...Would this fact be also detrimental to output result?

IMHO, what was occurring here, was that by having a 200V/1000uf DC Cap at DC Bridge Output, once this cap will start storing energy, it will automatically stop the Incoming AC Output Pulses from increasing under acceleration...maybe generating a "back-flow" or something like that.

I may be wrong here about my "assumptions", but the facts does not lie on the testing side, and the shown results.


Regards to All and VERY Happy Holidays


Ufopolitics

[Listener192]

DC side capacitor dampening

Hello,

This post is directed basically to Listener192 and anyone else who may contribute with their thoughts about the following issue I had (yes, in the past now)

I have been kind of frustrated all these past weeks, just because ANY of ALL my Models (basically referring to Core-Coils Set Up) were no longer giving me -what I refer to as the "Effect"- or the acceleration of speed-frequency of switch will result in a GAIN at Output, while a Decrease at Input.

And so, I have been trying and trying with not good results...until just today.

I found the problem was a direct result from adding the 1000uf/200V Electrolytic Cap as a filter at Output,(as Listener192 recommended) right at the Diode Bridge DC Side...so, I've noticed that as soon as I disconnected it, the set up started making the "effect" of acceleration>increase of Output.

However, I wanted to keep using a Cap at Output to clean DC Output...so, what I have discovered is that if I add an AC Running Cap at the AC side of the Output Bridge...then, even leaving that 1000uf cap, it will increase output as I accelerated my rotary switch.

My question(s) is(are)...:

Would this AC running Cap connected to the AC side of Output Diode Bridge, would it "mess" the DC Output RESULT?

And secondly...I have noticed that these two caps must be as close in capacitance as possible, in order that this effect would show up very clear, but basically HIGHLY RESPONSIVE...Now, since a 1000uf AC Running Cap, is not available, and if it does, it should cost a fortune...then, question is:

Can I lower the 1000uf DC Cap in order to match the AC Cap at Output?...say from 40 to 70-100uf?, I know it will definitively show some "ripple" at Output...Would this fact be also detrimental to output result?

IMHO, what was occurring here, was that by having a 200V/1000uf DC Cap at DC Bridge Output, once this cap will start storing energy, it will automatically stop the Incoming AC Output Pulses from increasing under acceleration...maybe generating a "back-flow" or something like that.

I may be wrong here about my "assumptions", but the facts does not lie on the testing side, and the shown results.


Regards to All and VERY Happy Holidays


Ufopolitics

Hi UFO,

If you have resonance at work, then the large value capacitor on the DC side of the FWBR will dampen the Q of the circuit. The capacitor you are placing in the AC side has a comparatively high reactance which provides some isolation for your coils resonance.

You could try a large choke in between the FWBR and your DC capacitor. This may raise the impedance seen by the AC circuit.

The ideal method for resonant circuits would be to use a digital scope with an A x B math function in conjunction with a current clamp and x 10 scope probe to perform a digital sample and integration of the load V & I, which would provide an average power measurement using your AC waveform.

On a rather negative note.. when I started using such a setup for power measurement, any perceived OU results that I have seen on many circuit schemes, soon evaporated. However this did save me a lot of time rejecting ideas that could have been time/money wasters.

Regards

L192

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,

If you have resonance at work, then the large value capacitor on the DC side of the FWBR will dampen the Q of the circuit. The capacitor you are placing in the AC side has a comparatively high reactance which provides some isolation for your coils resonance.

Thanks L192 for responding that fast,

And yes it could be that I have resonance "at work", but the fact is that the 1000uf cap does bring V higher, however, that takes place at no load conditions, so, as soon as I load it, then V drops way too much...in my conclusion it seems like a false V rise caused by the energy stored momentarily at cap, and as soon as it is loaded... V drops really low.

On the other hand, the raised V by higher frequencies -without cap- is much more "robust" as it does not drops V that much under load.

1-DC CAP OFF:
The way my set up works (without DC Cap on) is at follows...I start with a low frequency, even loading the output, as soon as I start speeding up the switch just a bit above "idling", V AND I starts rising up, while Input V&I decrease.

2-DC CAP ON:
When cap is on, the complete opposite "effect" takes place, where Output V&I starts reducing as I rise speed, while it becomes higher as I slow down switch...However, V&I at Input also starts rising up when slowing down.

Resuming, when I have set up 1, Input-Output works INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL, and for set 2 V&I for both I/O works DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL, but, BOTH REVERSED related to Frequency...which means that I/O both rise at low freq. and decrease at higher speed.

It is understood that ONLY having set up#1 RELATION between I/O and Frequency, we will be able to reach OU.

You could try a large choke in between the FWBR and your DC capacitor. This may raise the impedance seen by the AC circuit.

You mean a choke also parallel to Output, or in series at the high (positive) side?

The ideal method for resonant circuits would be to use a digital scope with an A x B math function in conjunction with a current clamp and x 10 scope probe to perform a digital sample and integration of the load V & I, which would provide an average power measurement using your AC waveform.

I believe I do have the A X B Math on my scope, but not sure, would have to look at scope Manual...but I will be honest...I have no idea how to even start looking at it, since I have never used that option...so, maybe a diagram and some explanations would help.

On a rather negative note.. when I started using such a setup for power measurement, any perceived OU results that I have seen on many circuit schemes, soon evaporated. However this did save me a lot of time rejecting ideas that could have been time/money wasters.

Regards

L192

Yeah, it is kind of frustrating to achieve it, to then see it "vanished" away...But in my case, I am very happy I found the cause.

I will be buying some lower DC Caps, in like the 40 and 70uf, still rated at 200 V, in order to be matching my AC before FWBR..but unfortunately, all supply stores near me have closed till January 2018.


Regards and Thanks again


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

My second set up...proving we were ALL wrong in our old Theories..

On a second note...

I have not stopped making other set ups related to Coils-Cores, and this time I am working on a set that I had pending a while back...which is using the cores from my old 3000W Single phase generator.

I have adapted the inner rotor to house a full side to side winding, by cutting the center-side metal around shaft, leaving it flat...I also cut off the shaft right at laminations surface, I wounded with bifilar 16 awg, using same length as all my exciters...

And the result is very positive even using the original (old) stator windings as the output coils, even though they are "spread over space-time" and so, they extend further than the rotor core width.

What I did found out, is what I have been VERY SURE a long time ago...that takes place in ANY Generator...

For those familiar with the more common way that stator coils (mains Output) are wound in a typical generator, will know they are set dividing symmetrically the core exactly at 180º, without any "blank" (empty) slots left AT THAT "JUNCTION".

Now, classic electromagnetism -according to Faraday Law- says that PEAK OUTPUT SINE (or MAX INDUCED OUTPUT) takes place exactly at that half junction set apart at 180º, dividing BOTH set of coils at stator...Based on the Theory above...that in that Area-Angle is where most of "vertically" conductors are concentrated...therefore, going by the "cutting lines of force" law...

Like it shows on Image below:



And so, I am very sorry to say that -ALL OF THE ABOVE (Classic EM)- it is simply NOT TRUE...According to My Test Experiment:

When I place my center exciter (used to be "the rotor") facing that specific area of more conductors at both sides of outer frame...is when I get ZERO Induction or very, very low...

However, when I ALIGN Center Exciter, exactly facing at the center core of all coils at both ends...is where I get MAX INDUCED OUTPUT.

Like it is shown at Image below:



I have done this test while running the system, and even being very tough to rotate, since all iron is magnetized...I can clearly see the results I am mentioning above.

Unfortunately I still do not have a fast PC available to show it in detail...but I would be loading pic's of this set up later on.


Regards to All


Ufopolitics

[Listener192]

Choke on DC side & Math function

Hi UFO,

The choke in series i.e. between the FWBR + and the Cap +.

What scope do you have that has a math function?
I would need to take a look at the operation manual to advise you.

Regards

L192