Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[JANGYD]

No secret?

Hi All,

I remember, "NO SECRET, if knowing how this machine works,
anybody can make it" from JB's words on DVD10.
Even though I DIDN"T make it work correctly for now, I am sure it's true.

I did test lots of variables on this machine with 3-frames for last three months.
Belows are my summaries from my experiment for the Kromrey Converter,
JB's DVD10 interviews including other interviews on different sources,
and other datas/reports opened on internet.
Everything is, of course, from John Bedini's introduction.

1)NO SECRET, Nothing Specific behind our scenes.
2)Anybody can make it, If knowing HOW IT WORKS,
3)Everything is the IMPEDANCE problem.
4)Not a normal gererator, rather than FLUX GATE Generator
5)NON-MAGNETIC SHAFT.
6)Blochwall on the Shaft(Non-Mangetic Shaft)
7)Not Solid State(Electric Circuit)
8)Radiant Reactive Power Output

I would like to condense these eight to one for starting like this;
'Non-Magnetic Shaft on which Blochwall should be there.'
I think we have to ask ourself 'Why, Why and Why it shoud be, otherwise?'
This question for my sure can led us somewhere.
I hope I can open my experiment reports claiming success someday.

Yes, I finally undertood why JB couldn't open his machine's dimensions,
that's the problems of "Matching and Balancing".
There may need so many hard work, hours, perseverance and endurance
for succeeding in solving this "Matching and Balancing" problem, I am sure.
Thanks,

Regards,

JANG YOUNGDEUK

[linesrg]

DMR's Kromrey

Good Evening,

The device that DMR is working on is the one I have referred to previously which I am funding.

The device can be made to the standard 'G' field device 'tricks' but so far it has only shown 50% front to back efficiency.

Whilst I would hesitate to state this is a no expense spared replication every effort has been made to accurately replicate what we know.

Has anybody studied EFTV Pt.10 closely and observed precisely how many wires are connected to each commutator/ slip ring? JB quite clearly indicates that this is a single wire machine but that you could wire it as a trifilar.

Why, therefore, are there two wires very clearly connected to each commutator? At the very least this is a two strand coil device. This could be an oversight on JB's behalf, but equally if a deliberate piece of disinformation verbally or allowing the astute to notice visual clues.

Regards

Richard

[Matthew Jones]

Whats the ticker time in the video when you notice the wires?

I would have to lean towards him putting you in study mode....

Matt

[linesrg]

Two wires

Matt,

Try 13:29'ish.

Regards

Richard

[Matthew Jones]

Yep 2 wires. At time 13.51 is the best shot. 18 awg wire if I were going to guess. It looks about right.

One of 2 things I have been looking at, as far as the impedance issue goes is the windings. Alot of attention has been paid to this already but I have one question that looms from reading through the whole post.
And I am sure the first question has been tested some, but if he changed the coils they should wound in a way that is other than the Kromrey patent.
HE started in on "The problem with the patten...." Then the goofy dude on the camera interrupted.
The patent Shows the coils wound in the same direction as the magnetic flux on each pole (In one state opposite in the other). So one set coils runs south to north across both sides and the other runs the same but of course in opposite direction.

Lets take look at the way he draws the coils on the blackboard (And this is in line with how he draws in HIS patents). If he changed the arrangement of the coils. According to the drawing....
Starting at top left (Coil 1) is wound in one direction North point toward the magnet. Top right (Coil 2) is pointed North towards the magnet. Both are pointed out.
But 3 and 4 are both South towards the magnet. Both 1 and 3 are connected to the brushes.

So heres some confirmation of what is gained from this wiring.

If you take a bilfiliar coil, connect the 2 end of the windings to each other, then pass a charge through, you will get no magnetic field, No gain in voltage, or amperage. You get 0.
You can make this same thing happen in 4 separate coils but the magnetic field will show up. Or pass through in this case without the flux inducing a charge.
Then its just a matter of reducing your resistance in the coils as close to 0 as you can get to reduce impedance in the energy coming out upon release.
I hope someone follows this.
You see the same thing in GFLUX generator.

The other thing I am taking a look at is the small holes in his iron ends, Why?? Maybe they came from salvage, or maybe this is some form of Magnetic Impedance matching.

I stated above, the core of the coil has a only a very small amount removed for the shaft to go through. The shaft is about the same size as the hole in the iron ends.

If you were to magnetically match the iron you would need the core to carry 2 times the amount of flux that one end would have to carry.
I think this could be tested with a gauss meter and a stable field.

He also has a hole in the iron core. It is directly in line with the holes in the Iron. You can see this at frame 16.27, very clearly. Again Why??

Some further evidence that it matters is in the Kromrey patent. His cores are of like size and shape as the magnetic poles flux path. He specifically mentions that at the point where there is an air gap when the core lines up with the flux path, the 2 together have a complete 90 deg of coverage. They are the same size and shape.

Everybody is duplicating Bedini's setup that he has on display. But these details seem to be overlooked. I am not sure if they matter or not but if the biggest question is impedance, we have to look at both magnetic and electrical.

E fields and M fields are the same thing according to Bearden, and Russian physics.

Just some things I am gathering for my build.

Matt

[dambit]

Hi Matt,

The small holes in the core ends are probably the result of being turned on a lathe. The lathe needs a good grip on the metal. My cores have the same holes also.

Interesting what you say about the windings. If possible a quick sketch would be great. As far as the impedance goes, I have noticed that with only one winding it is quite difficult to get a very low reading. Bifilar windings are probably the only way to get a reading low enough to get the process happening. Adding more windings would simply be an improvement.

Cheers,

Steve

[Matthew Jones]

Hi Dambit, No problem...



If you test this on a generator of convetional nature you'll see the effect. At point M (Yellow) no net gain in current or voltage. Both coils would cancel each other. At point A Same thing. At point Z Same thing. And again at the point at between An and Zs no gain. A Big Zero. You can test combination of one next to the other and you will not get gain from the passing magnetic feild.
I am not promising, I still need to test myself. This is just based on past experience.

Your probably right about the holes it the rotor core, whats your take on the ones at the end of each array. Hmmmm Don't discount magnetic impedance.( Magnetic impedance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) I can't say it is important but I would like to be able to say its not for sure...
Two little scenario's. The flux travels one way through the core. From north to south. On its way it hits a smaller media for travel. What happens to the flux at that point.
Water running down a pipe hits a narrow point Pressure go up, volume goes down. One side of the pipe has alot of water traveling slow the other is not as much traveling fast.
Granted the amount of time it takes flux to travel and the speed at which the generator travels a choke point may not fully saturate the iron on one side or the other.
This imbalance will cause a positive charge on your wire. A charge between 2 potentials. One higher one lower. Maybe, we'll see soon.

I plan on trying to test some of this the best I can and see what the result is with conventional power.

Matt

[Matthew Jones]

I wanted to ask one more time....

Has anybody attempted to charge the battery from either pole of the rectifier? If not can someone try.

Bedini does at time 32:00 - 33:00 and goes on to say "It doesn't care what you do with it..."

This is important because I haven't read anybody who said they had...

Another thing what color is the discharge when you throw a spark?

This is important as well...

Matt

[boguslaw]

It's a pity I cannot see video. Anyway, isn't impedance of parallel resonant circuit infinite at resonance ? I heard something about that and I think at resonance such LC circuit is like open one and no flow of power from source is needed. I don't know is this is related but that's I thought when I saw the list of important issues for Kromley generator.

[dmonarch]

Coil Temperature

Hi. A smal question for someone who has replicated the kromley converter either succesfully or unsuccesfully. Do the coils get warmer when the output is shorted in comparison to when the output is placed across a battery to charges.
Cheers
Damian

[JANGYD]

Very low COP

Hi All,

I am testing some of variables on the Kromrey Converter with new frame.
It's cop hits only 0.25 but I am not disappointed with it.
My test report is belows;

1)Off Load; Input_6.8A/24V, 2480rpm
2)DC short; input_3.3A/24V, 3208rpm
3)65W/12V lamp;input5.0A/24V, 2871rpm
4)COP test with 65W/12V car light bulb : 0.25

I cleared some problems with above experiment. go ahead!
This week I hope to clear a key problem harassing me for a long time.
Anyway I will report that if there is a good result. thanks.
Good Luck.

Regards,

JANG

[chasson321]

COP and Battery Conditioning

last edit.....

[linesrg]

As JB is posting on the Tesla Switch

John,
If you're about this forum currently perhaps you could spare some time to high advise on this thread?

Regards

Richard

[baroutologos]

Can someone explaim one thing to me?

The way Bedini draws the schematics of the coils arrangement is peculiar. The one pair of coils are wound oppositively in respect to flux lines orientations in comparison to the other set of coils.

e.g. lets assume the flux lines travel from north to south, the first pair of coils (in that orientation) is wound counter-clockwise whereas the second pair of coils (again north to south orientation flux lines) are wound clock wise.


Does the polarity of voltage produced from a coil is depended on the ways is it wound? (clock or counter-clock wise)
Has anyone any experience on that simple issue?

Baroutologos

[Matthew Jones]

e.g. lets assume the flux lines travel from north to south, the first pair of coils (in that orientation) is wound counter-clockwise whereas the second pair of coils (again north to south orientation flux lines) are wound clock wise.

I have been testing coil configurations. All the coils need to be wound clockwise from the center out (or Counterclockwise). This means the North side of the coil is hitting the magnet face.
This is the only way to produce a true zero.

For instance if you take a south facing coil and swipe a south magnet across it you will get positive charge on the meter.
But if you swipe a South magnet across a north facing coil you get a negative charge on the scope.

So if you want zero across all four poles they all have to be all wound in the same direction.
And of course that will only work if what you are looking for is a true 0. I am not sure yet that the machine should be run that way. But that is what Bedini said. The patent of course says different.

The other thing I am about to test is the amount of flux paths in a given machine.
The patent from Kromrey clearly states that the flux should change directions (Or flip 180 magnetic degrees) at every magnetic change.
In a machine with only 2 set of flux path this is not possible. In a machine like this your pattern on one coils would be N-N-S-S. At the point where the change come goes from N to S you should make energy. But from N to N or S to S you probably aren't making anything. Hence the 30 to 40% efficiencies some are seeing.
Kromrey was clear on that. Bedini says it as well. You want to switch the direction as quick as possible back and forth.

Now why Bedini's does it I have no clue. I am just looking at the patent.

I have just about got all the parts made up. I still have got to get my Silicon steel plates cut, or stamped. And then get some time.

But these tests can be done without a working prototype. Just checking the out put charge and the wave forms goes along way to seeing whats supposed to happen.

Matt