Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[NoNeed]

YouTube - Nikola Tesla - The Forgotten Wizard

This is a great little link, everyone needs a break once in a while,
I'll provide the entertainment and I'll buy the first round.

[StevanC]

Here is a decent link that shows you the formula for the inductance of a coil:

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/indcur.html

L = (mu x N-squared x A)/l

Where:

mu = magnetic permeability
N = number of turns
A = cross-sectional area of the coil
l = the length of the coil

(snip)

MileHigh

What is A of?

1. cross section of the core of the coil?

Or

2. cross section of the windings of the coil?

I would like to know


The capacitance , however small, prevents us see "pure" magnets field collapse, as it 'biases' it with capacitance

I think the term is "tainted"?

best regards,
Stevan C.

[MileHigh]

Did anyone else notice that Google is doing a tribute to Tesla for their graphic logo today?

Baroutologos: You are incorrect about about longer giving you more inductance. For your example, the longer coil has (0.309/0.126) = 2.45 times as many turns as the short coil. 2.45-squared = 6.00 times the inductance (approximately) for the long coil compared to the short coil if you do not factor in length. That's almost the same as the spec that states the longer coil is 5.6 times the inductance. That is in direct agreement with the fact that the inductance of a coil is proportional to the square of the number of turns. In addition, it makes perfect sense that it is only 5.6 times the inductance instead of 6 times the inductance. That's because the larger inductance coil is physically longer in length than the smaller inductance coil, and the formula specifically states that the longer your coil for a given number of turns, the smaller the inductance. It all works out.

To put it another way, a coil with 100 turns of wire that's 5 cm long will have more inductance than a coil of 100 turns of wire that's 10 cm long.

Capacitance can sometimes offset inductance, but you can not generalize. It has to be examined on a case by case basis.

StevanC: The "A" is the cross-section of the core of the coil.

> The capacitance , however small, prevents us see "pure" magnets field collapse, as it 'biases' it with capacitance

No, for all practical intents and purposes the capacitance of a coil can be ignored in almost all cases. It has no real affect on the magnetic field collapse. Where designers worry about this stuff is when they are doing things like designing microwave waveguides and amplifier circuits for communicating with satelites at very high microwave frequencies > 30 Gigahertz.

[xpskid]

Did anyone else notice that Google is doing a tribute to Tesla for their graphic logo today?

MileHigh,

Nice catch on the Google logo !!

Timm

[MileHigh]

I am going to try and play a bit of catch-up but I doubt that I can cover all of the bases.

Pneuphysics:

> You have my drawing posted earlier - draw or explain to me what you would like to test and I will be happy to reverse coil wires and let you know what I see.

I will try to make a general response. Suppose you have coils "A" and "B" and you have "Left" and "Right" terminals for each coil. "LA", "RA", etc. Imagine "wwww" is the coil itself.

Suppose you do your first test measuring the AC voltage across both coils is like this:

Scope_Probe_Gnd---LA-wwww-RA----LB-wwww-RB---Scope_Probe_Center

Suppose the voltage seems very low as compared to a "normal" measurement.

Then you should wire it like this and see what you measure:

Scope_Probe_Gnd---LA-wwww-RA----RB-wwww-LB---Scope_Probe_Center

That's a fancy way of saying "swap the wires on one of the coils."

It all goes back to your two scope traces where the one with the "John Bedini" wiring was 1/10 the voltage of the left scope trace. I was guessing that your two coils in series were subtracting voltages (180 degrees out of phase) and not adding voltages (in phase).

Baroutologos:

> What do you mean by the inner coil diameter must be larger from the flux path?

Any changing magnetic flux that goes through the inside of the coil cross-sectional area will be "seen" by the coil and you can pick up electrical energy from it.

Any changing magnetic flux that passes outside of the cross-sectional area of the coil will not be "seen" by the coil and you cannot pick up electrical energy from it.

If your iron and magnet setup to make your flux loop looks like a pipe four inches in diameter as part of your converter build, then the iron core of the pick-up coils should also be at least four inches in diamater. If the the iron cores of your pick-up coils are only one inch in diameter, you will not "catch" all of the available energy.

StevanC:

You describe magnetizing a piece of steel but I can't quite follow your explanation. All that I can say is once the piece of steel is magnetized it does in a sense represent some "stored energy", but it is not energy that you can later "extract" from the piece of magnetized steel. What you have done is line up some of the randomly arranged magnetic domains in the piece of steel by "yanking" them in the same direction.

I hope that helps!

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Finally, I did some sniffing around that link that I found for the coil inductance calculation and there is some really good stuff there.

The following two links relate directly back to my bunch of statements about coils. It would be helpful if the builders understood the "time domain response" for coils and caps:

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/indtra.html#c1
hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capchg.html#c1

Please look at the graphs of the exponential curves, it's very important. The "little e" you see in the equations is the "base of the natural logarithm." It's value is 2.7182818. Many of you must be familiar with exponentials and logarthims to "base 10." i.e.; "Ten squared is 100, the logarithm of 100 is two." Well, you can also calculate exponentials and logarthims to "base e." The reason for "base e" is that is how the real world operates. i.e.; Nature, how the natural physical world we live in and experience really operates, hence they call it a "natural logarithm base."

If all that stuff makes no sense to you, just look at the curves, and/or do some google searching.

And wow! Look at the top-level graphic images here discussing caps and coils. It shows how all the concepts are related together. Just click on a concept and it is explained for you. They even show you my capacitor-air tank example.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capcon.html#c1
hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/indcon.html#c1

If there are real keeners out there, this stuff is a great reference for understanding capacitors and inductors.

Anyway, if anybody is still awake (lol) bring on the Kromrey convertor discussions! Where are you guys going? What are the next steps?

[baroutologos]

@Milehigh,

You have a point there but somehow i am in doubt. Anyway, bear in mind that the "turns" is an quantity that does not described wire lenth and consequently resistance. Plus every consecutive turn as distances from the core, its inductunce capability dramatically decreases. Also, every consecutive turn requires longer wire to be done.

By the way. Series connecting inductors (same) results in squared inductance?

Bottom line u advocate that, if you have a set amount of wire its better to make short/thick coils for maximum inductunce rather than longer/thin??

Coil capacitance
..........................

If you study Tesla's biffilar coil patent, he states that for a set of 2 x 1000 turns coils, one wound biffilar and the other single wired, at 100 volts, the biffilar has an 250.000 more capacitance than the single wired. Not to mention at 300 or 500 volt. Easily the megaherz range downs to hundreds range for dense wound coils. That was the plan anyway. to achieve reasonance or somewhere there, in the hundreds hertz range, without a cap.

Post Updated: Thane Heins Perepiteia Replications
scroll down at Minde4000 post (his first post on page) and read his comments about his biffilar coil!

Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: Sorry, i don not wish to advertise mr Hein's work and throw you off topic, but simply to illustrate a fellow's experimenter findinings on biffilar coil setup.

[StevanC]

(snip)

StevanC:

You describe magnetizing a piece of steel but I can't quite follow your explanation. All that I can say is once the piece of steel is magnetized it does in a sense represent some "stored energy", but it is not energy that you can later "extract" from the piece of magnetized steel. What you have done is line up some of the randomly arranged magnetic domains in the piece of steel by "yanking" them in the same direction.

I hope that helps!

MileHigh

Do please quote me, and i will try to explain?


best regards,
Stevan C.

[MileHigh]

Baroutologos: The formula for the coil inductance calculation is the real thing. Did you look around those links? They are very informative.

Putting two inductors in series will not square your inductance. If they are far apart, then they should add together. If the are closer, then they will exhibint a limited amount of mutual inductance that may increase or decrease the combined inductance. I am just giving you a rough idea, you would have to research that more yourself to get a full understanding.

Yes shorter coils for the same wire and number of turns would be better. You could do a nice experiment and build an LC oscillator and by listening to the frequency change as you change the coil geometry you could confirm that for yourself. (If you don't have a scope, just use your ear!)

StevanC: It's just a few postings back.

MileHigh

[Shamus]

Just a quick note on the state of the mkII design. In the latest adventure I was spinning it up, noticing very good charging on the battery for about 3 seconds and then the voltage started falling back to where it started and didn't budge. When I stopped it, I noticed that one of the magnet pair rotors had come loose and could turn freely. Interestingly enough, though, there was still some HV coming from my FWBR even though only one magnet pair was actually turning.

Ah well, back to the drawing board. I'm hoping to get some free time soon to devote to fixing this. It's like it's ready to take off and then some stupid mechanical problem that I failed to anticipate rises up to bite me. But that's OK, every failure teaches something.

[StevanC]

MileHigh,

is it that one?


Shamus
me too

[dllabarre]

building

Are all the other G-Field Converter builders:

have working versions?

still building/rebuilding?

trying to decide what to try next?

given up and moved on to something else?

I'm waiting on 1 more part to finish putting my version of the G-Field Converter together.

I still need to find a Tachometer or at least a circuit to make a Tachometer to connect to my converter for testing. If you know of a place to buy one that can be connected to a G-Field Converter or a circuit to make one please pass it on.

DonL
Bedini Kromrey G-Force Converter

[dambit]

Hi Don,

I've put it aside for a little bit while I'm working on a work project and home renovations.

I'm in a situation where I know it can work as I had mild success at first, but have no idea how to get back to that point (without the aluminium covers)and then beyond.

Hopefully yourself and others here will have more luck.

Cheers,

Steve

[baroutologos]

@Gambit,

do not give up dude.. Your work is awesome! Not just there yet.
i strongly suggest when you find the time and courage to go with higher impedance coil, biffilars, series connected.

Specs could be 27 awg @ 20-40 ohms per coil. Just try it. I cannot say anything else.

@MileHigh,
yes i saw those links as well. Thanks for refreshing my understanding.
the question remains though. For a given core size, say diam 20mm, what is the layers thickness according your experience that beyond that there is a considerable diminishing effect (of inductunce) with each layer addition due to distance from the feromegnetic core. ???


Regards,
Baroutologos

[Mark]

Hey Guys

I spoke with Rick F. a couple of days ago and asked him if John would be giving out any more details on the Kromrey Converter. He told me they weren't really working on that right now and said that it was very difficult to get to work. From what I gathered with our short talk it sounded like John actually had someone else that actually tuned the units and the geometry was very important. Even the shaft size played a big role.