Jeff Driscoll <[email protected]> wrote: 100% vapor is steam that is completely transparent, it is termed 100% > quality. The H2O molecules are completely free from each other and not stuck > together, it is a gas. see here > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_quality > > 0% steam quality looks like white fog - like the fogging machines or white > clouds in they sky. >
That is correct. That is what the people at Hydrodynamics say. You can see the plume of steam become visible some distance away from the end of the hose. You can also run your hand through the invisible dry steam quickly. If it stings, it is wet, since there are droplets of water on the skin. I do not recommend this technique, but grizzled old guys who deal with 100 kW boilers do it all the time. If you run your hand through the plume of visible vapor you will find it extremely painful. If the steam comes out of Rossi's black hose transparent (in the first 1/2" > where it comes out) then it is 100% vapor (dry steam). > Various people who have observed the tests tell me that is what it looks like. That is not a definitive but it does indicate the steam is pretty dry. > If it comes out as white fog (in the first 1/2 inch of exiting) then it > is a mixture of vapor and tiny droplets. No one can visually determine the > mass ratio of gaseous vapor to tiny liquid droplets. > As you see in the video, by the time it reaches the end of that long hose, it is wet, and a lot of it has condensed. It is radiating heat into the room. That what Mats pointed out in his note to me, today. Rizzi's description of the steam as resembling at "baby fart" is colorful but that is what you would expect at the end of such a long hose. It is a shame they did not detach the hose and show the steam going into the air. As I said, various people who have observed these tests over the years have done that, and told me they did. That is not a fully-instrumented test so I have not mentioned it. Skeptics who do not believe in the flowing water test are not likely to be convinced by invisible steam. I am convinced, but I have done a lot more calorimetry than the people crying "fraud" here and elsewhere. > The previous tests in january and february used a humidity meter to measure > the water vapor to liquid water droplet ratio (i.e steam quality) of 100 > degree C steam which is a joke. > People who understand these meters tell me it is not a joke at all. The meter with that probe is fine for that purpose. There would not be much point to making an RH meter probe is intended for a range of temperature up to 300°C that does not work with steam. How many more tests are they going to use this "steam vaporizing" method? > The more they do it the more I suspect fraud. > You have absolutely no reason to suspect fraud, especially in view of the second test with hot water only. There is a difference between a test that is "not done quite the way I would do it," and a test that is fraud. - Jed
