Bedini 10-coil

[smw1998a]

@Lee,

30-35% efficient, that would be a record for the worst ever, maybe.

80% tops? That may be your experience, but that has nothing to do with
what others have achieved. You can speak for your own
experience, but you can't speak for what is possible with the machines.

There are people with 50 years experience in physics but it doesn't mean
they ever really learned anything. I'm not saying that applies to you but
just making a point that many people do a LOT of experimentation, a lot of
bad experimentation. Are you? I don't know, you been at this a long time,
but you can also see in that OTG group there were also claims of 10-20cop
and you never batted an eye at that. At least I thought you were in that
group.

And you never seen a battery exceed the rated amount by being charged
with these machines? To me, that is a little strange. And what voltage
does the battery drop to when you determine that it is drained? Specifically,
what battery and what is it specs? You said "significantly" so you obviously
saw some increase over rated amount - but significantly is very subjective.
It either exceeded the amount or it didn't.

Hello Aaron,
Yes, I am a member of OTG. I don't recall a COP of 10-20 ever being claimed. If there were I would have looked into it thoroughly, I'm sure. I see absolutely no reason to discus what you see as my failings and this wasn't the purpose of my post. I simply suggested that Ren prove me wrong by load testing his batteries to asses his front to back efficiency. Which I estimate to be 30% based on his waveform. Whether or not Ren chooses to publish the result of such load tests or even tries the load tests is his business.
I'm tired of people asking honest questions based on there experience and being belittled or ostracized because their questions are awkward or not acceptable to their peers purpose. This is bad science and creates a very poor learning environment. Ignorance maybe bliss but feeding ignorance is a sin. As I have said, I understand the SSG very well, it will charge batteries, it does rejuvenate tiered batteries very well. In all the cases I have studied it doesn't do it with a high degree of efficiency.

I'll tell you what, If Ren chooses to do front to back load tests on his energiser. What ever his results, whether he chooses to publish them or not I will help him build a simple circuit that will increase the measured efficiency of his energiser by 20%.

Regards Lee...

[WeThePeople]

If you honestly think John will put his name on a hoax, you are sadly
mistaken. And what you are saying is slanderous.

Wow, that was very harsh,
and no I didn't intend my observations of the facts
to be slanderous against John at all.

My point is that he says it is an exact copy,
when it is clearly not an exact copy at all.

I reworded my post to help eliminate that impression.

In fact, this clearly shows you did not watch the video above.

I have nothing bad to say about John whatsoever,
but I find fault that this kit does not use identical
magnet structure of the original wheel at all.

I even posted pics clearly proving that.

The opposing norths triggers the coil by inducing the current and the
transistor switched on when the voltage reversed on that base as soon
as those opposing norths leave the center of the core and moves away.

Again, had you watched the video,
you would see that is wrong too.

There ARE NO opposing norths in the kit.

Both the video I linked to above,
and at least two of the EFTV vids
both clearly show in detail,
and are narrated by John indicating
they "Trigger 22 degees after north".

The south fields are squeezing out between the norths and when the coil
charges north, that south is attracted to the coil's north. That south is
where some of the gain comes from as the magnets are PUMPS.

The purpose of the many individual welding rods
is to lower the amount of retained magnetism.

He has amplifiers
that are 30 years old still on the market being sold for thousands because
he has always only put his name behind QUALITY products - that is a FACT,
just watch Ebay sometimes.

Yes, those are awsome amplifiers

You forgot to mention his scaler wave CD revitalizers.

In fact John, (Not Rick) has made so many wonderful discoveries over the years,
that it will take decades after his death to just understand all his paperwork.

I still must maintain that Rick's version as a kit is not an exact copy,
and selling it representing it as an exact copy is indeed improper.

I'll refrain from using the "H" word though ...

[DavidE]

Wow. In one way I am sorry that I started this thread, in another way I have learned a great deal about human nature.

If I had one bit of hesitation about John Bedini I would have never posted the inception thread. If he is willing to put his name on it, that is good enough for me. Whatever design he sanctions would likely be equal to or better than anything that had come before. If you don't like what you see, simply exercise your right to move along.

There are sides in the struggle to keep us grid energy dependent. I would hope that anyone here would fight for any opportunity that represents even shades of independence. Because if you don't, it would be a short walk to determine which side you are on.

Let's debate the potential, the technology, the ideas, but let's stop short of making this personal... unless of course, energy dependence serves you.

[linesrg]

Simple truth is all

David,

Why should you regret starting the thread?

Either the device being sold is a direct copy of the original or it isn't. The implication in the promotional video is that it is and it would seem it may not be.

John B has a reputation with regard to previous relatively conventional endeavours such as his amplifiers - I wish they were more readily available here in the UK.

We have adverts here in the UK for a particular product where the punch line is that it does what it says on the can, I imagine there are similar ads all over the world.

The challenge with such as the 10-coiler is what does it say on the can?

Like Lee in this thread I am also a member of the somewhat vilified OTG group and like him I would love to know where the COP=10-20 came from.

As a group I would say we deal in facts and have the technical ability to build devices with sufficient precision and the ability to carry out documented tests.

We will continue to do this as a group and based on our results we will post support or criticism as required. We will do this in a calm and rational way without resorting to some of what we have seen elsewhere on this forum recently.

Regards

Richard

[ren]

Hello Aaron,
Yes, I am a member of OTG. I don't recall a COP of 10-20 ever being claimed. If there were I would have looked into it thoroughly, I'm sure. I see absolutely no reason to discus what you see as my failings and this wasn't the purpose of my post. I simply suggested that Ren prove me wrong by load testing his batteries to asses his front to back efficiency. Which I estimate to be 30% based on his waveform. Whether or not Ren chooses to publish the result of such load tests or even tries the load tests is his business.
I'm tired of people asking honest questions based on there experience and being belittled or ostracized because their questions are awkward or not acceptable to their peers purpose. This is bad science and creates a very poor learning environment. Ignorance maybe bliss but feeding ignorance is a sin. As I have said, I understand the SSG very well, it will charge batteries, it does rejuvenate tiered batteries very well. In all the cases I have studied it doesn't do it with a high degree of efficiency.

I'll tell you what, If Ren chooses to do front to back load tests on his energiser. What ever his results, whether he chooses to publish them or not I will help him build a simple circuit that will increase the measured efficiency of his energiser by 20%.

Regards Lee...

Hi Lee.

I have done a significant amount of load tests, based on my own protocols. Perhaps I should share with you the protocol so that it could be considered/examined as to its scientific merit? All my simple tests were conducted years ago, when first starting on the BM3 group. I struggled to get good efficiencies out of my first few energizers, but they did run with minimum input, that is, the front end draw was below 300ma, and as low as 50ma. However the charging battery was always difficult to push over 13.2v without exceeding the front ends c20.

The best results I ever got were from thicker wire energizers, ones that pushed a little more current. On a bicycle wheel energizer I recorded the following results.

Wall charged 18aH primary resting on 12.9v
2 x 12aH parallel drained to 12.01v resting through a resistive load (light bulb).

7.5 hours run time had the primary resting on 12.04v, running the machine on 800ma for the first 5.5hours, and bumping it up to 900ma for the last 2 hours.

Charging bank had reached 14.5v in this time, and had a resting voltage of 12.64. I then drained the charging bank through a 10 watt rated globe, drawing 850ma on my analogue gauge. I drained it down to 11.86, and let it rest, resting voltage at 12.01 after an hour. Total time was 6 hours and 35min powering the load.

I didnt get this overnight, it DID take repeated cycles like John said it would. I found that if I didnt push that extra bit of current at the end of the run I couldnt get it to go over 13.4v, but that didnt always net the result I was after either.

I have come to some conclusions on the energizers, and one I will say right now is this: Battery charging is a greedy process. Conventionally it would not be unheard of to put 2-5 times the amount of energy into a battery than you get back out. Its one thing to push a battery up to 14.5v, its another to trickle charge it once its there. And what qualifies as a FULLY charged battery? I have gotten higher resting voltages and resulting longer discharges by using the SG as a float/trickle charger on batteries that have already hit 14.5v. So I am amazed that Johns process does as well as it does, with what is given.

So it is a difficult science to say the least. My above results were enough evidence to me that reasonable efficiencies were obtainable, at the very least, I couldnt warrant the discarding of that amount of energy anyway.

I would love to hear about your other circuit, as I am interested in all parts of this tech. I wont be doing any load tests on the small kit energizer however. From past experience I feel that it would net poorer results, partly because I do not have what I would deem the correct sizer batteries for it. I can see from using the 7 aH batteries that the energizer is poorly matched to charge them well. But I have always studied this device with a dream for the rotor to do more that what is shown. Therein lies its potential I feel, efficient collection and utilization of its inductive discharge is an important part, as nothing should go to waste, but I feel that it is only one part of the machine.

My experiences with Johns circuits have opened up my mind to a whole world of possibilities, who knows where they will lead. Perhaps I will be like others after years of research, angry or frustrated, or dissapointed at my findings/results. Perhaps it will turn into something more. Time will tell.

Regards

[Aaron]

no claims

I don't see how anyone could consider the 10 coiler a hoax since I have not seen any statements from John or Rick about its output or its capabilities.

True.

I only stated what I witnessed but that has nothing to do with their
claims.

[dambit]

OMG, there are some crybabies here. Sorry to put it that way, but that's the first term that came to mind.

"The machine doesn't have scalar norths, it must be a hoax, false advertising." QQ

How about you use some initiative and simply change the magnet arrangement, or ask Rick if he has a version of the rotor with a scalar north setup.

Sometimes I wonder.

Now that that's out of the way, time for my morning coffee.

Cheers,

Steve

[Aaron]

@WeThePeople

Wow, that was very harsh,

There ARE NO opposing norths in the kit.

I thought Hoax was harsh. If that wasn't your intention,
then my apologies.

I'm sure someone that bought a kit might be able to
find 2 ceramics that are half the size of the one that
comes with the kit and make their own opposing sets
that would fit in the little plastic holder.

You get more mechanical work with normal single north
face and I know many people want as much power from
the rotor as possible.

[elias]

Hi,

I don't know why are we always arguing? We know that Bearden has Claimed a COP of much greater than 1 in EFTV2 and also Bedini has claimed a COP of 7 or more, for his 8 coil machine, But he always insists that it depends on the battery. What I am curious about is how many charge and discharge cycles, does it require to get a COP > 5 for this machine?

One of my best achievements with the Bedini energizer is charging my razor with it, and I seldom require a recharge for it, it just works.

And I insist that, the 10 coil can be built with 1000$, and I will build it, as soon as I find the time, and money for it. It would probably take a month to build it.

Elias

[WeThePeople]

Well with the 10-coil kit not being a copy of the real thing,
and that John has said in his vids it put 6KW into those batteries
(Noting that the pictures often said 10KW under them in PDF's).

I believe there is more to this dual magnet topic than is given credit.

I hear a lot of you saying you have direct contact with John,
if we refering to John Bedini in this case may I please ask
for a direct answer from John himself about this magnet pair issue.

Just one picture or diagram would be most helpful.

This isn't just some magnets pressed against each other,
look carefully at his video and you'll see much more is involved.

As far as coils and circuits, that is always an area that can be improved.

But it all starts with that wheel.

But with no specs on the kit, and a known value output on Johns,
An answer is called for on the amount his wheel plays in all this.

I read this again before I hit "Submit Reply",
I don't see anything that should start mudslinging.

But please understand I just want an answer
to what exactly is in John's real wheel.

It is my understanding it is patented,
so I hope he will share an answer.

But even an answer that he doesn't want to tell
would be better than no answer at all on this.

[WeThePeople]

In the interest of getting it from the horses mouth so to speak,
I have been searching and have found an entire page of quotes.

These were to a forum by John himself.

I will copy/paste just the sentences about
the wheel on his personal 10-coil device.

He made those magnets himself,
and they are not store bought magnets pressed together.

Many of the terms I have tried to correct the usage of here
like scaler north instead of scaler south and others are mentioned.

Remember, these are John's own words,
not opinions, there is no room for disagreeing.

The full set of entries can be read in full context here:

John Bedini: SG Collected Posts

And the referenced patent #5,487,057 here:

Patent #5,487,057

Sorry for the wall-o-words effect people...

*******************************************

John Bedini Quotes:

"I thought I would comment on the two north poles pushed together to form a mono pole. Yes we have used this for years and have built motors using this arrangement. In Patent number 5,487,057 you find
that we have used this for years in the audio clarifier, dual beam and Quadra beam. If you use this, the arrangement is awkward to mount. You are correct in what you have found and it works great . If
you choose to use this in a mono pole energizer the trigger is much stronger and it requires a change in the base resistors and the iron
in the coils. Look up the Patent.
John"

"Just about any steel wire will work for the core. I have only found a few that do not work. Check the iron with a magnet, if it retains the magnetism it won't work. The best I have found is the welding rod.
John"

"The normal rotor on the early machines can only develop a limited power level as can be seen by the pictures of the early machines, not so with the big rotary machine
for their is no magnetic fields like you have ever seen before on the rotor, it is based on full scalar electromagnetics of which I can not go into on the SG group. I can say that it requires full, Quaternion math, The machine does develop and is running on scalar fields. can also say that the trigger is not recorded or discussed anywhere on any of my pages and that I have not discussed it with anybody except Peter who works 24/7 with me every day without fail and it is from the year 1971 in my lab notes, and that the only other person that ever knew of this energizer was my good friend Ron Cole, dead now. That machine cost us 30.000 dollars to build. so there is nothing free about it. I can also say that it took about a month to machine all the parts and some could only be made by hand. The devices are not in any electronic stores at hand and must be selected for the proper impedance by buying 100's of them. So yes there is a lot to building this machine."

"What drives the wheel, the magnets around the wheel are only used for a trigger signal. What is driving the wheel is hidden from your view, what is hidden from your view is also the charging signal. The driving force of the wheel is scalar or magnetic south poles between the north poles. Make yourself a timing light by taking a green or red led with a 330 ohm resistor in series with it. Place skinny white strips down the center of the magnets around the wheel, connect the led across the coil and then tell me where the coil pulse is and what is driving the wheel.
The force that is driving the wheel is the same force charging the battery."

"The south pole scalar is the force that causes the motor/energizer to rotate, that force is equal to the charging radiant force, no current. Some have asked about, how do we get motor torque. If you
want torque then you give up the radiant charging. Another words if you add current to switch the north pole as a motor function you will lose the radiant charge and you can only have what the normal
reversal of the coil is, in back EMF, that is about 20%. Again if you use the motor function you will have no radiant energy for charging, please do not confuse the two functions."

"These systems do NOT capture "back EMF". Back EMF is not capturable. My patents say that my motor captures Back EMF because THAT is the only claim the Patent Office would accept. In reality, Back EMF is a term in electrical science that refers to the effect that reduces the current draw in a traction motor as the motor speeds up and generates a counter voltage that opposes the applied current. THAT is "back EMF." My systems do NOT use this process.
"

"The system consists of 24 1600 amp hour batteries, the box you see in the picture is a control manual switching box. the machine is constructed with 1" Plexiglas because everything interferes with the energy recovery. the load panel is lighting 1000 watts of light bulbs we have a maximum of 2.4 kw we can use, the coil arrangement is something that I can not talk about,"

"The big machine runs at 770 RPM, The big machines input current is 10
amperes. We only use 10% of the big batteries at 1600 amp hrs. The batteries can deliver 210 amps at 24 volts continuous for 8 Hrs, running these batteries at 10 amps is way under their C20 discharge rate. The cores are welding rod as I have always used, if you use a neo magnet you saturate the core the trigger does not work right."

"The magnets are made by me and I can not go into that, but I can say that it is standard material."

"The duty cycle of these machines is 11% on input. The idea is to not burn up much input power, the return is way over 450 volts in tension across 1 mill-ohm on the secondary batteries."

[Aaron]

magnets

You answered your own question I guess.

John makes a lot of stuff himself from scratch - some things you wouldn't
believe.

Anyway, I doubt you're going to be able to easily make your own -
follow my advice, make sure they're all the same strength.

[WeThePeople]

Thank you Aaron, I didn't mean to omit a TY in the previous post.

With so much conjecture on the topic,
I hoped to help out by referencing John.

I am however hoping someone in touch with John will ask
if a mere mortal could replicate that exact wheel themself.

Any info would be welcome!

Oh, and don't ask about the coils and trigger circuit,
It is my understanding that is not to be spoken about.

[WeThePeople]

What does the acronym OTG stand for?

Google gives me to many answers...

I like "Old Timers Guild" myself,
or perhaps "Older Than God" lol.

EDIT/UPDATE:
I came back and deleted 78 acronyms to save forum space

The answer is "Off The Grid",
thank you Aaron

[Aaron]

off the grid

Off the Grid

yahoo group