Big try at gravity wheel

[powercat]

Thanks ?? 

I have said that I do not have a self running ZED. 

This long walk around the garden path however, yes.  Decades ago I built this device and yes it does work and no I never got it to 100 percent, as I have stated.  It came fairly close but I always needed to add in a little more than I was taking out, so I concluded that the best I would be able to do with it would be a see-saw thing and moved on.

Now it makes sense why you did not go on to develop a self runner or do any verification, Wayne Travis has exactly the same problem, NO OU, he is also incapable of showing a continuous running device or have his device scientifically verified.

[MarkE]

Powercat, then it's a good thing for Wayne Travis and HER/Zydro that as he said in post 1148 that HER/Zydro is fully funded.  If new investment were needed, due diligence would be a serious problem as HER/Zydro cannot show either a viable concept or prototypes.

...
Where we are today:

I have on average five meetings a week with Utility companies, Inventors, Engineers, legal teams, political figures, and our new partners regarding our future alignments and focus - working together to bring reliable and clean energy to the world (None of those  meetings are for investment  - we are fully funded).

[Marsing]

.......

[MarkE]

Marsing, sure one could put energy into another store associated with the transfer device.  One could try different ideas along those lines.  For instance one might set-up a large variable store that is nearly isobaric so as to minimize the effects of Z^2.  Then one could make that store always have a higher pressure than either the A or B stores anywhere in the cycle.  The pump would have to do positive work moving fluid out of B into the store.  Then the store would release work filling and then lifting A.  For a first trivial analysis we assume that the pump requires no more energy than the energy difference between two states.  IE it will have to add only the work added to the C reservoir less the potential energy that was in the B store filling.  And in the release to A it will only lose the work associated with the reduced P*V.

Unless I did the math wrong, this idea makes things better as analyzed but is still under 50% efficient using all the idealized constraints.  I did not directly calculate the integral work performed pumping up the reservoir from B.  The untested assumption is that C being isobaric we can just work with the starting and ending volumes and pressures.

[MarkE]

I was going to leave this alone.

MarkE, the bottom line is you missed what I was trying to say, then you chose to jump all over it and me at the same time.  I assume by your edit that you are finally understanding the method I put forward and you are now trying to remove yourself from the corner.

Do Not worry about it, I am not the best communicator, and we all are human.

Webby, you are the one completely caught in a corner.  Go ahead draw up your scheme and show an actual analysis that helps your cause.  If you think that adding a third energy store, even a large one fixes your problems, then you are wrong as shown in the above reply to Marsing.