The constriction dosen't necessarily matter as flow will tend to spped up when
constricted. So you agree that there's no significant extra pressure?
- Original Message -
From: Alan J Fletcher
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:46 PM
Subject: Re:
At 10:19 AM 9/21/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
The constriction
dosen't necessarily matter as flow will tend to spped up when
constricted. So you agree that there's no significant extra
pressure?
Mats Lewan told me that his video cut off prematurely, but he thinks the
total draining time was about 3
Did you consider that for the first minute, valve was opened only as
little as it can be to be open at all. Later it was opened some more,
but not even then it was fully open. Therefore I think that we can
call this thing to 200 kPa pressure figure. If someone really did even
doubt that, because
At 12:49 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
The point is that a gallon
empties very quickly even though not vented at the top. The sound it
makes is immaterial and is most like caused by the water hitting the
barrel. I don't know why you feel the water is under inordinate pressure.
The E-CAt is
Clearly your calculations are a bit off. The running time on video is more like
1:20, still greater than drain time for 2 atm, showing there is less than 2atm
pressure. But since we don't know for how long the draining continues we dont
know how much less. Since the E-Cat is open to atmosphere
Alan, excellent work again. Considering Akira's temperature graph, we
can take that draining took about 5-7 min. In the beginning pressure
was 210 kPa or 122°C. But it is needed to take into consideration,
that valve was opened slowly. In the end of video, valve was only half
open.
At 02:33 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_sep11_f.php
I seem to have broken my file ... back soon!
At 02:56 PM 9/20/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 02:33 PM 9/20/2011, Joe
Catania wrote:
http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_sep11_f.php
I seem to have broken my file ... back soon!
It's back ... I added a table of draining time vs tap radius, and
corrected the video time.
I'm still open to
BTW you should run those time-to-drain numbers again. The outlet looks like its
about 2cm in diameter. The sound seems to be mostly water impacting on the side
of the pail.
- Original Message -
From: Alan J Fletcher
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011
At 02:33 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
Clearly your
calculations are a bit off. The running time on video is more like 1:20,
still greater than drain time for 2 atm, showing there is less than 2atm
pressure. But since we don't know for how long the draining continues we
dont know how much
At 03:36 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
BTW you should run
those time-to-drain numbers again. The outlet looks like its about 2cm in
diameter. The sound seems to be mostly water impacting on the side of the
pail.
Tank height 25
Radius 0.20Time 1 Bar 44.94 minTime 2 Bar 3.52 min
Radius 0.30Time
A 5-7 min draining time is completely consistent with 1 atm (ie no
additional pressure). That represents a flow of ~50ml/s or a velocity of
~15cm/s which is ~ 1/66 of the velocity obtained from dropping for 1 sec in
a gravity field. Since mgh=1/2mv^2, h= 1/2 (.15m/s)^2 /10ms^-2 or h=0.1125cm
I can't agree w/ a diameter of 1 cm.
- Original Message -
From: Alan J Fletcher
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Calculations for 1 MW plant. + Time to Drain the eCat
At 02:33 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
Clearly
But look at the size of the orifice in the video.
- Original Message -
From: Alan J Fletcher
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 6:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Calculations for 1 MW plant. + Time to Drain the eCat
At 03:36 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
Have it your way. Still there is little pressure necessary.
- Original Message -
From: Alan J Fletcher
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Calculations for 1 MW plant. + Time to Drain the eCat
At 04:00 PM 9/20/2011, Joe
Standard pipes use inches as unit of measure.
Should be one in the table:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_Pipe_Size
mic
2011/9/21 Joe Catania zrosumg...@aol.com:
Have it your way. Still there is little pressure necessary.
- Original Message -
From: Alan J Fletcher
To:
Hi,
On 21-9-2011 1:25, Michele Comitini wrote:
Standard pipes use inches as unit of measure.
Should be one in the table:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_Pipe_Size
Not always according the following page:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nennweite
It says:
Bei Kupferrohren wird der
At 04:19 PM 9/20/2011, Joe Catania wrote:
Have it your way.
We can't see inside the tap (or know what type it is), or if it's only
partly open -- it is probably more constricted than the outlet.
Still there is
little pressure necessary.
I put up the full table at :
Alan wrote:
We can't see inside the tap (or know what type it is), or if it's only
partly open.
By the looks of the orange handle on the valve, I'd say that this is the
type of valve that uses only a 90degree turn of the handle to go from full
shut to full open (ball valve). When the handle
At 05:31 PM 9/20/2011, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
Alan wrote:
We can't see inside the tap (or know what type it is), or if it's
only partly open
By the looks of the orange handle on the valve, Id say that this is the
type of valve that uses only a 90degree turn of the handle to go from
20 matches
Mail list logo
