Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world

[bistander]

No, it actually is flux density or flux per core cross sectional area.  For example, take any closed core and wind a single coil on it.  Apply a voltage to the coil until saturation is reached and take notes of all the parameters when this happens.  Now, remove the original coil and wind two coils on the same core that when in a buck mode they equal the inductance of the original.  This will require more wire so the penalty is increased DCR.  Now apply a voltage to this arrangement until you reach saturation of the core and compare to the original single coil.  Depending on the core shape/type used, you will find the saturation level is much higher.  This was my point with the Holcomb rotor.
...
Regards,
Pm

Hi Pm,
This is saturation definition:

Seen in some magnetic materials, saturation is the state reached when an increase in applied external magnetic field H cannot increase the magnetization of the material further, so the total magnetic flux density B more or less levels off. (Though, magnetization continues to increase very slowly with the field due to paramagnetism.) Saturation is a characteristic of ferromagnetic and ferrimagnetic materials, such as iron, nickel, cobalt and their alloys. Different ferromagnetic materials have different saturation levels.

from:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturation_(magnetic)

Saturation is characteristic of material (only). The shape of the material, or the coil you put near it, or the excitation of the coil, will not change the saturation level (tesla, or flux density level).
bi

[partzman]

Hi Pm,
This is saturation definition:

Saturation is characteristic of material (only). The shape of the material, or the coil you put near it, or the excitation of the coil, will not change the saturation level (tesla, or flux density level).
bi

Hi Bi,

Yes I'm familiar with core saturation causes and characteristics.  I think where we are missing each other here is when you have two equal bucking coils on a common core, you have two flux fields in opposition to each other so in a perfect arrangement and coupling, there would never be any core saturation under any applied H field.  However in a practical application, we purposely design in a k factor that produces a level of resulting inductance that we require for our conditions and it is this so called "leakage inductance" that we can now supply a larger than normal H field to before normal core saturation is reached.

In any case, bucking fields must be produced between rotor poles in Holcomb's devices in order for unipolar N or S poles to be generated and rotated but we are still left without a gain function!!

Regards,
Pm 

[onepower]

Solarlab

What makes you think or believe the Holcomb devices, and in particular the LinGen,
does not or will not work?

In my opinion there is a 80% chance the technology does work based on a few criteria...
1)Holcomb and his staff appear to be educated professional people well versed in EM systems with decades of first hand experience. They also talk technically like professionals only offering as many claims as is needed and can be verified. They also have large clean facilities, full of top of the line equipment and supposedly multiple reproducible or working devices. If they walk and talk like credible professionals we could assume they probably are.

2)The business model, to most skilled in the art actually building working technology we have a common problem. No person who sought large investment in the technology ever succeeded. This occurred because larger shell companies for utility or fossil fuel interests bought out the original investors, seized control of the company and buried the technology. In this respect Holcomb seems to know what there doing by limiting investment and growing the company through sales. Educated and intelligent people do not make rash decisions or blindly follow others they go with what they think has the greatest chance of success.

3)The technology in question, the HES mechanism, is familiar to me. In fact I recognized the layout immediately as a radial variant of the axial Hubbard device which I built and tested. The circuit is also familiar and follows Hubbard's device in it's layout, switching and output section. As such, in almost every respect the mechanism and device in question are very similar to something I have already tested and proven to have merit.

4)Beyond the people, technology, appearances and patents any device with any credibility must have a logical and rational explanation to justify any claim. I believe Holcomb has shown this even if the technical explanation is incomplete. You see, I also saw what appeared to be an energy gain associated with the iron cores of a similar device I built and tested. However I found this was not the true cause of the energy gain only an artifact of some other mechanism. So when Holcomb claimed the energy gain was from the iron cores I knew exactly what he was talking about even if in my opinion it was not technically correct.

When we add all these qualities together I believe they do have something and give them a 50/50 chance of still being in business a year from now. This has nothing to do with the technology more so the fact there going up against the fossil fuel industry littered with unpredictable psychopaths and paid shills. There are literally tens of thousands of fake shell companies, fake foundations, fake call centers continually spreading misinformation and they practically own most politicians. That's a lot to take on, I hope they succeed...

AC

[SolarLab]

Solarlab
In my opinion there is a 80% chance the technology does work based on a few criteria...
1)Holcomb and his staff appear to be educated professional people well versed in EM systems with decades of first hand experience. They also talk technically like professionals only offering as many claims as is needed and can be verified. They also have large clean facilities, full of top of the line equipment and supposedly multiple reproducible or working devices. If they walk and talk like credible professionals we could assume they probably are.

2)The business model, to most skilled in the art actually building working technology we have a common problem. No person who sought large investment in the technology ever succeeded. This occurred because larger shell companies for utility or fossil fuel interests bought out the original investors, seized control of the company and buried the technology. In this respect Holcomb seems to know what there doing by limiting investment and growing the company through sales. Educated and intelligent people do not make rash decisions or blindly follow others they go with what they think has the greatest chance of success.

3)The technology in question, the HES mechanism, is familiar to me. In fact I recognized the layout immediately as a radial variant of the axial Hubbard device which I built and tested. The circuit is also familiar and follows Hubbard's device in it's layout, switching and output section. As such, in almost every respect the mechanism and device in question are very similar to something I have already tested and proven to have merit.

4)Beyond the people, technology, appearances and patents any device with any credibility must have a logical and rational explanation to justify any claim. I believe Holcomb has shown this even if the technical explanation is incomplete. You see, I also saw what appeared to be an energy gain associated with the iron cores of a similar device I built and tested. However I found this was not the true cause of the energy gain only an artifact of some other mechanism. So when Holcomb claimed the energy gain was from the iron cores I knew exactly what he was talking about even if in my opinion it was not technically correct.

When we add all these qualities together I believe they do have something and give them a 50/50 chance of still being in business a year from now. This has nothing to do with the technology more so the fact there going up against the fossil fuel industry littered with unpredictable psychopaths and paid shills. There are literally tens of thousands of fake shell companies, fake foundations, fake call centers continually spreading misinformation and they practically own most politicians. That's a lot to take on, I hope they succeed...

AC

Hi Onepower,

Thanks for the insightful input, appreciated a lot.

Hopefully Smudge and others will chime in soon. Everyones analysis is appreciated as part of the overall conclusions.

Regards,

SL

[bistander]

Hubbard device, interesting. Something like this, I presume.
bi