Joshua refering to wikipaedia: The quality of steam can be quantitatively
described by steam quality (steam dryness), the proportion of saturated
steam in a saturated water/steam mixture. [4] i.e., a steam quality of 0
indicates 100% water while a steam quality of 1 (or 100%) indicates 100%
steam.
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Joshua refering to wikipaedia: The quality of steam can be quantitatively
described by steam quality (steam dryness), the proportion of saturated
steam in a saturated water/steam mixture. [4] i.e., a steam quality of
Thanks again to AG for the file.
The formula is Kelvin's : I.29 Page 12.
There's a critical radius value, below which drops will shrink, above which
they'll grow.
I don't know if my mis-remembered C-name was Critical, Kelvin or a nearby
Clapeyron equation.
Anyway , now I can finish reading
There's also a Clausius-Clapeyron equation.
(There's probably a single neuron in my brain recording that C memory.
Misfiring.)
I don't know if my mis-remembered C-name was Critical, Kelvin or a
nearby Clapeyron equation.
Boiler Efficiency and Steam Quality: The Challenge of Creating Quality Steam
Using Existing Boiler Efficiencies
http://www.nationalboard.org/index.aspx?pageID=164ID=235
...
Lower Pressure Increases Entrainment
As a steam bubble rises through the water and reaches the surface, it
Note : They are mainly talking about boilers with much higher pressures than
the eCat.
I dont think this is relevant.
Rossi himself has said somewhere in a video or interview, there might be
an error of 5% in the steam calculation.
If we assume steam was 50% wet, which is physically impossible, then we
still get a COP of about 3.
50% wet is rain and not fog or steam.
So the
If the same water is _theoretically_ supposed to boil at the same
precise temperature at a given pressure, I just don't understand how
water can _theoreticallly_ survive as a liquid drop while surrounded
by steam which is above the boiling point. In other words, the theory
that the same water
Am 19.11.2011 22:56, schrieb Harry Veeder:
If the same water is _theoretically_ supposed to boil at the same
precise temperature at a given pressure, I just don't understand how
water can _theoreticallly_ survive as a liquid drop while surrounded
by steam which is above the boiling point. In
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote:
If we assume steam was 50% wet, which is physically impossible, then we
still get a COP of about 3.
50% wet is rain and not fog or steam.
In 2-phase flow, steam (or vapor) quality is simply the ratio of the mass
of
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Am 19.11.2011 22:56, schrieb Harry Veeder:
If the same water is _theoretically_ supposed to boil at the same
precise temperature at a given pressure, I just don't understand how
water can _theoreticallly_ survive as
Am 19.11.2011 23:19, schrieb Joshua Cude:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de
mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If we assume steam was 50% wet, which is physically impossible,
then we still get a COP of about 3.
50% wet is rain and not fog
Am 19.11.2011 23:29, schrieb Harry Veeder:
Prof Chang has observed it and he says it is routinely observed but it
is just ignored because it doesn't fit theory. Harry
I have repeatedly tested Thermoelements over boiling water and have
never observed it.
When he doesnt accept steam theory why
In small bubbles or small drops, surface tension is dominant.
Pressure changes, so the PVT equilibrium can be different.
I have a link somewhere for this I'm not sure if I put in my tube boiler
analysis.
And for the life of me, I can't remember if small drops grow or shrink in a
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote:
But even at steam quality of 0% most of the experiments would give a COP
1, because the input energy measured was not enough to heat the water to
100° and definitely there was boiling and some steam observed.
In
The energy necessary to create a surface big enough to surround all atoms
of a liquid is the enthalpy of boiling. This is a recent result and is
pretty accurate for a large range of substances
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_vaporization#Physical_model_for_vaporization
.
So, at boiling
Am 19.11.2011 23:58, schrieb Alan Fletcher:
In small bubbles or small drops, surface tension is dominant.
This is true.
There is an interesting early scientific work about water electricity
from the physicist Lenard who later got the nobel price.
He points out that evaporating water is
Peter wrote: » Thank you for pointing this out, it is probably correct and
I was in error.»
No, what Joshua said does not even resemble physics. If his explanation
would be even remotely truthful, kettle boilers would be impossible,
because all water would escape from tea pots as low quality
Am 20.11.2011 00:37, schrieb Jouni Valkonen:
Peter wrote: » Thank you for pointing this out, it is probably correct
and I was in error.»
No, what Joshua said does not even resemble physics. If his
explanation would be even remotely truthful, kettle boilers would be
impossible, because all
Peter, I do not see how it would be possible, because if water is atomized
(it would cause also loud sound instead of observed gentle boiling sound),
it cannot climb the chimney, because atomized water quickly returns into
liquid in the closed container if velocity is low. This is also the reason
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Peter wrote: » Thank you for pointing this out, it is probably correct and
I was in error.»
No, what Joshua said does not even resemble physics. If his explanation
would be even remotely truthful, kettle boilers
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
And if there is low quality steam, then steam velocity cannot be high
because water mass flow was low, few gramms per second. So no matter how
you look it, low quality steam is physical impossibility with ecat.
That means that part does not leave.
2011/11/19 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
This again. Please explain what would happen if the flow rate was 675
kg/L, and a power of say 235 kW was delivered to the ecats (electrically,
or whatever). In that case, there is only enough power to vaporize
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
That means that part does not leave.
That could work for a while, but eventually the ecat would fill up. Anyway,
Rossi always uses the input flow rate to calculate the output power, so he
is assuming it is coming out.
Joshua wrote: »In the 2-phase literature, this mixture of percolated hot
water and steam is still called low-quality steam.»
Outside Krivit-inspired Rossi discussion I have never heard this kind of
definition for steam quality. Also wikipaedia does not recognize such
definition. Coffee makers do
Am 20.11.2011 01:01, schrieb Jouni Valkonen:
Peter, I do not see how it would be possible, because if water is
atomized (it would cause also loud sound instead of observed gentle
boiling sound), it cannot climb the chimney, because atomized water
quickly returns into liquid in the closed
Not if the output is actually much higher than the input!
2011/11/19 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote:
That means that part does not leave.
That could work for a while, but eventually the ecat would fill up.
Am 20.11.2011 01:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha:
Not if the output is actually much higher than the input!
He doesnt measure the output mass flow.
He always assumes this equals the input mass flow and it is all vaporized.
From this assumption he calculates the output energy.
If this assumption is
It is correct because otherwise, it would leave the pipe without bubbling!
:)
2011/11/19 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de
Am 20.11.2011 01:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha:
Not if the output is actually much higher than the input!
He doesnt measure the output mass flow.
He always assumes this
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote:
Am 20.11.2011 01:01, schrieb Jouni Valkonen:
Rossi says he has heated a room and he intends to sell the ecat for
heating applications.
So why doesnt he simply demonstrate this? The waterflow and delta_t is
easily
: 2011/11/19
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
That's what I've been asking. Jed Rothwell says he has proof that Rossi
had a 35 kW heater that ran continuously as a heater -- several people saw
it. But he won't provide the slightest documentation
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's the amazing part of the whole story: Rossi never had to bother with
making E-cats or Ottoman cats or a megawatt plant to prove his device
works. All he had to do was to take the scientists and reporters with some
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed says people who he trusts saw it. If there is still people talking
about LENR, well, thats part of his efforts, so he knows more people and
has more contacts than Rossi can controls. Or do you think he is lying?
Yeah, yeah, I know all that. Please, you dont need to say that all the time.
2011/11/19 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
BTW, that's a typical scammer tactic too-- they can never show you their
last successful device because they took it apart to reuse the components
or they're working on a
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed says people who he trusts saw it. If there is still people talking
about LENR, well, thats part of his efforts, so he knows more people and has
Good news : I found the link.Legacy Image - Scan to PDF
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710004292_1971004292.pdf
Bad news ... the file's corrupted, and only shows about a quarter of the
document on one of my systems (not this one!). Download fails, and adobe says
file
Downloaded the document ok. All there.
AG
On 11/20/2011 1:57 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:
Good news : I found the link.Legacy Image - Scan to PDF
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710004292_1971004292.pdf
Bad news ... the file's corrupted, and only shows about a quarter
Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try. This address)
- Original Message -
Downloaded the document ok. All there.
It is 11.8 MBs. Sending in the next email.
AG
On 11/20/2011 2:10 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:
Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try. This address)
- Original Message -
Downloaded the document ok. All there.
Sent. Shall I also send to your direct email?
AG
On 11/20/2011 2:10 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:
Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try. This address)
- Original Message -
Downloaded the document ok. All
Send to Vortex failed. Sending directly to your email.
AG
On 11/20/2011 2:10 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:
Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try. This address)
- Original Message -
Downloaded the document
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
Send to Vortex failed. Sending directly to your email.
Vortex is limited to a 40 kByte file size. Yahoo will allow 10 Mbyte
attachments or larger if you use their new mailer. You can load it up
to your documents
Thanks for that tip. It is done:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B__Wi_DF2CjJM2Y2Mjc4YTQtNjliNC00OGMxLWI5NTAtNWY0NzUyNWU1MTQ5
AG
On 11/20/2011 2:37 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
Send to Vortex failed. Sending
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for that tip. It is done:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B__Wi_DF2CjJM2Y2Mjc4YTQtNjliNC00OGMxLWI5NTAtNWY0NzUyNWU1MTQ5
That worked great. You can shorten the URL using goo.gl which keeps a
record of your
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Joshua wrote: »In the 2-phase literature, this mixture of percolated hot
water and steam is still called low-quality steam.»
Outside Krivit-inspired Rossi discussion I have never heard this kind of
definition for
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Not if the output is actually much higher than the input!
If only half the water is vaporized, and the output is higher than the
input, then the output must contain more than half liquid water, which was
the point to
Lol, wut?
2011/11/20 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote:
Not if the output is actually much higher than the input!
If only half the water is vaporized, and the output is higher than the
input, then the output must
, 2011 12:14 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler
Lol, wut?
2011/11/20 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Not if the output is actually much higher than the input!
If only half the water
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Daniel, I think that the poster believes that the ECATs are full of water
in Rossi's 1 MW test.
Well, full of water and steam. The steam takes up most of the volume and so
it moves much faster entraining water droplets
49 matches
Mail list logo
