Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 84255
  • *Latest: romeos69

  • *Total Posts: 898199
  • *Total Topics: 15837
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 17
  • *Total: 20

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE  (Read 1845805 times)

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1725 on: October 24, 2014, 02:15:49 AM »
Because of the information provided in my previous post, I am changing gear again! I will not pursue the construction of the rotating device shown in the 1902 Figuera’s Spanish patent #30376. Instead, I started the construction of the Figuera overunity transformer shown in his 1902 Spanish patent #30378.

As I already said, the devices shown in these two patents work on the same principle and have very similar structures. However, the overunity transformer is much simpler construction and does not required any type of electronic device or mechanical connections with motors. And, I already have all the components.

It is important to say that the feedback used for self-excitation should be decoupled. Otherwise, there would be a risk of voltage instability. For this purpose, I am planning on using a 1KW UPS that I already own. The feedback loop will consist of two connections, a connection between the output of the transformer and the input of the UPS, and the other connection being between the output of the UPS and the input of the transformer.

Let us see what happen!
« Last Edit: October 24, 2014, 01:42:06 PM by bajac »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Marsing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1726 on: October 24, 2014, 03:33:43 AM »
 
Hi antijon / all

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge#Tables_of_AWG_wire_sizes .
it say, with same numbers of secondary winding, bigger  wire or bigger diameter will also reduce the resistance.

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1727 on: October 24, 2014, 03:53:41 AM »
I will need your English expertise to help me out on understanding the message of a discussion between Mordey and others in the year of 1893. During this time, there were a lot of discussions, arguments, and even jealousy among well-known engineers that resulted in the standardization of the performance of today’s electrical system and its components such as transformers, generators, motors, etc. I am specifically referring to the discussion for finding the best method to test the generators.

There was a race to be the winner of what would become the standard for testing the alternators. It seems that two of the pioneers of the generators with ironless disc armatures, Mr. Mordey and Dr. Hopkinson, were under the gun. For instance, Mr. Mordey was being heavily criticized for proposing a method consisting in configuring half of the coils of an AC alternator as a motor and the other half as a generator.
I am under the impression that the crazy results of the testing performed on the ironless disc armature alternators were not published because of the fear of making a public ridicule and lose the professional credibility. The following is a quote from an article published in the journal THE ELECTRICIAN, MARCH 17, 1893, and title ON TESTING AND WORKING ALTERNATORS found on page 574,

“Now it was to be observed in the interesting method which Mr. Mordey had described, and the extension of it described by Mr. Miller, that the stress on the shaft was not tested at all, and it might be that the shaft would be weak or the bearings might heat when the shaft was required to transmit 100 H.P., which would not come out at all in the method of testing described. It was quite clear that if one had not an engine giving more than 10 H.P. one could not in any way transmit 100 H.P. through the shaft. It might be objected that the method he had spoken of resulted in a distortion of the field, and the result would not truly represent what would happen if there were no distortion.”

I showed this article to a colleague of mine and he agreed with my interpretation that it kind of looks as if the result of the test was given much more power output than what was being input. What do you think? Do you agree? Or, do you have a different interpretation?

To the above criticism, Mr. Mordey replied on page 576 by the end of the article:

“Some two years ago he [Mr. Mordey] described an experiment with an alternator in which one coil was taken out of the circuit and merely connected to a voltmeter. The other coils were then loaded from nothing up to full load and the excitation kept constant. He took that to indicate that the reaction of the armature on the field was not appreciable. He thought Mr. Kapp’s curve was not a good curves.  It appeared that the machine was going to break out of synchronism at 2 ½ times the best current. In his curve he got up to 20 times and did not break out of synchronism. With reference to Mr. Harrison’s experiments, he (Mr. Mordey) had had a good deal of experience of alternators, and have tried to find the faintest difference o field-current when the whole of the armature-current  was thrown off suddenly, and had never seen in his own machines the slightest flicker in the exciting current. Mr. Swinburne had criticized the modification of Dr. Hopkinson’s method on grounds that were not quite fair. He was trying to test an alternator; he was not trying to test an engine, or a boiler, or a belt. Really the alternator had to be driven somehow, and for the purpose of his argument his machine might be direct-driven. As to the side pull of the belt, he did not think that was a very serious matter. He did not think the loss in the bearings was a difficulty, and did not think the reduction of efficiency by side pull of the belt was to be traced to the bearing, but the belt.”

From the above it is noted that the efficiency of these machines was too good to be true. Critics, who were also prestigious engineers, were looking for any other factors to discredit the test resulting in “unreal” efficiency.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2014, 01:47:01 PM by bajac »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1727 on: October 24, 2014, 03:53:41 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1728 on: October 24, 2014, 02:17:10 PM »
Please, note that today's generators use protective relaying systems for disconnecting a generator that is out of synchronism. Because of strong armature reaction caused by sudden overloads, the shaft can encounter a fast jump in the torque that may slow down the rotor to a point in which the frequency of the induced voltage is affected. If the frequency is affected, heavy currents from the electrical grid could circulate through the armature coils. If this condition is not addressed soon enough, it could cause considerable damage to the generator structure. In addition, because of the mechanical stresses that strong armature reactions impose on the shaft mechanism of today's generators, careful attention must be paid to the design of the rotating shaft structure.

Mordey was heavily criticized for not providing "adequate design" to the shaft of his alternators. However, because the armature reaction of the Mordey's alternators was very weak, the bearing losses became negligible and almost practically any decent shaft size would have done the work.

It really amazes me that the critics of the time, who were very good engineers, could not realize what was going on with the ironless disc armature alternators. And, it keeps happening today. If someone had come to me when I was fresh out of college to tell me about overunity generators, I would have considered this person crazy!
 
I am attaching two photos and two sketches of the Ferranti's alternators. I am not sure but I think they refer to a 5MW alternator. Note the relative small size of the piston shown in the first sketch.
 
« Last Edit: October 24, 2014, 09:16:26 PM by bajac »

Offline antijon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1729 on: October 24, 2014, 04:35:28 PM »
Thanks for the link Hanon. Actually, the principle that relies on opposing fields can be easily demonstrated. But, i think it's true that there must be an air gap or something similar to reduce the effects of one primary onto another. In my tests, two opposing primary coils will cause them to draw more current as one tries to reduce the field of the other.

Anyway, it is a completely different principle, just like the addition of flux that I demonstrated.

Oh, to build a generator on this principle, look at the illustration. With a three pole rotor, all North pointing out, the stator coils should produce an AC current. Because of the three poles, in operation, when one magnet is leaving a stator, another magnet is approaching the opposite stator. This will produce a combined EMF equal to a standard rotor with a north and south pole. The effect of Lenz's law will still produce a back-torque because the current generated will still oppose the change of the rotor, but because there is no North-South "locking" the rotor to the stator, the running torque will be much smaller. I like to think that this design will show that the back-torque of Lenz's law is really very small.

Bajac, for some reason I couldn't download your document. Could you repost it, please? And yes, it does seem that they were trying to make a fool of Mordey.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1729 on: October 24, 2014, 04:35:28 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1730 on: October 24, 2014, 05:49:18 PM »
Bajac, for some reason I couldn't download your document. Could you repost it, please? And yes, it does seem that they were trying to make a fool of Mordey.

Antijon,
Could you provide me with the reply number where the document is found? I am not sure which document you are referring.
 
Thanks,
Bajac

Offline john-g

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1731 on: October 24, 2014, 10:49:10 PM »
Hi

This may be helpful about the testing method used by Mordey:


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1731 on: October 24, 2014, 10:49:10 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline antijon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1732 on: October 25, 2014, 04:57:34 AM »
Thanks Bajac, but never mind. I was able to download it with a different browser. That's the basis you're going to use in your device?

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1733 on: October 25, 2014, 05:01:46 AM »
John,

Thank you very much for the information!

It is interesting how the engineers of the time made a big effort for determining the heating losses of the alternators in order to calculate their efficiency. I have not seen a generator test performed to determine the efficiency as a function of the power output divided by the mechanical power input. All these efficiency calculations are based on the power output and the heating losses of the alternator only. My questions is, would you care to have an alternator with 30% heating losses and a COP of 400%? Such alternators would be self-excited and fuel free; and with a very simple construction, indeed.

Antijon,

If you are referring to the overunity transformer, yes! Later on I will post a diagram showing what I am planning to build for discussion. I already have rolls of silicon steel sheets. I will use a special scissors for making the lamination of the cores. For this type of AC device is recommended to use laminated cores to reduced the losses due to Eddy currents.

Thanks,
Bajac

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1733 on: October 25, 2014, 05:01:46 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1734 on: October 26, 2014, 02:49:34 AM »
I wanted to show you one generator posted in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHSXSsNroho
Can you see any similarity with the topic we have been discussing in this thread?

The device shown in this video is a degraded version of the iron-less coil armature principle used by Figuera, Ferranti, Mordey, Thompson, Hopkinson, and Tesla. Note that the above pioneers always had the induced iron-less coils in an air gap between a south and north magnetic poles, which is the setup that maximizes the magnetic flux in the air gap. The generator in this video is using one side of the magnet to face a side of the coil, only. Therefore, most of the magnetic lines of force stay closed to their magnets. Whenever you kill the dipole, the number of flux lines and magnetic intensity is decreased. Why do we want to do that? It is done that way because the principle of iron-less induced coil generators is not well understood.

Because a higher number of magnetic force lines are concentrated whenever there are two opposing magnetic poles, a much higher voltage can be induced when the coils travel through the air gap. It requires a stronger force to separate two opposing magnetic poles than the force required to push together two equal magnetic poles. In other words, the flux linkage is higher between opposing magnetic poles.

Offline phoneboy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1735 on: October 26, 2014, 02:58:25 AM »
The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant.  He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back.  Just an idea.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1735 on: October 26, 2014, 02:58:25 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1736 on: October 26, 2014, 03:40:25 AM »
The windings in the video are interesting and similar to an idea I had about this device, what if figuera's patent description of the coil orientation is exactly what he meant.  He should have been familiar with maxwell so what if he was using the a vector like in a toroidal transformer, the induction coils have to be figure 8 wound. I attached images of something I made in sketchup a few weeks back.  Just an idea.
I am not sure I understand how your setup works. Do you have a sketch showing the expected magnetic flux lines between the inducing and induced coils?

What I was trying to say is that if you use a single magnet or two magnets with the same magnetic poles, you will get a much weaker magnetic field for the same gap than when using a magnetic field between two opposite magnetic poles. When you have an air gap in between two opposite magnetic poles, more magnetic flux lines cross the gap to merge and form continuous loops around the two opposite magnets. That is the intended message of "do not kill the dipole." Did I explain it in a clear manner?

Offline phoneboy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1737 on: October 27, 2014, 12:21:52 AM »
@BAJAC, I believe I get what your saying.  I had a minute so I whipped up another drawing with single loops no cores and vectors.  The red and blue coils are the inducers and the green is the induced.  I hope this helps a bit, again just an idea.

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1738 on: October 27, 2014, 01:13:51 PM »
Thanks Phoneboy. I hope to see your device built, soon.

I am very puzzled with the fact that the genius of the 19th century did not seem to associate the small armature reaction of the generators with the efficiency. How come something that obvious has been overlooked for so long? Ferranti, Mordey, Thompson, and Tesla new about the small armature reaction of the iron-less coil armatures but to my knowledge they did not relate it to the efficiency of the rotating generators. Everything points out that the only person who did relate it the small armature reaction with the efficiency of the alternators was Clemente Figuera.

I mean, if the input power is the torque times the RPM, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to know that a small armature reaction should have made an alternator more efficient. It can be concluded that conspiracy and suppression are not the only causes for not having over unity generators, today. The brilliant minds of the past and present times might have played a larger role.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2014, 05:22:25 PM by bajac »

Offline bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1739 on: October 27, 2014, 01:34:44 PM »
The other question you may have is, why did not Mr. Figuera explicitly mentioned the principle of operation of his device? Did he know about the principle at all?

My best guess is yes! Mr. Figuera knew about the principle of operation but it was against his economic interest to mention it in his patents. The reason is simple, if Figuera had mentioned the principle of operation of his device, the competitors would have just used the devices built by Ferranti, Siemens, and Mordey. The latter devices were more practical to build and did not have to pay royalties. In that case, it was more likely that Figuera would have not received the payment from the Union of Banks. In addition, Figuera might have encountered problems for getting the patent awarded based on the existing arts.

 

OneLink