Goat Guy did not account for the heat loss over the length of the tube. Harry
----- Original Message ---- > From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 9:08:31 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Video] Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer (NET - >June 14, 2011) > > Here is an estimative of the power output of the steam based on the > video. What do you people think? Is it OK? It gives only 16Wats as the > output. > > http://disq.us/2bl5a3 > > ********************************* > > We, who've actually boiled water on a stove, we who've actually done > any thermodynamics in the lab (or industry). We can see. > > That is a ½ inch (13 mm) copper tube. Its inside diameter is less > than 10 mm. Using those dimensions, and a video editor, then > following the turbulent features, I measure the steam maximum velocity > as 14 cm/s. But hey — the invisible part is undoubtedly faster. > Let's say 25 cm/s > > Circular volume is circular area times length of a cylinder (or rate > of flow in cm/s). ( 14 cm × (3.14 × (($radius = ( 1.0 cm / 2) ↑ > 2)))) = 11 cubic cm [ML] per second. Now, as I recall, I was > expecting about 3120 ML/s. That makes this evolution 11/3120 … 0.35% > of expected for a 4.7 KW unit. 0.35% ( 4700 ) = 16.5 watts. > > 16 watts Daniel, is nowhere NEAR 4,700 watts. Sure as the sun rises, > this "demonstration" is bullsnot. Complete bullsnot. With that > relatively tiny pipe, I'd expect a roaring plume to come out at 4,700 > watts. Because, lest anyone (and especially you, since you seem kind > of naïve in the ways of boiling-water physics) forget… 4,700 watts of > heat is approximately 2 of the “large” coil standard kitchen range > electric burners. Even ONE of those gets a remarkable amount of steam > flowing from a hot-water kettle. > > Bullsnot. > > Thanks for the video. Unforgettable tripe. > > G O A T G U Y > > ************************* > >
