On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote:
> At 03:21 PM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: > >> >> This looks like ~2 kW, used to clean an automobile interior: >> >> >> What is your point? That thing produces steam at several times the rate of >> the ecat in the Krivit video. >> > > The Krivit video does not show the steam production rate, that's the > problem. It shows what's left after the steam runs through three meters of > rubber hose. We know that steam will condense in this hose, and some > estimates have been made of how much. It's quite enough to explain that weak > showing. Not even close by my estimation. First of all, if you accept Rossi's claim of 7kg/h flow rate that he makes on the video, then if it is all vaporized, the ecat is producing about 5 kW, not the 2.5 kW people have been using. The 5 kW is consistent with Rossi's claim of an energy gain of at least 6, since the input was 750 W. Secondly, some estimates of the power dissipated by the hose seem much too high. An old-fashioned steam radiator generates about 9.1 W of power per square meter per degree C temperature difference ( http://www.onlinetips.org/cast-iron-radiators). So, at 100C, it would generate about 9.1*70 = 636 W/m^2. The area of the hose is about 3m * pi * .025m = .235 m^2, so that works out to about 150 W total, assuming the rubber dissipates heat at the same rate as the cast iron of a radiator. I don't think that there is that big a difference between rubber and cast iron, but even a factor of 5 either way wouldn't affect the argument. Anyway, imagine coiling the hose up into a coil about a foot in diameter. That would be 3 turns. The heat from that would surely be substantially less than from a 1.5 kW space heater. And it's doubtful that the hose is even at 100C. Rossi makes a big deal about using insulation to handle the hose, but in Mats Lewan's video, he holds the hose without protection for quite a while. So, we have 5 kW total power, definitely less than 1 kW lost in the hose, and about 600 W consumed to raise the water to its bp. That leaves well over 3 kW of steam power left over at the end of the hose. There is no way that little puff of steam represents 3 kW after seeing the 2 kW steam cleaners on you-tube. Now, if we accept the input power as claimed (that it wasn't increased), and the flow rate as claimed, then 600 W are needed just to bring the water to the boiling point, leaving only 150 W to produce steam. If the output steam was more than that, then the reactor would have to contribute some power. Just not very much. And certainly not 5 kW.
