Dave,
Cavitation would not be a problem if the flow meter was situated ahead
of the pump, well below the liquid level in the holding tank. The
pipe is 80mm ID and would remain full. There is a potential problem
with turbulence when a flow meter is mounted downstream of the pump,
that is usually taken care of by having several feet of straight pipe
ahead of it.
Until we have a piping diagram this is a pointless discussion. Why this
should be secret baffles me. As manager doesn't mean manager in
legalese perhaps turbulence and cavitation have different meanings to
super lawyers too.
Having headed engineering for several major corporations and listened to
top level discussions I am persuaded that "follow the money" has a lot
of truth.
On 8/13/2016 2:47 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Bob,
You are describing a connection that would be ideal and likely
accurately monitor the water flow rate. The key ingredient is for the
flow setting component to be located downstream of the flow meter
which should be down stream of the main pumping function. The pump
would then ensure that positive pressure is applied to the flow meter.
But, is this what the schematic diagram shows? Jed's theory that the
water flow rate is much less than registered would suggest otherwise.
As previously stated, the answers to our questions will have to wait
until the proper system information is released.
Another issue that eventually requires addressing is whether or not
the flow through the meter is continuous or in bursts. A burst system
, if present, will further complicate the analysis. Previously I
recall discussion of dynamic pump control for each module as being
part of the overall control system.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sat, Aug 13, 2016 1:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!
David
You noted the following:
"The manual describing how to use this device does mention that it
needs to be kept free of negative pressure and cavitation conditions."
I would think that the design of the flow system would position the
flow meter down stream of the pump to assure a positive pressure on
the flow meter. In addition a calibrated orifice to help provide a
constant flow might be included down stream from the flow meter.
The use of gate valves to control flow is not uncommon, however, IMHO
not as reliable as an orifice for flow control. A throttle valve
would be the best option to control flow.
Bob Cook
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>>
*Sent:* Friday, August 12, 2016 2:03 PM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:l...@eskimo.com>
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!
I agree that it would be better to improve the fraud. You have to
wonder why he did not at least go to that level of expertise by using
fractional data?
It would be far more believable to suspect that he used the average
instead of making an effort to track the true data if he did not think
anyone would care. Could Penon be so convinced of the 1 MW and
extreme COP calculations that he did not believe that anyone would
become too demanding? I do not know.
Of course, I probably would assume that now it is too late to retract
the data as reported since it will do great harm to the court case to
do so. How could you explain to the judge that your data was known by
you to be inaccurate?
Penon is acting in a strange manner, the only way it makes sense is to
think that he did not expect a problem to develop with IH. Perhaps he
really believes that the COP was great and the power met the requirements.
I am still attempting to understand how the flow meter may have been
faked out by being less than full of water. The manual describing how
to use this device does mention that it needs to be kept free of
negative pressure and cavitation conditions. My current theory is
that a restriction of some type is located ahead of the meter which
limits the amount of liquid that can be pumped through the meter.
This problem is common in hydraulic systems where a clogged filter
starves the hydraulic pump.
When starved, the pump lowers the input port pressure which might
cause the incoming liquid to vaporize. The life expectancy of a
hydraulic pump is greatly reduced when cavitation of this type exists.
So, I am suspecting that the return water is vaporized to some degree
by this process thus leading to a large meter error. To be sure, we
need a diagram of the compete system which includes the location of
all the pumps, meters, and holding tanks, etc. We also need to know
the power being drawn be these pumps and tables of their operational
parameters as a function of power input.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com <mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:l...@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Fri, Aug 12, 2016 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!
David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>> wrote:
So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became
extremely bored making the same readings day in and out until he
placed data into the log that assumed everything continued as it
had for many long previous periods of time.
That might be true of the temperatures, which vary, then start
repeating, and then vary again. But the flow rate and pressure was the
same for every single day of the test, as noted by Murray. Penon did
not start off off recording actual values with variations, and then
later repeating values. He stuffed 36,000 kg into every day, for the
entire test.
By the way, as Rossi noted in the Lewan interview, Penon arbitrarily
reduced the flow by 10% down to 32,400 kg. Both numbers are shown. I
think 32,400 kg is used to compute heat. If a 10% reduction is valid,
why not 20% or 90%?
It was sloppy of Penon to record positive flow rates, elevated
temperatures and 1 MW heat production on days when Rossi in his blog
said the reactor was turned off. Eyewitnesses confirm that it was
actually off. If you are going to commit fraud, you should at least
try to make it look convincing. These people were just phoning it in!
- Jed
