Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[TinselKoala]

You said "In the official Zed way of thinking, this is what you do with the extra energy or work produced by the first Zed: you use it to help reset the second Zed.

Wrong. In the official Zed way of thinking, you use ONE THIRD of the extra energy or work produced by the first Zed, to help reset the second Zed.


That is not exactly the same thing now, is it?

I stand corrected, thank you.
But as far as I can determine, ONE THIRD of zero is still.... well..... zero. Since we have already been told, and we have seen in sims and calculations, that a single Zed by itself is under unity, meaning there is no extra energy or work produced by the first Zed, it can only be recycling that pesky "D" that's coming in from the second Zed....
So in the Koala way of thinking, at least, one third of zero is close enough to zero to call it "exactly the same thing".

[neptune]

@Webby1. I know that you initially built this model more as a "feasabilty study" than as a serious measurement model, but nevertheless, you seem to have learned an awful lot from it, and have shared that information with all of us. I understand that you are probably considering building a "Mark Two" model in the fullness of time.
      I am not quite sure that I fully understand your last paragraph. It would seem that you now have two inlets, one for air and one for water. where are they situated relative to each other, please?

[TinselKoala]

@webby: thanks for the straight answer; I don't believe we actually got it in so many words before. That allays one of my doubts, and I'm always happy for that.

I see nothing at all wrong with having to lower the movable reservoir to create a "suck" to reset things, as long as they stay reset when you bring the reservoir back to the "ground plane" or zero height reference and the Zed stays "reset" and doesn't hop up or something. But maybe it would, if there is excess pressure in it... this might actually be a good test to perform, if you know what I'm trying to describe.
Also I hope you get the point that the "heights" that matter are the heights of the centers of mass of the water in the reservoir, relative to the "ground level" zero, below and above it.

This sounds like a simple experiment to do, but the more I think about it the more tricky it seems, in order to get useful and consistent data. Don't worry, you have my great respect for what you are doing. We will eventually evolve a procedure that works, to give usable data that can't be picked apart by some random tree-dweller.

[see3d]

I am guessing you missed or I forgot to include the part where I can not measure the retainers diameter, my calipers do not fit inside down past the extender, so I thought I would give you the volumes that fill each one to maybe set the net thickness of the retainer to match, not sure if that maters for the lift, but it might for the flow of air and water.

Edit to add:  I am not using my number 1 riser so the the first gap is filed with water, and since I can not measure it I thought that the volumes would allow you to figure out how "thick" that space is.

Hi Webby,
Sorry about the long delay in responding.  I lost my system hard drive on my main computer this morning and I have been in debug and recovery mode all day.  I will respond as I catch up to each post so I don't miss anything.

I think the problem is I don't have a picture of where each dimension is in your model, because I don't have any diagram of your model -- like the sim cross section I showed.  Retainer rings?  I dont have anything called a retainer ring in my sim midel.  Which item would correspond?  I think your risers are not attached to each other, so that is probably where some of my confusion comes in. 

Providing volumes was a good idea.  I just need to have the sketch that identifies where each volume is, so I can calculate it correctly for the model.

TIA in advance for your indulgence.  My apologies if you have already posted the information, and I missed it.  If so, please point me in the right direction.

~Dennis

[see3d]

@see3d: Is it possible to compute and display a "break-even" line on your transfer graph set? I think you know what I mean, a line or point where, if your data exceeded that, it would indicate overunity or excess energy performance. I know that this information can be extracted from the data you show, but it would be neat to see it as a line on the graph too.

Of course it is possible, and I do compute a graph with that on it.  However, until I have a sim that produces results that match the real world builds, it would be irresponsible of me to publicly show that graph, as a number of people would see it as proof of one sort or another -- after all , computers don't lie.  I have already corrected a number of math formula errors in the sim since I started.  I am sure there are some more hiding in there yet.