RE: [Vo]:OT: "Pendulum Waves"

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

>From Robert:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVkdfJ9PkRQ
> 
> It's probably been shared before, but it's making the rounds again:
> Pendulums of varied lengths create some very entertaining wave effects.

First time I've seen it. Thanks Robert. Kool!

The pendulum patterns that ensue remind me in a roundabout way of some of the 
patterns I've generated from my own computer simulations. Mine are based on 
simulated celestial mechanics, where I perform time-lapse imagery over hundreds 
and millions of iterations. I've noted that interesting patterns can build 
during the decay process. I hope to publish some of this stuff on-line some 
day. Too busy right now.

Chaos theory is an interesting muse.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:OT: "Pendulum Waves"

[Robert Leguillon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVkdfJ9PkRQ

It's probably been shared before, but it's making the rounds again: Pendulums 
of varied lengths create some very entertaining wave effects.

Re: [Vo]:Possible systematic thermometry errors

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 05:07 PM 10/12/2011, Horace Heffner wrote:

Did you look at the NyTeknik photos?  It is the same kind of probe.
Attached is a small clip from he NyTeknik photo referenced.


You're right, of course    I too am suffering from post-overload.

Thanks for the plot links ... I'd looked at some, but not all.

Re: [Vo]:Possible systematic thermometry errors

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 3:39 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote:


At 04:22 PM 10/12/2011, Horace Heffner wrote:

POSSIBLE SYTEMATIC THERMOMETRY ERRORS

Regarding the T2 probe, examine the two photos to the right of this
article:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3284823.ece

The top one shows the E-cat with the T2 thermocouple probe inserted
down through the T fitting located on top. The second photo shows
the  E-cat without insulation and the cover removed.  The T fitting
can clearly be seen.  The top of the cooling fins almost reach the
bottom of the lid when it is on.  The long probe may be resting on
the cooling fins when it is in the fitting.

The length of the probe can be seen in the photos here:
more specifically here:

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/img/June2011/DSC_0025- 
BlueBox.JPG


No, the "long" thermocouple described there is the probe which  
Galantini (was it) used, both on the original and mini eCat's.


We've never seen the probe/thermocouple on the fat-cat. I think it  
just has a thermocouple wired in to the top of the T-fitting.
The lid was never opened wide enough to see its underside. I  
enhanced the dark areas of Lewan's open-lid photo, but I can't see  
anything like a probe.


Did you look at the NyTeknik photos?  It is the same kind of probe.   
Attached is a small clip from he NyTeknik photo referenced.


The barrel of that probe is used to seal into the T fitting.  If it  
is not sealed then any possibility of above atmospheric pressure  
operation is absurd.


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/


<>

Re: [Vo]:Plot / Spreadsheet request

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote:


At 04:19 PM 10/12/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
Does anyone have a link to a plot (or a spreadsheet)  showing  T2  
(output of eCat), Input power and Output power superimposed.


Coincidentally, a few of us just got a BIG spreadsheet analysis via  
Mats Lewan.


I haven't even looked at it, but the summary says that the possible  
Primary-in/Secondary-out thermocouple placement isn't a problem.


See this graph:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiT2Pout.png

Copies of this and other graphs:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiGraph.png

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiT2_RF.png

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dTbias.png

are in my review with descriptions:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

Spread sheet with 0.8° bias correction:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011.pdf

Original data spread sheet:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011noBias.pdf

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Plot / Spreadsheet request

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 04:19 PM 10/12/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
Does anyone have a link to a plot (or a spreadsheet)  showing  T2 
(output of eCat), Input power and Output power superimposed.


Coincidentally, a few of us just got a BIG spreadsheet analysis via 
Mats Lewan.


I haven't even looked at it, but the summary says that the possible 
Primary-in/Secondary-out thermocouple placement isn't a problem. 

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[francis]

Thanks Jed,

Yes I meant Piantelli.  I also had another though regarding this subject and
that is the role of the Greek government which stands to lose the remedy to
their economic disaster. They should sit Defkallion down  with
representatives for Rossi and make things right even if they have to
nationalize Defkallion to do it. Rossi needs cash right now and everyone is
trying to make predatory deals..Greece can't afford to lose this deal and
needs to offer the carrot instead of the stick because Rossi really doesn't
need them.

 

Regards

Fran

 

Roarty, Francis X wrote:

 

Agreed!  Focardi already has the better understanding and pre-existing
patents that don't 

depend on this claimed "secret sauce" ..

 

Do you mean Piantelli?

 

- Jed

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Possible systematic thermometry errors

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 04:22 PM 10/12/2011, Horace Heffner wrote:

POSSIBLE SYTEMATIC THERMOMETRY ERRORS

Regarding the T2 probe, examine the two photos to the right of this
article:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3284823.ece

The top one shows the E-cat with the T2 thermocouple probe inserted
down through the T fitting located on top. The second photo shows
the  E-cat without insulation and the cover removed.  The T fitting
can clearly be seen.  The top of the cooling fins almost reach the
bottom of the lid when it is on.  The long probe may be resting on
the cooling fins when it is in the fitting.

The length of the probe can be seen in the photos here:
more specifically here:

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/img/June2011/DSC_0025-BlueBox.JPG


No, the "long" thermocouple described there is the probe which 
Galantini (was it) used, both on the original and mini eCat's.


We've never seen the probe/thermocouple on the fat-cat. I think it 
just has a thermocouple wired in to the top of the T-fitting.
The lid was never opened wide enough to see its underside. I enhanced 
the dark areas of Lewan's open-lid photo, but I can't see anything 
like a probe. 

[Vo]:Possible systematic thermometry errors

[Horace Heffner]

There were questions about this but I can't find the post.  I'm lost  
in a sea of vortex posts.


The "POSSIBLE SYTEMATIC THERMOMETRY ERRORS" section of:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

has been updated with new URLs pointing to pictures of the T2 type  
probe.



Here is the section as currently written:

POSSIBLE SYTEMATIC THERMOMETRY ERRORS

Regarding the T2 probe, examine the two photos to the right of this  
article:


http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3284823.ece

The top one shows the E-cat with the T2 thermocouple probe inserted  
down through the T fitting located on top. The second photo shows  
the  E-cat without insulation and the cover removed.  The T fitting  
can clearly be seen.  The top of the cooling fins almost reach the  
bottom of the lid when it is on.  The long probe may be resting on  
the cooling fins when it is in the fitting.


The length of the probe can be seen in the photos here:

http://www.energydigital.com/green_technology/e-cat-device-commercial- 
cold-fusion-finally-reality


and here:

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/ 
AndreaRossiEnergyCatalyzerPhotoGallery-June.shtml


more specifically here:

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/img/June2011/DSC_0025- 
BlueBox.JPG


Regarding the Tout thermocouple, examine these photos of the hot end  
of the heat exchanger:


http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo1.jpg
http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo2.jpg

The central brass fitting is very thick. Given the hose ID is about  
1.5 cm, perhaps over a cm thick. It appears from the wire length the  
thermocouple was placed not far from it.


The intermediate section looks to be at least 0.75 cm thick

From the location of the tape, and the protruding thermocouple, in:

http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo2.jpg

it appears the thermocouple may have been taped to the large steel  
nut, possibly extending into the air beyond it.


Note: the steam/water inters the heat exchanger at the same end where  
the Tout thermocouple is located.


If we designate Thot to be the temperature of the water/steam  
arriving at the steam/hot water entry port, then there is some  
composite thermal resistance R1 from the Tout water to the Tout  
thermocouple, and a similar thermal resistance R2 to the Thot water/ 
steam, then the thermocouple will be at a temperature of 24°C + (R2/ 
(R1+R2)*100°C. To get an 8°C difference all is needed is for r=(R2/(R1 
+R2)) to satisfy:


   r * (100°C-24°C) = 8°C

   r = 8/76 = 0.1

Here are photos that show the thermocouple before removing the tape:

http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_1_crop.jpg
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_2_crop.jpg
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_3_crop.jpg
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_4_crop.jpg


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

[Vo]:Plot / Spreadsheet request

[Alan J Fletcher]

Does anyone have a link to a plot (or a spreadsheet)  showing  T2 
(output of eCat), Input power and Output power superimposed.


Spreadsheet similar to
http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/i_imagur_HwxRTh.png

Plot similar to this, but  with eCat T2 superimposed?
http://i.imgur.com/uFCJg.jpg

(Horace's published spreadsheet has everything except T2  -- thanks 
for all your work, btw)

Re: [Vo]:Rossi and Palin?

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Horace Heffner  wrote:
> See current cartoon:
>
> http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/04/e-cat-to-be-official-launch-name.html

That is particularly funny if Vorts realize that you are in Alaska.

Thanks for all your input Horace.  You are becoming quite famous.

T

[Vo]:Rossi and Palin?

[Horace Heffner]

See current cartoon:

http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/04/e-cat-to-be-official- 
launch-name.html


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 7:20 AM, Man on Bridges wrote:


Hi,

On 12-10-2011 16:10, Horace Heffner wrote:
Interesting.  The secondary circuit flow meter can be read at the  
end of the test here:


http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo1.jpg

I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test  
lasted 526 minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/ 
min = 0.0409 liters per second = 40.9 ml/s.


Strange. The secondary flow rate was given as 178 ml/s, or 10.7  
liters/min.  In 526 minutes that would be 5628 liters, or 5.62  
m^3.  It appears the meter began the test at 7.25 m^3.


Hmmm, I read that as 13.1403 m^3 is equal to 13,140.3 liter.


Yes. Thanks!  I didn't get much sleep.



Gives you 24.5 liters/min = 0.409 liters per second or 509 ml/s.


I get 13,140.3 liter/(526 min) = 24.98 liter/min = 416 ml/s. Clearly  
the meter had a large value on it to start.  Also, it was apparently  
not recorded before the experiment began.




Kind regards,

MoB





On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:26 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Horace Heffner  wrote:

I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test  
lasted 526 minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/ 
min = 0.0409 liters per second = 40.9 ml/s.


Lewan says the meter accumulated a total of 4,554 L from 11:57 to  
19:03 (7 hours, 6 minutes; 426 minutes).


With these meters, it is easier to read the accumulated amount  
than the instantaneous flow.




Yes.  There is no instantaneous flow value on the meter.  It was  
nonsensical to not simply record the total flows and times.




Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Robert Lynn]

The LMI P18 peristaltic pump is specified to have a maximum flow of 2mL per
stroke and 100Hz, 3.33ml/s, any pressures approaching 1.5 bar will reduce
this.

On 12 October 2011 20:48, Robert Leguillon wrote:

>  Facepalm.
>
> The inflow rate is NOT well regulated, nor is it 15 l/h.
> It was very, very well measured in the September test, and we can learn a
> lot from it.
> In the September test, before the pump was hooked up, they measure 15.8
> kg/hr (4.38g/s) consumption.  Once connected to the E-Cat, it dropped to
> 13.76 kg/hr (3.8g/s), then at boiling, it dropped to 11.08 kg/hr
> (3.07g/s).  This is just to demonstrate that the pump does not have
> consistent performance in the presence of any resistance.  For calculations,
> we cannot rely on this flow rate, because the September/October tests may
> not entirely correlate.
> We know that in the October test, it was not running at full speed, because
> they TURN IT UP during quenching.
>
>
> September Test:
> Added water during start up, from 18:30: 15640 + 9380 + 9473 + 9959 = 44452
> grams. Remaining in the inlet reservoir when the temperature inside the
> E-cat reached 100°C at 21:07: 8431 grams. Consumed in 2:37 hours (2.62
> hours): 36021 grams Flow during start-up: 13.76 kg/hour
> Added water from 21:07: 8431 + 10089 + 10460 + 6591 + 9960 = 45531 grams.
> Remaining in the inlet reservoir at 23:10: 22823 grams. Consumed in 2:03
> hours (2.05 hours): 22708 grams Flow during boiling: 11.08 kg/hour.
> Total running time >100°C: 2:05 (2.08) hours
> Total flow >100 degrees (from 21:05): 23.0 kg
>
>
>
> We can't trust the thermocouples at the secondary, and we can't trust the
> flow rate (or possibly the temperature, either) at the primary, this test is
> just a joke.
>

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan J Fletcher wrote:

Then primary went to the usual drain, just round the corner.  We don't 
know if he shook out any accumulated water before he measured.

The long, long hose was the secondary.


I know, but even the primary hose was long. Lewan says he measured the 
flow rate. That would have to be at the end of that hose, just round the 
corner. I wonder how he did it? I suppose the way to do this would be: 
take the hose out of the drain, hold it up for a while until it fills, 
and then measure the flow rate as it overflows. If he did not do that, I 
suppose the flow rate might have varied quite a bit, because the hose 
would have a lot of air and gaps in the hose.


Maybe I should ask him . . .

His log shows the temperature of the condensate coming out of the hose 
was 23.8°C. That is impossible. Something is wrong there. That is colder 
than the inlet water. Quite an impressive heat exchanger! Operated by 
Maxwell's Demon. I believe that was with his own thermocouple. He said 
the readings "did not make sense." I'll say they didn't!


You have to give Lewan credit for putting numbers into the log even 
though those numbers do not make sense. That is the correct thing to do. 
A lot of people would just throw the numbers away.


This illustrates an important point. Handheld instruments and manual 
techniques for measuring the flow rate should be used. They are 
valuable. But they should only be employed as a "reality check" or 
"backup" for electronic instruments that record on a computer. Trying to 
figure out what happened from sporadic measurements made with handheld 
instruments is nearly impossible. You need a full set of data taken at 
regular intervals with proper timestamps. The electronic instruments 
must be properly calibrated and tested in a blank run. This is 
experimental science 101 -- the kind of thing they teach in high school 
and college. (At least, they taught it to me.) As I said, if Rossi was 
an undergraduate I would give him a C or a D for this test.


I realize I am preaching to the choir here. I & others told all of this 
to Rossi but he didn't want to hear it.


- Jed

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Jed Rothwell]

Roarty, Francis X wrote:


Agreed!  Focardi already has the better understanding and pre-existing patents that don't 
depend on this claimed "secret sauce" ..


Do you mean Piantelli?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 12:35 PM 10/12/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Lewan measured the rate for 6 minutes. I suppose if the vessel was 
full and overflowing, it would be reasonably uniform over that 
duration . . . Hard to say. I guess this was at the end of the long 
hose. Who knows how that worked. You have to let the hose fill up 
before you start.


Then primary went to the usual drain, just round the corner.  We 
don't know if he shook out any accumulated water before he measured.

The long, long hose was the secondary.

RE: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Robert Leguillon]

"> I do not think Rossi was lying about dry steam. He says he does not know 
> much about how to measure steam quality. He assumed that Galantini knew 
> what he was doing. I still do assume that. Many people here have been 
> yelling about this but experts I have heard from say it was dry."
 
The wet vs dry steam argument lost all meaning in those early demonstrations, 
once the masses understood that the E-Cat could be pouring water out the hose 
and into the drain.
 

> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:11:21 -0400
> From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat
> 
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> 
> > This has been the problem all along -- everything is sloppy, Rossi's 
> > statements are often inaccurate or confusing, there's a little bit of 
> > what might be outright lying going on (e.g., the dry steam in the 
> > early tests, the undetectable isotope shifts, the factory heating 
> > system which nobody but Rossi ever saw) . . .
> 
> I agree with the part about "sloppy" and "isotope shifts," but Focardi 
> and others say they saw the factory heating system.
> 
> I do not think Rossi was lying about dry steam. He says he does not know 
> much about how to measure steam quality. He assumed that Galantini knew 
> what he was doing. I still do assume that. Many people here have been 
> yelling about this but experts I have heard from say it was dry.
> 
> Rossi is flamboyant and quick to anger, so he makes himself look bad. 
> His behavior magnifies his faults. Some people, such as the late John 
> Maddox, have the opposite quality. They give a good impression. They 
> speak well with a polished, professional demeanor. They come across as 
> authorities. You feel you should trust them. It turns they do not know 
> what they're talking about, but they give a good impression, so many 
> people believe them.
> 
> - Jed
> 
  

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Jed Rothwell]

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

This has been the problem all along -- everything is sloppy, Rossi's 
statements are often inaccurate or confusing, there's a little bit of 
what might be outright lying going on (e.g., the dry steam in the 
early tests, the undetectable isotope shifts, the factory heating 
system which nobody but Rossi ever saw) . . .


I agree with the part about "sloppy" and "isotope shifts," but Focardi 
and others say they saw the factory heating system.


I do not think Rossi was lying about dry steam. He says he does not know 
much about how to measure steam quality. He assumed that Galantini knew 
what he was doing. I still do assume that. Many people here have been 
yelling about this but experts I have heard from say it was dry.


Rossi is flamboyant and quick to anger, so he makes himself look bad. 
His behavior magnifies his faults. Some people, such as the late John 
Maddox, have the opposite quality. They give a good impression. They 
speak well with a polished, professional demeanor. They come across as 
authorities. You feel you should trust them. It turns they do not know 
what they're talking about, but they give a good impression, so many 
people believe them.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

You don't understand skin effect well. Injecting high frequencies obviously 
may fool the meter. I think it would be safer to heat with DC.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat


The skin effect can be neglected, because it adds a pure ohm resitance to 
the wire and the resistance is unknown anyway.
And inductive resistance means that the power is smaller than U_rms*I_rms 
because there is phaseshift.

Both effects reduce the heating power.
So there are two possibilities remaining:  Use a large crest factor or a 
high frequency that the meter cannot detect.

I think we can exclude this. This would be too easy to detetect.

Fraud would be much easier: The heat exchanger could be manipulated, so 
that only part of the water was heated.
Because the thermal difference was so small, it would be almost impossible 
to detect.


Another possibility is to make a small modification to each component:
Measure the flow rate a little bit wrong, measure temperatures a little 
bit wrong, calculate a little bit wrong, introduce so much errors and 
inaccuracies that a single one -if discovered- would prove nothing, but 
all together make an energy gain.



Am 12.10.2011 21:15, schrieb Joe Catania:
Heckert, why don't you go stand on a corner with a tin cup. Yes skin 
effect is important at high frequencies especiall in the case of certain 
pulse shapes. I'm a physicist and I happen to have intimate knowledge of 
just hgow important skin effect can be. Inductive reactance isn't just 
proportional to inductance its proportional to frequency as well. No 
doubt there may be considerable iron nearby the current. Alternating 
electric and magnetic fields can induce electric polarization and eddie 
currents which can dissiapte heat.
- Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Joe Catania:

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.

So you have studied electrical engineering?
I have. Unfortunately I dont know the proper english expressions to 
explain this, but it is trivial, anyway.
For these frequencies that are in question here and with those thick 
cables you can almost forget the skin effect.


- Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you 
can see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this 
could have high inductance.
If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron 
core, then you should patent and market this.

You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power. 
Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.

This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter

- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If 
there's any

reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

You interst me in the way Rossi may be going about this. It seems you are 
suggesting Rossi is studying from the book , How to Scam the Masses and 
Become Rich without Detection. The high-frequency injection certainly would 
seem to be in the bag of tricks for many scammers. Its well known that 
pulsed power will blow a fuse which can't be blown by the same DC level.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat





Another possibility is to make a small modification to each component:
Measure the flow rate a little bit wrong, measure temperatures a little 
bit wrong, calculate a little bit wrong, introduce so much errors and 
inaccuracies that a single one -if discovered- would prove nothing, but 
all together make an energy gain.
 If he is a real talented chaos experimenter who doesnt doublecheck and 
who doesnt make plausibility tests, as this seems to be the case, then he 
might have done just this with a long series of dilletantic experiments 
and he could really believe in the energy  production.

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

No you don't understand skin effect.
- Original Message - 
From: "Roarty, Francis X" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 3:15 PM
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat


Joe, Peter is correct -XL =6.28fl and real current thru the coil is 
"choked" off even though the dc resistance looks like a short. skin effect 
is only relevant on small diameter wires but in any case would also be 
choked off by the impeadance just like the DC path. The impedance 
effectively places itself in series with the circuit limiting any currents 
even through magnetic couplings - whatever momentary current goes one way 
is stored in the field and then repaid on the alternate cycle. A Coil 
would get hot to the touch if it really "dropped" the power like a 
resistor but it does not get hot because it is only storing it not 
dissipating it.

Fran

-Original Message-
From: Joe Catania [mailto:zrosumg...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:01 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:

http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can
see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could
have high inductance.

If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron core,
then you should patent and market this.
You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.

A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power.
Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.
This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter


- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania 
wrote:

It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is
prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's
any
reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Roarty, Francis X]

Joe ,
Yes a coil can induce eddy currents into what is essentially 
"secondaries" making the coil an air core transformer primary which already has 
very little coupling...and then also falls off at the square of the distance to 
any material which is acting as a secondary. I don't think you should be making 
comments about holding a tin cup when you are clearly on the weak side of this 
argument... the coupling is very weak and it takes driver circuits, ferrite 
core transformers and FETS to get the kind of coupling you are suggesting. I 
have years of experience on switching power supply development and can tell you 
the higher in frequency you want to chop the more difficult it becomes.
Fran

-Original Message-
From: Joe Catania [mailto:zrosumg...@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 3:15 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

Heckert, why don't you go stand on a corner with a tin cup. Yes skin effect 
is important at high frequencies especiall in the case of certain pulse 
shapes. I'm a physicist and I happen to have intimate knowledge of just hgow 
important skin effect can be. Inductive reactance isn't just proportional to 
inductance its proportional to frequency as well. No doubt there may be 
considerable iron nearby the current. Alternating electric and magnetic 
fields can induce electric polarization and eddie currents which can 
dissiapte heat.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat


> Am 12.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Joe Catania:
>> Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.
> So you have studied electrical engineering?
> I have. Unfortunately I dont know the proper english expressions to 
> explain this, but it is trivial, anyway.
> For these frequencies that are in question here and with those thick 
> cables you can almost forget the skin effect.
>
>> - Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 
>> 
>> To: 
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat
>>
>>
>>> Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
 http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can 
 see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could 
 have high inductance.
>>> If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron core, 
>>> then you should patent and market this.
>>> You will get rich and famous.
 Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
>>> A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power. 
>>> Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.
>>> This is even more true with high frequencies.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
 - Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
 To: 
 Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat


> Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!
>
> T
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
> wrote:
>> It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
>> prone to
>> error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's 
>> any
>> reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
>> inaccurate.
>
>

>>>
>>>
>>
>
> 

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

On 11-10-12 03:38 PM, Peter Heckert wrote:


Another possibility is to make a small modification to each component:
Measure the flow rate a little bit wrong, measure temperatures a 
little bit wrong, calculate a little bit wrong, introduce so much 
errors and inaccuracies that a single one -if discovered- would prove 
nothing, but all together make an energy gain.


And make sure everything is always as complicated as possible.  To make 
the thermal signature more obvious, don't just make better measurements 
-- add a heat exchanger, instead!  Then you've got twice as many 
components to mis-measure!


This has been the problem all along -- everything is sloppy, Rossi's 
statements are often inaccurate or confusing, there's a little bit of 
what might be outright lying going on (e.g., the dry steam in the early 
tests, the undetectable isotope shifts, the factory heating system which 
nobody but Rossi ever saw), and it all adds up to a blurry picture which 
is never, never cleared up, no matter how many times Rossi seems to set 
out to do so.


Is it because Rossi's just a brilliant turkey who can solve problems 
nobody else can get a grip on yet somehow can't understand how to 
produce a clean demonstration, or is it something more sinister?

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Roarty, Francis X]

Joe, Peter is correct -XL =6.28fl and real current thru the coil is "choked" 
off even though the dc resistance looks like a short. skin effect is only 
relevant on small diameter wires but in any case would also be choked off by 
the impeadance just like the DC path. The impedance effectively places itself 
in series with the circuit limiting any currents even through magnetic 
couplings - whatever momentary current goes one way is stored in the field and 
then repaid on the alternate cycle. A Coil would get hot to the touch if it 
really "dropped" the power like a resistor but it does not get hot because it 
is only storing it not dissipating it.
Fran

-Original Message-
From: Joe Catania [mailto:zrosumg...@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:01 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat


> Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
>> http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can 
>> see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could 
>> have high inductance.
> If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron core, 
> then you should patent and market this.
> You will get rich and famous.
>> Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
> A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power. 
> Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.
> This is even more true with high frequencies.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Peter
> 
>> - Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
>> To: 
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat
>>
>>
>>> Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!
>>>
>>> T
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
>>> wrote:
 It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
 prone to
 error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's 
 any
 reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
 inaccurate.
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
>

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Peter Heckert]

Another possibility is to make a small modification to each component:
Measure the flow rate a little bit wrong, measure temperatures a 
little bit wrong, calculate a little bit wrong, introduce so much 
errors and inaccuracies that a single one -if discovered- would prove 
nothing, but all together make an energy gain.
 If he is a real talented chaos experimenter who doesnt doublecheck and 
who doesnt make plausibility tests, as this seems to be the case, then 
he might have done just this with a long series of dilletantic 
experiments and he could really believe in the energy  production.

Re: [Vo]: When is a square, not a square?

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 21:41, Man on Bridges wrote:

B.t.w. my approximation says  LxWxH = 40x40x20 cm is approx. ~32 liters.


That is for the outer box, so 30x30x30 is NOT possible according to me.

Kind regards,

MoB

RE: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Robert Leguillon]

Facepalm.

The inflow rate is NOT well regulated, nor is it 15 l/h.
It was very, very well measured in the September test, and we can learn a lot 
from it.
In the September test, before the pump was hooked up, they measure 15.8 kg/hr 
(4.38g/s) consumption.  Once connected to the E-Cat, it dropped to 13.76 kg/hr 
(3.8g/s), then at boiling, it dropped to 11.08 kg/hr (3.07g/s).  This is just 
to demonstrate that the pump does not have consistent performance in the 
presence of any resistance.  For calculations, we cannot rely on this flow 
rate, because the September/October tests may not entirely correlate.  
We know that in the October test, it was not running at full speed, because 
they TURN IT UP during quenching.
 

September Test:
Added water during start up, from 18:30: 15640 + 9380 + 9473 + 9959 = 44452 
grams. Remaining in the inlet reservoir when the temperature inside the E-cat 
reached 100°C at 21:07: 8431 grams. Consumed in 2:37 hours (2.62 hours): 36021 
grams Flow during start-up: 13.76 kg/hour 
Added water from 21:07: 8431 + 10089 + 10460 + 6591 + 9960 = 45531 grams. 
Remaining in the inlet reservoir at 23:10: 22823 grams. Consumed in 2:03 hours 
(2.05 hours): 22708 grams Flow during boiling: 11.08 kg/hour. 
Total running time >100°C: 2:05 (2.08) hours 
Total flow >100 degrees (from 21:05): 23.0 kg 
 

We can't trust the thermocouples at the secondary, and we can't trust the flow 
rate (or possibly the temperature, either) at the primary, this test is just a 
joke.   

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Roarty, Francis X]

Agreed!  Focardi already has the better understanding and pre-existing patents 
that don't depend on this claimed "secret sauce" .. I can see him or Mills 
walking off with all the marbles while Defkallion and Rossi argue over who owns 
the rights to the secret sauce. 

Fran

-Original Message-
From: Man on Bridges [mailto:manonbrid...@aim.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:37 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from 
Defkalion GT

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 18:26, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
> Hello group,
>
> The subject of this email says it all. Have a read at this open letter 
> to Christos Stremmenos written by Alexandros Xanthoulis, Defkalion GT 
> CEO:
>
> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=297
>
> An English translation of Stremmenos' message to Defkalion GT appeared 
> on JONP is supposed to be posted soon on NyTeknik.
>
> This is his original message in Italian mixed with some English:
> http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360&cpage=23#comment-94994
>
> Cheers,
> S.A.

In Dutch we have the saying:
"Als twee honden vechten om een been, loopt de derde er mee heen."

Meaning: "Quibbling (or worse) between two parties, leads to 
opportunities for a third party."

I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone else benefits from this, so I 
would recommend Rossi & Defkalion come to an arrangement soon, as this 
is not a win-win situation for neither of them at the moment.

Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]: When is a square, not a square?

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 21:13, Terry Blanton wrote:

All squares are rectangles.  I should know.  It takes one to know one.


True, but not all 3D rectangles are a  platonic shape such as the cubes.

B.t.w. my approximation says  LxWxH = 40x40x20 cm is approx. ~32 liters.

Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Peter Heckert]

The skin effect can be neglected, because it adds a pure ohm resitance 
to the wire and the resistance is unknown anyway.
And inductive resistance means that the power is smaller than 
U_rms*I_rms because there is phaseshift.

Both effects reduce the heating power.
So there are two possibilities remaining:  Use a large crest factor or a 
high frequency that the meter cannot detect.

I think we can exclude this. This would be too easy to detetect.

Fraud would be much easier: The heat exchanger could be manipulated, so 
that only part of the water was heated.
Because the thermal difference was so small, it would be almost 
impossible to detect.


Another possibility is to make a small modification to each component:
Measure the flow rate a little bit wrong, measure temperatures a little 
bit wrong, calculate a little bit wrong, introduce so much errors and 
inaccuracies that a single one -if discovered- would prove nothing, but 
all together make an energy gain.



Am 12.10.2011 21:15, schrieb Joe Catania:
Heckert, why don't you go stand on a corner with a tin cup. Yes skin 
effect is important at high frequencies especiall in the case of 
certain pulse shapes. I'm a physicist and I happen to have intimate 
knowledge of just hgow important skin effect can be. Inductive 
reactance isn't just proportional to inductance its proportional to 
frequency as well. No doubt there may be considerable iron nearby the 
current. Alternating electric and magnetic fields can induce electric 
polarization and eddie currents which can dissiapte heat.
- Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Joe Catania:

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.

So you have studied electrical engineering?
I have. Unfortunately I dont know the proper english expressions to 
explain this, but it is trivial, anyway.
For these frequencies that are in question here and with those thick 
cables you can almost forget the skin effect.


- Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you 
can see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this 
could have high inductance.
If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron 
core, then you should patent and market this.

You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the 
power. Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.

This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter

- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania 
 wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power 
is prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If 
there's any

reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:


> It occurs to me that at 18:54, when Lewan measured 0.9 g/s of condensate,
> that would indicate 2 kW, but that is assuming it was all vaporized. If
> there were "slugs" of water coming out at that time, then there is no
> telling how much enthalpy the 0.9 g represents. . . . .
>

Hmmm . . . Let's assume the inflow rate really is 4.2 mL/s.

Does it make sense to say: if the reactor was overflowing at 18:54, with
"slugs" of water, the outlet flow would have to be around 4.2 mL/s?

Could it be overflowing at a much lower rate than the inflow?

It seems to me that if it was full up, boiling, and overflowing, the outflow
rate might fluctuate because the water is roiling and splashing, but it
would have to be close to the inlet rate.

Lewan measured the rate for 6 minutes. I suppose if the vessel was full and
overflowing, it would be reasonably uniform over that duration . . . Hard to
say. I guess this was at the end of the long hose. Who knows how that
worked. You have to let the hose fill up before you start.

It is frustrating trying to speculate about the thing with such thin
evidence and poorly documented performance. Perhaps this is a waste of time.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

Heckert, why don't you go stand on a corner with a tin cup. Yes skin effect 
is important at high frequencies especiall in the case of certain pulse 
shapes. I'm a physicist and I happen to have intimate knowledge of just hgow 
important skin effect can be. Inductive reactance isn't just proportional to 
inductance its proportional to frequency as well. No doubt there may be 
considerable iron nearby the current. Alternating electric and magnetic 
fields can induce electric polarization and eddie currents which can 
dissiapte heat.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Joe Catania:

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.

So you have studied electrical engineering?
I have. Unfortunately I dont know the proper english expressions to 
explain this, but it is trivial, anyway.
For these frequencies that are in question here and with those thick 
cables you can almost forget the skin effect.


- Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can 
see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could 
have high inductance.
If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron core, 
then you should patent and market this.

You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power. 
Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.

This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter


- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's 
any

reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]: When is a square, not a square?

[Terry Blanton]

All squares are rectangles.  I should know.  It takes one to know one.

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint
 wrote:
> Look at all the pictures of the heat-spreader inside the E-Cat, and tell me
> that the shape of the finned structure is a square and not a rectangle… Now,
> do you think that Lewan’s dimensions for that structure 30 x 30 x 30 are
> right?
>
>
>
> -mark
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Peter Heckert]

Am 12.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Joe Catania:

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.

So you have studied electrical engineering?
I have. Unfortunately I dont know the proper english expressions to 
explain this, but it is trivial, anyway.
For these frequencies that are in question here and with those thick 
cables you can almost forget the skin effect.


- Original Message - From: "Peter Heckert" 


To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you 
can see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this 
could have high inductance.
If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron 
core, then you should patent and market this.

You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the 
power. Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.

This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter


- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If 
there's any

reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

Rossi wrote:


That's the flow of the condensate water, and it is not constant.


Okay, that is what Heffner and I suggested.


The energy produced has been measured on the secondary circuit, so I 
didn't take a record of the primary flow rate.


I wish he would record _everything_. Sigh.


In any case, the flow rate of the pump of the primary circuit is 
regulated at 15 l/h.


4.2 ml/s. That sounds plausible.

Rossi sometimes gets numbers wrong -- as do I. But he usually tells the 
truth about things like this. He has no reason to lie in this case.


Since it took about two hours for the reaction to start I guess this 
means tank is 30 L, as discussed here.


It occurs to me that at 18:54, when Lewan measured 0.9 g/s of 
condensate, that would indicate 2 kW, but that is assuming it was all 
vaporized. If there were "slugs" of water coming out at that time, then 
there is no telling how much enthalpy the 0.9 g represents. I guess I 
was a little too quick to celebrate this apparent correlation.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

Another problem is magnetic and electric field coupling to dipolar matter. 
This can dissipate energy as well.
- Original Message - 
From: "Man on Bridges" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Hi,

On 12-10-2011 20:08, Joe Catania wrote:
But an analyzer would eliminate doubt. You'd actually be measuring power 
instead of relying of neglecting something you know nothing about.


A cheap secondhand CRT oscilloscope up to 10 MHz would show a lot of 
information as well ;-)


Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 20:08, Joe Catania wrote:
But an analyzer would eliminate doubt. You'd actually be measuring 
power instead of relying of neglecting something you know nothing about.


A cheap secondhand CRT oscilloscope up to 10 MHz would show a lot of 
information as well ;-)


Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]:1st peer reviewed paper out-finally

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 08:46 AM 10/10/2011, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875389211006092

Frank Znidarsic
Interesting ... though it got buried in the latest experiment.
Great to see LENR and Podkletnov in
the same paper!

[Vo]: When is a square, not a square?

[Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint]

Look at all the pictures of the heat-spreader inside the E-Cat, and tell me
that the shape of the finned structure is a square and not a rectangle. Now,
do you think that Lewan's dimensions for that structure 30 x 30 x 30 are
right?

 

-mark

 

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 18:26, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

Hello group,

The subject of this email says it all. Have a read at this open letter 
to Christos Stremmenos written by Alexandros Xanthoulis, Defkalion GT 
CEO:


http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=297

An English translation of Stremmenos' message to Defkalion GT appeared 
on JONP is supposed to be posted soon on NyTeknik.


This is his original message in Italian mixed with some English:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360&cpage=23#comment-94994

Cheers,
S.A.


In Dutch we have the saying:
"Als twee honden vechten om een been, loopt de derde er mee heen."

Meaning: "Quibbling (or worse) between two parties, leads to 
opportunities for a third party."


I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone else benefits from this, so I 
would recommend Rossi & Defkalion come to an arrangement soon, as this 
is not a win-win situation for neither of them at the moment.


Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Alan J Fletcher]

Vinnie Jones 

October 11th, 2011 at 3:13 PM 
Dear Andrea Rossi, 
I read with interest the answers that you gave to Mr. Gunnar Lindberg.
Among other things you say that 15 liter/hour was pumped, but close to
the end of the test Mats Lewan made the following note in his
report:
“18:57 Measured outflow of primary circuit in heat exchanger,
supposedly condensed steam, to be 328 g in 360 seconds,
giving a flow of 0.91 g/s. Temperature 23.8 °C.”
This will only give you 3,3 liters/hour. Could you please explain
that?
Kind regards, Vinnie

Andrea Rossi 

October 12th, 2011 at 1:47 AM 
Dear Vinnie Jones:
That’s the flow of the condensate water, and it is not constant. The
energy produced has been measured on the secondary circuit, so I didn’t
take a record of the primary flow rate. In any case, the flow rate of the
pump of the primary circuit is regulated at 15 l/h.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Harry Veeder]

I sometimes wonder if the breakup between Rossi and Defkalion is just
a charade, like the demo Rossi made for Krivit.

Harry

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
 wrote:
> Very interesting letter indeed.
>
> Regarding the following excerpt:
>
>> In all such cases, had there been close cooperation with
>> Defkalion to develop the technology together, as opposed
>> to focusing and putting pressure on us to receive money,
>> many of these unfortunate legal and technical
>> misunderstandings could have been avoided.
>>
>> As such, all these created serious delays for all
>> contractual parties and for payment to be made according
>> to our contract. You will safely recall that payment is
>> based on the successful demonstration according to
>> protocols and procedures that have been supplied to EFA,
>> whose conditions have not been met yet.
>
> It may be a matter of interpretation, one mired in legal jargon no
> doubt, as to whether RA actually supplied "...successful demonstration
> according to protocols and procedures that have been supplied to EFA."
>
> Obviously DGT sez no, while I presume AR will say that he did... so
> where's my money. Meanwhile, I get the impression that DGT is
> monumentally strapped for cash. Under the circumstances they could
> either pay AR what he thinks is owed to him, or DGT can redirect what
> limited financial resources they might still have left in the piggy
> bank towards completing their on-going R&D efforts - while
> simultaneously asking AR to just be a little more patient a while
> longer. Who's going to win this battle? I fear it won't be AR. Ya
> know, I'm sort of finding myself sympathizing more with DGT than with
> AR on this one.
>
> Don't change that channel folks!
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

But an analyzer would eliminate doubt. You'd actually be measuring power 
instead of relying of neglecting something you know nothing about.
- Original Message - 
From: "Alan J Fletcher" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



At 10:58 AM 10/12/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

2011/10/12 Joe Catania :
It can measure also DC current, but with separate DC settings of
course. So could it be plausible to feed DC-current along with AC and
clamp ammeter would not notice a thing? Then only conducting wire's
capacity could limit how much electric power Rossi is feeding into
E-Cat.


In September Lewan checked the DC periodically, and found it was zero.

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

Nonsense, high frequencies are subject to skin effect.
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Heckert" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can 
see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could 
have high inductance.
If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron core, 
then you should patent and market this.

You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power. 
Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.

This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter


- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's 
any

reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

The real point is that line current and voltage may not be in phase to begin 
with. Heckert is not knowledable and must resort to ad hominems. For 
instance there are most likely eddy currents induced in the band heaters.
- Original Message - 
From: "Jouni Valkonen" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat


2011/10/12 Joe Catania :

It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's any
reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.


Indeed, they used very cheap (€40) clamp ammeter (DIGIMASTER DM201)
that can only measure AC current in very limited frequency range at
50-60 Hz. But if there are spikes in the feed, it may measure even 50%
too low values. However, I think that spikes would show up in voltage
meter.

It can measure also DC current, but with separate DC settings of
course. So could it be plausible to feed DC-current along with AC and
clamp ammeter would not notice a thing? Then only conducting wire's
capacity could limit how much electric power Rossi is feeding into
E-Cat.

  –Jouni


http://www.zetabishop.it/product/8630/Pinza-Amperometrica-Digimaster-DM-201-VCA-ACA.asp

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 10:58 AM 10/12/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

2011/10/12 Joe Catania :
It can measure also DC current, but with separate DC settings of
course. So could it be plausible to feed DC-current along with AC and
clamp ammeter would not notice a thing? Then only conducting wire's
capacity could limit how much electric power Rossi is feeding into
E-Cat.


In September Lewan checked the DC periodically, and found it was zero. 

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 10:35 AM 10/12/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
However, because T2 readings can
not be trusted, we don't even know if the steam temperature is
120°C.Not sure why we cannot trust the T2 readings. I must
have missed that.
Maybe we can trust the value, but what does it MEAN?
The Lewan's September results showed 120C, 50% water -- implying either a
mix of superheated steam and overflow (unlikely with this architecture,
where it overflows from the top), or 2 Bar pressure,  or a
thermocouple placed so close to the core/fins  that it's not reading
the steam/water temperature.
** nonproportional font required  My September guess : 
 
 
Port

|  | 
 
*--*  **
 
| Superheated   1
Bar  |  |   
|   
 
| Steam   
118C ==>   |   
|  outlet hose
  95% Dry
|
*
  1 Bar 100C  |  ^ 
*=*   Superheated
steam =>
  Steam  
|  |  | 
CORE  
|    118C
 
|~|
|~~~  overflow fluid 100C
 
|
|
|  *-*
~  *-
 
|
*=* 
| | ~  |
    ~
|  
Water 
| | ~  |
    Inlet
|   Boil
100C 
|    Water Trap 100C
 
: 
: 
 
*--* 
  

The left side was a good guess ... with the core in the middle and
fins above and below.
The right side was wrong, because the outlet is at the very top of the
kettle.  If it's overflowing AND boiling then we will most likely
have bubbly flow through the outlet. This could form slugs in the hose
between them.
The variable temperature of the secondary outlet implies some kind of
intermittent heat transfer, but varying on a timescale faster than the
measurements were made.  
Possibly :
a) Water level oscillating ... sometimes it overflows.
b) Slugs -- alternating water and steam in the hose between the eCat and
heat exchanger
c) Percolation in the heat exchanger ... collecting water which is
periodically percolated and expelled.
Note that this is a counter-flow heat exchanger, so we DO expect to see
the secondary output track with the primary input.
Which mode has the highest heat transfer at the
primary-input/secondary-output end?
Superheated steam .. good thermal conductivity, but low specific
heat
Saturated steam ... poor conductivity, because it either has to condense
or become supercooled.
Water ... high conductivity, high specific heat

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Peter Heckert]

Am 12.10.2011 18:26, schrieb Akira Shirakawa:

Hello group,

The subject of this email says it all. Have a read at this open letter 
to Christos Stremmenos written by Alexandros Xanthoulis, Defkalion GT 
CEO:


http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=297

An English translation of Stremmenos' message to Defkalion GT appeared 
on JONP is supposed to be posted soon on NyTeknik.


This is his original message in Italian mixed with some English:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360&cpage=23#comment-94994


Im a big admirer of the french philosopher Rene Descartes.
He says, sometimes we see something miraculous happen and this leads us 
to speculating.
If we speculate, then we will not recognise the facts. Look to the known 
facts and analyze them.
Dont go into this trap. We must always look to the facts that are known 
and go from the known to the unknown.


What is not known: The relationships of Rossi, Defkalion and Stremmenos. 
The contracts. The finances. Their goals.

It is unknown if the technology really works.
What is known: They publish this and present this to the public who 
cannot understand it, because nobody knows the facts behind. This is the 
most stupid thing to do if there is a legal case.


So, the question is: Why do make their dirty wars in public?

Peter

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Jouni Valkonen]

2011/10/12 Joe Catania :
> It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is prone to
> error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's any
> reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
> inaccurate.

Indeed, they used very cheap (€40) clamp ammeter (DIGIMASTER DM201)
that can only measure AC current in very limited frequency range at
50-60 Hz. But if there are spikes in the feed, it may measure even 50%
too low values. However, I think that spikes would show up in voltage
meter.

It can measure also DC current, but with separate DC settings of
course. So could it be plausible to feed DC-current along with AC and
clamp ammeter would not notice a thing? Then only conducting wire's
capacity could limit how much electric power Rossi is feeding into
E-Cat.

   –Jouni


http://www.zetabishop.it/product/8630/Pinza-Amperometrica-Digimaster-DM-201-VCA-ACA.asp

RE: [Vo]: William Corliss passes...

[Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint]

Sorry bout that. I now see that the article was earlier this year. July 12.

-m

 

From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 10:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]: William Corliss passes...

 

FYI for all the ol'timer Vorts.

 

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/corliss-obit/

 

For all the newcomers, you might want to read about the "librarian of the
anomalous".

 

-Mark

 

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson]

Very interesting letter indeed.

Regarding the following excerpt:

> In all such cases, had there been close cooperation with
> Defkalion to develop the technology together, as opposed
> to focusing and putting pressure on us to receive money,
> many of these unfortunate legal and technical
> misunderstandings could have been avoided.
>
> As such, all these created serious delays for all
> contractual parties and for payment to be made according
> to our contract. You will safely recall that payment is
> based on the successful demonstration according to
> protocols and procedures that have been supplied to EFA,
> whose conditions have not been met yet.

It may be a matter of interpretation, one mired in legal jargon no
doubt, as to whether RA actually supplied "...successful demonstration
according to protocols and procedures that have been supplied to EFA."

Obviously DGT sez no, while I presume AR will say that he did... so
where's my money. Meanwhile, I get the impression that DGT is
monumentally strapped for cash. Under the circumstances they could
either pay AR what he thinks is owed to him, or DGT can redirect what
limited financial resources they might still have left in the piggy
bank towards completing their on-going R&D efforts - while
simultaneously asking AR to just be a little more patient a while
longer. Who's going to win this battle? I fear it won't be AR. Ya
know, I'm sort of finding myself sympathizing more with DGT than with
AR on this one.

Don't change that channel folks!

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

Horace Heffner wrote:

However, because T2 readings can not be trusted, we don't even know if 
the steam temperature is 120°C.


Not sure why we cannot trust the T2 readings. I must have missed that.


3. Putting the outlet thermocouple on the pipe is a good way to blur 
out momentary variations and heat bursts. It is a recommended technique.


Its baloney.  The thermocouples should have been located in wells in 
the water flow a few cm down the rubber tubing.


I meant that if he wanted to put the thermocouple outside the pipe, he 
should have extended the metal pipe a couple of feet. That would have 
been a great way to measure the temperature.


It would have been a good idea to put another thermocouple inside inside 
the flow of water through plastic T, in the plastic hose. You can attach 
4 thermocouples to that meter.


As I said yesterday it would have been best to use a 1 m hose and let 
people measure the water temperature independently.


A lot of things could have been done better. It would be hard to do it 
worse.


- Jed

[Vo]: William Corliss passes...

[Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint]

FYI for all the ol'timer Vorts.

 

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/corliss-obit/

 

For all the newcomers, you might want to read about the "librarian of the
anomalous".

 

-Mark

 

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Peter Heckert]

Am 12.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Joe Catania:
http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can 
see this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could 
have high inductance.
If you suceed to make a remarkably high inductance without an iron core, 
then you should patent and market this.

You will get rich and famous.

Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
A series inductance will shift the current phase and reduce the power. 
Power maximum is, when inductance is zero.

This is even more true with high frequencies.

Kind regards,

Peter


- Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  
wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is 
prone to
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's 
any

reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

Terry Blanton wrote:


I read somewhere that you are supposed put at strap on pipe thermocouple
about 2 feet away. I cannot find that document.

I think that is in the energy flow meter manual we discussed offline a
few weeks back.


Ah yes. That is partly because the ultrasonic flow meter requires a 
straight run of pipe, where the length of the pipe is several times the 
diameter.


Anyway, whatever type of temperature sensor you use it should be some 
distance from the heat source.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Akira Shirakawa
 wrote:
> Hello group,
>
> The subject of this email says it all.

It seems to say more than most would read into it.  The failure to
perform according to the protocol shared with EFA along with other
parts of the agreement could give Defkalion the rights to the AR IP
with no obligation for payments.  If so, DGT stands to walkaway with
everything but the US in their pocket with no obligation to AR.

At the same time, DGT could actually sue AR if he has used DGT IP as
is implied elsewhere.  As I had previously conjectured, the sharing of
IP between DGT and AR might have been a one way agreement.  If so,
this little soap opera is about to explode.

T

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[Terry Blanton]

vortex...@eskimo.com is alive and well:

fromEsa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com
reply-tovortex...@eskimo.com
to  vortex...@eskimo.com
dateWed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM
subject Re: [VoB]:Is There Anyone In There
mailed-by   eskimo.com
signed-by   gmail.com
unsubscribe Unsubscribe from this sender
Important mainly because of the words in the message.
hide details 12:59 PM (15 minutes ago)
i can hear you
- Hide quoted text -


On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
Just nod if you can hear me.  Is there anyone at  home?

T



On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:27 PM, peatbog  wrote:
>> Replied to in vortex-b.
>>
>
> I got a 550 failure from the attempt to send the reply to
> vortex-b, so maybe Popfile can sort the political junk from the
> juicy fringe-science stuff.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi: fat-cat architecure

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 01:19 PM 10/11/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I got confirmation from an observer that Lewan's photo and Rossi's
description accurately describe the inside.

http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3284879.ece/BINARY/original/DSC_0089_600.jpg

The 20x20x4 wafer is mounted at the center of the box, and has 39
heat-sinks pointing down (to boil water) and 39 up (to heat steam).
All three eCats (maybe 20x20x1) fit in one wafer, which includes the
shielding -- lead and ceramics.

Andrea Rossi 

October 11th, 2011 at 12:41 PM 
Dear Gunnar Lindberg:
All the box containing the reactor is filled with water. The reactor
wafer is cm 20 x 20 x 4 (external dimensions), and to it are welded all
the steel wings necessary to exchange all the heat produced inside the
reactor. When we disassembled the E-Cat all the attendants have seen that
all the box around the reactor is just a water box, filled of steel wings
and water. The water had been taken off, after the cooling, so with a
torchlight it has been easy to observe that all the box outside the
reactor is a water tank. The water enters from the bottom of the box,
evaporates and goes out as steam from the top of the box. Therefore is
absolutely impossible to insert any fuel, because it could be mixed with
the water, and obviously could not burn. There is not air inside, just
water and steam. As for the reactor, it is tight and waterproof. The
volume free for the water is about 30 liters, so that to fill up it are
necessary about 2 hours ( the pump of the primary circuit pumps about 15
liters per hour), but, as a matter of fact, the water begins to evaporate
before the box is full of water, so usually the “Effect” of the reactor
starts before 2 hours.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
(So it's definitely more of a kettle boiler than a tube boiler.)

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

http://www.omega.com/heaters/pdf/HEATER_INTRO_BAND_REF.pdf, as you can see 
this one uses a coiled wire. If not designed properly this could have high 
inductance. Also Lewan say he injects high frequency at one point.
- Original Message - 
From: "Terry Blanton" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat



Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  wrote:
It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is prone 
to

error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's any
reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
inaccurate.

[Vo]:More drama: open letter to Christos Stremmenos from Defkalion GT

[Akira Shirakawa]

Hello group,

The subject of this email says it all. Have a read at this open letter 
to Christos Stremmenos written by Alexandros Xanthoulis, Defkalion GT CEO:


http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=297

An English translation of Stremmenos' message to Defkalion GT appeared 
on JONP is supposed to be posted soon on NyTeknik.


This is his original message in Italian mixed with some English:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360&cpage=23#comment-94994

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[peatbog]

> Replied to in vortex-b.
> 

I got a 550 failure from the attempt to send the reply to
vortex-b, so maybe Popfile can sort the political junk from the
juicy fringe-science stuff.

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[peatbog]

Replied to in vortex-b.

Re: [Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Terry Blanton]

Yep, it's called power factor.  You're really on top of things, Joe!

T

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Joe Catania  wrote:
> It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is prone to
> error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's any
> reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be
> inaccurate.

[Vo]:Energy Analyzer for E-Cat

[Joe Catania]

It occurs to me that the means they are using to measure power is prone to 
error. An energy analyzer would be the best way to do it. If there's any 
reactance in the circuit they power calculations they use would be inaccurate.

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson]

> Kindly take this stuff to Vortex-b.

Hi Bog,

I've said my peace. I guess one could say I've had my cup'o'java.

However, in regards to your request. No.

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Need a break

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Horace Heffner  wrote:
> I need to take a break from this for a while. Snow line is coming down the
> mountains.

I guess you really do get to see winter coming, literally.  Here, it
just sneaks up on us.

T

Re: [Vo]:Need a break

[Jouni Valkonen]

I hope that they are doing the test in Upsala soon (If they are still
going to do it) and with similarly ambiguous results, so that
understanding what was happening takes several days of research. It is
more fun this way. And we need then Horace back from the break. But I
think that this test is finally explained, so the break is well
deserved.

–Jouni

2011/10/12 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson :
> Horace sez:
>
>> I need to take a break from this for a while. Snow line is coming down the
>> mountains.
>>
>
> Enjoy the encroaching sno, Horace!
>
> Have you purchased your season pass to the slopes?
>
> Come back for another round of carefully calculated skepticism at your
> convenience. ;-)
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Need a break

[OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson]

Horace sez:

> I need to take a break from this for a while. Snow line is coming down the
> mountains.
>

Enjoy the encroaching sno, Horace!

Have you purchased your season pass to the slopes?

Come back for another round of carefully calculated skepticism at your
convenience. ;-)

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

Oeps, my finger slipped on the keyboard, last number should be 409 ml/s.

On 12-10-2011 17:20, Man on Bridges wrote:

Hmmm, I read that as 13.1403 m^3 is equal to 13,140.3 liter.
Gives you 24.5 liters/min = 0.409 liters per second or 509 ml/s.


Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 16:10, Horace Heffner wrote:
Interesting.  The secondary circuit flow meter can be read at the end 
of the test here:


http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo1.jpg

I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test 
lasted 526 minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/min = 
0.0409 liters per second = 40.9 ml/s.


Strange. The secondary flow rate was given as 178 ml/s, or 10.7 
liters/min.  In 526 minutes that would be 5628 liters, or 5.62 m^3.  
It appears the meter began the test at 7.25 m^3.


Hmmm, I read that as 13.1403 m^3 is equal to 13,140.3 liter.
Gives you 24.5 liters/min = 0.409 liters per second or 509 ml/s.

Kind regards,

MoB

[Vo]:Need a break

[Horace Heffner]

I need to take a break from this for a while. Snow line is coming  
down the mountains.


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I read somewhere that you are supposed put at strap on pipe thermocouple
> about 2 feet away. I cannot find that document.

I think that is in the energy flow meter manual we discussed offline a
few weeks back.

T

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:15 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

Water inflow rate was calibrated and it was 13 kg/h. However, as in  
September, when water starts boiling and pressure is generated, it  
will reduce the flow rate, like it did in September. Therefore we  
can assume that water inflow rate was something like 10 kg/h.


As was mentioned several times before, indeed steam mass flow when  
measured (0.9 g/s and 1.9 g/s) corresponds to current output of E- 
Cat. Therefore when measurements were made, E-Cat was not overflowing.


Because E-Cat was not overflowing, this method could have been used  
for checking the calibration of heat exchanger, but this  
opportunity was missed by the observers.


—Jouni



There is no way to know if it was overflowing or not.  No one took  
the hose off to look.


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:46 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Horace Heffner wrote:

This is what I was talking about when I wrote: "The earlier noted  
flow measurement of 0.9 g/s, by Lewan, was at the output of the  
water/steam from the condenser heat exchanger.  It might have had  
nothing to do with with the actual pump rate.  . . .


So you did say that! You are way ahead of me.


It only had to do with the volume of steam being output, which is  
independent of the volume of water being pumped in - unless  
overflow is occurring, which seems unlikely at the early stage."


I don't get what you have in mind about overflowing, and the "slug  
of hot water" idea. Total enthalpy would be the same whether it  
overflows or not, wouldn't it? I don't see how it would affect the  
outlet thermocouple temperature. As I said, putting the  
thermocouple on the pipe which is a large heat sink will blur out  
any fluctuations.




Perhaps I should just do away with the bias correction.


How much is your correction? You probably indicate it but I don't  
see the number. Is at 0.5°C?


- Jed



The bias adjustment is 0.8 °C.

The relevant graph is here:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dTbias.png

The discussion in my paper is quoted here:

DISCUSSION OF GRAPH 4

Graph 4 shows Pout for the intial period before any steam came from  
the E-cat.  The red line in the graph shows about a negative 0.5 kW   
Pout for no heat input.   The blue line shows Pout after a 0.8°C  
adjustment to Delta T. No negative power is produced.  However, some  
nonexistent positive power is produced.  The net effect Ebias on  
total energy out of the 0.8C bias over the 526 minutes of the test is


  Ebias = (0.8K)*(178gm/s)*(4.2 J/(gm K))*(526 min)*(60 s/min) = 19  
MJ = 5.3 kWh


Without the bias the COP for the test drops from 3.2 to 2.6.


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dTbias.png

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:38 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Jouni Valkonen  wrote:

Water inflow rate was calibrated and it was 13 kg/h.

For this test? Where does it say that? Anyway, that comes to 3.6 g/ 
s which is enough to sustain the highest power without having the  
reservoir run dry.


It could be the reservoir was overflowing during most of the test.  
That would make no difference to the readings in the heat  
exchanger. The flow could be steam, or a mixture of steam and hot  
water; the heat exchanger will read it the same way.


I think that Hefner said that there may be intermittent bursts of  
hot water entering the heat exchanger and this might explain some  
of the outlet thermocouple variations. I do not think so:


1. We have very few data points from the thermocouples. You would  
have to have readings taken every few seconds to see a momentary  
heat burst.


Groups of slugs can last a while - until the water level drops.



3. Hot water coming through the pipe would lower the temperature  
not raise it.


Wrong!  Even if the steam were hotter, the high specific heat of  
water means the heat transfer will be greater at that point.   
However, because T2 readings can not be trusted, we don't even know  
if the steam temperature is 120°C.




3. Putting the outlet thermocouple on the pipe is a good way to  
blur out momentary variations and heat bursts. It is a recommended  
technique.


Its baloney.  The thermocouples should have been located in wells in  
the water flow a few cm down the rubber tubing.



The NRL went to a lot of trouble to make sure their pipes are good  
heat sinks in their test bed system. However, I think installation  
instructions recommend you put the thermocouple about 2 feet from  
the boiler  or heat exchanger on a straight segment of pipe.


I read somewhere that you are supposed put at strap on pipe  
thermocouple about 2 feet away.


This is different.  Rubber tubing is used.

I cannot find that document. I think that is what it said. If that  
is true, the readings may be a little bit high because of the steam  
pipe. As I said before, the thermal mass of the cooling water is so  
much larger than that of the steam that even if the thermocouple is  
picking up the average temperature right between them -- which is  
highly unlikely given its position -- the temperature would still  
be pretty close to the correct value.


There are many strap on thermometers available that are intended to  
be used on the outside of pipes. This one is a general-purpose  
thermocouple. However, this technique will work fine as long as the  
thermocouple is wrapped in insulation.


- Jed



More arm waving.

Your voice recognition system needs to be adapted to sense arm waves  
and footnote the text with reader warnings.  8^)


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

[Vo]:Lyne Atomic Hydrogen Furnace was WIKI Frozen

[Roarty, Francis X]

Alan,
Thanks for alerting me to Lyne's recent claims regarding Rossi. 
He has previously said the same about Moller's Atomic hydrogen generator when 
the 2005 tests by Naudin were underway. I am not saying he is wrong and in fact 
admire his concept that the reaction requires an ongoing oscillation between h1 
and h2 via catalytic material. He deserves some credit but I don't think he 
ever demonstrated the math or underlying physics that makes the oscillations 
occur. My posit requires the path to be asymmetrical where h1 is catalytically 
modified [call it fractional or Inverse rydberg] while h2 opposes the 
modification making the environment exploitable. Lyne seems to give Mills a 
free pass even though the skeletal catalyst is really just an inverse method of 
arriving at the same nano geometry.
I don't think our understanding of catalytic action is complete 
and it will wait for this hurdle to understand what is going on inside these 
reactors. My posit is that dilation occurs through suppression just like it 
does for spatial displacement approaching speed of light.  The number of 
virtual particles per unit volume appears to increase as an object  approaches 
C  but appears to decreases proportional to Casimir suppression. In the one 
case we are the fast aging "twin" relative the object approaching C while we 
are the slow aging "twin" relative to objects like hydrogen atoms undergoing 
suppression. [underscored by changes claimed for radioactive half lives of 
certain gases loaded into catalysts]
Regards
Fran




The wiki has been frozen.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer  No 
mention of October is allowed (actually, there's a comment in a different 
section that, I think, went un-noticed. by the Reliable Source police.)

Then  in discussion, we have :

LYNE ATOMIC HYDROGEN FURNACE

This invention is obviously a version of my LYNE ATOMIC HYDROGEN FURNACE 
derived from my Chapter VI from my 1997-98 second edition of Occult Ether 
Physics as in http://asse.altervista.org/lahg.pdf , published with my 
permission in 2003. The illustration which is included near the last page of my 
book shows that a "catalytic metal" is used to trigger the re-association of 
atomic hydrogen,though this is unnecessary. The reaction chamber of the 
Rossi-Focardi device however is completely filled with powdered nickel rather 
than using a catalytic metal trigger device at the entrance of the atomic 
hydrogen into the chamber as shown by my 1996 drawing. In the place of using a 
stream of H2 passing through an electric arc as in my drawing, Rossi-Focardi 
apparently used Nichrome resistance heating wire to disociate the H2 to H1 
similar to how Irving Langmuir did with the exception that "no tungsten was 
used" as Rossi said, since Nichrome is not tungsten. There have been several 
other tests of this device but this is the first version of my furnace by other 
researchers which is industrial-grade, other than my re-design over the past 15 
years which is not yet disclosed. In 2003 I was made an honorary member of a 
Rome group of gentlemen researchers, 
http://asse.altervista.org.altrascienza.html
 year 4, Number 20, Sept.-Oct. 2003, to which group I gave permission to 
distribute copies of my work to its members and associates in Italy. It is 
presumed that this is how the two University of Bologna professors eventually 
obtained copies of my work and began their experiments as did members of that 
Rome group did beginning in 2003.

William R. Lyne

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:36 AM, Andrea Selva wrote:

So why, as suggested by many,  he didn't use another kind of  
flowmeter so we could have now instantaneous values to plot along  
the temperature ones ?

Couldn't he afford it ? He sold home !
Having such data we could have explained the apparent instability  
and crazyness of the output power curve.




Probably not, if the two existing meters were replaced.   The input  
flow was likely steady.  However, it is true, an extra water meter  
located at the primary circuit exit of the heat exchanger would have  
been very informative.


Flow meters were used but apparently no one thought to record time  
stamped volume data.  It is much more accurate, depending on flow  
variations, to calculate flow f(t) from volume v(t) as:


  f(t) = d V(t)/dt

than to integrate:

  V(t) = integral f(t) dt

(or a similar integration to obtain energy) using occasional sporadic  
short interval flow measurements. This is the value of using volume  
meters.  Because they monitor continuously, they catch brief  
excursions that might otherwise be missed.


Unfortunately the flow meters were ignored.

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:More calcs.

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:17 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Susan Gipp wrote:

I'm sure that for Rossi numbers are pretty meaningless. He often  
use them just as nice words to emphasize his speeches. We don't  
have to take them to make calculations.

Let's talk instruments (when they work properly)


No, let's talk human reflexes. At around 18:00, someone touched the  
hose going to the heat exchanger. That person jumped back because  
the connection with hot. that was four hours after the power was  
turned out.


No, that was 2 hours 7 minutes after the power was turned off, at 15:53.

No matter how you analyze it, there is no way any part of the  
system could have been even warm at that time, unless there was  
kilowatt levels of heat being generated in the system.


This is simply wrong.



people also held there hands over the reactor and determined that  
it was very hot. Again there is no way this could be true unless  
heat was being generated inside the reactor.


The reactor was well insulated at this point.




Let us talk human hearing. People heard boiling inside the reactor.  
four hours after the power was turned off.


Yes.  They should hear boiling, as I showed there should be a few  
hundred watts steam generation at that point.


It would have been great to have the hose off momentarily at that  
point to see what was actually coming out of the E-cat.





You do not need to believe Rossi and you do not need to believe any  
of the instruments to be sure the thing was producing anomalous  
heat. You have first principle irrefutable proof right there, in  
what the witnesses felt and heard.


That is merely proof a thermal storage mechanism is available.




It would be nice if we had more reliable instrument readings, but  
we do not. However, that is no reason for us to ignore witness  
accounts, or to imagine that a person who is burned and feels pain  
has not touched something hot. Do not let your anger at Rossi cloud  
your judgment and make you ignore first principle proof.


You should look at the evidence you have, not evidence you do not  
have, or that you wish you had instead.


As it happens the Rossi numbers are not meaningless. As I just  
showed you can reconcile the condensate flow rate with the inlet  
and outlet temperature readings. It is likely that the outlet  
temperature was affected by the steam pipe, but that the effect was  
small and the numbers are basically correct.


Innumerate arm waving.


Instruments such as the Termometro meter are extremely reliable and  
there is no way Rossi could open up to meter and change it so that  
it produces fake numbers. Instruments such as this have  
microelectronics, like digital watches, and the only thing you can  
do is break them.


- Jed



It may be useful to read my review, though it is still in draft form:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

Horace Heffner wrote:

This is what I was talking about when I wrote: "The earlier noted flow 
measurement of 0.9 g/s, by Lewan, was at the output of the water/steam 
from the condenser heat exchanger.  It might have had nothing to do 
with with the actual pump rate.  . . .


So you did say that! You are way ahead of me.


It only had to do with the volume of steam being output, which is 
independent of the volume of water being pumped in - unless overflow 
is occurring, which seems unlikely at the early stage."


I don't get what you have in mind about overflowing, and the "slug of 
hot water" idea. Total enthalpy would be the same whether it overflows 
or not, wouldn't it? I don't see how it would affect the outlet 
thermocouple temperature. As I said, putting the thermocouple on the 
pipe which is a large heat sink will blur out any fluctuations.




Perhaps I should just do away with the bias correction.


How much is your correction? You probably indicate it but I don't see 
the number. Is at 0.5°C?


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

Jouni Valkonen  wrote:

Water inflow rate was calibrated and it was 13 kg/h.


For this test? Where does it say that? Anyway, that comes to 3.6 g/s which
is enough to sustain the highest power without having the reservoir run dry.

It could be the reservoir was overflowing during most of the test. That
would make no difference to the readings in the heat exchanger. The flow
could be steam, or a mixture of steam and hot water; the heat exchanger will
read it the same way.

I think that Hefner said that there may be intermittent bursts of hot water
entering the heat exchanger and this might explain some of the outlet
thermocouple variations. I do not think so:

1. We have very few data points from the thermocouples. You would have to
have readings taken every few seconds to see a momentary heat burst.

3. Hot water coming through the pipe would lower the temperature not raise
it.

3. Putting the outlet thermocouple on the pipe is a good way to blur out
momentary variations and heat bursts. It is a recommended technique. The NRL
went to a lot of trouble to make sure their pipes are good heat sinks in
their test bed system. However, I think installation instructions recommend
you put the thermocouple about 2 feet from the boiler  or heat exchanger on
a straight segment of pipe.

I read somewhere that you are supposed put at strap on pipe thermocouple
about 2 feet away. I cannot find that document. I think that is what it
said. If that is true, the readings may be a little bit high because of the
steam pipe. As I said before, the thermal mass of the cooling water is so
much larger than that of the steam that even if the thermocouple is picking
up the average temperature right between them -- which is highly unlikely
given its position -- the temperature would still be pretty close to the
correct value.

There are many strap on thermometers available that are intended to be used
on the outside of pipes. This one is a general-purpose thermocouple.
However, this technique will work fine as long as the thermocouple is
wrapped in insulation.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

The answer is been staring at us the whole time. I have been  
thinking of the Rossi reactor as something like a US water heater  
where inflow must always equal outflow, because a reservoir is  
always full. I have been thinking that if the inflow is a steady  
0.9 mL/s, the outflow has to be the same. But there is a reservoir  
that can hold different amounts, unlike a water heater.


This is what I was talking about when I wrote: "The earlier noted  
flow measurement of 0.9 g/s, by Lewan, was at the output of the water/ 
steam from the condenser heat exchanger.  It might have had nothing  
to do with with the actual pump rate.  It only had to do with the  
volume of steam being output, which is independent of the volume of  
water being pumped in - unless overflow is occurring, which seems  
unlikely at the early stage."





Lewan measured the outflow at 18:57. It was 0.91 g/s. That  
indicates output power of around 2 kW. Looking at the "power in the  
vs power out" graph, at 18:57 indicated power was 2.5 kW. Close  
enough!


http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak- 
ash4/304196_10150844451570375_818270374_20774905_1010742682_n.jpg


Earlier, at 16:51, indicated power was 8 kW.



I show a Pout of 8.073 kW in the spread sheet without correcting bias:

http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/Rossi6Oct2011.pdf

but 8.673 with correcting delta T bias. Here is my graph with bias.

http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/RossiT2Pout.png

Perhaps I should just do away with the bias correction.

If Lewan had measured the outflow at that time he would have found  
it much faster, 3.5 g/s. We have no idea what average inflow was  
during this test. It was probably steady the whole time. Probably,  
at 16:51 when the power was high, the water level in the reservoir  
was falling, and at 18:54 the water level was rising.


- Jed



It may be that at 16:51 a slug of hot water was affecting the Pout  
thermocouple, and it 18:54 not so much.



Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Andrea Selva]

So why, as suggested by many,  he didn't use another kind of flowmeter so we
could have now instantaneous values to plot along the temperature ones ?
Couldn't he afford it ? He sold home !
Having such data we could have explained the apparent instability and
crazyness of the output power curve.

2011/10/12 Jed Rothwell 

> Horace Heffner  wrote:
>
> I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test lasted
>> 526 minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/min = 0.0409
>> liters per second = 40.9 ml/s.
>>
>
> Lewan says the meter accumulated a total of 4,554 L from 11:57 to 19:03 (7
> hours, 6 minutes; 426 minutes).
>
> With these meters, it is easier to read the accumulated amount than the
> instantaneous flow.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Jed Rothwell]

Horace Heffner  wrote:

I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test lasted 526
> minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/min = 0.0409 liters
> per second = 40.9 ml/s.
>

Lewan says the meter accumulated a total of 4,554 L from 11:57 to 19:03 (7
hours, 6 minutes; 426 minutes).

With these meters, it is easier to read the accumulated amount than the
instantaneous flow.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More calcs.

[Jed Rothwell]

Susan Gipp wrote:

I'm sure that for Rossi numbers are pretty meaningless. He often use 
them just as nice words to emphasize his speeches. We don't have to 
take them to make calculations.

Let's talk instruments (when they work properly)


No, let's talk human reflexes. At around 18:00, someone touched the hose 
going to the heat exchanger. That person jumped back because the 
connection with hot. that was four hours after the power was turned out. 
No matter how you analyze it, there is no way any part of the system 
could have been even warm at that time, unless there was kilowatt levels 
of heat being generated in the system. people also held there hands over 
the reactor and determined that it was very hot. Again there is no way 
this could be true unless heat was being generated inside the reactor.


Let us talk human hearing. People heard boiling inside the reactor. four 
hours after the power was turned off.


You do not need to believe Rossi and you do not need to believe any of 
the instruments to be sure the thing was producing anomalous heat. You 
have first principle irrefutable proof right there, in what the 
witnesses felt and heard.


It would be nice if we had more reliable instrument readings, but we do 
not. However, that is no reason for us to ignore witness accounts, or to 
imagine that a person who is burned and feels pain has not touched 
something hot. Do not let your anger at Rossi cloud your judgment and 
make you ignore first principle proof.


You should look at the evidence you have, not evidence you do not have, 
or that you wish you had instead.


As it happens the Rossi numbers are not meaningless. As I just showed 
you can reconcile the condensate flow rate with the inlet and outlet 
temperature readings. It is likely that the outlet temperature was 
affected by the steam pipe, but that the effect was small and the 
numbers are basically correct. Instruments such as the Termometro meter 
are extremely reliable and there is no way Rossi could open up to meter 
and change it so that it produces fake numbers. Instruments such as this 
have microelectronics, like digital watches, and the only thing you can 
do is break them.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jouni Valkonen]

Water inflow rate was calibrated and it was 13 kg/h. However, as in
September, when water starts boiling and pressure is generated, it will
reduce the flow rate, like it did in September. Therefore we can assume that
water inflow rate was something like 10 kg/h.

As was mentioned several times before, indeed steam mass flow when measured
(0.9 g/s and 1.9 g/s) corresponds to current output of E-Cat. Therefore when
measurements were made, E-Cat was not overflowing.

Because E-Cat was not overflowing, this method could have been used for
checking the calibration of heat exchanger, but this opportunity was missed
by the observers.

—Jouni

keskiviikko, 12. lokakuuta 2011 Jed Rothwell 
kirjoitti:
> The answer is been staring at us the whole time. I have been thinking of
the Rossi reactor as something like a US water heater where inflow must
always equal outflow, because a reservoir is always full. I have been
thinking that if the inflow is a steady 0.9 mL/s, the outflow has to be the
same. But there is a reservoir that can hold different amounts, unlike a
water heater.
> Lewan measured the outflow at 18:57. It was 0.91 g/s. That indicates
output power of around 2 kW. Looking at the "power in the vs power
out" graph, at 18:57 indicated power was 2.5 kW. Close enough!
>
http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/304196_10150844451570375_818270374_20774905_1010742682_n.jpg
> Earlier, at 16:51, indicated power was 8 kW. If Lewan had measured the
outflow at that time he would have found it much faster, 3.5 g/s. We have no
idea what average inflow was during this test. It was probably steady the
whole time. Probably, at 16:51 when the power was high, the water level in
the reservoir was falling, and at 18:54 the water level was rising.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Water meters

[Horace Heffner]

On Oct 11, 2011, at 5:06 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:

Does anyone know what units are displayed on the odometer type  
display and sweep hands on the water meters used?


It says m^3 on the face, and the dials have x0.1, x 0.01, x0.001  
and one with a value I can't read but assume is x0.0001.




MoB has kindly confirmed the values on the dials, based on his water  
meter.  This means the x0.0001 dial registers 0.1 liter increments.   
This I confirmed by looking at time 0:57 to 0:59 in the video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-5cFOsisAo

You can see the 0.1 liter sweep hand going very fast. In the two  
seconds it moved from 0 to 0.5 liters, giving a flow rate of very  
approximately 0.25 liters/sec = 15 liters/min. A bit fast based on  
the given average of 10.7 liters/min!


This means the flow meters are excellent for this purpose.  Maybe  
they weren't read because it is difficult?  Time stamped digital  
photos taken periodically might be a good idea. Reading the sweep  
hands can then be done later.


Interesting.  The secondary circuit flow meter can be read at the end  
of the test here:


http://www.redmatica.com/media/Thermo1.jpg

I read the meter as 13.1403 m^3, or 1314.3 liters. Given the test  
lasted 526 minutes that is 1314.3 liter/(536 min.) = 2.45 liters/min  
= 0.0409 liters per second = 40.9 ml/s.


Strange. The secondary flow rate was given as 178 ml/s, or 10.7  
liters/min.  In 526 minutes that would be 5628 liters, or 5.62 m^3.   
It appears the meter began the test at 7.25 m^3.


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

[Vo]:Primary loop inflow stable, outflow varies! The two readings agree.

[Jed Rothwell]

The answer is been staring at us the whole time. I have been thinking of the
Rossi reactor as something like a US water heater where inflow must always
equal outflow, because a reservoir is always full. I have been thinking that
if the inflow is a steady 0.9 mL/s, the outflow has to be the same. But
there is a reservoir that can hold different amounts, unlike a water heater.

Lewan measured the outflow at 18:57. It was 0.91 g/s. That indicates output
power of around 2 kW. Looking at the "power in the vs power out" graph, at
18:57 indicated power was 2.5 kW. Close enough!

http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/304196_10150844451570375_818270374_20774905_1010742682_n.jpg

Earlier, at 16:51, indicated power was 8 kW. If Lewan had measured the
outflow at that time he would have found it much faster, 3.5 g/s. We have no
idea what average inflow was during this test. It was probably steady the
whole time. Probably, at 16:51 when the power was high, the water level in
the reservoir was falling, and at 18:54 the water level was rising.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[Man on Bridges]

Hi,

On 12-10-2011 15:08, Peter Gluck wrote:
It seems people still do not love Egality because it is an impossible, 
biased, false ant-mertocratic concept. But slowly the start to hate 
Inequality when it is in malign forms.

Take this meta-movement and the Arab spring.
It is important however that the solutions found should be better than 
the original problems.


Or as they say: "If you ain't part of the solution, you are part of the 
problem"


Kind regards,

MoB

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[peatbog]

Kindly take this stuff to Vortex-b.

Re: [Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[Peter Gluck]

You started it, my friend- but I have raised the problem
in the final part of this essay:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/02/sue-ellen-principle-and-kaltwasser.html

It seems people still do not love Egality because it is an impossible,
biased, false ant-mertocratic concept. But slowly the start to hate
Inequality when it is in malign forms.
Take this meta-movement and the Arab spring.
It is important however that the solutions found should be better than the
original problems.

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 3:55 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:

> From: Peter Gluck
>
> > History's bad wordplay:
> > http://www.alternet.org/story/152698/millionaire%27s_march%>
>
> 3A_protesters_hit_the_streets_in_ny_and_visit_the_1_percent_at_their_homes?a
> kid=7693.112117.nEOOaL&rd=1&t=2
>
> > 1 percent richest = FatCats
> >
> > Just signalling it, not to be discussed, please
>
> Too late, Peter,
>
> I DO feel compelled to briefly discuss the "political" mater... just a tad
> because I'm an American, and I'm deeply concerned about the direction my
> country has been headed lately. It's not pretty.
>
> IMO, it is appalling how many republican candidates vying for the president
> of the United States in 2012 have either dismissed or completely condemned
> these grass-roots demonstrations. They have side-stepped the fact that the
> formation of the movement is pretty much how their own super-conservative
> Tea Party movement began from individuals unhappy about the way things have
> been handled. It has been called the Tea Party of the Left. An appropriate
> description.
>
> This movement, of course, reminds me of my own participation in the
> Wisconsin demonstrations last winter against super conservative Governor,
> Mr. Walker, who is essentially my employer, me being a state employee.
> Walker is now facing the possibility of being recalled. Petitions to have
> him recalled will begin in earnest in November. Possible re-elections may
> proceed around April and May of next year.
>
> Meanwhile, in regards to the 99% movement, I heard republican candidate,
> Herman Cain, describe the movement as comprised of a bunch of disgruntled
> people blaming rich people for having jobs (and wealth) while they
> themselves don't. Herman's solution? Don't blame the rich for having jobs
> and having gotten rich from their efforts. His solution: go out and work
> for
> the wealth you covet from the rich. I guess from Herman's POV many of 9%
> who
> are currently unemployed must be lazy, or something stupid like that. He's
> clueless, and yet there are enough people in this country who apparently
> buy
> into his profound ignorance of the situation. Meanwhile, Michele Bachmann
> stated that she thought she saw a lot of union organizers in the midst of
> 99% crowds. Therefore, I guess that from her POV it makes the crowds
> nothing
> more than puppets doing the bidding of these nasty Union organizers. And,
> here too, there are enough people in this country who apparently buy into
> her POV as well.
>
> I am concerned about what will happen in 2012. I hope for the best, but to
> be honest I currently feel pessimistic. Perhaps It's because I haven't had
> my cup'o'java this morning yet.
>
> Regards,
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:OT - formally just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

From: Peter Gluck

> History's bad wordplay:
> http://www.alternet.org/story/152698/millionaire%27s_march%>
3A_protesters_hit_the_streets_in_ny_and_visit_the_1_percent_at_their_homes?a
kid=7693.112117.nEOOaL&rd=1&t=2

> 1 percent richest = FatCats
>
> Just signalling it, not to be discussed, please

Too late, Peter,

I DO feel compelled to briefly discuss the "political" mater... just a tad
because I'm an American, and I'm deeply concerned about the direction my
country has been headed lately. It's not pretty.

IMO, it is appalling how many republican candidates vying for the president
of the United States in 2012 have either dismissed or completely condemned
these grass-roots demonstrations. They have side-stepped the fact that the
formation of the movement is pretty much how their own super-conservative
Tea Party movement began from individuals unhappy about the way things have
been handled. It has been called the Tea Party of the Left. An appropriate
description.

This movement, of course, reminds me of my own participation in the
Wisconsin demonstrations last winter against super conservative Governor,
Mr. Walker, who is essentially my employer, me being a state employee.
Walker is now facing the possibility of being recalled. Petitions to have
him recalled will begin in earnest in November. Possible re-elections may
proceed around April and May of next year.

Meanwhile, in regards to the 99% movement, I heard republican candidate,
Herman Cain, describe the movement as comprised of a bunch of disgruntled
people blaming rich people for having jobs (and wealth) while they
themselves don't. Herman's solution? Don't blame the rich for having jobs
and having gotten rich from their efforts. His solution: go out and work for
the wealth you covet from the rich. I guess from Herman's POV many of 9% who
are currently unemployed must be lazy, or something stupid like that. He's
clueless, and yet there are enough people in this country who apparently buy
into his profound ignorance of the situation. Meanwhile, Michele Bachmann
stated that she thought she saw a lot of union organizers in the midst of
99% crowds. Therefore, I guess that from her POV it makes the crowds nothing
more than puppets doing the bidding of these nasty Union organizers. And,
here too, there are enough people in this country who apparently buy into
her POV as well.

I am concerned about what will happen in 2012. I hope for the best, but to
be honest I currently feel pessimistic. Perhaps It's because I haven't had
my cup'o'java this morning yet.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:just interesting- other FatCats in some trouble

[Peter Gluck]

History's bad wordplay:
http://www.alternet.org/story/152698/millionaire%27s_march%3A_protesters_hit_the_streets_in_ny_and_visit_the_1_percent_at_their_homes?akid=7693.112117.nEOOaL&rd=1&t=2

1 percent richest = FatCats

Just signalling it, not to be discussed, please
Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:More calcs.

[Susan Gipp]

I'm sure that for Rossi numbers are pretty meaningless. He often use them
just as nice words to emphasize his speeches. We don't have to take them to
make calculations.
Let's talk instruments (when they work properly)

2011/10/12 Robert Lynn 

> Rossi seems to be over-estimating pump output (again), the pump can do a
> maximum of 12l/hr (100Hz, 2ml per stroke) as per the spec sheet:
> http://www.lmi-pumps.com/datasheets/Pseries-08-01.pdf
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:More calcs.

[Robert Lynn]

Rossi seems to be over-estimating pump output (again), the pump can do a
maximum of 12l/hr (100Hz, 2ml per stroke) as per the spec sheet:
http://www.lmi-pumps.com/datasheets/Pseries-08-01.pdf

On 12 October 2011 07:18, Horace Heffner  wrote:

>
> My review of the Rossi 7 Oct 2011 experiment has been updated.
>
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.**pdf
>
> Also, the following sections were added:
>
> VOLUME CALCULATIONS
>
> The Lewan report  says: "The E-cat model used in this test was enclosed in
> a casing measuring about 50 x 60 x 35 centimeters."  These appear to be
> external measurements with wrapping, etc.
>
> "After cooling down the E-cat, the insulation was eliminated and the casing
> was opened. Inside the casing metal flanges of a heat exchanger could be
> seen, an object measuring about 30 x 30 x 30 centimeters. The rest of the
> volume was empty space where water could be heated, entering through a valve
> at the bottom, and with a valve at the top where steam could come out. "
>
> This gives an external volume of (50 x 60 x 35) cm^3 = 105000 cm^3 = 105
> liters. The heat exchanger etc. is (30 x 30 x 30) cm^3 = 27 liters. This
> should give an internal volume of 105 liters - 27 liters = 78 liters.  The
> disagrees with Rossi’s prior statements.
>
> Rossi states: “The volume free for the water is about 30 liters, so that to
> fill up it are necessary about 2 hours ( the pump of the primary circuit
> pumps about 15 liters per hour), but, as a matter of fact, the water begins
> to evaporate before the box is full of water, so usually the “Effect” of the
> reactor starts before 2 hours.”
>
> Using the photo in the NyTeknik report, an estimate of internal dimensions
> can be made.  The width of the finned structure is 134 pixels, giving in
> that line 134 px/(30 cm) = 4.467 pix/cm. The box width on that line is 209
> pix, giving a true dimension of (209 px)/(4.467 px/m) = 46.8 cm. The length
> of the finned structure is 253 px, giving in that line (253 px)/(30 cm) =
> 8.43 px/cm.  The inside length of the box is 376 px, giving a true length of
> 44.6 cm.  The lip appears to be 35 px/(4.467 px/cm) = 7.8 cm wide.  Judging
> from the lip width, the top of the finned structure appears to be about 4 cm
> below the lid.
>
> The gross inner volume of the box is (44.6 cm x 46.8 cm x 34 cm) = 71
> liters.
>
> The gross volume of the finned structure is (30 cm x 30 cm x 30 cm) = 27
> liters.
>
> It looks like about (1/9)*30 cm = 3.3 cm is cooling fins.  About 50% of the
> 3.3 cm x 30 cm x 30 cm = 3 liters should be water, giving a total finned
> structure volume of 27 liters - 3 liters = 24 liters.
>
> The net water occupiable volume of the box is thus 71 liters - 27 liters =
> 44 liters.
>
> The prior similar E-cat weighed in at 85 kg.  The current E-cat weighed 95
> kg before water was added.
>
> ESTIMATING THE PRIMARY CIRCUIT WATER FLOW RATE
>
> The extreme instability of Pout begins at about 169 minutes into the run.
>  If we assume this means percolator effects begin then the device should be
> almost full.  It should contain close to 44 liters of water.   The flow rate
> to accomplish this is (44 liters)/(169 minutes) = 4.34 ml/s or 15 liters per
> hour.  This is a familiar number as a pump limit, but not as the primary
> circuit flow rate.  Percolator effects could happen at a lesser volume if
> ripples are made in the water level .
>
> If the stated water volume of 30 liters is correct then the flow rate to
> accomplish percolator effects is (30 liters)/(169 minutes) = 3 ml/s or 10.7
> liters per hour. This is not consistent with the flow rate 1.5 ml/sec, or
> 5.4 liters per hour estimated earlier.  Note that if this flow rate is
> correct then the stored energy calulated in prior sections is reduced. It is
> also true that more iron could be used to increase the thermal capacity, and
> space for such is available.  The numbers provided here are only for concept
> checking.  A sophisitcated model and knowledge of actual measurements is
> needed for an accurate consistency check.  Unfortuantely measurement of flow
> rate into the E-cat was not made, even though a water meter was in the
> circuit.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/
>
>
>
>
>