Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mrwayne]

Can you or one of your engineers point out exactly where the equations do not correspond? Because the equations support exactly what you show on those "Travis effect" videos, they just don't support your claim of overunity for the whole device.

Please take time to review the Patent - not the simplified Travis Effect.
Wayne

[johnny874]

   Wayne,
Not to be yanking your chain but a couple of things to consider.
1) by lifting a cap, it's stored energy's release can be controlled
2) a slightly lower pressure and higher volume can perform more work
3) the hydraulic converter to rotation can act as an expansion chamber reducing useable pressure
4) back pressure reduces efficiency (hydro-electric generators have no back pressure)
5) lower pressure/higher volume around the outside of a fan type blade might be more efficient as it generates more torque
6) line pressure can be converted from high volume/low pressure to low volume/high pressure by using a convergent-divergent nozzle.
Of course, one day I may take the time to learn engineering.

[LarryC]

Hi Larry,
you kindly provided a great explanation of the principle, and I was able to follow it up to this point.
But now, can you please expand on how to correctly add another Travis effect layer?
BTW, it just has occurred to me that air can be replaced by a liquid, oil for example. Pumping liquids is much more efficient than pumping air, could add up
to the efficiency of the device.
Alex

Hi Alex,
Lets call this the complex Travis Effect and much harder to explain.
I recommend that you first look at Travis post #6 on Page 1, then Travis post #15 on Page 2.
#6 helps to understand how the layers increase the head pressure and #15 has a section on how the system is precharged.
I,ve attached patent fig 14,15 and 18 showing half of the vessels next to each other with the water colored in to improve visibility of the water before precharge (14), after precharge (15), and after lift (18).
This precharge technique is very unique as it would seem to require less input cost than by standard methods. I can't prove it does, but the fact that Mark Dansie is on board has convinced me that it works. Mark is one of the top free energy skeptics in the world and debunked many free energy devices all over the world.

Hope this helps,
Larry

[telecom]

Hi Alex,
Lets call this the complex Travis Effect and much harder to explain.
Hope this helps,
Larry

Hi Larry,
I just want to point out, that in your first diagram ( post 197) you could picture the Archimedes vessel not vertical, but horizontal.
In this case the total work to charge it with the air would be smaller, equal 3cu ft x 2 feet.
On the surface it appears that Travis effect still takes less energy than Archimedes, but IMHO it only can lift because the air is pressurized , which , unfortunately, requires energy.
If we replace air with a light liquid, such as oil, it will be evident that Travis effect is not working at all - nothing can be lifted.
Again, the lift is done by the pressure in the compressed air.
I think it is pointless to look at the complex Travis effect if simple Travis effect doesn't hold the water.

[LarryC]

@Travis,
In Fig 5B the water level in the pod only appears to have gone down 10% and the water level outside the pod has gone to the top. Is the drawing accurate?
Thanks, Larry