In sight of the drawings included in the 1902 patent, no. 30378, the 1908 patent, no. 44267, and the later Buforn´s patents I tend to think that a possible schematic for the device described in the 1908 patent is as follows:
For the 1902 patent, no. 30378, a possible arrangement with like poles facing each other is the next one. The next design is derived from one user of EF forum that stated:
“I am alternately powering the electromagnets because when the electromagnets are setup to be opposing to each other as one electromagnet starts to power down the lines of force shift toward it causing them to be pushed through the coil. When it is set up this way the electromagnets only have to vary in strength in relation to each other to cause induction in the secondary coil. In the diagrams I have provided earlier in this thread I have shown how anyone can prove all this out. Also when you do it this way the wires in the top of the induced coil have an opposite sign as the wires in the bottom of the coil. This is why it is necessary to split the coil in the middle, and hook the wires like I did. When the induced coil is used in this way its flux can not affect the flux of the primary electromagnets.”
Or maybe this patent just had a normal coil in the space “c” between both electromagnets “a” and “b”.
A great question remains partially unsolved for me referring to the 1902 patents. Those patents seems to indicate that the poles are located with opposite poles in front of each other. Are the 1902 patents different to the 1908 patent? Which is its real pole orientation? Is wrong my interpretation of the 1908 patent? I encourage to test both possible pole orientations North-South and, North-North or South-South. It is a matter of test every possible arrangement until finding the proper one. Let´s see how Figuera defined literally the arrangement in the patent 30378:
” Some electromagnets are arranged one in front of each other, with theirs poles [its poles] of contrary name at a small distance.
In the empty space remaining between the pole faces of the electromagnets of these two series, the induced wire passes …”
Again, not defining explicitly the North or South polarity of the electromagnets. Although it seems to be North-South. Note that both translations are possible: “their poles” , and also “its poles”. In spanish is written “sus polos” which may be translated in english identically as all 3rd person singular or plural: its poles / his poles / her poles / their poles. Each translation have a different meaning, depending if the referred poles are from two confronted electromagnets (“their poles”) or, they are the two poles of the same electromagnet (“its poles”). Note how the patent text is not explaining the arrangement in the most clearly way.
Anyway, once the device it is built it is quite easy to test all possible polarities until getting the right one.
Recommendations to build a prototype
Some recommendations for building a device which are proposed for some users in the forum threads:
- Do not close the magnetic circuit. Use an open magnetic path , just as Figuera drew it in his patents.
- Use just straight cores (do not use “E” cores) in order to avoid that the magnetic flux could jump to a near opposite pole.
- Use short induced cores to make sure that the most of the magnetic flux crosses the whole core length with small dissipation. Also use cores with enough transversal area to accommodate the magnetic flux.
- As induced coil use thick wires. For example the primary of a MOT (microwave oven transformer) could be fine to be used as induced wires.
- Avoid having zero volts in the driving signals in order to prevent the electromagnets to get discharged. Driving signals seems to need being always above zero voltage according to the suggestion of a forum user.
- Some users suggest to test with a small space between the electromagnets core and the induced coil core. This is not stated in the patents but maybe it could be needed. Also you may place some kind of aislant between cores to get this effect. As said before, this is just a suggestion, but no explicit reference to this feature is mentioned in any of the patents.
- Use two or more sets instead of just one set to enhance the output, and arrange the poles to have always the same pole toward the induced coil (all north poles or all south poles) to avoid a near opposite pole where the flux could be diverted. Some users say that two or more groups -piled one close to another- interact themselves to get any kind of multiplication effect, which is not achieved with just one group. Perhaps it is required to build 2 or more sets to get results. Maybe this explains why Figuera used 7 sets in his 1908 patent, and 4 sets in his 1902 patent.