Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

[ramset]

Stefan
Any close ups of the anchor points for the device ?
seems a poured concrete or perhaps even precast wall...If that is precast or structural concrete the anchors I can see [seems 4  on 6 inch flange? ] would hold at the very least a ton on each arm or easily twice that if done properly.
However if there was a thru hole in the middle of the anchor cluster  the edge or void would greatly diminish the holding power unless Epoxy was used, However you would see a stud with Nut if this was the case. [unless they epoxied inserts into the wall ..a pain to do]

can you call building maintenance ,and get some one on the phone to ask if there are any through holes to the other side ?
Running and hiding an electric line along the concrete wall would be hard to do, getting permission to see whats on the other side of the wall at those mounting points would be a step in the right direction.


this is a rented public display/convention center correct ?
maintenance would be culpable if they new a wire had been run to power this unit..and in Most places their men would have to provide that power.[if it is a convention center]
deception and fraud would not bode well for them either..?

or get some one at the demo to Grab a janitor or Maintenance guy to ask whats on the other side.
I guarantee if they powered that unit up in a sneaky way the electrician knows and so do most of the other maintenance crew.
Being part of a Fraud is a very big deal at a big deep pocket convention center...

[TinselKoala]

The wall brackets could themselves be conductors, connected through the wall by the bolts to a power feed on the other side, or inside, the visible wall. No weakening by a cable hole is needed. I read on ou.de that the Rosch people spent some time "refurbishing" the display building area before the demonstration. Plus... nobody knows (except the builders) what is actually inside the tube, or inside the power control box connected by cables to the tube.

But consider: if it has the mechanism inside it that is what they claim, similar to the transparent rectangular thing shown previously... there isn't very much room in there! The thing has to have sprockets at top and bottom that separate the chain by the diameter of the sprockets. Then it has to have the buoyant chambers attached to the outside of the chain. Then also there must be an internal pipe from the compressor down to the bottom, and the mechanism for coupling or transferring air from the pipe outlet into the floats at the correct place and time in the sequence. The floats must be small!

The air pump they are using isn't really a "compressor" but a high volume low pressure diaphragm pump, like a glorified fishtank aeration pump. Its working pressure is only 2.6 psi, according to the data sheet for the pump. But the pressure at the bottom of a 4 meter column of water is 39 kiloPascals or about 5.7 psi, over twice the working pressure of the air pump. How is the pump able to fill the floats at the bottom of this column of water?

So, if the thing _does_ work as claimed, where is the extra energy coming from? None of the parts are unusual, it uses COTS air pump and generator, there is nothing special or particularly clever about the chain, floats, sprockets, or water. The only "tricky part" is the mechanism for getting the air into the floats at the bottom of the rising part of the cycle, and that's easy enough to do, IF there is sufficient pressure of air (which there doesn't seem to be). Yet the math clearly shows that there is nowhere near enough power available from a bunch of smallish floats bobbing up through 4 meters of water to make 4.8 kW continuous output. So where is the "magic" coming into the system? There _must_ be an outside source of power because there is nothing _inside_ the system that is mysterious, not understood, new or special.

[mscoffman]

If you have a straight forward buoyancy machine, substituting mercury for water should work...Except air gas is going
to compress 13 times as much. I like to also replace all compressible objects with spring piston, vacuum filled objects
as you will drop out the gas temperature coefficients in equations. Though, mercury working fluid has expansion coefficients
with higher temperature like medical thermometers have. What you have done is convert a hard to analyze gas plus hydraulic
system into a one working fluid hydraulic and mechanical system.

Now, did you destroy your overunity buoyancy mechanism with the conversion or not? 

Actual mercury experiments would be difficult as heck to do safely, but are fun to think about.

..S..MarkSCoffman

[DENA]

@Hartiberlin,

I believe we need to do some math before saying this dose not work  ,
We have to see number of plastic balls ,which are already immersed in water , and see how much force these are creating ? (let's name it F1)
then also adding the small gravity force ,resulted by weight of balls ,when they are going down in air (another phase) we name it F2,
and buoyancy force against these two:

i still believe by right calculation of number of balls attached to chain and height of water we will get the F1+F2> F3
correct?

pls check the pic he had some figures ,H1 and H2, L1 L2, density ,...

[TinselKoala]

@mscoffman: no, mercury will not make it work.

@DENA: no, chambers with different density fluids will not make it work. The math has been done _properly_ , and many people have even tried actual experiments. They don't work!

https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm