Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[TinselKoala]

Didn't MileHigh already cover this?

Back to the topic of how to properly measure this single three layer (1 Pod, 2 Risers) ZED set up.  What is the opinion of the method that Wayne outlined in #2505?  I'll post the relevant section below in bold, not for emphasis, but just to delineate where his content starts and ends.

Lets say your load was 10 lbs (corrected by M), if your pressure increase is .215 and your stroke is .75 inches, and your volume was 27 cubic inches.

Here is the method - 27/.75 = 36 this give you a comparative piston value - 27 cubic inches could lift (in a frictionless position with a surface area of 36 inches a stroke of .75 inches.

Now multiply the pressure difference of .215 x 36 = you could lift 7.75 pounds (roughly)
Now compare your 7.75 to your actual lift of 10 pounds the same difference.

10/7.75 = 129%

Is this a valid method for evaluating input vs. output?

M.

I must have read this passage two hundred times and I still can't figure out just what is meant. It sounds like the Bates Motel all over again.... where did the missing dollar go?

MileHigh said to us,

If you pump 27 cubic inches of water into the ZED, and it raises up by 0.75 inches, then the effective area of the ZED riser is indeed 27/0.75 = 36 square inches.

Therefore, if you put a 10 pound weight on top of the ZED the increase in the water pressure would be 10 pounds divided by 36 square inches = 0.277 psi.

Look at Wayne's initial conditions again:  Lets say your load was 10 pounds, if your pressure increase is .215 and your stroke is .75 inches, and your volume was 27 cubic inches.

Your pressure increase would not be 0.215 psi Wayne, it would be 0.277 psi.

Note that 0.277/0.215 = 129%, exactly what Wayne is trying to claim as the "gain."

This is a simple geometry problem. You have so much volume at such and such pressure. You reduce the volume by a certain amount and your pressure goes up.  Therefore, as MH has pointed out, that figure of 0.215 PSI has to be explained, because it's too low. One way that it could be explained is that it is the result of a backwards calculation from a lift and weight measurement that is only slightly in error. It cannot be explained by any geometric means, I don't think.

Are these numbers from a measurement on a real system, or are they just made up for the sake of the illustration? I guess I don't need to remind you that if wishes were airline tickets, beggars would fly.

As to whether this method is really valid to analyze the Zed.... it would certainly help, if we had a data table of actual measurements on a system of known geometry like yours, wouldn't it?  To determine if the method is valid, it should be used on a known non-overunity system to see if it gives correct results.

[TinselKoala]

I see that mrwayne has updated his website today. He states that the time for handing over to the team for validation is likely to be this coming Friday. He also speaks of the next phase which heis calling the "Rotary Zed." Have a look for yourselves.

You didn't mention that he also expects to be up and running by Wednesday. Which of course means he's not up and running now.

And he also said in his October 1 update that

We expect to be finished by the end of the week - assuming all goes semi well (parts delivery), and we will be ready for the Validation!

So what I want to know is this: Has Mark Dansie made his airline reservations yet?

[camelherder49]

I can hardly wait for this week to be completed.
Just one question: When the ZED begins self running,
how will the fuel that makes it operate be described??

[mondrasek]

As to whether this method is really valid to analyze the Zed.... it would certainly help, if we had a data table of actual measurements on a system of known geometry like yours, wouldn't it?

Yeah, but it would also be preferable to take data from a system that does not have some sort of leak between the retainer walls.  I'm about 99% confident that a leak must be the cause of all unusual behaviors that I am witnessing while trying to set up a repeatable test stroke again.  And it is probably a factor for oddity in the hysteresis data as you pointed out.  I was hoping to possibly run a fast test that might minimize the affects of a leak, but, as you know, leaks grow.  So even a speed run will likely not allow for repeatability in multiple runs.

Dale, you about ready to take over?

The construction of my test ZED does not allow for easy (if at all) repair of a leak to an inner retainer wall.  Probably better to just build a new one.  I'll think on it for a few, but right now I think a complete tear down and rebuild of that section is required.  And since so much of the build is glued in place now, that would be rough.  So it would be really nice if someone else can support this.

M.

[fletcher]

I see that mrwayne has updated his website today. He states that the time for handing over to the team for validation is likely to be this coming Friday.

He also speaks of the next phase which he is calling the "Rotary Zed." Have a look for yourselves.

As he says in his blog it is a natural progression to take a reciprocating format & redesign it as a rotary format.

The analogy is taking a pendulum that swings back & forth [like a swing] & making it fall from 12 o'cl & end up back there with excess velocity [like kiiking] so that it rotates rather than oscillates - another analogy is a normal combustion engine pistons linear action driving a crank shaft being replaced by the Wankle rotary cycle.

There are a couple of reasons to change format from reciprocating to rotary, or back.

The first scenario is power density, & a two ZED unit device probably has more power density than a single ZED device, for example - or a rotary device for that matter, in terms of unit compactness.

The second is size & efficiency - a rotary device can revolve quickly & because of inertia acts as a flywheel - mechanical flywheels are efficient energy storage devices - devices can also be stacked on one output shaft.

Interesting times Friday.