Just to make sure we are on the same page,,

Water does not move from the accumulator INTO the ZED via the pod chamber.  The fluid in the accumulator does not mix with the fluid in the ZED's.

In the video of the ZED's in operation there is a "bag" that the water from the ZED enters into and this bag via a mechanical arm is connected to the "bag" for the second ZED and there is a hydraulic piston that helps that arm move.  This then takes the pressure from the raised ZED and allows it to communicate, via the bag and mechanical linkage, the pressure inside the pod chamber into the other bag which then moves that fluid into the lowered ZED.

The accumulator has fluid under pressure stored within it, this pressure is used to drive the piston which assists the pressure exchange and therefore the fluid input to the second ZED.

That accumulator is supplied fluid under pressure via a piston connected to the top of the risers, as they go up they take the fluid within that piston and force it into the accumulator thus replenishing the fluid volume and pressure within the accumulator.

IIRC, this was a point of confusion before, it was interpreted that the external system shared the same fluid and pressure, they do not.

Do you have a "formula for dummies" method??

I can do the pressure value and the volumes and stuff, but it is in the rate of change and what that means where I feel I may be making an error.

Question:
 Does anybody have some idea to what a validation by Mark Dansie of a OU device would cost?
I believe he comes with a team of engineers.

Red_Sunset

Hmm.  Instructive to who?

Funny thing (to me) is that physical build followed many days of CAD model drawings and calculations where I could not figure out how to prove or disprove anything.  I have probably a hundred hours of time wasted trying to figure out how to figure it out!

At the time I built it there was much request for a presentation of the "3-layer ZED that is clearly OU."  Wayne was not providing that, so I thought I would attempt to build one so that we could all have _something_ other than words to play with.  But it appeared to me that no one was interested in discussing any testing of that build or the test results in the forum.  I personally could not figure out how to calculate efficiencies from the test data, so I resorted to the method that Wayne had presented.  We discussed the validity of that method very briefly in PMs, but that broke down almost immediately into the same rhetoric as in the open forum, ie. no discussion of the experiment and data.

That build was intended to be a stop-gap until a sim or better build was presented.  With no apparent interest in what I had constructed, I shelved it and waited.  Unfortunately the sim and/or better build I have been waiting on has not materialized publicly.

With the reintroduction of the ZED topic in this thread I began thinking about it again (as have so many).  Applying some things I've learned (or think I've learned) since those past days I think I finally figured out a (fairly) simple mathematical test to see if a simple analysis of the ZED system where the ZED is substituted by a hydraulic cylinder analog is, in fact, a valid substitution.  But once again it does not appear anyone (except Red) is willing to agree that what I propose is a valid test of that assertion.  So why do it?

Cheers,

M.

Hello Monderask,

"So why do it?" ................... That is the end game 'here' it is sad..............  You are right.

You and the others are and have been right from the beginning - A hydraulic calculation is simple and makes the obvious point: If you make more stored PV out than consumed PV - you have more PV....it is a no brain-er. The simplest calcs will show that.

Time and speed are irelevant - PV is stored energy - not force. This has been demonstrated at least a dozen times by many of you.

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

On the positive note:

Mike- If you would like to come visit our new Temp Facility - while our others are being built - I will buy you a ticket (hotel) to come see our advancements.

Why do it? - You have earned it - and the desire for clean and Net energy is Growing.

You still have my e-mail.

p.s. We are very well funded. Ignore the Slander - it comes from ignorance, and demonstrates the lack of due dillignese.
.........................

To All - this is someone else'  thread - My apology for the interruption.


I have a product to develop - company to run - I won't be back.

Thanks for all the hard research you and a few other good men labored - I have two of those awesome models here with my collection!

God Bless

Mr Wayne