Second sending of this. First sent August 28, 2011 1:06:32 PM AKDT.
On Aug 27, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Joe Catania wrote:
For the umpteenth time it is not an assertion. The thermal mass of
the reactor is about 1MJ (based on specific heat), the energy
outflow is a mere fraction (~1kW). OK?
There has been no demonstration that output is higher than inout.
Steam quality is not measured, therma; inertia not accounted for.
and there is Rizzi's determination that flow is over estimated. I
hope I don't have to repeat these facts again. The source of heat
in the 15 minutes is thermal inertia since it would account for all
steam produced. Cold fusion is not indicated by what Levi has said.
I have not seen the graphs you speak of and I'm not sure they are
coincident with cutting the power but thermal inertia needs to be
accounted for. So show me the data. And all I can say is one does
not assume cold fusion to prove cold fusion. CF proof is totally
elusive by the means exploited. Its more likely a flaw in technique
of measurement. But if there is proof of anomalous heat it has
eluded my detection so far. The properway to do the calorimetry is
not with flow as I've detailed before.
Levi said steam stopped after 15 minutes so it seems you need to
get on the same page.
My two cents on this is it is a typical one of a kind anecdote - with
no solid measurements to back it up. We don't really know if the
device was initially outputting 5000 W or just the input wattage, for
example.
For the sake of discussion, let's just assume the story is correct
and the device was outputting 5 kW as advertised.
Let's also be generous with regard to mass, and assume it was
equivalent to 20 kg of copper, and stored 1 MJ of energy as specified
above.
Using a heat capacity of copper, 0.385 J/(gm K), a 20 kg mass requires
delta T = (10^6 J)/((0.385 J/(gm °C))*(2*10^4 gm)) = 130 °C
to store the 1 MJ thermal energy. If we assume inlet temperature of
23°C then this is an absolute temperature of 153°C.
The thermal mass, Cth, is given by:
Cth = (0.385 J/(gm °C)*(2*10^4 gm) = 7700 J/°C
Assume the device transfers 5 kW of output heat when the internal
temperature is 153°C and inlet temperature is 23°C, i.e. delta T is
130°C. This gives a thermal resistance of
R = (130°C)/(5^10^3 W) = 2.6x10^-2 °C/W.
The decay time constant, tau, for the 1 MJ thermal mass, C, is is
given by:
tau = R*Cth = (2.6x10^-2 °C/W)*(7700 J/°C) = 200 s
We now have the thermal decline curve:
T(t) = T0 * e^-(t/tau) = (153 °C) * 1/e^(t/tau)
The problem now is, with a flow of 1.94 gm/s cold water, what is the
minimum mass temperature that will permit heating of water to 100°C?
THe water heating required to heat the water from 23°C to 100°C is:
Pwater = (100°C - 23°C) * (1.94 gm/s) * (4.2 J/(gm °C)) = 627.4 W
For the thermal mass to provide this minimum heat flow for steam, the
mass temperature has to be:
Tcrit = Cth * * Pwater + 100 = 116.3°C
If we want steam to disappear at time t, then T(t) = 116.3°C. So:
(116.3°C) = (153 °C) * 1/e^(t/tau)
(t/tau) = ln((153°C) /(116.3 °C)
t = ln((153°C) /(116.3 °C)) * (200.2 s)
t = 54.9 s = .915 m
So, if all is as assumed above (very unlikely!) the device should not
be able to output steam for 15 minutes, or even more than 2 minutes,
unless a source of heat was present after the power was cut off. The
problem is we just do not have enough data to make the above
calculation credibly. This is not a new kind of problem with regard
to the E-Cat.
This is demonstrated more aptly by the following calculations:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiThermal.pdf
The above manual calculation is supported by the first row in the
Mode 1 numbers. In addition, calculations are provided for other
device masses in rows 2 and 3.
Mode 2 demonstrates that this simple thermal mass flow model is
inadequate to explain any steam in heat after death (without nuclear
energy added) if the mass temp is assumed to be 300°C, because the
Thermal Resistance necessary to explain normal operation is too high
to permit boiling of the water at all. The assumed numbers are
inconsistent.
Mode 4 demonstrates that no nuclear energy is consistent with the
assumptions provided the mass temperature is on the order of 1200°C,
and the mass of the device is between 20 kg and 10 kg.
Mode 5 shows that if the COP of the device is 1500/748 ~= 2, then the
heat after death observed is consistent with 500°C mass temperature
and a device mass of between 10 and 20 kg.
Hopefully the above examples are correct (though greatly
oversimplified) and useful to others for theorizing. A sensible
analysis requires a detailed finite element analysis and more input
data.
We just have to wait until October to see what happens. I hope for
the best. I hope we don't see non-credible delays and moving target
objectives as we have seen before in similar situations. I wish
Rossi great success. Even the most minor technical success for
Rossi would be one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs ever, and
have great importance for all mankind. Rossi is not a young man. I
hope he considers how limited his time on earth is and makes the
right decisions.
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
