2011/7/13 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > > In the video, Rossi did a rough approximation of the heat balance on a > paper chart. I am sure that result is correct as far as it goes. I expect it > is no more than 10% or 20% off. >
But your expectation does not constitute evidence. > This is fundamental physics going back hundreds of years, long before they > invented RH meters. The heat of vaporization of water at ~1 atm is fixed. > That is definitely steam coming out the end of the pipe. > "Steam coming out", is not the same as "all the water is converted to steam". And the second can represent 7 times more energy than the first. The data actually reported is consistent with 7 times less power than claimed *and* with centuries-old, fundamental physics. The blabber that Krivit raised and that has been repeated here about RH > meters is irrelevant even if it is is true -- which I doubt. > Actually, questions about the steam quality and RH meters were raised here and elsewhere long before Krivit jumped on the bandwagon. > He may not know much about RH meters but he never claimed to. You don't > need one to measure enthapy when you are only aiming to make a rough > approximation. > You certainly don't need (can't use) an RH meter to measure enthalpy of wet steam. In the case of wet steam, or a mixture of water and steam, you can't make even a rough approximation of enthalpy without some way to determine the steam quality or the mass ratio of vapor to liquid. By not reporting, or even measuring this ratio or the steam volume, Rossi is able to exaggerate heat claims by a factor of 7 without contradicting the measurements he does report. The thing that's most amazing about all of this is that 2 doddering Swedish academics were sucked in by it.
