Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

vorl bek wrote: > > The electric heating power is apparently used to suppress the > > reaction, not to enhance it. > > I have never heard of any material acting that way. If heat from > the electric heater is used to ignite the nickel, how would > continuing to heat it after it ignites suppress

Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

Akira Shirakawa wrote: > Sorry, here is a link that should make them available to everybody: > > http://imgur.com/a/iwZQ8 Nice! Good graphs! The Internet is wonderful. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-CAT: I am tired about discussions and number crunching

You are tired of discussions and number crunching? You are in the wrong place. Come back after cold fusion is commercialized and the whole world agrees it is real. Actually, I suppose this discussion group and LENR-CANR.org will be defunct when that happens. Kind of like "homebrew computer" clubs

Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

Akira: What does this word "rendomento" mean, in the Google translation? "This is the graph instead of the power output. One sees that the E-cat provides more energy than it consumes but does not rendomento is staggering." - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

Akira Shirakawa wrote: > What does this word "rendomento" mean, in the Google translation? >> > > It means performance, energy yield/gain. The user actually meant to write > "rendimento". Thanks. I think the author is wrong about that. Energy yield or gain is meaningless in this context, sinc

[Vo]:Cooling water thermocouples were taped to the outside of the pipe + 20 m hose problem

Lewan told me that the thermocouples from the handheld meter were taped to the outside of the metal pipe, and then very well insulated. People may complain, but actually that is a fine way to do it, in my experience. In the video, Rossi unwrapped the pipe and showed where the thermocouples were a

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

vorl bek wrote: > > First of all, "ignition" is only an analogy here. Nothing is or > > can be ignited or burned in the chemical sense. There is no > > oxygen. There is no fuel. No chemical changes occur in the cells. > > Thanks, I needed that reminder. Now I see that pretty much anything > goes

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-CAT: I am tired about discussions and number crunching

Peter Heckert wrote: > > Yes of course that will convince everyone. I suppose that if Rossi could do > this, he would, since he says commercial success is the most important > metric. > > He said he has used it to heat his office. He said this to Kullander and > Essen and they didnt doubt it, bec

Re: [Vo]:Blog comments re Oct 6 Fat Cat experment

Peter Gluck wrote: > i have tried to describe my opinion re the latest Rossi event here: > > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/10/seven-skinny-e-cats-eating-seven-fat.html > > This says: "- the primary steam hot water circuit was open and this can mean that the E-cats still cannot work w

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-CAT: I am tired about discussions and number crunching

Peter Heckert wrote: > I expect he did use it to heat an office. That does not mean he knows how > to do it again. > > He has always given the impression, that he can. > I do not get that impression. He says he is trying to commercialize as soon as possible. He says that is his principal goal. F

Re: [Vo]:Blog comments re Oct 6 Fat Cat experment

Peter Heckert wrote: > 1. There is no evidence that Rossi could not recirculate the condensate if > he wanted to. > > There is evidence that he did not want or he couldnt. > I wouldn't want to if I were him. It sounds like a pain in the butt with no benefit. Suppose for the sake of argument, h

Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

Horace Heffner wrote: > The test was advertised to be 24 hours. Then it was advertised to be at > least 12 hours. > I believe it was the other way around. They said 12 hours, possibly to be extended to 24. > Hidden power sources are not needed to explain the results. A misplaced > Tout the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-CAT: I am tired about discussions and number crunching

Peter Heckert wrote: > bending every effort to accomplish these goals. But I have never heard him > say he could be making commercially useful heaters now. > > Then you do not listen what he says. Examples for this are overwhelming in > count and content. > One example: A household sized ecat dev

Re: [Vo]:Rossi 6 Oct Experiment Data - Preliminary Data Analysis

I pressed send before I finished writing a message. Anyway, I meant to say: It does not matter how wrong the positioning may be, or how inaccurate or imprecise the thermometers are. Inescapably, it would cool to room temperature and all . . . would return to where they were when the test began.

[Vo]:Thermometer used to measure cooling water

This was shown in the video on the table. Lewan says this was a Termometro a 4 canali TM-947 SD. 4 canali evidently means you can attach up to 4 thermocouples. http://www.bergamomisure.it/parametri-ambientali/termometri/termometro-datalogger-4-canali-tm-947-con-scheda-sd.html - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Thermometer used to measure cooling water

Alan Fletcher wrote: Gee ... so why the heck didn't they use the other two on the "steam" input > and output? > And why the heck didn't they use the SD card to record and then publish all data points?!? Instead of relying on Lewan to write down the temperature from time to time. Rossi is a grea

Re: [Vo]:Thermometer used to measure cooling water

Horace Heffner wrote: > On Oct 8, 2011, at 1:51 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > This was shown in the video on the table. Lewan says this was a Termometro > a 4 canali TM-947 SD. > > 4 canali evidently means you can attach up to 4 thermocouples. > > > http://www

Re: [Vo]:Thermometer used to measure cooling water

Jouni Valkonen wrote: Mats calibrated the thermometer and indeed he saw the 1 degree offset in > calibration. Temperature of icy water was measured 1.0°C. Therefore this > error is known. > I discussed that with him. I do not think that was a 1.0°C error. He was seeing actual 1.0°C temperature v

Re: [Vo]:Thermometer used to measure cooling water

Horace Heffner wrote: > Two thermocouples were used to measure the delta T. If one is off 1 degree > hot absolute and the other is off 1 degree cold absolute, then delta T is > off by 2°C, systematically. > Yes of course if they are both off by 1 degree that's 2. HOWEVER: 1. They were not of

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

Robert Leguillon wrote: I saw it in the video, but this JPEG makes it even more obvious. Thanks for > the upload. > You've got 120+ degrees (allegedly) on one side . . . Why do you say "allegedly"? It was boiling in the cell. It has be over 100 deg C. Add some backpressure from the heat exchang

[Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Or if it is refutable, let's see someone make a serious effort to refute it. Stop quibbling about details. Get the heart of the matter, and tell us how a box of this size with no input power can boil water for 3 hours and remain at the same high temperature while you cool it with 1.8 tons of water.

Re: [Vo]:is my newsletter banned from Vortex?

Peter Gluck wrote: I am not able to send no 476 of my newsletter > to Vortex. > Probably too big. How many kilobytes is it? This is an old server, with a limit of 40 kB as I recall. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Joe Catania wrote: ** > With 40MJ of heat in the system it would be impossible for the temperature > to drop suddenly. I heat a block of steel to 900C, then I stop heating it, > and drop a gram of water on it. What's the temperature? 900C. Notice there > was no precipitous drop. > Please see New

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Joe Catania wrote: ** > No the band heater is at 900C but that metal block talk was only for > illustrative purposes. Newtons LAw is irrelevant. > Newton's law governs passive heat loss, which is what this has to be if there is not energy input and the flow rate does change. > An insulated me

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

Horace Heffner wrote: > Let's see ... The total length of that section looks to be about 10 cm. >> >> Let's apply your "resistor" calculation. >> >> As a first approximation, consider only the shortest path from the >> thermistor to the fluid. >> >> Vin = 100 (Voltage :: Temperature) Steam >> V

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Excuse me I meant to say that the cooling rate must obey Newton's law if there is NO energy generation and the flow rate does NOT change. In other words, if it passive cooling in unchanging conditions. Lewan's observations and report show that the flow rate and other essential parameters did not ch

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Robert Leguillon wrote: > You seem to be impressed by that graph. If you look closely at the Ny > Teknik results, the output at the heat exchanger doesn't seem to track the > logged E-Cat temperatures in any meaningful way. > It cannot track them. The eCat is boiling water at a given pressure,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi T2 and Pout Charts

Horace Heffner wrote: Here are some charts of possible interest. > Thanks! Put the first one up there too, in jpg or pgn format. I don't understand why your renditions come out so small but the images are sharp so that's good. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

Alan Fletcher wrote: > A ton of water went through the heat exchanger -- but we don't know > whether it heated up AT ALL. > Oh give me a break Alan! Seriously, get real. There was STEAM going in one side and TAP WATER going in the other. How could it not be heated up AT ALL?!? What the hell do

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

I wrote: > You can quibble about how much boiling water there was, but it had to be > enough for Lewan to hear it, and to make the insulated reactor surface. It > wasn't 50 ml, that's for sure. It had to be a substantial amount. > Meant: . . . and to make the insulated reactor surface HOT. The w

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Robert Leguillon wrote: Does anyone have a decent water capacity for the E-Cat? I see that H.H. > calculated 14.2 liters, but has there been any confirmed number out of the > Rossi camp? > I only ask, because multiple references have been made to "tons of cooling > water" to quench the reaction d

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Joe Catania wrote: ** > That appears to be a graph of power noy yemperature. > It is derived from Lewan's temperature readings. The flow rate was unchanged so correspondence to the temperature is unchanged for the entire dataset. In other words, you could replace the vertical axis power numbers

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Robert Leguillon wrote: The "rapid overfilling" was at .91 grams/second (It turns out the 1.92 g/s > was for quenching) > The "rapid overfill" I refer to is the quenching, at 1.92 g/s. I believe 0.91 was the rate during the test when Lewan checked it. 1.92 isn't very rapid, is it? Apparently it

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

Joe Catania wrote: ** > Jed I'm not going to bother to comment on your very flawed analysis. It > dosen't seem you want us to agree. > You don't believe that heat storage means the temperature rises? Forget about me. You do not agree with Newton; that's your problem. What the heck do you think

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion Press Release 10/10

That is hilarious. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

Alan J Fletcher wrote: In any event, this puts the thermocouple only 2 cm away from the center-line, and the thickness of the top of the manifold looks to be about 1 cm. Of course, rulers haven't been invented yet, so these distances are estimates. (Sorry, Jed ... this problem won't go awa

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion Press Release 10/10

OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: Looks to me as if Defkalion is trying it's best to remain diplomatic and respectful to the interests of the original parties while at the same time making it very clear to all potential investors that their own engineering efforts have now exceeded the invent

[Vo]:Thermocouples work fine on pipes

Horace Heffner wrote: > Putting a metal thermocouple up against a metal surface sounds like a > prescription for variable but systematic error, depending on vibrations, > touching the wire, humidity, etc. The steel nut can short out at least some > some of the potential. This means requiring

[Vo]:These problems could have been, and were, anticipated

In a private discussion, someone suggested that it can be difficult to anticipate objections. He said that even if a test convinces the experts at the time it is done, they may later come up with possible errors that did not occur to them at first. Naturally I agree there is some truth to that, but

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion Press Release 10/10 -- Only 1 eCat

Man on Bridges wrote: > It looks to me Rossi refers to the box as a wafer and not as what is common > in wafer production to silicon wafers. > I thought he meant that crinkly heat exchanger-like thing. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting

Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 11:20 AM 10/10/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: I said you will never get to the bottom of this, and it is not worth trying. You're probably right on that. So we're left with a purely qualitative demonstration. Ah well. Well, mainly qualitative. However, you

[Vo]:Another attempt to estimate based on likely heat before heat after death

H . . . I screwed up this analysis, I think. Let me try again. First, I refer to this graph: http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/304196_10150844451570375_818270374_20774905_1010742682_n.jpg I confused the issue by thinking about where the output line should be, given the likely re

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data

Alan J Fletcher wrote: I said you will never get to the bottom of this, and it is not worth trying. You're probably right on that. So we're left with a purely qualitative demonstration. Ah well. It's buried in Lewan's data -- but as he pointed out in his responses to Krivit, he DID measure

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data

Alan J Fletcher wrote: > It's buried in Lewan's data -- but as he pointed out in his responses to > Krivit, he DID measure the eCat output flow twice (presumably at the usual > drain). > He read it at the drain and also, during the video, from the flowmeter. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data

Alan J Fletcher wrote: The flowmeter and volume measurements are on the SECONDARY. The flow results for the secondary are fine .. as is its input temperature. He made TWO measurements on the PRIMARY flow ... one at the end of sustaining, and one after the hydrogen was purged and the peristalt

[Vo]:rcdc.it web tv video of Oct 6 Rossi test

In Italian. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-5cFOsisAo Some segments of this, such as around 2:00, show people outside at the end of the 20 m cooling water outlet hose. I believe some of them are trying to measure the temperature. Lewan told me the hose was so long, temperature measurements

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data

The Italian rcde.it video shows that the primary loop water came out of a large plastic garbage can parked next to the pump. It is a shame they did not weigh the garbage can before and after. That would have given the total amount pumped through. It may not all have been vaporized . . . That video

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data

Robert Leguillon wrote: Let's now take this to its logical conclusion. > At a primary flow rate of .91 g/s, the evidence makes it look as though the > average power (including the power applied by the band heater) over the > entire span, could not have been over 2.5 kW. Anything higher would have

Re: [Vo]:rcdc.it web tv video of Oct 6 Rossi test

Alan J Fletcher wrote: > At 9:20 someone accidentally touches the eCat .. and jumps back. It hurt! > Interesting! Is there any indication of what the real time was then? Was that during heat after death? If it was more than an hour into it, that video image proves there is anomalous heat. It pr

Re: [Vo]:No Control

Horace Heffner wrote: May people have made this comment. Some, like Jed, directly to Rossi. And I have the scars to show for it. He is mad as hell at me for what I wrote to him today, which I also posted here. A thermal pulse method is also a useful check on calorimetry functions > during run

Re: [Vo]:FW: Mills CIHT Published World Patent Application

Jones Beene wrote: > . . . apparently this is the basis of Mills' > latest-and-greatest claim to fame where the excess energy goes direct to > electricity. > If true, that's the IDEAL source of energy. Nothing better. That is the easiest form of energy to convert to other forms you need, such a

Re: [Vo]:New video on ecat.com

Daniel Rocha wrote: http://www.e-cat.com This link goes to Kleiner Perkins for some strange reason. Weird! - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof

Ed Storms wrote: > A careful examination of the attached graph reveals an interesting > conclusion. > This refers to Heffner's graph 1: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf - Jed

Re: [Vo]:rcdc.it web tv video of Oct 6 Rossi test

Craig Haynie wrote: Interesting! Is there any indication of what the real time was then? Was that during heat after death? If it was more than an hour into it, that video image proves there is anomalous heat. It proves that all by itself, in the absence of thermocouple readings or any other ordi

[Vo]:Please stop making unsupported, physically impossible assertions about stored heat

Colin Hercus wrote: If this excess energy over what is required to heat .9g/s of water to 124C is somehow stored in the eCAT (say, as thermal energy in a fairly well insulated block of steel) then it would be enough energy to possibly give the impression of a self sustaining reaction for at l

Re: [Vo]:Please stop making unsupported, physically impossible assertions about stored heat

Alexander Hollins wrote: jed, if the power were used to, say, run a thermoelectric heat pump, cooling one side of the pump, and heating something that was otherwise internally insulated . . . Sure. I agree. That would not be passive cooling. However, people have looked inside Rossi devices an

Re: [Vo]:Please stop making unsupported, physically impossible assertions about stored heat

Robert Leguillon wrote: Don't miss the fundamental argument of heat storage. Great care was taken to insulate the E-Cat, and keep heat from escaping. If you think that this is impossible, I have an experiment for you. Make a scalding hot 1/2 cup of coffee. Put it into a Thermos. See how lo

Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data

Alan J Fletcher wrote: Rossi wrote: 15kg/h here: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=20#comment-94236 That's 4.17 g/s -- Lewan recorded 0.9 (stable) and 1.9 (cool-down). This is why you need ins

Re: [Vo]:Please stop making unsupported, physically impossible assertions about stored heat

Robert Leguillon wrote: Where did they increase? They never went up in the E-Cat, only remained pretty darned steady (pegged to boiling point, slowly decreasing). The temperature in the eCat cannot go up because it is boiling water at a little more than 1 atm. It can boil away the water faste

[Vo]:Yes, this was a fiasco, but it was also first principle proof of the claims

Robert Lynn wrote: And you don't know if the water level in the huge reactor reservoir is rising or falling. And you know that there are big problems with the secondary loop calorimetry not remotely matching the primary in the one instance (Mat's walk around video) where we know the primary

Re: [Vo]:Rossi: fat-cat architecure

Rossi said: The volume free for the water is about 30 liters, so that to fill up it are > necessary about 2 hours ( the pump of the primary circuit pumps about 15 > liters per hour) . . . > This is confusing yet strangely helpful. Didn't he say there are four cells in each reactor box? There are

Re: [Vo]:Stremmenos calls Defkalion press release "megalomaniac"

Good grief! Here is Google translation: Christos Stremmenos October 11th, 2011 at 11:32 AM By chance I learned of the release of the GT SA Defkalion (Athens 11.10.10) and I feel a moral obligation to act in faith to my convictions have already been made public at the time .. I supported and sti

Re: [Vo]:Yes, this was a fiasco, but it was also first principle proof of the claims

Jouni Valkonen wrote: > It had nothing to do with Rossi, but Mats Lewan was the culprit, because he > failed to measure all the necessary variables. 1. Lewan did the best he could under difficult circumstances. 2. All the necessary variables (parameters) should have been recorded on a compute

Re: [Vo]:Yes, this was a fiasco, but it was also first principle proof of the claims

Jouni Valkonen wrote: > Therefore I do not complain Mats for being incompetent, because I know that > Horace, Jed and me would have failed in similar manner. It is just too easy > to be wise five days after the demonstration. I was wise before the demonstration. It took no great skill, but as

Re: [Vo]:Yes, this was a fiasco, but it was also first principle proof of the claims

Jouni Valkonen wrote: > But if you do not have such a fancy toys around, then you have to > improvise. . . > Most of the equipment he needed was right there! All he had to do was use it properly. As I said, the Termometro 4 channel TM-947 SD could have recorded the temperatures to a computer. J

Re: [Vo]:Yes, this was a fiasco, but it was also first principle proof of the claims

Jouni Valkonen wrote: > I said that the outlet water from > > the heat exchanger should be made available to observers so they could > > independently test the temperature with their own equipment. > > This is of course possible, but is it? 600 kg/h water is lots of water > and it is not trivial

[Vo]:Japan's revised energy plan

See: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2011/10/05/Japan-takes-steps-to-revise-energy-plan/UPI-61081317835370/#ixzz1aKbhqLE0 The Fukushima accident has had a profound impact. The statements and attitudes in this article would be unthinkable a year ago. Such as: "Headed by Nippon S

Re: [Vo]:Yes, this was a fiasco, but it was also first principle proof of the claims

I wrote: > 1. Put a tap in the hose to draw off samples periodically. To get an > accurate temperature, you draw off 1 L into a Dewar (a thermos bottle), stir > vigorously and insert several thermocouples and thermometers. > Toss out the first liter and fill it again. Maybe put the Dewar into a

[Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

The answer is been staring at us the whole time. I have been thinking of the Rossi reactor as something like a US water heater where inflow must always equal outflow, because a reservoir is always full. I have been thinking that if the inflow is a steady 0.9 mL/s, the outflow has to be the same. Bu

Re: [Vo]:More calcs.

Susan Gipp wrote: I'm sure that for Rossi numbers are pretty meaningless. He often use them just as nice words to emphasize his speeches. We don't have to take them to make calculations. Let's talk instruments (when they work properly) No, let's talk human reflexes. At around 18:00, someone

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

Horace Heffner wrote: I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test lasted 526 > minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/min = 0.0409 liters > per second = 40.9 ml/s. > Lewan says the meter accumulated a total of 4,554 L from 11:57 to 19:03 (7 hours, 6 minutes;

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

Jouni Valkonen wrote: Water inflow rate was calibrated and it was 13 kg/h. For this test? Where does it say that? Anyway, that comes to 3.6 g/s which is enough to sustain the highest power without having the reservoir run dry. It could be the reservoir was overflowing during most of the test.

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

Horace Heffner wrote: This is what I was talking about when I wrote: "The earlier noted flow measurement of 0.9 g/s, by Lewan, was at the output of the water/steam from the condenser heat exchanger. It might have had nothing to do with with the actual pump rate. . . . So you did say that!

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

Terry Blanton wrote: I read somewhere that you are supposed put at strap on pipe thermocouple about 2 feet away. I cannot find that document. I think that is in the energy flow meter manual we discussed offline a few weeks back. Ah yes. That is partly because the ultrasonic flow meter require

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

Horace Heffner wrote: However, because T2 readings can not be trusted, we don't even know if the steam temperature is 120°C. Not sure why we cannot trust the T2 readings. I must have missed that. 3. Putting the outlet thermocouple on the pipe is a good way to blur out momentary variations a

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

Rossi wrote: That's the flow of the condensate water, and it is not constant. Okay, that is what Heffner and I suggested. The energy produced has been measured on the secondary circuit, so I didn't take a record of the primary flow rate. I wish he would record _everything_. Sigh. In any

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

I wrote: > It occurs to me that at 18:54, when Lewan measured 0.9 g/s of condensate, > that would indicate 2 kW, but that is assuming it was all vaporized. If > there were "slugs" of water coming out at that time, then there is no > telling how much enthalpy the 0.9 g represents. . . . . > Hmmm

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: This has been the problem all along -- everything is sloppy, Rossi's statements are often inaccurate or confusing, there's a little bit of what might be outright lying going on (e.g., the dry steam in the early tests, the undetectable isotope shifts, the factory heat

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

Roarty, Francis X wrote: Agreed! Focardi already has the better understanding and pre-existing patents that don't depend on this claimed "secret sauce" .. Do you mean Piantelli? - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

Alan J Fletcher wrote: Then primary went to the usual drain, just round the corner. We don't know if he shook out any accumulated water before he measured. The long, long hose was the secondary. I know, but even the primary hose was long. Lewan says he measured the flow rate. That would hav

[Vo]:Mats Lewan comments on measuring primary circuit flow

I guess it isn't a circuit, strictly speaking. Anyway, Lewan said: "Sure. I filled up the hose first before [I started] measuring." He also said that he measured the temperature of the condensate using his own thermocouple. The number was lower than the heat exchanger cooling water measured by th

[Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

← E-Cat Test Demonstrates Energy Loss Rossi’s 11th Test, 11th Failure Posted on October 10, 2011 by Steven B. Krivit

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

Oops. I did not mean to copy that here. I hope Steve is not upset. I meant to comment on this one part: "My conclusion is that Lewan and Rossi made no flow measurements that would allow them to directly calculate the energy output during the heating phase." That is incorrect. They made the same

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

I wrote: > it clearly shows that by the end of the warm-up period, I put energy > already exceeded input energy. > Meant to say: OUTPUT energy already exceeded input . . . The point is, this is balance of heat generation and loss, similar to a financial balance sheet. Not complicated. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Alternative Oct 6 calorimetry method based on T2 and one measured mass flow point

Robert Lynn wrote: > Safety: Don’t stand near the fat cat. 30 litres of 125°C water and steam > at 1.5bar gauge pressure in a stupidly designed thin walled SQUARE pressure > vessel with one whole side held on by a few bolts and engineered by someone > of Rossi’s demonstrated ability could kill

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

Joe Catania wrote: Strange, I just commented on The EEStory.com thst input energy looks equal to output up to the time Lewan turns on the infamous "device that creates frequencies" which to my mind is clearly a meter beater. You have a vivid imagination. Perhaps you should inform Termometro a

Re: [Vo]:Mats Lewan comments on measuring primary circuit flow

By the way, Lewan said that his electronic thermometer was inexpensive. Not laboratory grade. Even the inexpensive ones are reliable but not as accurate in my experience. I think the cheap ones are often thermistors rather than thermocouples. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

Joe Catania wrote: Yes your imagination is vivid. I'm refering to the clamp on ammeter of course. Nice try. Ah, so you should inform Digimaster company that their instrument can be fooled with a simple device. Please let us know their reply. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

Joe Catania wrote: I should? I've already done what I should do. Nonsense! You should tell the company. They will be grateful you have discovered this terrible problem with their instrument. They may pay you a large sum of money for helping them find this problem. You should inform all of t

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: > I sure appreciate Mr. Krivit being a bit more forthcoming in his own > thought processes on the controversial Rossi Saga. . . . This is carelessness. The information Krivit demanded from Lewan was right there, in plain sight, in Lewan's report. I think t

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

Joe Catania wrote: ** > The point is more that the choice of a meter that can't measure high > frequency is requisite for this hoax. > Two different meters, in this case. I suggest you make a box that fools both of these meters to demonstrate that it can be done. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Krivit report on Oct. 6 Rossi test

Joe Catania wrote: I suggest you accept my treatment was theoretical. Rossi should comply, not me. Rossi set up two meters, a Digitmaster DM201 and a Mastech MS2102. You are saying you know a "theoretical" way to fool both of them, simultaneously, with some sort of external signal generator

Re: [Vo]:Alternative Oct 6 calorimetry method based on T2 and one measured mass flow point

Robert Lynn wrote: Another attempt to untangle Rossi’s mess . . . > > So how do the results from this method look? Well the total steam > enthalpy flow throughout the >100°C period from 13:46 to 19:59 is 52.7MJ > (substantially greater than the 32.1MJ . . . > That's nifty. The graph has the

Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?

Jeff Driscoll wrote: A fraudster (i.e. Rossi) could have yanked on that thermocouple just before opening up the insulation wrapping making it fraudulently appear that the thermocouple was close to the exit of the secondary cooling water when in fact it was close to the hot steam input side of

Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?

OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: >From hence forth they tend to advertise only the observations that > support the premise that Rossi is a "fraudster." Observations that may > suggest Rossi's work might actually possess merit are conveniently > ignored and/or glossed over. > In this case, th

Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?

Peter Heckert wrote: > In this case, the skeptics are ignoring the fact that the heat increased > during heat after death, instead of declining according to Newton's law. > This proves they are wrong. I have not seen a response from any of them > trying to explain this fact. > > This is not igno

Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?

Robert Leguillon wrote: > Please provide a specific example of the heat increase during > "Heat-After-Death." You have been asked multiple times for this . . . > I have pointed it out multiple times. The temperature continues rising after the power is cut off at 15:50. It rises again peaking

Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?

Higgins Bob-CBH003 wrote: ** ** > > As I recall, at the same time the hydrogen was discharged, the water flow > rate was increased – basically being doubled. This caused short term > stored energy (hot water) to be pushed out of the E-cat output and then > measured in the heat exchanger. > No d

Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?

I wrote: > 19:08 Delta T 8.2°C. Hydrogen discharged, degassing of powder begins, > primary circuit flow rate increased. It is unclear whether this temperature > was recorded before these actions or after them. > Oops. I read that wrong. That Delta T is from 19:22. There was no reading at 19:08.

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stemmenos from Defkalion GT

Jouni Valkonen wrote: This certainly off topic, but Greece economy would not be cured, because mining is capital intensive production and thus it does not help much the sick market economy of Greece. Yes. Mineral wealth is a curse. Places like Saudi Arabia and Texas end up with dysfunctional

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >