Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

Okay, I am lost here.  The lift was 4.68536mm.  Did I miss something?

Or 4.653mm by your math.  Probably due to the use of different constants for water density and gravity?

4.653 is the single riser.  I was answering your question with respect to the three riser.

[MarkE]

PC, Mark Dansie posted much more recently, and in this thread.  Why don't you quote from there?  It should be his most recent thoughts on the ZED topic.

Well there is post #572

So, I have not seen the data that convinces me, and I do hope to get to see and assist in evaluating a proof of concept one day. However until that day arrives I will continue my public stance as of interest but not supported by any data I have seen to date. Others who work with Wayne, many with engineering qualifications do believe in what they are doing and their calculations. I am a very simple person, and do not get involved in such matters until a working prototype is running run and data has been collected with acceptable methodologies.

You can read the totality of the post.  I think that the above paragraph sums it up.  He remains interested, but not because there is any data that supports the claims.  He hasn't seen any such data.

[MarkE]

That is fine.  But I think you do Mark Dansie a disservice by misrepresenting him when you quote from two years ago.  His opinions may have changed since that time.  And since he went to the effort of posting his current opinions, those are the ones that should be presented.

I do not see anywhere that Mark Dansie has stated improved optimism since the time he stated what PowerCat quoted.

[MarkE]

Quite absurd, educated adults debating for years whether it's possible
  to get energy out of something that's dead as a stone.
  I'm somewhat confused by mrwayne's statement that we push it down
  and it goes up.
                       John.

Wayne Travis' statement apparently refers to the fact that the "charged" ZED in State 2 rises to reach a lower energy state in State 3.  Wayne apparently represents that something that exactly emulates the action of a linear compression spring is somehow unusual in its behavior.

[mondrasek]

The single riser ZED has a total uplift force of:  pWater*G0*(59.293mm - 1.420mm)*pi/4*26mm² = 0.30078N.  You are apparently applying 28mm², the OD of the riser, instead of the ID.

Of course I am using the OD instead of the ID.  I am calculating the lift force due to BUOYANCY.  The correct water displacement value is achieved when you consider the water displaced by the air inside the riser AND the wall thickness.  That means you use the OD.

If you want to calculate the buoyancy Force on a fully submerged 1m³ cube that has a wall thickness of 100mm throughout, is it not displacing 1m³?  Or do you want to calculate the displacement using only the remaining internal volume?