Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[hanon1492]

The toroid will work if used as a dynamic variac as was proved empirically by Netica or also in the video in the link below. It will not work as described theoretically by MM with one continuous winding and one whole brush rotation around the whole circle. Just to remember because MM is refering now to "his design" as the one that Netica resolved and posted with an open winding and brush movement back and forth, not continuous. Merits to whom is due.

https://vimeo.com/178144785

BTW, many months ago I already posted that, as a first rule of thumb, the impedance of the current regulator (resistance or whatever method used) should be aprox. the same as the impedance of each serie of electromagnets. If anyone need to see my post I will look for it. Just in case anyone think he is ahead of others.

[marathonman]

Device build

QUOTE;
"I could build a hundred of your devices and when none of them worked you would insist I didn't build any of them right."

No ! i would just like to see one Cifta without putting me down.

" When yours is built and works like you claim I will gladly apologize for being wrong."

why should you, as a so called knowledgeable man, have to apologize for something that shouldn't of been said in the first place. you chose to bad mouth me instead of proving me wrong. that says a lot about you and the direction of the human race as a whole.

i have freely gave what was bestowed to me through thick or thin, right or not completely right. you chose to listen, i did not force any of you to listen. that is why i moved off of this thread because a few people did want to hear what i have to say. I FORCED NO ONE.

yet you people still attack my ways with NO PROOF what so ever other than hearsay. do you hear builders whining and crying on the continuum?? NO YOU DON'T, do you here Netica whining and crying because part G was not working correctly for him?? NO YOU DON'T he just slightly altered part G to work for him without bad mouthing me.
that is what a researcher do. guess what, part G works.

i'm sorry Cifta but Figuera's device is an inductive device that recycles power whether you think it is or not.

now please settle down and enjoy the holidays with your family and i with Figuera as that is all i have.

good day.

Hanon;

i still see you trying to get your 15 minutes of fame back. how is that video of yours doing that i told you how to do it and what to use?? you still don't understand part G but your coming around. your still behind others and lack any real research or build but that doesn't seam to stop the mouth though. good luck with the build because of all the people on this forum you'll need it the most.
Quote;
" brush movement back and forth, not continuous."

and again as always, completely WRONG.
PLEASE GET A LIFE HANON.

ps. if people really wanted to hear your research then how do you explain the Continuum getting 400 plus % more views then this thread..... meaning they don't want to hear your Bs either.
WOW ! reality bites.
psps. please tell your BMF marsthonman said HI.

MM

[bistander]

Scope traces

UFO,

I have been studying your scope shots and think I have some ideas about what is going on with your build. If you want to discuss those ideas I am willing but if not that is fine also. Just let me know.

Carroll

Hi Ufo,

I too have been looking at your scope traces. Interesting, thanks for the data. Can you define where in the circuit you have the probes? Perhaps a schematic or one of you good looking diagrams.

Also thinking about inductance. N squared for your primary coil is 67,600. N squared for the toroid coil is like 3 to 500. So at first glance it would appear like the toroid coil inductance would be much, much less than the primary coil. However there are many other factors to consider.

Hopefully clarification on the scope and circuit will help me see what's going on. Did we get any data from Netica?

Happy holidays,

bi

[hanon1492]

If I proud of something really big in this project is that more than 3 years ago I posted the interpretation that you all are using now with poles in repulsion to pressurize both fields and move them back and forth to create flux cutting induction. The real essence of this generator.

Follow the next link for the post where I collected all those ideas and showed them in simple words:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post246900

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

I too have been looking at you scope traces. Interesting, thanks for the data. Can you define where in the circuit you have the probes? Perhaps a schematic or one of you good looking diagrams.

Also thinking about inductance. N squared for your primary coil is 67,600. N squared for the toroid coil is like 3 to 500. So at first glance it would appear like the toroid coil inductance would be much, much less than the primary coil. However there are many other factors to consider.

Hopefully clarification on the scope and circuit will help me see what's going on. Did we get any data from Netica?

Happy holidays,

bi

Happy Holidays Bistander,

I was attending a Family Dinner last night...sorry.


Probes are set at each output Positive terminals from Part G.
Then both probes gators-ground are connected to negative source terminal (batteries)

Yes, there are huge differences between both components...but again, it has to be tested with the right Linear PSU, at the very perfect and sweet spot of V and A...where Field would be Spatially Strong enough to generate a good induction on secondary...until I do not perform that test...I am not changing Toroid 8 gauge winding...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[marathonman]

Wow !

HONON;
So basically you have done NOTHING IN THREE YEARS. milking your 15 minutes of fame......WHO CARES HANON your missing the whole point.
Hanon all you have to do is research on your own. please start building and find out for yourself, that is all you have to do is get off your butts and get busy.

if you people would stop badgering me and do your own research then life would be good for the all of us. all you people seam so scared to stick your neck out and find out for your selves. stop cowering in the dark like cowards do and get busy. so what if you find out that you have been lied to by status quo dogma science, at least you will have learned something new instead of hiding behind the wrong info tree. everyone makes mistakes and some things might need a little tweek....... SO WHAT fix it and move on, that is what research is all about.

contrary to you people on this thread, we are in this boat together whether you realize it or not. the human race might depend on this device in the future so i would suggest closing the ney say mouth and get busy, your very survival might depend on it.
beside, if we were on a boat together i would of already thrown you people overboard a long time ago. OPS ! did i say that. JUST KIDDING.

just please quite trying to retain your 15 minutes of fame and get busy building and researching..... all of you, as we just very slightly might learn something from each other in the process.

Happy Holidays People.

MM
Donald

[Ufopolitics]

The following is from a post by UFO:

Where we could see in formula that N, u, A are DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO INDUCTANCE...which means as they are greater, Inductance Increases...EXCEPT for LENGTH (l)...which is INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL (dividing Parameter), therefore the longer the coil the less the inductance.

Hope this help you all guys in your builds...


Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi UFO and Merry Christmas.

The part of your post I have highlighted in red could be misleading to those not real familiar with inductance. A better way to say that would be that for a coil with all other things being the same the longer coil will have lower inductance. This means if one coil has 20 turns of a given diameter and core material and another has the same 20 turns spaced out so the coil is twice as long then the inductance would be half.

Or another way to look at it is if one coil has 20 turns and a second coil has 40 turns so it's length is twice the first coil then the second coil will have MORE inductance and not less.

Actually in VHF radio equipment most tuned circuits have air coils of only 4 to 6 turns and they are tuned by squeezing the loops of the coils together or spreading them apart more to change the inductance.

I hope this helps a little in your understanding of inductance.

Respectfully,
Carroll
__________________

Thanks and Happy Holidays Citfta,

Yes, thanks for correcting me above...as I perfectly understand what you are writing...it is simple math basics...as I understand my red statement tends to confusion.

All Directly Proportional Parameters (N, A and u) in the Inductance Formula are Predominant over the Inversely proportional ones (divided by)...in this case Length (l).

Which basically means that All upper parameters dictates directly the rate of Inductance over length.

Another point that I wanted to bring up related to my post cited by you...is that the longer an electromagnet is, the greater its magnetic field, and the less leakage from pole to pole...like it takes place in flat coils.

However, everything must come to a "Balance" when it comes to our final Coil arrangement, which satisfies each point in relatively compensated parameters.

I already posted the Probes connections descriptions on previous post to Bistander...but anyways, do it again, no biggie...both probes are connected to part G positive terminals which are connected to each primaries and probes ground to negative of batteries and primaries other end.

Let me know (both of you) if you understand it with this explanation...or need a drawing.

Thanks


Regards


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

contrary to you people on this thread, we are in this boat together whether you realize it or not. the human race might depend on this device in the future so i would suggest closing the ney say mouth and get busy

In some posts I see a concilliatory attitude which I really find much better than others old attitudes. And I also agree with the quoted text.

MM, you know that we were quite good forum friends for months because we agreed in 99% on the device interpretation. The problem just came when you started to derive your posts toward the idea that patent description was wrong and just the toroid works but not any other method. You know that this is our only difference. Against your opinion I am not against you or against the toroid. I will love watching people succeding into this or seeing a final design for a toroid. But for me the 1908 patent is sacred I just wanted to keep it as it written: a simpler method to understand for non experts, although more wasteful. What Figuera explained was how to move the fields in unison.

I wish you all the best, in this thread or the other thread.

Months ago I decided to quit posting and I just decided to keep posting till the end of the year. If you consider me as an enemy then you will start the year with an smile. I consider that in overall I have helped Figuera a lot to reconquest his site in history.

Go ahead, but always keep the 1908 patent as the basic reference point. We just must keep separated our interpretations and the writtings of our beloved Clemente Figuera. His writtings must always be available as he decided to write them. And our interpretations must be separated from the patents because the interpretation may be changing as the empirical results are coming along.


Long Life to Figuera !!!

[hanon1492]

Ufo,

If you need to retune your toroid with different number of turns to match the impedance of your coils I think you may make it at first with simple household wire which is easier to manipulate. When you find the needed number of turns, later, (if required), you may redo it with thick wires. Just in case you find it simpler.

[citfta]

Hi UFO,

Sorry for the slow response. I have had a very busy day. Thanks for the explanation of how your scope leads are connected. A drawing of exactly how the part g is connected to the primary coils might also be a help. But I think I see enough from the scope shots to have an idea of what is going on. You are correct I believe that the problem is your part g is not controlling the current like you want it to. And I also think you may be correct about the difference in impedance between part g and the primaries may also be a contributor to the problem. I am not real certain that is part of the problem but it may be.

Now from what I see of the scope shot I believe you are over saturating the primary coil cores. This is of course because of too much current flowing through the primary coils. If you look at the double spikes on the scope I believe the first spike is caused by the start of current into the primary coil but then very quickly it reaches saturation of the core and then the voltage drops as the current goes very high. The second spike is I believe caused as the current drops until the core begins to come out of saturation and that spike lasts until the core loses its flux completely.

If you put a scope channel on the secondary I believe you will also see those same spikes. But of course those spikes won't really supply a lot of power and are not what you want.

To test to see if this is what is happening I would suggest you use a much lower voltage and adjust it slowly up until you see the signal start to flat top a little. If you are not saturating the cores your current level should not go very high with no load on the secondary. And when you get some voltage on the secondary then you can try adding some load to the secondary to see if it does or does not affect the primary. From my understanding of this device a load on the secondary should not affect the primary. So let's get the primary working with a nice signal and go from there. I would suggest starting with only 5 volts or so fed to part g and see how that looks on the scope.

One last thing I want to mention. You are using the same scope that I have with a very slight difference in model number. These scopes as you probably know are sampling scopes. Because there is a finite time between samples they do sometimes miss very short pulses so you don't always get the full picture when using them. If you have an old analogue scope you might want to compare what it shows with the Rigol. I do love the math functions and accurate time base of the Rigol. It is a very nice tool for this kind of testing.

Regards,
Carroll

[marathonman]

Saturation

I don't mean to be butting in on your conversation but i believe you are completely correct on the cores total saturation.
that was a good call Cifta.

last night i was reviewing some of my notes on core tests, winding count and currant intensities and i had the same anomalies when testing small cores. from a few other publications i have been reading about stator and rotor reactions to currant intensities the results they had concluded the same thing that the spikes were related to complete core saturation.

so again good call.

MM

[marathonman]

Household Wire

Ufo,

If you need to retune your toroid with different number of turns to match the impedance of your coils I think you may make it at first with simple household wire which is easier to manipulate. When you find the needed number of turns, later, (if required), you may redo it with thick wires. Just in case you find it simpler.

HONON;

House hold wire is a total pain in the backside to use. having to strip the plastic covering in spots is not fun every time you need a connection.
he is using bare grounding wire, in which i think is the most convenient approach one could take. he can easily change his configuration anytime and when he has it right he can hit it with a clear protective coating to protect from shock and moisture. in his present setup all he has to do is loosen screws to move a tap, not so with household wiring.

just something to consider.

MM

[citfta]

Thank you MM. I appreciate your comments.

Regards,
Carroll

[Ufopolitics]

Hi UFO,

Sorry for the slow response. I have had a very busy day. Thanks for the explanation of how your scope leads are connected. A drawing of exactly how the part g is connected to the primary coils might also be a help. But I think I see enough from the scope shots to have an idea of what is going on. You are correct I believe that the problem is your part g is not controlling the current like you want it to. And I also think you may be correct about the difference in impedance between part g and the primaries may also be a contributor to the problem. I am not real certain that is part of the problem but it may be.

Now from what I see of the scope shot I believe you are over saturating the primary coil cores. This is of course because of too much current flowing through the primary coils. If you look at the double spikes on the scope I believe the first spike is caused by the start of current into the primary coil but then very quickly it reaches saturation of the core and then the voltage drops as the current goes very high. The second spike is I believe caused as the current drops until the core begins to come out of saturation and that spike lasts until the core loses its flux completely.

If you put a scope channel on the secondary I believe you will also see those same spikes. But of course those spikes won't really supply a lot of power and are not what you want.

To test to see if this is what is happening I would suggest you use a much lower voltage and adjust it slowly up until you see the signal start to flat top a little. If you are not saturating the cores your current level should not go very high with no load on the secondary. And when you get some voltage on the secondary then you can try adding some load to the secondary to see if it does or does not affect the primary. From my understanding of this device a load on the secondary should not affect the primary. So let's get the primary working with a nice signal and go from there. I would suggest starting with only 5 volts or so fed to part g and see how that looks on the scope.

One last thing I want to mention. You are using the same scope that I have with a very slight difference in model number. These scopes as you probably know are sampling scopes. Because there is a finite time between samples they do sometimes miss very short pulses so you don't always get the full picture when using them. If you have an old analogue scope you might want to compare what it shows with the Rigol. I do love the math functions and accurate time base of the Rigol. It is a very nice tool for this kind of testing.

Regards,
Carroll

Hello Citfta and thanks,

Exactly correct...I was doing some rough tests with batteries directly connected to system at 36, 24 and 12V...as I wrote before, batteries, due to such low resistance on Exciter System will disburse full currents...which is not good.

The amount of turns on Part G -as I have it now- can only control certain and much lower current flow. And so, if it is exceeded of course it would mess up whole thing...like saturating primaries.

Incredibly...I still got some steady induction on secondary when accelerating to higher speeds!...I had two 12V incandescent bulbs in series connected at secondary and they lit up...dimly, but they did..

The only way to conduct a proper test on this system would be with a Linear PSU, with Coarse and Fine Voltage and Currents Adjustments...to reach the suitable spot -to the Milli Amps- Milli Volts accuracy- on Power Supply where Induction at Secondary would be excellent.


I am still waiting on both Linear PSU's...then I will conduct the proper testing.

I believe we will succeed on this upcoming tests...and I have a very positive feeling about it.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Saturation

...

Now from what I see of the scope shot I believe you are over saturating the primary coil cores. This is of course because of too much current flowing through the primary coils. ...

Hi,

I don't think you can saturate the primary core without smoking the coil. There is no magnetic circuit of ferrous material. So it amounts to a ginormous air gap. Even with the 260 turns the current required for the MMF needed to produce a saturation level of flux in the core is way beyond the supply capability and ampacity of the conductors in the coil and associated circuit.

If you have a variac or vaiable AC power supply, it is easy to verify by running a saturation curve test.

bi