Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[GreenHiker]

For anyone who wants to understand the Travis Effect fully , or how Wayne and his team engineered the twin ZED machine to utilize the effect, I personally suggest:

Watch the videos 1-5 on the Travis Effect - Links are on this site, Wayne's site or search "Travis Effect" on YouTube.
Study post number #523 page 35 from Tom Webb (webby1) titled "Just my 2 cents worth". Nice write up. That moves you from the effect, to the machine. Do not give up on his write up and skip ahead. Understand each point before you go to the next.

When finished, you should now understand exactly what Larry just said. With the Travis effect and Wayne's concentric tanks, there is the equivalent buoyant force from several filled air tanks wanting to rise, in each ZED.

Whatever calculations you are using to verify the claims, double check that you come up with approximately the same buoyant force for each shell if it were by itself underwater, with air inside. Then sum the results for the total number of shells plus the buoyancy of the pod. See LarryC's Travis Calculator if you need help.

After that you can study the cycling of the machines and how the different stages of the stroke operate. Very cool.

You folks are tearing this up! Great work.

Thanks,

Tom (from the Videos) 

[KanShi]

@mondrasek:
As I said, it was an experiment to test your abilities (it does not directly apply to the travis effect device). In simpler terms, most of the weight of the hovercraft is transmitted to the partially submerged body through the air cushion, so yes, it will sink a bit. It's the same thing as putting 17% of weights on the water and 83% of weights on the body (you even said so yourself). Adding a few kilograms of weights to a huge area (let's say 1 square kilometer) will do nothing, the water pressure at any depth will (virtually) not change. As soon as the body sinks a bit, the buoyant force will increase as more water is displaced (that's what I haven't stated explicitly).
Do you finally understand?

As for the spreadsheet, LarryC added all the pressures up (in his first spreadsheet, it was correct) - even those, that should have been subtracted. That was what I was pointing out.

[mondrasek]

Do you finally understand?

@KanShi, what I understand is you trying to back away from your original argument rather than just admit you were wrong.  The only time the body will sink in an ideal system is if the "hovercraft" becomes so small that it is not supported by any of the water.  Then the body will effectively see the weight of the hovercraft (ie. 100% of the pressure) and since no pressure is transferred to the water, buoyancy will change.

Since in the case of the ZEDs the air pressure IS equally distributed over the tops of Pod/Risers and their surrounding water columns there is no correlation with your hovercraft example.

The spreadsheet was and is correct I believe.  That is the only point of this discussion.  Failing to admit your mistake is disappointing, but just so the other members understand and do not follow that mistake is all that I hope to achieve.

M.

[neptune]

As a layman , I am amazed at the level of mathematics which is apparently needed to analyse this device, which is basically half a dozen empty bean tins and some water. There are some differences of opinion, and various theories.I have made my opinion clear and I will not repeat them here. I think that very soon this device will be replicated, and also we shall see what the results of Mark Dansies prolonged tests are . Four years after the Wright Brothers flew, the academics were still busy "proving" that it was impossible. At least we have not yet quite sunk to the level of name calling .

[KanShi]

What is worth considering is this:
1) instead of 4 risers you can have 1 riser with the same pressure, same area and even larger pod.
In Larry's latest spreadsheet you see surface diameter of 36.9i, pod diameter of 30i and pressure of 14.4 psi creating a lift of 16075 pounds.
So, you can have 1 riser with the same parameters and a 34.9i pod with a lift of 18858 pounds and the same input requirements (see picture).
Any disagreements?

2) Lifting force will gradually decrease as the riser rises (assuming no further input) - decrease in air pressure and lower water level.

3) Lift distance is limited.

4) Let's completely remove the pod and just use a riser with a solid insert. Now we are using almost no air for 15410 pounds of lift. See what you got? Yes, that is called a pneumatic lift.

5) Or simply use a pod inside a closed tower. See the picture. 34.9i diameter pod and 14.4 psi. Little air used.

Compare 1, 2 and 4... See the analogy? Seems to me like a pneumatic lift with added 2548 pounds of lift using buoyancy.
(what you need is calculating the distance of lift vs. the energy required to fill the tank up).


@mondrasek: no, I am not trying to back away. The hovercraft does NOT have to become small. Basically what that exercise was based on is that a small local displacement virtually does not affect total pressure at depth (this is a fact).
LarryC had an error in his spreadsheet (in the one using square shapes) - it is fixed now, though. He is now subtracting correctly and he wasn't before (at all).

@neptune: that is basic school mathematics and basic school physics (at least for europe).