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

[RS_]

Hi Richard,

I designed a PCB that was a upgrade to the SG back pop the charging battery that PL showed the year before. You can get one from me, or Teslagenx, and a 5 strand Coil to go with it, from them too....

I showed all the Schematics of the 4 battery swapper system power supply at the conference, and added the 3 battery Swapper system Schematics for the SSG charger to the Presentation, after the conference during editing.

Chad and I have been working on fully automated Swapper systems for both, for a good while now.... The hardware is finished. I am a hardware man, and designing the Arduino Master/Slave Software code for both swapper systems, has been like banging my head against the wall, and has taken me a while..... Got it Very close now, just needs some more minor features, and tweaks to the code....

If you have any questions, I will do my best to answer them.

Too bad PPL like you don't live close to me, so we can collaborate......

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Richard,

You can use just about anything. Deep cycles are best whether they are gel, amg or flooded cell. Starter batteries will work but not designed to pull long steady loads. You can even use a variac and rectify the output for dc if the input motor is dc. You can go up in voltage, not just 12 or 24 volts, just depends on what the prime mover motor is rated for.

I think Aaron was commenting on the power source for the Kromrey Generator not the SSG with four battery rotation. I don't see how you could use a variac to replace one of the batteries in the four battery rotation system.

What type of PCB did he make for someone and can I find out about it and more sketches?

I don't know about RS's board, but I think the pcb Peter demonstrated was a joint project between himself and Teslagenx. I asked Tom from Teslagenx if they would make this board available to us, and he indicated that was in the plans for later release. Haven't heard anything more about this for some time now.

Wish I could be there but I live in northern Illinois and conference is far from here.

I live in west central Illinois and have managed to attend three of the conferences. It is a very long and tiring drive, plus it's expensive to do. Since we are both in Illinois maybe we could get together sometime and share information on projects. What you are doing is also on my bucket list of replications to try.

[rdvideo]

Aaron, thanks for the info. Since I am working on my project in my house, no garage, sealed would be best. I was wondering on the different types of deep cycle batteries and you answered my question there. There is a lot to read here and need to do some speed reading to catch-up on things. Never thought about variac which would work at beginning of project to get things going using it as the primary. Now to dig through my electronic parts collected over 45 years in electronics and find the variac I have and now have something to use it for. I liked what RS did with the poor man's system and keep re-watching it to get as much info that I can from it. Presentation could of been better like showing his setup to see all of the electronics involved with his machine. What type of PCB did he make for someone and can I find out about it and more sketches? Wish I could be there but I live in northern Illinois and conference is far from here.

I am going to try again and post a pic of my project in the beginning.

I'll be back with more questions.

Richard (aka rdvideo)

[Aaron Murakami]

What type of batteries can be used with this system besides the standard deep cycle battery?

You can use just about anything. Deep cycles are best whether they are gel, amg or flooded cell. Starter batteries will work but not designed to pull long steady loads. You can even use a variac and rectify the output for dc if the input motor is dc. You can go up in voltage, not just 12 or 24 volts, just depends on what the prime mover motor is rated for.

[rdvideo]

Hello

Hi All,
Back into the forum after getting my basic setup from Teslagenx which is half of the frame that Peter used. Using one long coil at the moment and waiting for my second coil from Teslagenx. Now that I have a second source for funds, I want to complete this 'mini beast' that Peter started. I have built the original SSG back in 2013 and worked fine the first time tried. That was with a bi-filar coil that I made out wood and a piece of PVC pipe. Lost extra funds and had to put project on the back burner. Now extra funds are back for good and want to complete this project and I need some help in doing this, so I came back to where I know I will get info I can trust.

Screw stuff from Rick 'whathisface' because I bought a pre-wound bi-filar coil from him in 2013 to see how well it performed as compared to what I made from instructions and what I had on hand and his coil was the worst made coil I've ever seen made. My coil performed better than his and enough of that. When the master of something passes on, others follow to fill in his space to teach the same thing even though they do not know what they are doing, but they think they do!

What type of batteries can be used with this system besides the standard deep cycle battery?

[geoffrey sr miller]

Geoffrey, you're part of the problem promoting that here and you obviously have zero personal insight into any of this situation in regards to John Bedini.

Scorch, Rick has no valid points because his long-winded babble is filled with nothing but pure unadulterated lies. I will respond to those in Energetic Forum and will copy this over there for the record to preserve his lies.

Hi Aaron
Call me if you want to know why I forwarded Rick's info.

Thank's Geoffrey

[Faraday88]

Well, yes, agreed regarding testing and conclusions. But; I am very lazy and will probably just use straight coils without worrying about any geometry.
Is challenging enough just to fabricate straight coils good enough and balanced well enough that nothing flies apart or the whole apparatus walks across the bench.

And I am still wondering; has anybody else actually built one of these?
I have scrolled all through this thread and not finding any build photos.

Did find this post I wrote way back then about the Muller coils-

http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=3398&page=5&p=24157&viewfull=1#post24157

Oh and regarding the apparent recent 'discovery' of how John wound his coils; it appears somebody was questioning this over a year ago-

http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=3398&page=13&p=25398&viewfull=1#post25398

And this seems to say that maybe they actually are SUPPOSED to be in a bucking configuration-

http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=3398&page=13&p=25411&viewfull=1#post25411

And I ask again-
Does Aaron or Peter have the vertical converter and if yes; shouldn't we replicate that since it appears to be better version that did demonstrate some cooling effects in the EFV video?
And: Shouldn't we also check the polarity and poles of THOSE coils?

Kindest regards;
}:>

Its Simple as day light to me....the verticle one is a G-field generator much improvised version of the kromery convertor.. people have to learn from the fundamental one....btw the G-field could very well be fundamantal in a way!!!
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Scorch]

Well, yes, agreed regarding testing and conclusions. But; I am very lazy and will probably just use straight coils without worrying about any geometry.
Is challenging enough just to fabricate straight coils good enough and balanced well enough that nothing flies apart or the whole apparatus walks across the bench.

And I am still wondering; has anybody else actually built one of these?
I have scrolled all through this thread and not finding any build photos.

Did find this post I wrote way back then about the Muller coils-

http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=3398&page=5&p=24157&viewfull=1#post24157

Oh and regarding the apparent recent 'discovery' of how John wound his coils; it appears somebody was questioning this over a year ago-

http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=3398&page=13&p=25398&viewfull=1#post25398

And this seems to say that maybe they actually are SUPPOSED to be in a bucking configuration-

http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=3398&page=13&p=25411&viewfull=1#post25411

And I ask again-
Does Aaron or Peter have the vertical converter and if yes; shouldn't we replicate that since it appears to be better version that did demonstrate some cooling effects in the EFV video?
And: Shouldn't we also check the polarity and poles of THOSE coils?

Kindest regards;
}:>

Hi Scorch,
Very well yes i appreciate your thinking about the magnetic gradient i thought of the same(Bill muller case)..it could be the case in the Muller design, but these things remain speculative unless one tries them out and get conclusive evidence of the actual purpose behind it. but as for the Kromery convertor the conical shape has nothing significant that's for sure as far as i can say.
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Faraday88]

I believe this was discussed in depth. I was there and yes; remember that his cores were very proprietary.
Just don't remember where all the different entries are regarding the significance of the cone shape in 417+ pages of study...

http://overunity.com/3842/muller-dynamo/

Why so critical to be that close to the pole as to actually sacrifice space for windings?

Think about it. Could simply move the coil back a few millimeters and have more room for rotational clearances while still maintaining very tight gap between core and pole.
If more magnetic field strength for the core is desired then; simply add more or better magnets to the stack.

Also think about this reasoning and engineering of it- Field strength near the pole is strongest therefore less wire needed in the winding nearest the pole and more wire needed farther away from the pole to still take advantage of weaker field strength farther away from pole.

Does this sound logical or am I totally out in left field?
Maybe it should be the opposite. More wire where field strength is strongest...

Kindest regards;
}:>

Hi Scorch,
Very well yes i appreciate your thinking about the magnetic gradient i thought of the same(Bill muller case)..it could be the case in the Muller design, but these things remain speculative unless one tries them out and get conclusive evidence of the actual purpose behind it. but as for the Kromery convertor the conical shape has nothing significant that's for sure as far as i can say.
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Scorch]

I believe this was discussed in depth. I was there and yes; remember that his cores were very proprietary.
Just don't remember where all the different entries are regarding the significance of the cone shape in 417+ pages of study...

http://overunity.com/3842/muller-dynamo/

Why so critical to be that close to the pole as to actually sacrifice space for windings?

Think about it. Could simply move the coil back a few millimeters and have more room for rotational clearances while still maintaining very tight gap between core and pole.
If more magnetic field strength for the core is desired then; simply add more or better magnets to the stack.

Also think about this reasoning and engineering of it- Field strength near the pole is strongest therefore less wire needed in the winding nearest the pole and more wire needed farther away from the pole to still take advantage of weaker field strength farther away from pole.

Does this sound logical or am I totally out in left field?
Maybe it should be the opposite. More wire where field strength is strongest...

Kindest regards;
}:>

[Aaron Murakami]

That's right - and John confirmed it verbally to me when I asked about the cone shaped coils. He said that was the "only way to do it" in order to keep the core close to the lamination carrying the permanent magnet field. If you want to keep the cylindrical shape, you could extend the core out past the end of the bobbin - everyone just has to experiment on their own to see what works better or if it even makes much difference.

[Faraday88]

Regarding Geometry. Don't know if you guys remember this or ever saw these from the original Muller Motor Web site before they took all this stuff down.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6770[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6771[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6770[/ATTACH]

And yes, John's coils do appear to be very much a cone geometry and is entirely possible he got this from the Muller design or even earlier work somewhere else.
Aaron seemed to think this was just about clearances but; I believe there is more to it than mere clearances.

And yes; the Muller design appears to be very low impedance.
Just a few turns of very heavy gauge wire and in one of these drawings; the output goes directly to a center tap step up transformer.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6772[/ATTACH]

Kindest regards;

}:>

[Faraday88]

This is where anything related to Rick Friedrich and his lies will be discussed here: http://www.energeticforum.com/free-e...arge-scam.html - it is free to join.

You obviously already have your mind made up and are not actually asking a question. I have nothing to justify to an anonymous troll.

Please look up what gatekeeper means because there is no context in which that even applies.

Any further post in this thread on this topic will be deleted.

Hi Aaron,
Why was all these tolerated at all in first place??
John's work is monumental we all know it.
People spread garbage easily now that he not around... what a sad day!!
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[Aaron Murakami]

Aaron,

I don't know you very well or am I tremendously familiar with these Forums. However, I do know some of the personalities mentioned and have some personal experience with their accomplishments.

Your quote above about another prompts me to say simply:

"Spoken like a true Gatekeeper."

If I may ask, What is your TRUE purpose here?

Sovereign

This is where anything related to Rick Friedrich and his lies will be discussed here: http://www.energeticforum.com/free-e...arge-scam.html - it is free to join.

You obviously already have your mind made up and are not actually asking a question. I have nothing to justify to an anonymous troll.

Please look up what gatekeeper means because there is no context in which that even applies.

Any further post in this thread on this topic will be deleted.

[Scorch]

Regarding Geometry. Don't know if you guys remember this or ever saw these from the original Muller Motor Web site before they took all this stuff down.







And yes, John's coils do appear to be very much a cone geometry and is entirely possible he got this from the Muller design or even earlier work somewhere else.
Aaron seemed to think this was just about clearances but; I believe there is more to it than mere clearances.

And yes; the Muller design appears to be very low impedance.
Just a few turns of very heavy gauge wire and in one of these drawings; the output goes directly to a center tap step up transformer.



Kindest regards;

}:>

Hi Bradley,
Just to clarify and correct you... its LOW IMPEDENCE and not LOW INDUCTANCE.. is what John meant..and that's what Tesla taught us on how to wind Coils..( Tesla Patent Coils for Electromagnets).
Geometry is very essesntial again.. Aaron clarify's why the cone shape..in the Video i guess.. so that it does'nt get obstructed by the magnet pole pieces during rotation.
Rgds,
Faraday88.