PesWiki.com

Menu

Talk:OS:Modified Bedini Cole Window Motor

Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 14, 2016 at 9:38 pm.

  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.

Discussion page for OS:Modified Bedini Cole Window Motor

Image:Mikes bedinicolewindow aparatus 95x95.jpg

Mike (HMM) has posted a demonstrated video of a device which quickly became buzzed as "overunity," but he does not claim it to be such. Complete instructions provided. Many researchers presently seeking to replicate the effect.

Comments

post here

(Just click on the "There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1].)

I don't claim it to be over unity

"I just want to say that I have never claimed this to be overunity. I think it is near unity. The third winding charges the cap quickly, and the motor runs of this charge for a long time -- not forever." -- Mike (HMM) http://www.gn0sis.com/component/option,com_joomlaboard/Itemid,33/func,view/id,2236/catid,41/limit,20/limitstart,280/ (02/15/07)

Rebuttal : "I don't think he considers the fact that it runs for several hours while overcoming air resistance, bearing friction, [while charging] a cap upwards. He only thinks it's not OU because when he tries to load it down, it stops and because he cannot power a large external load. He has not considered all the factors!" -- David Clarke ( davidclarke@ctglabs.com ) (02/15/07)

Note: Mike says it does not run forever. This is correct, but it should be noted that when the motor stops it's because it has burned out parts of it's circuitry. So far it has only stopped because of component voltage ratings were not high enough to handle the current generated by the device. It has never spun down to a dead stop.

Rich Weber -- www.gn0sis.com (gn0stik@gn0sis.com)

What Overunity Entails

"Is a gyroscope, caught on a video tape for 5 minutes a free energy machine? Don't let the claim of a Lenz' Law violation take you to la la land. If the video recording goes for 24 hours without even slowing down, with a tachometer in view, then MAYBE the inventor has something...." Congress:Advisor:Kenneth M. Rauen, NEC, (Feb. 16, 2007)

Math Does Not Point to Overunity Here

On Feb. 16, 2007, New Energy Congress member, Congress:Member:Robert Indech, PhD PE wrote:

The motor design presented is interesting, but, as its inventor claims, it is not over-unity. One piece of major evidence of its prowess is its ability to charge a 47,000uF capacitor to 6 volts with hardly any change in its rotation rate. Let us consider some of the physics of this design, particularly a calculation of the energy required to charge the capacitor, and a rough estimation of the rotational energy of this motor. Since neither materials, not dimensions, are presented on the website, I am only making a rough approximation for the latter based upon what I can estimate from the images.

The energy to charge the capacitor is E= .5CV^2, or inserting values: E= .5 (0.047)6^2= .85 joules.

The rotational energy of the motor is calculated at .5Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia of the rotating cylinder and w is the angular velocity. Suppose that the motor rotates at 3000 rpm, which is 50 revolutions per second. The angular velocity is then 5023.14 =314 rads/sec. The moment of inertia of a solid cylinder is given as I = .5mR^2 where m is the mass and R is the radius. Since I do not know the exact composition of the cylinder, it looking like a composite of metal and plastic, I approximate the density, "dn", at about 5000 kg/m^3 (compared to steel density at 7850 kg/m^3 and water density at about 2260 kg/m^3). I would figure that the diameter of the cylinder is about 3 inches (or 0.076 meter) and its length is 4 inches (or 0.1 meter). From this approximation, its mass would be calculated at m=3.14R^2Ldn = 3.14 (0.038^2)0.15000= 2.3 kg. The moment of inertia would then be I= .52.3(0.038^2)= 0.0017 kg-m^2. The rotational kinetic energy would then be: E= .50.0017(314^2)= 83.8 joules.

From this rough analysis, it is seen that the rotational kinetic energy is approximately 100 times that of the capacitor charging energy. Thus, one would expect hardly any change in the apparent rotation rate of the armature due to the energy draw to the capacitor.

Response by Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann (Feb. 16, 2007)

: [It seems that] Robert Indech did not look very closely at this video.

: 1. The extracted energy of about 1 Joule = 1 Watt-seconds is about right. (it is almost 7 Volts not 6 Volts)

: 2. But when you look closely, you can see that Mike is just tipping the rotor at the start, and gives it a light spin and it actually increases its speed during the charging at least 2 or 3 times and at the beginning it is probably only 5 rev/second so 300 RPM.

: So it is a factor 10 less input energy already as Mr. Indeech calculated, and also its mass is probably much less than the guessed 2.3 Kg -- as you can see how easily it is turned back and forth!

: A 2.3 Kg mass would not be so easy to spin up back and forth, as it would have much more inertia... ! So I guess the mass of the rotor is at maximum 500 grams or less...

: So already the fact that the rotor accelerates in RPM while charging a cap and the motor runs for hours and hours while not slowing down, while charging the cap higher and higher indeed [indicates] overunity.

Overlooked

"This motor and circuit has been on John Bedini's website for at least 7 years, just ignored by everyone." -- CTG Labs http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1988.msg23486.html#msg23486 (02/14/07)

Bedini Withholding Judgment

While this "replication" of a self-running version of John Bedini's Window Motor has caused a considerable worldwide euphoria in the last few days, John and I are withholding judgment at this time. First of all, no one has duplicated "Mike's" results yet. Second, it is not at all clear, from a circuit standpoint, what function or benefit "Mike's" circuit modifications (as published) provide.

While John has maintained for years that the Bedini/Cole motor COULD be configured to fully self-run, no model currently at his shop behaves as convincingly as the images in "Mike's" replication video.

We recommend that researchers double their efforts to channel this recent infusion of enthusiasm into working hardware. Only multiple duplications of "Mike's" experimental set-up will provide insight into the benefits or the futility of this proposed circuit modification. -- Directory:Peter Lindemann (02/16/07)

Comment: I agree with Peter, in fact, I would recommend an organized build group of the CD motor type that has been hosted by PESN in the past so that each builder can work with other builders in a more organized fashion. -- Rich W. (gn0stik@gn0sis.com)

Should have waited for replication before hype

"Stefan Hartman was asked(by multiple people in the initial core group attempting to replicate Mike's device) nicely to hold off from posting information on Mike's setup until there had been at least one solid replication. At such a time, the complete information needed to build said device would have been compiled into a concise document and then distributed to the world. So, since Stefan couldn't wait to post the information to his site and there are still no replications, everyone is questioning this, and rightly so!" -- Anonymous (02/16/07)

Actually Stefan Hartmann asked beforhand, and was given the go ahead from the administrator of gnosis.com

---Stefans post on Gnosis forum before uploading to Overunity.com---

Re:The Bedini - Cole Window Motor - 2007/02/15 02:49

Okay, I copied

now all the information from Mike

over here:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1988.0.html

Hope we get this way some more replications faster now.

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

--- Response from Gnostik, the administrator from Gnosis.com---

Re:The Bedini - Cole Window Motor - 2007/02/15 03:51

Good Idea Stefan. Post a link to this forum as well. Get as many people involved in one place as possible.

Edit: nevermind I did already. If you could post it in your thread opening post that would be good.

In fact, I don't mind if you take things from my forum, as long as you post links to the threads you got them from.

Rich

Outstanding Documentation

On Feb. 16, 2007, New Energy Congress member, Congress:Advisor:Kenneth M. Rauen wrote:

This is the best video documentation of an invention I have seen yet!

For the first time, from such evidence, I believe there is something there, assuming the small details I cannot see are not energy sources. I believe so because 1) the rotor is started by hand at slow speed and accelerates, as evidenced by the "picket fence" effect with the video frame rate, AND 2) the voltage of the capacitor climbs! There is no way the hand twist start imparted any energy that was stored and released slowly to accelerate the rotor!

Robert's energy calculations make it all the more impressive, as capacitor relaxation (from incomplete discharge, even though the meter showed 0.0 V briefly) could not have provided the acceleration energy, for the rotor at full speed had 100 times the energy of a fully charged cap.

This seems to be a 1/4-hampster-power demonstration!

Bedini comments on Gn0sis

On Feb. 17, 2007, John Bedini wrote:

Mike,

This is great work, It seems you have created a great debate in the energy community, that's good they need it.

As stated these drawings and machines have been on my internet sight since the internet started. I'm not here to find fault in anything you have done. I'm going to point out that unless everybody in this group follows your variation to the T

"They are doomed to failure", In replicating your motor.

The Window Motor is very close to the many I have built over the years, however unless everybody has your exact details, wire size, lengths in feet, switching devices, exact circuit wiring and so on, they will never reproduce it. The first thing to state here is that their is a big difference between efficiency and COP of the system. In the motor you reproduced your efficiency is around 99.9 but the COP is over 100% that is why the "CAP charges" up. The next problem is that your hall device can not work correct, because of the Radiant spike, if you walk away the Hall will soon burn out and that part will hinder your performance.

So I will state for the record right here the Motor section is not over unity and your statement is correct.

The Group needs to understand what they are building, they are building a machine that takes advantage of a simple trigger system, you must supply the trigger to cause the effect to happen. It is that trigger that causes things to happen, it's known as a sharp gradient. Sharp gradients cause normal EM systems to do real funny things since it is not in the normal text. For example the correct sharp pulse can trigger a battery to recharge itself, it can cause a capacitor to recharge itself and so on.

You are dealing with quantum systems when you cause this to happen, and they look totally different from the standard EM systems, when you combine the two you have real trouble.

Normal EM systems are designed to never be over unity and you only have meters and scopes that see only this, you can not see in the Quantum level with your instruments.

The original Maxwell equations allow the production of The term FREE ENERGY, the paper is on the internet and also it can be found on Tom Bearden's Internet Sight.

I'm Not here to have a debate with any people that think they know better, I do not want to discuss the TURBO CHARGER, which was mine in the beginning, I do not want to discuss Glow bulbs, or I think that this is what is going on, because it's not what is going on.

You Have made a great leap in what you did and posted to the internet in this group along with the Video.

John Bedini

----

On Feb. 18, 2007, John Bedini wrote:

Dave,

Yes we build Radiant Oscillators and they work very well, but I can not give out the details of that system.

As for the Monopole it works the same way, under unity in the front end with all normal EM devices. The energy shows up in the extended run time in the secondary battery if done right.

You all forget to calculate the spinning mass, you all also forget to calculate what the two batteries do. Notice what happens, the front battery goes downward while the secondary battery goes upward, then you must add in the energy to turn that mass in mechanical energy you got for free, total COP over 100%. the motor part of the energizer does the switching while the mechanical energy is free. It is not a Motor as in conventional thinking, just acts like a motor. We call this a motor because it turns, but the real term is energizer. As for you that wish to call it a simple oscillator have at it.

The Monopole Motor/Energizer is just the basics your working with. The thing to study here is the waveform it generates' and what it does with the massless current you can't see with your scopes. Everybody knows that it takes real current to charge batteries, then explain to me how it is possible to charge lead acid batteries with no current. Again you are generating a signal to tell the battery to charge, no EM circuit in the world will do this with no current, The store bought chargers use real EM (wasted product) to charge batteries. each time you charge a battery with EM you start to kill the battery, notice the amount of cycles you get out of this, not much before you can't charge it anymore, in that condition the Monopole will charge your useless battery , do the experiment. It's all about Potential Charge.

John

----

2007/02/18 19:26:

To All,

The term Back EMF is not what the energizer is catching, back EMF only applies to DC motor's. The DC motor depending on the applied voltage, when this happens there is a counter force known as Back EMF and the motor keeps the same rpm until the voltage drops down.

Back EMF in a pulsed DC system is very different as the current does not have time to catch up. Back EMF is always below the potential's input. Example if you put 10 volts in you will get about 8.5 back in back EMF. There is a misconception about what back EMF is.

Now we must move on to what the Patent office will except, they will not except the term Radiant Spike, so we are stuck with Back EMF. If you Study what a coil of wire really does you will find that when the switching device turns on, the Radiant spike is the first to show itself as you see in Mikes pictures. Tesla also said that when the switch was thrown in the DC power house the wire was surrounded with a blue needle type sparks being emitted from the wire, a stinging feeling, it killed people. This is the energy you're working with, it is not Back EMF.

The Meters of today have trouble catching this pulse as it is something very different. In the Quantum end this is what happens. The potential of the coil expands outward in a type of magnetic bottle, the space that surrounds this is pushing inward like tiny little arrows all around it, but they have no polarity they are natural particles. You must punch this little hole for some of this to get through, and only then do you get extra energy into the system, that is free, remember it is additive to the system. So you have the total EMF of the system plus what is being added under a sharp gradient of high potential. Some would like to say it is di/dt but it is something very different. What do engineers do, they try to short this extra energy out, in my case I want to catch it and use it to charge my batteries. So if you look at this there is very little current in the sharp spike, the less current the better, input power controls this . Here is another way to look at this Tesla was going to give everybody free energy, wrong, Tesla was going to use water power to supply the trigger signal to his transmitter, The benefits from this is he would punch the hole in the aether and cause standing waves to light your lights, Morgan knew this and that was the end of Tesla.

Remember Nature is in total balance this is why you feel no pressure, but put the system out of balance and you can tap the energy. Think about it, do the experiments to find out. The Monopole is a system that is nonlinear. When you through the magnetic fields out of balance this is what you get an energy that is additive. The sharper the DC pulse gradient the more energy you can add to the system, "if you can catch it". A closed loop system will catch none of this and you will have normal back EMF under unity, Normal transformer, normal DC motor. it's only when you through something out of balance the you see this effect.

John

----

2007/02/19 17:01

One thing to remember here is that The Bedini Cole switching circuit allows the supply to be independent from the drive coil. Cole and I have made Power Amplifiers using this circuit forever, Alexander has nothing to do with this motor concept as it does not use the same switching. I have posted, and commented on this machine.

Mike used the very first switching circuit we developed to switch a two pole motor.

The bipolar switch uses hall's but halls draw current which drains the capacitor. So you must be very clever in how you switch this motor, I said that you must switch only one time, that means one powerful motor pulse. the rest is a generator action to charge the capacitor to the voltage level the motor will seek, get it.

After that the motor will fight all the known laws affecting motors, standard physics.

You must be smart enough to trick this pass the known laws. I will find the 1st drawing and post it today.

John Bedini

compilation of bedini comments, some which arent on this list

See also

Directory:Electromagnetic

Directory:Bedini SG - Bedini SG replication project at PESWiki

PowerPedia:John Bedini

- OS

- News:Open Source

- Main Page

- PES Network Inc.

Comments