John Bedini's Magnetic Model

[Faraday88]

Bearden 1984 SG Operational Description... Five

Dave Wing

Splendid!!!Dave where did you get these from???
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Faraday88]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6fYwt0QV_U
Sorry for Not quoting first.

Nice video
Rgds,
Faraday88

[Dave Wing]

Bearden 1984 SG Operational Description... Five

Dave Wing

[Dave Wing]

Bearden 1984 SG Operational Description... Four



Dave Wing

[Dave Wing]

Bearden 1984 SG Operational Description... Three



Dave Wing

[Dave Wing]

Bearden 1984 SG Operational Description... Two



Dave Wing

[Dave Wing]

Bearden 1984 SG Operational Description Draft.


Dave Wing

[diveflyfish]

Absolutely

[diveflyfish]

Floyd S got the magnets to flip polarity. JB said it was because the Barrium magnets had memory.. Two little pulses on the Ferris Wheel Hub would flip the polarity then they would remember to go back. This would drive the wheel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6fYwt0QV_U
Sorry for Not quoting first.

[diveflyfish]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6fYwt0QV_U
FYI.

[Bluebatch]

I have an old CRT tv with a flat screen. I have set it up with the screen facing up, and send a grid pattern onto with an old laptop and a square grid I made on Excel.
What is interesting about this, is that when I place magnets on it, the colors of course go wild, the black and white grid only distorts a little. And it seems to have a little twist to it, depending on North and South.
It think that the difference in BW/color distortion is normal. The magnet fields only pull the electron raster beams just a little bit. That is what the BW grid shows. However, the colors are dependent on a repeating matrix of color phosphors embedded on the screen. A tiny shift in the electron raster beams makes them land on different phosphor field, and a large color distortion is seen, as it only takes a few thousandths of an inch to move the raster from one color field to another.
There is much I could do with this, but have not yet, to study the strength and interaction of magnetic fields. You are doing some of this, and I appreciate it.

[Faraday88]

While it is Intuitive to do so, there is also a bottle neck, how would the trigger coil be wound for the other two geometry of the coils?? My guess is that their would be a common Trigger for all of them (as is practiced for a Multi-coil system)..what do you say on this...??
Rgds,
Faraday88[ATTACH=CONFIG]6010[/ATTACH]

Hi Aaron,
Further to the discussion earlier on the 23degree criterion, i feel that the placement of the 3-axis Magnet face at 23 degree interval between any two adjecent(either sides) magnets characterizes the central Field (S-pole) as the effective OPENED-UP Bloch wall, this gives a set of 5 Magnets to total a 16 magnets around the rotor.
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Faraday88]

Ok, I'll give you the little trick I came up with years ago that strengthens the south superpole poking out between the magnets. You can draw it out and predict where the North face of the disc magnets want to go. This always works, does the strengthening without making the faces of the magnets stronger, which would be undesirable, but it makes it run faster, which will of course reduce the input draw.

If any of you try it, please post your results. For practicality of the ring magnet size, its easiest of course on smaller rotors. But the idea can obviously be applied with magnets strategically embedded into larger rotors to give the same effect.



You can see the idea in the sketch - more than an idea, it works because I've done it on multiple smaller SG's and it always speeds up the rotor with reduced current.

If you have north out on the magnets, superpole south squeezes out between the magnets as shown.

Drawing shows 1 ring magnet on shaft, but use 2 - one on each side of the rotor. When Yaro was experimenting with a magnet and the ZFM, it reminded me of this so here it is. This is obviously simpler than the ZFM arrangement with 2 different poles on the rotor but I believe it can be applied to that when tweaked according to the fields on the rotor.

Make sure the face of the disc magnet facing the rotor is the polarity of the superpole squeezing out between the magnets. So obviously when you try to move the disc magnets towards the rotor they'll want to repel. Push them there and glue them, whatever. The S faces on disc magnets will push on those superpole south fields and will density them so they will be stronger squeezing out between the norths.

First test I ever did was on the little pink roller skate wheel SG I have. I put the disk magnets on the shaft both sides like this. As they got closer to the rotor as the rotor was spinning, the repulsion was obvious so bit by bit, I forced them closer and closer and the wheel sped up and current dropped.

You can obviously put stronger magnets on the rotor to get a stronger superpole, but the point is to do this without increasing the actual strength of the magnets on the rotor.

While it is Intuitive to do so, there is also a bottle neck, how would the trigger coil be wound for the other two geometry of the coils?? My guess is that their would be a common Trigger for all of them (as is practiced for a Multi-coil system)..what do you say on this...??
Rgds,
Faraday88

[Faraday88]

Hi Aaron,
Here is what i feel about the questions you askedi'm writing it beside your question since that keeps it easy to know)

You have 3 variations of the North - are you going to use one with with 3 different kinds? Or just pick one and have than for all 3 North and compare the results between the 3 kinds?
The Genisis of having the 3-axis face of the Magnets (spaced 120 degree from each other)is based on the fact that we need to bring the Bloch wall of the coil ''Outside'',this is an alternative to make the Magnet from getting ''Inside'' where the bloch walls of the Magnet and the Coil Interact the most, this is the Natural Geometry with the N-face going towards the coil core (''inside''). since we cannot make the magnet travel into the coil core, the 3-flipp Conversion or 3-axis face does this outside.and you have an equivalent of the first.

Your coil winding, the middle one, that is actually how I wound my original trifilars because I thought the recovery winding had to be wound in the opposite direction. I thought I was going to siphon off the back emf into a cap in addition to capturing the inductive spike. I thought that because the old SG drawings show the dot at the bottom of the coil, which I thought it was supposed to mean the recovery winding was in the opposite direction. I asked John and he only said it represented a different phase. I agree with you and yes this is one of the truth of the pat # 6,545,444. the recovery coil is wound that way as per me.
there is another aspect of this pat# 6,545,444 coil winding that we shall discuss for a later time.

Are you planning on putting those 2 windings in opposite direction in parallel?
Yes this is how they are already in action on my SG machine, I guess in JB's double decker machine this is how they are wound also..!

Back when he was at the "palace" building, he drew me a diagram in the sand outside the building when were were talking explaining the experiments he did with taking a single winding and winding it in one direction, then he would switch and wind it in other direction, then reversed again and so on. He didn't get into the results or what he was trying to find, just that it was an experiment he did.

Your 3rd winding diagram will not necessarily be like the bifilar pancake coil winding, it will just put those two windings in series. Yes! It is not meant to be, on the hind sight they are Magnetically 'Parallely Coupled' the Implication of that coupling is to tend to become a Flat pancake Magnetically speaking. We did that something like 8 times on the generator coil that we had on the machine that Peter demonstrated a few years back at the conference.
Do you mean you wound in alternate direction 4 times for each direction in alternate fashion? yes that did occur to me as well as for the Genny coil.
Like I mentioned before, there is a way to strengthen the S fields that are already there to make it run faster and with less draw. I might post it here - not sure yet.

[/QUOTE]

Hi Aaron,
Yes, now about the other aspect of the Coil windings methods for the Pat # 6,545,444 :
This Patent is a Capacitor-Discharger circuit or the SG and not SSG, as clear as JB stated it.. 'view them in Inverted fashion'
The Capacitor -Discharge works backwards from the monopole Circuit that is Magnetic('Majorly') towards the coil at the secondary recovery coil to the primary/trigger combined into the Battery.
if one takes the schematic literally..the Trigger coil is less in number of turns as compared to the power and the recovery...!!this is where the Inverted circuit make sense. A Discharging Capacitor is the Magnetic eqiuvalent of a Negative resistor (a Battery) this sucks the Magnetic Scalar so to speak from the monopole Field at the instance of the Discharge, which shows up as the Gain in the Battery being charged. Here is attached a schematic of one of the iteration of the 6,545,444 as per me. the Capacitor charged in the Generator mode while the Battery is actually connected accross the bridge recovery coil. (please note: consider the literal winding directions and the turns ratio as shown in the schematic you shall observe something new!!)
Just returned from my experiments!!! and look what a revealation!! the above circuit works with little modification to the trigger circuit. Now it is very convincing that this machine is a direct inspiration of the 1984 Single battery Motor/Generator with the difference that the later (2000SGor Pat#6,545,444) is a ''True Energiser'' since it accumalates storage of Energy for useage at later time..while the 1984 machine can be viewed as an ''Extended Motor'' that lasts for extended time giving the same power for long Durations..!
I just reposted the schematic,as there was a mis-connection in it the correct one is here below.. attached below is also the 'butterfly'Field lines of repulsion producing the super S-pole, the interseting aspect of the S-S pole(or N-N squeeze) squeeze is that they are directed inwards such that the resultant position of the Bloch wall (effective) and the poles are flipped in manner that the Outside( space around the Magnet) is the Bloch wall(now Dipole..Real!) and the Inside(way directed by the pencil beam) is the pole place (Monopole...Virtual!!), the implication are as simple as Virtual and real interchanging but the real is backed up by the virtual potentials and the virtual of course becoming usable!!
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Faraday88]

Ok, I'll give you the little trick I came up with years ago that strengthens the south superpole poking out between the magnets. You can draw it out and predict where the North face of the disc magnets want to go. This always works, does the strengthening without making the faces of the magnets stronger, which would be undesirable, but it makes it run faster, which will of course reduce the input draw.

If any of you try it, please post your results. For practicality of the ring magnet size, its easiest of course on smaller rotors. But the idea can obviously be applied with magnets strategically embedded into larger rotors to give the same effect.



You can see the idea in the sketch - more than an idea, it works because I've done it on multiple smaller SG's and it always speeds up the rotor with reduced current.

If you have north out on the magnets, superpole south squeezes out between the magnets as shown.

Drawing shows 1 ring magnet on shaft, but use 2 - one on each side of the rotor. When Yaro was experimenting with a magnet and the ZFM, it reminded me of this so here it is. This is obviously simpler than the ZFM arrangement with 2 different poles on the rotor but I believe it can be applied to that when tweaked according to the fields on the rotor.

Make sure the face of the disc magnet facing the rotor is the polarity of the superpole squeezing out between the magnets. So obviously when you try to move the disc magnets towards the rotor they'll want to repel. Push them there and glue them, whatever. The S faces on disc magnets will push on those superpole south fields and will density them so they will be stronger squeezing out between the norths.

First test I ever did was on the little pink roller skate wheel SG I have. I put the disk magnets on the shaft both sides like this. As they got closer to the rotor as the rotor was spinning, the repulsion was obvious so bit by bit, I forced them closer and closer and the wheel sped up and current dropped.

You can obviously put stronger magnets on the rotor to get a stronger superpole, but the point is to do this without increasing the actual strength of the magnets on the rotor.

Excellent thinking Aaron!!Thanks for sharing that. In my previous post the Super S-pole were added effect of the 3-axis N-face and the Super-S-pole produced by two S-S squeezed Magnets placed between any 2 -axis Magnets of the Monopole.
Next, why not use each style Coil winding for each pole in the 3-pole monopole???
While it is Intuitive to do so, there is also a bottle neck, how would the trigger coil be wound for the other two geometry of the coils?? My guess is that their would be a common Trigger for all of them (as is practiced for a Multi-coil system)..what do you say on this...??
Best Regards,
Faraday88.