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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 514772
  • *Total Topics: 15317
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED  (Read 435384 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #345 on: March 03, 2014, 09:45:01 PM »
I am sorry MarkE,

You seemed to miss this post. I will post it again.
... Wall of pointless text ...

Nonsense video with no measurements:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-0TITC4Wrc



Wayne Travis
President
Zydro Energy, LLC
Mr.Wayne@ZydroEnergy.com
Every time you or TK, or the puppets come back.
If your last line is a promise to keep spamming your wall of text, I don't think Stefan will appreciate that.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #345 on: March 03, 2014, 09:45:01 PM »

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #346 on: March 03, 2014, 09:58:07 PM »
MarkE, one might wonder why you are ignoring my two posts that point out a mistake in your presented values as well as a couple in the methods in your final Stage 3 presentation.  It is an invalid "Energy Balance" Analysis, as well as completely ignores that works was done in the form of F*ds.
You are absolutely wrong.  The spreadsheet correctly shows all of the math.  Each energy value in the spreadsheet explicitly calculates energy as the integral of F*ds.  All of the math reflects real physics.  The drawing had one transcription error, picking up a value one row off from the spreadsheet.

Here is are all the files again with the transcription error in the AR2 value that was pasted onto the State 3 drawing corrected.

You are free to show by competing analysis and / or demonstration that I got anything wrong in the spreadsheet.  If you do, then make certain that you apply actual physics and not contrived ideas such as you have so far.

The math shows exactly what I told you and that you refused to discuss:  That equalizing water column heights as occurs in the transition from State 2 to State 3 loses stored energy without doing any useful work.  The most efficient ZED is no ZED at all.

ETA: Also the spreadsheet is here.  No values or formulas were changed.  It adds more comments and corrected the State 3 graphic.  It also includes audit of the incompressible fluid volumes.  Got that Mondrasek:  The fluids are incompressible:  Their volumes are fixed.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #347 on: March 03, 2014, 10:09:57 PM »
In the condition you show in your State 3 drawing the pod is still submersed in 28.537mm of water.  It is displacing 89.652 cc of that water.  Are you saying that does not create a buoyant Force equal to ~89 grams?  What is keeping it from rising further?  Where is the equal and opposite force that is cancelling this buoyant Force that remains?

The three risers are likewise still positively buoyant due to the head difference of the water on their OD and ID, right?
I have shown all the work in the spreadsheet in convenient easy to read algebraic form.  If you aren't going to bother to read and understand the work, then there is little hope for you.  Either you accept your stipulation that the system was vented in State 1 so that there was no net force up or down on the risers, or you change your problem definition.  If you accept the former, then what you have is no different than objects floating on a volume of water at the end of each:  State 1 and State 3.  State 2 added volume to the water which because of the restraint on the Russian Dolls of Ignorance was forced into AR7.  Once the restraint was released at State 3, the added fluid effectively redistributed to an equal height across the entire cross-section as required by fluid behavior.  Ergo, we poured some water into Archimedes' bath and his rubby ducky, Spanish Armada playset all rose with added water.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #347 on: March 03, 2014, 10:09:57 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #348 on: March 03, 2014, 10:13:46 PM »
MarkE,

I am still patient with you.

As far as your insinuations and slander, my motives have been clear and consistent from my first post.
Quote
Yes you are selling lies to investors.  That has been clear for years now.

......

I know, our ZED system is tough to wrap your head around for some, you are very close - don't give up.
Despite the complications of detail that you try and use to obfuscate the fact that you have nothing of value, the fact is that at the end of the day, you lift and drop weights.  There is no energy gain to be had from doing such a thing.  You have never shown the slightest bit of evidence to the contrary.
Quote

If all you see is lifting and dropping weights - you missed the production which is removed before dropping, and the re use of each half cycles charge.
I see it for what it is, not the illusion that you try and misrepresent.
Quote

That is not dropping a rock twice.

Wayne
You should be more concerned about where your burned investors might want to drop rocks.

Offline mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #349 on: March 03, 2014, 10:27:01 PM »
You are free to show by competing analysis and / or demonstration that I got anything wrong in the spreadsheet.  If you do, then make certain that you apply actual physics and not contrived ideas such as you have so far.

MarkE, your math is not in question.  But it results in a paradox, right?  If you solve to balance Energy, you end up with unbalanced Forces left over (this is what your analysis shows).  If you solve to balance the Forces, then the Energy balance is not correct.  Do you disagree?  Are there not unbalance buoyant Forces in State 3 of your analysis?

The math shows exactly what I told you and that you refused to discuss:  That equalizing water column heights as occurs in the transition from State 2 to State 3 loses stored energy without doing any useful work.  The most efficient ZED is no ZED at all.

There was useful work performed that you have ignored.  The ZED in this Analysis was not allowed to rise uninhibited by a load.  We agreed on this from post 249 of this thread:

I utilized the same analysis method for the output rise as was used for the input of the water charge:  F*ds as expressed for the case of a Volume of a Fluid that is being moved by a change in Pressure that either starts or ends at zero:  Paverage*V.  The riser initially will want to move with a Pressure that can be calculated from the buoyant force sum of the pod and risers.  That Pressure should drop linearly to zero as the ZED reaches equilibrium at the end of the rise.  The physical device that would restrain the initial Pressure and allow it to drop to zero while performing the rise is not important for the analysis I think.  Please let me know if you think otherwise.

You violated this first by NOT calculating the lift difference using the described method of an Energy balance.  You instead resorted to a Volume balance which is flat wrong for this open ZED.  Then you ignore that work output preformed upon the non-physical device agreed upon would provide the theoretical output F*ds as the Paverage*V, or simply Faverage*ds where ds is the lift distance.  So there is Work that can be performed by the change from State 2 to State 3 and you ignore that in your Analysis.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #349 on: March 03, 2014, 10:27:01 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #350 on: March 03, 2014, 10:35:08 PM »
I have shown all the work in the spreadsheet in convenient easy to read algebraic form.  If you aren't going to bother to read and understand the work, then there is little hope for you.  Either you accept your stipulation that the system was vented in State 1 so that there was no net force up or down on the risers, or you change your problem definition.  If you accept the former, then what you have is no different than objects floating on a volume of water at the end of each:  State 1 and State 3.  State 2 added volume to the water which because of the restraint on the Russian Dolls of Ignorance was forced into AR7.  Once the restraint was released at State 3, the added fluid effectively redistributed to an equal height across the entire cross-section as required by fluid behavior.  Ergo, we poured some water into Archimedes' bath and his rubby ducky, Spanish Armada playset all rose with added water.

MarkE, the venting allowed for assembly without inducing buoyant Forces and kept internal Pressures neutral.  It is the fact that there is zero water head between the OD and ID of each riser (and no water around the pod) that determines that each element is being acted on by no buoyant Forces and therefore in equilibrium.  In your State 3 there exists positive buoyant Forces on the pod and all three risers that are yet unresolved.  How do you wish to resolve those Forces?  Or can you point out an equal and opposite Force that is neutralizing the remaining buoyant Forces?

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #351 on: March 03, 2014, 10:56:48 PM »
MarkE,

There is no way the system you have presented will stop in this position.

This system will continue to lift until the water level in AR7 has been drawn down below the water level in AR6 to counter the decreasing buoyant lift of the  other 2 risers and the pod.

It will be the negative buoyant condition of the 3rd riser that stops the movement, and your setup has not reached that.

The duckys are playing submarine,, and they are filled with air!
Webby do try and pay attention.  State 1 was stipulated by Mondrasek.  AR7 increases in height over the State 1 stipulated equilibrium condition just like the entire rest of the cross-section does.  That's what fluids do webby:  They flow to fill the available area.  The outer walls of the base assembly define that area.  The Russian Dolls of Ignorance configuration does not change that reality.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #351 on: March 03, 2014, 10:56:48 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #352 on: March 03, 2014, 10:59:40 PM »
MarkE, the venting allowed for assembly without inducing buoyant Forces and kept internal Pressures neutral.  It is the fact that there is zero water head between the OD and ID of each riser (and no water around the pod) that determines that each element is being acted on by no buoyant Forces and therefore in equilibrium.  In your State 3 there exists positive buoyant Forces on the pod and all three risers that are yet unresolved.  How do you wish to resolve those Forces?  Or can you point out an equal and opposite Force that is neutralizing the remaining buoyant Forces?
Mondrasek, again you are flat, stinking wrong.  Under the condition that you again reiterate for State 1 above, the act of adding water in State 2 is to move that condition to one where the water level rises by the added water volume divided by the cross section.  If you are going to continue to dispute basic physics then go find a suitable reference to support your absolutely incorrect argument.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #353 on: March 03, 2014, 11:04:13 PM »
MarkE, your math is not in question.  But it results in a paradox, right?  If you solve to balance Energy, you end up with unbalanced Forces left over (this is what your analysis shows).  If you solve to balance the Forces, then the Energy balance is not correct.  Do you disagree?  Are there not unbalance buoyant Forces in State 3 of your analysis?

There was useful work performed that you have ignored.  The ZED in this Analysis was not allowed to rise uninhibited by a load.  We agreed on this from post 249 of this thread:

I utilized the same analysis method for the output rise as was used for the input of the water charge:  F*ds as expressed for the case of a Volume of a Fluid that is being moved by a change in Pressure that either starts or ends at zero:  Paverage*V.  The riser initially will want to move with a Pressure that can be calculated from the buoyant force sum of the pod and risers.  That Pressure should drop linearly to zero as the ZED reaches equilibrium at the end of the rise.  The physical device that would restrain the initial Pressure and allow it to drop to zero while performing the rise is not important for the analysis I think.  Please let me know if you think otherwise.

You violated this first by NOT calculating the lift difference using the described method of an Energy balance.  You instead resorted to a Volume balance which is flat wrong for this open ZED.  Then you ignore that work output preformed upon the non-physical device agreed upon would provide the theoretical output F*ds as the Paverage*V, or simply Faverage*ds where ds is the lift distance.  So there is Work that can be performed by the change from State 2 to State 3 and you ignore that in your Analysis.
Monderasek, there is no paradox.  The behavior is all very well understood.  If you think that this is a paradox, then you must think that connecting one charged capacitor to a second uncharged capacitor is a paradox as well.  There is no more paradox here than there is to slowing down your car by applying the brakes.  Your latest incorrect assumption is that the stored energy remains constant.  You insist on this incorrect position even when the physics have been explained to you multiple times.  This whole foolish contraption is a glorified pool of fluid.  Add more fluid and it rises.  End of story.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #353 on: March 03, 2014, 11:04:13 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #354 on: March 04, 2014, 12:05:02 AM »
Yes MarkE do pay attention.

Where are the water heights in state 1.

Where are the water heights in end of state 2.

Where are the water heights in end of state 3.  Not back to a neutral height are they.
Nope, you are still not paying attention.  Mondrasek stipulated the neutral condition as State 1.  Now you may reasonably object to that stipulation, but then you will have to take that up with Mondrasek.  But as long as he stipulates that State 1 is as he depicted it, the result in State 3 falls out.

Now, suppose that we object to the State 1 stipulation.  Suppose that we note that the real neutral water level is in a State 0 where no risers have been inserted.  The mechanics don't change.  The "ideal ZED" remains an energy wasting piece of junk outperformed by a brick.
Quote

Water will flow and find its own level.
Tell that to Mondrasek.  He seems to think that incompressible fluids behave some other way.
Quote

There is a buoyant lift left in the risers, all of them as you have them at the end of state 3.  They all have a positive buoyant lift potential that is left,, repeat, the water still wants to move down and that will move things and make the risers go up.
Again, State 3 arises from Mondrasek's:  Wayne Travis approved stipulation of State 1.  If you object to the State 1 stipulation, and you should, then you need to ask that pair why Mondrasek stipulated State 1 as he did and why Wayne Travis approved of that stipulation.
Quote

The only avenue there is for the increase in volume needed for all of that movement is from AR7, that will get sucked down until the suction, the negative buoyant lift equals the positive buoyant lift of the other 2 risers and the pod.
Again, you need to change the stipulation of State 1.  Otherwise, we get exactly what has been shown.
Quote

Do remember that I have played with a 5 riser system, and look at some of the pics I posted of that system.

I can tell you that the system as you have it in end of state 3 WILL move up and I can tell you that the water in AR7 WILL get sucked down.
Again, that is because your experiment did not have the State 1 stipulation:  Apples and oranges.
Quote

Use your finger and follow the movement,, see that the movement can happen, see that nature will want to make that movement happen, see that that movement will happen.

You know that movement can happen because it happened for the system to go from state 1 to end of state 2.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #355 on: March 04, 2014, 01:52:35 AM »
It's incredible watching Wayne ply his craft.  It's very similar to debating with John Rohner.  In both cases they post incomprehensible goop and pretend that they are actually saying something valid.

I really hope this one ends where the good guys win.  It's soooo creepy to see this stuff happening in real time.  There must be a lot of passive observers reading this thread that can distinguish right from wrong.  It's incredible how so many of them remain mute in the presence of such wrong.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

- Edmund Burke (1729-97)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #355 on: March 04, 2014, 01:52:35 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline mrwayne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #356 on: March 04, 2014, 01:59:32 AM »
Regarding State one:

Monderask is discussing an Mathematical Analysis of an ideal ZED.

Has stated his purpose is to discuss Pv difference between a single and three layer system.

...............

MarkE You jump to the conclusion that you have analyzed a ZED in Operation.

These are two separate subjects - as I clearly and complete shared a complete ZED operation.

...............

It is a mistake to assume that state 1 as Monderask described in his Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED is the same as the state 1 I described - which is sunk ZED - with enough differential pressure to maintain neutral buoyancy of added weight or risers.

While ZED B is a Fully stroke ZED at the end of a determined and limited stroke - with a load balancing differential intact.

....................

MarkE slow down, we are not attacking you, if you make these mistakes on purpose - that is wrong.

Wayne

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #357 on: March 04, 2014, 02:04:29 AM »
Quote
if you make these mistakes on purpose - that is wrong

See how incredibly creepy he is?  He is playing the MIB card and he is playing it to a specific type of audience.

I really and truly hope that you make the national media Wayne for all the right reasons.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #358 on: March 04, 2014, 02:05:03 AM »
MarkE.

Look at your state 3 drawing.  Do you not see 4 floats that are partially sunk.

State 1 is neutrally buoyant, and that is not an issue, state 2 has had a volume placed into the pod chamber, that volume not only forces the water and air to redistribute and create a buoyant force it also raises the base line for the pod chamber, this increase in base line height also then creates a physical step for the other columns to negotiate and in this negotiation there is a continued buoyant condition for the risers and pod.

Those heads will fall, and when they do they will push the air up and force the risers to move a further distance, at that time the water in AR7 will be below AR6 and the other 2 risers and pod will still have a positive buoyant value, but it is the negative buoyant value of the 3rd riser that will balance against that so that the forces sum BACK to zero as in state 1.
Webby you cannot have it both ways.  Either you accept Mondrasek's: Wayne Travis approved State 1 or you don't.  If you accept it then State 3 falls out as shown.  If you don't accept it then you change the problem.  So pick your poison:  State 1 as stipulated by Mondrasek and approved by Wayne Travis with State 3 as the result, or State 1 as your experience tells you which yields a different and still lossy result.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #359 on: March 04, 2014, 02:07:54 AM »
MarkE, the venting allowed for assembly without inducing buoyant Forces and kept internal Pressures neutral.  It is the fact that there is zero water head between the OD and ID of each riser (and no water around the pod) that determines that each element is being acted on by no buoyant Forces and therefore in equilibrium.  In your State 3 there exists positive buoyant Forces on the pod and all three risers that are yet unresolved.  How do you wish to resolve those Forces?  Or can you point out an equal and opposite Force that is neutralizing the remaining buoyant Forces?
Mondrasek the stipulation that State 1 has no buoyant uplift is your Wayne Travis approved stipulation.  Choose:  Keep the stipulation, in which case State 3 results, or remove the stipulation and solve for a different State 3.  The results all depend on your stipulation.

 

OneLink