Quote from: wildew on September 22, 2012, 09:40:37 PM
OK - I have a minuteRelativity...  what CAN be measured as anything other than a difference?

You are so correct Dale,  that is when they came up with the terms "absolute" & "Relative" to differentiate where is ground zero.
Things can get quickly very confusing.

Quote from: mondrasek on September 22, 2012, 06:48:14 PM
The video is up on YouTube now.  I apologize after watching it for the several times I "misspeak" and do not hit the correct lift values during the rushed commentary/experiment.  But I believe this video still shows that I was not making up the data I posted earlier.

Let me know if there are specific experiments or measurements that you would like to see from this setup.  I can't promise anything, but will do what I can (because I can).

M.
http://youtu.be/YwXsoqm75WY

Hi Mondrasek,

I like your approach, very nice and systematic, nice setup and video. We should get something reasonable out of this.
I think I made a mistake on the input calculation when it comes to input pressure, I think my assumed float pressure is wrong in relation to the water height.
You have some other stuff loaded on top of the riser, what is the weight of that ?
The pressure is as important as the weight because it is the second part of the energy calculation .

With the same setup as in the video,
So lets do the following steps..
1.. What is the Kg of the Non removable weight on top of the riser
2.. What is the water height in the measuring tube at the start with nothing on top of the riser (I mean nothing at all, and you have the normal amount of water inside you began with before )
3.. How different is the water level in the zed compared to the measuring tube
4.. What is the water height in the tube when you put the non-removable weight on
5.. What is the water height in the tube when you put the 1.2kg removable weight on
6.. What is the water height in the tube at the end of the 10mm lift

Measure the water in the measuring tube vertically with reference to the inside bottom of the zed.

Regards, Michel

Hi Dale,
Let me try to help you where I can.  I do not always clearly understand the sequence of events and readings,
I made your statements in bold to differentiate.

1U tests
Looked REAL good. Lift and sink a total of 18.5 pounds an inch using 3 pounds of water and head 13.5" to 15"
Remove 5 pounds at the top and I would still remove 3 pounds of water BUT I would have to drop the head to 10" to sink.
Am I correct to say, 
With 18.5lb weight and 3lb of input water you can lift and sink with a cycled head change of ~14"
With 13.5lb, and 3lb of input water to lift or sink, with a cycled head change of 10".
This should also mean that the delta 5lb (at that base weight), needs not much of water and has a cycled head change of 4”


Now at 2U:
load is 23.5 Lbs. 5.5" POD tube. Lift head is up to 23" ( after tweaking the setup... ) and sink without the brick is 16" head.
I am not clear on, what is 5.5” POD Tube
We lift 23.5lb with a head of 23”
We sink 18.5lb with 16” head  <<  so what do you need to lift the 18.5lb and what do you need to sink the 23.5 ? 

Fluid transfer is down 1/3 to 2LBs but head differential needed is up.  Even after re-applying the 5Lb lift load the head is at 20".
For lift, there shouldn’t be any great difference in water requirement by weight, because the vacated space in the pod would remain the same regardless of weight. Only the head would change in the pod, but this water requirement should be marginal compared to stroke displacement and the other layer heads is per-provisioned (outer 1U).
The only problem with the flat top you made is that it can never achieve the lift capability of individual layers, notwithstanding each pressure layer is referenced to atmos counter pressure. The single surface is divided between all pressure zones and the outer lift area is small (with the lowest pressure) and most likely only accounts for less that 10% of the lift. The pod area is the largest with the largest pressure and will account for the majority of the lift

Looking like the 2U is almost a step backwards taking a 2Lb lift of 3" to lift and remove 5Lb 1".  I wanted to do the build this way - 1U at a time, to be able to test and compare the addition of layers.

You are right when looking at the lift capability figures,  based on the figures given above.
1U - Your lift capability is ~ 36 lb/psi
2U â€" Your lift capability is ~  30 lb/psi  <<< not normal ??

To be able to do a better analysis, you need more systematic and sequential figures to avoid measurement or interpretation errors. Refer to the posts sent to Mondrasek, gather that data in an ordered xls would go a long way to getting a handle on it.
I am sure you have done your sizing, area and lift calcs in xls format before you started to build, could I have a look at the model.

Regards, Michel

The argument continues is it or is it not OU ?
a self-runner would settle the argument and this thread would need a moderator to cope with the amount of people
Wanting to replicate.

measurements alone are not enough I can show a circuit that produces more voltage out then in,
have I got overunity ?  A better question would be can I make the circuit self-run answer no.
In the early days of this forum we saw many examples of (more voltage out then in)
Most people have reached an understanding on better ways of measuring performance,
and we can all move on much quicker to the next promising thread.

Let's not forget why most of us are here, we need affordable energy the situation is only getting worse.
All research is very good but when somebody makes a claim that they have achieved OU one of the greatest leaps
In science, then that claim must be investigated and scrutinised and challenged since it is the very reason
Most of us are here and we need to get on and build and promote a working device ASAP

So lots of excuses as to why a selfrunner can't be produced is not really going to go down well here,
and the challenges and arguments are going to go on.

Its a real shame we could do without all the obfuscation but over the years I have got used to it,
Unfortunately it normally leads to nothing, I hope I'm wrong.

@Red_Sunset. Are you saying that a Zed where the risers can move independently of each other will give a better COP than a Zed where all the risers are fixed together sharing a common lid [flat top] ?