Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world

[bistander]

That first answer wasn't very good, was it?  "Magnetic Circuit" kind of explains the phenomena,
what ever that is. Had to think on that one abit for a {hopefully} more fundamental view.

Try this -> The magnetic field "in" the iron is like the magnetic field in a bar magnet.

The field, - ""as we see it"" - , is not really "in" the "iron" or "bar;" it's the field in close proximity to, or
around, the iron or around a permanent bar magnet.  If 'the field were only inside the iron or bar, it would
not do us much good. Atomic Magnetic Domains reside within the iron (a.k.a. sort iron or electrical steel)
and is easily magnetized and de-magnetized, whereas a permanent magnet bar will maintain it's magnatism.

The magnetic field will also "couple" between other unattached "iron" close by. The space
seperating these two, or more, "irons" (the gap) results in losses - that's where the "Magnetic Circuit" analysis
helps us to determine those losses and adjust our design accordingly (e.g. saturation, etc.).

Note we can control the (magnetic) field around the iron but the (magnetic) field around the
permanent bar magnet is always there. Also, since the "u" in air is a lot less than that found in metals, often
times it's almost invisible in CAE simulation cartoons, even for small "gaps," but the Field will traverse
from one "iron" to another close adjacent "iron," and in some cases the gap loss with not be much.

The field rapidly falls in air (air u~0) so we configure our pick-up windings (induced) in the "close
adjacent" iron in some fashion that affords good/reasonable magnetic field coupling with the windings.

If we left the pick-up windings in the air close to the "inducing iron" the coupling would be very inefficient,
plus the field would be partially blocked by the close copper layer and the outer copper layes would see
much less of the magnetic field. This appears to have been a drawback in the early Gramme generators.

Instead, we surround (as best we can) the pick-up coils (LAP) by the coupled magnetic field from the Rotor
Coil Poles to capture as much of the field as we can (e.g. by using stator slots). Lots of various schemes
for this but that's the basic idea.

Sounds simple enough; but these basic things seem to stump, it appears, even some of the experts here!

Edit: added clairifications and corrected spelling errors.

Hi SL,
In your most recent post you said "Except, I can't seem to find any of your claimed "knowledge and experience" in your posts - what have I missed?" It didn't take long to find an example where you could benefit from me. I didn't post it at the time, last week, because you're unappreciative and the post wasn't directed at me. There are numerous examples where, mostly, you call me picky or petty and insult me just for giving valuable information.

Your whole explanation is, let's say, confusing from the technical side, but in particular, these parts are incorrect.
You say "air u~0"
I presume by u, you refer to permeability, or relative permeability. If so, air has a relative permeability of very, very nearly = 1.0, which
means it is essentially equal to the permeability of free space. See the chart and reference below.
You say "field would be partially blocked by the close copper layer"
Copper will not "block" magnetic field. Copper also has a relative permeability of essentially 1.0, very, very close to that of air.
Your comment about Gramme generators is total misinformation.

No wonder you like Holcomb so much. His and your gibberish sound very much alike.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-magnetic-permeability-definition-examples.html#
bi

[SolarLab]

Hi SL,
In your most recent post you said "Except, I can't seem to find any of your claimed "knowledge and experience" in your posts - what have I missed?" It didn't take long to find an example where you could benefit from me. I didn't post it at the time, last week, because you're unappreciative and the post wasn't directed at me. There are numerous examples where, mostly, you call me picky or petty and insult me just for giving valuable information.

Your whole explanation is, let's say, confusing from the technical side, but in particular, these parts are incorrect.
You say "air u~0"
I presume by u, you refer to permeability, or relative permeability. If so, air has a relative permeability of very, very nearly = 1.0, which
means it is essentially equally to the permeability of free space. See the chart and reference below.
You say "field would be partially blocked by the close copper layer"
Copper will not "block" magnetic field. Copper also has a relative permeability of essentially 1.0, very, very close to that of air.
Your comment about Gramme generators is total misinformation.

No wonder you like Holcomb so much. His and your gibberish sound very much alike.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-magnetic-permeability-definition-examples.html#
bi

WOW - another Earth Shattering find! (u~0)...  Keep digging, it just gets better by the post!

It will stop thousands from going down the wrong path... or, possibly keep them from discovering an
easily built and simple to understand excess energy scheme.

Disadvantages in the Gramme Generator are common knowledge, BTW. [drop a magnet down a copper pipe]

Give it up man! Leave it up to those that "can" and "are" doing it right now. Wantabees only get in the way!

 

[bistander]

WOW - another Earth Shattering find! (u~0)...  Keep digging, it just gets better by the post!

It will stop thousands from going down the wrong path... or, possibly keep them from discovering an
easily built and simple to understand excess energy scheme.

Disadvantages in the Gramme Generator are common knowledge, BTW. [drop a magnet down a copper pipe]

Give it up man! Leave it up to those that "can" and "are" doing it right now. Wantabees only get in the way!

Hi SL,
You don't have a copper tube, do you? Try your magnet drop down a solenoid coil of #28 copper wire, similar to the context of the application at hand.

Care to support your claim about the Gramme ring with more than generality. Gramme ring had drawbacks but magnetic blocking effect of copper was not one. Look it up.

You never did have big boy pants, did you?
bi

[SolarLab]

Hi SL,
You don't have a copper tube, do you? Try your magnet drop down a solenoid coil of #28 copper wire, similar to the context of the application at hand.

Care to support your claim about the Gramme ring with more than generality. Gramme ring had drawbacks but magnetic blocking effect of copper was not one. Look it up.

You never did have big boy pants, did you?
bi

Let me ask, before I forget: 

How did your posted Linear graph of the GO-35ZH135 change anything from the posted Log graph?

I didn't quite catch that. Give it up man! Your getting in too deep with your limited knowledge...

Sticks and stones are giving away your Troll shield, BTW. Those kind of things don't work anymore.

SL

[bistander]

Let me ask, before I forget: 

How did your posted Linear graph of the GO-35ZH135 change anything from the posted Log graph?

I didn't quite catch that. Give it up man! Your getting in too deep with your limited knowledge...

Sticks and stones are giving away your Troll shield, BTW. Those kind of things don't work anymore.

SL

Hi SL,
You really don't pay attention or are easily confused. I didn't post a linear GO-35ZH135 graph. You did.

You say I have "limited knowledge". Maybe I should limit what I pass to you. If you study up on it and can ask an intelligent question, I'll do my best to explain.

You're the guy who says he has big boy pants, but can't answer simple questions and seemingly can't tolerate criticism. Did you buy that steel yet?
bi