Hello. At http://www.focus.it/scienza/e-cat_collezione_C9.aspx you will find
a collection of 120 images and at
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL360E4122CB586EB7feature=viewall
20 short videoclips of the E-Cat test (2011, oct. 6). The collection is not
for public purpose (despite a
Hi Robert,
If this excess energy over what is required to heat .9g/s of water to 124C
is somehow stored in the eCAT (say, as thermal energy in a fairly well
insulated block of steel) then it would be enough energy to possibly give
the impression of a self sustaining reaction for at least 3 hours.
Am 11.10.2011 16:01, schrieb Colin Hercus:
Hi Robert,
If this excess energy over what is required to heat .9g/s of water to
124C is somehow stored in the eCAT (say, as thermal energy in a fairly
well insulated block of steel) then it would be enough energy to
possibly give the impression of
Pump capacity and pump stroke contradict 15 kg / hour. The observers twice
collected the output, and it was .91 g/s during operation, and still under 2
g/s after it was sped up during quenching.
See Robert Lynn's calculations below, with manufacturer and video reference, or
just look at the Ny
At 09:19 AM 10/11/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
Rossi wrote: 15kg/h here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
That's 4.17 g/s -- Lewan recorded 0.9 (stable) and 1.9
(cool-down).
I don't think we even know what pump was used (piston? peristaltic) -- it
doesn't
Am 11.10.2011 18:37, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 09:19 AM 10/11/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
Rossi wrote: 15kg/h here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
That's 4.17 g/s -- Lewan
At 09:37 AM 10/11/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 09:19 AM 10/11/2011, Peter
Heckert wrote:
Rossi wrote: 15kg/h here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
That's 4.17 g/s -- Lewan recorded 0.9 (stable) and 1.9
(cool-down).
I don't think we even know what pump
Hy Alan, I'm Raymond Zreick, journalist for Focus magazine (Italy). This is
my first message in this mailing list.
@Alan
I don't think we even know what pump was used (piston? peristaltic)
it doesn't show in any of the videos.
peristaltic
It is also in the Lewan's technical report.
I
At 09:51 AM 10/11/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
Am 11.10.2011 18:37, schrieb
Alan J Fletcher:
At 09:19 AM 10/11/2011, Peter
Heckert wrote:
Rossi wrote: 15kg/h here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
That's 4.17 g/s -- Lewan recorded 0.9 (stable) and 1.9
Welcome Raymond!
Your testimony of Rossi's presentation and opinions will be very valuable to
our discussions!
2011/10/11 Raymond Zreick zre...@gmail.com
Hy Alan, I'm Raymond Zreick, journalist for Focus magazine (Italy). This is
my first message in this mailing list.
@Alan
I don't
At 10:13 AM 10/11/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:
2011/10/11 Raymond Zreick
zre...@gmail.com
Hy Alan, I'm Raymond Zreick,
journalist for Focus magazine (Italy). This is my first message in this
mailing list.
Welcome to Vortex !
Some of us are still trying to figure out what happened in the
Peristaltic pump NSF Model # CEP183-362N3 Serial # 060550065 Max output 12.0
liters/h Max press 1.50 bar
So it was a maximum of 12 l/hr during cool-down, and if we take Lewan's
numbers as a ratio -- 6 l/hr when stable.
12l/hr gives a maximum transfer rate of 8.8 kW -- close to the peak 7.6
Hy Daniel.
@Daniel Rocha
Your testimony of Rossi's presentation and opinions will be very valuable
to our discussions!
@Alan Fletcher
Some of us are still trying to figure out what happened in the
demonstration. It will be good to have first-hand information.
Yes, but mine are only
At 10:26 AM 10/11/2011, Robert Lynn wrote:
Peristaltic pump NSF Model #
CEP183-362N3 Serial # 060550065 Max output 12.0 liters/h Max press 1.50
bar
So it was a maximum of 12 l/hr during cool-down, and if we take
Lewan's numbers as a ratio -- 6 l/hr when stable.
12l/hr gives a maximum
calorimetry is plagued with
phase-change and unknown water flow, just where do we stand?
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:26:43 +0100
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data
From: robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Peristaltic pump NSF Model # CEP183-362N3
can tell what the maximum flow
rate is because the pump is only capable of deliverting 2ml per stroke.
Somebody said 40 strokes a minute (it's audible in Lewan's video) ...
which makes 1.33 g /sec (4.8 l/hr) - fairly close to Lewan's 0.9
And there's probably some back-pressure.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data
From: robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Peristaltic pump NSF Model # CEP183-362N3 Serial # 060550065 Max output
12.0 liters/h Max press 1.50 bar
So it was a maximum of 12 l/hr during cool-down, and if we
and 1.9 g/s (when turned up for quenching). As the
heat exchanger was probably receiving a water/steam mix, though, even these
measurements may be unreliable.
From: robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data
Date: Tue, 11
.
--
From: robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:02:37 -0500
The data from the September test is great, in this aspect. They did it
right.
They were filling
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
Rossi wrote: 15kg/h here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
That's 4.17 g/s -- Lewan recorded 0.9 (stable) and 1.9 (cool-down).
This is why you need
On Oct 9, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
When you zoom in on the end of the sensor lead wire, where the frayed
insulation is, you clearly see the bare metal thermocouple wires.
And from the length of that section of lead wire (~1.5 to 2
inches), the
most likely location for
Jed I'm not going to bother to comment on your very flawed analysis. It dosen't
seem you want us to agree.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2011 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting
Alan Fletcher
Jed I'm not going to bother to comment on your very flawed analysis. It dosen't
seem you want us to agree.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2011 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting
Alan Fletcher
Joe Catania zrosumg...@aol.com wrote:
**
Jed I'm not going to bother to comment on your very flawed analysis. It
dosen't seem you want us to agree.
You don't believe that heat storage means the temperature rises?
Forget about me. You do not agree with Newton; that's your problem. What the
I already said there was heat storage. We are not contesting me here Jed and
that's what is clear.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting
Joe Catania zrosumg
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joe Catania zrosumg...@aol.com wrote:
Jed I'm not going to bother to comment on your very flawed analysis. It
dosen't seem you want us to agree.
You don't believe that heat storage means the temperature rises?
I just received a couple of iphone photos from an attendee (but I
don't have permission to post them) which clearly shows that the
thermocouple was attached to the nut near the center of the
manifold. As best as I can tell, this lines up with the center of
the connection to the heat
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
In any event, this puts the thermocouple only 2 cm away from the
center-line, and the thickness of the top of the manifold looks to be
about 1 cm.
Of course, rulers haven't been invented yet, so these distances are
estimates.
(Sorry, Jed ... this problem won't go
At 06:50 PM 10/9/2011, Alan Fletcher wrote:
This analysis presumes that
there is similar coupling of heat from the two streams.
On the output (water) side the coupling is from water to brass, which is
efficient.
On the input (steam) side we have an unknown selection of
any/all
a) Superheated
At 11:20 AM 10/10/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I said you will never get to the bottom of this, and it is not worth trying.
You're probably right on that. So we're left with a purely
qualitative demonstration. Ah well.
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 11:20 AM 10/10/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I said you will never get to the bottom of this, and it is not worth
trying.
You're probably right on that. So we're left with a purely qualitative
demonstration. Ah well.
Well, mainly qualitative. However, you can make a
For what it's worth, here are crops of the thermistors, heat
exchanger and manifold:
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_1_crop.jpg
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_2_crop.jpg
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_3_crop.jpg
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_4_crop.jpg
At 12:16 PM 10/10/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 11:20 AM 10/10/2011, Jed
Rothwell wrote:
I said you will never get to the
bottom of this, and it is not worth trying.
You're probably right on that. So we're left with a purely qualitative
demonstration. Ah well.
It's buried in Lewan's data --
Rossi could give us the answer as to how much the secondary outlet
thermocouple was biased in 1/2 hour with a jug of boiling water and a cold
water supply. But his ego would never allow him to.
On 10 October 2011 20:58, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
For what it's worth, here are crops
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I said you will never get to the bottom of this, and it is not worth
trying.
You're probably right on that. So we're left with a purely
qualitative demonstration. Ah well.
It's buried in Lewan's data -- but as he pointed out in his responses
to Krivit, he DID
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
It's buried in Lewan's data -- but as he pointed out in his responses to
Krivit, he DID measure the eCat output flow twice (presumably at the usual
drain).
He read it at the drain and also, during the video, from the flowmeter.
- Jed
-0700
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: a...@well.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting / SOME flow data
At 12:16 PM 10/10/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 11:20 AM 10/10/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I said you will never get to the bottom of this, and it is not worth trying.
You're probably
At 02:09 PM 10/10/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Alan J Fletcher
a...@well.com wrote:
It's buried in Lewan's data -- but as he pointed out in his responses
to Krivit, he DID measure the eCat output flow twice (presumably at the
usual drain).
He read it at the drain and also, during the video,
At 02:15 PM 10/10/2011, Robert Leguillon wrote:
Look closer at this one:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiT2Pout.png
Let me give you a scenario. There is some back pressure on the
E-Cat, so boiling temperature rises as high as 124 degrees.
Note: This is in the believer's favor. If
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
The flowmeter and volume measurements are on the SECONDARY. The flow
results for the secondary are fine .. as is its input temperature.
He made TWO measurements on the PRIMARY flow ... one at the end of
sustaining, and one after the hydrogen was purged and the
The double flow was recorded after they began trying to quench the reaction.
Increasing the flow rate was specifically mentioned before that second
measurement, and everyone previously lauded the pump for it's accuracy during
previous demonstrations.
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
At 12:58 PM 10/10/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
For what it's worth, here are crops of the thermistors, heat
exchanger and manifold:
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_1_crop.jpg
Diagram : http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_manifold_001_h1200.jpg
I just heard back from my source ... NO, the
During Mat's walk through video I make it about 40+/-1 Hz, with same LMI P18
pump with 2ml max stroke (and back pressure of at least 1.3bar if making
124°C steam, pump is limited to 1.5bar)
http://www.lmi-pumps.com/datasheets/Pseries-08-01.pdf, that would suggest at
maximum 1.3g/s and probably
Let's now take this to its logical conclusion.
At a primary flow rate of .91 g/s, the evidence makes it look as though the
average power (including the power applied by the band heater) over the entire
span, could not have been over 2.5 kW. Anything higher would have resulted in
higher E-Cat
The Italian rcde.it video shows that the primary loop water came out of a
large plastic garbage can parked next to the pump. It is a shame they did
not weigh the garbage can before and after. That would have given the total
amount pumped through. It may not all have been vaporized . . .
That
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
Let's now take this to its logical conclusion.
At a primary flow rate of .91 g/s, the evidence makes it look as though the
average power (including the power applied by the band heater) over the
entire span, could not have been over 2.5 kW.
Let's see ... The total length of that section looks to be about 10 cm.
Let's apply your resistor calculation.
As a first approximation, consider only the shortest path from the thermistor
to the fluid.
Vin = 100 (Voltage :: Temperature) Steam
Vout = 30 : Output of heat exchanger.
The
I think that the sensor is under the black tape near the END of the pipe -- you
can see the wire going under it -- which I estimated as 5 cm from the center.
I did my calculation before you posted that ... if Mario Masso used HIS sensor
position that would increase the calculated error.
-
:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting
I think that the sensor is under the black tape near the END of the pipe -- you
can see the wire going under it -- which I estimated as 5 cm from the center.
I did my calculation before you posted that ... if Mario
On Oct 8, 2011, at 10:39 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
Alan:
Thx for doing the calcs...
I too saw the TC lead wires going under the black tape which is on
the fitting where they push on the flexible hose. However, if you
look closely, the lead wires continue for at least another 2
That's terrible, then. The thermistor is (my eye) 2.5 cm from the closest
point of the incoming steam line (the center of the block) through solid brass.
My 2-resistor calculation then gives a 5V (5C) offset. (I couldn't find the
22passi link).
I tried a triangular resistor mesh with 21
Thx for posting that pic...
-Original Message-
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net]
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2011 1:33 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting
Mark,
In the video Rossi points to the spot. Attached is a clip showing
On Oct 8, 2011, at 9:58 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:
Let's see ... The total length of that section looks to be about
10 cm.
Let's apply your resistor calculation.
As a first approximation, consider only the shortest path from the
thermistor to the fluid.
Vin = 100 (Voltage ::
On Oct 8, 2011, at 10:39 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
Alan:
Thx for doing the calcs...
I too saw the TC lead wires going under the black tape which is on
the fitting where they push on the flexible hose. However, if you
look closely, the lead wires continue for at least another 2
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
Let's see ... The total length of that section looks to be about 10 cm.
Let's apply your resistor calculation.
As a first approximation, consider only the shortest path from the
thermistor to the fluid.
Vin = 100 (Voltage :: Temperature)
Horace Heffner - Original Message -
On this we may disagree significantly. Take a look at the photos
kindly provided by Enzo:
http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo1.jpg
http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo2.jpg
The central brass fitting is very thick. Given the hose ID is about
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi heat exchanger fitting
On Oct 8, 2011, at 10:08 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:
I think that the sensor is under the black tape near the END of the
pipe -- you can see the wire going under it -- which I estimated as
5 cm from the center.
That tape
- Jed wrote ... - Original Message -
Okay TIME OUT. Stop worrying about this. Forget about the damned
thermocouples altogether. Pretend they were not there. Stop obsessing
over small technical details and Look At The Facts:
When the power went off, the reactor was boiling inside and
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
A ton of water went through the heat exchanger -- but we don't know
whether it heated up AT ALL.
Oh give me a break Alan! Seriously, get real. There was STEAM going in one
side and TAP WATER going in the other. How could it not be heated up AT
ALL?!? What
I wrote:
You can quibble about how much boiling water there was, but it had to be
enough for Lewan to hear it, and to make the insulated reactor surface. It
wasn't 50 ml, that's for sure. It had to be a substantial amount.
Meant: . . . and to make the insulated reactor surface HOT. The
A thermal imaging camera would have made this visually clear to
people who were not present and could not feel heat.
Maybe bring one or a few such cameras to the next test?
Harry
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I wrote:
You can quibble about how
I saw it in the video, but this JPEG makes it even more obvious. Thanks for the
upload.
You've got 120+ degrees (allegedly) on one side, and a couple inches away less
than 30 degrees. A few degrees of heat transfer is lauded as conclusive,
irrefutable evidence of a multi-kilowatt cold fusion
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
I saw it in the video, but this JPEG makes it even more obvious. Thanks for
the upload.
You've got 120+ degrees (allegedly) on one side . . .
Why do you say allegedly? It was boiling in the cell. It has be over 100
deg C. Add some
Hello Jed,
I recall that Horace described evidence that slugs of hot water,
separated by steam, went directly from the exit of the reactor into
the heat exchanger right next to the output thermocouple of the heat
exchanger -- it is plausible that hot water could create the excess
heating of that
Two more pictures of the thermocouple (from user agoz on 22passi blog)
http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo1.jpg
http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo2.jpg
Another user on 22passi (Mario Massa) computed that the thermocouple
in that position could give a reading as higher as 5 deg C more then
the
Thanks for posting those pics, Enzo...
Like I said yesterday at about this same time...
The Tout thermocouple being within an inch or two of the hot
steam flow into the heat exchanger does not sit well w/me...
Looks like the thermocouple was Less than 2 from the steam-half of the
exchanger
66 matches
Mail list logo
