Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

These 2 screenshots are with MarkE's force number in Screenshot-6 and the buoyant lift force number in Screenshot-7, for the lift force value in cell B164

These have the riserwallthickness and the ringwallthickness both set to 0mm.

This takes the physical structure out of the equation and thus turns it into an "ideal" model.

These numbers MUST be the same for each lift method, that is in Screenshot-6 MarkE's lift force and the buoyant lift force must be the same as each other for state 2, then they must also be the same as each other in Screenshot-7 for state 2.

So look at cell F256 and cell F253, these numbers must be the same.

Did you forget to mention that you have substituted your own incorrect formulas for the correct formulas that are in the R4 spreadsheet?  Did you mention that you have added two different values for up lift force on the riser walls?  In this amazing new Tom Web artificial physics, a submerged object is subject to two different additive up forces.

[mondrasek]

Mondrasek has admitted that his analysis was mistaken and that the analysis behind the R4 spreadsheet is correct.  Try to keep up Tom.

I have agreed that you maths appear correct.  I have not (yet) agreed with your conclusions.  I still firmly believe that all Forces must be resolved as a first order of business.  Only after the Forces are resolved correctly can Energy calculations be analyzed.

[LibreEnergia]

This thread is becoming somewhat ridiculous. It is obvious Webby has only the most tenuous grasp of mathematics and mechanics at best. I'd suggest we forget his somewhat incomprehensible ramblings and analysis and concentrate on holding Wayne Travis to account for his on-going misleading and false statements.

Travis says he need not demonstrate a working machine to prove his point, and that the mathematics alone will prove it.

Well, Wayne Travis, here is your chance to 'reset' the discussion. Please provide (or your  engineers) a coherent and fully worked mathematical explanation. Everything presented so far has been shown to be incorrect, so it needs to start from first principles and be clear and complete.

If you prefer to allow your engineers to present this analysis, then let them state their qualifications and affiliations as well. Professional engineers are accountable for their actions. I intend to hold them to such account.

[celsus]

webby, just a little reminder 

Your add ons are wrong Tom.  You are double counting values.

[mondrasek]

webby, just a little reminder 

Welcome back, TK!