Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[Cadman]

Thanks for the info Cadman.
No, I'm not using pwm. My coils are pulsed only with positive going dc pulses
derived from a 12 volt power supply with a 500 ohm pot that sets the current
level for each of the 8 sets. That's 16 small pots to bias the pwr fets.
Tried explaining my setup in a previous post.
Most people on this thread who are using the resistor/commutator method.
all seem to fail, except for MM. So just thought I'd try something different.
I'm sure CF's setup would have been completely different if he had what we
have today.

Not using PWM is a good thing in my opinion. I am not very knowledgeable about electronics so please forgive my ignorance. If I was I would be trying something like you are for sure.

You didn't comment about the signal shape, so I hope you at least try it before winding bigger coils or increasing the amperage. The time at full current, and minimum current, is at least twice as long as the time at all other current levels.

Regards,
CM

[Elcheapo]

The time at full current, and minimum current, is at least twice as long as the time at all other current levels.

Regards,
CM

Now you really got me confused. I had thought that full CURRENT LEVEL was
to be twice as MUCH as the minimum CURRENT LEVEL.
You had also said that "using proper time values made a huge difference".
This got me thinking about Bedini who was getting some free energy by using
intense pulses of very short duration.

I think the success of this thing is largely dependent upon "motional electric fields" as described by Hooper.
But exactly what is it that generates these fields?
I know we need 2 strong opposing magnetic fields, but what else?
Maybe it's like you say, the timing. Something to think about.
If you look at post #973, my coil wave-forms are exactly like the top one.

Regards
Elcheapo

[Cadman]

Now you really got me confused. I had thought that full CURRENT LEVEL was
to be twice as MUCH as the minimum CURRENT LEVEL.
You had also said that "using proper time values made a huge difference".
This got me thinking about Bedini who was getting some free energy by using
intense pulses of very short duration.

I think the success of this thing is largely dependent upon "motional electric fields" as described by Hooper.
But exactly what is it that generates these fields?
I know we need 2 strong opposing magnetic fields, but what else?
Maybe it's like you say, the timing. Something to think about.
If you look at post #973, my coil wave-forms are exactly like the top one.

Regards
Elcheapo

Sorry to confuse you.

I won't comment on the min and max current values because that will be different for different configurations.

I am talking about the time spent at each step of the current. Kekho77's wave form is not correct because the top and bottom step of the wave form should be twice as wide as he depicted. It's simple really, just look at the 1914 patent. The min and max points of the resistance are connected to two adjacent commutator segments and all other connections are not. Other than that Kekho77's wave form is correct.

I believe if you implement this change, keeping a make before break scenario, then you will see an improvement. The increased times at min and max improved my output several hundred percent, so I firmly believe you will see some improvement.

Regards,
CM

[Elcheapo]

timing

Sorry to confuse you.

I won't comment on the min and max current values because that will be different for different configurations.

I am talking about the time spent at each step of the current. Kekho77's wave form is not correct because the top and bottom step of the wave form should be twice as wide as he depicted. It's simple really, just look at the 1914 patent. The min and max points of the resistance are connected to two adjacent commutator segments and all other connections are not. Other than that Kekho77's wave form is correct.

I believe if you implement this change, keeping a make before break scenario, then you will see an improvement. The increased times at min and max improved my output several hundred percent, so I firmly believe you will see some improvement.

Regards,
CM

Thanks again for the help Cadman. I'll be working on these changes before
doing any more work on my coils.
I take it then that after the big improvement you still don't have o.u.
Just hope you don't give up as there is lots to learn.

[marathonman]

Part G

Quote;
'I'm sure CF's setup would have been completely different if he had what we have today."

I tend to disagree with this statement as part G would be hard to replace even with new tech because of it's multiple functions.

the reason i chose the timing circuit i am using now is because all it does is mimic the brush rotation only. the coils wrapped around the core control the currant/voltage variation just like the original rotating part G does, all i did is make part G non moving while retaining all of it's magical qualities.
I say again, part G controls the primaries.

Cadman;

Hows your part G coming along?
first day off in 8 days from 12 to 14 hrs a day, feels good to relax and drink a beer.


MM

[Elcheapo]

part G

Quote:
"I tend to disagree with this statement as part G would be hard to replace even with new tech because of it's multiple functions."

Hi MM. I was hoping you'd chime in here.
So you're saying new tech can't do multiple functions? I didn't know that!
I guess now with the new setup, your output is cop>3 now. Tell us more.
What's the inductance of each of the 8 coils you're switching?

Elcheapo

[marathonman]

Part G

My set up as you so contemptly described is the same as i started posting on this thread.
there is no separate coils for part G, it is one continuous wind contrary to your belief.
as for the inductance values, trust me i will get them to this thread.


MM

[Cadman]

Elcheapo,

No, it was never OU. The build I have been talking about was made a couple of years ago and to be honest it was ridiculous. It used PWM from an Arduino and was so small it was only good for verifying a configuration and operating requirements. It was a three coil on one straight core and the core only penetrated the two inducer coils about 40%. The coils were taken from 3 little 12VDC relays and were all the same. I didn't use the other halves of the inducer coils for anything so it threw away half of the input right from the start.

It did prove to my satisfaction that the 1908 and later patents were viable generators. It also proved the commutator timing in the patent was real. Speaking from memory the timing change increased the voltage from about 2 volts to about 7.5 VAC 60Hz. Input was from a 9V battery. All in all it was very encouraging and convinced me to study generators and pursue it.

After much study I came to the conclusion that in order for this generator to work three things were required that I did not have. The first was a method to control the field current without resistors or PWM, which is part G for me, the second was a way to maintain a constant strength flux field for the induced like all other generators, which is the N-N S-S coil configuration, and the third was flux cutting which is also the N-N S-S coil arrangement. The higher output of a N-N is a bonus I did not foresee. Well come to think of it there were four things. The fourth was enough iron in the cores to create some serious output.

So, here I am trying a serious build, not giving up at all. And I hope you continue with your version and continue to share your experiences because there may be more than one way to success.

I remain open minded about powering the gen directly with a solid state setup like you have, due to previous experience. And I have often wondered what I could have done with a series of coils chained together to make use of all the inducer coil poles but two, like one of the patents depict.


MM,

Like yourself I'm buried up to my eyeballs in my wage slave job with no slack in sight. I'm stuck at building this commutator switch too. I may have to redesign it and start over so all I have at the moment is the wound core of part G and the core for the coils.

CM

[hanon1492]

I remain open minded about powering the gen directly with a solid state setup like you have, due to previous experience.

This is the attitude. IMO the real important concept is to move the two fields back and forth no matter how you do it. Some methods will have a better or worse performance but all should work fine if we get a non-dragging generator.

---------

The force of an electromagnets increases with the square of the intensity (I) and decreases with the square of the air distance (g) between the two poles of the electromagnets, the returning path of the lines to the opposite pole, path of high reluctance. Thus why U electromagnets with a yoke has a great lifting force because the air distance is almost null, usually taken as 0.1 mm or 0.3 mm as a distance between the electromagnet core and the yoke.

In Figuera generator The distance g changes depending of the different collision point of the two fields in each instant.

Being contant all the other parameters in an electromagnet the force is F = K • ( I / g )^2. Therefore if the air distance between poles is doubled between the instant of a contracted field and that of an expanded field the intensity has to change accordingly in order to maintain the same force to balance both fields in collision.



A couple of links to calculate the force: link1 or link2

[Elcheapo]

quote by Cadman

"It did prove to my satisfaction that the 1908 and later patents were viable generators. It also proved the commutator timing in the patent was real. Speaking from memory the timing change increased the voltage from about 2 volts to about 7.5 VAC 60Hz. Input was from a 9V battery. All in all it was very encouraging and convinced me to study generators and pursue it."

That was quite a nice increase from 2 to 7.5v using just 9v. So getting the proper timing was a huge advantage. I sure as hell will be working on that.
Sounds like all your experiments are really paying off and glad you'll be continuing on.
I had wound some coils on round 1.5" D forms and then stashed them with mild steel welding rods after removing the flux. I cut them to 6" and mounted my 3 coils on them with the hollows on each end. Didn't work.
So now I'm back to the laminated cores from old xformers.
I think it was MM that said to just use the wide center part of the E's which I"ll do.
I had made up a hall effect device some years ago, but can't seem to find it.
It would be handy for checking the relative field strength of different coils.

regards

[marathonman]

Cores

Elcheapo;
Just remember to hit the scrap yards for large cores. a while back hanon did just that a found some very nice ones.

i was also referring to part G's core in my previous post, without it there will be no place for the declining electromagnet to store that power every half turn. no amount of electronics can change this fact and without it, it will not be self running no matter how hard you try.

Hanon;
Thanks for the links.

Cadman;

All my hard work is paying off, a Realtor was next door to where i was working and was very impressed with my work. she stated she needed a good house maintenance man and took my number then said expect a call in a few weeks.
fingers are crossed.

MM

[Cadman]

Elcheapo,

That increased output I stated was kind of bothering me so I searched for the old info and sure enough, that was the increase from a different test and had nothing to do with the timing.

The increase from the timing change was only 84%, from 5.0 to 9.2 VAC and that was powered from a 12VDC wall wart.

I apologize profusely.

CM

[Cadman]

MM,

Best of luck to you. I hope your new prospect pans out.

Last night I bollixed another mechanical switch. Sigh. I'm beginning to think my fabrication skills are abandoning me in my old age

CM

[marathonman]

Huh !

Oh i thought it said project, yes prospect and thank you very much. she was a very nice agent and once i do jobs for her she will cackle like a hen to all her agent friends leading to many more.

below is a graphical representation of the timing my board will produce. for simplicity sake the signal going back to zero is actually 8 more transistors giving them much more time to dissipate heat. all i am doing is creating artificial brush movement through make before break set up while the winding's on part G's core are responsible for the currant/voltage variation just like the original part G did. all i did was make part G stationary while retaining ALL IT'S IMPORTANT FUNCTIONS.
please notice zero and 7 are twice as long as the rest to get the natural AC curve as cadman was trying to convey to elcheapo. this function can not be over looked. that basically gives each tap an on time of 1.04 ms but since there is two taps at zero and 7 with a total on time of 2.08 ms per revolution.
for further precautions, timing overlap capacitor capabilities were added to my board if decade counters failed to do so along with course/fine frequency adjustments.

also i like using this trace width cal tool because it has Required Track Clearance for voltage according to ANSI regs at bottom of calc tool that all calc tools fail to report. according to the tool at 100 volts trace should have at least 43 mil clearance, mine is set for 45.
ANSI PCB Track Width Calculator





MM

[Elcheapo]

Control

Cadman,

No need for an apology as we humans don't have perfect memories.
The 84% is still a good increase.
And thanks again for sharing all your information.


MM,

I had thought that the double time periods at each end couldn't be any other way due to mechanical switching. So I changed my circuit so the ends have the same timing as the rest, thinking this would be better. But I can change it back if need be.
I'm still a little skeptical on the functioning of that single layer toroid coil working at just 60 hz or less. Desperately hope I'm wrong.
I wish you all the best in your never ending attempts and will try to help any way I can.

Elcheapo