Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


Go Back   Energetic Forum > > >
   

John Bedini Discussion threads relating to John Bedini. Bedini SG, Bedini SSG, Crystal Batteries, etc...

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #331  
Old 07-06-2009, 11:53 PM
NoNeed's Avatar
NoNeed NoNeed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5
Send a message via Skype™ to NoNeed
The Ohmic "Sweet Spot"

Hello Baroutologos


> Anti-Lentz effect The motor should draw less current when under load
That is a fairly complicated thing and it would be great if somebody really investigates it. In general terms, you would expect lower current consumption for when the generator output is shorted, and when it is open circuit. That's because in both cases no power is being transfered into the load. Somewhere between zero ohms load and infinite ohms load there is a "sweet spot" resistive value for the whole motor/convertor/load system that would put maximum power into the load and therefore draw the most current from the motor. So will the Kromrey convertor exhibit radically different performance curves than a conventional motor/generator in this case? I realize that the replicators might not want to take it this far with respect to making measurements, but you can always do some bacis investigations and then make some infrences.


I believe I might be able to shed some insight into the "Sweet Spot" you speak of and why at such a low resistance 0.63 ohms such a huge increase
in negative power output results. It all comes down to impedance matching or resonance, just like tesla discovered. Resonance is natures hidden jem. Find it and the amount of power transfer available is limited only by your setup.

Now when I saw the numbers a question appeared in my mind and I quickly went back to my basic electronics textbooks from college, and found this link as well.

Online Parallel Resistor Calculator

John Bedini, estimates that the resistance of the trifilar windings on each coil is approx 0.4 ohms with four of these in series that gives us a total resistance of approx 1.6 ohms okay that's a given and understood.

The question now is why at 0.63 ohm load resistance was the output so high?

When you plug in the numbers to a parallel resistive calculation you get this

"parallel resistive calculation"
1.6 ohms Total Resistance and 0.63 ohms load resistance gives you a
total system resistance of approx 0.45 ohms!

This total resistance is extremely close to the resistance of a single trifilar coil and is within the realm of now impedance matching the entire circuit, which is a desired effect.
In simple radio theory a superhetrodyne receiver works on the same primciple impedance match your antenna with the RF Oscillator and you get the best SWR or (Standing Wave Ratio) or AKA Power Output
sorry for the geek speak

So to conclude you now have five resistors in a "closed parallel loop" that are all matched at approx 0.4 ohms.

In any future build you want to try and find this sweet spot simply by doing a standard parallel circuit calculation, whatever your coil resistance's are.
Make sure that each coil is exactly the same and then calculate what your load resistor should be to match the other four to obtain the best result.

I've heard that this effect is actually referred to as a "Lenz Law Clamp"

For anyone's curiosity. I have watched the video #10 and was completely shocked by what I saw, and I'm am currently building a Kromrey Converter
as well so yes I am a builder.

I think everyone on this forum is doing a great job at
So as a good friend of mine told me, Keep it up your on to something!


Thanks Again

NoNeed

"Why burn fuel when there's NoNeed"
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #332  
Old 07-07-2009, 12:22 AM
dambit's Avatar
dambit dambit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 493
Send a message via Skype™ to dambit
Hi All,

Well I hate to say it, but I have tried every wiring combination I can think of and I am still unable to repeat my initial results. I am officially stumped.

I haven't given up, but I think I'll rest it for a little bit while I refresh my mind.

Cheers,

Steve

(secretly wishing Bedini would for once give a wiring digram)
__________________
You can view my vids here

http://www.youtube.com/SJohnM81
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 07-07-2009, 01:22 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by MileHigh View Post
Pneuphysics: Sorry, but it looks to me like the scope capture on the right is an example of when you have miswired the coils so that they are not adding together. Instead they are subtracting from each other. The clue to this is that the voltage scale on the left scope capture is 1 volt per division, and the voltage scale on the right scope capture is 0.1 volts per division. Since output power is proportional to the square of the voltage, the setup for the right scope capture can only produce 1/100th the power of the setup for the left scope capture.

You still get an output waveform becasue it is almost impossible for both coils to output exactly the same voltage at the same time. You can see that one of your magnetic flux paths couples better and dominates over the other flux path because you are not seeing any inverted fly-by waveforms. You can also see how one coil is slightly different from the other coil because you have alternating "high" and "low" fly-by waveforms.
The jpg on the right is wired like John shows in the video, not my way. The jpg on the left is wired the way I have gotten results in the past.


Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 07-07-2009, 01:23 AM
xpskid xpskid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by dambit View Post
Hi All,

Well I hate to say it, but I have tried every wiring combination I can think of and I am still unable to repeat my initial results. I am officially stumped.
Steve,

I'm in a lull at the moment too.
Before I try another configuration, I thought I'd step back and heed some of Steve C's advise and do some single coil tests.. plus watch DVD 11 and see if I can pick up any magnetic field insight.

Food for thought.... please send me any ideas to include in the DOE.
Build a small coil I can pulse as a reference.
Wind one end of a (Kromrey) armature pulse it with N and S fields and measure the response. Variables: CW / CCW winds, start wind shaft side outward, outside inward.

The thought would be to verify a configuration to sum voltages, determine any differences in wind direction both circular and direction along the armature axis (Pneuphysics), etc. before chosing the next configuration.

2 things still puzzle me...
First
Kromrey uses 2 coils per iron bar (due to shaft)
Ron Cole used 2 coils per bar on G-Field
G-Field at Town Hall used ?? coils per bar
John's patent generator which uses a single spinning magnet uses 2 coils per bar
Why ? Does he need to leave any open area around the blotch wall ? or does he need to pulse the poles differently on either end in order to pulse the blotch wall ?

Second
John's comments at the Town Hall meeting where he states "In order to produce this type of energy, you must produce 2 figure 8's" and instructs his assistant to trace the figure 8's for the audience.

Timm
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 07-07-2009, 01:26 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by xpskid View Post
Nice comparison to help answer Steve's question !!

Does John method produce similar effects ? The speed increase/ amp reduction ? I'd be curious because the second trace doesn't appear to have the negitive pole reversal ?

Some of John's latter devices use a single magnet and always completed the flux path in the same direction ? However he started adding additional windings to the iron bars which he used a battery to power. He may have set the opposing fields with the battery, then fiipped it back with the single magnet.

Timm


Timm
Hi Timm,

No, if i wired it like I saw in the video - pretty sure - then no effects including no charging. Don't know why.... Bedini way.


Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 07-07-2009, 01:34 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by kent_elyue View Post
pneuphysics:

I have a question regarding your schematic in post #328, "Kromrey vs Gfield.jpg". What is the difference in the waveform output between 1) wiring the G-field as you have drawn, and 2) reversing the leads on coil number two?

In other words, you have drawn it wired this way: Top Left=out, Top right connected to Bottom Left, Bottom Right=out. What does the waveform look like if you wire it this way: Top Left=out, Top Right connected to Bottom Right, Bottom Left=out?

Is that what you've shown with the two scope shots in post #330, "The way mine are wired Crossed.JPG" and "Wired like John shows in Video.JPG"?

(Words are so inadequate sometimes, aren't they?)
Hi Kent,

Yep Top right to bottom right produces zip - nothing. you are correct. You are also right on the Words - the words do not always add up to whats in my head.


Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 07-07-2009, 01:54 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
New test results

Here is a spreadsheet with test results today, all day. Hope it helps someone. What I did basically was start with 1 strand of top coil wired in series with 1 strand of the bottom coil wired like jpg on left in post 328? Took readings then added another strand from top and bottom until all strands were in a big serial config generating over 300 vac PP. Wave shape looked the same for all. I will reserve my comments. Just raw data.

Each coil pair is 1.6 ohms x 4 pairs = total of 6.4 ohms when all are in series.


Pneuphysics
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Kromrey tests July 6th 2009-Post.pdf (10.9 KB, 97 views)
__________________
 

Last edited by pneuphysics; 07-07-2009 at 02:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 07-07-2009, 01:59 AM
xpskid xpskid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by xpskid View Post
Steve,

I'm in a lull at the moment too.
Before I try another configuration, I thought I'd step back and heed some of Steve C's advise and do some single coil tests.. plus watch DVD 11 and see if I can pick up any magnetic field insight.
... and, I need to play with the PC/USB Cheapo O'scope when it arrives this week << The hugee is my oscope.
Sorry pneuphysics... couldn't affort the $2.5K scope (kids), I'll leave the really fast events to you !!

Timm
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 07-07-2009, 02:09 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by xpskid View Post
... and, I need to play with the PC/USB Cheapo O'scope when it arrives this week << The hugee is my oscope.
Sorry pneuphysics... couldn't affort the $2.5K scope (kids), I'll leave the really fast events to you !!

Timm
No problem Timm I have been there

Let me know how it works,
Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #340  
Old 07-07-2009, 07:13 AM
baroutologos baroutologos is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 586
@Pneumaphysics,

Am i reading correct? 33000 rpm? Whoa! COOL. I want that!

yes, you are right. If you blindly follow any OU machine making instructions, chances are you fail. Patents, videos, explainations are concepts given for us to experiment and find out how to put things together. No working models specs. At least not described as they really are (physically) or they would be hundreds of them around already. (common sense)

@ Noneed

I have not in anyway reached in any definite conclusion, but the overall idea is what you say. DC resistance kills "acceleration" performance and forces this type of generator to behave as a normal draggy one.
Causes still unknown. Speculations too many.
By the way it is suggested that there is a sweet spot that these type of genys will perform at OU in considerable "COP"s. In the pursue of this spot i have invested too much (As Bedini calls it bell shape, the top of the Bell for a given layout - not experienced yet)

According my experience those are key factors to obtain accelaration... Coil Impedance should be considerable not minute and frequency.
Bear in mind that large impedance in real life conductors comes with high resistance. (which effectively kills the effect)
You can compensate low impedance (hence low resistance) by increasing rpm. (10000 or 20000 is not bad idead! dreadful maybe) A rough rule of thumb of mine so far is that considerable voltage should be developed as ,say, 250-500 volts ac.
Those i know so far (experienced).

By the way, the Muller (Kromrey) report output you mention, i think its fundamentally flawed.


Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: still waiting for the flux question reply
__________________
 

Last edited by baroutologos; 07-07-2009 at 07:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #341  
Old 07-07-2009, 09:20 AM
StevanC's Avatar
StevanC StevanC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Serbia
Posts: 269
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuphysics View Post
Here is a spreadsheet with test results today, all day. Hope it helps someone. What I did basically was start with 1 strand of top coil wired in series with 1 strand of the bottom coil wired like jpg on left in post 328? Took readings then added another strand from top and bottom until all strands were in a big serial config generating over 300 vac PP. Wave shape looked the same for all. I will reserve my comments. Just raw data.

Each coil pair is 1.6 ohms x 4 pairs = total of 6.4 ohms when all are in series.


Pneuphysics
After skimming over Your report:


1: the AWG24 seems to be a kind of "short" over the series windings, "eating away" energy harvested from the fields?

2. There in 4 x #18 nearby lies the sweet-spot? Any AWG #16 handy?

excellent example of a benchmark
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 07-07-2009, 09:31 AM
StevanC's Avatar
StevanC StevanC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Serbia
Posts: 269
A benchmark for output (just thoughts)

1. A capacitor reportedy converts "whatever" to normal electriricty

2a. A voltage triggered capacitor dumps always at same amount of charge (Q=const) so we can deduce by time (cadence) if the rate increases or decreases for a fixed load it is powering?

2b. A time-period triggered capacitor always dumps at same time regardles of chrage amount (dT=const), so we can deduce from the voltage level if there is a increase of input or not. It can be dischraged to a fixed arbitrary load.

3. A device charging such a capacitor, beit a PSU, a SSG, WM or Kromrey, will see it as a relatively low impedance load (capacitor load), depending of the voltage the capacitor reaches compared to the powering voltage source.
I suggest ranges 12V -> 25V (powering -> dumping) or about so, and capacitances of 25000 uF up to 80000 uF for output powers of 1...12W range?

4. This kind of test should be simple to replicate, yet provide enough accuracy to be considered scientific enough?

my2c
__________________
 

Last edited by StevanC; 07-07-2009 at 09:32 AM. Reason: :wall:
Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 07-07-2009, 11:22 AM
baroutologos baroutologos is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 586
@StevenC

You could not be more enlightening.
By the way for the time it seems that Pneuphysics is probably the only one with the capacity to conduct those.

Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: Good work Pneuphysics and thanks for reporting results
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 07-07-2009, 06:02 PM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by baroutologos View Post
@Pneumaphysics,

Am i reading correct? 33000 rpm? Whoa! COOL. I want that!

yes, you are right. If you blindly follow any OU machine making instructions, chances are you fail. Patents, videos, explainations are concepts given for us to experiment and find out how to put things together. No working models specs. At least not described as they really are (physically) or they would be hundreds of them around already. (common sense)

@ Noneed

I have not in anyway reached in any definite conclusion, but the overall idea is what you say. DC resistance kills "acceleration" performance and forces this type of generator to behave as a normal draggy one.
Causes still unknown. Speculations too many.
By the way it is suggested that there is a sweet spot that these type of genys will perform at OU in considerable "COP"s. In the pursue of this spot i have invested too much (As Bedini calls it bell shape, the top of the Bell for a given layout - not experienced yet)

According my experience those are key factors to obtain accelaration... Coil Impedance should be considerable not minute and frequency.
Bear in mind that large impedance in real life conductors comes with high resistance. (which effectively kills the effect)
You can compensate low impedance (hence low resistance) by increasing rpm. (10000 or 20000 is not bad idead! dreadful maybe) A rough rule of thumb of mine so far is that considerable voltage should be developed as ,say, 250-500 volts ac.
Those i know so far (experienced).

By the way, the Muller (Kromrey) report output you mention, i think its fundamentally flawed.


Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: still waiting for the flux question reply
Baroutologos,

Sorry for the misunderstanding, my dc motor tries to keep the wheel spinning at 1800 rpm. The 33 is rps multiply times 60 = 1980 rpm. At 33,000 one mag cuts loose and it might knock a satellite out of orbit

Take care,
Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 07-07-2009, 06:13 PM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevanC View Post
After skimming over Your report:


1: the AWG24 seems to be a kind of "short" over the series windings, "eating away" energy harvested from the fields?

2. There in 4 x #18 nearby lies the sweet-spot? Any AWG #16 handy?

excellent example of a benchmark
StevanC,

Thanks my friend - I have a little 16ga. I built 3 of those huge coils using a full spool 11 pounds of 18ga. It is a good idea i think to go heavier wire. I have quite a gap between my magnets and the core so for now I am going to replace the Brass shaft with a 1/2" SS non-magnetic and re-bore my magnet holder bars. One is a little off so one of the magnets is farther from the pole pieces by just under 1/4". I am getting small gold looking flakes (brass I'm sure) landing all over the area where this GField was running all day yesterday. Shaft is still tight but I would like to try tighter tolerances and faster speed (3600rpm). I am not seeing any measurable cooling yet either. It does not get hot but not cold as well

I'll keep you posted,
Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 07-07-2009, 06:21 PM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevanC View Post
A benchmark for output (just thoughts)

1. A capacitor reportedy converts "whatever" to normal electriricty

2a. A voltage triggered capacitor dumps always at same amount of charge (Q=const) so we can deduce by time (cadence) if the rate increases or decreases for a fixed load it is powering?

2b. A time-period triggered capacitor always dumps at same time regardles of chrage amount (dT=const), so we can deduce from the voltage level if there is a increase of input or not. It can be dischraged to a fixed arbitrary load.

3. A device charging such a capacitor, beit a PSU, a SSG, WM or Kromrey, will see it as a relatively low impedance load (capacitor load), depending of the voltage the capacitor reaches compared to the powering voltage source.
I suggest ranges 12V -> 25V (powering -> dumping) or about so, and capacitances of 25000 uF up to 80000 uF for output powers of 1...12W range?

4. This kind of test should be simple to replicate, yet provide enough accuracy to be considered scientific enough?

my2c
Great Idea,

I have some really big caps that I bought for my electric car to offset the motor inductance I could use them and a uP analog reader with digital IO to drive relays to dump the load and take cap readings every 5 seconds That will measure real power out into inductive or resistive loads. Whatever you want...

Good one
Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 07-07-2009, 07:01 PM
baroutologos baroutologos is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 586
@pneumaphysics

Caps ready, heavier wire ready...Whow man. You rock!

Regards,
Baroutologos
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 07-07-2009, 07:09 PM
kent_elyue kent_elyue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 45
Random Musings

StevanC: Kudos! Excellent suggestions on the use of capacitors to make measurements. Incidentally, capacitors can also be called condensers.

There are SO many variables with this seductively simple-looking device. EXACTLY how are the coils wound? EXACTLY how are they wired? EXACTLY how are the cores constructed? What is the optimum rotational speed for any given build? What are the optimal dimensions of EVERYTHING? EXACTLY how does the non-magnetic shaft play a role in successful function?

Posted are a couple screenshots from the DVD. In watching the video I wondered about the non-magnetic shaft. In the chalk-board diagram John shows the magnetic circuit taking in environmental energy in four places: the midpoint of the stacked magnets, and the top and bottom of the shaft. It made me wonder if the core had to have a COMPLETE magnetic break at the shaft location. The chalk drawing shows the core being a solid piece with a non-magnetic shaft going through it, but is the relationship (ratio) between the core diameter and the shaft diameter important? It's not very clear in the closeup screenshot of the rotor shaft and core/coil assembly, but a set-collar can be made of non-magnetic material. Perhaps the each core (top and bottom) is actually two separate cores, making four cores in total?

This is just one more detail that may or may not be important, but certainly adds to the possible places where secrets can remain obscured, and/or overlooked. Wouldn't it be frustrating to find out that we were looking for the problem (or solution) entirely in the wrong place.

(Sigh...) As has already been lamented, wouldn't it be nice to have a working one to copy and then play with?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg closeup-f19788.jpg (81.8 KB, 60 views)
File Type: jpg closeup-f31908.jpg (144.4 KB, 55 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 07-07-2009, 10:30 PM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
I found the post with the all poles facing out the same in the Kromrey. Interesting - not my idea - but information

Take care,
Pneuphysics
Attached Files
File Type: pdf __www.linux-host.org_energy_bkomrey.pdf (122.8 KB, 73 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 07-07-2009, 11:04 PM
StevanC's Avatar
StevanC StevanC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Serbia
Posts: 269
Question Core to core section

The cores should provide a massive path to magnet flux AFAIK:

We want the whole flux to:

1. accomodate the path

2. fade swiftly away from within the free broken core(s)

S it seems logical to me, we want a heavy iron section through the shaft:

for 12mm iron core, i would go with M10 therad on a 12mm Al or brass shaft IMO.
I woult take care the core irons hug the shaft neatly ;-)



(getting qute a few cents hugh? )

regards,
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 07-08-2009, 12:16 AM
kent_elyue kent_elyue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevanC View Post
The cores should provide a massive path to magnet flux AFAIK:

We want the whole flux to:

1. accomodate the path

2. fade swiftly away from within the free broken core(s)

S it seems logical to me, we want a heavy iron section through the shaft:

for 12mm iron core, i would go with M10 therad on a 12mm Al or brass shaft IMO.
I woult take care the core irons hug the shaft neatly ;-)



(getting qute a few cents hugh? )

regards,
That makes sense to me. Thank you for the reply.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 07-08-2009, 01:05 AM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
Well, lots of commenting activity today, nice to see all the minds are stimulated. For what it's worth, I have worked in electronics one way or the other for about 30 years (much to my shock). Sometimes I feel compelled to make "back to basics" comments because it seems that some of you guys (and girls?) have jumped the gun, so to speak. I have not worked with motors since school, and that was only one course. I am not a builder, so that's out in the open. My aim here is to have fun and see if anybody goes the full distance with their convertor and hopefully contribute when I can. If you have read the forums, I am sure that you are all aware that many topics fizzle out and people loose interest, and no tangible results are ever recorded for various projects. It would be so cool to see some of you answer the big questions that you are trying to answer with your replications. I am also not sure what some of the builders goals are with their setups, but I suppose that will become clearer as things progress. All that being said...

Baroutologos: I will try to answer your question about your diagrams. The design of the convertor indicates completing a magnetic flux path to maximize the magnetic flux. When you go around the path you can model it like it is a bunch of resistors in series and the magnets are like voltage sources. Iron core acts like a low value resistor as long as it is not saturated, and air is like a high value resistor. Therefore it would indicate that completing the flux path would swap a high resistor (air) for a low resistor (iron), giving you more flux "current". I am not giving you a definitive answer, just the basic principles. For example, if your iron core is already saturated with the "air" resistor, do you gain much by swapping it with an "iron" resistor? I think the real answer can be found if you do more research for yourself.

NoNeed: Note the standard setup is one or more coils, all wired in series, with a load, also in series. So I think that you are incorrect when you mention calculating the coil resistance in parallel with the load resistance. With respect to resonance, honestly a lot of people "abuse" that term. I see no resonance at play in this setup and I can explain further if you want.

Pneuphysics: Re: The John Bedini wiring that you followed. If you can you should try swapping the wires on one coil to see if your output voltage is 10X larger like I said. It really does look like you are subtracting voltages there. I know that you responded to Kent stating that you got nothing when you crossed the JB wire config. I don't know, something seems strange because your waveforms are 10X higher in voltage than the JB waveforms.

Timm: I know you are still suspicious of my comments stating that CW vs CCW and how a coil is phisically wound are of no importance. I suggest that you try and experiment to prove it for youself. When your get your USB scope going, try CW vs. CCW, and you shoud see opposite waveforms. Then try CW swaped-wires vs. CCW and you should see the same waveforms. Try winding a coil different ways (same number of turns) and you should see the same waveforms.

Pneuphysics: Re: Your spreadsheet. I think the big thing that you want to conclude here is the higher number of turns, the higher the AC voltage output. You can clearly see the 1X, 2X, 3X etc, ratios. It is a fundamental principle. The AC voltage is proportional to the value of the inductance, and the value of the inductance is proportional to the number of turns. The motor amps times the voltage are giving you the approximate watts your setup is burning as heat when there is no useful output from the convertor. It is your wattage "overhead" just to keep the setup turning.

StevanC: I think that you are looking at how capacitors work in Bedini setups where you can clearly see the voltage increasing when connected in the place of the charging battery and mistakenly applying it to the convertor setup. This does not really translate and a cap will not be much use in determining the power output of the convertor. They are simpy two different beasts.

Kent: Yes you can play with the variables but any work there shoud be focused on the coils and the flux path. You must know that many Mylow replicators fell into a trap where they tried thousands of combinations and got nowhere. Trust me, there is no such thing as "optimal dimensions" of anything. This is an electrical generation device and it should fundamentally operate the same way independent of scale and dimensions, materials uesd for the support colums, etc. Please don't fall into the trap of searching for the "magic" combination, that would be a huge waste of energy and time and expense on your side. If you are curious about the shaft material, discussing it in the forum would be the way to go. How doed it impact on the magnetic flux path for your particular configuration? Those are the types of questions you should be asking. Blindly changing materials and dimensions of parts in search of a Holy Grail is not the way to go. Please don't be offended by my comments I am truly trying to help you.

Good luck all!
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 07-08-2009, 01:17 AM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
One final comment:

"In watching the video I wondered about the non-magnetic shaft. In the chalk-board diagram John shows the magnetic circuit taking in environmental energy in four places: the midpoint of the stacked magnets, and the top and bottom of the shaft."

I assume that this is one of the "big questions" that all of you are trying to answer. Is this device taking in "environmental energy?" What is "environmental energy?"

If some of you stick it out for long run, it will be interesting to see what your conclusions end up being.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 07-08-2009, 01:27 AM
Matthew Jones's Avatar
Matthew Jones Matthew Jones is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,741
I have been reading this post and correct me If I am wrong but you guys have the impedance and ohms of resistance wrong.

I am specifically speaking of this post http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post59412. Later a couple of others speak of it. Post#341

Mr Bedini did not say to raise or match the the resistance he said to eliminate it. Of course he does not make as clear as that, but it wasn't hard to hear what he was saying. (See EFV part 10, at 35minutes)

I do not talk tech well, so the simple example would be.... If 100 turns of a given wire AWG give you 4 ohms of resistance then you need 4 wires of the same legnth, for the least amount of resistance or "0" resistance.

You cannot grab negative energy on a wire with resistance present.

You have to understand what it is in all aspects to see. Positive energy flows, Negative has to be pushed or pulled. Positive heats up, negative cools. Positive is collected on the pole of the magnet, Negative is collected between the poles. ect....

If you have resistance, what happens is the negative is collected on the coil from the feild fluxuation after it passes the magnets, then when arriving at the magnets is pushed down the wire. Be cause of the setup in the magnets only very little positve energy is present. Remeber the magnetic flux is in a Cancelled state. This fluxuation is enough to move the negative down the wire.
But with resistance present it allows more time for the Positve charge to collect on the wire.
When both positve and negative are on the wire they cancel each other out. Reducing your overall net of energy.

Oh and you cannot refer to COMMON, EVERDAY, EE BOOKS, or so called EE EDUCATIONS for this info. If you do it will not work.

Matt
__________________
ADD BROMIKEY TO YOUR IGNORE LIST He is a saboteur bent on the systematic distraction of every good topic on this forum and since he has been here most working threads have shut down. He is the enemy. If you have blocked him already add this to your signature and encourage others to block him as well. His onslaught of rambling in large text and his constant attempts to misinform at the excuse of being stupid should no longer be tolerated.

USER CP/Ignore list.

Last edited by Matthew Jones; 07-08-2009 at 01:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 07-08-2009, 03:13 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Jones View Post
I have been reading this post and correct me If I am wrong but you guys have the impedance and ohms of resistance wrong.

I am specifically speaking of this post http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post59412. Later a couple of others speak of it. Post#341

Mr Bedini did not say to raise or match the the resistance he said to eliminate it. Of course he does not make as clear as that, but it wasn't hard to hear what he was saying. (See EFV part 10, at 35minutes)

I do not talk tech well, so the simple example would be.... If 100 turns of a given wire AWG give you 4 ohms of resistance then you need 4 wires of the same legnth, for the least amount of resistance or "0" resistance.

You cannot grab negative energy on a wire with resistance present.

You have to understand what it is in all aspects to see. Positive energy flows, Negative has to be pushed or pulled. Positive heats up, negative cools. Positive is collected on the pole of the magnet, Negative is collected between the poles. ect....

If you have resistance, what happens is the negative is collected on the coil from the feild fluxuation after it passes the magnets, then when arriving at the magnets is pushed down the wire. Be cause of the setup in the magnets only very little positve energy is present. Remeber the magnetic flux is in a Cancelled state. This fluxuation is enough to move the negative down the wire.
But with resistance present it allows more time for the Positve charge to collect on the wire.
When both positve and negative are on the wire they cancel each other out. Reducing your overall net of energy.

Oh and you cannot refer to COMMON, EVERDAY, EE BOOKS, or so called EE EDUCATIONS for this info. If you do it will not work.

Matt
Hi Matt,

I understand what you are saying but one thing I find confusing - in all of the videos i have viewed mostly Tom Bearden talks a lot on the subject of negative energy and the effect impedance has on increasing it - low impedance positive energy moves ahead and high impedance draws negative energy in from the vacuum. Not sure how it relates to Kromrey but I noticed when my 5 filar coils are all in parallel I get the most effect, like you say.

But remember Impedance "Z" is different then "R" resistance. Impedance is resistance to AC - a function of the circuits (coils in this case) DC resistance, Capacitance and Inductance - different at different frequencies. IMHO - That is what makes this effect so hard to nail down. Since the frequency is pretty low I am just using DC coil resistance which by the way in 4 4 ohm coils in parallel is 1 ohm not 0 but at some frequency it would be 0 impedance.

Hope this helps,
Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 07-08-2009, 03:28 AM
pneuphysics pneuphysics is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by MileHigh View Post
One final comment:

"In watching the video I wondered about the non-magnetic shaft. In the chalk-board diagram John shows the magnetic circuit taking in environmental energy in four places: the midpoint of the stacked magnets, and the top and bottom of the shaft."

I assume that this is one of the "big questions" that all of you are trying to answer. Is this device taking in "environmental energy?" What is "environmental energy?"

If some of you stick it out for long run, it will be interesting to see what your conclusions end up being.
My 2 cents The "environmental energy" is from the annihilation of electrons and their antimatter positrons in sufficient numbers to manifest a measurable event. The simple explanation.

Or maybe just magic

Night
Pneuphysics
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 07-08-2009, 03:35 AM
xpskid xpskid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by MileHigh View Post
One final comment:

If some of you stick it out for long run, it will be interesting to see what your conclusions end up being.

MileHigh,

Thanks for your comments !!
Every forum like this needs someone grounded, challenging every statement, and providing a explaination grounded in traditional theory. Of course, everyone want to find a breakthrough, and sometimes they jump to conclusions based on a couple data points.
I appreciate your respectful comments to differing, non-traditional opinions !

It would be nice to see the builder/blogger ratio increase, but it is what it is.

Timm
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 07-08-2009, 04:58 AM
dllabarre's Avatar
dllabarre dllabarre is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 186
Still building...

I'm still designing, testing and building a G-Field Converter.
My slip rings should be complete by end of this week.

Also documenting everything I can at:
Bedini Kromrey G-Force Converter

This website is a "work in progress" so don't take it for anything more than a place for me to gather my ideas nor comment on the incompleteness or ugliness of it.

These designs have not been tested, as I don't have a working model yet.
I will modify this website as I determine what works and what doesn't work from trial and error from my testing and the testing results of others on this forum.

Thank you to everyone who's keeping this project on track!

DonL
__________________
 

Last edited by dllabarre; 07-08-2009 at 05:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 07-08-2009, 05:32 AM
NoNeed's Avatar
NoNeed NoNeed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5
Send a message via Skype™ to NoNeed
We Need to think differently

Mile High: Note the standard setup is one or more coils, all wired in series, with a load, also in series. So I think that you are incorrect when you mention calculating the coil resistance in parallel with the load resistance.

Of course the load resistor is in series if you are thinking in conventional terms but this generator and it's outputs are far from conventional, if you told me before I saw the DVD that a Generator exists that will accelerate when loaded or even shorted I would have said that is impossible

I have seen first hand what a 400hz aircraft AC Gen does when it's output leads short together or are sent to ground, they arc weld and the generator overheats from the massive load put on it's conventional geometry

We Need to think differently

The reason I thought about considering the load resistor was in parallel was because of this statement that I found,

Perhaps "true negative resistors" operate differently when they are in this state of tapping energy from the vacuum

"The source dipole, once made, is a true negative resistor that freely extracts observable, usable field energy from the vacuum, and pours it out through the terminals of the generator or battery. The outflowing energy moves at light speed through all space surrounding the conductors of the external circuit, and generally parallel to them. It's a tiny bit convergent into the wires, because in the "sheath" or boundary layer of the flow right down on the surface of the conductors, that part of the flow strikes the surface charges and gets diverged into the wires to power up the electrons and the circuit."



Timm: You had asked sometime ago about different methods of winding.

I'd be interested in anyone's experience with coil fabrication with respect to windings. Different ways to wind the coil... Which ways reduce the inductance/impedance ? Are there ways to provide a capacitance effect via the wind configuration ?

We've had multi-filar and twisted multi-filar... Does anyone have data to suggest what twisting does to the reisistance/inductance/ impedance ?
Are there other tricks ?

Here are some good Ground Rules for winding coils

with regards to the Impedance of a coil, the rule of thumb is:

- the more "packed" or concentrated in a smaller volume around the iron core, the higher the inductance and, hence, the impedance; this is why
I always wind my coils by hand on a lathe at very slow speed to make sure the coils are as tightly packed together as possible
- the more a coil resembles a long solenoid (small diameter and high axial length), the higher the inductance;
- the tighter the windings are wrapped around the iron core, the higher the inductance for a given number of turns.
Note that impedance is directly related to inductance, since the impedance is proportional to the product of coil inductance and frequency of the ac voltage across the coil.

As for the multifilar and twisted windings: for higher frequency signals, a multifilar winding is desirable if a higher quality factor (a.k.a. Q)is sought, due to the "depth of field penetration" effect of high frequency signals (the higher the frequency, the lower the depth of penetration), which causes the current to flow only through the skin of the wire (as opposed to the whole cross sectional area).

The low penetration depth effectively increases the wire resistance, and so multifilar wires are employed to obtain a certain inductance with low resistance (to obtain a high Q coil).
Twisting the multifilar wires has the effect of reducing the mutual capacitance of adjacent turns, in order to obtain coils with lower equivalent capacitance. This is desirable when coil capacitance plays a significant role in the system that employs it, since the coil capacitance tends to "short" the high frequency signal across the coil terminals, effectively attenuating or filtering such signals in an unwanted way.
Also, winding the coil with criss-cross turns in adjacent layers (reducing the parallelism between turns) reduces the coil capacitance.





NoNeed
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 07-08-2009, 07:24 AM
baroutologos baroutologos is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 586
@ Milehigh

Thanks for giving us info and guidance since most of us lack practical as theoretical knowledge of "traditional" (and proven) insights in the electric engeeing art.
But, bear in mind we are not the conventional type of generator we seek. Those types will behave far from standard types one. Shorted run cool and withoutout any drag. On the contrary assist rotation!

@
Noneed

Yes dude i have (observations and theory yet) reached same conclusions.

* Coils should be elongated or to put it in another way, the wire/iron ratio should be great than our standard coils. Thus we achieve the greater possible inductunce with lower wire resistance. (laminations are of essence here)
* Thicker wires equal less resistance and better performance.
* Finnaly best way to counter inductunce and increase output at specific conditions (high frequency etc) is to wound coils ala Tesla type. Bifilar series wound or Capacitor coil. (tested by other credible persons - not me yet)
............................................
By the way there is always the issue -after setting up this type of generator- to how efficiently experience the best COP.
............................................
Lastly IMO wiring of coils regarding CW or CCW is of no importance (only for triggering at SSG). Just do it Bedini way and do not be concerned any more with that.

regards,
Baroutologos
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers