You don't need "active feedback." The steam escapes the reactor
shortly after being formed
On 8/24/2016 12:33 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 08/24/2016 12:03 AM, David Roberson wrote:
As I have stated, if the steam is truly dry then plenty of power is
being supplied to the customer. If the ERV is mistaken that the
steam is dry then I.H. is likely correct.
If everyone accepts that the true pressure of the steam is
atmospheric while the temperature is 102.8 C then it is dry.
Unless there's some active feedback mechanism keeping the temperature
of the effluent between 100 and 103 C, it's hard to believe the
effluent is dry steam. The heat capacity of steam is so small
compared with the latent heat of vaporization one would expect the
temperature of (dry) steam in the closed system to be driven well
above boiling -- not just barely over it.
This has been the problem with Rossi's steam demos since the
beginning: There is no feedback mechanism to keep the temperature
barely above boiling, yet it never goes more than a couple degrees
above. Either there's feedback nailing the power output to the level
needed to /just exactly/ vaporize the water (with essentially no heat
left over to superheat the steam), or there is feedback nailing the
water flow rate to the be just fast enough to consume all the heat
from the system in vaporizing the water, or there is a miraculous
coincidence between the heat produced and the water flow rate.
We /know/ there's no feedback controlling the flow rate, because that
was rock steady.
No mention has ever been made of any feedback mechanism fixing the
reaction rate to the steam temperature, so short of fantasizing about
something Rossi never said he did, we have no reason to believe such a
thing exists. In fact we don't even know that the reaction (if there
is a reaction) can be controlled with the precision needed to keep the
output temperature so close to boiling -- and we also have no reason
to believe anyone would even /want/ to do that.
So, the only conclusion that makes sense in this situation is that the
"feedback" keeping the temperature almost exactly at boiling is
provided by water mixed with the steam, and that consequently the
steam must be very wet.
But that is the root of the problem; both parties do not agree that
this is true. Only one can be right in this case. Also, there is no
law of nature that ensures that what the ERV states is true. He may
be confused by the location of gauges, etc.
AA, Engineer48 claims that the pumps are all manually set and not
under automatic control according to his picture. If true, that
would eliminate the feedback level control that was discussed
earlier. It is my opinion that some form of automatic level control
is required in order to produce a stable system that prevents liquid
filling or dying out of the CATS. This is an important factor that
both of the parties should address.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 23, 2016 10:59 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Interesting Steam Calculation
Apparently the ERV measured 102.8 C @ atmospheric pressure. That is
dry steam.
That implies the customer used steam at a negative pressure.
On 8/23/2016 8:50 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
Dave--
The steam table indicates a condition of equilibrium between the
liquid phase and the gaseous phase of water. If the conditions
are 1 bar at a temperature above the 99.9743 there is no liquid
phase in equilibrium with the steam (gas) phase. The gas is
phase is at 102 degrees and is said to be super heated.
The steam tables tell you nothing about liquid phase carry-over
in a dynamic flowing system. Normally there would be a moisture
separator in the system to assure no carry-over.
Bob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>
*Sent:* Monday, August 22, 2016 9:27:19 PM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Interesting Steam Calculation
Dave--
Where did the pressure of 15.75 psi abs come from? I thought
the pressure of the 102C dry steam (assumed) was 1 atmos.--not
15.75 abs.
I think your assumed conditions above 1 atmos. were never measured.
Bob Cook
Bob, I used a steam table calculator located at
http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/calculator/steam-table-pressure.html
to obtain my data points.
According to that source, 14.6954 psi abs is 0 bar at a
temperature of 99.9743 C degrees.
At 102 C degrees the pressure is shown as 15.7902 psi absolute.
Also, at 15.75 psi abs you should be at 101.928 C. I must have
accidentally written the last digit in error for some reason.
Does this answer your first question?
You are correct about the assumed pressures above 1 atmosphere
not being measured directly. I admit that I rounded off the
readings a bit, but the amount of error resulting from the values
I chose did not appear to impact the answers to a significant
degree. In one of Rossi's earlier experiments the temperature
within his ECAT was measured to reach a high of about 135 C just
as the calculated power being measured at the output of his heat
exchanger reached the maximum. At the time I concluded that this
must have occurred as a result of the filling of his device by
liquid water.
I chose 130 C for my latest calculations mainly as an estimate of
the temperature within the ECAT modules. The higher pressure
(39.2 psi absolute) was the value required to keep the liquid
water in saturation with the vapor. Rossi is using a feedback
system to control the heating of his modules and that requires
him to operate each at a few degrees above the output
temperature(102 C?) as a minimum. There is no guarantee that he
regulates them at 130 C as I assumed, but that temperature was
consistent with having a ratio of vapor volume to liquid volume
of nearly 100 to 1.
Of course I could have raised the ECAT temperature to get a
larger ratio of flash vapor to liquid water at the output stream.
Likewise, the ratio would drop if a lower temperature is assumed.
The 130 C appeared to be near to his earlier design, and I had to
choose something. Do you have a suggestion for a better
temperature or pressure to assume?
Dave
------------------------------------------------------------------------
