Peter, thanks for this idea. This superheating process to eliminate
corrosive agents might be plausible with Rossi. Therefore we might not be
able to trust thermometer as a reliable pressure sensor, if it is not placed
under the liquid water level. But we need to find other means to measure
About multiple e-kittens in a box, question 2) from the exchange below on JONP:
Andrea Rossi
September 16th, 2011 at 4:23 AM
Dear Alessandro Casali:
1- I prefer not to give this info, for security reasons
2- multiple
3- see 1
4- yes
5- longer
6- will need drive time to time
7- everything upgrades
At 01:41 AM 9/20/2011, Michele Comitini wrote:
About multiple e-kittens in a box, question 2) from the exchange
below on JONP:
Alessandro Casali
The 27MW e-cats are single core or do they have multiple cores?
Andrea Rossi
2- multiple
I missed that one! Now I really, really don't know how to
Am 16.09.2011 21:26, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 11:57 AM 9/16/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
The important information is: There is no superheated steam because
inside the ecat is everything almost at boiling temperature. For
superheated steam you need an extra heater that heats the steam and
At 05:52 PM 9/18/2011, Colin Hercus wrote:
Woops, sorry Alan. I should be more careful.
Good grief ... no problem!! The superheater chamber idea was
directly from Lewan's report (and the literature).. All I added was
direct overflow (which may or may not be true).
I've updated my Sept ecat analysis
http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_sep11_e.php
No radical new conclusions, but I shifted the analysis point from 130C to
118C, when the output fluid measurement was made, and interleaved the
calculations with the explanatory text. (And the pressure calculations
2011/9/19 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de
.
Someone had the idea Rossi might have multiple small e-cats in this big
box.
Peter
Me too. I don't know why but I haave a strong feeling that inside the
fat-cat there are the 4 well known e-kittyes that Rossi showed us in the
past demos plus
Woops, sorry Alan. I should be more careful.
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote:
Hi Colin,
Alan Fletcher gets the credit for that scenario.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Colin
I'm still trying to figure out what's going on!
The outlet port is very high on the unit ... if it was just the overflow
from a kettle boiler then there wouldn't be any room for steam.
I might have to go back to thinking of it as a Tube boiler, where the
flow of the steam carries the water with
2011/9/16 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com:
I'm still trying to figure out what's going on!
The outlet port is very high on the unit ... if it was just the overflow
from a kettle boiler then there wouldn't be any room for steam.
I might have to go back to thinking of it as a Tube boiler, where
2011/9/16 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com:
Electric power was just less than 10% of the core
heat production that was still increasing and as there is lots of
thermal inertia, it could absorb 2.5 kW loss of heating power that we
did not even notice it.
Here was mistake, I of course
I think the problem is, that you look too much at unimportant information.
First we must decide which of the information is imortant and which is
unimportant.
Also we must see if there is any important information missing. (This is
the most difficult part)
If nothing is missing, then we have
At 11:24 AM 9/16/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Thanks for your comments I'm still looking at the whole picture.
This is also the reason, why I do not believe that two chambered inner
structure. We do not have any evidence that would support the idea of
superheated steam and also I do not
Am 16.09.2011 21:10, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
Lewan told me that Rossi insists that there are no internal
obstructions to the outlet which would cause the internal pressure to
be significantly above 1 atmosphere. If that is true, then
superheating is the only alternative.
Quite often Rossi
At 11:57 AM 9/16/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
The important information is: There is no superheated steam because
inside the ecat is everything almost at boiling temperature. For
superheated steam you need an extra heater that heats the steam and
there is none.
Because the temperature inside
Am 16.09.2011 21:20, schrieb Peter Heckert:
Am 16.09.2011 21:10, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
Lewan told me that Rossi insists that there are no internal
obstructions to the outlet which would cause the internal pressure to
be significantly above 1 atmosphere. If that is true, then
superheating is
At 11:45 AM 9/16/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Still I find it baffling why there was no bump in the graph, when
power was cut off? Do you Alan or anyone else have any ideas?
There isn't a bump in the graph when it's heating up,
either. Previously we've seen a distinct increase in the slope
At 12:26 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
To maintain an internal pressure of 3 Bar (needed for 130C) you'd
need a pretty small orifice : less than 1/32 inch ?.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/steam-flow-orifices-d_1158.html
(Unfortunately, that's in engineering units .. I'll look for a
If the E-Cat is going to truly be analyzed as black box, we need all inputs
and outputs. Obviously, a thermometer stuck inside the E-Cat, when we don't
know the pressure, physical construction, etc., does nobody any good. (Hell, we
don't even know if it's in water, or what type of thermal
Am 16.09.2011 22:13, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 12:26 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
To maintain an internal pressure of 3 Bar (needed for 130C) you'd
need a pretty small orifice : less than 1/32 inch ?.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/steam-flow-orifices-d_1158.html
(Unfortunately,
On 2011-09-16 22:19, Robert Leguillon wrote:
[...] This is still supposition and silliness. Every time Rossi let's the E-Cat out
of the bag, the demonstrations get worse, and the power gains get smaller. Please
let NASA evaluate this device, with no phase change, so we can have real answers in
Given that his new test will be a prototype of a nuclear reactor, look at
the examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boiling_water_reactor_english.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PressurizedWaterReactor.gif
All of them have the characteristics of operation of the e-cats presented
At 01:13 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I'm still looking for the 'orifice' needed to create 3 Bar internal pressure.
Napier's formula (accurate to about 3%) for steam going through an
orifice in a flat plate, to atmospheric pressure.
W = p * a / 70
Where W is flow lbs/sec
p is
2011/9/16 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de:
The volume of water at end of hose is measured and fortunately this equals
the mass of water.
Problem with that there is only one data point, and you have no way
know whether the system was in equilibrium or not or if the power
production was
2011/9/17 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
Given that his new test will be a prototype of a nuclear reactor, look at
the examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boiling_water_reactor_english.svg
Finally someone realized that E-Cat is just typical miniature BWR! ^^
Therefore Rossi's
Am 16.09.2011 23:25, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 01:13 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I'm still looking for the 'orifice' needed to create 3 Bar internal
pressure.
Napier's formula (accurate to about 3%) for steam going through an
orifice in a flat plate, to atmospheric pressure.
W
About basic of operation of BWR and steam related to nuclear there is
good reference and also theory of operation on CANDU
http://goo.gl/6iXex
look for thermodynamics and hydraulics.
mic
2011/9/16 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com:
2011/9/17 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
Given
At 12:26 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I still think that the 2-chamber
design explains more than the 1-chamber 3-bar design. The core
could easily be engineered with a water-efficient heat exchanger in one
chamber, and a steam-efficient heat exchanger in the
other.
From Lewan's report :
Am 16.09.2011 23:52, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
That's super-heating.
So to confirm Rossi's statements (130C, 1 Bar Pressure, No restrictor
orifice, No direct fluid overflow) we would need to show that 130C (or
maybe 120C) superheated steam (ie NO liquid water) at 11 kg/hr will
condense to
I was just throwing some random thoughts. I am not sure where you were
ironic, if you were anywhere at all...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
Date: 2011/9/16
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thoughts on the eCat and 130C steam
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
2011/9
Hi Horace,
Your 3rd scenario may be right. From mats Report
According to Andrea Rossi the increased
dimension is due to a larger volume inside where the water is heated,
approximately 30 liters, and a larger heat-exchanger with a greater
surface which should result in a more effective heat
Hi Colin,
Alan Fletcher gets the credit for that scenario.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Colin Hercus wrote:
Hi Horace,
Your 3rd scenario may be right. From mats Report
According to Andrea Rossi the increased
dimension is
32 matches
Mail list logo
