subject:"\[Vo\]\:Re\: \[e\-cat\] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless"

Galantini said that reads grams of liquid water / m^3 of vapor on display of 
HD37AB1347.
From Levi’s report,  Galantini used an HP474ACR probe, that measure RH and 
temperature.
In the 2nd email, Galantini claim that he measured the preassure inside the 
e-cat. Nobody know how he measured, since HD37AB1347 instruments CANNOT measure 
preassure, but only *atmospheric preassure*, with strict temperature range 
(-20,+60, see manual). Beyond these ranges, nobody know if the instrument works 
well.


--- IT TEXT ---
Oggetto:sonda
Data:   Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:56:41 +0100
Mittente:   Greit Service srl lt;@greitservice.itgt;
A:  lt;francesco.celani@gt;

Si certifica che lo strumento con cui è stato effettuata la misura dell'acqua 
libera nel vapore durante il test svoltosi a Bologna il 14.01.2011 era lo 
strumento HD37AB1347 della Delta Ohm dotato di sonda mod.HP474AC con campo di 
risoluzione -40;+150°C.

Galantini dr.Gilberto


Data: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:02:22 +0200
Da: Greit Service srl 
Rispondi-A:Greit Service srl [omissis]
A: [omissis]

Buon giorno, in merito alla richiesta fattami in data odierna, come da me 
ripetutamente confermato alle numerose persone che me ne hanno fatto richiesta 
in passato, ripeto che tutte le mie misurazioni effettuate durante le decine di 
test per misurare la quantità di acqua non evaporata presente nel vapore 
prodotto dai generatori  “E-Cat” sono sempre state effettuate dando i risultati 
in % di massa poiché lo strumento utilizzato indica  i gr. di acqua per mc. di 
vapore.
Confermo che la temperatura misurata è sempre stata maggiore di 100,1°C.
E che la pressione misurata nel camino è sempre risultata essere pari alla 
pressione ambiente.
Lo strumento utilizzato durante il test effettuato alla presenza dei professori 
svedesi è stato il seguente: Testo 176 H2  codice 0572 1766.
Distinti saluti.


From: Michele Comitini 
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 7:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini 
instrument is useless

I cannot find where Galantini declared that he used the RH reading on the 
datalogger.  Did he declare that?

Maybe  he used the probe because it measures T in the correct range up to 
150°C.  If he knew the pressure at the point where the probe was then with 
steam tables or Mollier diagram the quality of steam is derived. 
Why that probe with RH sensor then? Maybe it just comes bundled with the 
datalogger.

The Essen report points to a probe for temperature only.  Did they use a 
different way to find steam quality?

mic

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

Let me get this simple to you. You are WRONG.

There is the probe and there is the instrument itself. The instrument itself
just responds to whatever analogical electric signals the probe sends. And
it is basically a calculator and makes stores this signuals The instrument
is called

***HD37AB134***

MANUAL:

http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/manuali/HD37AB1347_M_15-12-2010_uk.pdf

and you are talking about the validity ranges of the probes

P37AB147*** and the P37B147*

The instrument can be connected to A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROBES*** which,
among them, includes (PAGE 64, you can see the list of all probes supported)

 HP474ACR

which goes up to 150C.

It is even stressed that the probes are ordered separately.

[Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

Daniel, *you* are wrong!
The ONLY *preassure* probe that can be connected is P37AB147*** and the 
P37B147*
And these ones meaure *atmsopheric preassure*
The other probes that can be connected DON’T MEASURE PRESSURE.
And HP474ACR doesnt’ measure preassure.

From: Daniel Rocha 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 3:38 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini 
instrument is useless

Let me get this simple to you. You are WRONG.

There is the probe and there is the instrument itself. The instrument itself 
just responds to whatever analogical electric signals the probe sends. And it 
is basically a calculator and makes stores this signuals The instrument is 
called  

***HD37AB134***

MANUAL:

http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/manuali/HD37AB1347_M_15-12-2010_uk.pdf

and you are talking about the validity ranges of the probes

P37AB147*** and the P37B147*

The instrument can be connected to A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROBES*** which, 
among them, includes (PAGE 64, you can see the list of all probes supported)

 HP474ACR

which goes up to 150C.

It is even stressed that the probes are ordered separately.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

Any probe that measures temperature in boiling water system measures
also pressure. That is because boiling point of water is directly
depended on pressure.

- Jouni

2011/8/5 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com:
 Daniel, *you* are wrong!
 The ONLY *preassure* probe that can be connected is P37AB147*** and the
 P37B147*
 And these ones meaure *atmsopheric preassure*
 The other probes that can be connected DON’T MEASURE PRESSURE.
 And HP474ACR doesnt’ measure preassure.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

 By knowing the RH, you will know the steam quality, adding temperature and
output, you will find the pressure inside the chamber.

[Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

They claims that tehy have measured a temperature  100 C degrees and a 
pression equal to ambient preassure, so they claims that the steam is dry.
You need to measure the preassure for that claim, since you can achive (with 
liquid water) a 102 temperature with a little over preassure.
-Messaggio originale- 
From: Jouni Valkonen

Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:17 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that 
galantini instrument is useless

Any probe that measures temperature in boiling water system measures
also pressure. That is because boiling point of water is directly
depended on pressure.

- Jouni

2011/8/5 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com:

Daniel, *you* are wrong!
The ONLY *preassure* probe that can be connected is P37AB147*** and 
the

P37B147*
And these ones meaure *atmsopheric preassure*
The other probes that can be connected DON’T MEASURE PRESSURE.
And HP474ACR doesnt’ measure preassure.

[Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

Again, Galantini said that he *measured* the preassure. There’s a big 
difference between a calculation and a measuramernt.
Since Delta Ohm’s engineer said that the instrument and the probe IS NOT 
SUITABLE for the measurement that Galtini did, then all derived (calculated) 
measuremnt are useless.
And NOT, NOBODY IN THE WORLD measure steam quality with RH, nobody!
If you are so sure, then provide me a single piece of letterature with wrote 
that with RH you can measure steam quality. You will fail.

From: Daniel Rocha 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini 
instrument is useless


By knowing the RH, you will know the steam quality, adding temperature and 
output, you will find the pressure inside the chamber.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

*Literature.

From: Mattia Rizzi 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:34 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini 
instrument is useless

Again, Galantini said that he *measured* the preassure. There’s a big 
difference between a calculation and a measuramernt.
Since Delta Ohm’s engineer said that the instrument and the probe IS NOT 
SUITABLE for the measurement that Galtini did, then all derived (calculated) 
measuremnt are useless.
And NOT, NOBODY IN THE WORLD measure steam quality with RH, nobody!
If you are so sure, then provide me a single piece of letterature with wrote 
that with RH you can measure steam quality. You will fail.

From: Daniel Rocha 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini 
instrument is useless

By knowing the RH, you will know the steam quality, adding temperature and 
output, you will find the pressure inside the chamber.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

Yes, he measured the pressure. He doesn't need an instrument specific for
that. You don't need an instrument for every data you want to find. For
example, even in any big particle colliders you don't see all of the
resulting colliding particles. You reconstruct the the trajectories and the
energy and deduce what kind of collision happened.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

There is no need for literature. If you have 1bar or less and any
temperature above 100C, with 0% RH, you have no liquid water in any kind of
gas, even if that gas is steam.

[Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

IF-IF-IF

If you have 1bar
Yeah, but you need to measure it, and with the probes that can be connected, 
you can measure *atmospehric pressure* with –20-+60C. If you put it inside a 
100C enviroment, kaboom.

with 0% RH
Yeah, BUT THE PROBE IS NOT DESIGNED TO BE PUT INSIDE AN ENVIRONMENT LIKE THE 
E-CAT

any temperature above 100C
That’s the only measuremnt correct, temperature. ANd with a 100.1-101 
temperature, there will be likely a very WET steam


From: Daniel Rocha 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 4:51 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini 
instrument is useless

There is no need for literature. If you have 1bar or less and any temperature 
above 100C, with 0% RH, you have no liquid water in any kind of gas, even if 
that gas is steam.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011/8/5 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com:
 They claims that tehy have measured a temperature  100 C degrees and a
 pression equal to ambient preassure, so they claims that the steam is dry.

They may claim whatever they want, but it is impossible that there is
ambient pressure, since E-Cat is closed system, excluding small
opening for the hose and there is substantial steam generation. Also
it is even more impossible that steam temperature is above boiling
point of local pressure. This is very basic steam stuff, although
people seem to have huge amounts of difficulties to understand this.

This is the reason why you need to know only one measured variable
from E-Cat and that is the temperature of steam. From that you can
calculate the pressure and total amount of steam generated, since only
steam contributes for the pressure. In practice absolute value is
rather difficult (but not impossible) to calculate, but relative
output power for each demonstrations is easy, because in every
demonstration was basically the same from perspective of steam flow.

- Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

The probe can work util 150C. It doesn't need to be that one that measure
pressure directly.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011-08-05 Thread Andrea Selva

Daniel you lost me a cople messages ago. Is this a  circular demostration ?
*The steam is dry because P = 1bar and P = 1 bar because the steam is dry ?*
Is this you saying ?
P, T and Dryness are three values tied together by one law (mollier diagram)
tho know one you need the other two. We do know only T, how to get the other
two ?

2011/8/5 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com

 There is no need for literature. If you have 1bar or less and any
 temperature above 100C, with 0% RH, you have no liquid water in any kind of
 gas, even if that gas is steam.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


 This is the reason why you need to know only one measured variable
 from E-Cat and that is the temperature of steam.


You need also RH to make sure there is no mist.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

No, not a circular demonstration. Steam is dry because P=1bar, and T100
cosidering that the measured RH=0.

[Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


they want, but it is impossible that there is

ambient pressure, since E-Cat is closed system


Exaclty, there will be a little (unknown) over preassure.


it is even more impossible that steam temperature is above boiling

point of local pressure

Hey! If inside there's over preassure, then the boling point will increase. 
That's obvisuly!
Since you don't know the over preassure, then if you read 101 degrees you 
cannot say it's dry!


-Messaggio originale- 
From: Jouni Valkonen

Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 5:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that 
galantini instrument is useless


2011/8/5 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com:

They claims that tehy have measured a temperature  100 C degrees and a
pression equal to ambient preassure, so they claims that the steam is dry.


They may claim whatever they want, but it is impossible that there is
ambient pressure, since E-Cat is closed system, excluding small
opening for the hose and there is substantial steam generation. Also
it is even more impossible that steam temperature is above boiling
point of local pressure. This is very basic steam stuff, although
people seem to have huge amounts of difficulties to understand this.

This is the reason why you need to know only one measured variable
from E-Cat and that is the temperature of steam. From that you can
calculate the pressure and total amount of steam generated, since only
steam contributes for the pressure. In practice absolute value is
rather difficult (but not impossible) to calculate, but relative
output power for each demonstrations is easy, because in every
demonstration was basically the same from perspective of steam flow.

- Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

But if you say RH=0, it is dry. If there is mist it will point a non null
RH, if there is bubbling, there will probably be a short circuit and the
value of RH will saturate or very wildly.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011/8/5 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
 This is the reason why you need to know only one measured variable
 from E-Cat and that is the temperature of steam.

 You need also RH to make sure there is no mist.


Mist does not contribute for the pressure and hence the temperature of
boiling water and steam. Therefore mist or overflown water is not
necessary to measure. Because amount of mist/overflown water is just
the difference of weight of the steam and total weight of water.

And what comes to the wet steam issue that all water boilers
produces 1-2% wet steam. Not much less not much more.

- Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

No, you misunderstood me. I am talking about the need for the RH quantity,
to make sure that there isn't enough liquid mass to invalidate the output
power.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011/8/5 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
 I am talking about the need for the RH quantity,
 to make sure that there isn't enough liquid mass to invalidate the output
 power.

This kind of setup, that there is no liquid mass with steam, is
impossible, because it is not stable. Water inflow must always be
greater than steam flow (i.e. heat output), otherwise system is not
stable, and heat element (and steam) temperature starts rising
uncontrolled. This is especially bad thing, if heat output is tens of
kilowatts, because it will lead inevitable meltdown of heating
element.

- Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

I just read about relative humidity. It I was wrong about the measurement of
RH. It will be 1 all the time given the measured steam above, without, is
already saturated steam. So, only the T will make sense.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

The high powered tests were done with a lot of liquid water instead of
showing steam.

RE: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 01:43 PM 8/4/2011, Michele Comitini wrote:

I cannot find where Galantini declared that he 
used the RH reading on the datalogger.Â  Did he declare that?


He used the g/m^3 reading, which is a calculated 
reading. I believe that this reading does 
consider pressure, if the information is available.



MaybeÂ  he used the probe because it measures T 
in the correct range up to 150Â°C.Â


Sure. However, that rating doesn't mean that it 
provides accurate readings all through that range.

 http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml

If he knew the pressure at the point where the 
probe was then with steam tables or Mollier 
diagram the quality of steam is derived.
Why that probe with RH sensor then? Maybe it 
just comes bundled with the datalogger.


The reading for g/m^3 requires the humidity sensor.

The Essen report points to a probe for 
temperature only.Â  Did they use a different way to find steam quality?


Essen and Kullander also report relying upon the g/m^3 display.

Michele, you have not pointed to a specific 
steam table that allows the derivation of 
quality of steam. Derived from what?


For saturated steam, which is obviously the 
condition in the E-Cats, the pressure and 
temperature are nailed to each other, and it is 
independent of quality of the steam. Only if the 
temperature rises above the saturated steam 
temperature for the pressure will the quality of the steam be determinable.


http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html 
shows a Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use 
this diagram to determine steam quality.


The question of how to use the Testo device to 
measure steam quality has been asked many times. 
The manufacturer and many others have stated it 
cannot be done. Nobody who claims it can be done has shown the procedure.


Galantini provided no data as readings from the 
meter, and no description of determination.

http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml

However, he states:

I confirm that the measured temperature always 
was higher than 100.1°C and that the measured 
pressure in the chimney always was equal to the ambient pressure.


It appears that Galantini thinks that the 
temperature of 100.1 C and pressure at ambient 
-- which he does not state -- is adequate to 
determine that the steam is dry. However, he's 
totally neglected that pressure inside the E-Cat 
*must* be greater than ambient, or steam would 
not flow out. The measured temperature of 100.5 
in the Marwan report for April indicates a 
pressure of, as I recall, 1.03 bar for saturated steam.


Some of us have done the calculations for 
expected steam velocity and pressure if all the 
water were being vaporized. Galantini, if he did 
measure the pressure in the E-cat and found it to 
be ambient, was making an approximation.


That the temperature is very stable indicates 
that the steam is saturated, which means it is at least somewhat wet.


All appearances are that Galantini made a major 
mistake, and he's not responded with actual data, 
nor with a description of his procedure.


Bottom line, then, his testimony means nothing. 
He is not an expert on steam, he's a chemist, he 
happens to own a company which does environmental 
testing, so he had the Testo data logger, I'd 
assume, in stock and he offered to help, having no understanding of the issues.


About the device: http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/st_airQ.php?str=HD37AB1347

With the HP474AC probe, the device will measure 
temperature up to 150 C., with an accuracy of +/- 
0.3 C, and humidity up to 100% with an accuracy, 
over 95%, of +/- 3.5%. It measures atmospheric 
pressure, but the sensor is not in the probe, it appears. It's in the device.


So we have a new mystery: how did Galantini 
determine that pressure in the E-cat was 
ambient. Did he simply read the pressure 
display and assume this was from the probe? I can 
imagine someone unfamiliar with the instrument making that mistake.


Rather, we have a very strong indicator of the 
pressure: it was at saturated steam pressure for 
the temperature. The evidence for this is the 
stable temperature observed, without a major 
excursion above a stable temperature. Once the 
steam is completely dry, the temperature can and very likely will rise.


The appearance is very strong from the 
demonstration reports that a temperature above 
100 C was assumed to indicate saturated steam, 
which is a blatant error. There will be pressure 
in the E-cat if any steam is being generated.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011-08-05 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence




On 11-08-05 11:00 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

Also
it is even more impossible that steam temperature is above boiling
point of local pressure.


Heavens, Jouni, where have you been?

That silly argument leads directly to the conclusion that the atmosphere 
can't be any hotter than the temperature at which oxygen liquefies.


If I have a tea kettle with a small opening, and if I boil all the water 
it contains away, leaving only water vapor inside, the kettle will be 
filled entirely by water vapor (all air having been expelled during the 
boiling, displaced by the steam).  And now, let's continue heating it, 
until the kettle is glowing a nice cherry red.  The small opening 
assures that the pressure inside the kettle is still 1 atmosphere, of 
course.  But what temperature is the water vapor inside?  Is it still at 
100C?


If it is, it's a miracle of non-thermodynamic behavior.

I don't understand how anyone can fail to get this.



  This is very basic steam stuff,


You can say that again.



  although
people seem to have huge amounts of difficulties to understand this.



So it appears.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 08:58 AM 8/5/2011, Mattia Rizzi wrote:
Galantini said that reads grams of liquid water 
/ m^3 of vapor on display of HD37AB1347.
From Leviâs report,  Galantini used an 
HP474ACR probe, that measure RH and temperature.
In the 2nd email, Galantini claim that he 
measured the preassure inside the e-cat. Nobody 
know how he measured, since HD37AB1347 
instruments CANNOT measure preassure, but only 
*atmospheric preassure*, with strict temperature 
range (-20,+60, see manual). Beyond these 
ranges, nobody know if the instrument works well.




Rizzi is quite correct, it appears. The device 
has a pressure sensor in it, the pressure sensor 
is not in the probe. It's looking like Galantini 
assumed he was getting a pressure reading from 
the probe he'd placed in the E-cat, hence his error.


The man had no clue. He should have been suspicious.

These people had no idea how much pressure would 
be generated inside the E-cat from a few grams of 
steam per second being generated! At ambient 
was just plain preposterous nonsense, unless there was *no* steam.


But why would we expect a chemist to be an expert on steam?

Why? Well, if we were Rossi and wanted to snooker 
some expert into validating his claims, we might indeed choose a chemist.

RE: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011-08-05 Thread Michele Comitini


 http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html shows a
Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use this diagram to determine steam
quality.

Dear Abd,

I use like this:
Take the isobaric curve;
Find intersection with temperature.
Now you can read the steam quality using the closest red curve.
If you need more precision you can read the enthalpy on the left and you can
find the mass of vapour and water in a unit of volume by algebraic
calculation.

As for the steam tables they are everywhere. If you want to play with steam
go here :
http://www.steamtablesonline.com/

mic

Il giorno 05/ago/2011 19:59, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com ha
scritto:

 At 01:43 PM 8/4/2011, Michele Comitini wrote:

 I cannot find where Galantini declared that he used the RH reading on the
datalogger.Â  Did he declare that?


 He used the g/m^3 reading, which is a calculated reading. I believe that
this reading does consider pressure, if the information is available.


 MaybeÂ  he used the probe because it measures T in the correct range up
to 150Â°C.Â


 Sure. However, that rating doesn't mean that it provides accurate readings
all through that range.
  http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml


 If he knew the pressure at the point where the probe was then with steam
tables or Mollier diagram the quality of steam is derived.
 Why that probe with RH sensor then? Maybe it just comes bundled with the
datalogger.


 The reading for g/m^3 requires the humidity sensor.

 The Essen report points to a probe for temperature only.Â  Did they use a
different way to find steam quality?


 Essen and Kullander also report relying upon the g/m^3 display.

 Michele, you have not pointed to a specific steam table that allows the
derivation of quality of steam. Derived from what?

 For saturated steam, which is obviously the condition in the E-Cats, the
pressure and temperature are nailed to each other, and it is independent of
quality of the steam. Only if the temperature rises above the saturated
steam temperature for the pressure will the quality of the steam be
determinable.

 http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html shows a
Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use this diagram to determine steam
quality.

 The question of how to use the Testo device to measure steam quality has
been asked many times. The manufacturer and many others have stated it
cannot be done. Nobody who claims it can be done has shown the procedure.

 Galantini provided no data as readings from the meter, and no description
of determination.
 http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml

 However, he states:

 I confirm that the measured temperature always was higher than 100.1°C
and that the measured pressure in the chimney always was equal to the
ambient pressure.


 It appears that Galantini thinks that the temperature of 100.1 C and
pressure at ambient -- which he does not state -- is adequate to determine
that the steam is dry. However, he's totally neglected that pressure inside
the E-Cat *must* be greater than ambient, or steam would not flow out. The
measured temperature of 100.5 in the Marwan report for April indicates a
pressure of, as I recall, 1.03 bar for saturated steam.

 Some of us have done the calculations for expected steam velocity and
pressure if all the water were being vaporized. Galantini, if he did measure
the pressure in the E-cat and found it to be ambient, was making an
approximation.

 That the temperature is very stable indicates that the steam is saturated,
which means it is at least somewhat wet.

 All appearances are that Galantini made a major mistake, and he's not
responded with actual data, nor with a description of his procedure.

 Bottom line, then, his testimony means nothing. He is not an expert on
steam, he's a chemist, he happens to own a company which does environmental
testing, so he had the Testo data logger, I'd assume, in stock and he
offered to help, having no understanding of the issues.

 About the device:
http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/st_airQ.php?str=HD37AB1347

 With the HP474AC probe, the device will measure temperature up to 150 C.,
with an accuracy of +/- 0.3 C, and humidity up to 100% with an accuracy,
over 95%, of +/- 3.5%. It measures atmospheric pressure, but the sensor is
not in the probe, it appears. It's in the device.

 So we have a new mystery: how did Galantini determine that pressure in the
E-cat was ambient. Did he simply read the pressure display and assume this
was from the probe? I can imagine someone unfamiliar with the instrument
making that mistake.

 Rather, we have a very strong indicator of the pressure: it was at
saturated steam pressure for the temperature. The evidence for this is the
stable temperature observed, without a major excursion above a stable
temperature. Once the steam is completely dry, the temperature can and very
likely will rise.

 The appearance is very strong from the

RE: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011-08-05 Thread Michele Comitini

Anyway i searched all possible reference of text written on the internet by
Galantini about the e-cat measurements and he does not mention steam tables
nor Mollier diagrams but psychrometric tables which i do not understand how
to use with steam... does anyone have a clue?

mic
Il giorno 05/ago/2011 22:55, Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com
ha scritto:

 http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html shows
a
 Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use this diagram to determine steam
 quality.

 Dear Abd,

 I use like this:
 Take the isobaric curve;
 Find intersection with temperature.
 Now you can read the steam quality using the closest red curve.
 If you need more precision you can read the enthalpy on the left and you
can
 find the mass of vapour and water in a unit of volume by algebraic
 calculation.

 As for the steam tables they are everywhere. If you want to play with
steam
 go here :
 http://www.steamtablesonline.com/

 mic

 Il giorno 05/ago/2011 19:59, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
ha
 scritto:

 At 01:43 PM 8/4/2011, Michele Comitini wrote:

 I cannot find where Galantini declared that he used the RH reading on
the
 datalogger.Â Did he declare that?


 He used the g/m^3 reading, which is a calculated reading. I believe that
 this reading does consider pressure, if the information is available.


 MaybeÂ he used the probe because it measures T in the correct range up
 to 150Â°C.Â


 Sure. However, that rating doesn't mean that it provides accurate
readings
 all through that range.
 http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml


 If he knew the pressure at the point where the probe was then with steam
 tables or Mollier diagram the quality of steam is derived.
 Why that probe with RH sensor then? Maybe it just comes bundled with the
 datalogger.


 The reading for g/m^3 requires the humidity sensor.

 The Essen report points to a probe for temperature only.Â Did they use a
 different way to find steam quality?


 Essen and Kullander also report relying upon the g/m^3 display.

 Michele, you have not pointed to a specific steam table that allows the
 derivation of quality of steam. Derived from what?

 For saturated steam, which is obviously the condition in the E-Cats, the
 pressure and temperature are nailed to each other, and it is independent
of
 quality of the steam. Only if the temperature rises above the saturated
 steam temperature for the pressure will the quality of the steam be
 determinable.

 http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html shows
a
 Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use this diagram to determine steam
 quality.

 The question of how to use the Testo device to measure steam quality has
 been asked many times. The manufacturer and many others have stated it
 cannot be done. Nobody who claims it can be done has shown the procedure.

 Galantini provided no data as readings from the meter, and no description
 of determination.
 http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml

 However, he states:

 I confirm that the measured temperature always was higher than 100.1°C
 and that the measured pressure in the chimney always was equal to the
 ambient pressure.


 It appears that Galantini thinks that the temperature of 100.1 C and
 pressure at ambient -- which he does not state -- is adequate to
determine
 that the steam is dry. However, he's totally neglected that pressure
inside
 the E-Cat *must* be greater than ambient, or steam would not flow out. The
 measured temperature of 100.5 in the Marwan report for April indicates a
 pressure of, as I recall, 1.03 bar for saturated steam.

 Some of us have done the calculations for expected steam velocity and
 pressure if all the water were being vaporized. Galantini, if he did
measure
 the pressure in the E-cat and found it to be ambient, was making an
 approximation.

 That the temperature is very stable indicates that the steam is
saturated,
 which means it is at least somewhat wet.

 All appearances are that Galantini made a major mistake, and he's not
 responded with actual data, nor with a description of his procedure.

 Bottom line, then, his testimony means nothing. He is not an expert on
 steam, he's a chemist, he happens to own a company which does
environmental
 testing, so he had the Testo data logger, I'd assume, in stock and he
 offered to help, having no understanding of the issues.

 About the device:
 http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/st_airQ.php?str=HD37AB1347

 With the HP474AC probe, the device will measure temperature up to 150 C.,
 with an accuracy of +/- 0.3 C, and humidity up to 100% with an accuracy,
 over 95%, of +/- 3.5%. It measures atmospheric pressure, but the sensor is
 not in the probe, it appears. It's in the device.

 So we have a new mystery: how did Galantini determine that pressure in
the
 E-cat was ambient. Did he simply read the pressure display and assume
this
 was from the probe? I can

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011/8/5 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
 The device has a pressure sensor in it,
 the pressure sensor is not in the probe. It's looking like Galantini assumed
 he was getting a pressure reading from the probe he'd placed in the E-cat,
 hence his error.


This is too simple explanation! Rossi arranged perfectly open and
transparent demonstration, but he just hired unimaginably stupid
scientists, such as Galantini and Kullander who failed with such a
basic laboratory routines as calibrating thermometer. All measurements
what was needed to do was, to weight the inflow water rate, measure
the temperature inside E-Cat and examine the diameter of opening for
the water/steam outlet hose. With these figures it is possible to
calculate rather accurately what is the real heating power of E-Cat.

But no, they failed to calibrate thermometer and since it's absolute
accuracy without calibration is something like ±0.5°C, temperature
figure is more less useless! Luckily Mats Lewan was smart enough
scientist and we can at least _assume_, that the same thermometer was
used in all demonstrations.

- Jouni

Ps. Abd ul-Rahman, be careful when insulting chemists. I'm
(bio-)chemist too and I know everything about the steam, since I have
cooked pasta when I was 12-years old. And also physical chemistry
covers rather well all that are related to thermodynamics.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

At 09:38 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:

Let me get this simple to you. You are WRONG.

We can stop right here. Daniel, you have sent this message to an
entire mailing list. There is nothing in your message that indicates
to whom or to what you are responding.

There is nothing in your message more than what's really obvious, to
anyone who reads the documents, and some of us read all this months ago.

By the way, looking at this manual, it looks like pressure is part of
the P37AB147 and P37B147 probes, I misread the specifications in the
manufacturer's catalog and incorrectly assumed that the pressure
sensor was part of the data logger. Those probes do measure pressure.
Those probes, however, are only rated to 60 C. Galantini used the
HP474ACR probe, which measures humidity and temperature, which indeed
can handle 150 C. It is not clear that it can actually measure
temperature at that level.

The device is designed for the monitoring of indoor air quality. This
explains why Galantini would have access to one of these,
environmental testing is his business. There is no sign that he or
his business have any expertise in steam engineering. He is a chemist.

The manual makes clear that the g/m^3 is a displayed humidity
value. It is simply Absolute Humidity. The sensor is a plastic
material that can take in water vapor. But not liquid water, so it
only measures the vapor phase.

For convenience, here is the rest of your post.

There is the probe and there is the instrument itself. The
instrument itself just responds to whatever analogical electric
signals the probe sends. And it is basically a calculator and makes
stores this signuals The instrument is called

***HD37AB134***

MANUAL:

http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/manuali/HD37AB1347_M_15-12-2010_uk.pdfhttp://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/manuali/HD37AB1347_M_15-12-2010_uk.pdf

and you are talking about the validity ranges of the probes

P37AB147*** and the P37B147*

The instrument can be connected to A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROBES***
which, among them, includes (PAGE 64, you can see the list of all
probes supported)

HP474ACR

which goes up to 150C.

It is even stressed that the probes are ordered separately.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 10:17 AM 8/5/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

Any probe that measures temperature in boiling water system measures
also pressure. That is because boiling point of water is directly
depended on pressure.


Jouni, you can't see the forest for the trees. Sure, temperature will 
depend on pressure. But pressure is not being measured by a 
temperature probe. Rather, if we assume saturated steam and we know 
the temperate, and it's saturated steam, yes, we can calculate the pressure.


But Galantini measured the temperature and appears to have concluded 
that a temperature of 100.1 C. or more indicated dry steam. That 
isn't true if the pressure is elevated only a little. He also claimed 
that the pressure was ambient. That was preposterous if this was 
under conditions of substantial steam generation, pressure would be 
elevated, and that's been calculated.


Galantini, with the probes he had, could not have measured the 
pressure inside the chimney, unless he took the probe with pressure 
measurement (he did not state he used that probe) and took it well 
beyond its rated temperature.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 10:29 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:

By knowing the RH, you will know the steam quality, adding 
temperature and output, you will find the pressure inside the chamber.


That's nonsense. Relative humidity maxes at 100%. The device used 
doesn't even reach that level.


Steam quality has little relationship to pressure because liquid 
water takes up so little volume compared to water vapor, gram per gram.


If, as you claim, RH corresponds to steam quality, try to find a 
conversion table. In fact, measuring steam quality is a difficult 
business, it's far from simple.


The temperature, however, if we assume saturated steam, will indeed 
tell us the pressure. Wet steam will, with constant pressure, 
maintain that same temperature over a range of 0-100% steam quality. 
(at 0% it's pure liquid water, no vapor. At 100% it is dry steam.)


The only way to derive steam quality from temperature would be to 
verify that the steam is hotter than the temperature for wet steam at 
the known pressure. Dry steam can get as hot as you can make it. Wet 
steam is, at a pressure of 1 bar, nailed to a temperature of 100 C.


It goes over that value in the E-cat because there is pressure from 
steam generation.


People should really get this: there is practically no way to make 
try dry steam without taking special precautions to separate the 
liquid and vapor phases, after the water has been boiled. Boilers 
ordinarily produce wet steam, typically 95% quality. I suggest 
looking up steam quality, there is lots of information about it on the web.


Boilers, however, do not ordinarily have liquid water spilling over 
the edge of a hole in the side of the boiler, at a pace determined by 
the difference between the pumped rate and the vaporization rate. If 
there is substantial steam (my very rough estimate is 5% 
vaporization, under Rossi conditions) the water will be atomized by 
the flow of steam, the steam will go from 5% or so (normal) wetness 
to as high as 95% wetness. I.e, 5 % quality.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011/8/6 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
 At 10:17 AM 8/5/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

 Any probe that measures temperature in boiling water system measures
 also pressure. That is because boiling point of water is directly
 depended on pressure.

 Jouni, you can't see the forest for the trees. Sure, temperature will depend
 on pressure. But pressure is not being measured by a temperature probe.
 Rather, if we assume saturated steam and we know the temperate, and it's
 saturated steam, yes, we can calculate the pressure.

No we do not need to assume anything. All what is needed is just to
observe that boiler system is stable, and we get always steam with
temperature exactly at boiling point of local pressure. If this is not
the case, then we do not have steam at all and temperature is
something below boiling or cooling is insufficient and temperature
rises well above boiling and again is not stable. There is absolutely
nothing in between, but either system is in the stable equilibrium at
boiling point or it is not not. And if it is not, then it is very easy
to observe.


- Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 10:41 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Yes, he measured the pressure. He doesn't need an instrument 
specific for that. You don't need an instrument for every data you 
want to find. For example, even in any big particle colliders you 
don't see all of the resulting colliding particles. You reconstruct 
the the trajectories and the energy and deduce what kind of collision happened.


This is total BS. Of course he doesn't need an instrument specific 
for that. The obvious method is to look at the temperature of 
saturated steam. However, Galantini concluded -- we don't know how -- 
that the steam was dry. Dry steam will not tell you what the pressure is.


If you have wet steam at 100.5 degrees, I did the calculations, I 
forget the pressure I came up with, but it was about 1.03 bar, as I 
recall. Galantini states a temperature of 100.1 degrees and a 
pressure of ambient, which would have been below 1 bar because of 
the elevation of Bologna.


The statements are not consistent, and those here who are claiming 
that this humidity meter measurement is just fine are simply exposing 
strong bias. I've been looking for months. There is nothing 
confirming that you can use a humidity meter to measure steam quality. Zilch.


Except for Galantini's claim. Kullander and Essen seem to have made 
the same mistake. None of these people have explained how they did 
it. They have not reported the meter readings they obtained. 
Galantini simply reports dry, which would be an astonishing result 
to anyone who understands steam engineering, making it obvious that he doesn't.


Kullander and Essen reported quite low levels of wetness by mass. Low 
enough to be supicious in themselves. It appears that Kullander and 
Essen likewise did not have steam experience, Essen has been explicit 
about that.


We do know that all these people used a relative humidity probe, and 
they read the meter in g/m^3. Somehow they converted this into a 
steam quality measurement. How? They have not said, in spite of 
multiple requests.


What is that reading? From the manual, it is absolute humidity. 
However, the sensor is not designed to admit liquid water at all. It 
is only measuring vapor. With low accuracy near 100% humidity, by the 
way, the manual states +/- 3.5% above 95% humidity.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 10:51 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:
There is no need for literature. If you have 1bar or less and any 
temperature above 100C, with 0% RH, you have no liquid water in any 
kind of gas, even if that gas is steam.


Actually, if the gas is 100% steam, the RH is 100%.

Yes. The statement is true. The pressure in the E-cat is over 1 bar, 
precisely by the amount to correspond to the measured temperature. At 
1 bar, if the temperature is over 100 C., the steam is dry. But, 
remember, measurements aren't perfectly accurate.


Boilers do not produce dry steam unless it is arranged for the steam 
to be in continued contact with a surface over boiling temperature. 
Normally, they produce steam that is about 95% quality. I.e, by mass, 
95% vapor and 5% liquid water. (I understand steam does not conduct 
heat very well, so the existence of some hot surfaces to which steam 
is transiently exposed may not be enough to convert the steam to dry steam.)


The statement is only true if the water is in very small droplets, 
i.e., mist. Larger masses of water can coexist for some time with 
water vapor over boiling temperature.


But in saturated steam, the temperature is nailed to the boiling 
point, which depends on pressure.


Add heat, some of the water evaporates. Cool it, some of the vapor 
condenses. Temperature resists change, until either the water is all 
evaporated, or it is all condensed.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 11:00 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:
The probe can work util 150C. It doesn't need to be that one that 
measure pressure directly.


that's right. However, how are you going to measure temperature of 
100 C, and the pressure, with a pressure probe only rated for 60 C?


Sure, you can measure the atmospheric pressure. But not the pressure 
of the steam, which is what we are most interested in!

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 11:04 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:

This is the reason why you need to know only one measured variable
from E-Cat and that is the temperature of steam.


You need also RH to make sure there is no mist.


RH does not vary with mist. Mist is at RH of 100%. As is saturated 
steam. No matter what the quality.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 11:07 AM 8/5/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote:
No, not a circular demonstration. Steam is dry because P=1bar, and 
T100 cosidering that the measured RH=0.


Where is the measured RH found to be zero? Daniel, you are very far 
off the wall here.


What you've done is to accept Galantini's statement, but he made that 
statement without having the equipment to make the measurements.


He had no means of determining the pressure inside the E-Cat, because 
that environment was beyond the capacity of his pressure probe.


He could measure the temperature, which, from the behavior of the 
E-cat (it obviously was stuck at that temperature in spite of 
increasing heat), was saturated steam. Thus the pressure could be inferred.


But what he did was to apparently *assume* 1 bar, then, because the 
temperature was elevated over 100 C., which is the boiling point of 
water at 1 bar, he assumed dry steam.


But if the pressure in the E-cat were only 1 bar, we could conclude 
that very little steam was being evolved! Because even a little steam 
would raise the pressure over ambient.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless

2011/8/6 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
 Boilers, however, do not ordinarily have liquid water spilling over the edge
 of a hole in the side of the boiler, at a pace determined by the difference
 between the pumped rate and the vaporization rate. If there is substantial
 steam (my very rough estimate is 5% vaporization, under Rossi conditions)
 the water will be atomized by the flow of steam, the steam will go from 5%
 or so (normal) wetness to as high as 95% wetness. I.e, 5 % quality.

Please stop this wet steam nonsense. There is no way that Rossi could
make a system that produces steam with wetness anymore than 5%. It is
very difficult to do very wet steam.

I guess is that it is possible to make very wet steam by aggressively
cooling high pressure and velocity steam. This leads to dramatic
reduction of temperature and pressure and formation of very wet steam,
although I have no idea how stable high wetness state is, before
surface tensions takes hold and creates water droplets. I would guess,
that it ultra wet steam is related to super cooled water, that it can
exists if steam velocity is high enough, such as in steam turbine.

However, this is not what is happening, because temperature is more or
less stable and pressure variotions are very small, therefore there is
no ultra wet steam formation in the E-Cat.

- Jouni

PS. since google does not know what ultra wet steam is, this my own
theory about what ultra wet steam is.

RE: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 04:55 PM 8/5/2011, Michele Comitini wrote:



 
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.htmlhttp://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html 
shows a Mollier diagram, but I see no way to 
use this diagram to determine steam quality.


Dear Abd,

I use like this:
Take the isobaric curve;
Find intersection with temperature.
Now you can read the steam quality using the closest red curve.
If you need more precision you can read the 
enthalpy on the left and you can find the mass 
of vapour and water in a unit of volume by algebraic calculation.


Great. Isobaric curve for 1 bar. Intersects the 
tempurature curve at 100 C. Steam quality 100%. 
What does this mean? That all steam at 100 C and 
1 bar is 100% dry? The temperature lines do not go below 100%, anywhere.



As for the steam tables they are everywhere. If 
you want to play with steam go here :Â

http://www.steamtablesonline.com/http://www.steamtablesonline.com/


I looked at the calculator there and found that 
the pressure/temperature relationship did not 
change with a change in steam quality. Steam 
quality affects the enthalpy, drastically.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless


At 06:22 PM 8/5/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:


Ps. Abd ul-Rahman, be careful when insulting chemists. I'm
(bio-)chemist too and I know everything about the steam, since I have
cooked pasta when I was 12-years old. And also physical chemistry
covers rather well all that are related to thermodynamics.


I'm not insulting chemists, I'm just noting that citing a chemist as 
if he is an unassailable authority on steam quality is nuts. Unless 
you can cite reasons to believe it.


And you don't know everything about steam because you have cooked 
pasta. You may know a great deal about pasta, sure.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [e-cat] Engineer from delta ohm confirms that galantini instrument is useless