Murray an "expert"? He wasn't even an engineer, he was an IT guy with
connections to DOD.
As for the rest of your comment, I have answered it all before. Exhibit
5 says:
"According to the data you have reported (averaged data for 10 months or
for 3 ERV reports),
1) the conserved mass flow rate of the system from February to November
2015 was on
average *33,558 kg/day (1,398 kg/h)*.
2) the temperature of the water and steam were on average *68.7º C and
102.8º C*, respectively..
3) the steam pressure was reported (for the entire period) to be *0
kPaG, *so the steam was dry*
*
4) The only power consumption figure we have is from Lewan ~20 kW.*"
*
On 8/20/2016 11:52 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
If they knew something was wrong, why didn't they DO something
about it?
They tried to do something, as you see in the Answer and in Exhibit 5.
Rossi refused to let their expert in the door! See Exhibit 19.
Exhibit 5 shows the ERV's analysis that indicates the plant was
working very well.
Good grief! "Working very well" on what planet? The flow meter was the
wrong size and only half in the water, so it was giving the wrong
answer. The data for flow rates and pressure were blatantly false. The
pressure was impossible:
"The steam pressure was reported (for the entire period) to be 0
kPaG and the piping is DN40. For steam to flow, a pressure
differential is required to overcome the losses in the pipe. Given
the foregoing, this would require that the pressure on the JMP
side of the building was significantly below atmospheric (vacuum)
and that the steam would flow at extraordinary velocity. But this
was obviously not the situation present at the location."
There was no ventilation equipment except for a broken fan hanging
from the ceiling, so there could not possibly be even 100 kW, never
mind 1 MW. The data showed 1 MW of constant heat production on days
when Rossi, in his blog, reported the machine was half turned off, or
fully turned off, and eyewitnesses confirmed this.
The arrangement with the "hidden" customer was lunatic, and it obvious
the customer was completely fake.
And much else was wrong with it??? If this is your idea of "working
well" what would be a fiasco?
You seem to be disconnected from reality.
- Jed
