My latest Spice Simulation results, using Bob Higgins' diagram, gives
an error of +3.8 %
This is probably LESS than the modelling errors.
http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_oct11_spice.php
Main screenshot :
http://lenr.qumbu.com/lenr_spicepics/111109_spice_007.png
Primary Input (HOT): 100 C water at 15 liters/hour.
Secondary Output (COLD) : 30C water at 600 liters/hour (40x ratio)
Ambient : 30 C
Thermocouple : 31.96 C
Secondary Outlet : 30.78 C (raised slightly from 30C by conduction
through the manifold).
Difference : 1.19 C (or 3.8 %)
This simulation is for Primary Input water at 100C, and is UNCALLIBRATED.
The main unknown in the simulation is the thermal resistance through
the insulation, and to air where it is uninsulated.
But removing ALL connections to ambient temperature -- which yields
the highest thermocouple placement error -- gives only a +4.4% error.
There are also possible errors in the placement of the Secondary
Input thermocouple, which would give a negative offset, and partly
cancelling the primary.
I therefore accept the published Heat Exchanger Secondary results as
valid, and don't plan to study this any further.
It would still be advisable to separate both the thermocouples from
the heat exchanger assembly through a section of insulated hose.
(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
