Quote from: TinselKoala on August 17, 2012, 10:58:13 AM
Really? If the input weight (that you have removed) has dropped less than the output load (that you have removed) has risen ... then the system is NOT reset to the beginning of a cycle with all levels and pressures the same as when started. Do you think that by bleeding off some pressure, doing work elsewhere, it will then be reset to the original state?

TK,

My simulation starts with the Riser at the bottom stop and no input or output weights applied, atmospheric air PSI everywhere, no Pod head, no exit head differentials.  The riser has a NET weight of 0.01 pounds holding it against the bottom stop.  Therefore, removing the input and output weights at any point will return it to the initial state.  This initial state is very easy for me to analyze without a computer.

There is no provision for any fluid or pressure removal from the system as I have presented it.  Excess energy production would be removed from any excess differential in the movement distance of the input and output weights.  The potential excess output work would simply be a measure of the distance x weight.  From a practical point of view, there would be other more direct ways of removal of any excess.  For instance driving a crank from the linear motion of the Riser to spin a generator.  In that case, it would be equivalent to the input weight moving the same distance as the output weight, but with a heaver output weight.

Please don't complicate it.  It was reduced to this very simple form on purpose to aid in understanding.  Wayne's machine has a lot of moving parts.  It is beyond my ability to analyze it.  I am trying to work with this simple cartoon version so I can analyze and understand it, building it up from the most simple to the more complex, one step at a time.  If I am successful with this learning approach, you and others here will help me understand as I turn that understanding back around into an ever more complete simulation the will help others understand in an upward knowledge spiral.

Questions that you already know the answer to, but don't think I have explained well enough for others to understand are welcome.

~Dennis

@TK. I described the "thing with fins" as an alternator. You insist it is a generator. The term generator as I understand it is a term that includes alternators and Dynamos. So all alternators are generators, but not all generators are alternators. Modern wind turbines are usually permanent magnet alternators with rectification on the output to provide DC. But if you still want to call it a generator, that is fine by me.
      Regarding your other question, well Mondrasek pretty well covered it . As the ZEDs rise, the hydaulic rams fitted to them act as pumps, one per ZED. They force 30 cubic inches of fluid into the accumulator. From there, half powers the hydraulic motor/generator, the other half powers the rams which push the convoluted bags to input water into the zeds. The low pressure "exhaust" from the hydraulic motor, and from the convoluted bag rams is returned to the reservoir.,
      You ask how does the hydraulic oil get back into the system from the reservoir. As each Zed falls, oil is drawn into the hydraulic-ram-used-as-a-pump mounted on top of the ZED.

Quote from: neptune on August 17, 2012, 12:57:14 PM
@TK. I described the "thing with fins" as an alternator. You insist it is a generator. The term generator as I understand it is a term that includes alternators and Dynamos. So all alternators are generators, but not all generators are alternators. Modern wind turbines are usually permanent magnet alternators with rectification on the output to provide DC. But if you still want to call it a generator, that is fine by me.
      Regarding your other question, well Mondrasek pretty well covered it . As the ZEDs rise, the hydaulic rams fitted to them act as pumps, one per ZED. They force 30 cubic inches of fluid into the accumulator. From there, half powers the hydraulic motor/generator, the other half powers the rams which push the convoluted bags to input water into the zeds. The low pressure "exhaust" from the hydraulic motor, and from the convoluted bag rams is returned to the reservoir.,
      You ask how does the hydraulic oil get back into the system from the reservoir. As each Zed falls, oil is drawn into the hydraulic-ram-used-as-a-pump mounted on top of the ZED.

I am not INSISTING it's a generator... I am REPEATING what was told to me, and what I've seen in units that are similar in appearance. You may note also that on MrWayne's  diagram it is called a GENERATOR.

You can argue semantics if you like, distracting from the main issue. The important distinction between a GENERATOR and an ALTERNATOR is that the generator can be driven electrically in a simple manner and will turn... just like a motor. Alternators with field coils and no PMs... much more difficult to make them motor along. Also... generator/motors will work fairly well even at low RPMs and torques. Alternators, not so much.

Please provide the part number of the unit in question, so that we can get some specs and see if it's a generator with PMs, that can be reversed into a motor, or an alternator with field coils that are more difficult.

QuoteYou ask how does the hydraulic oil get back into the system from the reservoir. As each Zed falls, oil is drawn into the hydraulic-ram-used-as-a-pump mounted on top of the ZED.

But every body else who has answered this question is telling me that the oil is injected into the zeds -- or somewhere -- at high pressure. This does not jive with your description, which requires a NEGATIVE pressure, or suction. The reservoir is held at what pressure?

Oh... the first 15 units goes into the zed at high pressure and the rest which flowed thru the hydraulic motor/pump  is returned at low pressure, from the suction of the rams ... a process that requires INPUT WORK?

The ZED tanks contain air and water only.
The hydraulic (oil) system is external to the ZED(s).

Nothing is injected into or taken out of the ZED system once set up and operating.

@see3d:

I am complicating the issue?

OK, fine. I suppose my continued request for real data on the simple three layer system that is clearly overunity by itself adds to the complications, doesn't it? Especially when the fact that we aren't being provided with this data or any other evidence that that _simple_ system is clearly overunity by itself, starts sticking out like  a sore thumb. It's pretty complicated to try to interpret that set of facts, all right.

And LarryC's posting of his most recent diagram is simplifying the issue. Uh huh.

OK fine, carry on.