Predictions:
1) This test has the potential to be quite conclusive. It won't be. *Check
2) It will take a LONG time for the e-Cat to come up to temperature. Only
after it's stable, Rossi will begin circulating water in the secondary, and the
e-Cat temperature will drop a little, and then have to stabilize again. *It
took 4 hours, but the secondary was flowing from the start. Thanks, Jed for
pre-empting this.
3) Secondary water flow will be properly measured and regularly recorded, but
input primary power measurements will still be inconclusive. i would REALLY
like to see Voltage and Current (Thru-Line , not clamp-on, measured from an
eCat equivalent of "mains distribution") *Still a clamp-on meter that was only
looked at occasionally.
4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations
using a "no input" value during the supposed "self-sustaining" mode of
operation to exist at all. As a result, we will all be cursing the
"self-sustaining" mode as an unnecessary invention that only muddies the
results. Many will say that the hours of "warm up time" should correlate to
hours of "cool down" time, and that residual heat can explain away the
maintained temperature. *Check. The E-Cat side never showed greater than 2.5 kW
output (using water flow and temperature), and we had to rely on
self-sustaining mode to see gains, here. The secondary side of the
heat-exchanger was very, very erratic, and did not track the E-Cat temperature
in any meaningful way.
5) Rossi and Jed will say that the test was conclusive (Sorry, Jed) *Check
**Note: All that we NEED here for a conclusive test is:
1) Input power properly and completely measured, time-stamped, and flagged with
any Rossi-enduced duty-cycle changes during operation. *Didn't get it
2) Secondary circuit water flow with flowmeter measurements, continually
recorded and time stamped *Didn't get continual recording, but we did get a
check and elapsed total
3) Secondary circuit water flow input temperature, continually recorded and
time stamped *Didn't get it, just occasional checks (and it didn't match E-Cat
water input)
4) Secondary circuit water flow output temperature, continually recorded and
time stamped *Didn't get it, just occasional checks. It was measured WAY too
close to the steam input of the heat exchanger, making this data really, really
suspicious
5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction *Didn't get it
Extraneous data will only serve to complicate what should be very
straightforward calculations. *Got it
Donating to the World; Two Cents at a Time,
R.L.
