DeltaOhm instrument is quite sophisticated and it suits very well for measuring steam quality and thus enthalpy that steam caries. There is no problem with that, because as Wikipaedia quite clearly defines steam quality that "Low quality steam would contain a high moisture percentage and therefore damage components more easily". And it is good to put very much emphasis that low steam quality is exactly the same as high moisture or humidity content. Also everyone, who has visited at tropical regions does know what moisture or humidity means. The fact whether gas is air or steam is irrelevant, because moisture is defined as water droplets that are suspended into gaseous median. It can be steam or air, it does not matter what gas, because gas is gas and suspensions is suspension.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_quality Humidity sensor http://www.deltaohm.com/ver2010/uk/st_airQ.php?str=HD37AB1347 But this is how Wikipaedia defines the steam quality and this is how it is used in normal steam engineering. However, how Steven and Horace define steam quality, this definition has nothing to do with theirs definition, where they think that steam quality would be the water content that is overflowing from E-Cat with steam. No, this is just ordinary hot water that is not suspended into gaseous phase. As we see from the Mats's video, liquid water and high quality steam are well separated and they can be separated easily just with simple water trap. And normal water boiler (such as a kettle) does contain natural water trap, therefore only suspended water droplets can escape with steam. In normal pressure and normal steam velocities (small pressure difference), only 99-98% quality steam can exist and thus only 1-2% liquid water droplets can be suspended into gaseous phase. This is what the experts were telling to Jed, such as that NyTeknik's interviewed expert, who said quite bluntly that it is impossible for E-Cat to produce less quality steam than 90%. I would say that it is impossible to go below 95% but perhaps he played just safe. (They asked about steam quality, not how much water was overflowing due to percolator effect.) This is also the water quality what Galantini measured with his DeltaOhm probe. And has E-Cat was operating only with pressure diffence of 10 kPa, there was no way that he could have measured any less steam quality than 98%. Kullander and Essén did measure 98.8% steam quality that is very typical for normal pressure water boilers. If you want to go extremely low steam quality such as 60%, certainly it is possible inside steam engines, where pressure differences are counted in megapascals. And if you spray atomized water into ultrahigh velocity steam, I have read that some paper has described as low as 10% quality steam, while they have tested steam quality measuring instruments. Steam quality can be measure e.g. measuring speed of sound in steam, because it goes the faster the higher is the moisture content of gas. This is what steam quality is in steam physics, and indeed it is relevant concept in steam engines, because you certainly do not want too much corroding moisture inside steam engine, because it reduces the lifespan of steam engine. However, it is sad that measuring steam quality does not tell anything how much there is water escaping in liquid phase that is not suspended into gaseous phase. So, please, I would urge people, especially Horace, to use physical concepts in their proper meaning. Liquid water is different thing that the suspension of steam and liquid water droplets. Of course it does not help much to determine what was the total enthalpy of E-Cat, but at least we could understand why Galantini and Kullander and Lewan did mistake with their measurements and failed to measure the total enthalpy (e.g. by doing steam sparging calorimetry). They had wrong understanding for the steam quality. Indeed DeltaOhm does measure the steam quality or moisture, but steam quality is for enthalpy calculations irrelevant concept here with E-Cat. What was necessary for enthalpy measurements to measure, was the pressure inside E-Cat. Of course as a smart scientist Galantini tried to do this. Unfortunately he did not realize that DeltaOhm, does indeed measure atmospheric pressure, but this does not help much, because he should have measure the pressure inside E-Cat. Of course, we know from the flat and smooth temperature graphs that steam temperature was always at the boiling point inside E-Cat, when the temperature was above 99.6°C, because inside E-Cat (due to percolator effect) only steam pressure contribute for the excess pressure. Therefore we get pressure directly from the water boiling point tables e.g. in here: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/boiling-point-water-d_926.html Hopefully this clarify the concepts and what was relevant to measure. We should have payed our attention for measuring steam pressure, not for the steam quality issue. That is because it is very easy to establish correlation between pressure and total enthalpy, because they are directly proportional into each other as long as water inflow rate is constant. But as we can see from the Rossi's setup, he indeed does measure the total enthalpy directly from steam temperature (therefore he measure the temperature accurately with data logger). And he showed quite much sense of humor, when he presented a demonstration for Steven, where he did exactly as "expert scientists" such as Galantini, Levi and Kullander had told him to do, because he is just mere engineer... Therefore he showed how silly was the method what those expert scientists used for determining the enthalpy. Nice practical joke, although too bad that Krivit was the one who suffered with chronic reputation loss. (In the case you did not know, June E-Cat did not produce any excess heat in addition to 810 W electric power.) However, if we do understand the concept of pressure, then we can retrospectively calculate with reasonable accuracy the enthalpy for each demonstrations, if we compare the scarce useful data from different demonstration. Especially December and April demonstrations were the most useful. And of course this new one was superior to previous in every respect. –Jouni
