Originally posted by rosehillworks
View Post
When Mr. Naudin did that experiment he overlooked the increasing voltage drop across his arc as he increased the fixed distance. Without this data consideration all of the published numbers are meaningless and most likley in error.
I was hoping that this experiment could be redone since he had all the apparatus hardware already built, but it never happened. (That I know of)
If this circuit was indeed OU, as the presentation suggested, then it would have been commercialized by 2006.
I really don't know what the real story was behind that whole well done presentation. There was no folow up that I ever ran across, but then again I don't get out often.
Never the less carbon arcs are still important, yet they don't appear directly in the Gray technology. So far the Bedini Field Notes report that the electrode material was silver. The carbon was assumed to function as a high current low value resistor. In the patent documents it is shown as a variable resistor. Why it is located inside the CEST enclosure is still a mystery.
I think the carbon resistor was intended to balance the load impedance (less than 10 Ohms) of his arc with the impedance of his Pulse Forming Network (PFN) that was hidden in his storage capacitor. In my SPICE IV simulations if the load impedance varies by 10% the energy delivered from the PFN can degrade 30%. It also really messes up the fall time badly. In my opinion, and what John Bedini has already shown, it is the fall time across the high voltage electrode in the CSET that is important. I'm still not sure just how long the current pulse needs to be before the arc resistance stabalized, but it seems to be more than 3 uS. Next I need to find out just how much current and how fast the fall time needs to be.
Mark Mckay
Leave a comment: