Post Deleted.

According to the information posted on his website, one of Mrwayne`s tasks in the current week, was to schedule the next stage of verification. I am assuming that he probably means arranging the next visit from Mark Dansie. Judging by the way things have been done in the past, his next website update will be on Monday, when he will probably tell us more. If Marks verdict is positive, and I believe it will be unless there are teething problems, the next stage will be verification by the Big Guns on behalf of potential investors.
         There are several very promising technologies in the frame at the moment, and personally, I think that in the future as in the past we shall see several competing technologies running side by side. There will probably be no one-size-fits-all answer. Experience will tell what is the most cost-effective size for ZED machines. The answer could be a machine suitable to serve all the homes in one or two streets. This would be handy, as the sites of electricity substations could be reallocated as generator sites when the National Grid becomes redundant. When that happens, the scrap merchants are going to have a field day. We can recycle the pylons as a source of steel to build ZEDs. We live in exiting times, and things may move faster than you thought possible.

Quote from: neptune on July 14, 2012, 09:12:46 AM
We live in exiting times, and things may move faster than you thought possible.

Poignant ambiguity created by the mere (accidental or deliberate) omission of that little "c" in "exiting".

The following interesting nonlinear example came up in PM's with others trying to understand and help.

One nonlinear unit is a car air shock absorber, as its resistance to compression increases as applied force gets higher.

Now, if you had a small Travis model on your desk, that is set at a PSI (50% of max) which will lift 25 pounds and it has a 20 pound weight on top and had risen an inch to a stop. Now with your hand apply forces varying from >o to 10 pounds. It will respond similar to a spring as the internal air will be compressing/decompressing and the water column lowering/rising in response to the air volume changes due to the external pressure changes.

Then compare that to a hydraulic system doing the same test. No movement.

Correction: Thanks M.


Regards, Larry 

Anybody up for a Beta test?

The below attachment is from my water height calculator and the spreadsheet is below.
Note how the New water levels have a increasing downward slope from outside to inside.

The logic used is to first lower the water level in the Outside Container by the entered value, then raise the water level in the adjacent channel. The new difference in water levels causes the PSI in the adjacent air channel to lower. The lowered pressure is used to calculate the expansion of the air. That expanded value is used to determine how much to lower the next water channel and raise the water in the adjacent channel. Then use the accumulated PSI to calculate the expansion of the air. So on and so on until the pod water level is lowered.

Basically, the outside water drop is forcing all the inner channel to respond accordingly.


This logic is much simpler, then changing the POD level and calculating outward. To do it correctly, it would require recursive iteration calculations forward and backward on the previous channels. As each channel change require changes to all previous channels which again changes the current channel, and round and round you go until it settles.

Regards, Larry

.