It is my understanding that the test in Rossi's facility in Ferrara, Italy
was the 24 hr test that IH first witnesses to form the basis for buying the
1 Mw unit. Rossi subsequently shipped to NC. It consisted of 100 10 kw
reactors. The successful 24 hr test earned Rossi $10 to add to the S1.5 M
he received in sale of the unit to IH.
The Lugano test was a separate operation which was supported by both Rossi
and IH early after the agreement signing.
The current $89M in question was to be paid to Rossi by IH at the end of the
350 day operation of the unit purchased by IH. However, somewhere along the
line the purchased unit was replaced by a new 1 Mw plant design with 4, 250
Mw reactors. The original plant was held as a backup in the 350 day trial,
but was not used. It may have been shipped from NC to Miami to serve as a
ready backup. It seems reasonable that IH agreed to substitute the newer
plant design. It would seem that IH paid for the construction of the new
plant, since they went along with the 350 test in the Miami location and
paid half the cost of the third party observer.
As I have considered in an earlier comment, my guess is that IH had to show
more ownership of knowhow and IP to bring the Chinese entities on board.
That decision on IH's part may have been the beginning of the friction, if
not their lack of action to identify a customer to accomplish the 350 test
and allow payment of the $89M to Rossi upon its completion. Such action,
if actually occurring would get my attention, if I were Rossi.
The $89M would have likely provided funding for Rossi's planned development
of a large scale production facility in Sweden and further protection of his
patents and IP, consistent with his long-stated strategy. Flooding the
market with low cost devices before competitors could get a foot hold or
governments could act to stop the spread of the technology seems to be a
reasonable strategy, given Rossi experience in Italy in the past and his
awareness of hostile political powers that would go against such a change.
Bob Cook
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 2:32 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor
Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.
I do not accept this analysis as definitive. Please note the very rapid
change in measured temperature of the Lugano reactor that occurs with a
small change in input drive power. How would you explain that as a
function of the material? Do you believe that the material changes
properties that significantly with such a small change in drive?
My thermal models show this effect quite clearly, especially when the
COP begins to become significant. I believe that everyone needs to
rethink what they are accepting as facts.
Dave
On 04/08/2016 01:58 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
If anyone is still operating under the illusion that there was valid
thermal
gain at Lugano, please re-educate yourself via the authoritative work of
Thomas Clarke.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1c8DgA3A7ovRVhQcHBweTVNbjg/view?pref=2&pli
=1
The conclusion: The analysis here shows that the estimated excess heat in
the Report is wrong, and results from an incorrect assumption that alumina
is a gray body with temperature-dependent emissivity. In fact alumina has
a
non-gray-body frequency-dependent spectral emissivity that combines with
Plank's Law to result in a temperature-dependent total emissivity. The
infra-red thermography results must thus be adjusted using the relevant
band
emissivity of alumina, not the temperature-dependent total emissivity.
We show that when this error is corrected the resulting temperature is
779C,
not the claimed 1401C. The total estimated power out from the system shows
a
COP of 1.07 and matches power in to within possible experimental error.
Remarkably, the two tests with 755W and 865W input have very similar COP,
and this similarity is not very sensitive to changes in parameters such as
alumina emissivity. Thus the argument for high differential COP used by
the
Report as additional evidence falls and both the COP and differential COP
are as expected for a system with no excess heat.
From: Robert Dorr
I stand corrected. Rossi said, just today, that I.H built the E-Cat for
the Lugano test and that they even signed it.
But the Lugano reactor did not produce significant excess heat, after the
measurement errors were accounted for, so the Lugano fiasco reaffirms the
stance of IH - that they have never witnessed excess heat in a valid test
of
a Rossi reactor.
