mirror of
https://github.com/nhammer514/textfiles-politics.git
synced 2024-12-29 09:16:21 -05:00
524 lines
25 KiB
XML
524 lines
25 KiB
XML
<xml><p>&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#
|
||
%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&
|
||
#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%
|
||
&%# &%#
|
||
%#& Axon Industries Present %#&
|
||
#&% #&%
|
||
&%# The Kromery Converter/Free Electricity &%#
|
||
%#& %#&
|
||
#&% Original articles by John Bedini, Eike Mueller, and Tom Bearden. #&%
|
||
&%# Retyped Without Permission 07/04/86 by (_>Shadow Hawk 1<_) &%#
|
||
%#& %#&
|
||
#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%
|
||
&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#
|
||
%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&%#&
|
||
|
||
Tom Bearden
|
||
|
||
John Bedini has a prototype free energy motor.
|
||
|
||
Imagine having a small D.C. electrical motor sitting on your laboratory bench
|
||
powered by a common 12 volt battery. Imagine starting with a fully charged
|
||
battery and connecting it to the motor with no other power input. Obviously,
|
||
the motor is going to run off the battery, but by conventional thinking it will
|
||
stop when the battery runs down.
|
||
|
||
It isn't running by the conventional wisdom of electrical physics. It isn't
|
||
running by the conventional rules of electric motors and generators, but it is
|
||
running.
|
||
|
||
And it isn't something complex. It's pretty simple, once one gets the hang of
|
||
the basic idea.
|
||
|
||
Impossible, you say. Not at all. That's precisely what John Bedini has done,
|
||
and the motor is running now in his workshop.
|
||
|
||
It's running off the principles of electromagnetics that Nikola Tesla
|
||
discovered shortly before 1900 in his Colorado Springs experiments. It's
|
||
running off the fact that pure empty vacuum - pure "emptiness", so to speak, is
|
||
filled with rivers and oceans of seething energy, just as Nikola Tesla pointed
|
||
out.
|
||
|
||
It's running off the fact that vacuum space-time itself is nothing but pure
|
||
masless charge. That is, vacuum has a very high electrostatic scalar potential
|
||
- it is greatly stressed. To usefully tap the enormous locked-in energy of that
|
||
stress, all one has to do is crack it sharply and tap the vacuum oscillations
|
||
that result. The best way to do that is to hit something resonant that is
|
||
imbedded in the vacuum, then tap the resonant stress of the ringing of the
|
||
vacuum itself.
|
||
|
||
In other words, we can ring something at its resonant frequency and, if that
|
||
something is imbedded in the vacuum, we can tap off the resonance in vacuum
|
||
stress, without tapping energy directly from the embedded system we rang into
|
||
oscillation. So what we really need is something that is deeply imbedded in the
|
||
vacuum, that is, something that can translate the "vacuum" movement into "mass"
|
||
movement.
|
||
|
||
Well, all charged particles and ions are already imbedded in the vacuum by
|
||
their charged fluxes, so stressed oscillations - that is, vacuum oscillations -
|
||
can be converted into normal energy of mass movement by charged particles or
|
||
ions, if the system of charged particles or ions is made to resonate in phase
|
||
with our tapping "potential". For our purpose, let's use a system of ions.
|
||
|
||
First we will need a big accumulator to hold a lot of the charged ions in the
|
||
system that we wish to shock into oscillation. We need something that has a big
|
||
capacitance and also contains a lot of ions.
|
||
|
||
An ordinary battery filled with electrolyte fits the bill nicely. While it's
|
||
not commonly known, ordinary lead-acid storage batterys have a resonant ionic
|
||
frequency, usually in the range of from 1 - 6 Mhz. All we have to do is shock
|
||
-oscillate the ions in the electrolyte at their resonant frequency and time our
|
||
"trigger" potential and "siphon" circuit correctly. Then if we keep adding
|
||
potential to trigger the system we can get all that "potential" to translate
|
||
into "free electrical energy".
|
||
|
||
Look at it this way. Conventionally "electrostatic scalar potential" is composed
|
||
of work or energy per columb of charged particle mass. So if we add potential
|
||
alone, without the mass flow, to a system of oscillating charged particles, we
|
||
add "physical energy" in the entire charged particle system. In
|
||
other words, the "potential" we add is converted directly into "ordinary energy
|
||
" by the imbedded ions in the system. And if we are clever we don't have to
|
||
furnish any pushing energy to move pure potential around. (For proof that this
|
||
is possible, see Bearden's Toward a New Electromagnetics; Part IV; Vectors and
|
||
Mechanisms Clarified, Tesla Book Co., 1983, Slide 19, Page 43, and the accom-
|
||
panying write-up, pages 10, and 11. Also see Y. Aharonov and V. Bohm, "Signifi-
|
||
cance of Electromagnetic Potentials in the Quantum Theory", Physical Review,
|
||
Second Series, Vol. 115, No. 3, Aug. 1, 1959, pages 485-491. On page 490 you
|
||
you will find that it's possible to have a field-free reigon of space, and
|
||
still have the potential determine the physical properties of the system.)
|
||
|
||
Now this "free energy resonant coupling" can be done in a simple, cheap
|
||
system. You don't need big cyclotrons and huge laboratories to do it; you can
|
||
do it with ordinary D.C. motors, batteries, controllers and trigger circuits.
|
||
|
||
And that's exactly what John Bedini has done. It's real. It works. It's
|
||
running now on John's laboratory bench in prototype form.
|
||
|
||
But that's not all. John is also a humanitarian. He's as concerned as I am
|
||
for that little old widow lady at the end of the lane, stretching her meager
|
||
Social Security check as far as she can, shivering in the cold winter and not
|
||
daring to turn up her furnace because she can't afford the frightful utility
|
||
bills.
|
||
|
||
That's simply got to change and John Bedini may well be the fellow who changes
|
||
it. By openly releasing his work in this paper, he is providing enough
|
||
information for all the tinkerers and independent inventors around the world to
|
||
have at it. If he can get a thousand of them to duplicate his device, it simply
|
||
can't be supressed as so many others have been.
|
||
|
||
So here it is. John has deliberately written his paper for the tinkerer and
|
||
experimenter, not for the scientist. You must be careful, for the device is a
|
||
little tricky to adjust in and synchronize all the resonances. You'll have to
|
||
fiddle with it, but it will work. Keep at it.
|
||
|
||
Also, we warn you not to play with this unless you know what you are doing.
|
||
The resonating battery electrolyte produces hydrogen, and if you hit it to hard
|
||
with a "voltage spike" you can get an electrical spark inside the battery. If
|
||
that happens, THE BATTERY WILL EXPLODE, so don't mess with it unless you are
|
||
qualified and use the utmost caution.
|
||
|
||
But it DOES work. So all you experimenters and pioneers, now's your chance.
|
||
Have at it. Build it. Tinker with it. Fiddle it into resonant operation. Then
|
||
lets build this thing in quantity, sell it widely, and get those home utilities
|
||
down to where we can all afford them - including the shivering little old lady
|
||
at the end of the lane.
|
||
|
||
And when we do, lets give John Bedini, and men like him the credit and appre-
|
||
ciation they so richly deserve.
|
||
|
||
Tom Bearden
|
||
|
||
April 13,1984
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
John Bedini
|
||
|
||
[Note: John Bedini developed Two kinds of controller devices. One, being very
|
||
simple, is the one I will present here. The other is quite a bit more complex,
|
||
and would be impossible for me to reproduce here... Anyway if you want to see
|
||
the all electronic controller, get the book "Bedini's Free Energy Generator" by
|
||
John C. Bedini, Published by the Tesla Book Co. 1580 Magnolia Ave., Millbrae,
|
||
CA 94030.]
|
||
|
||
For some time man has been looking for different ways to generate electricity
|
||
. He has used water power, steam power, nuclear power, and solar power. Recent
|
||
papers written by Tom Bearden make a free energy generator possible. Tom
|
||
Bearden, rather than patent his devices, chose to share them with people who
|
||
had open ears. I myself have had many conversations with Tom Bearden. He
|
||
found Tom to be one of the most reasonable men he had ever dealt with in this
|
||
energy field. Most others would tell you stories of great machines they had,
|
||
but would never present the truth with circuit diagrams or a look at the
|
||
machine in question. Tom, on the other hand, clearly presents his ideas and
|
||
clearly presents his ideas and discloses the concepts by means of which
|
||
they work.
|
||
|
||
The facts I am about to present to you about free energy were never put into
|
||
textbooks, only portions were. The textbooks have grounded people in
|
||
conventional theory and made things very complicated. What I am about to
|
||
explain is very simple; anyone can understand this theory and anyone who
|
||
understands what he is doing can build this device.
|
||
|
||
I have been grounded in conventional theory for some eleven years. I have
|
||
always tried to study the simplicity of electrical circuits, but my mind
|
||
wouldn't allow this because of my orthodox training. In any event, I had to
|
||
change the way i was looking at things. I started to wonder, why do we need to
|
||
have things so complicated? The truth of the matter is, we have been taught to
|
||
consume or waste energy at every turn in our lives, so we jump into our cars,
|
||
turn on lights, etc. In other words, we have been conditioned to waste energy
|
||
and fuels lavishly, not realizing that someday someone will sky-rocket our
|
||
energy bills to a point where we will not be able to pay for these fuels.
|
||
Everything will come to a stand-still. But laugh as you will, at that time Rube
|
||
Goldberg machines will power your future. It probably will not be uncommon to
|
||
see machines from the size of garbage cans to the size of two story apartment
|
||
houses powering everything in sight. These machines will be using a force in
|
||
nature never conceived by the conventionally trained mind of today.
|
||
|
||
The theory I am about to explain to you will bring you one step closer to
|
||
gaining free energy.
|
||
|
||
To begin my story I must state I had a vision - looking for this energy. Many
|
||
times I hammered my head into the ground, but I refused to give up in my search
|
||
. Any person with a dream should never let it be wasted by fools, who will
|
||
always say "you can't do that". All that statement really means is that they do
|
||
not know how to do it.
|
||
|
||
There are many different ways to explain this theory. I will discuss the
|
||
first one now.
|
||
|
||
The device is very simple and uses a motor, a generator, a controller switch,
|
||
and a battery. Basically, we drive a direct current motor with pulsed current
|
||
from a battery, then utilize a special means to cause the battery to recharge
|
||
itself.
|
||
|
||
First, the battery, controller, and generator are interconnected as shown
|
||
in figure 3. (See also Figure 1)
|
||
|
||
|
||
/-----\ /-----\
|
||
o-12v | |===| || | 14v.o
|
||
[Motor==| |==||===Gen. ]
|
||
o+ | |===| || | .o
|
||
\-----/ Mass \-----/
|
||
Controller
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 1: The Kromery Converter
|
||
|
||
|
||
__________
|
||
= Brush 1
|
||
_-_ * =shaft
|
||
/xxx\ xxx=copper
|
||
/x/x\x\ = =brush
|
||
| x*x=|_________ _o--o1
|
||
\ \x/ /Brush 2 /|
|
||
\_ _/ 2o--/
|
||
-
|
||
= Brush 3 o--o3
|
||
__________ Equivelant
|
||
Circuit
|
||
|
||
Figure 2: Controller Construction
|
||
|
||
|
||
3O To controller 1O To controller
|
||
| brush #3 | brush #1
|
||
| |
|
||
| Mass | 2O To controller
|
||
| Gen. Motor| | brush #2
|
||
| ____ = ____ | |
|
||
\----O+ |-=-| +O-/ \-To batt +
|
||
/--O- |-=-| -O--+---To batt -
|
||
| ---- = ---- |
|
||
\---------------/
|
||
|
||
Figure 3: Schematic of the device
|
||
|
||
|
||
Let's begin by stating certain facts. The ions move backwards under charging
|
||
conditions and in reverse under discharging conditions. So here we start
|
||
our new concept. Suppose we have constructed a machine that has tricked this battery
|
||
into a different space and time relationship. Simply put, suppose the battery
|
||
never did any work and it should have its full charge left in it. Suppose this
|
||
becomes possible because we have stressed the terminals in such a way that the
|
||
ions in the battery electrolyte actually move themselves backwards. The
|
||
machine, or unit, that makes this possible has many different names. Some
|
||
people call these units generators, energizers, alternators, etc.
|
||
Conventionally such devices have one thing in common; they stress the battery
|
||
backwards by pushing electricity into the battery and forcibly pushing the
|
||
ions in the electrolyte backwards. In our theory, we are not going to push anything - the ions are going to move themselves, recharging the battery.
|
||
|
||
If we go a little deeper into this theory, you are probably asking yourself,
|
||
"what is this madman talking about?" Simply put, we are going to put a stress on
|
||
the battery terminals for a moment in time and the battery will do the rest.
|
||
Now comes the heavy part of this theory. What they didn't teach you in textbooks
|
||
is that, in order for the battery to charge, two oscillatory actions must occur,
|
||
one at the positive terminal and one at the negative terminal. Under different
|
||
stress levels this then forces the ions backwards. The same would occur for an
|
||
electron. Our machine will slingshot ions in the battery electrolyte backwards
|
||
beyond the normal recoil action.
|
||
|
||
I must give a very stern warning at this time that if the voltage developed
|
||
is too high the battery will explode. Use the utmost care. Test setups in my lab
|
||
have proven that this can be dangerous. Do not build the device and experiment
|
||
with it unless you know what you are doing, and use the utmost caution.
|
||
|
||
When struck by a sharp voltage spike, the electrolyte in the battery will
|
||
resonate at a certain frequency and this can also force the ions backwards.
|
||
Simply put, the battery, the motor, and the energizer will become resonant at
|
||
some point, "ring" like a bell when we "strike" it, and in its ringing the most
|
||
energy will be developed.
|
||
|
||
[Note: sorry I can't produce waveforms here so get the book! I will present
|
||
the explanation here, however]
|
||
|
||
The battery is really charging itself. The ions in the electrolyte are being
|
||
stressed in a curved space and time relationship, the battery is actually
|
||
forced into believing that no work ever occured. The oscillatory action that has
|
||
taken place by the energizer has just pulsed our "slingshot" and immediately
|
||
let go. Once this has happened, the electrolyte in the battery goes wild
|
||
and the ions race backwards, giving off hydrogen and oxygen gas. I must make a
|
||
stern warning here! The time of the stimulaing pulse is very important. If the
|
||
time is to long the battery will burn itself out. If the pulse time is too
|
||
short or if the circuit fails to operate correctly, the battery will never
|
||
recover its charge. Taking this into consideration, the only failures that
|
||
could occur would be the controller failure due to a points faiulre (on the
|
||
electronic controller), or the multivibrator latched in the "on" position
|
||
(again, only on the electronic controller). Anyone studying this can see
|
||
that we have used very little energy to get to this point, and gained a lot of
|
||
resonant energy in return.
|
||
|
||
We must remember that, if the battery is applied to the energizer longer than
|
||
normal, we must burn up the excess energy to keep the battery cool. The problem
|
||
now becomes one of embarrassing excess of energy, not a shortage.
|
||
|
||
The energizer is also a simple machine, but if yu want to, you can make it
|
||
very complex. The simple way is to study the alternator principles. The waves
|
||
we want to generate are like those that came from old D.C. generators with the
|
||
exception of armature drag, bearing drag, and no excited fields. Also, we
|
||
would want to cut the magnetic fields at 90 degress to the armature. The
|
||
simpler the better.
|
||
|
||
I am going to throw a few ideas your way. I have run some tests in my lab and
|
||
discovered that certain types of energizers, generators, and alternators do what
|
||
we need. Also, we want to be able to tune the output of our energizer. The old
|
||
D.C. generator puts out something very close towhat we need, except for The
|
||
drag.
|
||
|
||
In an A.C. generator output we are going to see just what we manufacture. It
|
||
would appear that this leaves this generator out. Not really, because we can
|
||
make this generator's output change by rectifying it.
|
||
|
||
In looking at the A.C. generator with rectified output, we see that it could
|
||
become very useful to us as an energizer, simply because it is the easiest
|
||
to construct and its principles are simple. I have done experiments with an
|
||
A.C. generator using ALL N. alligned magnets, and rectified. Most people can
|
||
see that that type o alternator might
|
||
have some problems. However, remember that I am looking for a certain type of
|
||
wave form that I want to tune to a certain frequency at a certain speed.
|
||
The winding of this alternatr is a problem and it is a bit tricky, but I chose to stay with this unit. You may
|
||
choose a different method if you retain the principle. The type of energizer that
|
||
was used for the prototype was a standard office type 2-speed A.C. fan housing.
|
||
The coils were replaced with 6 coils of approx. 200 turns of #20 wire - all in
|
||
phase. Six permanent magnets are bonded to an aluminum disc. This arrangement
|
||
is basically a magneto, but will produce more amperage than ordinarily expected
|
||
of a magneto.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Controller Construction:
|
||
Figure 2 shows the controller. It should be made of two coencentric circles,
|
||
one with approx. 140 degrees of copper, the other, spaced far enough from the
|
||
first for a brush to be inserted between them, a full 360 degrees of copper. Provisions should be made to
|
||
rotate the brushes in relationship to each
|
||
other in order to secure the required timing.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Eike Mueller
|
||
|
||
John Bedini found that the material generally available concerning Kromery's
|
||
Converter had been altered. Rebuilding the Kromery Converter from the patent
|
||
papers ended up in a non-functioning device. Bedini found the necessary
|
||
modifications which made this machine perform.
|
||
|
||
Our first goal was to determine the converters efficiency. We found this
|
||
to be quite difficult as the efficiency changes with the load applied.
|
||
|
||
Figure K-1 shows the first setup we used. We drove the Kromery Converter
|
||
from a 12v motorcycle battery. We connected at the output of the converter
|
||
a condenser and a rectifier bridge in parallel. The rectified current
|
||
was then put back into the motorcycle battery. To detect any current flow,
|
||
we connect into the positive line a 12 V light bulb.
|
||
|
||
The result of this test was the light bulb was lit up. However after 15 minutes
|
||
the batrery voltage had dropped from 11.05 V to 9.10 V. The speed of the
|
||
converter was stabale at 1020 rpm.
|
||
|
||
/----------\ /----\
|
||
/--O Kromery +O----+--O+12v|
|
||
|/-OConverter-O---+---O- | FIGURE K - 1
|
||
|| \----------/ || \----/
|
||
|| ||
|
||
|| /------------/| KROMERY CONVERTER
|
||
|\-------. |
|
||
| | / \ |
|
||
| | /FW \ | TEST SETUP #1
|
||
| \-Bridg+--(X)-/
|
||
| \ / Bulb
|
||
| \ /
|
||
\--------.
|
||
|
||
|
||
In the next test we introduced a seperate battery (battery #2) for charging
|
||
from the converter.
|
||
|
||
We recharged the battery #2 from 12.30 V to 12.40 V within 4 minutes, and we
|
||
measured a current flow into the battery #2 of 0.8 amperes.
|
||
|
||
/----------\ /----\
|
||
/--O Kromery +O-------O+12v|
|
||
|/-OConverter-O-------O-#1 | FIGURE K - 2
|
||
|| \----------/ \----/
|
||
||
|
||
|| /-------------\ /----\ KROMERY CONVERTER
|
||
|\-------. \--O-12*|
|
||
| | / \ /--O+#2 |
|
||
| | /FW \ | \----/ TEST SETUP #2
|
||
| \-Bridg+--(/)-/
|
||
| \ / Ampere *Note difference
|
||
| \ / Meter in polarity from
|
||
\--------. battery #1.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure K-2 shows the second test setup. Because the kromery converter
|
||
ran too slow on one 12 V battery, we decided to drive the converter using
|
||
24 V via two 12 V batteries, connected in series.
|
||
|
||
Next we wanted to find a correlation between the normal charging of battery
|
||
#2 using a commercial battery charger, and charging this same battery with the
|
||
Kromery converter. We drained the battery #2 to 8 V, connected it to the
|
||
Kromery Converter, and after reaching 11.51 V, we measured the time it took to
|
||
charge the battery from this voltage level of 11.51 V to 12.45 V. We
|
||
reached this voltage (12.45 V) after 11 minutes. The indicated current into the
|
||
battery was 0.94 A.
|
||
|
||
We then repeated these steps using the commercial battery charger. Because we
|
||
ran out of time after nearly 2 hours, we disconnected the battery from the
|
||
charger. The battery voltage had reached 12.41 V. The measurement is depicted
|
||
in Figure K-3.
|
||
|
||
|
||
THE BATTERY CHARGER NEEDED 119 MINUTES
|
||
|
||
TO RAISE THE BATTERY VOLTAGE FROM 11.51 V TO 12.41 V
|
||
FIGURE K - 3
|
||
|
||
THE KROMERY CONVERTER NEEDED 11 MINUTES
|
||
|
||
TO RAISE THE BATTERY VOLTAGE FROM 11.51 V TO 12.45 V
|
||
|
||
|
||
NOTE: The charger could not fill up the batteries
|
||
|
||
to 12.45 volts within two hours.
|
||
|
||
|
||
We wanted to find a correction factor for the Kromery Converter by comparing
|
||
the same effect, i.e. the charging of the same battery from one specific
|
||
voltage to another specific voltage. The calculation of this factor is avilable
|
||
in the book "Experiments with a Kromery and a Brandt-Tesla converter built by
|
||
John Bedini" By Eike Mueller, with Comments by Tom Bearden. Table K-1 shows the
|
||
combined test results. Because we detected an increase in the speed of the
|
||
Kromery Converter as well as a decrease in the input energy when we increased
|
||
the output load, we decided to measure the input energy and speed when the
|
||
output was shorted. Again, the input energy dropped and the speed increased.
|
||
|
||
Measurement No Load Loaded With Shorted Corrected
|
||
Battery Fact. 5.535
|
||
============================================================
|
||
|
||
Input Voltage 25.30 25.00 24.90
|
||
|
||
Input Current 3.90 3.00 2.20
|
||
|
||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Watts In 98.67 75.00 54.78
|
||
|
||
Watts Out N/A 10.26 N/A 56.78
|
||
|
||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Speed In Rev/Sec 40.00 65.00 73.00
|
||
|
||
Output Voltage DC 48.00 10.80 N/A
|
||
|
||
Output Current N/A 0.95 1.05
|
||
|
||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Watts In/Out N/A 7.31 N/A 1.32
|
||
|
||
============================================================
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table K - 1
|
||
|
||
|
||
Using the earlier determined correction factor of 5.535 we calculated the
|
||
energy they put into the battery to 56.78 watts (from 10.26 * 5.535). Looking
|
||
at Table K-1 we see that it takes only 54.78 watts to run the Kromery Converter
|
||
when the output is shorted. This result led us to continue with theese tests
|
||
and load the converter output even more. The results of these tests can be seen
|
||
in Table K-2.
|
||
|
||
Here again, we detected that we would get a higher efficiency of the total
|
||
device, the more we load down the output side. This effect is totally
|
||
contradictory to the conventional laws of physics.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Measurement No Load Loaded With Loaded w/ Loaded w/
|
||
Lamp & Batt 13.5 Ohms 0.63 Ohms
|
||
============================================================
|
||
|
||
Input Voltage 25.40 25.30 20.00 21.90
|
||
|
||
Input Current 3.90 3.90 3.39 2.30
|
||
|
||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Watts In 99.06 98.67 67.80 50.37
|
||
|
||
Watts Out N/A 21.00 185.19 634.92
|
||
|
||
Watts Out (Corrected) 116.24
|
||
|
||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Resistance (Ohms) N/A N/A 13.50 0.63
|
||
|
||
Output Voltage DC 48.00 28.00 50.00 20.00
|
||
|
||
Output Current N/A 0.75 N/A N/A
|
||
|
||
------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Watts In/Out N/A 0.85 0.37 0.08
|
||
|
||
============================================================
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table K - 2
|
||
|
||
|
||
We used the Kromery correction factor for the First case, when we had connected
|
||
the battery to the converter output. We did not use this factor in both other
|
||
cases when we used resistors in the output circuit.
|
||
|
||
The above test results show that the efficiency of the Kromery Converter is
|
||
well above 100%.
|
||
|
||
|
||
The end. Typed by (_>Shadow Hawk 1<_). May be distributed anywhere as long as
|
||
you keep the credits. I dont give a shit what you do with it either.
|
||
|
||
DOWNLOADED FROM P-80 SYSTEMS.....
|
||
</p></xml> |