Kromrey Disclosure - Bedini SG - Beyond the Advanced Handbook by Peter Lindemann

[Scorch]

Build Progress photo

Hello all.

Just a minor update and build photo.

Started with a Nema 17 bracket which is not quite the right size for this Buehler # 1.13.044.284.50 50 watt motor.
Used a step drill to enlarge my center hole then a #20 twist drill to cut new mounting holes.



Still not sure if this is the best thread to share an actual build as these previous questions still remain unanswered...

-What is the wire gauge John used for the rotor coils?
-What is the approximate number of turns he used per coil?
-Are his rotor and pole pieces solid or laminate layers?
-Are ceramic (ferrite) magnets suitable?
-Is this the correct thread to start detailing a replication attempt based on the recent disclosure or is there another thread of other builders actually building these on this forum?

Please respond.

Kindest regards;

}:>

[Dwane Dibley]

Thanks for the reply Dwane. I'm not seeing this with my setup. Are you able to sketch out your setup so we can compare notes. You can PM it to me if you wish.

John K.

No problem. I'll set up a test and try to take some scope shots tomorrow. I can't see where we are differing. The key is a similarity to the three battery switch, but, in this case, John warns when using a dead battery as "C" to avoid sucking the other batteries dry! What that mean is 24volts across say 1 volt. Almost a short circuit. In our circuit, I am suggesting something less dramatic.

I'll be back!

regards

Dwane

[John_Koorn]

Hi John,
Essentially, when measuring across A and B in a static condition, you will get the combined voltage - say 25.2volts. As soon as the trigger switches current through the coil, this places A and B in parallel with C. A and B will at this time now show 18 volts if the batteries are good - a simple meter test will confirm this. If the batteries are poor condition, sulfated and etc, then this 18 volts will dramatically decrease to say maybe 15 volts or 13 volts depending upon their condition. As we need a minimum of 2 volts above the voltage on battery C to enable charging, and with the combined resistance and or impedance of the primary coil being in series with the battery it becomes unlikely that any charging will take place under these circumstances. Assuming then that battery C is good - say 12.6v - this leaves the difference across the coil resistance when switching. A scope probe will confirm this and you should show a progression of two pulse steps - 24 -> 18 -> 6, then 200 radiant spike.

So when I stated that you are seeing 18 or 6 volts, the first voltage is from realtime coil switched into circuit, the second voltage is what I am seeing on my scope across coil. You can measure the A and B with a meter when just connected across C without pulse to see the drop, and possible resistance in the battery if sulfated.

Regards

Dwane

Thanks for the reply Dwane. I'm not seeing this with my setup. Are you able to sketch out your setup so we can compare notes. You can PM it to me if you wish.

John K.

[Dwane Dibley]

Dwane, not sure I follow you. You should get the difference of potential of batteries "A"+"B"-"C" across the coil, minus a bit for switching losses.

So if "A" was 25.0v, "B" was 25.0v and "C" was 24.0v you should be seeing approximately 26.0v across the coil when the transistor/s switch.

Can you explain where you are only seeing 18 or 6 volts, or where you are measuring this?

John K.

Hi John,
Essentially, when measuring across A and B in a static condition, you will get the combined voltage - say 25.2volts. As soon as the trigger switches current through the coil, this places A and B in parallel with C. A and B will at this time now show 18 volts if the batteries are good - a simple meter test will confirm this. If the batteries are poor condition, sulfated and etc, then this 18 volts will dramatically decrease to say maybe 15 volts or 13 volts depending upon their condition. As we need a minimum of 2 volts above the voltage on battery C to enable charging, and with the combined resistance and or impedance of the primary coil being in series with the battery it becomes unlikely that any charging will take place under these circumstances. Assuming then that battery C is good - say 12.6v - this leaves the difference across the coil resistance when switching. A scope probe will confirm this and you should show a progression of two pulse steps - 24 -> 18 -> 6, then 200 radiant spike.

So when I stated that you are seeing 18 or 6 volts, the first voltage is from realtime coil switched into circuit, the second voltage is what I am seeing on my scope across coil. You can measure the A and B with a meter when just connected across C without pulse to see the drop, and possible resistance in the battery if sulfated.

Regards

Dwane

[Faraday88]

Perhaps you could be a little bit more specific, which "sensible part" would you be referring to? Incidentally, do you work at Electronic City?

Yes you got it right...hope you did not pun intend here!! there is a place by that name where i live here in Bangalore Karnataka Bangalore..Electronic City that is...
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[John_Koorn]

Regarding the final circuit suggested by Peter on the Video. I have been experimenting with this circuit and I have noticed that care has to be taken with the switching of the batteries. Although the circuit is suggesting 24volts across the primary coil, essentially you only get 18volts. This gives only six volts across the coil: which if this voltage falls due to poor battery charge will severely impact on the performance of the circuit. Thus, if there are any problems with the batteries, old, run down, sulfated and etc., then the circuit will not operate efficiently. The notion of swapping discharged batteries into and out of the circuit for a rest period, essentially requires batteries that are not overly discharged. That is, the circuit, to my mind, will work best as a maintenance charging system and when loads are being drawn. At the present time, for this circuit, battery recovery work takes a lot of hands on administration of the swapping process to bring a bad battery back.
.

Regards

Dwane

Dwane, not sure I follow you. You should get the difference of potential of batteries "A"+"B"-"C" across the coil, minus a bit for switching losses.

So if "A" was 25.0v, "B" was 25.0v and "C" was 24.0v you should be seeing approximately 26.0v across the coil when the transistor/s switch.

Can you explain where you are only seeing 18 or 6 volts, or where you are measuring this?

John K.

[Dwane Dibley]

Take the 'sensible part' of what i intend to show (hopefully you catch it some day)..leave the rest..what is the big deal anyway!!
good day to you too!!!

Perhaps you could be a little bit more specific, which "sensible part" would you be referring to? Incidentally, do you work at Electronic City?

[Faraday88]

??? You don't make any sense! This is not what you have already implied! It is OK to change your position, but do not try and make it look like you are not the one making the mistake! You have tried to make up some garbage about the relationship with pulse techniques between the energiser and the Gray motor which as other previous posts have indicated you know very little. And it is unlikely that Mark would have explained in detail how the Gray Motor operated. You have stated it so OWN IT!!!

Have a good day!

Take the 'sensible part' of what i intend to show (hopefully you catch it some day)..leave the rest..what is the big deal anyway!!
good day to you too!!!

[Dwane Dibley]

Regarding the final circuit suggested by Peter on the Video. I have been experimenting with this circuit and I have noticed that care has to be taken with the switching of the batteries. Although the circuit is suggesting 24volts across the primary coil, essentially you only get 18volts. This gives only six volts across the coil: which if this voltage falls due to poor battery charge will severely impact on the performance of the circuit. Thus, if there are any problems with the batteries, old, run down, sulfated and etc., then the circuit will not operate efficiently. The notion of swapping discharged batteries into and out of the circuit for a rest period, essentially requires batteries that are not overly discharged. That is, the circuit, to my mind, will work best as a maintenance charging system and when loads are being drawn. At the present time, for this circuit, battery recovery work takes a lot of hands on administration of the swapping process to bring a bad battery back.
.

Regards

Dwane

[Dwane Dibley]

Hi Dwane ,
with all due respect to your first hand opinion, I have corresponded with Mark Mckay and had wonderful exchange of understandings on the E V Gray motor..this was 3-4 years ago.. what is really astonishing to me that the tit bits of all this either the ENERGISER/MOTOR/GENERATOR ect are clear in view and none has ever integrated them to make up the stuff!
any way lets see how things go..!!
Rgds,
Faraday88.

??? You don't make any sense! This is not what you have already implied! It is OK to change your position, but do not try and make it look like you are not the one making the mistake! You have tried to make up some garbage about the relationship with pulse techniques between the energiser and the Gray motor which as other previous posts have indicated you know very little. And it is unlikely that Mark would have explained in detail how the Gray Motor operated. You have stated it so OWN IT!!!

Have a good day!

[Faraday88]

There is no "Red Herring" about Marvin Cole. It was this original motor he designed that John Bedini witnessed an output of 100hp. Nothing is documented about his disappearance. He just did not show up for work!! I also think that Jim Watson was/is not a figment of any conspiratorial scheme to distract attention away from any other person. There was no reason to create such an illusion! The energiser provenance was/is common knowledge.

I get it that you make an argument for the Motor = Energiser, and indeed, I recall an Icehouse web page where commentary was given by John Bedini on the excess output from an energiser which was used to drive a boat. However, to my mind, there is a clear distinction between the operation of an energiser and an electric motor, for that is what the Gray Motor was, a motor driven by high current pulses. If you have not already got the Gray research, google Mark McKay and E V Gray. Mark has spent many years determining the real facts about the Gray Motor. An energiser, as defined by John Bedini's research and outcome requires the operation of recycling energy for its operation. This is implicit in its design. It may operate with a notional form of PWM. The Gray Motor pulse mechanism was independent from the integral energy source, but required the input energy source to operate. By that, I imply that an expendable medium was required to run the Gray Motor, not recyling energy back to the battery supply as with the energiser: which makes the energiser a generator! The Gray Motor used an independent energy source as its input to achieve a greatly increased ratio of energy output. The "Petrol" so to speak that supplied the electricity is not recycled back to re-energise the motor. It could have been, but the economics was just not worth it! The energy supply - Petrol so to speak - was free!!

I hope this helps.

Regards

Dwane

Hi Dwane ,
with all due respect to your first hand opinion, I have corresponded with Mark Mckay and had wonderful exchange of understandings on the E V Gray motor..this was 3-4 years ago.. what is really astonishing to me that the tit bits of all this either the ENERGISER/MOTOR/GENERATOR ect are clear in view and none has ever integrated them to make up the stuff!
any way lets see how things go..!!
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Dwane Dibley]

some where i feel the Jim watson and the Mervin cole stories are some kind of red herring to distract the attention from the original inventors or were made to keep a fictitious spin off or some nebulous reasons unclear even today..
Best Regards,
Faraday88.

There is no "Red Herring" about Marvin Cole. It was this original motor he designed that John Bedini witnessed an output of 100hp. Nothing is documented about his disappearance. He just did not show up for work!! I also think that Jim Watson was/is not a figment of any conspiratorial scheme to distract attention away from any other person. There was no reason to create such an illusion! The energiser provenance was/is common knowledge.

I get it that you make an argument for the Motor = Energiser, and indeed, I recall an Icehouse web page where commentary was given by John Bedini on the excess output from an energiser which was used to drive a boat. However, to my mind, there is a clear distinction between the operation of an energiser and an electric motor, for that is what the Gray Motor was, a motor driven by high current pulses. If you have not already got the Gray research, google Mark McKay and E V Gray. Mark has spent many years determining the real facts about the Gray Motor. An energiser, as defined by John Bedini's research and outcome requires the operation of recycling energy for its operation. This is implicit in its design. It may operate with a notional form of PWM. The Gray Motor pulse mechanism was independent from the integral energy source, but required the input energy source to operate. By that, I imply that an expendable medium was required to run the Gray Motor, not recyling energy back to the battery supply as with the energiser: which makes the energiser a generator! The Gray Motor used an independent energy source as its input to achieve a greatly increased ratio of energy output. The "Petrol" so to speak that supplied the electricity is not recycled back to re-energise the motor. It could have been, but the economics was just not worth it! The energy supply - Petrol so to speak - was free!!

I hope this helps.

Regards

Dwane

[Tom C]

Don,

I don,t have it handy, Erik did all the design and testing for it. send us an email directly he can probably answer you quickly.

Tom C

[brodonh]

Swapper

D,

yes...

Tom C

Hi Tom,
Can you say the part # is for the relays.
I'd like to take a shot at that swapper with arduino.
Thanks,
Bro d

[Faraday88]

Hello Faraday88,
How is the 1984 generator like the Gray Motor? One is a generator and the other is a motor!! Also, they have completely different operational modes. The original John Bedini energiser has morphed into a self contained self drive unit where the external motor has been deleted. It uses battery power as the initial energy source to supply energy to batteries for converson into useable power. The Gray motor uses a combination of high voltage pulses and atmospheric energy to drive it: and likely relied on the Townsend effect for power. In reality, his recovery process was to keep the batteries charged only to supply high voltage pulses, a bit like an automobile alternator. The petrol, so to speak was what nobody understands. It is just that Gray himself did not fully understand how the motor worked, it was someone called Marvin Cole who put it all together.

Hope this clarifies the Gray Motor a bit for you.

Regards

Dwane

Well, there are two aspect of calling the device as MOTORS... the 1984 is a SINGLE BATTERY motor with POWER pulses fed in two directions one to the Recharge the Battery and the other to Power the Motor..now this is a TORQUE MOTOR.
The SSG (and not SG) that JB designed years later may be called as SPEED MOTOR and not Torque motor!and hence it is not a Motor in the torque sense, again the SSG is a TWO BATTERY system and is really an ENERGISER to charge Batteries and not meant for Mechanical load applications, The other thing to remember is that the Battery is the 'LOAD' to the SSG kind of ENERGISER, hence Bigger Batteries work better.. What i meant by saying that the machine(JB's 1984) is ONE SCALE BELOW the Gray motor is that..the G-Field coils when fired with High-Voltage Capacitor discharge through them will yield tremendous motoring Torque and that is the full scale of the Gray motor.. Yes!!the secret is out there.. recall Aaron's Pulsed Plasma Motor of lowering the impedance of an Inductor to produce power gain or Discharge times lowered for the same power is very much of what i have pointed out here! its all been there.. only complication of information limits our tinkering process unless your are determined to find it out somehow!!!
some where i feel the Jim watson and the Mervin cole stories are some kind of red herring to distract the attention from the original inventors or were made to keep a fictitious spin off or some nebulous reasons unclear even today..
Best Regards,
Faraday88.