Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > 3) The company in Georgia (Rome?) still makes the cavitation pump > but do not advertise it as gainful. That is word of mouth. > Well, it is word of me.
http://hydrodynamics.com/ > 4) If the cavitation pump has COP of 2, then that could reduce the > electrical input needed by the ecat by half, in principle. > As I recall, the excess was at most 17% (1.17 times input). It was sporadic. Most of the time there was no excess. Note, however, that when there was no excess the ratio was around 0.9 at best because there are massive losses from any large steel tank full of boiling water. I mean the surface is very hot, and it radiates a lot of heat into the room. The Boiler Efficiency Guide discusses this. Absolute efficiency is not what matters. What matters is how much heat actually transfers to the fluid. That is why I said flow calorimetry is the measurement you want to look at in a commercial evaluation, rather than the heat loss method. The fuel-to-steam efficiency is what matters. - Jed
