Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[dambit]

I thought I should post a pic of the device complete. Taken just before I turned it on and the coil broke.

I think heatshrink should be fine for now as far as keeping the coils together goes. Later when I get back from my trip I will redo them completely.

In the picture of the coils and shaft, the first coil is bottom left. The wires are fairly stiff so they didn't move around much, which was good. I thought aluminium tape (100mph tape for those in the airlines) would be strong enough to hold the coils together, but I guess not.

Cheers.

Steve

[baroutologos]

It is a beauty, is not it?

regards,
Baroutologos

[nali2001]

Years ago I found a Kromrey document from some (if I remember correctly) German study, they made this impressive device. They stated that it never showed o.u. though... Will see if I can find the original document again.

[Paul Harmans]

Wasn’t here for a few day’s, but what a lot of new info! Feel sorry for you Steve about the damage to your coils, but it’s a good lesson for all of us. I’m still collecting materials, I search for some nylon rod to construct an axle.

[Mark]

For once I would like to see some real creditable evidence of a working "over unity device"

[Paul Harmans]

Maybe a stupid question, but I am thinking about my coils for my Kromrey. I did construct a Bedini SSG and I made my coils from pvc pipe. The SSG runs, but I did not get any over unity. Could it be that pvc reduce the outcome? If so, I need some other material for the coils for the Kromrey. What can I use, or do you know pvc is OK as well?

[dambit]

For once I would like to see some real creditable evidence of a working "over unity device"

I'm sorry I'm having mechanical problems Mark. Next time I'll try harder and spend more money, just for you.

If you have have nothing constructive to say, you guessed it, better to say nothing at all.

Steve.

[Mark]

Steve

My coment wasn't even dirrected at you it was in reference to Nali2001 post of the pictured device.

I think your build is very inpressive! And I wish you success.

I have spent a few thousand dollars on plans and builds and done quite a bit of research. I by no means am any kind of electrical engineer and am just learning these old technologies. What I meant is that there has been so much interest and work done on this forum by so many people that it is disappointing that know one has been able to build a "Free Energy Machine" yet. Dont take my comment personally it was not meant to be nagative toward your build.

[baroutologos]

@ MARK

Yes, you have right that there is a lack of OU devices in this forum (as many others as well) We are trying for that

One thing i have noticed about the usual irritating failure of people pursuing ou is that they go "small". That means they try to make devices too small.

Even though the technique may be the right one, if you go small chances are you will fail. In bigger proportions all things are becoming very clear. The frictions, circuit losses, etc are too small to be the prevailing factor. So the concept is proven. (OU or not OU)

Regards,
Baroutologos

[dambit]

Sorry Mark,

After having reviewed the post I now understand what you were saying.

Cheers,

Steve.

[Joit]

@Mark
I wouldnt look for this Devices what they are building in Labs, for that.
There are plenty Pages at the Web, where they did rebuild something, but they all did not work.
I think, they dont even bother, to try to get it running, just builded, and it shall run.
And all her Results are, they dont work with long Testresults. Its more like, they proove, that it cant work, then anything else.

A Friend of me told me once, that at the 60's he saw a emergency generator in a Hospital.
It was a big Thing, and once, if it been powered on with an other Motor to certain RPM, it did run by its own and powered the Hospital.
The Generator was leftover from the US Army in Frankfurt, but he only did make a Look at it, and no further Infos about it.

But just shows, that they do her Best, that Things like this dont go public.

[Mark]

No Problem Steve,

I'm sure you were just frustrated when your coil came apart. I havent had a coil come apart but have blown apart a few rotors. One blew a hole in the back of my chair and broke a huge Dale Earnhart mirror I had. I was so upset I had to put things a way for a month.

Eventually one of us is going to get a working model and then we will all have what we've been trying so hard to do! That will be a day to celebrate.

Good Fortune to All

Mark

[Shamus]

After watching the EFTV #10 and looking at the drawing JB did on the chalkboard, I am struck by the incredible simplicity of this machine. It is so simple that it almost repels the mind. I'm not kidding, it was a real lightbulb moment for me.

The motor is there just to turn the shaft, and that's it. All the action is in harvesting the energy of the magnetic field by using coils on the iron bars. Genius! And of course that all points back at the design of the magneto...

My head is spinning (pun intended!) at the possibilities.

[Mark]

Hello Steve and others

I was just reading some posts on the monople 2 group and came across this post which may help you with your build.

"You must follow the instructions Mr. Bedini gives EXACTLY. The patent has some obvious and some insipid, subtle flaws. I cannot believe they are accidental. They are difficult to go through textually in a post, but if you have an understanding of the funtion and design, then these flaws jump out at you. Mr. Bedini and I discussed these points in his shop a couple of years ago, and they will NEGATE all your efforts to get a machine to work. Just listen carefully to Mr. Bedini on the DVD and TAKE NOTES on what he says. His comments are critical." and

"Two points that jumped out at me: John's drawings were similar to the patent, but the patent diagram shows one of the coils flipped. The wire that drops down the shaft crosses to the coil on the opposite side. John also points out in the town hall meeting how the flow makes a figure 8 between the two coils. And the G-field which operates on similar principles (I believe), has the connections between coils on one side. "

Hope this helps

Mark

[Shamus]

I'm not sure about the figure-8 flux flow; I can't even envision how you would arrange magnets/bars in such a way. Which also reminds me of how he reiterated several times that the shaft *must* be non-magnetic, that otherwise you get two separate flux loops (that look suspiciously like a sideways "8" ). I did find it interesting that while he put a percent sign after writing the "120" he did *not* do the same when he wrote the "180" (it was a degree sign instead). Probably nothing, but who knows?

Again, from the DVD and KROMREY CONVERTER, it still seems to me to be a very simple machine and very little to get wrong. That page is quite old, BTW, seems like even now not too many people know about it.