Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[bistander]

Concept

Bistander,

All I have been pursuing ALL this time...is to build a "MAGNETIC FIELD MOTOR"

Which is a motor which does not displaces any physical rotor. nor shafts...but just the Magnetic Field.

You grab the device in your hands...you will feel like it is "moving" very fast...however, apparently nothing observable moving there...because we are talking about a Field displacement through Static metals on the device.

If it is based on a "Linear Displacement" just like a Linear Motor...then it would be like Figuera...except Figuera is closer to a Linear but, Reciprocating Motor movement of the Field.

A Full Rotational 360 degrees Magnetic Field Motor...if you grab it in your hands...you will feel a Gyroscope Effect of Spatial Balancing in space...almost an Antigravitational effect... remember the Steve Marks TPU/ Jack Durban opinion?

Same exact deal.

But it is not that "simple" to wind a Motor which does not have any rotors...but a transparent, all messed up and not fully understood magnetic field.

But I know...once we achieve this...it is all finished.

The "End of Energy Games"...


Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

Since you first (that I know of) came up with this idea or concept, I've been hinting or suggesting that you simply use a 3-phase motor (or generator or alternator) and lock the rotor. 3-phase excitation of the stator will produce a traveling flux wave which will produce moving flux around the stationary (locked) rotor. The AC excitation on the stator winding could be biased such that it doesn't cross zero potential as you desire. The air gap is small and should not interfere with experiments yet allow seperation of "primary" & "secondary" or ("field" & "armature") for altering the winding.

As to your comments regarding "feeling" magnetic field motion or relationship to gravity, I'll defer until I see proof.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

Since you first (that I know of) came up with this idea or concept, I've been hinting or suggesting that you simply use a 3-phase motor (or generator or alternator) and lock the rotor. 3-phase excitation of the stator will produce a traveling flux wave which will produce moving flux around the stationary (locked) rotor. The AC excitation on the stator winding could be biased such that it doesn't cross zero potential as you desire. The air gap is small and should not interfere with experiments yet allow seperation of "primary" & "secondary" or ("field" & "armature") for altering the winding.

Hello Bistander,

I know...and it is a very simple test and build, however, it is a different geometric displacement of the field...

In almost any existing Motor or Generator (I said "almost", since there could always be one of a kind...) the Field on stator and rotor (interacting-exchange) are facing each others...so, making this displacement around the stator core with its existing windings it will deliver a "sideways" translation of the field...and that is not what I am looking for here.

The Field translation through the Induced core am looking for is closer to Figuera's and Cook's concepts...but taking it to a rotational geometry in a toroid or ring shape volume.

Field travels within the iron core in either a reciprocating or rotational displacement.

A drawback I have found with Figuera's Primaries-Secondaries relation, is that both Fields which generates the repulsion Field at secondaries, displaces in a too short range through the secondary core, no matter how much you change everything around...so Induction is not like expected.

As to your comments regarding "feeling" magnetic field motion or relationship to gravity, I'll defer until I see proof.

Regards,

bi

Ok, I understand...but when you see even just the design... I know you will understand what I am referring to...it is simple, all you need is the basic knowledge about Motors...and you have that part.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Analysis

Thanks Bistander,

Ok, if I go based on your "patch" then I have a total of 70 Ohms at resistor bank (in reality)...and so, the resistance at A Set of Primaries would be less than 1 ohm (0.4 + 0.4)...meaning I have to add a series resistor of 70 ohms, or say 69...to each primary...then we are "balanced" now?

How about the currents going there?

How about the Field generated there?

Very low, very weak, respectively...

Resulting in a very low induction gain.

Thanks Bistander, but I was referring to some issue where we all approach more to the Figuera way of thinking...

Hi Ufo,

If we look at the steady state (or very low frequency) analysis of your resistor set-up, just use Ohm's Law at each step around the rotary switch. Use that circuit diagram I posted yesterday except erase 6 of 7 sets of coils leaving one each S, y & N.

When the brush contacts #8, positive (+) is direct to R and onto S then to negative (-). Let's assume a supply of 10 Volts for this analysis. For the condition just described, the only resistance between + & - is 0.4 Ohms. Therefore current thru this branch is 25A. The other branch when brush contacts #8 is thru all resistors (70 Ohms) and coil N ( total of 70.4 Ohms). Current in this branch is 10V / 70.4 ohm = 0.14A.

Brush at position #4 (mid way) gives 2 equal branches of 35.4 Ohms each yielding 10V / 35.4ohm = 0.28A.

If brush is on #7, branch current thru S = 10V / 10.4ohm = 0.96A.

Brush on #6, current thru S = 10V / 20.4ohm = 0.49A.

And so on.

So on the 7 increment rotation, all positions give less than one Ampere except the ends giving direct connection and 25A. However 25 Amperes is above the current limit of your power supply. So what is happening (so I believe) is the when the circuit attempts to draw 25A, the PSU either shuts off or starts modulating to limit current (effectively shutting off and on very fast). The abrupt switching of relatively high current thru the coil (having relatively high inductance) will induce voltage spikes causing arcing and erosion at the comm-brush interface.

You need lower resistance resistors or higher resistance coils (smaller wire and more turns). With the 70 Ohm resistor bank you'll need higher supply potential.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Direction

...

In almost any existing Motor or Generator (I said "almost", since there could always be one of a kind...) the Field on stator and rotor (interacting-exchange) are facing each others...so, making this displacement around the stator core with its existing windings it will deliver a "sideways" translation of the field...and that is not what I am looking for here.

The Field translation through the Induced core am looking for is closer to Figuera's and Cook's concepts...but taking it to a rotational geometry in a toroid or ring shape volume.

Field travels within the iron core in either a reciprocating or rotational displacement.
...

Hi Ufo,

I think the field direction is correct as I describe the locked rotor stator excited 3-phase machine. The flux ( B field) direction is radial. The field motion is circulating around. So the two are at right angle to each other (field direction and motion) and will result in induction in the axial direction, like the the flux cutting the y coil turns on the Figuera device.

Regards,

bi

[Cornboy 555]

Hi seaad,

To finish this thought: 1000 Hz = 60,000 RPM of the brush rotating around the commutator (rotary switching device).

Regards,

bi

Ahh, piece of cake.

Respectfully, Cornboy.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

I think the field direction is correct as I describe the locked rotor stator excited 3-phase machine. The flux ( B field) direction is radial. The field motion is circulating around. So the two are at right angle to each other (field direction and motion)

Yes, exactly Bistander, all of the above... everything is correct and so I agree with.

and will result in induction in the axial direction, like the the flux cutting the y coil turns on the Figuera device.

Regards,

bi

Now here -specifically on the bold part- is where I do not see it that way...but we've been there before.

As I interpret this...Induction takes place radially as well, and in every step where exciter coil/core to Induced coil/core face each others, except that Induction "grows/increases" axially, as all sequenced-series Induced coils are "axially disposed"...so, what is taking place is an Axial Sum from all -per pole- Radial Interactions-Inductions.


Thanks and regards



Ufopolitics

[Grey Wolf]

Hello UFO POLITICS, Just letting you know that I have been able to post now. Thanks for your help. Grey Wolf

[Ufopolitics]

Welcome Grey Wolf!!

Hello UFO POLITICS, Just letting you know that I have been able to post now. Thanks for your help. Grey Wolf

Hello Grey Wolf and welcome here!!

To All, Grey Wolf contacted me in the YouTube Channel and I ask him to join Us here, and so he was having some difficulties after becoming a Member, being able to post.

I wrote to Aaron Murakami...and he solved the issue.

Thanks Aaron for making this possible!

Grey Wolf is a great builder, developing the Figuera Device with new ideas about its configuration.


Great to have you here!!


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

If we look at the steady state (or very low frequency) analysis of your resistor set-up, just use Ohm's Law at each step around the rotary switch. Use that circuit diagram I posted yesterday except erase 6 of 7 sets of coils leaving one each S, y & N.

When the brush contacts #8, positive (+) is direct to R and onto S then to negative (-). Let's assume a supply of 10 Volts for this analysis. For the condition just described, the only resistance between + & - is 0.4 Ohms. Therefore current thru this branch is 25A. The other branch when brush contacts #8 is thru all resistors (70 Ohms) and coil N ( total of 70.4 Ohms). Current in this branch is 10V / 70.4 ohm = 0.14A.

Brush at position #4 (mid way) gives 2 equal branches of 35.4 Ohms each yielding 10V / 35.4ohm = 0.28A.

If brush is on #7, branch current thru S = 10V / 10.4ohm = 0.96A.

Brush on #6, current thru S = 10V / 20.4ohm = 0.49A.

And so on.

So on the 7 increment rotation, all positions give less than one Ampere except the ends giving direct connection and 25A. However 25 Amperes is above the current limit of your power supply. So what is happening (so I believe) is the when the circuit attempts to draw 25A, the PSU either shuts off or starts modulating to limit current (effectively shutting off and on very fast). The abrupt switching of relatively high current thru the coil (having relatively high inductance) will induce voltage spikes causing arcing and erosion at the comm-brush interface.

You need lower resistance resistors or higher resistance coils (smaller wire and more turns). With the 70 Ohm resistor bank you'll need higher supply potential.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Thanks for all your time to explain all of the above.

I have "repaired" the previous CAD I have shown before...about interlaced coils...now it is a completely different structure, volume and geometry.

No more series connected coils, Field loose power as we fluctuate currents through different resistance, so we have to keep modulating power.

I am working on a completely different system as far as Primaries configuration, but same rotary switching controller.

Circuit is a mixed of Series-Parallel Coils, and fluctuating coils are all parallel.

Rotary switch directly drives overlapped and stepped sequenced coils connected in parallel at both facing primaries.

All fluctuating coils have exactly the same resistance, but different geometry, so, current nor voltage need to vary during operation, except a very minor, when brush transfers from coil to coil and contacts two sets for just milliseconds, same thing that takes place in a motor, specifically an Asymmetric one.

It is just a different "Spatial Location" for each coil within the fluctuating range...all linear though.

Just need around 50V and close to two amps to run the exciter system...and no more drop of fluctuating angle at higher speeds, it keeps very robust at all times.

It is a "Linear Reciprocating Magnetic Field Motor"...on first testing model, but I plan to make it also on a Toroidal Core where field would be in a rotation mode by "cross-winding" commutator.

Now I can see the field traveling on a much longer range...to the point where in each Two primaries "assembly" set, I will have Three Induced Coils...or three part "y"...and if I connect them in series...Well let's wait to see it alive...

I will display some Diagrams next week...as I am waiting on wire to make it all happen...it takes a lot of winding copper and time.


There is a lot more to it...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[seaad]

!!!

Earlier I have demanded MM to build a replica of his working OU unit . and even tried to bribe him with money ( =No no); .And now, even the tough guy with the enormous hands tries the luck to persuade MM to do the same!

Serious Builders Thread: . http://www.energeticforum.com/298651-post456.html . . "On my honest opinion is that you should first try to replicate your own previous build" . . .

http://www.energeticforum.com/292324-post926.html . "My demo device i built as prof of concept put out 300 watts with 100 in."

/ Arne

[SlickDick]

I agree and i am already been working in that direction in replication but i will test my part G first before i proceed any further. i am reviewing notes as we speak. one thing to note is i did not use a core on the first one as i did not fully comprehend part G at that time and only resistive wire was used. that is why it got so hot as i have said many times before nor was it looped back to self. yes a com was used.
as for part G, i still think Doug may be holding the key to success to himself or at least a key factor but i am reviewing my notes and it could be right under my nose so it could be on me, i don't know.


MM

Part G is irrelevant. It's about the OU remember? Loop back comes second. OU first.

Oh well... Who needs logic.

[hanon1492]

Where did Figuera state to use low resistance electromagnets?



He just said to build powerful electromagnets. But you can keep on following wrong guidelines more and more and build low impedance electromagnets with few turns....

Forget the electromagnet's impedance and just think about the electromagnet's force.


Powerful electromagnets: many turns (N), high current (I) -------> (N•I)^2

I post again this:

[citfta]

hanon, you are wasting your time. Until the so called builders take the time to actually learn something you will never convince them of the proper way of doing something. As your formula clearly shows the magnetic strength comes from the ampere turns. That clearly means you can have a lot of turns and few amps and get just as much magnetic force as from a few turns and a lot of amps. I wound a coil just a couple of days ago from #30 gauge wire. Using only 450 milliamps it is a very strong magnet. Of course I had several hundred feet of wire in order to get a strong magnet but that saved me a lot of amps to get the same result as a shorter heavier gauge wire.

Why so many blindly follow someone without doing a little research on their own is amazing. Our society in the U.S. has been so dumbed down by our media and so called entertainment industry that very few seem to be able to think for themselves.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[bistander]

Question to Cadman

@all
Over the weekend I performed some testing of my little setup. Input is provided with a 12VDC car battery now, which eliminated the oscillating input I had with the battery charger as the input source.
...

Using analog meters the best results were 3 volt 6 amp DC input with 5 volt 2.75 amp rectified output. Output coils were in parallel.

18 watts in, 13.75 watts out.

I also tested higher voltage and amperage input which gave a corresponding increase in the output, but the in/out ratio remained the same.
...

Hi CM,

I am just wondering how you get a 3 VDC input using a 12 V car battery. Also on the partial quote above last paragraph, it sounds like you were able to vary the input voltage. How did you do that using the car battery?

Thanks for posting results.

bi

[seaad]

Good!

@ Cadman; . If your values "18 watts in, 13.75 watts out." are correct I have to say that your efficiency 76% is very very good. Much better than I have ever expected.

Your disappointment "... I will mark this build as another fail." comes of course from that you didn't comes closer or above to 100%. But with your config. 4 segment toroid "output unit" I have to remind you of what you wrote to me in post #1515 : "If you build a transformer, you have a transformer, not a generator." I wish you best luck anyhow!

Can you describe or show your output waveform?

Regards / Arne

P.S: https://www.solidrop.net/product/gw2...0v-output.html
GW2500-NS Goodwe on grid solar Inverter,2500w on grid inverter Euro efficiency>97%, single MPPT single phase 230V output