You're right. Someone of the group of seven attendees had placed an ammeter on the line. The line voltage is either assumed or measured to be 220 VAC. (Levan reports ~236 VAC.)
At least once, the ammeter was read. The quoted phrase referring to start up: "The electric heater was switched on at 10:25, and the meter reading was 1.5 amperes corresponding to 330 watts for the heating including the power for the instrumentation, about 30 watts." However:- 1) How often the ammeter was observed is unreported. 2) No mention is made of an internal heater that would draw additional power. 3) On all photographs of the device when made visible, I recall two fiber glass insulated wires protruding from the butt end of the thing (one often white and one back&white stripped.) These could lead to two likely devices: a thermocouple or a heating element. The blue control box has two manually settable control channels visible on the operator side. From this data is likely implied that the edition of the device in question had an internal heater in addition to the external band heater. 4) The calculated energy_output vs. energy_input of Essen and Kullander is about double that reported by either Levan and Levi at around eight to one. On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Damon Craig wrote: > > Check out their report. They report the power input as 500 Watts in their >> energy calculations. Why? >> > > That is incorrect. The report says: > > "The electric heater was switched on at 10:25, and the meter reading was > 1.5 > amperes corresponding to 330 watts for the heating including the power for > the > instrumentation, about 30 watts. The electric heater thus provides a power > of 300 watts to the > nickel-hydrogen mixture. This corresponds also to the nominal power of the > resistor." > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/**EssenHexperiment.pdf<http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EssenHexperiment.pdf> > > Please get your facts straight. > > - Jed > >
