Indeed, this is possibility. Mats Lewan was somewhat ashamed when he
"forgot" to check this although he was well prepared and was somewhat
familiar with this possibility. This is although not plausible, i think,
because anyone who observed tests could have required to check this out.
Actually during June demonstration ground and neutral wire were clamped and
nothing suspicious was found, but this should not surprise anyone because
there was not any excess heat produced in the first place...
However, easiest way to fake test results is of course hidden power source.
It takes just about one liter liquid fuel and a fuel cell to fake all tests.
This should not be too difficult to hide. E.g. that wooden stand could be
hollow.
—Jouni
On Sep 14, 2011 1:00 AM, "Horace Heffner" wrote:
> This is just for the fun of it, not serious stuff regarding Rossi.
>
> Earlier in the thread "Structure of Rossi Device" the possibility
> that ground and neutral were shorted in the Rossi controller box was
> discussed, thereby sharing return power on neutral and ground, and
> thus possibly halving the measured current to the device. This would
> be an easy mistake to make if a polarized plug were used, unless a
> GFCI protected receptacle were used. However, the ammeter would have
> to clamped on the neutral or ground wire by mistake.
>
>
> The L-type plug used would permit ground and neutral to be shorted,
> but would cause a short and breaker trip with 50% probability if
> plugged in at random. The L-type plug has three identical round
> conductors aligned in a row, with the central one being blue. It is a
> non-polarized plug. The insulation color of wires according to the
> current IEC 60446 standard is neutral-blue, line-brown, and
> protective-earth-green/yellow. However, since the plug is not
> polarized, blue and brown wires can exchange roles depending on
> orientation of the plug at plug-in time. The clamp-on ammeter Rossi
> used was correctly clamped on the brown line wire which carries the
> potential, provided the plug is oriented correctly, else it is
> clamped on the neutral.
>
> Just for fun I tried to see if I could come up with a circuit using
> just diodes and a transformer that would be line-neutral polarity
> independent which would always share return current on the neutral
> and ground. I came up with the circuit in Fig. 1. It is impervious to
> polarity of the inputs I1 and I2, and shares current between the
> neutral and ground regardless which way an L-type plug is plugged
> in. This can be done without a transformer if active components are
> used.
>
>
> --|<|o-|>|---G
> | |
> | o---o
> | |
> | o |
> | | | | Transformer
> | o---|>|o-|<|---G | ---O||
> | | | O||
> o---o-|---|>|o-|<|---G o--O||O---o S1 To
> I1 | | ||O Load
> | o--O||O---o S2
> | O||
> | o--O||
> I2 | |
> o-o---|<|0-|>|---G
>
> Fig. 1 - Circuit Sharing Load on Ground and Neutral.
>
> This still leaves the problem that the plug has to be plugged in so
> that the brown (line) wire carries neutral to make for wrong
> measurements. Also, ground fault isolation, if present, will result
> in a triggered breaker.
>
> A much more simple method to throw off power measurements is to put a
> diode and possibly an inductor in the line so as to draw primarily DC
> power from the AC line. The AC current measurement from a clamp-on
> AC meter would then be artificially very low.
>
> o---Inductor-o---|>|---o To
> o--o Load
>
> This is the kind of thing, drawing mostly unidirectional current from
> an AC source, could easily be done unintentionally. I don't think
> any of the above is actually relevant to Rossi's work. Still, I
> think it is good to think about these things when looking at new
> claims for free energy. It highlights the importance of good input
> power measurement.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
>
>
>
>
