Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[pneuphysics]

xpskid - i could not get the coils to work when they were wound in the same direction so i peeled one apart and rewound it so the coils are wound in opposite directions and then connected in series. They each consist of 4 strands of tight twist 18ga. about 300 feet long and one 22 ga. trigger wire as the monopole junkies will recognize all twisted together and soldered together at the ends so they are in parallel. I do have an inductance meter so i can measure them for you. The coils are about 3.5" in outside diameter and are wrapped arround a 1" steel bolt inside a pcv pipe with acrylic 1/4" side pieces. The bolt is anealed in an oven at 2000deg. F for a few hours to grow some oxide on the outside - not sure that is important but it does keep them in place I got the same results many in here got until my wave form looked like the one on Bedini's site for the stationary coil unit Ron Cole put together. I will post the scope trace of Ron's and mine when i get home. You may have all noticed but the scope trace looks to make sense with what is going on. It looks like a big sine wave that has been inverted part way up the pos slope and the sine pulse rides down and back up - same on the neg part of the wave. My thoughts are the magic is in that quick reversal, but could be wrong

Back to work i'll post more tonight, mostly pics. Oh BTW the reason for the short test is i need to build a better motor support. just wanted to run it long enough to do a quick test.

Take care,
Pneuphysics

[pneuphysics]

Lambda -

I am inclined to try the rotating armature with coils in the future. If i do i am going to try an idea i picked up on the net where all coils are arranged with the outside poles all the same and inside obviously the same but opposite. Has anyone tried this yet?

Pneuphysics

[xpskid]

xpskid - i could not get the coils to work when they were wound in the same direction so i peeled one apart and rewound it so the coils are wound in opposite directions and then connected in series.

Pneuphysics,

Reference the winding diagram in post #220. It's difficult to explain the windings in words, so you can use that image to say what is different or the same.

Regards,

Timm

[kent_elyue]

It looks like a big sine wave that has been inverted part way up the pos slope and the sine pulse rides down and back up - same on the neg part of the wave. My thoughts are the magic is in that quick reversal, but could be wrong

That's my thinking, too. I have considered that scope picture at length and tried to fathom it. It almost looks like a bounce, as if the signal overshot and snapped back, or hit some invisible boundary and reflected back on itself, before reversing polarity.

Just thinking aloud... I wonder if there is a way to precisely correlate the signal to the physical position of the coils in their rotation, and if there is any point in bothering?

[MileHigh]

Gentlemen, you don't ever need to rewind your coils to change your confugurations. All that you need to do is swap the wires, it's as simple as that. When you swap the wires you invert the voltage waveform from the coil and reverse the current direction. Someone once posted that an easy way to check your coils are correctly connected in series is to measure AC volts while you run the motor. Just measure the voltage across two coils in series, swap the wires of one of the coils, run the motor again and measure the voltage. The configuration that gives you the higher AC voltage is the right one. Two coils in series can either add together or cancell each other out, so it's important.

[kent_elyue]

For what it's worth, here's another small (perhaps meaningless) detail. I was just studying the screenshots from the DVD again and I noticed that the height at which the stacked magnets rest on the pole pieces seems to be down around the center point of the coil. See the attachment. It's taken from around the 15 minute mark of the video.

[kent_elyue]

Gentlemen, you don't ever need to rewind your coils to change your confugurations.

Under "normal AC situations" you may be right. But here I beg to differ. There is such a thing known as the "Right-hand Rule."


From Wikpedia:

"Left handedness

In certain situations, it may be useful to use the opposite convention, where one of the vectors is reversed and so creates a left-handed triad instead of a right-handed triad.

An example of this situation is for left-handed materials. Normally, for an electromagnetic wave, the electric and magnetic fields, and the direction of propagation of the wave obey the right-hand rule. However, left-handed materials have special properties - the negative refractive index. It makes the direction of propagation point in the opposite direction."

A perfect example of this is if one makes two short coils on the same core and joins them in the center (there are 3 possible permutations this way), as opposed to using one wire only and starting in the center of the core and, by turning the core, working outwards to both opposite ends. The latter is a very different result from any possible combination of wiring you can achieve using the first method of winding. I saw a picture of this recently, too. I'll see if I can locate it.

[kent_elyue]

VERY different

I couldn't find the picture I remembered, so I drew a very lame one to illustrate.

Simply switching wires around does NOT always accomplish the same end result as rewinding a CW winding into a CCW winding. In the picture below, no matter how you configure the two separate windings in the upper coil, you can never achieve the same result as in the lower coil.

[MileHigh]

Kent: I can't visualize the coil winding thing you are describing, a picture would be appreciated.

> It looks like a big sine wave that has been inverted part way up the pos slope and the sine pulse rides down and back up - same on the neg part of the wave. My thoughts are the magic is in that quick reversal, but could be wrong

If you guys can post a link to the waveform picture and a picture of the setup I should be able to explain it to you. Once you understand what's going on it should allow you to just look at any kind of generator and visualize the output from it.

> 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.

Those are really interesting points above. I realize that I made a mistake with my previous comments saying the coil output impedance was more important than the coil resistance. The reason for this is that the frequency 'f' in the equation above will be roughly ((RPM x 4)/60) and the 'L' will also be very small. Therefore X(L) will be a very very small number.

The total impedance of the coil will be the coil resistance R plus the reactance X(L). Since X(L) is so small at your generator frequency you can ignore it. Without a long story, I was also incorrect about searching for an impedance match for generator applications.

Please have a look at the firt part of this application note from Jaycar: (I hope I can post URLs, and you can see where I went wrong for a typical generator application)

www dot jaycar dot com.au/images_uploaded/impmatch.pdf

Finally, the frequency calculation is very very roughty ((RPM x 4)/60) in your setup but it is quite a bit more complicated than that. It's actually a frequency spectrum.

[MileHigh]

Kent: Re: The drawing with the two coil examples. Your lower coil is a combination of a CW coil followed by a CCW coil on the same core. That's something that you never want to do because if the two halves are the same number of turns they will cancel each other out and there will be no inductance at all.

What I said about simply swapping the wires from the coils to make sure they all add up is true. Of course I am assuming that in the convertor both coils are passing by their respective magnets at the same time. You can look at a coil output as a device that generates a "differential" output. The only thing that is important is the difference in voltages across the two terminals of the coil. If you flip the wires of the coil, it's the same as reversing the wires of your multimeter, when the instantaneous voltage on the terminals measures 10 volts, you can flip the wires of the coil, or flip your multimeter leads, and you will measure -10 volts. It's like you can get a mirror image of the voltage waveform just by swapping the leads. I hope that helps!

[pneuphysics]

Bingo Kent

Bingo Kent -

Lefthand and Righthand rule dates way back. your description makes sense to me and I'll tell you that coil bugged the heck out of me to where i was reduced to winding a string around a dowel rod and flipping it end to end. I do not know why but it did not give me the wave form i wanted until i rewound it. Here are my wave forms - rectified and full wave.

One the waveshape issue you can trace a large sine wave, set the paper down in front of you and fold the top section down over the bottom with your crease half way up the positive peak. Then the same with the bottom folding it up over the top half way up the negative peak. Put it upto the light and what do you see? To rectify it fold it in half top to bottom.

Enjoy,
Pneuphysics

[pneuphysics]

Mile_High,

I do understand what you are saying but I believe one key here is a small point that Bedini makes in previous videos that may be at play - not sure - but it is the cancelling here that looks to classical EE's like a cancelled potential but when in fact there are 2 large potentials our meters see as 0 because they oppose. I believe that is what Bedini is chasing because they are still large potentials capable of great things if harnesed properly. I do not know for sure but I do know when I have applied total conventional wisdom i have not gotten the results i wanted. only when i step way out of the box.

For what it's worth
Pneuphysics

[MileHigh]

Pneuphysics: You said:

> One the waveshape issue you can trace a large sine wave, set the paper down in front of you and fold the top section down over the bottom with your crease half way up the positive peak. Then the same with the bottom folding it up...

It sure as hell looks like that doesn't it? lol Sometimes you gotta look harder! lol

I have a question or two: For the unrectified waveform, is that across just one coil? Can you describe the what magnet polarity sequence the coil sees as it goes around a full turn? (It looks to me like N-S or N-S-N-S if there are four magnets)

For the cancelled potentials stuff I can only ask you to try some stuff and see for yourself. I am very confident on my side.

[pneuphysics]

XpsKid - Thanks for the warm welcome -

XpsKid - Thanks for the warm welcome -

Here are a couple pics - 1 while glueing the coils mounts in gives a good shot of the coils. For scale the center bolts are 1" diameter and the plastic side squares are 4 1/4" on each side.

The other shot is taken during testing setup.

I am working on that wiring you requested, since it is not the same as the 4 coil rotary i will draw and scan it in. I do have a drawing i may include now that shows how the coils are wound but is connected in parallel.

Take care,
Pneuphysics

[xpskid]

Mile_High,

I do understand what you are saying but I believe one key here is a small point that Bedini makes in previous videos that may be at play - not sure - but it is the cancelling here that looks to classical EE's like a cancelled potential but when in fact there are 2 large potentials our meters see as 0 because they oppose. I believe that is what Bedini is chasing because they are still large potentials capable of great things if harnesed properly. I do not know for sure but I do know when I have applied total conventional wisdom i have not gotten the results i wanted. only when i step way out of the box.

For what it's worth
Pneuphysics

MileHigh,

I very much appreciate your lengthy discussions and thought out answers, you are well versed in these areas, but I must ask, did you purchase and have you watched EFV DVD 10 ?

The one point I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on is the idea that all can be explained by classical theory and that outside the blackbox (The Kromrey) one should be able to apply traditional measurements and meters to document the device performance. If a device supposedly can power kW's of load through a wire measured in microns, how can that fit traditional theory ? My point being, if it turns out that I can measure it via a meter, great !, but I"m going to rely on observations as stated above first, and if they manifest themselves, I'm going to chase'em !.

I just don't want to miss a clue because my meter say nothing is happening.

Respectfully submitted,

Timm