Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mondrasek]

M. had a pod and 2 riser version. I only have a system rise calculator for a pod and 3 riser version. In 2708 it shows that a 3 riser built according to M. specification (Pic 1) fails to maintain full force for a .75 lift as it starts with 4.75 and ends with 1.85. Pic 2 shows the results from a replication built to Wayne's specifications and it starts with a lift force of 15.05 and ends with a lift force of 15.12.

Larry, thanks again for posting those earlier graphs and for restating their meaning again here.  I've been trying to think what more I can test with my build and I think your post solidified something I was considering while digesting your earlier graphs.

Your graphs point to the possibility that my build (with one less riser) is acting similarly and loosing lift force dramatically throughout the stroke range that I was testing.  So what if we test a smaller stroke range?

My reasoning for testing a smaller stroke range is this:  Testing different lift masses has already been done and shown to be a linear relationship.  So no joy there and futile testing.  But if I lower the top stop and adjust for a shorter stroke I might stay within a higher force range if your analysis is correct.  So this should be evidenced by a smaller input volume (respectively).  And I think that means that the same calculations when performed on the new test data must show a larger ratio (OU %).  So I think it is a worthwhile test.

As always, I welcome input and suggestions.  But please note that the modifications to top stop height and stroke are already underway.

M.

[mondrasek]

Webby,

I wouldn't say it is too late.  Unlike you, my changes may take a few days.  From you I would expect new results in less than an hour or two!

I see no reason not to try, though I need to find a way to get the water out of the outer annulus first.  I need a very thin tube.  I'm not sure what (or why) a hobby shop might have something as small as that.  So suggestions are again welcome!

M.

PS.  I think I can still get 8 mm of stroke.  The bigger the better to minimize the errors due to measurements.  And I can always go shorter in the future if another data point is deemed important.

[Xaverius]

Xavier,
I might be naive here, but I do not understand what "validation" has to do with "understanding the system".   Even after validation has successfully completed, the understanding wouldn't have changed, at least not due to the validation.
Please explain !

Good point RSS.  Like I said, after the validation Wayne will release his book which explains the ZED.  The bonus would be that the system would also be proven, the skeptics can go home and the rest of us can join the "117 members" to get this thing to the public.  Maybe that sounds too optimistic, but getting past the validation would enable this team to finally move forward with this project.  Yes?  No?

[DaveBrit]

Maybe that sounds too optimistic, but getting past the validation would enable this team to finally move forward with this project.  Yes?  No?

Getting past the validation team is a major step and instrumental in securing additional resources to advance the ZED technology and determine the scalability.  Will a system 4 meters x 4 meters and 5 meters in height be capable of 10KW output or only 100 watts output?  But Mark Dansie must be 110% convinced before the validation team goes into action.

Dave

[DiscerningDave]

Getting past the validation team is a major step and instrumental in securing additional resources to advance the ZED technology and determine the scalability.  Will a system 4 meters x 4 meters and 5 meters in height be capable of 10KW output or only 100 watts output?  But Mark Dansie must be 110% convinced before the validation team goes into action.

Dave

Wow, Mark Dansie is over unity, too?  ;-)