Join us in the search for Free Energy. Share your experiments and discoveries, post your build logs, and discuss.

We have a strict No-Troll policy. So you can post without fear of being ridiculed.

New Members- Check Your Spam Folder For Activation Link

Please read our Rules. Any problems or suggestions- Contact Us

 

Other Overunity Forums:

Overunity Machines   ||   Overunity Research



Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Clemente Figuera Discussion and Opinions
#21
You are on the right path 
I have seen similar set up for collection of free electrons 
There is general conception that You need higher magnetism to be able force electrons in to the colector

I had coil designed for 1.6T but designer only works on numbers and he calculated 20 000 turns of 0.85 wire. And coil will be 59kg diameter of winding will be 28cm
 
It doesn’t make sense 

Back to drawing board
Reply
#22
The energy comes from the same palace as a ordinary generator the movement of the electrons.
It does not matter if you use only magnetism or magnetism and a power as water or wind. To move the electrons you only need magnetism. And you only need to move them forward and back a little. And when you move the electrons back and forth, you get magnetism and electricity. Where the energy for the electrons comes from is a good question.

"Shunt wound dynamo for parallel circuit
incandescent lighting, and for mill and factory power. The coils of the
field magnet form a shunt to the main circuit; they consist of many turns
of fine wire and consequently absorb only a small fraction of the current
induced in the armature."

   

You can't move the electrons like in a transformer you have to move them like in a generator.
Reply
#23
Haha 59 kg of wiring, maybe he is used to wind coils for CERN.

Previously I used a calculator here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hba...enoid.html (it doesn't work for me right now but it usually works)

I put 20 mm as the length of the solenoid, 4000 for permeability (not sure about this one, it could be higher) and 100 turns of 0.3 mm wire which can hold maximum of 0.7 A and the magnetic flux density in the center of the coil was computed as 

B = (mu_r*N*I)/L
where mu_r = k*mu_0

mu_0 - permeability of vacuum
k - relative permeability
mu_r - relative permeability of the core
N - number of turns of wire
I - current
L - length of the solenoid

With these parameters it looks like this:

mu_r = 4000*4*pi*10^-7 = 5.026544*10^-3
B = (5.026544*10^-3*100*0.7)/.02 = 17.593 T

So I was quite happy with that result (never mind it is past saturation). But the result was nowhere near that value when measured. It is probably because my core is actually not 20 mm long, but much longer and I put wire only on the 20 mm part of it. In the end it will most likely be good to use a short but wide core.

Now I will refer to the paper I shared in the previous post and use similar parameters.
I got a steel bar that is 50 mm wide cut into 100 mm long pieces and if I stack them to be 50 mm tall (which is used in the document I shared in the previous post as an example), the core is very short and wide. I put a piece of wire to show the direction of winding. According to the computations in the paper, this should give 1.2 T with only 48 turns and around 0.3 A of current for iron core. Note the iron core also is round with relative permeability 3,700, whereas I am showing rectangular steel core (rel. permeability 785). But the lengths are the same so with rel. permeability of steel it should need 3700/785 = 4.7 times more turns of wire, so 230 turns of wire. 
   
Reply
#24
I use this calculator 
https://production-solution.com/coil-calculator.htm

That would be much better if there will be calculator that respect required electromagnetic field value
Reply
#25
Straight wires perpendicular to the magnetic field B calculations.



PDF
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11p5fVm1...sp=sharing

To create a sinusoidal magnetic field with a peak value of 5.3 mT at a frequency of 60 Hz using a coil with 100 turns and a magnetic steel core with a relative permeability of 1000 and a core area of 10 cm x 2 cm = 20 cm^2:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1scH777q...sp=sharing


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
#26
So the power needed to create a changing magnetic field is much less than the power created in the wires perpendicular to the changing magnetic field.

This is what Figuera realized and exploited.
And also solarlab that patented his discovery.
Reply
#27
Hi feb_,

the equations in the document you sent are for magnetic flux density inside the electormagnet. In the drawing you sent, I assume the wire is supposed to go through air, which has high magnetic flux resistance. With 5.7 mT in the core there will probably be negligent magnetic flux going through the wire in the air gap. I managed to create a 600 mT field in a 2.5 cm air gap at DC, but at 50 Hz AC I cannot get as high, it vibrates too much. I managed to do it with a silicon steel C-core, with 4 coils with 860 turns of wire connected in parallel, and about 3A. The C-C core pair has two legs, and when I made the air gap by putting the cores 2.5 cm apart, I filled one of the legs with ferromagnetic material to lower the magnetic flux resistance. If I manage to hold the magnetic cores in place somehow, I can try to put a wire through and do a measurement. But in general, if the air gap between electromagnets is half of the diameter (or the smaller of a rectangular-shaped magnetic core), the magnetic field in the air gap should be homogenous.

I already made a simulation of a bunch of 100 wires going through 7 pairs of electromagnets and the results were not spectacular. It is true though that I made the magnets long, bar-like and they were facing the wire with the smallest face, orienting them lengthwise like in your picture could be worth trying.
Reply
#28
(06-28-2024, 07:41 PM)feb_ Wrote: So the power needed to create a changing magnetic field is much less than the power created in the wires perpendicular to the changing magnetic field.

This is what Figuera realized and exploited.
And also solarlab that patented his discovery.

Hello Feb
Would you be able to share the link for this patents?
“Solarlab” ?
Reply
#29
(06-30-2024, 04:15 PM)kloakez Wrote: Hi feb_,

the equations in the document you sent are for magnetic flux density inside the electormagnet. In the drawing you sent, I assume the wire is supposed to go through air, which has high magnetic flux resistance. With 5.7 mT in the core there will probably be negligent magnetic flux going through the wire in the air gap. I managed to create a 600 mT field in a 2.5 cm air gap at DC, but at 50 Hz AC I cannot get as high, it vibrates too much. I managed to do it with a silicon steel C-core, with 4 coils with 860 turns of wire connected in parallel, and about 3A. The C-C core pair has two legs, and when I made the air gap by putting the cores 2.5 cm apart, I filled one of the legs with ferromagnetic material to lower the magnetic flux resistance. If I manage to hold the magnetic cores in place somehow, I can try to put a wire through and do a measurement. But in general, if the air gap between electromagnets is half of the diameter (or the smaller of a rectangular-shaped magnetic core), the magnetic field in the air gap should be homogenous.

I already made a simulation of a bunch of 100 wires going through 7 pairs of electromagnets and the results were not spectacular. It is true though that I made the magnets long, bar-like and they were facing the wire with the smallest face, orienting them lengthwise like in your picture could be worth trying.

The air gap should be as small as possible if the diameter of the wire is e.g. 1 mm then the gap can be 1 mm just so you can fit the wires.

(06-30-2024, 05:30 PM)Lasco Wrote: Hello Feb
Would you be able to share the link for this patents?
“Solarlab” ?

EEG_EM_New_Technique_TRANSVERSE_FLUX (TF) (Provisional Patent Applied for)

att https://overunitymachines.com/

Two flat coils betwen two U cores.        

one between each leg
Reply
#30
That looks cool, does it work?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)