Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED  (Read 624397 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #975 on: March 12, 2014, 11:50:02 PM »
In the spreadsheet I have from you  A126 has    ST3_AR6_Hdel_pmm   NOT ST2_AR6_Hdel_pmm

So B107 should look the same as B108 with the additional AR parts added?
B120 through B127 are the changes in water height in each of the annular rings for each mm lift of the risers going from State 2 to State 3.  B107 which is the pressure at the bottom of the pod chamber should read:  =ST2R1Pressure+G0*pWater*m_per_mm*ST2FillHeightAR1 provided that we want to treat this like the risers.  However, if we do that, then we have to account for the pressure above when calculating the total lift, whereas what the spreadsheet was doing was just using the head since the AR2 pressure acts upon the head and the top of the pod, canceling out.  I think I like changing to accounting for the AR2 pressure, even though it cancels out, as I think that makes the spreadsheet more consistent and easier to follow.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #976 on: March 12, 2014, 11:53:34 PM »
MarkE,


I'm done.


It is impossible to teach someone without the common sense to understand what 'Utilize PSI' implies.
I'm sorry that I resist going down garden paths.  The chair in which you are seated has plenty of PSI that you utilize to stay off of the floor.  Yet it does not need to do any work to serve that useful function.

The ~$1. spring from Amazon lets me utilize position dependent force in 1/1000th the volume of the "ideal ZED".  The "ideal ZED" reduces to an overly complicated, short stroke, low rate, orientation restricted spring.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #977 on: March 13, 2014, 12:09:11 AM »
I think that would be better as the pressure placed into the accumulator,, the precharge is termed as the pressure inside the ZED after it is filled up with water.

So the point you are saying is that the accumulator *may* be nothing more than a *battery* that is being used and hence can get used up.

So it needs to be checked for start charge, running charge state and end charge.
For whatever one deems to be a complete cycle, one needs to account for:  Stored energy at the start, stored energy at the end, energy added, and energy released.  HER/Zydro misuse terms all the time.  The "ball" in HER/Zydro's game of three card monty is energy.

Nearly constant force can be had from a low rate spring that has been highly preloaded.  Apply that to a piston and get nearly constant pressure.  Add a pressure regulator, and get even more constant pressure.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #978 on: March 13, 2014, 12:11:01 AM »
Silly me,,

I changed B113 to include -ST2R1Pressure*(PodOD*m_per_mm)^2)

I could of just subtracted the pressures but that would not show all energy and what it all is doing,, this is what the correct method should be??  I mean I could get the same answer but I would not be showing all interactions and all the energy and stuff,, so this way the negative force from r1 is shown as well as the positive force from the pod.
I think it is best to include all the terms even where they cancel out.  Then anyone can see what the operating assumptions are.  As I mentioned above, the AR2 pressure acts on everything in the pod chamber, including the water and the pod. 

Offline orbut 3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #979 on: March 13, 2014, 03:38:03 AM »
MarkE,


I'm done.


It is impossible to teach someone without the common sense to understand what 'Utilize PSI' implies.


Oh, please, no. Larry, don't run away now just because MarkE is closed-minded. There are many lurkers here who follow this thread and wish to be enlightened.
Please, stand your ground and show us the maths that pave the paths to fully understand ZED.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #980 on: March 13, 2014, 03:51:41 AM »
Note the classic formula when it comes to things like this:  The proponents of the proposition (including management) are not able to properly describe their system, nor are they able to articulate how to analyze their system.  It's John Rohner all over again where the designer of a "special" spark plug firing circuit demonstrated to the world that he didn't even understand how a spark plug circuit worked.

It's almost unbelievable what people can get away with.  They are like barnacles in the ocean fixed in place and casting their feathery cirri into the "air" to pick up a few "free" tender morsels of food energy.

MileHigh

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #981 on: March 13, 2014, 04:08:25 AM »
Note the classic formula when it comes to things like this:  The proponents of the proposition (including management) are not able to properly describe their system, nor are they able to articulate how to analyze their system.  It's John Rohner all over again where the designer of a "special" spark plug firing circuit demonstrated to the world that he didn't even understand how a spark plug circuit worked.

It's almost unbelievable what people can get away with.  They are like barnacles in the ocean fixed in place and casting their feathery cirri into the "air" to pick up a few "free" tender morsels of food energy.

MileHigh
I must have missed that.  Did Dr. Dr. Con really demonstrate that he doesn't even know how a spark plug ignition circuit works?  I know he said a lot of stupid things on PESN.  I don't remember that.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #982 on: March 13, 2014, 04:20:48 AM »
Yes John had a moderately involved conversation with an engineer on Facebook and that's what transpired.  He tried to bluff his way through once he was caught.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #983 on: March 13, 2014, 04:23:37 AM »
Yes John had a moderately involved conversation with an engineer on Facebook and that's what transpired.  He tried to bluff his way through once he was caught.
Dr. Dr. Con versus a real engineer: that must have been fun.   How many of his nonexistent Ph.D.'s did he destroy in that conversation?

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #984 on: March 13, 2014, 04:29:23 AM »
Just like Gomer Pyle he shrank down to the lowest buck private.  :)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #985 on: March 13, 2014, 04:56:05 AM »
I take it that this conversation occurred before the FBI raided his place.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #986 on: March 13, 2014, 01:56:29 PM »
Well.... what's the verdict?
Has the issue been resolved?
Do we see why and how the spreadsheets were thought to indicate some kind of "overunity" or not?

Is ZED dead? Darn. I was really hoping someone would explain to me how millimeters of spreadsheet lift translate into pushing those production rams several feet in and out to make their high-pressure, high volume "production".

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #987 on: March 13, 2014, 02:10:31 PM »
Well.... what's the verdict?
Has the issue been resolved?
Do we see why and how the spreadsheets were thought to indicate some kind of "overunity" or not?

Is ZED dead? Darn. I was really hoping someone would explain to me how millimeters of spreadsheet lift translate into pushing those production rams several feet in and out to make their high-pressure, high volume "production".
ZED was dead before it started.  Cyclically lifting and dropping weights may be a way to build muscles on a budget but it does not make free energy.  How much water does it take to make a kW?  That's not so hard to figure out.  Head*Flow yields power.  1kW = 1000J/s = 1000/(pWater*G0)m*m3/s = 0.102 m*m3/s ~=88.5 ft*gps.  50kW requires a whopping 4400 ft*gps.  A 65HP pump is a large affair.

Offline minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #988 on: March 13, 2014, 03:02:40 PM »





     I do believe mr. Travis thought he was "on to something" in the early days.
 Alarm bells rang for me when he said " the longest run so far is 4 hours, but
 thats no matter".
    Well it did matter, and the whole thing then has followed the classic route
  of hot air and nothing else.
    Thankyou to all who have contributed, it sure is a long garden, and I've
  enjoyed every step down its winding path.
                                             John.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #989 on: March 13, 2014, 03:40:28 PM »




     I do believe mr. Travis thought he was "on to something" in the early days.
 Alarm bells rang for me when he said " the longest run so far is 4 hours, but
 thats no matter".
    Well it did matter, and the whole thing then has followed the classic route
  of hot air and nothing else.
    Thankyou to all who have contributed, it sure is a long garden, and I've
  enjoyed every step down its winding path.
                                             John.
I can tell you that from the very first that I heard about this on PESN, Wayne and his crew seemed to take great pains to misrepresent, beginning with the still undefined, supposed "Travis Effect".  The HER/Zydro crew fought tooth and nail to try and carry the misrepresentation that air is responsible for buoyant force applied to an object submerged in water.  All I have seen from these guys is a bunch of hand waving and suggestion.  Never did they offer any substance.  Even if one were to buy into their completely false claims of being able to obtain free energy from gravity, as TinselKoala has pointed out several times, the power levels that they quote would require enormous fluid stores in order to sustain the kinds of loads they claim for even an hour or two.  50kW by one hour for example would require a product of water head and volume of: ~37,000 m*m3.  The smallest that can be fit into is s a box over 40 ft on each side, IE 700,000 gallons, or more than the volume of an Olympic swimming pool, just to run for one hour at 100% efficiency.  If it were only the depth of an Olympic pool:  2m it would have to be a much larger total volume.  The whole thing is ridiculous beyond words.  Wayne Travis has sold an absolute BS story to his investors. He continues to shamelessly promote his false claims without even blinking.