> > http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html shows a Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use this diagram to determine steam quality. > Dear Abd,
I use like this: Take the isobaric curve; Find intersection with temperature. Now you can read the steam quality using the closest red curve. If you need more precision you can read the enthalpy on the left and you can find the mass of vapour and water in a unit of volume by algebraic calculation. As for the steam tables they are everywhere. If you want to play with steam go here : http://www.steamtablesonline.com/ mic Il giorno 05/ago/2011 19:59, "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <a...@lomaxdesign.com> ha scritto: > > At 01:43 PM 8/4/2011, Michele Comitini wrote: > >> I cannot find where Galantini declared that he used the RH reading on the datalogger. Did he declare that? > > > He used the g/m^3 reading, which is a calculated reading. I believe that this reading does consider pressure, if the information is available. > > >> Maybe he used the probe because it measures T in the correct range up to 150°C. > > > Sure. However, that rating doesn't mean that it provides accurate readings all through that range. > http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml > > >> If he knew the pressure at the point where the probe was then with steam tables or Mollier diagram the quality of steam is derived. >> Why that probe with RH sensor then? Maybe it just comes bundled with the datalogger. > > > The reading for g/m^3 requires the humidity sensor. > >> The Essen report points to a probe for temperature only. Did they use a different way to find steam quality? > > > Essen and Kullander also report relying upon the g/m^3 display. > > Michele, you have not pointed to a specific "steam table" that allows the derivation of quality of steam. Derived from what? > > For saturated steam, which is obviously the condition in the E-Cats, the pressure and temperature are nailed to each other, and it is independent of quality of the steam. Only if the temperature rises above the saturated steam temperature for the pressure will the quality of the steam be determinable. > > http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mollier-diagram-water-d_308.html shows a Mollier diagram, but I see no way to use this diagram to determine steam quality. > > The question of how to use the Testo device to measure steam quality has been asked many times. The manufacturer and many others have stated it cannot be done. Nobody who claims it can be done has shown the procedure. > > Galantini provided no data as readings from the meter, and no description of determination. > http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3717appendixc1.shtml > > However, he states: > >> I confirm that the measured temperature always was higher than 100.1°C and that the measured pressure in the chimney always was equal to the ambient pressure. > > > It appears that Galantini thinks that the temperature of 100.1 C and "pressure at ambient" -- which he does not state -- is adequate to determine that the steam is dry. However, he's totally neglected that pressure inside the E-Cat *must* be greater than ambient, or steam would not flow out. The measured temperature of 100.5 in the Marwan report for April indicates a pressure of, as I recall, 1.03 bar for saturated steam. > > Some of us have done the calculations for expected steam velocity and pressure if all the water were being vaporized. Galantini, if he did measure the pressure in the E-cat and found it to be "ambient," was making an approximation. > > That the temperature is very stable indicates that the steam is saturated, which means it is at least somewhat wet. > > All appearances are that Galantini made a major mistake, and he's not responded with actual data, nor with a description of his procedure. > > Bottom line, then, his testimony means nothing. He is not an expert on steam, he's a chemist, he happens to own a company which does environmental testing, so he had the Testo data logger, I'd assume, in stock and he offered to help, having no understanding of the issues. > > About the device: http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/st_airQ.php?str=HD37AB1347 > > With the HP474AC probe, the device will measure temperature up to 150 C., with an accuracy of +/- 0.3 C, and humidity up to 100% with an accuracy, over 95%, of +/- 3.5%. It measures atmospheric pressure, but the sensor is not in the probe, it appears. It's in the device. > > So we have a new mystery: how did Galantini determine that pressure in the E-cat was "ambient." Did he simply read the pressure display and assume this was from the probe? I can imagine someone unfamiliar with the instrument making that mistake. > > Rather, we have a very strong indicator of the pressure: it was at saturated steam pressure for the temperature. The evidence for this is the stable temperature observed, without a major excursion above a stable temperature. Once the steam is completely dry, the temperature can and very likely will rise. > > The appearance is very strong from the demonstration reports that a temperature above 100 C was assumed to indicate saturated steam, which is a blatant error. There will be pressure in the E-cat if any steam is being generated. >
