2011/9/2 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>: > Horace Heffner <hheff...@mtaonline.net> wrote: >> >> This test shows your true colors. It indicates that you actually expect >> the steam power to be on the order of 100 watts, not 10,000 watts or even >> 1,000 watts. If you put a wand issuing 10,000 watts steam power into the >> bucket you will get a notion of what I mean. > > I don't see your point. I used to do this test with a hose producing 75 kW > at Hydrodynamics Inc. It worked fine. The results were close to the expected > amount from that heater. >
Also the nozzle of steam wand was very small, thus pressure of steam was high. And also there was only 200 ml water in the mug, but it could easily handle 1kW range high pressure steam, I have no doubts that a bucket can handle kW range power output and a barrel can absorb 10 kW range steam power. Also instead of water, bucket can also contain water + melting ice to increase its potential to absorb enthalpy and enhance the condensation of sparged steam. >> >> Beyond that, this "bucket method" works only for a brief snapshot of >> power. It does nothing to accomplish an overall energy balance for a test. > > It proves that the steam is dry. For the rest of the test, you can depend on > temperatures. It does not get wet one minute and dry the next. If you think > it "percolates" just hold the hose out for 10 minutes. > Right, although It does not prove that steam is dry, because measuring dryness requires extremely accurate measurements. Bucket is nowhere near accurate enough. It can measure total momentary enthalpy, but this method cannot separate wet steam from liquid hot water, what is required for measuring the dryness of steam. (oh, sorry, I here used steam dryness in its proper meaning, I know what you really meant^^) As steam temperature of E-Cat depends on steam pressure, this can give a momentary power output. Then we easily can get the proper relationship of temperature and enthalpy, and then we can run steaming test indefinitely and know the total enthalpy of E-Cat within two significant digits. If there are variations in enthalpy/temperature between the sparging tests, then it is required gather more datapoints, so that we can fit proper trend line for boiling point temperature (i.e.pressure) and enthalpy. Horace, what you were proposing for calorimetry is far too complex and prone for errors. With simple steam sparging test it is possible to attain two significant digits accuracy for indefinitely lasting experiment. Your method requires lots of work, but this does not increase accuracy of test. –Jouni
