Overunity Machines

Hello to All,

Within this Topic I am going to start a series of information, which I consider very important, related to Building our Figuera Generator.

For that reason, I would be adding here a lot of info, which is very useful and now all is gone from Modern Electrical Books...as Dynamos are categorized as "Obsolete Technology" from the past...

I want to thank @GreyWolf47 , @Cadman and @feb_ for supplying great contributions they have shared.


First, to understand the Figuera "R Box", I want to show what the Symbols looked like in those times, and compare it to the 1908 Patent:


Now, let's look again at that "R Box" from the patent image:


As we all can see, Figuera clearly meant "Inductive Resistance" (Sp: Espiras de Resistencia) [Resistance Spirals] when He drew the patent image, plus when He mentions "adding a series of "Sp: resistencias" (resistors) to Control the Currents...and those bolts down to "Coils"...Coils add Inductive resistance to currents, PLUS they also generate a Magnetic Field...So, they have a DUAL PURPOSE here.

Therefore, Figuera regulated the Currents with these Inductive Resistance Coils, back and forth through the Positive Single Brush He designed. But, Not only that...

Figuera was also Expanding and Retracting BOTH Stator Fields (Parts N + S on Patent) Magnetic Fields at the same time, by SWITCHING these Coils in a Back and Forth LINEAR RECIPROCATING Fashion.

By doing this, Figuera "mimics" the Armature Coils displacement in a Rotation between both N-S Fields, but in a LINEAR fashion.


To be continued...plus edited further on...please, do not post now, until I am finished with the posts.

Thank You!


Ufopolitics

This is the way that Dynamos Output their Energy Generated (on this Specific Image is a "SERIES CONNECTION"):



As we can see, the "series conn." comes from the way that Static Fields and Armature (through Brushes) are connected.

As the Coils on the Armature-Rotor gets induced (generates currents) by rotating in between both North-South Static Fields, these later ones, start getting filled up with energy, and it is on these two end terminals from Stators, that we LOAD the Dynamo.

This valuable information below was sent to me by Member @Cadman 



Full text of "Scientific American Volume 77 Number 19 (November 1897)" (https://archive.org/details/scientific-american-1897-11-06/page/n11/mode/2up?view=theater)

F. B. H. writes: I am an old reader of your valuable paper, and I want to ask a few
questions in regard to the eight light dynamo described
in Supplement, vol. xxiv. No. 600. My question is
this: Can I double the drawings in every respect and
get an operative machine? I mean one, if well constructed,
that would answer as well as the eight light
machine. If any changes are needful, please state what
they are. Be sure to state size of wire for armature and
field magnets, the winding being the same as in the
eight light machine. Should I double the length and
diameter of armature? To be short, if I were to double
or multiply by 2 all the measurements given, would my
machine be out of proportion?

A. The sizes given in the drawings of the eight light dynamo can be doubled.
This makes the machine 4 times as large.
If it is wound with the same sizes and number of turns of wire as the original,
it will have the same current in amperes, but 4 times the voltage.
If the field is made larger, the armature should be increased in the same degree.
Now, if you also use wires twice as thick, but have the same number of turns,
the carrying capacity in amperes will be increased 4 times,and the total output of the machine will be 16 times as great.
In place of No. 20 wires use No. 14 on armature. In place of No. 18 wire use No. 12 on field.

240V 40A DC


Full text of "Scientific American Volume 61 Number 26 (December 1889)"

(1649) L. C. asks :
1. Have you ever described a motor of one or two horse power? If so, in what number?
A. No.
2. Could the eight light dynamo described in No. 600, Scientific American Supplement, be used as a motor?
A. Yes.
3. If so, should any changes be made?
A. No.
4. About what power would the eight light dynamo develop used as a motor?
A. About 1 horse power.
5. What power would the eight light dynamo develop used as a motor increased to twice the size of the one
described in No. 600?
A. If twice the size linear, it would be about 5 horse power.

6. What power would this motor develop
if the field magnets only are increased to twice the size?
A. This would give an undesirable proportion, with no advantages.

In order to adapt the dynamo to the varied conditions of service, its design is modified in numerous ways, giving rise to the different "types." These may be classified with respect to:

1. Field magnets;
2. Field excitation;
3. Field winding.

The first division relates to the number of magnetic poles, as unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar dynamos; also, interpolar dynamos. Under the second division are included the following:

1. Self-exciting machines of which the magneto is the simplest. Its magnetic field 1s obtained from permanent magnets, hence the electromotive force generated is comparatively small. The more important type of self-exciting machine is provided with electro-magnets in which the field of force is "built up" from the residual magnetism of the soft iron or steel cores of the field magnets of the dynamo itself. Nearly all commercial types of dynamos are of this class.

2. Separately excited machines in which the field magnets are magnetized when the machine is in operation by current supplied from a separate source such as a battery or magneto generator.

With respect to the third division, based on the field winding, dynamos are classed as:

1. Series wound;
2. Shunt wound;
3. Compound wound.

H All,

So, how did they Regulated Dynamo's Energy Generation on the 19th Century?

At those times, it was necessary to regulate Dynamos generated energy, whenever they turned ON and OFF the different loads, like, simply, Incandescent Lamps...or motors.

There were three ways of regulation:

1- Adjusting Brushes (that is why we see a "handle" that can move the two brushes, around commutator...)
2- Lowering the huge Vapor Engine speed...and this was way more complex to achieve...
3- Adding Resistances to Fields through a "Rheostat"...in a "shunt" connection...let's see...

Hello ufo,
you are doing well to continue researching everything related to the dynamos of Figuera's time. This is where the possible solution lies, since Figuera was inspired by a dynamo, then decomposed it into seven or eight sections. If you look at the Manchester dynamo, it has 32 contacts on the collector, that means 16 coils or set of turns, of which eight are in the northern hemisphere and the other eight in the southern hemisphere, as it turns out that the northern yoke covers 120º and the south another 120º there are another 120º free of which there are 60º left and 60º right. The brushes are only movable by 30º, which is 90º from the perpendicular to the north and south poles to the magnetic centers minus the 60º free of magnetism because it is not affected by the yokes.

Hidrógeno.

Quote from: hidrogeno on Jan 27, 2024, 03:53 PMHello ufo,
you are doing well to continue researching everything related to the dynamos of Figuera's time. This is where the possible solution lies, since Figuera was inspired by a dynamo, then decomposed it into seven or eight sections. If you look at the Manchester dynamo, it has 32 contacts on the collector, that means 16 coils or set of turns, of which eight are in the northern hemisphere and the other eight in the southern hemisphere, as it turns out that the northern yoke covers 120º and the south another 120º there are another 120º free of which there are 60º left and 60º right. The brushes are only movable by 30º, which is 90º from the perpendicular to the north and south poles to the magnetic centers minus the 60º free of magnetism because it is not affected by the yokes.

Hidrógeno.

Thanks Hidrogeno,

That is called the "idle" angles...where "apparently" there is no Field interaction...However, there is...and it is called "Field Distortion" which comes from Rotation.

So those two angles, right and left are there for a reason, to allow Space for this Distortion, as Fields tries to keep interacting with Stator Core, it distorts.


Also nowadays Generators and Motors still have that Angle-Separation in between stator poles.

This "distorsion" means fields drags not to be separated from steel, and this reflects in a very high mechanical force required by the "prime mover"...the Engine.

This increases as we add more loads to Generator...or Motor.

In Figuera's it is completely different approach, as there is no Rotation at all, but just a Linear movement. We then do not need those "idle" angles. The Field does not distort with a linear movement.

There is still a demand when we add loads...but then, all we need to do is to increase the frequency/speed of that small motor turning the positive brush... ;D

Cheers

Ufopolitics

Hello to All,

After Member GreyWolf47 posted yesterday on his Builder's Topic:

Quote from: GreyWolf47 on Jan 28, 2024, 07:39 PMUfopolitics:
See Hawkins electrical guide vol 1 pages 165, 166 , 167, 168, 169an 170.
Greywolf47

I went ahead and review those Six (6) pages...

And actually, I found out I needed to go FURTHER BACK, to page 163... to find out, these Pages (163 to 170) are JUST dedicated to the AC Sinewave Output, from an ALTERNATOR, NOT from a DYNAMO.

See the pages here on: Hawkins Book (starts at page 163) (https://archive.org/details/hawkins-electrical-guide-series-books/hawkins%20electrical%20guide)

A DYNAMO DIFFERENTIATES FROM AN ALTERNATOR, SIMPLY, BY THE WAY THEY OUTPUT ELECTRICAL POWER:

1-ALTERNATORS OUTPUT AC SINEWAVE, WHICH GOES POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE.

2-DYNAMOS OUTPUT PULSED DC CURRENTS, WHICH NEVER GO NEGATIVE.






However, all these misleading comments, lead me to continue reading beyond, and entering into Dynamo's specific's related to wave analysis in detail...coming next.

Regards to All

Ufopolitics

Ok, so, after reading about Alternators, and understanding these machines has absolutely NOTHING to do with the way Figuera's Generator was conceived...

The 1908 Figuera Generator, was conceived based on the Engineering Reversal from a DYNAMO from the 19th Century (NOT FROM AN ALTERNATOR), and when you "reverse" something, it gives you the OPPOSITE RESULT than "Positive Model" (prior to Eng. reversal) gives as Output, So, the Figuera Generator outputs an AC Sinewave, NOT Direct Currents

And AC Output is awesome for our times!!...but NOT for those times, where they were still using DC Currents, as a matter of fact, Figuera even mentions on his 1908 Patent, that we could use "another small motor with a commutator" to REVERSE CURRENTS BACK TO DC (remember they did not have "converters" nor Diodes at those times...) ;D 

So, I kept reading (btw, I love to read) basically into the: REAL DYNAMO CHAPTER on Hawkins book, starting on Page 171 (https://archive.org/details/hawkins-electrical-guide-series-books/hawkins%20electrical%20guide)

And after passing the "Basic" interpretation, based on a "single loop" of one wire (that cannot be any further from reality on how you really wind these machines for real...

The Book goes into the Graphic examples of the GRAMME RING ARMATURE


And Gramme Ring Armatures were NOT the best to use on Dynamos...they were succeeded by the Drum Armature, as further on with the Siemens Winding Design as the best of its time...

Gramme Armatures draw back, major disadvantage, was all the wires behind the steel ring, which were not induced at all, so that was a waste of copper...instead Drum Armatures have ALL wires exposed to Field Interactions...

HOWEVER, in order to "Decompose Dynamo's Matrix", into Figuera's Engineering Reversal, I consider it is better to analyze Dynamo's Armatures, based on Gramme's Structure, rather than the Drum Type.

When I use a 3D Software to Decompose Gramme Ring Armature Coils, and set them as Figuera's, in a GEOMETRICALLY LINEAR FASHION, there would not be, one single millimeter of any of those coils, that would not get induced, when set within the Magnetic Fields from Stator, according to Figuera's Geometry...

Regards

Ufopolitics
 

Please, look at how the six coils are connected to Commutator...Doesn't it "looks familiar"...?

Of course it does!!...it is EXACTLY the way Figuera connected his Coils from his R Box to Commutator!!


With a "tap", a "derivative", in between the SERIES COILS...

And this specific connection type, also goes for the 2 and 4 Coils...now, can we put more Coils there?...like "seven"?...of course we can!

All we need to do then, is to start the decomposing-matrix and reverse it, process, and film it...sorry, meant "batch render" it... ;D


Regards


Ufopolitics

Hello,

And  please, do not take me wrong here, or "judge me" wrong, I know perfectly well, how Dynamo's armatures are wound, the same as any DC Brushed Motor...no matter what armature is used...on what motor type.

I refer to the way wires run, in a LONG travel line, from armature to commutator, with Tap ON ARMATURE, and NOT TAP on Commutator HOOKS, like it is done UP TO NOW...which is almost "invisible" to the plain eye.

This "view" tends to have that "idea", of separating commutator from armature, in a more "visible" way...by just extending those wires further away...

This is just my opinion...as I see it from Figuera's mindset and point of view...back in those times.

Regards


Ufopolitics

I have mounted all coils from one module of Figuera's Generator, on an old Gramme's Ring Armature...is part of the process to view this generator in different perspectives...to enhance our views...

In a "Rotary" setup, our minds are designed to understand it even better than a linear display. As it may trigger -as well- some ideas within a Toroidal Future setup?...where we do not need jumpers, but another row of coils...using the "back end" Poles of both Primaries...perhaps?

Anyways, I thought I will get your minds to think...outside the "box"... ;)

Regards

Ufopolitics

Good morming,

The ring idea just reminded me of an earlier idea I had that I forgot to pass on to you.  I was wondering if taking a large C-clamp and putting it on your earlier device would complete the magnetic flux path and make it more efficient.  Just put the ends of the C-clamp on the ends of your large iron core while you have the 60 watt bulb lit and see if it gets brighter.

Just an idea from my wandering thoughts.

Take care,
Carroll

PS: I am going to try that with my system later today and I will report back wtih the results.

Good morning Citfta,

Actually, I was looking at another way to see this circuit, like in a Symmetrical Brushed Motor, where the armature circuit, since it is closed it will keep the currents balanced...

Brushed motors have a positive and a negative brush running on commutator...only difference here, is that negative is fixed, as positive brush is the one that moves along circuit.

However, it still plays a similar role with currents, don't you think?...Even though, the circuit currents keep moving from areas of low resistance, while other side is on high...then switching or reversing low with high...

On the other note, yes, it "should" increase by closing magnetic circuit...however, on the setup I tested on method 2, adding the heavy plates at ends don't do anything...still, I have to do it again with proper resistance to make sure.

Regards

Ufopolitics

Good Morning again Ufo,

I'll reply here since it is part of this discussion but if you want to move the discussion to my thread that is fine also.

As you have seen in my videos my system is much smaller than your's so my results are not as great as yours.  But I decided to see if there was any noticable difference when I put a large C-clamp on my secondary core which is a ferrite core and not an iron core like yours.  I DO see a difference.  Because of the length of my core I had to find a very large C-clamp.  When I added the C-clamp the P-P voltage went from 15.0 volts to 16.8 volts.  The max voltage according to the scope went from 6.8 volts to  7.8 volts and the input current went from 380 milliamps down to 370 milliamps.  I believe (probably wrong) that since your core is iron you may see a more noticable difference.  And your system being larger will probably also show a more noticable difference.

I need to find a different video uploading site.  I don't like YouTube and Vimeo has a limit for free uploads of only 500MB per week.  So I couldn't load a video of this test.

Later,
Carroll

Quote from: Ufopolitics on Jan 24, 2024, 09:02 PM

WIRE GAUGES PLUS NUMBER OF TURNS, UTILIZED ON THESE DYNAMOS, RELATED TO THE DESIRED OUTPUT REQUIRED

HOW TO INCREASE POWER ON A DYNAMO BASED ON CHANGING GAUGE AND NUMBER OF TURNS TO BE DESIGNED

This valuable information below was sent to me by Member @Cadman



Full text of "Scientific American Volume 77 Number 19 (November 1897)" (https://archive.org/details/scientific-american-1897-11-06/page/n11/mode/2up?view=theater)

F. B. H. writes: I am an old reader of your valuable paper, and I want to ask a few
questions in regard to the eight light dynamo described
in Supplement, vol. xxiv. No. 600. My question is
this: Can I double the drawings in every respect and
get an operative machine? I mean one, if well constructed,
that would answer as well as the eight light
machine. If any changes are needful, please state what
they are. Be sure to state size of wire for armature and
field magnets, the winding being the same as in the
eight light machine. Should I double the length and
diameter of armature? To be short, if I were to double
or multiply by 2 all the measurements given, would my
machine be out of proportion?

ANSWER. The sizes given in the drawings of the eight-light dynamo can be doubled. This makes the machine 4 times as large.

1-If it is wound with the same sizes (gauge) and number of turns of wire as the original,
it will have the same current in amperes, but 4 times the voltage.

2-If the field is made larger, the armature should be increased in the same degree.

3-Now, if you also use wires twice as thick, but have the same number of turns,
the carrying capacity in amperes will be increased 4 times, and the total output of the machine will be 16 times as great.
In place of No. 20 wires use No. 14 on armature. In place of No. 18 wire use No. 12 on field.

240V 40A DC

Hello to All,

So, above I kind of underlined some sentences, as also numbered the Answers for easier understanding and further analysis.

And this is the RATIO of any changes we can do to any machine, basically, a Dynamo form the 19th Century, and that is where our Figuera Machines are based on.



1- So, if we DOUBLE the size of Machine, based on using same gauge, same number of turns, BUT DOUBLED, we will increase Four (4) Times the Voltage.

2- This is obvious, that if we increase the Size of Fields, on the same SCALE (Degree) we should also increase Armature.

3- If use wires "twice as thick" (DOUBLING GAUGE), BUT, KEEPING THE SAME NUMBER OF TURNS.  The capacity in Amperage will be Increased Four (4) Times.

And the Total Capacity of Machine Output (in WATTS) would be increased 16 Times.

It is understood that if we increase Voltage Four (4) Times (As in Answer 1), as Amperage Four (4) Times ( As in Answer 3), then the Total Power (in WATTS) would be increased multiplying 4X4= 16 Times.

QuoteIn place of No. 20 wires use No. 14 on armature. In place of No. 18 wire use No. 12 on field.

Please note here, that "increase" between Field-Armature takes place in double digits, or existing Armature is 20 ga and Field is 18 ga.

Then the Increase value, would be 14ga on Armature, as 12ga on Fields...of course realize that Fields always would have MUCH more Turns and length as Armature.

All these information is VERY VALUABLE in assisting to build a Figuera Generator!!

Regards

Ufopolitics

Quote from: Ufopolitics on Feb 02, 2024, 09:24 AM...ANALYZING ANSWER 1, BASED ON DOUBLING THE SIZES GIVEN ON THE DRAWINGS (which we do not have)...

Actually, we do have the complete drawings. They are in this document

Eight Light Dynamo - Scientific American supp 600 excerpt.pdf

attached to this post here https://overunitymachines.com/index.php?msg=523

Regards
Cadman

Quote from: Cadman on Feb 03, 2024, 10:19 AM

Quote from: Ufopolitics on Feb 02, 2024, 09:24 AM...ANALYZING ANSWER 1, BASED ON DOUBLING THE SIZES GIVEN ON THE DRAWINGS (which we do not have)...

Actually, we do have the complete drawings. They are in this document

Eight Light Dynamo - Scientific American supp 600 excerpt.pdf

attached to this post here https://overunitymachines.com/index.php?msg=523

Regards
Cadman

Hello Cadman,

Sorry I missed that Top Title, on the whole paper!!

Yes, it is about the "Eight Light Dynamo"...great!

Thanks for clearing it up.

Regards

Ufopolitics