On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Mark Iverson <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote:
> ** > > What if the E-Cat is operating with a 98% 'full charge' on the > heat-capacitor? It would still have considerable capacity left to absorb > heat fluctuations without significantly changing steam temperature. > It would be able to absorb 2% fluctuations, yes. That's not considerable. Even if it were at 90%, fluctuations of slightly more than 10% would occasionally raise the temperature above the boiling point. > > Thus, ***IF*** the reactor's heat output is stable enough, it could achieve > what they are saying... > It would not only have to be stable enough, but the flow rate and starting temperature would have to be chosen accurately enough so that the ecat power would always land just short of point C, and never exceed it. In 5 demonstrations, with different starting temperatures, and different flow rates, it is unlikely that the ecat would always give just under the necessary power for dry steam, and never over. And even if you believe that Rossi is capable of choosing the flow rates that accurately, one wonders why he would. Allowing it to go just beyond point C, even briefly, so the temperature rises (even briefly) to 110 or 120 C, which would take only few per cent or so of additional power (or of reduced flow rate) would be good evidence that the steam is dry. As for the stability, in the 18-hour run, they claim the power briefly increased by an order of magnitude, and then it stabilized to between 15 kW and 20 kW. That means that, *according to them*, the stability is at best 25%, but with order of magnitude spikes. And all of these powers are enough to give steam well above 100C in any of the other runs, including the January demo. But I'm glad that we at least agree now that the stable temperature means that the ecat is somewhere between points B and C on that curve. Rossi has not given evidence that it is near point C, and he could easily do so, it it were. The appearance of the output fluid, and all the data he has presented, is consistent with it being near point B. And the only deviation from perfect regulation occurred in the January demonstration, where the temperature dipped briefly *below* the boiling point in mid-plateau. That is extremely compelling evidence that the ecat operates rather close to point B on your graph.
