I post this from overunitydotcom because I believe it is relevant:
NRamaswami
Full Member
***
Posts: 186
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #2082 on: Today at 07:49:20 AM »
Quote
Randy:
I do not understand why feel that a particular mode of doing things is needed. What matters is the principle of operation behind any device.
Look at Figuera's own words as translated and shown at
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258I believe this is done by Hanon.
----------------------------------------------BEGIN------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION
Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion, is that the turns of the induced circuit approaches and moves away from the magnetic centers of the inductor magnet or electromagnets, and those turns, while spinning, go through sections of the magnetic field of different power, because, while this has its maximum attraction in the center of the core of each electromagnet, this action will weaken as the induced is separated from the center of the electromagnet, to increase again, when the induced is approaching the center of another electromagnet with opposite sign to the first one.
Because we all know that the effects that are manifested when a closed circuit approaches and moves away from a magnetic center are the same as when, this circuit being still and motionless, the magnetic field is increased and reduced in intensity; since any variation , occurring in the flow traversing a circuit is producing electrical induced current .It was considered the possibility of building a machine that would work, not in the principle of movement, as do the current dynamos, but using the principle of increase and decrease, this is the variation of the power of the magnetic field, or the electrical current which produces it.
The voltage from the total current of the current dynamos is the sum of partial induced currents born in each one of the turns of the induced. Therefore it matters little to these induced currents if they were obtained by the turning of the induced, or by the variation of the magnetic flux that runs through them; but in the first case, a greater source of mechanical work than obtained electricity is required, and in the second case, the force necessary to achieve the variation of flux is so insignificant that it can be derived without any inconvenience, from the one supplied by the machine.
Until the present no machine based on this principle has been applied yet to the production of large electrical currents, and which among other advantages, has suppressed any necessity for motion and therefore the force needed to produce it.
In order to privilege the application to the production of large industrial electrical currents, on the principle that says that “there is production of induced electrical current provided that you change in any way the flow of force through the induced circuit,” seems that it is enough with the previously exposed; however, as this application need to materialize in a machine, there is need to describe it in order to see how to carry out a practical application of said principle.
This principle is not new since it is just a consequence of the laws of induction stated by Faraday in the year 1831: what it is new and requested to privilege is the application of this principle to a machine which produces large industrial electrical currents which until now cannot be obtained but transforming mechanical work into electricity.
Let’s therefore make the description of a machine based on the prior principle which is being privileged; but it must be noted, and what is sought is the patent for the application of this principle, that all machines built based on this principle, will be included in the scope of this patent, whatever the form and way that has been used to make the application.
------------------------------------------END-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now look at what I did. I sent primary current from the first P1 to the P2 and then back to the mains neutral. But It is AC current. Every second it changes direction 50 times. The only difference is I have used quadfilar coils to ensure that the current flows first in the primary four times and then moves to the second Primary where it again rotates four times before it changes its direction.
When the current rotates first in P1 the first primary is stronger than the second primary. But when it rotates in P2 second primary is stronger than P1. Now for every second P1 and P2 alternately becomes stronger and weaker because what we used is AC from the mains.
If you look closely at Figueras circuit it is intended to make the current flow first in one direction let us say from the head to the tail portion in Let us say P1, P3,P5 etc and then in P6,P4 and P2 by using the rotating contact device. He has given the current from a battery and so it is a direct current going one way only and it needs to be pulsed and so the circuit is given.
That arrangement is subject to the wear and tear of the rotary contact or commutator brushes.
I have simplified the whole thing because 1. I did not and could not make commutator brushes that can withstand the sparks that come and 2. as you know well I do not understand the circuits.
But as you can see the principle has been implemented in the modification made by me. We found that the straight pole is the best one.
Actually Figuera hides several trade secrets.
a. What is the pole between the primaries. That has been an intense discussion here and I had to tell that if you show identical poles against each other the result will be zero voltage. Why and how I could say that? Hands on experience without theoretical knowledge. I have tried myself identical poles to face each other and got zero voltage. So I could describe it.
b. Figuera hides what is the method of making the coils.. He simply says coils properly wound...What is the proper winding..We had to figure it out.
C. Figuera hides what is the core size..to be used.
d. Figuera also hides that the secondary has to be wound on the primary core also. Otherwise it goes waste. We are all aware that transformers are the most efficient electrical devices and they are normally about 98% effiecient. So if we wind a secondary coil in Primary core we must get 98% what is supplied. It is simple common sense that if you wind it on two primaries and then use the magnetic flux between the two opposite poles of the two primaries you are going to have more than 100% of the input.
What we did not realize is the fact that if the wires are of identical size in the primary and secondary, doubling the voltage, also doubles the amperage. At 300 volts we could generate 10 amps. At 620 volts it became 20 amps. But 300x10=3000 while 620x20= 12400. An almost four fold increase in power output. Voltage developed is based on the number of turns. Amperage is based on the size of the wire used and the magnetic field strength and (I believe or assume frequency..If the frequency were higher Amperage would have been higher too. I think this is what Don Smith is saying. But he is using very high frequency high voltage units that is frightening to replicate...I cannot confirm it as it is my assumption)
Figuera gives only an indication in the statement that reels and reels of coils.. That alone gives the hint that a lot of wires and turns are needed.
We have determined that the core size matters. You must have a minimum of 1.5 feet of iron rods and bigger the diameter of the primary the better it is. Actually bigger the diameter of the iron and higher the mass and higher the number of parallel wires the lower the input. What I have done at 1540 watts input can also be done with an input of 110 watts. and possibly more output in the secondary may be the result.
What I do not understand is this?
We understand that conducting metals are without any life.
We understand that conducting metals will generate electricity when they are subjected to a rotating magnetic field.
Not otherwise..
Now where is this Electricity coming from? What exactly is this electricity. Why and how a metal knows that it is in the rotating magnetic field and why and how it produces electricity and from where does it come..Answer...We do not know.
Now If we take a permanent magnet near an electromagnet the permanent magnet begins to oscillate violently. It has no life. Nothing. Strangely it does not jump at the electromagnet. it is very agitated but it does not jump at it. To the contrary if you take a permanent magnet near another permanent magnet it immediately changes the poles and dives at the other magnet. We all know this also.
I have checked once by winding some coils on an agitated permanent magnet to see if it produces voltage..I may be wrong here.. For I have done it only once..But there was no voltage.
I do not know if the rotating core of the turbines is given DC current to make them permanent electromagnet. A rotating permanent magnet induces electricity. We know it from the dynamo.
It is not necessary to rotate the core if you are giving it Alternating current. But the core size should be very large and iron should be in the 2.7 to 3.7 Tesla ranges. I preferred a lower range due to heat issues. But even without heat issues by supplying a lower input and having a large core we should be able to generate substantial current.
The secret of the Figuera device is that it used both Lenz law obeying coils and Lenz law denying coils in between the opposite poles and then ensured that the output is higher.
I have tested with smaller cores but I have realized that we add more and more iron around smaller cores output voltage goes up. That was against common sense but then I realized that the size of the core matters.
You can have very large but smaller power electromagnet that avoids the heating issues but still can produce lot of electricity. When we built the very large electromagnet that prevented the current from flowing out there was no heat but the magnetism was significant.
So you can provide even much smaller input but the core size must be big. Daniel McFarland Cook gives the details of the length and minimum diameter of the iron needed. I would say a L:D ratio of 2:1 may be used to produce the best output for the primary and the secondary can be of the 1:1 size..
Smaller the distance between the two opposite poles higher is the mangetic flux and higher is the output in the secondary.
There was a question last night if I have seen that my device is posted on Patricks website..He is the person who has trained me up and motivated me to do these experiments. He has the moral right to post it. I have not studied it yet. He has all the information with him.
If there are any other questions I will gladly answer them.
I hope we have provided sufficient information now. Please ask if there is a need.
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KW charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd plate?
Author
Topic: Daniel McFarland Cook Generator (Read 227525 times)
