Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[Shamus]

All very pertinent info and well worth pondering. And I think John is quite correct about there being a "bell curve" (or "window" if you will) in which the device will operate and display the phenomena described in the EFTV #10.

And I have to remind myself that every failure teaches something--as long as I'm willing to listen. Yes, I consider the mk I to be a failure because of several design problems. So, after carefully considering the design flaws of the mk I, I'm building the mk II (sorry, still no pictures as I can't find the charger to my digital camera ).

It's similar to the mk I except I built the rotor in a cage just in case magnets decide to go flying. Also I used only 50 ft of #22 on each coil (instead of 100 ft), trifilar wound, non-twisted, and made sure of the polarity of each coil by putting the cores next to each other and energizing them to see if they attracted or repelled. The ohms of the coils this time are around 1.2 total, much better than I had hoped. I can't wait to do some testing with this setup.

[dllabarre]

no mention of laminations in the coils in the video

Point #1: It is claimed that laminations are used in the pole pieces (stator), and in the armature pieces. The patent does stipulate which direction the laminations are to be stacked. The exact wording (starting in Column 2, line 24) is this: "The armatures... may consist in essence of highly permeable foils whose principle dimension is perpendicular to the rotor axis." I assume the "principle dimension" to be the length.

Did JB use laminated coils on the Kromrey Converter he demostrated in the video?
If not, would laminated coils raise the COP?

Thank you,
DonL

[xpskid]

Xpskid: You made a few basic measurements with configuration #4 and you are implying that you want to move onto a new configuration. Am I correct in assuming that you have a full setup with an electric motor powering your magnet-coil configuration and it is a reasonably faithful replication of a Kromrey Convertor? If yes, why change configurations? Can you come up with a plan for making measurements on the setup? What are the characteristics shown in the DVD that you are trying to observe beyond the "cold air" effect? Did you get any cold air?

[kent_elyue]

Did JB use laminated coils on the Kromrey Converter he demostrated in the video?
If not, would laminated coils raise the COP?

Thank you,
DonL

I had checked the screenshots on the dvd to see if I could verify one way or the other, but it did not "look" like laminations on either the poles or the coils. However, both the patent and John Bedini state that laminations would reduce the eddy currents. (See Lambda's post #228)

[kent_elyue]

I built the rotor in a cage just in case magnets decide to go flying.

A non-magnetic cage?
I know, stupid question...

[baroutologos]

@ Timm

What else could be done?

Assuming magnet strength / geometry, magnetic flux manipulation, coil cores and coil possitioning is as supposed (told). The ONLY variables left to you to manipulate is:

* coil's windings
* armature speed

There has not to be any "voodoo magic" involved. As with just any generator these are the variables.
By the way, I have witnessed the anti Lenz' effect in a setup of mine.
Regards,
Baroutologos

[dllabarre]

@ Timm
By the way, I have witnessed the anti Lenz' effect in a setup of mine.
Regards,
Baroutologos

How are your coils wound:

• AWG?
  number of turns?
  single, bi-filar, tri-filar?
  If bi or tri, how many wires did you run from 1 coil to the next?

I don't mean to be a PITA but the more details we present here the easier it will be for others to resolve their issues.

Thank you,
DonL

PITA=Pain In The A??


PS: the rest of my parts should be in by Wednesday!!

[MileHigh]

[MileHigh]

> Windings: I've tested #23, #18 and a couple different winding configurations.

Here is the basic number crunching on the windings: A single very thick winding or a bifilar or trifilar winding setup that has the same cross-sectional area as the single very thick winding will behave the same way if the number of turns is the same. Bedini is making a point to try to keep the coil resistance as low as possible to reduce the i-squared x resistance losses to a minimum.

The "sweet spot" resistor is also known as the impedance matching resistor. The resistor can be tuned to match the output impedance of the coils when they are functioning in the running convertor. This is not to be confused with the resistance measurement for the coils. When the load resistor is an impedance match for the coil setup, then you will get the maximum possible power transfer into the load at a given RPM. This will also generate a maximum Lenz drag effect on the driving electric motor. Depening on the power of your setup, the impedance matching resistor might have to be able to dissipate tens of watts.

The higher the number of turns in your coils for a given RPM, the higher the open-circuit output voltage you will get from the convertor. As you know, the higher the output voltage, the lower the output current. Coils with a higher number of turns have a higher output impedance, and therefore the impedance matching load resistor has to be a higher value to make the match for the maximum power transfer into the load.

Ultimately, it does not matter how many turns your coils are wound to, as long as the coil dimensions are about the same, the maximum power output from the convertor will be the same. You just have to change the load resistor to find the match for a given coil setup.

If anybody is looking for a relatively economical way to measure the power into the load resistor, you probably have seen sound card adapters and software that you can use to capture waveforms. Gotoluc has a setup like that, and I have to assume that the software can do RMS power calculations on captured waveforms. The output wavefom from the convertor is only slightly sinusoidal, so you really do need a true RMS power calculation.

Everything above is applicable to a conventional generator. My gut feeling is that the Kromrey convertor will produce power in pretty much the same way as a conventional generator, except the convertor's output waveform will be quite different from a standard sine wave. The convertor looks to me like it has a very strong cogging point when the coils line up with the stator magnets. I really don't think that strong cogging point is gong to help when it comes to it's ability to produce output power. The cogging is an unwanted "disturbance torque" as far as the motor is concerned. The only way to make that go away would be to have a huge flywheel attached to the shaft, and that's not part of the design.

I could be wrong but I think the most important point is not to assume it's conventional, and also to not assume it's not conventional. You have to build it and then play with it and investigate to find out for yourselves.

[linesrg]

Flywheel

Don't forget Bedini did show a flywheel in the DVD and mentioned it would help the cogging effect.

A colleague has also suggsted using some kind of pulsing motor drive (PWM) to drive this device.

Regards

Richard

[baroutologos]

I don't mean to be a PITA ...

@ DONL

PITA? LOL! Man we are to share views and info. The more specific and technical we get the more closer to any solution we are.

In order to witness the accelaration effect (at worst the non slow-down effect when coil is shorted) my setup is composed:

A rotor 12'' diam composed of 6 neomagnets 1'' diam all north face out.
RPM must be 1200+
Coil single wire, 29AWG at 75 ohms! When shorted accelaration DOES occur.
Nothing else on the others oddities mentioned.

I hope this helps,

.................................................. .
@MileHigh

Ultimately, it does not matter how many turns your coils are wound to, as long as the coil dimensions are about the same, the maximum power output from the convertor will be the same. You just have to change the load resistor to find the match for a given coil setup.

Very true. In a given setup (magnet strength, topology, coil's core material and shape, rotor rpm) any given coil has a specific amount of output no matter how the windings are.
But, in order to extract the maximum energy out of it, it is desired the least ohmic resistance possible.
Anyway, the accelaration effect requires great coil impedance and NOT low coil impedance. The accelaration effect also does stack as you connect many coils in series in same phase. That's my (note that) experience.


Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: do it yourself

[Paul Harmans]

[pneuphysics]

My Kromrey experience so far

Hello all,

I joined this group coming from the Monople_1 group where I have spent several years working on variants of the monopole units. I have built units ranging from a single pole hard drive platter units to a 25lb. stainless steel rotor unit with 3 large quadfilar coils - spins about 500rpm scary

I have spent the last few months working on a Kromrey converter and here is what my experience has been. First of all i want you to know as a newby i read all the previous posts before sharing.

I have built a 2 coil (quadfilar from previous unit) stationary unit and had my first decent test last night. Here are my results:

After test run of 3 minutes:
Magnet temp. = 83.4 deg. F
Pole pieces temp. = 94.5 deg. F
Air expelled was not measured due to the need for an accurate system.
Battery was a gel cell 7ah - its temp dropped 1.2 deg. F in 3 minutes.
Battery rose .17vdc in 3 minutes.
24vdc motor drive was 1.11 amps while the kromrey output was open
24vdc motor drive was .86 amps while the kromrey output was shorted
Approx a 22.5% reduction in draw.
The system ran noticable faster when it was shorted, no doubt. I am building an rpm gauge to read the exact difference.

This unit is not pretty but i think it may help someone on here when i get my details posted. I am noticing some neat anomolies with respect to speed and geometry. The output wave was the key that got me to where I am.

Got to get back to work

[xpskid]

Hello all,

This unit is not pretty but i think it may help someone on here when i get my details posted. I am noticing some neat anomolies with respect to speed and geometry. The output wave was the key that got me to where I am.

Got to get back to work

Pneuphysics,

That is great !! Thanks for joining us on Steve Forum

I know several people here have iron's in many different fires trying to draw together a collective of thoughts... some sources want to remain anonymous, but we're trying to get the details out without breaking any trust.

Please share your details when possible...

There is a general concensus building that the mechanical part isn't too difficult, but the windings and impedance values have been a challange. It's good to see someone try a quadfilar to examine even lower inductance. Anything special about your wind, direction, or coil sequence ?

Looking forward to seeing your build.

Thanks !!

Timm

[Lambda]

I have re-wound my coils and they are now in the configuration that John Bedini recommends on the DVD. I am not noticing any of the effects that John shows in the DVD, and I believe I know why (I need to tri-filar my coils for one). I would really appreciate any other thoughts on this, because I am stuck and believe this is the key.

On EFTV 10 DVD around 34:30 into it, John draws out the circuit, with the coils in a tri-filar configuration, all in series. He said, "We found out it was an impedance problem. You cut the impedance by 3." He mentions that the impedance of the coils would be 3 ohms, and then when tri-filar wound it should drop to .4 ohms. He mentions impedance, not resistance! Well, impedance has many variables as most of you know, and to calculate the impedance in this particular case, you would first measure the inductance of the coil, and use the standard formula to get your inductive reactance (impedance).

X(L) = 2*pi*f*L, X(L) being inductive reactance as I cannot do subscripts on here.

Now, plug in the inductance you measured and then the other variable would be your frequency, which is based upon the RPM and the number of poles. If it is a 4 pole, I imagine there would be 4 pulses per revolution, so multiply the RPM by 4. Now I can see why John states it is a bell curve, and is speed dependant, as the impedance is frequency dependant.

I certainly appreciate any and all feedback as we are all in the same boat trying to figure this out and understand the technology. This is all sounding very familiar with the SSG having a purely reactive output, as it seems we are seeking the same thing in this case as well.

Regards,

Mike H.