Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED  (Read 746669 times)

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #705 on: March 07, 2014, 02:21:10 PM »



   Webby,
             how much efficiency do you need to get a functioning device?
     Must be well over 100% I would have thought.
                        John.

mrwayne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #706 on: March 07, 2014, 03:30:44 PM »
Thanks Webby,

The spring was meant to be just another puppet rabbit trail like:

The Pink
Unicorn
Bollard
Hereon or what ever..
Brick
Rock
Gravity switch

and feel free to add to the misdirection list..

But as fate would have it - the analogy can be corrected - SMile

And Your spring correction is not too far from reality - Make one change - the ZED Spring has a impressive attribute missed...

It gets taller as it is compressed..................... how is that for counter intuitive......

That's what I shared with Mark on his second visit - we push down to go up smile - makes the input a double use.

Now - give a an inventor worth his salt that can not use it to circumvent gravity ,,,,,,,,

Wayne


to elude the obvious - but if you want to cover
« Last Edit: March 07, 2014, 11:52:24 PM by mrwayne »

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #707 on: March 07, 2014, 03:44:49 PM »


Hi Mags,
            my 9v electric fence gives you a fair tickle, 6000 v , 2.7 stored joules.
     Why not collaborate with Webby and solve this whole ZED thingy?
                     John.

Lol,  Oh you guys. ;D   

Again, what part of  "the reed switch connects the battery across the led" can you not understand??

lol   Come one come all. Duth thou challengest me??   Ok then.    Keep up the responses of belief that....   
1. Magsy doesnt understand boost converters, what a fool.    ;D
2. Magsy just has to be misquoting MH in a cheap plot to discredit Milehigh. :o
3. Magsy couldnt possibly have 'copies' of posts proving his statements. Nah, could be, never happened. ::) ;D
4.  Magsy couldnt possibly have a link to the circuit described by Milehigh, showing just what Magsy means by  "the reed switch connects the battery across the led to light the led."
5.  Magsy doesnt have quotes/links of MH blaming the fact that is been 30years since he had any bench time.


Lol.  Keep them doubter posts coming boys.  And then when I get home after work and show all, you will all probably say, hmmm,  now we know that Magsy wasnt foolin. Magsy did not make it up, unlike Mark 'actually' stating Wayne claims that he can switch 'gravity' on and off, of which there is not a shred of evidence from Mark as to prove Wayne said 'exactly' that. For how many pages now???? ::) ::) ::) ::) :P   

Are you following readers??? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D   Are there any others out there that think I could not possibly have those quotes and links of Mh describing such??   Come one come all, step up to the pulpit, and show some more pulse motors and joule thief circuits, flip floppers and shocking fake pens ::) .

Yep, Ole Magsy must be just making it up. Magsy doesnt ever have links to back up his statements. lol  Right readers??? 

See what I did there readers????   By not posting the links right now, these guys get time to decide the risk of enjoying a tasty foot.  ;)   Oooo  looky   what was it just the other day, 16,860 readers??
Well it is 19,619 this morning.  The readers are plenty.  Im so glad they are paying close attention. ;D

Well, you all have today to add to what you might think "the reed switch connects the battery across the led to make it light" might possibly mean. 1.2v and a typical red led and a reed switch.


Ohhh, this is gunna be gooood.   Be back after work for the BIG reveal.    Dont miss out on this one dear readers.    Later this evening, we will have interviews of what the 'masters of the universe' think their feet taste like.   Ranch or Blue cheese?    :P

Magsy   ;D





minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #708 on: March 07, 2014, 03:45:34 PM »



   All Wayne has to do is show it working.
                       John.

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #709 on: March 07, 2014, 04:18:49 PM »
I thought the forward voltage drop for an ordinary red LED was 0.6 volts and I was wrong.  In the past, I have calculated the current programming resistor values for when an LED is connected to a 5-volt source and a 12-volt source.  That's a huge challenge for the average experimenter on the forums.  I think the last time I had to worry about LEDs was in 1988 when I had to put a few indicator lights on the front panel of a VMEbus controller card that I was designing.

MileHigh

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #710 on: March 07, 2014, 04:35:02 PM »



  Webby,
         I asked Wayne if he had a self running 5 hp machine.
   His answer was  "I'm confused"
    All I wanted was a Yes/no answer, no waffle.
                    John.

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #711 on: March 07, 2014, 04:45:17 PM »
So you get a movement S = FSTART/KRATE 0.30078N / 64.649N/m =  0.004653m and an output energy of
0.5*0.30078N*0.004653m   0.700mJ.

MarkE, thank you so much for all your hard work!  I think it must be in this last step that I have made my mistake.  I'm looking at it now, but found a discrepancy between our work.  It might be a small miss on your part, or I am making another mistake, so I wanted to clarify.

I am finding the riser in the no-pod, single riser example at State 2 to be displacing 35.6234 cm3 of water and should therefore have an FSTART = 0.34884N.  Can you please clarify if I am missing a step?

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #712 on: March 07, 2014, 04:52:52 PM »
The energy expended, is the loss of potential energy in the annular columns as they move from the State 2 condition to the State 3 condition with the riser at 2.492mm lift...

Okay, I am lost here.  The lift was 4.68536mm.  Did I miss something?

Or 4.653mm by your math.  Probably due to the use of different constants for water density and gravity?

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #713 on: March 07, 2014, 04:56:52 PM »



    mrwayne's  on to something," you push it down and it goes up".
    Quite amazing!
                       John.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #714 on: March 07, 2014, 05:10:46 PM »
I thought the forward voltage drop for an ordinary red LED was 0.6 volts and I was wrong.  In the past, I have calculated the current programming resistor values for when an LED is connected to a 5-volt source and a 12-volt source.  That's a huge challenge for the average experimenter on the forums.  I think the last time I had to worry about LEDs was in 1988 when I had to put a few indicator lights on the front panel of a VMEbus controller card that I was designing.

MileHigh

You probably thought you had discovered Free Energy when the LEDs were much brighter than you expected!

Here's how I do it:
V=IR, so R=V/I
R = (Vsupply - Vfwd)/ILED

ETA: I've just been testing and identifying a bunch of random Zener diodes that have unreadable or mysterious markings. Any guesses as to how I'm doing it?

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #715 on: March 07, 2014, 05:12:35 PM »


    mrwayne's  on to something," you push it down and it goes up".
    Quite amazing!
                       John.

More like "you push on him, and the 5hp machine goes away."

powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #716 on: March 07, 2014, 05:31:29 PM »
Thanks Webby,

The spring was meant to be just another puppet rabbit trail like:

The Pink
Unicorn
Bollard
Hereon or what ever..
Brick
Rock
Gravity switch

and feel free to add the the misdirection list..

But as fate would have it - the analogy can be corrected - SMile

And Your spring correction is not too far from reality - Make one change - the ZED Spring has a impressive attribute missed...

It gets taller as it is compressed..................... how that for counter intuitive......

That's what I shared with Mark on his second visit - we push down to go up smile - makes the input a double use.

Now - give a an inventor worth his salt that can not use it to circumvent gravity ,,,,,,,,

Wayne


to elude the obvious - but if you want to cover


But Wayne it doesn't work in reality, you have never been able to show the device continuously running, and that is why you repeatedly lied about verification.
You're a twisted son of a bitch you keep dropping Mark's name in as some kind of justification, here is a quote of what he actually thinks.

Quote from: markdansie on August 27, 2012, 05:05:15 AM
Quote
I still have not seen the two day demo yet , but I never put a time frame on this.
However as with all things as time carries on the confidence level always diminishes.


mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #717 on: March 07, 2014, 05:35:36 PM »
Quote from: markdansie on August 27, 2012, 05:05:15 AM

PC, Mark Dansie posted much more recently, and in this thread.  Why don't you quote from there?  It should be his most recent thoughts on the ZED topic.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #718 on: March 07, 2014, 05:43:16 PM »
Quote
Now - give a an inventor worth his salt that can not use it to circumvent gravity ,,,,,,,,

Wayne

Let's see.... is circumventing gravity the same thing as turning buoyancy on and off?

Oh... wait.... you didn't say outright that it was YOU who were circumventing gravity.... you just call everyone else who CAN'T do it, "not worth his salt"... in plain talk, incompetent.

However you are leaving out one very important part of your testimony, honest Wayne Travis. And that is.... that you can't do it either.

And another thing: the cars and airplanes you travel in, the bridges you drive over, even the garbage disposal in your kitchen.... all were invented by inventors and designed by engineers who, according to you, are "not worth their salt."




MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #719 on: March 07, 2014, 05:51:38 PM »
sure,, I think the prediction of efficiency was off by a lot however.

Since KanShi seems to be the Gold Standard,, explain my 75 to 95 percent efficient lifts with a poorly built device.

And this is where I go back to the old thread and ask a simple question.

If I have a 75% efficient lift, how much do I need to recover from what is left after the lift?

MarkE, you are actually going over the worst usage of the system,, think about it,, this is the worst that it will do,,
A brick is easily over 99% efficient.  The less that you let the ZED move the better the efficiency gets.  Once the ZED does not move at all, it approximates the efficiency of a much smaller, cheaper, and more reliable brick.