Quote from: neptune on June 29, 2012, 12:34:42 PM
I have been giving some thought to mrwayne`s suggestion about making a linear chart... So we have a two axis graph. Question is, what do the two axes show? Is one for the amount of weight lifted, and the other for input pressure? Would that show what we want to show?

I am actually working on this idea right now.  I think the essence would be shown by stroke position vs force of the input compared to the stroke position vs force of the output.  So one axis would be the stroke position for in and out.  The other axis would be the force generated -- in two lines, one for in and one for out.  Some scaling may be required to overlay the lines.  A straight hydraulic piston can be also plotted in the same way.  Integrating the force over the distance of input and output might also make an interesting curve. 

Creating the formulas is step one.  They can be plugged into the WolframAlpha dot com site to draw the graphs. 

Quote from: neptune on June 29, 2012, 12:34:42 PM
I have been giving some thought to mrwayne`s suggestion about making a linear chart. I will freely admit that mathematics is not my strong point. So I think by a linear chart he probably means a graph. Obviously we have to be careful to compare apples with apples and not oranges. It is usual to start with some assumptions. So we assume that for the purpose of this graph, we will use one zed. We know the size of this ZED, and we know how much water we need to inject into it to "stroke" it, and at  what pressure. We know how much weight it is going to lift and what distance it will be lifted.
    The equivalent hydraulic system we will use for comparison. It just consists of two interconnected cylinders, or if you like giant syringes. The input cylinder or pump will be designed to pump the same amount of water as is used to stroke the ZED. The diameter of the output cylinder will be chosen so that it has the same stroke length as the ZED . So both systems will have the same input volume and pressure.
    So we have a two axis graph. Question is, what do the two axes show? Is one for the amount of weight lifted, and the other for input pressure? Would that show what we want to show?
    So now we have two curves on the graph, one for the hydraulic system and one for the ZED. We may want to show a third curve for a two ZED system.
    These are just the initial thoughts of a layman. Could be complete Bullshine. Come on guys , someone can do better than this?

Hello All,
This graph shows our actual internal input cost (psi) on our demo model and the resultant lift in pounds.
This is after the weight and risers are lifted - so add 5.0 psi to see actual psi.
The weight of the risers  weights = 2500 - and they create on the down stroke 5.0 psi.
Notice what the added input is to lift another 2500, and then what 5.0 more lifts....
This is what we mean by non linear.
p.s Ignore the first ten or so points - the cylinders had cross over pressure in them - start where the lift begins.

Wayne

The attached spreadsheet is intended to help in the understanding of Wayne's reply 746. In blue the nonlinear aspect and sweet spot is easy to see and it is mathematical proof of OU. Hope you get your OMG. The spreadsheet file is also included, just change the yellow fields for your model.

Edit: Some of the relationships are based on Wayne's 3 layer demo unit that he described in 746, it would need to be adjusted for higher layer models as they would be more efficient.

Regards, Larry

Quote from: Seamus101 on June 29, 2012, 09:25:27 PM
Can I ask where the energy comes from to 'merely' raise the water level of the pod? If it comes from the other Zed then there is no overunity present as you have simply depleted the potential of the other side. All that potential needs to be restored and the net effect is zero. If it comes from an external water supply then you have invented a generator powered by the head of the water supply. No OU there either.

This situation reminds me of a question once posed by my high school physics teacher who asked us to show why a float rising through a free surface was not a source of free energy. A naive analysis based around forces showed it to be so as it neglected to consider the change in height of the water surface as the float was sunk into it.

Sorry about your teacher.
He should have shown the energy potential in the height of the water raised, the value of the compressed air in the float, and the value of the down ward force caused by the buoyancy - and in a tiny degree - the humidity, temperature change, and the friction in the water.
The Force calculations should have raised the question "where is "all" the missing energy? Even using Energy instead of force - you can only find 67% of the energy in buoyancy - that means something was unknown, not observed, or not utilized.
That's what I was looking for when I discovered the Travis Effect - a volumetric based equation does not give the answer.

To your Question:
Two parts - we do not consume the energy from the other Zed - as I have shown before - the head is not consumed in the process - we transfer it laterally from side to side - your teacher did not ask you what the cost of moving a floating object side ways -
Until the Zed - no one had a use for that idea - the Zed does. (we move the raised water - as your example - in the form of head - side ways back and forth - and then when we do - the value of our float goes from float to sink - allowing us to operate the float in a cycle. This accounts for 5 psi worth of work, in our system - that we do not add or subtract  during operation.
Second: the 3.8 pounds of input comes from part of the production - Which is produced at the high side of our ESA.
I hope this helps, Wayne

We began running pretrial tests - prior to Mark Dansie's return - I had very much hoped to be done by Wednesday.
Mark is on Standby - he is very graciously patient. As you already know - we update his group most every day.
Update on Mark's return:
We ran into a few minor technical problems - which have been resolved - so our Pretrial runs begin again Today.
Here is a copy of the last few update letters to Mark's Group:
June 26
Hello Men, Very good day.
After replacing the last suspect leaking check valve - and the pressure loss remained - we pulled the lid off the Zed and found the leak was from the fitting under the lid inside the top of the Zed. - repaired and are leak free  at last!
Matthew reversed the operation of his water level adjustment calculator - and gave us the low position based on our end of stroke data (high position)
This is where the water level should be at the start of a cycle / so now we have both.
We set it up, ran it and verified the accuracy.
We also verified the production strength  :-) we are GOOD!
In short - we gained 750 pounds lift per inch - above the internal input cost.........
Everything is working great -
In the morning we will be fine tuning the water level (minor changes) and running the system.
I have one manageable set back - we only need 1.375 si cylinder for the lever arm assist - (the internal input) and we have the options of 1.0si and 2.0si
Running 2.0si is a big waste - still over unity - but overkill the input -
I used to be able to move the location of the cylinders - but not since we mounted it horizontally.
Another option is lowering the output - by lowering the operating range - with less weight. - but that drops our output too.
The third option is to adjust the system to use all 2.0si - that puts us dangerously close to blowing skirts.
I will have to make a decision,
Thanks for your support.
Wayne Travis
President
HydroEnergy Revolution LLC
mr.wayne@hydroenergyrevolution.com
June 27
Hello Men,  Better day than our very good day yesterday.
Matthew built me a lever arm calculator (excel) so I could make the adjustment once - lol
Then took a cat nap and I slept on my Lever arm decision - and came up with a fourth alternative -
Step one - Drop one section from the three section production cylinder (leave it open it to the reservoir).
Step two - charge the accumulator from 550 psi (nitrogen) to 950 psi.(Chickasha Industrial will be here 9:00am)
Step three - remove the lever arm two from the staging program.
Step four - Adjust the gate valve to accommodate the speed increase.
Step five - set starting position and hit it!
In summary:
Using only one lever arm - at the higher pressure will give us the right force to create the same/better pressure at the production cylinder
This will result in a higher net production, and happens to be the pressure our Hydraulic {Motor not pump} pump is designed for - which means we will provide more torque, volume and rpm to the generator - and the Zed's run faster.......
p.s. We had one poppet valve for the cross over function fail - that is the section we will bypass.
Everything just fell perfectly into place ;-)
Wayne Travis
President
HydroEnergy Revolution LLC
mr.wayne@hydroenergyrevolution.com
June 28
Hello Men, Made the changes mentioned yesterday - the poppet valves did not hold under the higher pressure - so I had them disabled. We do not have to have them to run. We began running at 3:30 pm.
The Data showed that one of our cylinder (sections) was not building pressure - probably an air bubble form pulling the Poppets.
I had meetings all day until about 9:00pm - We will vent the system and pull data in the morning.
Even with the one exception - the system is running well - and the set up (which we keep practicing and improving) - is going very well.
We are close, maybe a day away.
Wayne Travis
President
HydroEnergy Revolution LLC
mr.wayne@hydroenergyrevolution.com
June 29
Hello Men,
I have to say I am disappointed (that we did not finish this week) - I really wanted to be done by the 28.
The Poppet valves that could not handle the pressure - yesterday we blocked the ports so we could run without them - the block - did not hold - so we went ahead and removed them completely and plumbed the sections.
We can later re-install a new better valve.
We have bled the lines, and after my 7:00 meeting in the morning - I run again.
Some good news - the set up worked perfectly again, and the new procedure allows us to set up on the low end - instead of the high end - which will help with the "measuring setup cost to".
I will be working through the weekend - and I hope you have a great weekend and a Fourth of July.
We will be doing a designed experiment on sloping the water levels - we have noticed that we can get better lift - from the same (total) pressure - by the way we set up the layers.
Wayne Travis
President
HydroEnergy Revolution LLC
mr.wayne@hydroenergyrevolution.com