Bedini's Kromrey Converter

[pneuphysics]

Ok the short-speed up thing i can somehow understand it. Even though in my experience so far, it requires a too many turns coils to manifest the event (high impedance?) as well as rotor frequency should be damn high.

But, can you extract any energy out of the shorted coils by parallel applying the FWBR??? I think you cannot or minute amounts of it. If your experience is of the opposite, then i will happily give a try.



see my PEREPITEIA-FEG ver1

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...-watson-3.html
(scroll down to pictures) Utilizing the SSG (axial mode though) for torquy operation is a costly fiasko! Cost me some 300 euros (400+ USD) !

Regards,
Baroutologos

Ok - I charged a 12vdc 7ah gel cell battery from 12.24vdc to 12.41 in 3 minutes during which it dropped 1 deg. F (not enough to get excited) according to my ir gun. I need to run a longer test on a reliable battery this weekend. I mentioned before the motor is not tied down too well - that is why the short test. Plus I would like to run the DC driving motor from an ac to dc power supply so it is stable for long testing times. got to find one in my junk stash

Cool looking Bedini Energizer I have never replicated that unit but I understand they take a lot of tweeking to get the timing right.

Take care,
Pneuphysics

[pneuphysics]

Pneuphysics,

Is this idea the wiring diagram you posted earlier, with all S poles facing out ?

Timm

Yes it is. I have not taken the time to analyze it, just wondered if anyone tried it and what the scope trace looked like. I am still looking for the source of this idea, I saw it on the net somewhere.

Remember in Bedinis video, If you get a shock off the output of your generator it is not wired right. if you can pass the energy through thin wires without melting them you are wired correctly. What does that tell you? It tells me this is no standard generator nor is it a current generator. It produces a waveform that batteries respond to but we do not. It produces a waveform that our instruments are capable of seeing but the useful product over and above what our scopes see is what we do not understand and cannot see. I am sure each one of us, given the time and resources could get the Kromrey, or gfield to work. We just need the magic combination. We will find it together!

Good luck to all,
Pneuphysics

[MileHigh]

Magnetic flux "breaking"

I just want to mention a basic concept in electromagnetism because some people in the forum may not be aware of it and it should demistify the voltage waveforms that you observe from your convertor coils.

A coil will react to changes in the magnetic flux passing through the cross-sectional area of the coil and generate voltage across the unloaded coil terminals in response. If the coil is shorted then it will generate a current in response. The instant there are no changes in magnetic flux the response from the coil disappears and becomes zero.

To put it in more precise terms for the open-terminal voltage case: The voltage generated by a coil will be proportional to the inductance of the coil times the rate of change of magnetic flux going through the coil with respect to time. This is a very important concept and is worthwhile thinking about.

A week ago we discussed a converter waveform and how it was non-sinusoidal. Imagine a simplified case where the magnetic flux path has a cross-sectional area that is a perfect circle of uniform density and the coil corss-section is also a perfect circle the same size.

So you have a circular "pipe" of magnetic flux that is passing across a circular coil "receptor". You can imagine something akin to a total eclipse of the sun by the moon, where the moon is the magnetic flux "piple" and the sun is the coil. The area of the overlap would be equivalent to the amount of flux going through the coil.

When they first touch, only a small area overlaps, and therefore the rate of change of magnetic flux the coil "sees" at the beginning is very small. Since the amount of flux going through the coil is directly proportional to the overlap area, let's just use area to make it easier to visualize.

So the rate of change of overlap area with respect to time starts out slowly, and as the two circles continue to overlap, the rate of change of overlap area with respect to time starts to increase. At a certain point the rate of change of area reaches a peak, then after that it starts to decrease. When the two circles are perfectly lined up (i.e.; TDC or a "full eclipse") then for a brief moment the rate of change of overlap area with respect to time is zero. That's the zero cross point in the voltage waveform. Then as the "moon" continues moving past the "sun" the whole process repeats itself, but now the rate of change of area overlap with respect to time is negative.

If you go back to those scope waveforms, that is exactly what you are seeing. You really have to think hard and visualize it, to corelate the rate of change of overlap area with respect to time with the scope traces.

Some of you may be familiar with the equation for the voltage across a coil, v = L di/dt. This is essectially the same thing. "di/dt" is the rate of change of current with respect to time. For the generator (convertor) case, the equivalent to current is simply the magnetic flux density times the overlap area with the coil. Therefore the rate of change of overlap area with respect to time is the essentially the same as the rate of change of current with respect to time. In both cases you get voltage across the coil.

This might help: You are in a car with your eyes clossed. The car's speed is equivalent to the flowing current. If the current starts to increase, it's like the car is starting to accelerate. The force you feel on your body when the car is accelerating is equivalent to the voltage generated by the coil. (Force = mass x acceleraton, and acceleration is change in velocity with respect to time, therefore force = mass x change in velocity with respect to time. Voltage = Inductance x change in current with respect to time.)

v = L di/dt also explains the collapsing field spike that you get from a coil in a Bedini motor. When the transistor switches off abruptly, di/dt gets very very large, and therfore the voltage across the coil gets very very high.

Some of you may be tempted to say, "This doesn't apply for this unconventional setup" and I can assure you that would be a very unwise way of thinking. For every person that uploads scope shots of their waveforms and pictures of their setups, you should be able to see how the scope shots relate back to the actual physcial build. By the same token, like I said before, you can simply look at how a convertor is built, look at the cross-sectional shape of the magnetic flux path, look at the cross-sectional shape of the coils, and look at the speed of the "fly by" between the magnetic flux path and the coils to make an estimate of what the voltage waveform from the convertor will look like before you even see it.

In all likelyhood, every Kromrey convertor will react as desribed above without exception. Finally, if you understood all of the above then it should not be a surprise to observe increasing voltage output from the coils when the RPM increases.

[pneuphysics]

Maybe this is a value we should start capturing and comparing ?

Timm

Last post for the night, I promise Just trying to answer posts top down and add my 2 cents in there. As you already know dv/dt is best extrapolated from your scope traces so you would have to have a scope #1. Not sure how many here have one. But I still think the peak is important too. When my coils were wired in parallel and the unit was powered by a drill 800rpm my pulses were maybe 5-7 vdc rectified and I could not charge a 12vdc battery. I got the same pulse waveform when I went in series and added a faster motor that gave me 30vdc rectified pulses that charged the 12vdc battery very quickly. I think both are important - just not sure why.

Good night and good luck all,
Pneuphysics

[dambit]

Hi Guys,

Hi Pneuphysics, one thing I am still unsure about is this. Does it matter which end of the coil we start the wind from. I understand the direction of the wind, CW or CCW etc, but do we start winding from the side closest to the magnets or the shaft? Does it make a difference? A more detailed coil schematic should help clear this up. For me anyway.

Cheers,

Steve

[dllabarre]

I just want to mention a basic concept in electromagnetism because some people in the forum may not be aware of it and it should demistify the voltage waveforms that you observe from your convertor coils....

Thank you for taking the time to post this long explanation.
It totally cleared up this concept for me.
I had a basic understanding but now I have a clear understanding from your examples.

WTG!

DonL

[StevanC]

Conventional and more

I just want to mention a basic concept in electromagnetism because some people in the forum may not be aware of it and it should demistify the voltage waveforms that you observe from your convertor coils.
(snip)

Some of you may be tempted to say, "This doesn't apply for this unconventional setup" and I can assure you that would be a very unwise way of thinking. For every person that uploads scope shots of their waveforms and pictures of their setups, you should be able to see how the scope shots relate back to the actual physcial build. By the same token, like I said before, you can simply look at how a convertor is built, look at the cross-sectional shape of the magnetic flux path, look at the cross-sectional shape of the coils, and look at the speed of the "fly by" between the magnetic flux path and the coils to make an estimate of what the voltage waveform from the convertor will look like before you even see it.

In all likelyhood, every Kromrey convertor will react as desribed above without exception. Finally, if you understood all of the above then it should not be a surprise to observe increasing voltage output from the coils when the RPM increases.

As John Bedini wrote: There is nothing on the (scope) trace that explains what charges the battery so good.

The charge the battery receives in the end is "different" yet "like" the normal DC charge one, except that a dead battery can receive it too.

Yes,
all stuff the SSG, WM and Kromrey do can be traced on the scopes, but there seem to be "more than meets the eye"?

The alone property of the sub 5% duty cycle waveform seems to make good to the overall wet chemistry?

And there seems to be more "kinds" of electricity than we where supposed to be taught about?

So, i agree not to mystify the operation of the Kromrey when the scope-shots come in question - it seems it's nothing there unusual.

But if we where to quantize the amount of energy delivered to a battery compared to the amount recovered?

And that is the stumbling stone of all this past years IMO



best regards,
Stevan C.

[MileHigh]

Happy July 4th to our American friends.

I will just add my two-cent quick-ish comments!

Pneuphysics: Putting two generator coils in parallel should be avoided. It's impossible to have their instantaneous voltages match therefore the coil with the higher voltage will discharge into the battery and the other coil. The coil with the lower voltage will contribute nothing towards charging the battery. It's similar to never putting two batteries that are driving a load in parallel.

Dambit: The winding pattern for the coil is of no real importance. The most important thing is that the inner cross-sectional shape of the coil should ideally be the same size or larger than the cross-sectional shape of the magnetic flux path. The number of turns determines the inductance of the coil. If you wind the coil the in the "wrong" direction, just flip the wires and you are fine!

DonL: You are very welcome and I am glad it helped.

StevanC: Determining if the nature of the electricity from the convertor is "different" could indeed be the real challenge. If you want to ignore the "why" for now and look at the results that's perfectly valid. Many people may assume that you can look at battery voltages to make these types of measurements. I am sure many others know to make real measurements you have to run charging and discharging cycle tests with precise energy in and energy out measurements. That's not easy or fun and is a lot of work!

[pneuphysics]

Good Morning All

I did a drawing of my coils as they are wound now in series and how it relates to a Kromrey. The Kromrey is on the right and GField on the left. This may help with your coil config since it is my opinion they are the same. Note the shaft going verticle thru the coils that would spin the coils inside of the stationary magnets (Kromrey fashion). The thing I like about GField is the magnets are easier to spin, no slip rings and the magnets can be adjusted very close to the coils without fancy machining on the coil ends or pole pieces. My purpose is not to change your direction to Gfield instead of Kromrey but to help with coil winding for the Kromrey. I no longer think I would wind the coils like the post I just put up from the net where all outside poles are the same. Instead I would wire mine like in this jpeg posted here. one coil wound cw and the other ccw just like Bedini showed in the video except when he gets to the right side end he comes from the front of the top coil continuing in the same direction back across the front of the bottom coil. Which if you look at it is the same cw and ccw coil arrangement. I believe (and my work shows this to be a high probability) when John got to the right side end he should have gone from the front of the top coil to the back of the bottom coil opposite end and wound that coil in the opposite direction all the way down. Again the cw and ccw wind is the same so how John did it may work as well. I will test this later today and let you know if I get the same results. So many possibilities

Peunphysics

[pneuphysics]

Hi Guys,

Hi Pneuphysics, one thing I am still unsure about is this. Does it matter which end of the coil we start the wind from. I understand the direction of the wind, CW or CCW etc, but do we start winding from the side closest to the magnets or the shaft? Does it make a difference? A more detailed coil schematic should help clear this up. For me anyway.

Cheers,

Steve

Super question, I will find out today - if so it may explain some problems in the past. with the GField i can change coil connects very easy. I'll keep you posted.

BTW MileHigh I agree totally with your comment about battery tests. Very difficult. I had to build a AD converter to measure voltage - a reasonable load - and write a program to disconnect the battery from the load at final discharge while taking a measurement every minute and logging the entry. And that was on the discharge side only. More complex on the charging side because you have to switch in your AD converter measure then back out cuz it affected the charge to be connected all the time.


Pneuphysics

[pneuphysics]

Super question, I will find out today - if so it may explain some problems in the past. with the GField i can change coil connects very easy. I'll keep you posted.



Pneuphysics

Very interesting! One jpg wired like John shows directly from Video. The other is same as mine Back of top coil tied to front of bottom coil. I like johns cuz if i rectify it i should get twice the pos pulses. hmmmm. anyone? thoughts? Cannot answer your question yet on starting end but you do get a different wave for sure.

Pneuphysics

[MileHigh]

Pneuphysics: Sorry, but it looks to me like the scope capture on the right is an example of when you have miswired the coils so that they are not adding together. Instead they are subtracting from each other. The clue to this is that the voltage scale on the left scope capture is 1 volt per division, and the voltage scale on the right scope capture is 0.1 volts per division. Since output power is proportional to the square of the voltage, the setup for the right scope capture can only produce 1/100th the power of the setup for the left scope capture.

You still get an output waveform becasue it is almost impossible for both coils to output exactly the same voltage at the same time. You can see that one of your magnetic flux paths couples better and dominates over the other flux path because you are not seeing any inverted fly-by waveforms. You can also see how one coil is slightly different from the other coil because you have alternating "high" and "low" fly-by waveforms.

[xpskid]

Very interesting! One jpg wired like John shows directly from Video. The other is same as mine Back of top coil tied to front of bottom coil. I like johns cuz if i rectify it i should get twice the pos pulses. hmmmm. anyone? thoughts? Cannot answer your question yet on starting end but you do get a different wave for sure.

Pneuphysics

Nice comparison to help answer Steve's question !!

Does John method produce similar effects ? The speed increase/ amp reduction ? I'd be curious because the second trace doesn't appear to have the negitive pole reversal ?

Some of John's latter devices use a single magnet and always completed the flux path in the same direction ? However he started adding additional windings to the iron bars which he used a battery to power. He may have set the opposing fields with the battery, then fiipped it back with the single magnet.

Timm


Timm

[kent_elyue]

pneuphysics:

I have a question regarding your schematic in post #328, "Kromrey vs Gfield.jpg". What is the difference in the waveform output between 1) wiring the G-field as you have drawn, and 2) reversing the leads on coil number two?

In other words, you have drawn it wired this way: Top Left=out, Top right connected to Bottom Left, Bottom Right=out. What does the waveform look like if you wire it this way: Top Left=out, Top Right connected to Bottom Right, Bottom Left=out?

Is that what you've shown with the two scope shots in post #330, "The way mine are wired Crossed.JPG" and "Wired like John shows in Video.JPG"?

(Words are so inadequate sometimes, aren't they?)

[baroutologos]

Magnetic flux /output question

At first i ask to be excused from moderator since my post is not quite relevant to topic, but somehow is.

I want someone with actual experience (measurements and perfomance testing) to aswer me that question. Configuration A or B will produce more power in conventional terms (coil's output). We assume magnets are on rotor (or coil)

Thanks in advance,

Regards,
Baroutologos

ps: by anwering this will help me save lots of effort and money