Why do you think that one guy has to do all the design work? The PLC can be for the second generation where cost is focused upon. The first passes should be done with easier to program flash processors. As you say, details, details, etc. The main point is that it is a joke to think that this design will take 100 man years.
Rossi most likely already has a first pass control system that he is in the process of debugging as we write. If he is smart, which I know that he is, he is putting plenty of intelligence into each individual ECAT controller (100 computers) so that later they can be operated in stand alone conditions. At least one of his software guys is likely working on some form of GUI that uses a standard operating system to save time. That guy is concentrating upon a command structure to interface with the individual ECATs by perhaps a serial driver. Of course other engineers, etc. are laying out the hardware for the ECAT PCBs and coming up with an acceptable package for them. I would expect the first pass process to take no more than 6 months to achieve a prototype. They can not afford to take much longer if they wish to win the race for a final product. After the first systems are debugged and operating well enough it will be time to pursue the cost savings that you imply for the final system. At that time, each controller should cost no more than $50 once they establish a high rate of production. In time, that cost will appear excessive. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 5:03 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells Who is going to design the hardware for the custom PLC and the RTU, and the custom bus interface cards inside the ghosted duel PCs? Will you do that during lunch? On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:57 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: Surely you are kidding. Have you written processor code before? I have written control systems for numerous radios that are more complex than an ECAT. You only have a couple of inputs to handle for an ECAT and the only outputs appear to be drive for the power heating system and monitoring processes. The communications link to the main controller should be straight forward as well. I would class the control system for a 100 Megawatt ECAT system as relatively simple provided someone figures out how to handle stability and so forth. Those functions can be determined by making the proper measurements of an operating device over environmental and time extremes. Throw in a DSP capable processor if you want to be fancy. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells IF Rossi is developing his home grown command and control system, we won't see the E-Cat cluster reactor released for another 10 years. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:26 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: Yeah, and they did not have an internally designed controller in that case. The Iranians purchased a standard system from what I read. It is much easier to monkey around with a controller that anyone can purchase than one where you change the software at will. Rossi apparently is developing his own control software. Do you know otherwise? Consider the case of Linux systems compared to Windows devices. The very frequent updates keep malicious code under control. The closer you hold the source code and version distributions to your chest, the more difficult it becomes for bad guys to interfere. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells The Iranians lost control of their centrifuges, and they were not on the internet. The infection came in on a memory stick. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: You assume that these ECAT systems must be connected to the Internet. If that connection is too dangerous then it should not be standard until the vulnerabilities are resolved. Of course it is modern to monitor and control things by connection to the internet, but that is not the only choice. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:more energy in disputes than from cells How will Russia kept their oil and gas products running in the face of Rossi's E-Cat challenge? Here's how. SCADA Strangelove: Zero-days & hacking for full remote control Speaking of critical SCADA systems online and the risks to them…after finding more than 60,000 exposed control systems online, two Russian security researchers found vulnerabilities that could be exploited to take “full control of systems running energy, chemical and transportation systems.” At the Chaos Communication Congress, 30C3, Positive Research chief technology officer Sergey Gordeychik and consultant Gleb Gritsai said they demonstrated “how to get full control of industrial infrastructure” to the energy, oil and gas, chemical and transportation sectors. “The vulnerabilities,” according to the Australian IT News, “existed in the way passwords were encrypted and stored in the software's Project database and allowed attackers to gain full access to Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) using attacks described as dangerous and easy to launch.” They probed and found holes in “popular and high-end ICS and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control everything from home solar panel installations to critical national infrastructure.” There are also numerous vulnerabilities in “home systems -- exposed to the public internet and at risk of attack.” In one case, the researchers responsibly disclosed a “vulnerability in the cloud SCADA platform Daq Connect which allowed attackers running a demonstration kiosk to access other customer installations." The vendor's totally unhelpful response was to tell the researchers “to simply 'not do' the attacks.” The SCADA Strangelove project has identified more than 150 zero-day vulnerabilities in SCADA, ICS and PLCs, with five percent of those being “dangerous remote code execution holes.” At 30C3, they released an updated version of THC-Hydra, “a password-cracking tool that targeted the vulnerability in Siemens PLC S-300 devices,” and a “Pretty Shiny Sparkly ICS/SCADA/PLC Cheat Sheet,” identifying almost 600 ICS, PLC and SCADA systems, so you too can “become a real SCADA Hacker.” On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: Rossihas publicly stated that he is using over 100 computers to implementhis latest control stratagem. From this meager bit of information wecan deduce fairly much what is going on with the 1 megawatt clusterE-Cat reactor. That number of computers means he is using a SCADAsystem to do the command and control function to keep his creation inline. Theterm SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) usually refersto a centralized system which monitors and controls the industrialinfrastructure of entire sites, or complexes of systems spread outover large areas (anything from an industrial plant to a nation).Most localized control actions are performed automatically by RemoteTerminal Unit (RTU)s or by Programmable Logic Controller (PLC)s.These are computer boards which are controlled by a low levelmicrocomputer usually housed in a rack mounted enclosure using a fullduplex bus structure to communicate with a master controlstation(MCS). The MCS is a custom coded PC that hosts the bus networkand provides a graphical user interface to depict the operationalparameters and status of all the E-Cats. In a high availabilityapplication, the MCD runs in a ghosted mode with a hot backup PC. Thecost of such a system(a high quality implementation) is substantial. This digital Command andControl(C&C) will comprise a large fraction of the cost ofRossi's 1 megawatt plant. Even the best of such systems is prone to bugs, out ofprofile behavior and hacking attacks. Usually industrial customerswill want to integrate the E-Cat cluster reactor into their factorywide SCADA C&C system. In myopinion, Rossi and Industrial heat have made a mistake in judgment onthis reactor design decision. A simplified fail safe (as in a nuclear reactor) analog basedcontrol system is best suited to the 1 MW E-Cat cluster reactor. On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> 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
