I have personally designed PC GUI interfaces to my own radio controllers that are built into the radio system. The real question you should ask is how much independence can each of the ECAT controllers be? A good design would have the major control processes distributed and thereby limit the amount of control required by the more complex central system controller.
If I were Rossi, I would make each ECAT processor intelligent enough to perform every function required to keep it operating smoothly. I would design in the fail safe mechanisms to each as well as the ability to take itself offline when a fault occurs. With that degree of independence you would only have to handle status communications at the main hub. Of course, a command structure would need to be generated. Lets not get lost in complexity by assuming that a task is impossible before a proper plan is worked out. My bet is that Rossi only has 3 or so programmers working on his 100 Megawatt system. A first pass control system should take 6 months or less once the requirements are established. A conservative person might wish to integrate purchased control sections into the design, but that should not be necessary. One day soon we will see how Rossi and company approached the control requirements and I suspect you will be surprised. Why design a car when a bike is all you need? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Then there is the ghosted real time PC based master control system to consider. Have you ever worked on a PC based real-time graphic interface controlling 100 remote computer? If you can custom code that up in a few months, you are more than a good programmer, you are a GOD programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:46 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: I am a programmer. The cost depends upon the requirements that must be met. Each ECAT should be easy to control once it is understood since the input complexity appears very small. Controlling the complete system is more complex, but I do not think that we are looking at a major effort such as a modern operating system would require. A couple of good programmers should be able to make the first pass in a few months. I suspect that you are worried about an issue that is simple to handle. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Details, details, details, the costs are all in the details. The communication problems between the PLC and the PLS multiplexer (RTU) requires a complicated communication protocol, and data buffering in both the PLC and the RTU. The main control station can fail. this requires data storage during reboot. The bottom line is that the SCADA system is complicated and requires a lot of code. Coding is expensive, ask any programmer. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote: Dave- I agree with you and had the same thought about Axil's rash conclusion. Some solar panels have the same kind of mirco processor to control the voltage of each panel in a group of many panels. The ones that are not producing are identified and taken off line generally. A farm of wind turbines works the same way. I think computer and micro processor mean the same thing. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: David Roberson To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Axil, I suspect that you are misreading what Rossi stated. Why would you not think that each small ECAT unit has its own microcontroller? There are approximately 100 individual ECATs and he has chosen to control each one independently while a main control system coordinates them. If what I believe is true then the power handling required to activate the internal heating sections is modest. This lowers the cost of that function by a considerable amount. Also, failure of each unit can be monitored and the faulty ones located quickly and easily replaced. Rossi likes to operate in a practical, simple manner. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Rossi has publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implement his latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information we can deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt cluster E-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADA system to do the command and control function to keep his creation in line. The term SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refers to a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrial infrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation). Most localized control actions are performed automatically by Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s. These are computer boards which are controlled by a low level microcomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a full duplex bus structure to communicate with a master control station(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus network and provides a graphical user interface to depict the operational parameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availability application, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. The cost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command and Control(C&C) will comprise a large fraction of the cost of Rossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out of profile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customers will want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factory wide SCADA C&C system. In my opinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment on this reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog based control system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: Dear Friends, when the New Paradigm of LENR will arrive, remember me for this too: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/daily-shared-lenr-discoveries-december_9.html It is the daily info here...more daily than info this time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
