On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While I am also a skeptical, even rough approximation gives a huge > output gain. Above 100 degrees means gas, A temperature reading within a degree or two of 100C is consistent with a mixture of gas and liquid. > and pumping a mixture would > require either another pump, by means of ventilation. Why? The pump is capable of pushing through pure liquid. It should have no trouble with a mixture of gas and liquid. Ventilation is noisy and would require a large opening. Why? Pure steam would require more ventilation than a mixture of steam and water. The volume is 1700 times higher. It would be louder and hotter. > Even 1% of liquid is a thick > fog, which is not the case, This depends on droplet size etc. There are papers on 2-phase flow that measure the size of the droplets; they're larger than in a fog. > The actual results are all more consistent with at least 2500KW than > less than 1000W. OK. We clearly disagree about this. That little puff of steam looks like a few hundred watts to me. I don't think we can resolve this by typing. In any case, it's not a quantitative measure. Using the quantitative measures (temperature and flow rate), only 600 W is needed. The rest is hand-waving arguments about steam dryness. Rossi could easily prove it's dry by heating it to 120C (by reducing the flow rate), or by measuring the flow rate of the steam. Wonder why he doesn't do it. > It is much easier to suppose that Rossi is just draining energy from > somewhere else. > > I think that's harder, actually.
