MAGNETISM IN ITS RELATION TO INDUCED ELECTROMOTIVE FORCE AND CURRENT

[Jim Mac]

That is all I would like to say about that. use the right terms that the electrical engineers use. It shows you are informed. more than just a story tellers.

Sorry Tom, but this is NOT an Electrical Engineering forum.  This old paper describes what happens much better than many Electrical Engineers of today do.  Many do not understand the difference between Counter-Current and Inductive Kickback (Extracurrent).

Here is an example-  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bEgL-DFzC8   "Tell Your Students A Collapsing Field Is Back-EMF".... What a joke...

Overunity, Perpetual Motion, Free Energy- Etc. are All ACCEPTED TERMS here.  We are NOT here to conform to the accepted Laws of mainstream engineers. We are here to challenge and question them.

[Escumo]

That is all I would like to say about that. use the right terms that the electrical engineers use. It shows you are informed. more than just a story tellers.

Sorry Tom, but this is NOT an Electrical Engineering forum.  This old paper describes what happens much better than many Electrical Engineers of today do.  Many do not understand the difference between Counter-Current and Inductive Kickback (Extracurrent).

Here is an example-  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bEgL-DFzC8   "Tell Your Students A Collapsing Field Is Back-EMF".... What a joke...

Overunity, Perpetual Motion, Free Energy- Etc. are All ACCEPTED TERMS here.  We are NOT here to conform to the accepted Laws of mainstream engineers. We are here to challenge and question them.

Exactly, there are many electrical engineering compendiums, however, do experiments and give your opinion based on the results obtained, there are fewer, so the most logical conclusion is to give your opinion based on the results obtained by yourself and if they coincide with a theory expressed in some engineering text. So you can accept that you can give your opinion with more confidence, however the best option is to experiment for yourself and that is why we are here, at least me, and others, not to want to ridicule anyone OK???

[Cadman]

Before dismissing that article, take a minute and read up on who Elihu Thomson was and what he accomplished.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elihu_Thomson

Pretty impressive credentials! And he was like us.
“Thomson was notable both for his emphasis on models and for the singular focus with which he pursued his research, with Thomson referring to his workshop as a "model room" rather than a laboratory.”

He was an experimental builder!

[Escumo]

Someone does not know how to differentiate between an engineer and an ingenue, an engineer is the one who follows the doctrines, an ingenuous person is the one who does not have doctrines, he creates them, so that the engineers can exploit them and have a means of life. There are many engineers who do not have ingenuity, ingenuity is not learned at the university, you are born with it, an engineer without doctrines is nothing, the ideal is an engineer with ingenuity, but of these there are very, very few, if there are any Humanity advances a lot.

[solarlab]

IMHO, (my 2 cents)

It's difficult, if not impossible to pigeon hole people, especially technical ones.

Observing technical folks - in the many forms they will cloak themselves as the need
arrises; be it hobbists, technicians, engineers, physicists, scientists, no label, whatever,
the one common asset that stands out is most of the achievers is they demonstrate
a "Curse -of-the-Ever-Curious."

Their methods, techniques language and tools may vary, but the "Curse" always
propels them, which, in nearly every case, results in some form of success!

Also, over time, I've observed that many who have gained some achievement, are
able to talk in many "tongues" - what I mean by this is - Engineer to Engineer, the
language is detailed Engineering, Scientist to Scientist the language is detailed
Science, and so forth; however, a discussion between an Engineer and a Medical
Doctor or other non engineering person the language would necessarily be at a
level where the ideas being discussed would be "understood" at the level required.

Consider, a Professor lecturing on some subject to Phd level students versus a new
first year class - you get the idea!

A good example in developing presentations is found, for example, in Britannica, 
[ https://www.britannica.com/science/magnetism ] and many others. These
seem to hit a good balance of easing into a technical explaination.

The use of "acronims and mathematics" is fine if your audience knows what these
are however the use of "more descriptive terms" should be the default if there is
any doubt - and it's not at all wrong and is likely a bit safer!

SL

[Escumo]

Browsing YouTube I found an informative video regarding advances in the search for energy by scientists and I found it very interesting, which is why I allow myself to attach it to this thread, despite Holcomb's latest invention, from my point of view , is a copy of Clemente Figuera's, updated and executed with current technology, I find it very interesting to spend an hour watching this wonder that has been provided to us by a man who has a YouTube channel and with just this video, enjoy it, it is authentic. https://youtu.be/wvamIRUSbYE?si=hzDUBvuvV14xtO0I

[Jim Mac]

Yes. Clemente Figuera told us his invention was inspired by Nikola Tesla's egg of Columbus. Which was the first public demonstration of rotating magnetic fields.

And it is specifically said Clemente figuera's invention was meant to replicate a solid state dynamo. Without a doubt, he was using virtual rotation

This should be enough for us to realize we do not need big, complicated electronics and master circuits to accomplish virtual, rotating magnetic fields that do the impossible. It is able to be done with simple resistance, coils, and commutators

[Escumo]

Exactly, plus the iron, that is all necessary to make the initial Figuera system described in their patents. In the video above starting at minute 31:10 they describe the benefits of iron and how it amplifies by itself the magnetic induction provided by a coil to a piece of iron, that is the determining factor that existed with Figuera and today Therefore, large state-of-the-art electronic elements are not necessary, or anything like that, it is only necessary to mentally discover how to take advantage of said magnetic amplification, it is on the order of thousands of times more and make a prototype taking advantage of that characteristic.

[solarlab]

Just an FYI:
[might be old info for most but haven't seen it here yet]

A Soft Magnetic Material's B-H Curve provides an indication of the Material's Magnetic Gain. 

The free - "femm" software package allows reviewing this in a non-linear graphical form. 

Finite Element Method Magnetics : HomePage
https://www.femm.info/wiki/HomePage

Download & install [typically C:/femm42]
{optional: in C:/femm42/bin -> right click femm.exe -> send to -> Desktop (create short cut)}

Run "femm.exe," then "open" (from) C:femm42/examples/tutorial.fem (or any file);

In the Ribbon select "Properties," In the drop down select "Materials Library;"

Open "Soft Magnetic Materials," select any material; (e.g. Pure Iron);

Then -> in the Nonlinear Material Properties box -> click "Edit B-H Curve;"

Below the numerical value columns -> click on "Plot B-H Curve," or, better yet,
"Log Plot B-H Curve"  => the "X" axis is "H, Amp/Meter" [e.g. 1 turn of 1 Meter at 1 Amp] will
yield a "B, Tesla of about 1.2T. Coil core circumference times the number of turns and Amps
will determine the "B, in Tesla."

In short - the core material (B-H Curve) will increase the coils H to give B (within the material).

An increase of near 4 to 6 per pole is possible, however, increased frequency and more poles
(plus overlapped excitation, etc.) may increase the overall effects. Also, review the B and H
definitions and other parameters to gain the full picture.

This little blurb is just to give you a free way to access various B-H Curves. Note the differences
in material B-H performances.

[Escumo]

Muchas gracias por tu aporte respecto a la curva BH que hoy en día es muy conocida, no así en la época de Figuera, en mi opinión comprobó el poder de magnetización y desmagnetización del hierro dulce, y vio la fuerza extraordinaria que desarrolla el hierro y lo fácil que es. es liberarlo desconectando la bobina de excitación de la electricidad, y a partir de este efecto desarrolló el generador de su invento, equiparando su funcionamiento al de una dinamo por el que tuvo que sustituir el motor que impulsa la dinamo y le proporciona fuerza mecánica. a la fuerza de excitación magnética para hacer la inducción, es decir, en una dinamo, la fuerza mecánica se suma a la fuerza magnética del excitador y así se logra la inducción, superando la fuerza de Lenz, ya que Figuera reemplazó la fuerza mecánica por la fuerza magnética que el hierro se aporta por sí solo y sin gasto de energía cuando es excitado por una bobina excitadora, (excitador) como ya sabemos es del orden de decenas de miles de veces el aporte y ese es un detalle importante tanto en magnitud como en calidad. que la magnetización del hierro sigue la misma dirección que la de la bobina excitadora, a esto lo llamo materia; “crear un vector de magnetización virtual que se mueve, en ambas direcciones, en un seno de inducción controlado” y cómo esto se hizo sin la ayuda de ningún tipo de electrónica de control, evidentemente no es necesario, ya que su equipo demostró trabajar para una certificación de la Agencia Española. Ministerio de Fomento de la época.