2011/10/12 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>:
> Jouni Valkonen <jounivalko...@gmail.com> 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 I wrote
> here, in a message I copied to Rossi:
> ". . . Several days before this test, I sent Rossi a short list of
> suggestions. For example, I said that all data should be recorded on a
> single computer with time stamped records. 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 to dispose it anywhere that is convenient for
the observers.
But if Mats had been creative, he could have measured the mass flow of
the output of primary loop. If there is a correlation between mass
flow and secondary loop ΔT, then it means, that E-Cat is not
overflowing. And if E-Cat is not overflowing, then we get directly the
total enthalpy from the mass flow and we can calibrate the heat
exchanger.
There is always opportunities to be creative. But it is hard.
But you are right. We definitely should have more data points from the
secondary loop than every ten minutes. This was major mistake that was
done.
–Jouni
