Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[xpskid]

Timeline

Has anyone researched the timeline for these devices ? I can probably do it, but thought someone else may have done it already.

Bedini left conference, went and figured out the Kromrey
Ron Coles G-Field
The small G-Field devices that JB built
The Town Hall G-Field device
The Kromrey in the DVD

Just trying to understand the order of the builds.
This may help understand which were "principle" devices and which were improvements, etc.

Thanks,

Timm

[JANGYD]

It's paper

Thanks JANG !!

Sorry for the confusing question...
In the picture I see something white, (maybe paper, teflon, ???) between the ends of your magnet stake and the top/bottom plates. I was curious as to what that was. That may be too specific, but curious.

Regards,

Timm

Hi Timm,

It's paper, my name card.
Al. poles supporting two plates top and bottom are a little bit long than magnets stacks.

Your Regards,

JANG

[baroutologos]

Nice line of thinking JD.

By studying the build timeline you figure out which device is an advanced setup in comparison to other. According my "hunch", the Town hall G-field or the FEG machine, is the evolution of the Kromrey's setup.
Do not just know it yet, time will tell.


EDIT:
I was reading today about the Brown-Ecklin generator report by W.D. Bauer, written in 1996. It gives quite an overall and specific description of the device, records output data of this generator in various coils combinations /rpm ranges / flux intensities and calculates the efficiency of this machine. (Inventor is cited)
see.. The Brown-Ecklin generator: Part 1

My question: (in hope someone with knowledge of such a system respond)
How does calculate those figures? In table 2 voltage is measured open circuit, current closed circuit thus he makes the assumption that must be V x A power output?

Not to mention that Brown-Ecklin's generator is an advancement of Kromrey's converter machine, thus having no at moving around coils (Ren hates spinning coils :P ) or even magnets. Just an iron bridge.

my conslusions are: More or less, its easy to make a G-filed machine. the part we have NOT be told is how to efficienty extract the energy out of it without disrupting its performance. John Bedini should give some guidelines on this.

Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: Pay extra attention to the role of shunt capacitor across excitation field coil's terminals. This, inventor supports, effectively substitues current input for generating the stationary magnetic field by creating an alternating one.

[xpskid]

Nice line of thinking JD.

my conslusions are: More or less, its easy to make a G-filed machine. the part we have NOT be told is how to efficienty extract the energy out of it without disrupting its performance. John Bedini should give some guidelines on this.

Regards,
Baroutologos

I agree with this statement...
Hopefully I can get back in the barn this weekend, but I have some ideas around this thought. They stem from the idea of maintaining a 0 magnetic field within the device as stated by JB in the video.

Regards,

Timm

[Shamus]

OK, I finally got the mkII G-field running today and did some short experiments. Short, because, well, the usual mechanical problems.

I think I'm in the ballpark as it did charge a smallish 7Ah gel cell from 12.2?V (can't remember the last digit--note to self: take better notes!) to 12.51V in about 15 minutes.

I did short it out and while it made some sparks it didn't seem to increase the speed of the motor--and that could be because it's an AC motor and it seems to be built to run at a constant speed (data point: motor was allegedly running at 3050 RPM; need to measure it to be sure). I also did the finger test and there was no shock whatsoever from the leads coming off the FWBR.

The interesting thing is that when I measured the DC voltage coming of the FWBR it was right around 7V. Somehow, 7V was charging a battery up to 12.5V. To those of you having problems, you might want to look at that.

All this fun and testing was cut short when one of my homemade horseshoe magnets loosened itself from the shaft so that it could spin freely on its own. So I hope to be able to do some more comprehensive testing on this rig once the glue sets.

Goodnight all, I'm off to watch the EFTV #10 one more time, to see if I missed anything the first three or four times around.

[dambit]

Hi All,

Finaly I'm able to get back into this.

I think one of my major design problems is my coil cores. I don't think they are being charged by the magnet flux very effectively because of the way they are joined together. (see first pic)

I have just ordered my new ones (with a new shaft) to be machined and they are more in keeping with what Bedini has done with his. One solid core with a small hole for the shaft. (see second pic)

With a little luck this should help matters.

Cheers,

Steve

P.S Sorry about the text on the second pic, this is what I send my machinist.

[baroutologos]

@Dambit, that should have been done already! :P

Core is meant to be solid, not 2 pieces (if i understand well) so as magnetic flux to flow unimpended.

Consider also changing your windings. (must be the 10th time i say this? :P)
According my new gained knowledge, i can speculate that 200-300 turns of 10-fillar 29-30 awg will work in your setup fine!!!! (lot of work)

You gonna have your accelaration that way under short and motor input down at lower rpm.

Regards,
Baroutologos

[JANGYD]

10inch Generator.

Hi All

When I read the post commeting to JNL, I have got some question.
He said his 10-inches generator uses a motor draws 12W(1A/12V) input.
I don't know whether this 10 inch generator is the same with the model
demonstrated in EFTV DVD10.
In my guess the model in DVD10 draw 10A or more at 24V.
Are these two models different?
Could you show me the model introduced in JNL post?
Thanks.

JANG YOUNGDEUK

ps)Steve I hope you should be success like the first trial.

[baroutologos]

@JD,

we have discussed with Dambit that issue again. If you have read Bedini's FEG book (1984) he is overconcerned about the power feeding the machine. He states in that booklet that the FEG run at 12 watts of power. (quite reasonable if OU is to be attained in rough systems)

kromrey's converter of Bedini's shown at EFTV 10, must consumes some 200 - 350 watts ! In my oppinion its a concept machine of no real value.
In order to demonstrate OU of 170% at 300watts of input you gonna need some 500watts of power out.

How does it seems to you, really? Can that little piece take out 500 watts?
No if you ask me.

Regards,
Baroutologos

[Shamus]

Hi Jang,

If you look at that "replication" by JNL you can see that it's not a successful one and there's even a note at the bottom of that page from John Bedini explaining why. I personally wouldn't use it as a reference for anything. And no, it's not even remotely close to what was shown in EFTV #10. Here's the page: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/gfield.htm

@Baroutologos: It could be a demonstrator, but who knows? Perhaps with a different, more efficient motor the power consumption could be taken down considerably. And I'd say it's far from useless; look again at the effects he was achieving with it! Even if it was at COP<1 (which we don't know, because no voltage/amp measurements were shown on the output) it was still a step in the right direction because it was generating *cold* electricity.

@All: After watching EFTV #10 yet another time, it seems clear to me that the machine he showed *does not* use trifilar windings on the coils which means even that machine could be made more powerful. Two things stood out to me after watching it again: One, non-magnetic shaft and two, completely contained, closed flux path when the pole pieces are in alignment with the magnets.

[Shamus]

Here is the quote from that JNL page. I think it's very relevant to this thread, so I'm copying it here verbatim:

Comments from JOHN BEDINI :

<<

Their is a difference between My G-Field and Jeans, Go to My section and look at the pictures I have put up there in motors and ideas, You will see that My Machine has four poles with permeate magnets on the out side. The G-Field is a flux gate generator the curve in which it works is very important along with the windings most of these generators will at some point be 120% or better, but it must be matched to the load. It runs on a Bell Curve so You must be at the top of this curve at the correct speed, I have suggested to Jean that he uses a brushless motor and a non- magnetic shaft this is very important. the 10 inch generator on my page uses a motor that only draws 1amp or 12 watts at 12 volts the output from this proto-type generator is 14.5 volts at 5 amps = 72.5 watts, But 2.5 amps moves back inside the generator so you are left with 36.25 watts to back charge the batteries.

When building this Generator You must build it with Transformer laminations or You will have Eddie current losses in the pole pieces this will cost you 10 watts or better. The way to get the current out of the Generator ,You must"Tri-filer wind the coils" this lowers the Impedance of the coils, The coils are in series on this machine. As You can see that 1/2 the power moves back into the generator you must get this out of the coils "BY LOWERING THE COIL IMPEDANCE" and matching to the load you want to power. One more thing that I might add to are discussion is that when the G-Field is operating correctly the motor current must move down under load to 1/2 the power input, as You can see now the power input drops to 6 watts . "Ron Cole's Test were done under full DC conditions, The G-Field output "MUST BE FULLY RECTIFIED AND FILTERED TO PURE DC".

I hope You understand what I have said here, because this is why they have all failed at making this Machine.

John Bedini

>>

[dambit]

kromrey's converter of Bedini's shown at EFTV 10, must consumes some 200 - 350 watts ! In my oppinion its a concept machine of no real value.
In order to demonstrate OU of 170% at 300watts of input you gonna need some 500watts of power out.

Regards,
Baroutologos

Hi Baroutologos,

It may not be of any real industrial value, but I don't know a single outdoorsman/camper who wouldn't want one to charge the batteries they use for lights and stuff. That prototype alone could be a real money spinner if he wanted.

I know I should have used solid cores, but I already had the others and I fugured that I may as well try all the cominations I could with them just in case. The only part I need to source now is a new drive motor. The slowest one I can find runs at 8000 rpm. Way too fast. I may have to order one online.

Cheers,

Steve

[Shamus]

Hey Steve, maybe you could use that 8K RPM motor if you geared it down.

Well, I did some tests last night with the mkII and all the things I noticed before the last breakdown were still present. This time the charge battery started at 12.26V and went up to 12.62V in about 30-40 minutes. This morning when I went out to the barn to check the battery it was sitting at 12.28V.

I'm still trying to think if I've missed something with my build. I'm pretty sure I hit all the major points that JB mentioned in the DVD:

- Non-magnetic shaft (wood)
- Low impedance coils, connected in series, trifilar for low Z
- Laminated core (1/16" welding rods)
- High RPM (well, this I'm still not 100% sure of)

I've been going through and trying alternatives. I even tried connecting the battery with reversed polarity to the FWBR (shocking! ). I think putting the horseshoes with like poles facing each other probably wouldn't work, but I don't know this for certain. The only thing left that I can think of to try is to turn one of my coils around 180 degrees.

In the mean time I'll be doing this -->

[JANGYD]

Speed Up but very limited

Hi All

Recently I retuned my Kromrey Converter.
When it runs over 3000RPM and AC-shorted, it speeds up 3200RPM.
It is very limited. It was double speedup on Muller's report.
So I think my machine is not properly tuned. It needs more understanding.

When it runs 5700RPM at 12A/24V and AC-shorted,
it speeds up 5980PRM and it's current gets down to 6A.
I found 'Bell Curve" is very important for good efficiency and the top of
"Bell Curve" is not on high speed.

Yes, It was that. Fundamentally It has to speed up as double rate without
current following up. I think there are two important things,
one is tuning and the other is how to control BLOCHWALL Control.
thanks.

JANG.

[baroutologos]

Hy JD,

great findings. Mine findings in different setup though (see FEG thread) indicate something quite similar.
Bear in mind that the "quantity of speedup" in RPM has to do ALSO with the prime mover and its torque curves.

If AC induction motor (as a bench grinder) is employed then the speedup in an Average system is more that DOUBLE in rpm terms. On the other hand, amperage down, is the usefull part of the equation.

And yes to the second finding, RPM ( at least in mine setup) has to do with device's AC output and above a critical range the very manifestation of the "speedup" phenomenon. The more efficient RPM value to be operated, IMO has to do with specific setup, magnets/coil physical arrangement, motor consumptions etc.

Generally above a certain RPM value, the greater is not the better.(losses rise exponentially etc)

Regards,
Baroutologos