PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-05-19, 00:10:24
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
Author Topic: A true OU Breakthrough..? Holcomb scientific research  (Read 11133 times)
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 338
I wonder if they are using Metglas cores since they mention "electrical steel".  Metglas is what Tom Bearden used in his "MEG" that claimed an overunity of five.   See this site:  https://metglas.com/distribution-transformer-electrical-steel/
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 440
I wonder if they are using Metglas cores since they mention "electrical steel".  Metglas is what Tom Bearden used in his "MEG" that claimed an overunity of five.   See this site:  https://metglas.com/distribution-transformer-electrical-steel/

Electrical steel typically refers to the steel alloys used to cut/stamp traditional motor and xfmr laminations from.  Metglas is often moreso made in thin ribbon form and then wound to make cores.

I'd have to search the patents again to find them, but a couple of standard lamination alloy letter/number designations are given as examples.

The alloys may be stated in one of the patents I linked in my recent post/response to F6FLT.

PW
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1578
I wonder if they are using Metglas cores since they mention "electrical steel".  Metglas is what Tom Bearden used in his "MEG" ...

What about black sand?
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1729
I wonder if they are using Metglas cores since they mention "electrical steel".  Metglas is what Tom Bearden used in his "MEG" that claimed an overunity of five.   See this site:  https://metglas.com/distribution-transformer-electrical-steel/
in that last patent link I posted he used mu metal for shielding. I have not seen metglass mentioned though
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1729
Another interesting one in a series
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
I have added the pdf to the folder http://exvacuo.free.fr/div/Sciences/NewEnergy/Holcomb/ .
It is quite different from the others.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
There are three systems being discussed, a high efficiency motor, a single to 3 phase converter, and an overunity energy source.

The image you grabbed from the video animation is, I believe, the high efficiency motor.  Elsewhere in that video (or one of the other videos) we see several vertically mounted "motor" shaped units in front of a large control/monitoring panel of sorts.  This, I believe, is the three phase converter.  I do not think we have seen any images of the overunity "free energy source", although that appears to be, in one embodiment, the complicated system with multiple gears and rotors as seen in patent drawings.  What I think are the three phase converters may be a later embodiment of the OU system, but it does not appear to be salient wound as discussed in the patents.  What I think are three phase converters look like fairly standard wound rotor synchronous motors with the rotor shaft physically retained to prevent rotation.  Sequentially energizing the physically stationary rotor windings with properly wound/sequenced field coils would seem to be a plausible manner with which to make a three phase converter.

Regarding the third set of coils in the center of the animation screen grab you posted, let's call that the physically rotating armature (the patent references are somewhat confusing).  The outer most coils are physically stationary field coils.  The middle group of coils is referred to as a rotor, albeit physically stationary as well, with its coils driven in sequence to create a rotating magnetic field.

Another embodiment I have seen replaces the rotating armature coils with permanent magnets.

The following patent covers most of this:

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/09/e1/22/db3b8980221e4c/WO2010079422A1.pdf

FIG 14 depicts connection to a three phase power source.  From the patent text, the rectangular boxes with long and short dashes within are  plugs/connectors, the circles with curved top tees are wattmeters.

With all the connections, caps, loads, and windings involved, and no mention so far, that I have seen, of reactive power (I/V phase angles), there seems to be plenty of room for measurement errors.

This is also covered in the following patent:

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/88/74/14/b00c916e4df8c4/US10008916.pdf

Note that this patent has an assignee that may, or mat not, be an offshore shell/holding corp which may, or may not, mean anything.  From a search result, the assignee may also have been listed in the leaked Panama Papers.  Perhaps I am wrong on all this and the companies are not one and the same, so please search the assignee and form an opinion for yourself.

PW

Yes, it's hard to get your head around it, and there are technical inconsistencies in what is said in the patents.

The assignee of the last patent you cited is "Redemptive Technologies Ltd", but you can see that it is also the applicant and there it says "Road Town , Tortola ( VG ) ; Robert Ray Holcomb , Road Town , Tortola ( VG )". The assignee is Holcomb.
All the information we have on his systems comes only from Holcomb. This is not reassuring.
- no third party involved in his case
- only three people on their team
- a multitude of details in the patents without presentation of a general guiding idea
- conditioning speech with lots of references and images of a green world without pollution
- a claimed source of energy, the spin of unpaired electrons, without any explanation of the causal links that would prove it and make the difference with a conventional system

The only positive point is the DNV verification report. But even this one is suspect, since it states "The harnessing of the energy from the spin of these unpaired electrons in the magnetic domains are most certainly the source of energy". But what does it say? No evidence is provided, and a certification body does not usually make such speculations, only measurements.
Finally, it seems to me that in a video (I can't find where), they talked about "SGS" as a second certifying body having verified their system, but no reference to SGS nor report is available on their site, contrary to DNV's, which remains the only one.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 440
Yes, it's hard to get your head around it, and there are technical inconsistencies in what is said in the patents.

The assignee of the last patent you cited is "Redemptive Technologies Ltd", but you can see that it is also the applicant and there it says "Road Town , Tortola ( VG ) ; Robert Ray Holcomb , Road Town , Tortola ( VG )". The assignee is Holcomb.
All the information we have on his systems comes only from Holcomb. This is not reassuring.
- no third party involved in his case
- only three people on their team
- a multitude of details in the patents without presentation of a general guiding idea
- conditioning speech with lots of references and images of a green world without pollution
- a claimed source of energy, the spin of unpaired electrons, without any explanation of the causal links that would prove it and make the difference with a conventional system

The only positive point is the DNV verification report. But even this one is suspect, since it states "The harnessing of the energy from the spin of these unpaired electrons in the magnetic domains are most certainly the source of energy". But what does it say? No evidence is provided, and a certification body does not usually make such speculations, only measurements.
Finally, it seems to me that in a video (I can't find where), they talked about "SGS" as a second certifying body having verified their system, but no reference to SGS nor report is available on their site, contrary to DNV's, which remains the only one.

In this video:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUIK1GZSduo

At 00:57 he seems to saying that these are the solid state (non-rotating) "overunity/free energy" devices.  At 1:21 the windings shown may or may not be from the devices shown at 00:57, but if they are, the rotor does not appear to be salient wound as in the patents.

Perhaps the solid state system presented is a relatively new embodiment and patents on that system may still be pending or not yet published. 

The patents themselves are rather strange.  I have never seen so many figures with no description of them in the body of the text.  But, as most probably know, the claims are the legal/important part, the rest is pretty much wall paper... (although the description is normally supposed to make an invention obvious to those practiced in the art).

PW 
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
@picowatt

A free energy machine can be mistaken for a type 1 perpetual motion machine, so it is difficult to patent as such. Anyway, even the inventor of such a machine would not believe in it, so he will assume a new energy source at work, and if he does not know it, he will imagine anything. Well, not quite, because if the source is identified later, and does not correspond to what he has indicated, his patent will no longer apply.

If Holcomb has an invention that really works and he doesn't know the source of the energy, claiming as he does that the energy comes from the spin is pretty clever, because that's what's at work in any magnetic device. He is only discreetly evading the real question which becomes: where does the spin take the energy it provides? But the patent can be accepted.

And if Holcomb's invention is a scam, imagining a source of energy like spin is also clever, since it is a recognized electronic property, and this can reassure potential investors.

So we are not much further ahead to know the end of the story.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 462
Faraday laws of induction are pure overunity if we believe Clemente Figuera. Magnetic field is source of energy.
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
@picowatt

A free energy machine can be mistaken for a type 1 perpetual motion machine, so it is difficult to patent as such. Anyway, even the inventor of such a machine would not believe in it, so he will assume a new energy source at work, and if he does not know it, he will imagine anything. Well, not quite, because if the source is identified later, and does not correspond to what he has indicated, his patent will no longer apply.

If Holcomb has an invention that really works and he doesn't know the source of the energy, claiming as he does that the energy comes from the spin is pretty clever, because that's what's at work in any magnetic device. He is only discreetly evading the real question which becomes: where does the spin take the energy it provides? But the patent can be accepted.

And if Holcomb's invention is a scam, imagining a source of energy like spin is also clever, since it is a recognized electronic property, and this can reassure potential investors.

So we are not much further ahead to know the end of the story.

Clever.
I'm from Missouri, the "Show Me" state.   A working, tested and REPLICATED prototype is what I'm looking for...
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
Faraday laws of induction are pure overunity if we believe Clemente Figuera. Magnetic field is source of energy.

Please save us this noise of nonsense and unrelated urban legends, it's childish and off topic.




---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
I'm from Missouri, the "Show Me" state.  ...
O0
I'm from France, also a "Show Me" state.  Probably a cultural heritage of Descartes...   :)


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Guest
Clever.
I'm from Missouri, the "Show Me" state.   A working, tested and REPLICATED prototype is what I'm looking for...



   Yeah Prof. You're not the only one....
   I'm from Earth. The world led by idiots, and mad men. Where they would tax even the air you breath, if they could. And, free energy is not allowed.

   NickZ
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
@NickZ

Free energy is not only allowed, it is desired.

Just do it. 


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 338
Just in case some here aren't following the discussion of HES on overunity.com I think you may want to look in on UfoPolitics posts starting at #53 here: https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/ on page 4.  UfoPolitics has been working with these concepts for decades and is a hands on builder who I'd say is genius on these concepts.   I think his posts give some credence to Holcomb's devices. 
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1688
I guess this is the best place to post the following as it is my first attempt to understand the Holcomb device.  I apologize that I applied RLE as part of the solution but I couldn't help it!!

The pix of cores and coils shows the basic setup at present.  The two coils are the primaries and the three coils are the secondaries.  Only one primary is used for this test and that is the one on the right.  The secondaries are all connected in parallel are connected in series with a constant current inductor Lcc with 24.3mH.  The ending current in Lcc is clamped at 51.5us and held while the core currents reset back to their starting levels.

The scope channels are CH1(yel) is L1 voltage that is not used, CH2(blu) is the voltage across the primary L2, CH3(pnk) is the voltage across Lcc, and CH4(grn) is the current probe identified with each scope shot.

The 1st pix is Pin shown to be 190.5mW over 108.1us for an input energy Uin = .1905*108.1e-6 = 20.6uJ.  CH4 shows the current thru L2 and CH Math(red) shows the average of the sampled instantaneous products of voltage times current over time.

The 2nd and 3rd pix show the starting and ending currents in Lcc of 171.2ma and 180.3ma respectively.  This equates to an energy gain in Lcc of (.1803^2-.1712^2)*.0243/2 = 38.8uJ.

The apparent energy gain is 38.8e-6/20.6e-6 = 1.88.

The 4th and 5th pix show the core flux reset back to the initial starting conditions of the L2 primary and L3,4,5 secondaries respectively.  No energy is consumed during this process.

Now, I fully realize that this is a single phase, single primary example that you may say doesn't represent the Holcomb device accurately and I would agree.  I do have another example using both primaries connected in a buck mode with the EM field moving left to right for delayed single sine pules on the input.  What I don't have to demonstrate this at the moment is a fast unipolar switch to clamp Lcc such as a power Jfet or IGBT.  A diode is series with a Mosfet drain will not work due to the low voltage at the required clamp time.  The preliminary COP calcs for this arrangement is ~6-8.

Please note the staggered cores as this is my interpretation of Holcomb's stator/rotor combo implemented with common ferrite E cores.

Regards,
Pm



 
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 16
Hello
could you show a circuit to it?
Greeting
Lota
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1688
Hello
could you show a circuit to it?
Greeting
Lota

Yes, see the attached below.

Regards,
Pm

Edit: Added Bias Supply
Edit: L1 is not used.
« Last Edit: 2022-03-24, 15:28:43 by partzman »
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 254
If this is not an outright scam, and that is a big IF. The only thing that comes to mind here is the delayed magnetization and relaxation time of ferromagnetic materials. They even hint at this in their ridiculous example of using a "plastic core" vs steel core. There is no way simple flux routing will magically produce OU. It has to be an intrinsic and anomalous property of the material itself that allows for possible OU. And that is giving them a lot of credit.

On the business side it makes absolutely no sense for them to sell an "in line" version of the generator when they also offer a complete closed system one. This makes my scam alarms go off hard.
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4015
broli
While I am not certain
This _inline_option “may” be a method to circumvent certain approval process’s to allow faster
Distribution to market ?

A new Stand alone power source will surely be a big hoop to jump through for insurance
and other concerns?
(Although AllCanadian did mention a possible solution with “grid tie inverter ( I think??”
I do know DC has a simpler path forward ( just example not relevant??)

And yes one concern of great note …edited test reports ?

I have done decades as freelance for test labs , and it’s almost a chain of custody issue
All along the way , there are certain liabilities attached to most Lab testing
Although typically limited to actual test and associated fixtures / device under test within the lab !

Still lab reputations are involved and taken quite seriously by same ..
Edits are ?? ( need explanation IMO …could be administrative or some proprietary issue ? with claimant, should be noted or signed off by Lab supervisor .

Respectfully
Chet K


   
Full Member
***

Posts: 152
If this is not an outright scam, and that is a big IF. The only thing that comes to mind here is the delayed magnetization and relaxation time of ferromagnetic materials. They even hint at this in their ridiculous example of using a "plastic core" vs steel core. There is no way simple flux routing will magically produce OU. It has to be an intrinsic and anomalous property of the material itself that allows for possible OU. And that is giving them a lot of credit.

On the business side it makes absolutely no sense for them to sell an "in line" version of the generator when they also offer a complete closed system one. This makes my scam alarms go off hard.

broli,

It may be a scam but it would make a lot of sense to sell an inline version. Take for example the company I work for. We sell and lease a -lot- of 3 phase motor driven equipment to commercial and industrial customers. Some of them only have single phase and a lot of them only 208V 3 phase. With 1 PH we have to use an inverter to convert it to 3 PH and with 208 3 PH the power grid is almost always rural and subject to poor delivery, voltage drop etc. which often requires us to de-rate the performance of our equipment to keep from tripping overloads and the customer's breakers.

On top of that our customers today are very concerned with the cost of energy and if we could offer a product that required half the power of our competitors, well that's a no-brainer. Add onto that our enormous monthly electric bill for our 100+ large mig welders and press brakes and shears and plasma cutters running multiple shifts.

If these reach the market at a reasonable price we will definitely be a customer.

Cadman


---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 254
broli,

It may be a scam but it would make a lot of sense to sell an inline version. Take for example the company I work for. We sell and lease a -lot- of 3 phase motor driven equipment to commercial and industrial customers. Some of them only have single phase and a lot of them only 208V 3 phase. With 1 PH we have to use an inverter to convert it to 3 PH and with 208 3 PH the power grid is almost always rural and subject to poor delivery, voltage drop etc. which often requires us to de-rate the performance of our equipment to keep from tripping overloads and the customer's breakers.

On top of that our customers today are very concerned with the cost of energy and if we could offer a product that required half the power of our competitors, well that's a no-brainer. Add onto that our enormous monthly electric bill for our 100+ large mig welders and press brakes and shears and plasma cutters running multiple shifts.

If these reach the market at a reasonable price we will definitely be a customer.

Cadman

Their patent describes nothing novel, in fact they are describing ferromagnetism and how electron spins align in such material as being the "discovery". If this is the real deal it would be reversed engineered so fast and cheaply that it makes any business model they have obsolete within months. Good luck having to protect an IP on "electron spin".
If they had a billionaire dollar to back them up I would understand them coming out of "stealth mode", but there is no indication of that right now so I wonder why they went public at this stage.
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4015
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Member Goat at Stefan’s posted some news

https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565950/#new

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8wAMQE3vykE

Livestream interview with Dr Holcomb !

Thanks
Chet

Thanks, Chet.

The interview with Dr Holcomb starts at 10 am on 22 April (tomorrow morning):

   
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-19, 00:10:24