Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mrwayne]

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.

Hello all, I am sure you are all aware that we are looking at only a portion of the system, so it is understandable to draw such conclusion.
Here is what I realized when I first noticed the "Travis Effect"
First - the minimal amount of volume it took to begin lift of a certain weight
Second - the speed at which buoyancy could be utilized
Third - that venting and refilling was not necessary to to change the force of a submerged object
Fourth - the relationship to the Work being done was not limited to one direction
I combined those discoveries - and turned them into the patent, the working models and every step of our process - conforms to standard physics - except the entropy notion that mechanical free energy is impossible.
Thank you for your comments.
Wayne Travis

[johnny874]

   Uh, Wayne,
I talked to God. She told me to give you a simple hydro-generator idea that can work so I can enjoy building my Bessler wheel.
I don't like you, but do want to enjoy my own life.
  This idea is quite simple so it might be over your head. I did go to school for stuff like this and thanks to God who gave me a hearing loss, I have had much time to learn about such things. After all, who wants a family when they can spend their time learning engineering, right ?
This idea is that the staic head on the left is pumped into a chamber with a vacuum measured in hg's. For people who have no engineering background, hg's is pronounced inches and is what  vacuum is measured in. A vacuum is a pressure below 14.2 psia (pounds per square inch absolute).
At 33 ft. or 9.8m's, a mass of 1 lb. or 1 kg. would have twice the pressure at the bottom of the static head. Any diver would know this, even my brother Paul who did diving for free for the Coast Gaurd. Talk about breaking the rules, he should have been court martialed. He is a strict by the book kind of guy.
The trick is, when pumping water into a vacuum, you are not going against atmospheric pressure. Even at 7.5hg's or 7 psi, a net force of 3.5 psi can be realized. And this simply by using the water in the open side (open to the atmosphere) creating an air tight seal that maintains the vacuum while the water flows.
This is where area to lift vs. pressure comes into play to prevent a static head in the vacuum chamber being of such a height it becomes unworkable.
This is something that can work because it would be manipulating the pressure difference between a constant vacuum and atmospheric pressure.
  If you choke on this Wayne, it's okay with me. But as Alex posted, if it doesn't work in the simple, it won't work in the complex.  And with this, it's components can be tested for under $100.00. I know, you can't afford something that cost effective.
Now I can enjoy my build which I have spent several years on. It's how I roll, like Bessler 

edited to add; correction, a complete vacuum is 30 hg's (inches) or 0 psia. 15 hg's of vacuum is equivalent to 7.1psia.
Was thinking to let it go and see if anyone caught my mistake. It's engineering and something probably everyone in this thread should know.
But who would have thought that a vacuum could perform work ? I mean besides Nature who abhors it.

[mrwayne]

@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

Hello Larry - what you have in those three drawings - it the action of using "Air"  to move the water - to create the head in the system.
5A - no air yet, 5B Precharge air, 5C stroke
In 5b - you see the quantity required to go from sink to full float - Now since the resistance is overcome - as you add more air - the system moves higher - it makes it appear that the water level satyed the same in the next example.
P.s. We built the air moving system as drawn and the water moving system - the water worked much much better.

[mrwayne]

Dear Johnny,
After reading all your posts, I have to say.

Wow,

You are really smart, you should go to the Bessler page and teach everyone.

Thanks for the info, it will come in handy.

Wayne

[johnny874]

wayne
tnis part of the forum is for gravity power,
your system is mechanical, it is disruptive to this part of the forum,