Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Because all energy was finally converted into hot air, this should become obvious from the fan-driven heat radiators. I have developed this formula for air flow: air flow[m^3/s] = 0.77 * P[kW] / delta_T[°K] At 470 kW and initial air temperature of 20°C and final air temperature of 100°C we have a hot air flow of 0.77*470/80 [m^3/s] = 4.5 m^3/s of 100°C hot air. This amount of heat cannot been unnoticed, it must have bee rather hot near the heatradiators. If we assume lower temperature, the air flow increases and it must be rather loud and stormy. Because 1 m^3 of air has a mass inertia of 1.3 kg, this must also give some noise and force effects on the direct environment. Am 31.10.2011 13:54, schrieb Rich Murray: megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water -- cup of tea, anyone?]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 [ Rich Murray: this nail in the coffin goes right to the point... using Rossi's own data... ] http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/H-Ni_Fusion/message/791 [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW fromjoshua.cude joshua.c...@yahoo.com reply-toh-ni_fus...@yahoogroups.com to h-ni_fus...@yahoogroups.com dateMon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:02 AM subject [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW mailing listH-Ni_Fusion.yahoogroups.com 4:02 AM (1 hour ago) The presented evidence from the megawatt demo does not support output power above 70 kW in the 1 MW reactor. The calculation used by Rossi and Fioravanti to claim 470 kW assumes that essentially all the water pumped through the system is vaporized. However, there is no evidence presented in the report to support that assumption. Rossi collects liquid water at the exit of the reactor, but there is no evidence presented that liquid cannot be carried past this collector, entrained in the fast flowing steam, and into the heat exchanger. The only measurement reported is the temperature of the fluid as it exits. This is on average about 105 C, which probably corresponds to the boiling point inside the conduit at an elevated pressure due to the formation of some steam. The fact that no independent measurement was reported of pressure or steam quality indicates that Fioravanti is no more competent than Essen and Kallunder were. If one accepts the notion that above 100 C, the steam is dry, then the total power transfer is proportional to: T2-T1 if T2= 100 T2-T1 + 540 + (T2-100)(.5)if T2 100 By this calculation, at 100 C, the power transfer is about 65 kW, and at 100.1 C it is about 470 kW. The blue line in the attached figure (PowerTransfer.jpg) represents the result of this calculation for Rossi's latest data in arbitrary units. (The plateau would be about 470 kW.) Or even if you want to claim that the steam is only dry when it reaches 105 C a few minutes later, then the power would follow the dashed line. So Rossi and Fioravanti want us to believe that although it takes 2 hours for the power transfer to reach 65 kW (100C), it takes only a few minutes to go from 65 kW to 470 kW. The power transfer to the water is proportional to the temperature difference between the water and the heating elements. So this amounts to a claim that the temperature of the heating elements changes essentially discontinuously by a huge amount, and exactly when the water begins to boil. How does it know? And how does it know to stop increasing essentially as soon as all the water is vaporized? If the power increased by another 10%, the steam temperature would increase to more than 200 C. Yet it settles in nicely to a fairly constant temperature just above 100 C, just as if regulated by a mixture of phases at the boiling point, which fluctuates a little because of irregular internal pressure. Such a discontinuous change in the temperature is simply not plausible. A few minutes after it reaches 100 C, the power transfer must still be quite close to the 65 kW, even as the temperature reaches 105 C. That means that the temperature is no indication of dry steam, and so the most we can say from the data presented, if it is accepted, is that the power output is higher than about 70 kW. No data is presented to determine how much higher.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This amount of heat cannot been unnoticed, it must have bee rather hot near the heatradiators. Yes, it was. I believe that is why they were surrounded by barriers. You can see this more clearly in Lewan's video, that was just uploaded. You can also see that the radiators were placed outside. If they had been in the warehouse it would have been intolerably hot. The video shows that the outlet pipe valve handle from the reactor was hot to the touch. If Rossi have allowed observers to look carefully at the genset power meters, they might have confirmed that there was no power going into the reactor, but only to the pumps and radiator fans. With such a large, sophisticated genset I expect each circuit was monitored individually. If you could confirm there is no power going into the reactors, and you know the outlet pipe is hot, and the air around the radiators is hot, this would be proof of an anomalous reaction. The power from the pumps alone could not heat the water enough to make the valve handle palpably hot. It is a shame that Rossi did not allow the observers to confirm the claim. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
2011/10/31 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com It is a shame that Rossi did not allow the observers to confirm the claim. - Jed Probably Peter Svensson did look closely. Look at his tweets today, right after he came back from his trip to watch the E-Cat: http://twitter.com/#!/petersvensson petersvensson petersvensson @ @DanielMTd2 The Spatula Cartel and Big Liverwurst got to me first. I'm their man. há 34 minutos Favorito Retweetar Responder petersvensson petersvensson @ @propagare Sure, follow @ap. If I write something you'll have no problem finding it. há 1 hora petersvensson petersvensson I'm back in the office to find a cobweb with a spider on my monitor. Hey! It was only four days! há 1 hora petersvensson petersvensson @propagare @guidavinocom @johnpfrade Sorry, there's nothing I can say at this point há 1 hora petersvensson petersvensson @hanzjager @dobermanmacleod @ronnmaswan @jockety @FreeEnergyNews @darshansingh @docbennett Sorry, there's nothing I can say at this point * He behaves as he were under NDA.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 15:40, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This amount of heat cannot been unnoticed, it must have bee rather hot near the heatradiators. Yes, it was. I believe that is why they were surrounded by barriers. You can see this more clearly in Lewan's video, that was just uploaded. You can also see that the radiators were placed outside. If they had been in the warehouse it would have been intolerably hot. Look here: http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Eglise_St_Thomas_-_Strasbourg.JPGfiletimestamp=20090714091321 This is an image of the famous St. Thomas Church in Strasbourg. The thermal energy needed to heat this is 480 kW. (Thats obviously enough to heat this unisolated holy big building in winter) They use remote waste heat from industry to heat it. This is the engineering company that built the system, look Nr. 9. http://www.ib-breiden.de/referenzen/ From there I learned this. I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) If the air is only heated from 20° to 40° the air flow must be 16 m^3 / s But there is nothing where the cold air can flow in from below in Rossis setup. Efficient stationary air coolers are built this way, that cold air comes from below and hot air goes up like here: http://www.directindustry.de/prod/heatcraft-europe-friga-bohn-hk-refrigeration/flussigkeits-ruckkuhler-8259-439364.html Rossis system is inefficient and cannot cool down the condensed water to 18 degrees (This was the water input temperature) Maybe my imagination is not good enough, but I fear, the recherge and calculation of others is not good enough. kind regards, Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
http://www.nyteknik.se//template/ver03/fragments/comment/commentsFetch.jsp?articleId=3303682endPosition=25 [ Comment by Joshua Cude, after his comment very similar to the post quoted here. ] It's the old steam trick again In the first place, the report comes from Rossi, with no identification of the customer, so it's just his word. We had Rossi's word yesterday, so there's nothing new today. And the amateurish quality of the report is amazing. In the second place, if you accept the data as given, there is no verification that the units weren't pre-heated for any number of hours through the night. Again, we have only Rossi's word. In the 3rd place, he's back to his old tricks of claiming all the water is converted to steam, without any measurement provided to verify it. That gives him a big factor of 8 in the output power. Remove the factor of 8 for claiming dry steam without evidence, add in 3 or 4 hours of heating during the night, and once again, there is no evidence for excess heat, let alone heat from nuclear reactions. That's if you accept the data that is given. Rossi has succeeded in prolonging uncertainty again; probably because certainty would not further his goals. Joshua Cude 29 Oct 2011 02:59
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) I cannot imagine that either, but what is your point? The heat is not being confined or compressed in a small space. It is outdoors. It is being blown into the air. The amount of heat and fans and radiators are roughly the same size as those on the diesel locomotive parked in a railroad station. When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. Modern diesel electric locomotives range from 3 to 5 MW. They produce a lot more waste heat than that when they are underway. When they are sitting at the platform after a trip, cooling down, I suppose they emit roughly 1 MW of heat. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:17, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert wrote: I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) I cannot imagine that either, but what is your point? The heat is not being confined or compressed in a small space. 480 kW is enough to heat the big St Thomas Church in winter. They use many spatial distributed heaters to heat the church. Compared to this the heating source in Rossis system is compressed to a footprint of some m^2. It is outdoors. It is being blown into the air. The amount of heat and fans and radiators are roughly the same size as those on the diesel locomotive parked in a railroad station. When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. The use some splywood boards like Rossi and build these airtight around the locomotive, this way that the flow of cold input air is inhibited, set the locomotive to 470 kW power and see what happens. Modern diesel electric locomotives range from 3 to 5 MW. They produce a lot more waste heat than that when they are underway. When they are sitting at the platform after a trip, cooling down, I suppose they emit roughly 1 MW of heat. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
On 11-10-31 04:30 PM, Peter Heckert wrote: Am 31.10.2011 21:17, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert wrote: I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) I cannot imagine that either, but what is your point? The heat is not being confined or compressed in a small space. 480 kW is enough to heat the big St Thomas Church in winter. They use many spatial distributed heaters to heat the church. Compared to this the heating source in Rossis system is compressed to a footprint of some m^2. It is outdoors. It is being blown into the air. The amount of heat and fans and radiators are roughly the same size as those on the diesel locomotive parked in a railroad station. When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. The use some splywood boards like Rossi and build these airtight around the locomotive, this way that the flow of cold input air is inhibited, set the locomotive to 470 kW power and see what happens. Uh, let me think, here ... Splinters go in all directions when the train runs into the side of the box? Modern diesel electric locomotives range from 3 to 5 MW. They produce a lot more waste heat than that when they are underway. When they are sitting at the platform after a trip, cooling down, I suppose they emit roughly 1 MW of heat. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. The use some splywood boards like Rossi and build these airtight around the locomotive, this way that the flow of cold input air is inhibited, set the locomotive to 470 kW power and see what happens. What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! The space is roughly as confined as the underground platforms at Grand Central Station in New York City, or Back Bay station in Boston. The plywood boards are about as confining the posters, dividers or glass waiting area walls in those stations. The stations are not intolerably hot, even when you stand next to the locomotive. It is my favorite place to stand. As I said, I do love enormous noisy dangerous machinery. I am sure the fan boxes are quite hot, which is why they erected the plywood. So are the blowers in a diesel locomotive. You do not want to get too close to those things. But oh they are lovely and I even like the smell. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:41, schrieb Jed Rothwell: What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. It is very obvious that it was open to the sky I didnot think it would need special explanation but obviously not all people are bright enough to see the obvious. SCNR Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. It is very obvious that it was open to the sky I didnot think it would need special explanation but obviously not all people are bright enough to see the obvious. Yes, well, since it is open to the sky, it is not confined. Do you agree? So what are you talking about? The hot air blows away instantly, just as it does from a locomotive sitting in a station. I seem to be missing your point here. Are you talking about a hypothetical test in an enclosed space? This test was nothing like that. There is no expectation that anything will get hot. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:47, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 31.10.2011 21:41, schrieb Jed Rothwell: What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. This arrangement /must/ become hot, because the airflow is hindered, especially the inflow of cold air is hindered, and the air is enturbulated. This arrangemen must become hot like a locomotive under open sky, it cannot cool the condensate down to 18°C . You would never get permission to do this with a locomotive or truck under open sky, you would damage it. It is very obvious that it was open to the sky I didnot think it would need special explanation but obviously not all people are bright enough to see the obvious. SCNR Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:57, schrieb Jed Rothwell: I seem to be missing your point here. Are you talking about a hypothetical test in an enclosed space? This test was nothing like that. There is no expectation that anything will get hot. Obviously you do not want to understand. I will not explain every little bit in such a way that dumb little Klein Erna can understand it. If you dont understand it, then dont answer.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. This arrangement /must/ become hot, because the airflow is hindered, especially the inflow of cold air is hindered, and the air is enturbulated. This arrangemen must become hot like a locomotive under open sky, it cannot cool the condensate down to 18°C. Ah, you finally got to your point. How do you know the condensate went back to 18°C? The feedwater temperature rose throughout the test, from 15°C to 18°C. The test lasted 8 hours. 5,400 L of water was pumped through the reactor and (presumably) vaporized during that time. I think there was more than 5,400 L in the holding tanks. The condensate could have been coming back at a higher temperature than the tanks. Plus, the open reservoir tanks would cool down on their own. Anyway, there is no problem cooling down equipment in this situation. I have seen large power company transformers behind shopping malls placed in small confined areas, sometimes bricked in to keep people away from them. They produce a great deal of waste heat. It goes straight up. Not a problem. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
I wrote: I think there was more than 5,400 L in the holding tanks. The condensate could have been coming back at a higher temperature than the tanks. I should have said the condensate *must* have been coming back at a higher temperature than the water in the tanks. It must have been well above 18°C or the tank temperature would not have risen. It would be hard to estimate how much higher it would be because the tanks also lose heat, and we do not know the ambient temperature. The feedwater temperature is recorded in the spreadsheet, and it gradually rises. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 22:18, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Anyway, there is no problem cooling down equipment in this situation. I have seen large power company transformers behind shopping malls placed in small confined areas, sometimes bricked in to keep people away from them. They produce a great deal of waste heat. It goes straight up. Not a problem. A 10 MW transformer, if it has an efficiency of 99% produces 10 kW waste heat. That is another dimension. Without telling numbers this cannot been compared. We are talking about 470 kW waste heat.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 22:44, schrieb Jed Rothwell: I wrote: I think there was more than 5,400 L in the holding tanks. The condensate could have been coming back at a higher temperature than the tanks. I should have said the condensate _must_ have been coming back at a higher temperature than the water in the tanks. It must have been well above 18°C or the tank temperature would not have risen. It would be hard to estimate how much higher it would be because the tanks also lose heat, and we do not know the ambient temperature. The feedwater temperature is recorded in the spreadsheet, and it gradually rises. Yes this can be. Unfortunately the usage of the second watertank is not known. It is also not known if the second heatdissipator and the second stem tube where in use. Possibly these where connected to the idle side of the plant. Too much unknown factors. Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: A 10 MW transformer, if it has an efficiency of 99% produces 10 kW waste heat. Good point. In any case, I do not think you can show the temperature of the condensate must have been at some temperature or another. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The feedwater temperature is recorded in the spreadsheet, and it gradually rises. Yes this can be. Unfortunately the usage of the second watertank is not known. It is also not known if the second heatdissipator and the second stem tube where in use. Possibly these where connected to the idle side of the plant. I believe the feedwater tanks were linked together with a pipe. I think someone said that in a video. The water level seemed to be falling to the same level in both tanks. - Jed
