I have never seen any indication of the H2 pressure during the experiment. It would seem logical that the pressure would vary quite a lot with temperature.
Dave -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Wed, Nov 23, 2011 10:16 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill I have a doubt. Is that H2 pressure just on the loading before the experiment? But, there is no mention of what is the pressure during the experiment, right? 2011/11/23 Robert Leguillon <robert.leguil...@hotmail.com> There are obviously much, much bigger problems than the weight of the hydrogen tank, but nevertheless: September 7th: "Hydrogen was filled after having checked that there was no pressure inside the E-cat. The bottle was attached, opened, closed, and detached. Weight hydrogen bottle: - before filling: 13613.4 grams - after filling: 13610.7 grams Total loaded: 2.7 grams Pressure H2 Bottle: 60 bar Reduced: 20 bar " October 6th: "Hydrogen was filled after having checked that there was no pressure inside the E-cat. The bottle was attached, opened, closed, and detached. Weight hydrogen bottle: - before filling: 13606.4 grams - after filling: 13604.9 grams Total loaded: 1.5 grams Pressure H2 Bottle: 55 bar Reduced: 15 bar " October 28th: "The Hydrogen tank has been weighted (sic) by means of a scale before and after loading of the Hydrogen In the reactor. Before the loading the weight measured is: 13604.5 kg After the loading the weight measured is: 13602.8 kg The Hydrogen tank pressure has been measured before and after the load: Hydrogen pressure before the load: 55 BAR Hydrogen pressure after the load: 55 BAR " Rossi later corrected himself. The 13604.5 kg and 13602.8 kg measurements should have been 13604.5 g and 13602.8 g, respectively. So, one "Ottoman" E-Cat sometimes takes 2.7 g at 20 bar, and sometimes 1.5 g at 15 bar. On the other hand, 107 of the "Ottoman E-Cats" only take 1.7 g. But, Jed says that there is no reason to think that the numbers were fabricated, so it must be fine. > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:51:48 -0500 > From: jedrothw...@gmail.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill > > Jouni Valkonen wrote: > > > This means with certainty that figures were fabricated and also in > > rather poor manner. > > > > There is no reason to think the figures are fabricated. > > Weighing the entire tank is an extremely inaccurate method. Almost useless. > > > > There was initially also wrong units used, that hydrogen quantity was > > in kilogramms instead of gramms. > > > > This was obviously a mistake. People often confuse units of measure. > > - Jed > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:36:35 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill From: jounivalko...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com That hydrogen bottle weight is a good point. It has been discussed somewhere, but I do not remember was it here or elsewhere. This means with certainty that figures were fabricated and also in rather poor manner. There was initially also wrong units used, that hydrogen quantity was in kilogramms instead of gramms. This kind of typo in units implies that figures were just put there without much of thinking. Certainly they were not measured! —Jouni On Nov 23, 2011 3:00 PM, "Gigi DiMarco" <gdmgdms...@gmail.com> wrote: We can derive the following conclusions: - no intermediate experiments/tests have been made since 0.4 grams is likely to be a leakage, unless a different vessel was used - almost same quantity of Hydrogen is needed for either 1 or 107 fat-cat systems OR - Fioravanti & Rossi report misleading figures Since Rossi in his blog says that 18 kg are needed in 6 months to charge the 1MW plant, 100 grams are needed in 1 day. Giancarlo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
