The computations in the following pdfs are provided in order to
hopefully permit more meaningful discussion or understanding of the
percolator effect as it relates to Rossi type devices and simulators:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/KrivitFilm.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Cantwell2.pdf
It appears there has been a failure to understand the significance of
my recent post:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg50661.html
One problem is a failure to grasp that pure water can be expected to
accumulate within such devices until a percolation effect causes the
water to be ejected or overflow from the device.
There is a failure to either understand or accept that the percolator
effect can be expected to happen in at least two locations: (1)
anywhere the hose rises, including at the exit, or (2) in the
vertical flow column (chimney) in the device itself.
This leads to problems with interpreting experimental results, such
as the assumption that the percolator effect happens only due to
water that has condensed in the hose due to heat loss through the
hose wall. The time constant for percolation events in the hose
clearly can be expected to differ from such events occurring at the
vertical flow column, the "chimney".
This false assumption has even been applied to Rick Cantwell's
excellent experiment, discussed in the above referenced vortex
posting. This strikes me as very odd because all the parameters are
known - there is no possibility of excess heat from nuclear effects.
As my computations show, when Cantwell's device is at equilibrium in
mode 2 or mode 3, significant water, the majority of the input water,
is necessarily pumped out of the device without boiling at all.
The KrivitFilm pdf provides enough information to show that the Rossi
demo device in the Krivit 14 June 2011 film necessarily pumps out
liquid water unless the thermal power of the device is above 5012 W,
and the steam flow is 3.2 liters per second from the device. The hose
can not condense a significant portion of the steam coming out of the
device at this power, as an upper bound for condensation power for 3
liters of hose should be about 460 watts. Tis assumes a delta T of
10°C, as Rick Cantwell observed. Even if the outer wall temperature
is 80°C, the most condensing power is about 920 watts, only one fifth
the water flow. This leaves the steam output at over 2500 cc/sec.
Assuming even a 2 cm tube inner diameter, that is over 8 m/sec output
velocity, clearly far more than the Krivit video shows.
If the thermal power of the device is below the dryout temperature,
*it is necessarily true* that water must spill out of the chimney.
Suppose for a moment that the device is actually performing above the
dryout power of 5012 watts. When equilibrium is finally reached, the
steam laving the lower boiler area is necessarily heated by the
excess energy. As the calculations show, this steam heating in the
boiler area results in a dramatic increase in chimney steam
temperature. No such increase was ever observed in the Rossi device.
It is therefore necessarily true the device never operated even a
small amount above the dryout power of 5012 W.
For the claim that the steam was dry to be true, that there was no
percolator effects in the device itself, no water overflow, the
device would have to operate at exactly the dryout power output *at
all times*, because it never operates at thermal output above that
condition.
It is noteworthy that the dryout condition for such devices is when J/
gm applied is greater than or equal to the heat of vaporization per
gram of water plus the heat required to raise a gram of water to
boiling. Thus the formula
Dryout condition in J/gm = Dcond = Hvap+(Bpoint-Wtemp)*Hcap
is used in the computations. Given a constant flow F in gm/s is used
the critical dryout power Pcrit is given by:
Pcrit = F * Dcond
If a thermal power of P watts is present, the critical flow rate
Fcrit is given by:
Fcrit = P / Dcond
The critical values result in all the water being boiled with no
significant power heating the steam itself, i.e. dryout conditions.
If operation at even a very small percentage above dryout conditions
is achieved then output steam temperature should be very
significantly above boiling temperature.
It is notable that if steam temperature is elevated well above
boiling then some heat flux through the steam tube is required to
drop the temperature to condensation range. This results in less
condensation in the steam tube than operation right at dryout
conditions.
It seems obvious that percolator effects can be expected within the
Rossi device even if operating with significant excess (nuclear)
power, and that "steam quality" can not be expected to be anywhere
near perfect. If the hose is removed it can be expected that water
will be seen being expelled, if the device is operating in equilibrium.
It is also notable that controllers are used. Controllers vary the
input power, else they are of no use. It is therefore not possible
for the device to operate exactly at dryout temperature all the
time. Input power variation necessarily results in state changes,
and thus the device can not be expected to operate precisely at
dryout conditions at all moments. Percolator effects necessarily
happen then in any long runs, thus it can not be *assumed* the steam
is always dry.
It is possible that Rossi's device produces no excess power at all in
the Krivit film, and in other tests that have been well discussed on
vortex-l.
Meaningful data can be obtained through the performance of well
calibrated, and preferably dual method, calorimetry on the device, as
a black box, that establishes a complete energy balance for each
run. Use of control runs is also a standard method, and useful for
calibrating the calorimetry. A thermal pulse method is also a useful
check on calorimetry functions during run times. Anything less than
this kind of professional calorimetry can not be relied upon. Anyone
who has actually done calorimetry is keenly aware of the difficulty
of getting it right. Sparging steam into a bucket, though far better
than other steam methods applied to date on Rossi's devices, and
publicly disclosed, has numerous serious drawbacks, which have
already been discussed.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
