Breaking the mold, I'm agreeing with Cude here, in part.
At 05:29 AM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
In any case, if the device is to be used to determine liquid content in steam, it would at least have to be calibrated for that purpose. There is no indication such a calibration was performed.
There are procedures given for calibrating the meter for other measurements. We have no information allowing us to accept, so far, that this meter is useful for steam quality determination, nor do we have the kind of information I've seen where critical measurements are reported legally. There will be reference to calibrations and when the calibration was performed, etc. Galantini's report is relatively informal, which isn't surprising, in itself. But for us, the information is missing, and may reflect the absence of any such calibration.
It would be possible, just from the experiments performed, to determine if the RH probe were of any use. If the RH readings were *monitored* on a continuos basis, like the temperature, and *reported*, we could see if the reading ever actually changes. Presumably the steam must begin wet and then become drier as the power transfer increases.
Not necessarily. Indeed, the steam may be wetter with higher power, because of higher turbulence inside the device.
During this process, does the RH reading on that probe change? If it doesn't, whatever it is measuring is not relevant to the liquid content of the steam.
Well, there may be a transient wet steam phase, where dry steam generated in the device is made wet by condensation as it passes into the still-cool outlet chimney. But the probe has a delay time, it doesn't instantly change the humidity level in that capacitor, I don't recall what the time necessary is. I think I may have read about watching the humidity reading until it settles.
There are two very simple ways to prove the steam is dry: (1) Measure the output flow rate (velocity); if it is steam, it should be 1700 times higher than the input flow rate;
Yeah, but it's not so simple to determine that rate. Could be done, though.
(2) Reduce the input flow rate so the steam temperature exceeds boiling by more than a few degrees -- say 120C or so. That these two methods are not used suggests the steam is not dry.
Not really. It suggests that measures have not been taken to prove that it's dry.
Reducing the input flow rate could be dangerous with this device, possibly. I'd prefer to see gravity feed, so that water is replace as it boils. A feed container sitting on a scale on an elevated table is how I'd think of doing it, the water would siphon into the E-Cat to maintain constant water level there, matching the level outside in the feed container, which would be kept at that level periodically by adding a known weight (or volume would be accurate enough) of water.
If it's confirmed that the steam is dry, then, the energy generated could be directly measured by the consumption of water. The confirmation of dry steam would take place in the vent at the top of the chimney, I described how a tee could be placed there so that an observer could switch the steam from the hose (normal operation) to the vent aiming straight up (steam quality test position). No meter is necessary.
