Jones has explained the case better than me. It was a peristaltic pump, see Celani's report "peristaltic pump, small size 10-20 W power" I have used this type of pump for many liquids, including phosgene- so I noticed it immediately. The temperature of the steam was 101 C- and to be again personal when you are burned with it as I was twice, you don't feel the difference.. I hope to see a similar device, if my health permits I will visit Francesco Piantelli this summer and see his cells in action. Peter
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you for the clarification. > > My only point was that there was a coincidence in need of explaining: > the power in and power out *seem* to be set independently and yet they > match to a nicety. > > Your explanation of that coincidence, given below, is in rough agreement > with Jones's, which is that there is (or could be) either explicit or > implicit feedback to the reactor itself which is pinning the output > temperature. Robin also speculated that that might be the case. > > That's reasonable, but again, I'd really like to see such an assertion > from someone who knows. If it's true, then it has interesting > implications of its own regarding the fine control it's possible to > exercise over the reaction. > > The thing I find totally frustrating is that so many people on this list > seem to feel that there is nothing here in need of explaining, because > steam is just always magically at 100C. > > I hope to see a similar device, if my health permits I will visit Francesco Piantelli this summer and see his cells in action. > > On 02/09/2011 12:52 PM, Peter Gluck wrote: > > I have understood. I have even worked with many types of pumps, > > including those with constant, fixed flow, as in this case- the > > peristaltic pump.. > > A nit: It's not a peristaltic pump, it's a constant displacement pump. > The practical difference, as I understand it, is that the latter > provides even more precise control over the flow rate. > > > Very probably the system works in this way- you have a core, very hot > > in the center of the device- Ni and H reacting in a metallic tube.. By > > external heating - with the input current a resistor heats the core to > > a temperature (350 C?) and the reaction is started. It releases heat > > and if this heat is not removed fast enough the core overheats and > > stops working. > > Implicit negative feedback to the reaction. That's certainly possible, > but if so, it would be nice if someone from the experimental team would > state it as a fact. > > > With sufficient cooling as in this case it works - probably the inner > > temperature oscillates in some limits. The entire quantity of cooling > > water is evaporated and a bit overheated. We don't know how the Ecat > > is controlled, probably the heat furnished by the resistor is > > automatically adjusted to the cooling load. Remember that Rossi told > > that he heat after death regime, zero input (after the start of > > reaction) can be dangerous. > > >
