Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world

[kolbacict]

Solarlab made a simulation

Agree. I'm inattentive, somewhat lazy.
And still some difficulty with language.
Why is a linear version better than a circular one?

[Feb2006]

Not necessarily better but easier to build.
I hope that with ferrite core and fast switching you can get better performance.
But I don't know.
I believe that Holcomb has something extraordinary and is building those right now.
And we owe it to the world and our children to get it out and rolling.

[Ufopolitics]

Hello,

@Feb2006 and All

It is NOT that simple...a Linear Movement Generator (LinGen) is somehow similar to Figuera...and there are many possibilities of errors.
I have tried these Systems over years of experimenting so, my experience is vast.
Linear movements will not let you develop a High Voltage over back and forth pulsations.
Rotational Systems are far better, because they increase Output Voltage & Currents over "unlimited/unstoppable" spacetime.
The Rotational traveling Space is never ending (infinite) while Linear goes Forward and STOPS, Goes Reverse and STOPS...and so on and on:

...FORWARD/STOPS/RETURN/STOPS/FORWARD/STOPS...

There is a huge LOSS everytime You STOP/PAUSE, whether to go forward or to Return, EVEN for milliseconds.
Induction is ALL about SPACETIME VARIATIONS, NOT only Time...NOT only Space, but BOTH!!
Everytime you STOP, Space gain=Energy progression is OFF

Rotational Systems are simply NON STOP, but CONTINUOUS ALL THE TIME!!

Everytime your system STOPS, Energy drops/falls, so it must RESTART...

You do whatever you guys want, after all it is entirely your money and your time...this is just my opinion.

IMHO, These Systems (Linear) could be good to power cell phones, small appliances, LED Bulbs, etc,etc...BUT NOT for big power applications.

However, they could be configured to generate more, by adding many units which alternate OFF Times, in  order to make them more continuous.

Sincerely

Ufopolitics

[SolarLab]

Hello,

@Feb2006 and All

It is NOT that simple...a Linear Movement Generator (LinGen) is somehow similar to Figuera...and there are many possibilities of errors.
I have tried these Systems over years of experimenting so, my experience is vast.
Linear movements will not let you develop a High Voltage over back and forth pulsations.
Rotational Systems are far better, because they increase Output Voltage & Currents over "unlimited/unstoppable" spacetime.
The Rotational traveling Space is never ending (infinite) while Linear goes Forward and STOPS, Goes Reverse and STOPS...and so on and on:

...FORWARD/STOPS/RETURN/STOPS/FORWARD/STOPS...

There is a huge LOSS everytime You STOP/PAUSE, whether to go forward or to Return, EVEN for milliseconds.
Induction is ALL about SPACETIME VARIATIONS, NOT only Time...NOT only Space, but BOTH!!
Everytime you STOP, Space gain=Energy progression is OFF

Rotational Systems are simply NON STOP, but CONTINUOUS ALL THE TIME!!

Everytime your system STOPS, Energy drops/falls, so it must RESTART...

You do whatever you guys want, after all it is entirely your money and your time...this is just my opinion.

IMHO, These Systems (Linear) could be good to power cell phones, small appliances, LED Bulbs, etc,etc...BUT NOT for big power applications.

However, they could be configured to generate more, by adding many units which alternate OFF Times, in  order to make them more continuous.

Sincerely

Ufopolitics

Ufopolitics,

For a planar configuration (so called LinGen) there is no Starting or Stopping required. The Control Processor
simply rolls the driver FETs, in proper sequence, along the planar poles.

Consider a chain where the links are the poles; but the chain is not joined together - it's infinitely long. You just
continually pull this infinite chain over the poles. One infinite chain for the North Poles and another one for the
South Poles. You can have as many Poles (chain links) as you like with respect to your overall configuration and
the sequenced Control Processor.

There is no technical or operational reason to Start, Stop or reverse direction. The Speed of the rolling might change
or vary, if needed, to accommodate the changing output power needs. Or, for that matter, any number of
Voltage/Current/Hz requirements. Of course you can start/stop/reverse or re-sequence as desired.

In the simulations it appears the sequence is interrupted but thats not really the case. This was only due to forum posting
size limitations, and gif downsizing, plus some CPU numeric processing time constraints. Large workstation simulations
(requiring many GBs of storage for the simulation video captures) show the smooth, uninterupted, operation.

A Four North and four South pole configuration [call it a Block of "8" - 4N + 4S; for lack of a better term] with a
single coil Lap Winding, was chosen for presentation but this was arbitrary. An almost endless number of Poles could 
likely be used, with the corresponding Lap Winding coil, to form a Block.

This is where the Planar configuration (LinGen) has a big advantage over a Circular configuration
(motor housing for example). Another major advantage is size; a planar block is easily scaled and also
lends itself to a segmented physical distribution - fit the Blocks in various locations and simply wire
them together according to plan.

Interestingly, cascading these Blocks is relatively straight forward and can form a variety of outputs. DC
series/parallel or AC 3-phase, etc. Quite versatile in fact, all from a single Block design and a bit of Controller
Processor software manipulation. This is still a work-in-progress but looks to be quite exciting.

Also, a Rotational System need not be Non Stop or Continuous, an electronic controller will determine the
operational characteristics as is already done in many motors.


It's good to recall that the Holcomb Generator utilizes each Pole pulse such that the Coil/Pole magnetics
full magnification occures each time the Pole/Coil is energized. This can amount to many magnifications per cycle.

When reviewing a napkin-cad approach, worth noting is the interaction between the so-called Rotor coil/poles and
the Stator coil/poles. Avoiding/reducing any interactions between them is one key ingredient; this applies equally
to both the planar and circular configurations.

Considering the many advantages provided by a Planar configuration, including ease of build and versatility, this
approach should not be discarded without serious consideration.

SL

[Ufopolitics]

Ufopolitics,

For a planar configuration (so called LinGen) there is no Starting or Stopping required. The Control Processor
simply rolls the driver FETs, in proper sequence, along the planar poles.

Consider a chain where the links are the poles; but the chain is not joined together - it's infinitely long. You just
continually pull this infinite chain over the poles. One infinite chain for the North Poles and another one for the
South Poles. You can have as many Poles (chain links) as you like with respect to your overall configuration and
the sequenced Control Processor.

There is no technical or operational reason to Start, Stop or reverse direction. The Speed of the rolling might change
or vary, if needed, to accommodate the changing output power needs. Or, for that matter, any number of
Voltage/Current/Hz requirements. Of course you can start/stop/reverse or re-sequence as desired.

In the simulations it appears the sequence is interrupted but thats not really the case. This was only due to forum posting
size limitations, and gif downsizing, plus some CPU numeric processing time constraints. Large workstation simulations
(requiring many GBs of storage for the simulation video captures) show the smooth, uninterupted, operation.

A Four North and four South pole configuration [call it a Block of "8" - 4N + 4S; for lack of a better term] with a
single coil Lap Winding, was chosen for presentation but this was arbitrary. An almost endless number of Poles could 
likely be used, with the corresponding Lap Winding coil, to form a Block.

This is where the Planar configuration (LinGen) has a big advantage over a Circular configuration
(motor housing for example). Another major advantage is size; a planar block is easily scaled and also
lends itself to a segmented physical distribution - fit the Blocks in various locations and simply wire
them together according to plan.

Interestingly, cascading these Blocks is relatively straight forward and can form a variety of outputs. DC
series/parallel or AC 3-phase, etc. Quite versatile in fact, all from a single Block design and a bit of Controller
Processor software manipulation. This is still a work-in-progress but looks to be quite exciting.

Also, a Rotational System need not be Non Stop or Continuous, an electronic controller will determine the
operational characteristics as is already done in many motors.


It's good to recall that the Holcomb Generator utilizes each Pole pulse such that the Coil/Pole magnetics
full magnification occures each time the Pole/Coil is energized. This can amount to many magnifications per cycle.

When reviewing a napkin-cad approach, worth noting is the interaction between the so-called Rotor coil/poles and
the Stator coil/poles. Avoiding/reducing any interactions between them is one key ingredient; this applies equally
to both the planar and circular configurations.

Considering the many advantages provided by a Planar configuration, including ease of build and versatility, this
approach should not be discarded without serious consideration.

SL

Hello SL,

I was just giving my opinion strictly based on what Feb2006 loaded before, his diagrams about the setup of coils, plus his 555 timer circuit...
So, my opinion was not about the LinGen from Holcomb, nor based on your simulations.
I have just explained that I have worked on these systems before (linear) as also on rotational, so I was rendering my opinion based on my experience on Real Lab Testing, not based on simulations, nor any assumptions.

1- A Magnetic Field is a Three Dimensional (3D) entity, not planar, not spread in two planes (2D), So when it comes to analysis of movements, please consider to have in mind these facts.

2- "Poles" in a Magnetic Field can not be considered as separated entities from Field, they have a 3D Positioning that will never change related to the whole Field Spectrum. Which means you can not run in a linear fashion, first one pole, then the other pole, flat, and facing towards induced coils in a planar design like a "sandwhich" type configuration. Unless you create two fields, where each will face one pole down to induced coil(s)...while in a rotation, I just need one field and use both of its poles at the same time.

3- All my failures in the past were due to Field Collapse, these systems will not perform in max output if field is collapsed or stopped, no matter if nanoseconds.

So, the Figuera approach, which is very similar to the one Feb2006 showed up, works by "ramping" field up and down , but not in a real linear motion, but by pulsing ON/OFF with the 555 Timer and FET...this is not a smooth operation, it is just an ON/OFF scenario, where, if PWM falls to zero it will collapse field, on Scope signal, you will get a square wave, where the up-down lines are purely vertical, stip and radical up and downs lines, and this is like a radical switching from On to Off...and I will tell you, up front, it will not work this way.

Unless there is an "attenuation" applied to signal, where Figuera used Resistors or Inductors to smooth ups and downs forming a "chopped pyramid" type signal...and still, they do collapse to zero...

Or, unless you use some specific very short capacity cap, or other more "elegant" electronic circuit, which prevents the PWM signal to drop all the way to zero...

On my setup, I have incorporated a small Electronic Controller to directly feed Field energy with a PWM, but, still using my mechanical rotary switch as the Distributor of the charges sent to the coils in the rotation sequence...it works great, but, like I said before, I added a small capacity Electrolytic Cap, but of high voltage (450V) to prevent PWM to lower all the way to zero.

Again, I am not saying linear generation will "never" work...am just saying, based on my experience, I rather work with what I know is going to render excellent results in the end.

Cheers

Ufopolitics