Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE  (Read 2334667 times)

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1815 on: November 22, 2014, 08:25:36 PM »
As an educational exercise, it is interesting to correlate the alternators built by Ferranti, Mordey, and Siemens with the generators built by Figuera. For example, in theory the Figuera's 1908 device can also work as a rotary generator if each of the lineup of N, S, and Y electromagnets are placed in a disc configuration. The N and S discs shall be fixed with respect to each other and rotate relative to the Y electromagnets. In addition, the DC voltage applied to the N and S electromagnets should be continuous or pure DC voltage, instead of the two 90 degrees shifted full wave rectified voltages used in the 1908 motionless generator. However, the N and S electromagnets shall be geometrically spaced such that the induced voltages are shifted 90 electrical degrees with opposite N and S magnetic polarities.

The above proposed iron core rotating alternator, based on the Figuera's 1908 apparatus, should not carry over the problem of increasing air gaps for increasing power that was inherent to the ironless disc armature altenators built by the end of the 19th century. Said iron core generators would have been the next step improvement over the Ferranti, Mordey, and Siemen's alternators. The power of such iron core generators can be increased by increasing the iron core, wire gauge, and turns of the Y electromagnets while maintaining the air gap length with the N and S electromagnets to a minimum.

Of course, it is much desirable to have a motionless generator than a rotating one.

Bajac

hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
    • https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1816 on: November 23, 2014, 09:43:51 PM »
Hi all,

I want to recall you that in nowhere in the 1908 patent Figuera defined the real pole orientation. He did not use the words "North" and "South" in any sentence of the patent. He just called "renctangle N" and "rectangle S"

In the description:
"Suppose that electromagnets are represented by rectangles N and  rectangles S"

In the claims
: "...characterized by two series of electromagnets which form the inductor circuit, ..."

Where did Figuera used the words "north" and "south" in the patent?  Please re-read the patent and tell if you can fin them...

As you know I am almost sure that Figuera used poles in repulsion mode: like poles facing each other in order to swing the magnetic field back and forth. I will post some interesting results in my next post.

By now I just attach a couple of images. We must test every possible configuration: pole orientation, coil orientation (aligned, perpendicular,...), ...

marathonman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1817 on: November 23, 2014, 09:50:36 PM »
Hello all,

 It's good to be back among the living and working.
this is off topic but i am working on a rotating ring dynamo that i converted to motionless using electromagnets with the timing board similar to figueras timing board used by Patrick. board is finished waiting for Two more pay checks to order core material.
here is pic of ring dynamo.

marathonman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1818 on: November 23, 2014, 09:55:38 PM »
Oh man i am sorry for the Huge pics i forgot about resizing , i am so sorry.

hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
    • https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1819 on: November 23, 2014, 11:00:07 PM »
Marathon,

I am happy to see you back and fine!!.

The motionless dynamo you are building seem to be based on intermitent fluxes between poles.
IMHO oppinion this is not the same as moving the field as I think that Figuera tried to do. The aim of Figuera was to get flux cutting
Therefore you need to move the lines laterraly across the wires, not crossing along as the motionless dynamo
I don´t know if in your time off the forum you could watch a very interesting video that I uploaded:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbWoaPUE5s

Regards!!

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1820 on: November 24, 2014, 12:20:48 AM »
I am amazed with people still insisting that the N and S labels of the electromagnets shown in the Figuera's 1908 patent were not meant to be North and South magnetic polarities. Since the beginning and way before Figuera, the standard polarities of electromagnets have always been 'N' for North and 'S' for South. How are we supposed to advance in figuring out Figuera's patents if we do not accept something as basic as the polarities of electromagnets? If Figuera meant to have equal instead of opposite poles, then, why do his patents show N & S? Figuera would have to be very dumb to label the electromagnets N-S when he meant S-S or N-N. It is just non-sense! To label electromagnets with N and S for magnetic North and South has been the standard for so long and it is so obvious that there is no need to call them out explicitly.


Why would Figuera have wanted to risk the possibility of losing his patent rights or the cancellation of his patents? If Figuera had wrongly described his invention, it would have been a justified excuse for competitors to manufacture the correct version of the invention without paying royalties to Figuera. We need to clear our heads and get back on the right track.


Just as a curiosity, how many of you think that the N and S shown in the Figueras patents were meant for magnetic North and South?

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1821 on: November 24, 2014, 12:22:04 AM »
Hello all,

 It's good to be back among the living and working.
this is off topic but i am working on a rotating ring dynamo that i converted to motionless using electromagnets with the timing board similar to figueras timing board used by Patrick. board is finished waiting for Two more pay checks to order core material.
here is pic of ring dynamo.


Marathonman, it is nice to see you back!

marathonman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1822 on: November 24, 2014, 01:28:24 AM »
Thank you both:
Hanon my design is not based on Figueras design... like i said (off topic). i just wanted to convert a rotating Dynamo to motionless to see if i can. Sorry!
i don't have enough info to proceed any further until there is a breakthrough with Figueras but i am following the thread. i am just as confused as i was when i started.
Pretty board huh!

hanon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
    • https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1823 on: November 24, 2014, 11:25:38 AM »
Hi all: 

I divide my post in two parts. The theoretical part may be arguable. The experimental data are real results from my tests.

THEORY:  In this thread there are many points of view, I am just offering my interpretation of the Figuera patent. I am just telling that Figuera did not use the words "NORTH" and "SOUTH" explicitly in the 1908 patent. He just called "RECTANGLE N" and "RECTANGLE S", as he could also have used "rectangle A" and "rectangle B". For that reason I was copying literally those paragraphs in my previous post, in order that each one may judge for themselves. Patents have a legal background, therefore if he did not use the words "north" and "south" then the patent is protecting all possible pole orientation. Which one is the fair configuration? I am not completely sure, but I bet that he used the electromagnets in repulsion mode and he just moved back and forth the fields.

EXPERIMENT: I had been testing some configurations. I have tested the configuration with poles in repulsion mode (North-North and South-South), and between them I put two induced coils perpendicularly, as represented in the attached picture and the attached sketch. I powered the system with AC (12 V)

I can tell you that the input consumption was not altered when adding a load in the induced coils, nor when I shortcircuited the induced coils. This a good starting point. I got under-unity results, I mean, the output power was lower than the input. But the importat fact is that input power (12VAC, 0.18 A) did not increase when having a load in the induced coil. Period.

This is a simple test which may be replicated in minutes by anyone. Please post your results if you decide to replicate this simple test.

nelsonrochaa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 653
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1824 on: November 24, 2014, 05:17:05 PM »
Hi all: 

I divide my post in two parts. The theoretical part may be arguable. The experimental data are real results from my tests.

THEORY:  In this thread there are many points of view, I am just offering my interpretation of the Figuera patent. I am just telling that Figuera did not use the words "NORTH" and "SOUTH" explicitly in the 1908 patent. He just called "RECTANGLE N" and "RECTANGLE S", as he could also have used "rectangle A" and "rectangle B". For that reason I was copying literally those paragraphs in my previous post, in order that each one may judge for themselves. Patents have a legal background, therefore if he did not use the words "north" and "south" then the patent is protecting all possible pole orientation. Which one is the fair configuration? I am not completely sure, but I bet that he used the electromagnets in repulsion mode and he just moved back and forth the fields.

EXPERIMENT: I had been testing some configurations. I have tested the configuration with poles in repulsion mode (North-North and South-South), and between them I put two induced coils perpendicularly, as represented in the attached picture and the attached sketch. I powered the system with AC (12 V)

I can tell you that the input consumption was not altered when adding a load in the induced coils, nor when I shortcircuited the induced coils. This a good starting point. I got under-unity results, I mean, the output power was lower than the input. But the importat fact is that input power (12VAC, 0.18 A) did not increase when having a load in the induced coil. Period.

This is a simple test which may be replicated in minutes by anyone. Please post your results if you decide to replicate this simple test.

Hi Hanon ,
Very usable your test .
 Can i ask if you see any type of increase in the magnetic field perpendicular to main coils ?
Did you consider try to connect the main input coils in bifilar mode and pulse them?
Based in some tests that i did , i think you can achieve best results pulsing the main coils with DC at higher frequencies that 50hz .
I make some tests that can be usable to you .
one more time very thanks for your work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM_Zg-R8LI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRjGMCBAh0




Thanks for your work.   

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1825 on: November 24, 2014, 06:29:10 PM »
I was reading the book "Ferranti and the British electrical industry, 1864-1930, by J. F. Wilson, and the following called my attention. It is a statement found in the last paragraph on page 26,

"It is interesting to note that it was from his childhood 'bible', Ganot's Treatise on Physics, that the germ of the Ferranti meter was born, proving that his grasp of electro-magnetic theory had improved significantly since early stumblings with a perpetual motion machine in 1879."

It would be important to find more information about this claim, but this is the only reference I found connecting Ferranti with overunity generators. If you take into account that by 1882 Ferranti was heavily involved in the design of novel electric power plants, then, it was not that long ago when he was claiming overunity machines. This answer a question that I had about if Ferranti ever knew the overunity capability of his generators. Was Ferranti forced to keep his mouth shut in this regard? 

Doug1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 763
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1826 on: November 24, 2014, 07:38:09 PM »
"Just as a curiosity, how many of you think that the N and S shown in the Figueras patents were meant for magnetic North and South?"

  No not ever. There is a relative motion of the magnetic field from the perspective
of the induced coil which implies a direction of the inducer fields relative motion compared to the coil and core which it occupies which is independent in both inducers and induced. Each set being two inducers and one induced are all independent fields. The two inducers impart their motion separately to the Y induced so they can conserve the input of current rather then directly transform it into the Y coil as would by transformer action.
  The N and S only to define individualism other wise there would be the corresponding pole for each coil to indicate the orientation of each coil with a complete NS Y NS or NS Y SN. The ends of the coils which are tied to the resistive controller + are so positioned to indicate the magnetic orientation of the coils if they were static devices which they are not so it does not make any sense to dwell on that. They may maintain a north and south pole which increases and decreases but from the point of view of the Y coil (induced) the relative motion is reversed.
 

Doug1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 763
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1827 on: November 24, 2014, 07:58:55 PM »
Hanon

 How many turns do you have on your coils? How many volts/amps per turn? Number of turns divided by the volts and amps powering the coil?

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1828 on: November 24, 2014, 08:25:19 PM »
bajac

I think we are progressing so fast we need a quick look into the past and connect dots.
I strongly suggest this is  related (somehow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ylYgUOfUzY
and this also http://www.richlandsource.com/community/article_fbac1344-779e-11e3-8a2f-10604b9f7e7e.html


forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1829 on: November 24, 2014, 08:33:58 PM »
nelsonrochaa
I'm really interested in Your ideas about how this type of energy is created, what is the source ?
There must be a source, I don't believe physics laws to be so incomplete.
Who can prove what is the source of excess energy ? Figuera stated it was magnetic field (not just conversion of mechanical energy into electricity).