As I said, Alan Goldwater's work is on the small diameter coil that will go into the dogbone in place of the LENR reactor core. Temperature measurements made on it by itself, were made with a type-k thermocouple placed inside the tiny alumina tube (4mm OD) used as a coil form for the kanthal heater wire on the outside (6 mm OD coil). When the kanthal wound tube was coated with a ceramic cement, there was insulation and not as much convection and this coil got to the 1300C range inside the center of the alumina tube. This is NOT the dogbone shaped convection tube.
I know the text is confusing, having Alan's work described just below the dogbone picture. The dogbone shaped convection tube has NOT been heated to that temperature. You also have my opinion wrong. As I said, I am concerned that even putting in a total of 3kW electric in our dogbone test, we may not get to the same temperature as in the Lugano report. The electrical input in the Lugano report was a little above 900W as I recall, and I don't believe it is possible to get the dogbone to 1400C on the OUTSIDE with 900W input based on our measurements. Also, the type of heater element we now believe was used in the Lugano hotCat was not capable of delivering over about 1kW of input heat. So if the hotCat was really putting out over 2.5kW of heat to get it to 1400C, then there was definitely substantial gain. We will know in January. Bob Higgins On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 8:59 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Blaze Spinnaker > > Aren't you compare the body average to the core? The body average means > that it's sustaining 1260 over the entire body. Doesn't that mean it's > outputting more energy than one core reading? > > That depends on heat transfer characteristics of the two - it could be > more or it could be less, but the point is that there is a similarity and > near identity in the two systems that should be alarming to those who > think Rossi was showing COP >3. > > If the report is accurate (and apparently Bob thinks it is not), then the > preliminary implication is that either Rossi’s version is not gainful or > the dummy reactor is gainful. > >
