Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[neptune]

OMG. Positive discussion is back, great . Can I just ask, Is 5in^3, just a way of writing 5 cubic inches?
@mondrasek. In item [4] in your last post, you mention "decreasing head pressure at twice the rate of drop" and say that you think it is significant. Indeed Wayne mentioned this earlier in a sort of obscure way .



It is probably a bit early, but has anyone considered the problem of interwall gaps. Does anyone agree that the volume of water needs to be the same in each section , in spite of circumferance increasing as we move from the centre towards the outer wall. Ultimately we need a formula to work this out , taking wall thickness into account .

[mondrasek]

@Cisco,

Thanks for pointing that out.  But I don't think it matters right now, since I am just trying to figure out the dimentional relationships of the members.  I think you can start at any level, but then (in my case) you need to lower to the point where the ZED members becomes neutraly buoyant.  The volume of water needed to do this should be 1/2 the volume that needs to be exchanged bertween ZEDs for operation.  This will define the actual stroke needed and the outside wall and rings attached to the bottom member can then be shortened to elliminate wasted material and uneeded water volume.  At least that is how I was seeing it before realizing I need to adjust my Buoyancy forces by subtracting the down force of the increased air pressure.  BTW, an initial look at that makes me think that my proportions are not correct.  I think all of the members are too tall, but I need to do some more checking.

M.

[mondrasek]

Can I just ask, Is 5in^3, just a way of writing 5 cubic inches?

Yes sir.

It is probably a bit early, but has anyone considered the problem of interwall gaps. Does anyone agree that the volume of water needs to be the same in each section , in spite of circumferance increasing as we move from the centre towards the outer wall. Ultimately we need a formula to work this out , taking wall thickness into account .

I have not yet committed to needing the same volume in each annular section yet.  But you may be right.  I believe I have another mistake in my diagrams and calcs on the -5 in^3 due to only ajusting fluid level heights when they do have different volumes which makes that wrong.  If they had the same volumes then that would have been okay.  But I will have to check if just calculating the volumes properly is okay or if the same volumes are a necessity.

M.

[LarryC]

Interesting.  I seem to have missed that the buoyant force in each enclosed Pod or Riser also needs to overcome the downward force from the pressure of the air in the chamber in which it is rising.  I'll have to redo my calcs.
Thanks for that!

Hi M,

Nice work. But think Wayne, he's the genius, I'm just hanging on for the ride and loving it.

The pod is not effected as it is Archimedes's, so the volume or pressure differentials can be used for the calculation.

For those that don't have a spreadsheet and want to understand the calculations in the spreedsheet file, OpenOffice can be downloaded for free and it has most of the Microsoft Office applications. 

The total force is without the system losses.  But think of it this way to help understand the great potential, allow that force to lift the external load 1 MM, then the water inlet refills that 1 MM and it only sees the water head.

Regards, Larry

[mondrasek]

@LarryC, after thinking about it some more I think what I had done originally is fine, since all my Bouyany Force calculation were based off of the head pressure differentials, so the internal air pressures are already accounted for.  So now I'm having trouble understanding the spread sheet you have.  Could you draw up a diagram to explain where the dimensions and especially the "Next layer" are refering?

M.