Motor Generators

[bistander]

It is immediately obvious that you do not understand the subject at all or are deliberately misleading.

The excitation current forms a magnetic flux sufficient to induce an EMF, but the electromagnetic moment of the anchor reaction in idle mode is equal only to the mechanical costs of rotation. Only when the load is connected is a working magnetic field formed, which consists of the excitation magnetic field and the magnetic field of the phase currents under load; for the resulting magnetic system of the generator, this is the full flux. It is this flux that forms the electromagnetic moment of the generator; for the rotor to rotate, an appropriate mechanical force of rotation is required. We exchange the physical effort for the electromagnet control system and get the same effect without physical rotation.

Let's call the excitation magnetic flux differently - it is the control magnetic flux, and the magnetic flux of the phase currents is the working field. Ideally, these fields are equal, but in reality, especially for amateurs, the field from the phase currents is either less or more than the excitation field. If you do not know the specifics, you can not even start designing. So if we correctly organize the excitation work - control of the magnetic flux that controls the generation process, we get a stationary rotor with rotating magnetic poles.

-------------------------------------------
Two slides about generation, but such a different way of interpreting what is happening there.

967681910.jpg

Okay Rakarskiy,
You've thrown in a term with which I was unfamiliar and I assumed it was just an artifact of language differences. "a working magnetic field" as you call it can infer a magnetic field interacting with a moving charge, in which case there is, obviously, armature current in the dynamo.

But by the same token,

appropriate mechanical force of rotation is required

you admit that mechanical power is necessary for conversion to electrical power via the

electromagnetic moment

. That is the truth which I insist negates

exchange the physical effort for the electromagnet control system and get the same effect without physical rotation.

The "same effect" will not be realized. The apparatus becomes a transformer, not a generator. Either way, OU or free energy is not possible.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

It is immediately obvious that you do not understand the subject at all or are deliberately misleading.

The excitation current forms a magnetic flux sufficient to induce an EMF, but the electromagnetic moment of the anchor reaction in idle mode is equal only to the mechanical costs of rotation. Only when the load is connected is a working magnetic field formed, which consists of the excitation magnetic field and the magnetic field of the phase currents under load; for the resulting magnetic system of the generator, this is the full flux. It is this flux that forms the electromagnetic moment of the generator; for the rotor to rotate, an appropriate mechanical force of rotation is required. We exchange the physical effort for the electromagnet control system and get the same effect without physical rotation.

Let's call the excitation magnetic flux differently - it is the control magnetic flux, and the magnetic flux of the phase currents is the working field. Ideally, these fields are equal, but in reality, especially for amateurs, the field from the phase currents is either less or more than the excitation field. If you do not know the specifics, you can not even start designing. So if we correctly organize the excitation work - control of the magnetic flux that controls the generation process, we get a stationary rotor with rotating magnetic poles.

-------------------------------------------
Two slides about generation, but such a different way of interpreting what is happening there.

967681910.jpg

[bistander]

2022-05-26_21233111.jpg

Yes, I am correct. Certainly the load current in the armature will have an effect on the field, called armature reaction, but it doesn't "depend(s) largely on the connected load to create a working rotating field", as you said, born out by the fact that the rotating magnetic field is present in the total absence of load current.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

2022-05-26_21233111.jpg

[bistander]

Any electromagnetic generator depends on the power of the load, or rather its magnetic system depends on it. Therefore, all generators are calculated based on the power of the core's ability to accommodate the field from the phase with the load and excitation. Magnetomotive force is an interesting parameter that design engineers use in their calculations. If you do not know how it is expressed in calculations, you can say that you are an empty talker.

Holcomb may have had difficulties with scaling, but it is quite possible to make a simple model for yourself with an output power of no more than 1 kW. I only recommend that everyone do this quietly and without publicity.

The "working rotating field" is established (produced) by the rotor's field from the the field coil using external excitation and it is present even without a load on the armature in the typical alternator. There is voltage on the armature terminals at no-load. It is generating this voltage from the rotating magnetic field. How can you say that depends on the load?

Sure, the design of the alternator depends on the intended load, but your statements are wrong. The rotating magnetic field in the typical alternator is present even without the load, open circuit.

Your statement "like a synchronous generator, depends largely on the connected load to create a working rotating field" is false.

it is quite possible to make a simple model for yourself with an output power of no more than 1 kW. I only recommend that everyone do this quietly and without publicity

Sure, but it won't do what you claim. You do it. Or hire it done. Prove it to us. Like Solarlab. Disappeared. Failure. Like Holcomb. Disappeared. Failure.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

Any electromagnetic generator depends on the power of the load, or rather its magnetic system depends on it. Therefore, all generators are calculated based on the power of the core's ability to accommodate the field from the phase with the load and excitation. Magnetomotive force is an interesting parameter that design engineers use in their calculations. If you do not know how it is expressed in calculations, you can say that you are an empty talker.

Holcomb may have had difficulties with scaling, but it is quite possible to make a simple model for yourself with an output power of no more than 1 kW. I only recommend that everyone do this quietly and without publicity.

[bistander]

.I wrote that definition back in mid 2022. If you are not educated enough to understand what it says, then why bother doing it at all.
https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2022/...ystem.html?m=1

Translation below using Google Translate. bi.

Robert Holcomb's solid-state synchronous machine operates according to the algorithm of a traditional electromechanical synchronous machine that generates electricity. A solid-state rotor is a system of electromagnets that simulates the action of a mechanical magnetic rotor. The task is to create a magnetic flux of excitation, hold it and move it in the stator and rotor, synchronously inducing EMF in the phases of the generator. When a load is connected, the excited current in the phase wires enhances the magnetic field of the magnetic flux of the system. The magnetic flux [ϕ] has a constant component for both a traditional electromechanical generator machine and a solid-state Holcomb machine. The Holcomb machine, like a synchronous generator, depends largely on the connected load to create a working rotating field.

Mr. Rakarskiy,
If the translation is correct, "like a synchronous generator, depends largely on the connected load to create a working rotating field", you are misinformed and state a falsehood.

Besides that, the material in the link has been successfully refuted on the now closed ou.com forum. I'm not wasting time searching for it. Fact is: Holcomb is a fake. Where is he now? Where is his forum's biggest fan, Solarlab? Nobody has ever replicated his device and produced useful output of real power in excess of input power. You claim it's easy to do. Well do it and prove yourself. Otherwise you're just fantasizing.
bi

{edit}

If you are not educated enough to understand what it says, then why bother doing it at all.

I am educated and experienced in the field. I understand very well what "it says". And it is wrong. I "bother doing it" because when corrupt science is presented to the public, I feel a voice of reason (truth) should also.

[Rakarskiy]

.I wrote that definition back in mid 2022. If you are not educated enough to understand what it says, then why bother doing it at all.
https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2022/...ystem.html?m=1

Твердотільна синхронна машина Роберта Холкомба працює за алгоритмом традиційної електромеханічної синхронної машини, яка виробляє електроенергію. Твердотільний ротор — це система електромагнітів, що імітує дію механічного магнітного ротора. Завдання полягає в тому, щоб створити магнітний потік збудження, утримати його і перемістити в статорі і роторі, синхронно індукуючи ЕРС у фазах генератора. При підключенні навантаження збуджений струм у фазних проводах підсилює магнітне поле магнітного потоку системи. Магнітний потік [ϕ] має постійну складову як для традиційної електромеханічної генераторної машини, так і для твердотільної машини Холкомба. Машина Холкомба, як і синхронний генератор, значною мірою залежить від підключеного навантаження для створення робочого обертового поля.

[bistander]

A locked rotor? By the way, back in 2021, just after the introduction of the HES, my reader, a manufacturer of small hydroelectric generators, immediately wanted to do the same. I told him I doubted it and he would get a transformer.
In my publications about Holcomb, I clearly state what should be done. The condition is a constant magnetic flux excitation including the source of this excitation must have appropriate parameters. These parameters are fulfilled in any DC motor armature.

Yes.

he would get a transformer

Exactly. That's all Holcomb gets from his apparatus. And all you get from your experiment.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

A locked rotor? By the way, back in 2021, just after the introduction of the HES, my reader, a manufacturer of small hydroelectric generators, immediately wanted to do the same. I told him I doubted it and he would get a transformer.
In my publications about Holcomb, I clearly state what should be done. The condition is a constant magnetic flux excitation including the source of this excitation must have appropriate parameters. These parameters are fulfilled in any DC motor armature.

[bistander]

Yes, that's exactly how they teach it, but the second excitation option does not simulate the current in the closed windings of the armature with collector-brush commutation. When commutating with restarts, there will be mutual induction, pulse transformation.

But the essence is correct, if we rotate the brushes around the armature collector, we will get a condition under which there will be no mutual induction, but there will be generation.

How to make electronic commutation and the corresponding winding, just in my course on design and manufacturing.

--------------------------
I don't know who Holcomb Energy Systems is deceiving in your opinion, I have not seen a single court decision. The fact that they do not want to prove anything to anyone is their business. Probably there is no need.

Rakarskiy,

will get a condition under which there will be no mutual induction, but there will be generation

It's the other way around, like a locked rotor test on an induction motor, a test engineers do in the lab at university and in industry.

Generation is the conversation of mechanical energy into electrical energy and it doesn't occur without physical motion, the displacement between two bodies between which exists force (work being done).

I don't know who Holcomb Energy Systems is deceiving in your opinion

You, obviously.
bi

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocked_rotor_test

[Rakarskiy]

For those interested in understanding this video, read https://www.jmag-international.com/engineers_diary/021/

engineers_diary_021a (1).jpg

Yes, that's exactly how they teach it, but the second excitation option does not simulate the current in the closed windings of the armature with collector-brush commutation. When commutating with restarts, there will be mutual induction, pulse transformation.

But the essence is correct, if we rotate the brushes around the armature collector, we will get a condition under which there will be no mutual induction, but there will be generation.

How to make electronic commutation and the corresponding winding, just in my course on design and manufacturing.

--------------------------
I don't know who Holcomb Energy Systems is deceiving in your opinion, I have not seen a single court decision. The fact that they do not want to prove anything to anyone is their business. Probably there is no need.

[bistander]

I absolutely agree that this is a declaration. But what was measured was rather peak capabilities. This publication contains much more interesting data.

Cutting Energy Bills — And Carbon Footprints — in HALF. | by Holcomb Energy Systems | Medium

Operation of the machine, especially with maintaining frequency, voltage under variable load, is a very complex process. Increasing power is generally problematic in my opinion.

By the way, the US Patent Office has issued a patent for the invention (2022-05-17 Publication of US11336134B2; 2038-07-01Adjusted expiration) application submitted in 2017.

You can sue the patent office, they are probably in cahoots. As for Gene Brown, he claimed and did not prove different things.

---------------------------------------------
I have developed a very simple and clear topology. Anyone with hands and brains can test it by inserting a DC motor armature into a stator with a three-phase winding and rotating the contact brushes. The magnetic poles of the armature will rotate without rotating the armature core inserted into the stator. We get generation. To build a real model, design solutions are already needed. It will be difficult to scale, but it becomes possible to make a low-power model, for example, to replace a car generator. I described the entire evolution of how this happens, what should be avoided and what points to rely on, even calculated the 1500 W / 12 V option, about 100 W of excitation costs.

I do not urge you to believe me, I have done my part, the rest is only for the decision of the one who strives for this or is waiting for someone to make him happy.

Motionless ALTERNATOR / Нерухомий АЛЬТЕРНАТОР / ALTERNADOR estacionario | Patreon

RESULTS and PLANS 2025 | Patreon

Mr. Rakarskiy ,
I have studied those bar charts and they are manipulating and misrepresenting data. In the real world installations the energy cost increases when Holcomb's device is used. Every time.

As far as your experiment (replace a car generator), several people with hands and brains have conducted such and it fails to produce O.U. or free energy. It simply behaved as transformer.
bi

[bistander]

DC and brushless DC motor animation - YouTube

For those interested in understanding this video, read https://www.jmag-international.com/engineers_diary/021/

engineers_diary_021a (1).jpg

[Rakarskiy]

DC and brushless DC motor animation - YouTube