Dear  SolarLab!

I know what multi-way analytical calculations are, besides, at one time I was a developer of complex economic systems, where data collection was formed according to specified criteria.
I also do engineering calculations. My practice has always been based on repeatability and prediction. I adopted various calculation methods, while my methodology significantly reduced the material investment as for design.

If I say something, I know for sure. The magnetic circuit, you can very accurately calculate in dynamics, but this does not mean that you can quite accurately calculate the dimensionality of the EMF.
I will surprise you, but the EMF guidance system in the wire is very different from the one that is taught based on formula (1) [E=BLV] and the one that works in a generator and a transformer with a core, the so-called engineering transformer formula (2) [E=4.44kФNf].
I already know exactly how the static system of a transformer and a mechanical generator differ. Why Dr. Holcomb went by simulating the mechanical rotation of the magnetic poles in saturation in the stator core. The problem is solved more simply in a mechanical generator. A little more complicated with the switchable magnet system. And it's very difficult in the static system that I'm working on. By the way, I found a mistake in my modeling and got closer to a larger reality. It remains for me to check the controller system. It is definitely clear that there are two magnetic fields. There is a field in the core which is already independent. In a mechanical generator, it is enough to excite it to the maximum, taking into account the excitation source and phase current, and mechanically rotate it. In the system which I am working on, turning the flow through zero is not such an easy task as it turned out, and the first data simply baffled me.

The simple frame generator that I have discussed in this material ( https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/p/ampere-force.html ) is fully consistent with general educational theory. The only thing I specified was the AMPER POWER, and confirmed that part of the electric field of the primary EMF turns into CURRENT POWER, and as a result, into the Vortex magnetic field around the conductor.
What is the difference between a slotted stator generator and a transformer? I will answer with the amplitude of the hysteresis of the magnetic field in the zone of the phase wire.

PS
Perhaps I can now describe the work of Holcomb's pocket electromagnetic generator, in any case, on my discovery of the principle, this emerges into a general methodology. It remains for me to confirm or deny this.

I don't think Mitch got the measurements wrong. But all calculations with Ohm's law are consistent more than ever exactly.
He did not change the output voltage at idle, in any case, he did not provide me with such data.
Everything else agrees very well with applied formulas and concepts.
By the way, the concept of full power is of interest only to electricity sellers, in order to eliminate their losses in measurements in the circuit section.

https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2022/06/static-electromagnetic-transducer.html

Dear  SolarLab!

I know what multi-way analytical calculations are, besides, at one time I was a developer of complex economic systems, where data collection was formed according to specified criteria.
I also do engineering calculations. My practice has always been based on repeatability and prediction. I adopted various calculation methods, while my methodology significantly reduced the material investment as for design.

If I say something, I know for sure. The magnetic circuit, you can very accurately calculate in dynamics, but this does not mean that you can quite accurately calculate the dimensionality of the EMF.
I will surprise you, but the EMF guidance system in the wire is very different from the one that is taught based on formula (1) [E=BLV] and the one that works in a generator and a transformer with a core, the so-called engineering transformer formula (2) [E=4.44kФNf].
I already know exactly how the static system of a transformer and a mechanical generator differ. Why Dr. Holcomb went by simulating the mechanical rotation of the magnetic poles in saturation in the stator core. The problem is solved more simply in a mechanical generator. A little more complicated with the switchable magnet system. And it's very difficult in the static system that I'm working on. By the way, I found a mistake in my modeling and got closer to a larger reality. It remains for me to check the controller system. It is definitely clear that there are two magnetic fields. There is a field in the core which is already independent. In a mechanical generator, it is enough to excite it to the maximum, taking into account the excitation source and phase current, and mechanically rotate it. In the system which I am working on, turning the flow through zero is not such an easy task as it turned out, and the first data simply baffled me.

The simple frame generator that I have discussed in this material ( https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/p/ampere-force.html ) is fully consistent with general educational theory. The only thing I specified was the AMPER POWER, and confirmed that part of the electric field of the primary EMF turns into CURRENT POWER, and as a result, into the Vortex magnetic field around the conductor.
What is the difference between a slotted stator generator and a transformer? I will answer with the amplitude of the hysteresis of the magnetic field in the zone of the phase wire.

PS
Perhaps I can now describe the work of Holcomb's pocket electromagnetic generator, in any case, on my discovery of the principle, this emerges into a general methodology. It remains for me to confirm or deny this.

Dear Rakarskiy,

It's quite obvious you either do not read my posts or simply don't understand them; which is fine since many don't.

However to clarify:

- Analytical Analysis refers to doing analysis based on mathematical formulas (e.g. E = I x R where E is Volts, I is Current
and R is Resistance) {ok, now 'ya-all' can rag on my use of caps,  }

- Numeric Analysis refers to doing analysis based on Computer Numerics via Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) where the
design as a whole is entered into the computer as a physical model where the model's component characteristics are specified
and the Analysis is calculated for the entire device or system.

I took the time to provide some examples, including background information, a few posts back:

https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg572182/#msg572182

Fortunately I found Holcomb's Patents very clear after a few hours of study and his approach is, in my mind at least,
extremely brilliant and straight forward. My OUR forum posts presented in the "Holcomb" thread show this.

The last remaining part is finding a suitable (affordable, high performance) material.

You can complicate the theory, analysis and design if that's what you prefer; but for me there was no need to. Plus, I do not
need, nor have the desire, to try and impress anyone with my wealth of knowledge (which usually shows as just jibberish )!

Anyway - Good Luck!

SL

 

capitalist comrades, you have not a drop of conscience.

Hahaha!  Kolbacict, you nailed it!


Jimboot, I had to quote the above.  Just struck me as too funny.  Give it a week and you can kindly remove this post.

Hello all,

It is very uncomfortable for me to make this post.  No one is a bigger fan and supporter of Holcomb Energy Systems than I.  I previously shared some of this information with Jimboot in a PM but feel increasingly that it should be shared with the general forum.

This information comes from two people I have spoken with at length who had recent hands-on demonstrations of the Holcomb In Line Power Generator (ILPG) at the HES Sarasota, FL lab.  The following conclusions come from these first hand witnesses, both of whom are in agreement with them.

1.  The ILPG which HES is planning to market does not at all resemble the generators described in their patents or patent applications.  The ILPG is identical to a fixed-rotor, slip ring motor.  It is powered by 3-phase AC mains, not by pulsed DC as are the generators described in patents and patent applications.  You can deduce this by careful study of public posts by HES.   

2.  The ILPG produces a large current gain between the input and output measuring points, verified with a current clamp meter.  This has also been publicly posted by HES.  But the witnesses conclude this current gain is an accompanied by a large phase shift in current with respect to the voltage.

3.  The ILPG does NOT produce more power than it consumes.  HES made an unwitting error, without purposeful deceit, in wiring their input and output power meters.  Because the meters show a power gain, HES is convinced it is real and are proceeding full ahead when, in fact, there is no power gain at all.

When measuring 3-phase power, the voltage probes and current transformer probes for each of the 3 lines must be properly associated when connected to the power meter.  If the voltage and current probes are shifted with respect to each other, the current and voltage phase relationships the meter sees are incorrect and the meter reads false power values. 

The witnesses surmise that HES wired the power meter voltage and current probes incorrectly in order to show a power gain commensurate with the current gain, which they otherwise could not make sense of.  The witnesses say the current gain, however, is due to its being measured inside an LC circuit, not because of an increase in power.   

4.  The ILPG can be configured to work as a power factor correcting device and reduce the electric bill in a facility with 3-phase mains that previously did not have appropriate power factor correction.  But it will not produce any excess power.

HES has been made aware of the metering error.  However, they believe the ILPG's unique properties require that the power meters' voltage and current probes should indeed be shifted with respect to one another, that the power meters should not be connected in the normal manner.  HES is convinced that unorthodox power meter wiring is correct for the ILPG.

The situation is very discouraging to me.  Both witnesses are impeccable.  A big part of me wishes they are wrong.  But I would not bet on it.  Raising further red flags, despite multiple, repeated requests, HES has yet to provide them with verification of power gain in the ILPG by an independent third party who knows how to correctly measure 3-phase power, using their own meters.

I sincerely hope HES realizes their error and reverts to their patented generator which possibly might work.  Best wishes to everyone who is trying to replicate that earlier technology! 















 

 Hi Beginners Mind,

Does that mean Florida Power and Light (FPL) has a "wiring" problem in their Power Distribution,
Metering and Billing Systems as well?

Or maybe FPL simply knows nothing about "Power Factor" and it's effects on their grid. Do you
believe PF correction could actually affect an over 100% increase in VAR consumption?

Just curious! 

BTW, who are these "anonamous sources?" - We hear a lot of stuff these days from
so called "anonamous sources - unfortunately about 127% of it is BS from LARPS, TROLLS & SHILLS;
therefore I always prefer to confirm their stories and their sources.

Regards,

SL

As our good friend Brandon would say - "Come On Man!"     

BTW - the Florida Power and Light (FPL) billing data sheet with respect to the "HES" was
posted a while back or it can be found on the Holcomb Energy System web site...

You might want to bring this data to the attention of your anonamous sources.
Then you can also include FPL in your hit piece posts as well.

But, good luck with that!

The FPL Billing Chart is below (in case you can't find it): (make sure you check the usage - kWh vs Temp)

Maybe you will come forward with your real name and the real names of these "Anonymous witnesses" to see, if they really have the expertize to measure these things correctly...
Otherwise it is just an Anonymous claim and nobody will believe you...
 
Regards, Stefan. (Admin)

Hello all,

It is very uncomfortable for me to make this post.  No one is a bigger fan and supporter of Holcomb Energy Systems than I.  I previously shared some of this information with Jimboot in a PM but feel increasingly that it should be shared with the general forum.

This information comes from two people I have spoken with at length who had recent hands-on demonstrations of the Holcomb In Line Power Generator (ILPG) at the HES Sarasota, FL lab.  The following conclusions come from these first hand witnesses, both of whom are in agreement with them.

1.  The ILPG which HES is planning to market does not at all resemble the generators described in their patents or patent applications.  The ILPG is identical to a fixed-rotor, slip ring motor.  It is powered by 3-phase AC mains, not by pulsed DC as are the generators described in patents and patent applications.  You can deduce this by careful study of public posts by HES.   

2.  The ILPG produces a large current gain between the input and output measuring points, verified with a current clamp meter.  This has also been publicly posted by HES.  But the witnesses conclude this current gain is an accompanied by a large phase shift in current with respect to the voltage.

3.  The ILPG does NOT produce more power than it consumes.  HES made an unwitting error, without purposeful deceit, in wiring their input and output power meters.  Because the meters show a power gain, HES is convinced it is real and are proceeding full ahead when, in fact, there is no power gain at all.

When measuring 3-phase power, the voltage probes and current transformer probes for each of the 3 lines must be properly associated when connected to the power meter.  If the voltage and current probes are shifted with respect to each other, the current and voltage phase relationships the meter sees are incorrect and the meter reads false power values. 

The witnesses surmise that HES wired the power meter voltage and current probes incorrectly in order to show a power gain commensurate with the current gain, which they otherwise could not make sense of.  The witnesses say the current gain, however, is due to its being measured inside an LC circuit, not because of an increase in power.   

4.  The ILPG can be configured to work as a power factor correcting device and reduce the electric bill in a facility with 3-phase mains that previously did not have appropriate power factor correction.  But it will not produce any excess power.

HES has been made aware of the metering error.  However, they believe the ILPG's unique properties require that the power meters' voltage and current probes should indeed be shifted with respect to one another, that the power meters should not be connected in the normal manner.  HES is convinced that unorthodox power meter wiring is correct for the ILPG.

The situation is very discouraging to me.  Both witnesses are impeccable.  A big part of me wishes they are wrong.  But I would not bet on it.  Raising further red flags, despite multiple, repeated requests, HES has yet to provide them with verification of power gain in the ILPG by an independent third party who knows how to correctly measure 3-phase power, using their own meters.

I sincerely hope HES realizes their error and reverts to their patented generator which possibly might work.  Best wishes to everyone who is trying to replicate that earlier technology!