2011/9/17 Horace Heffner <hheff...@mtaonline.net>: > Measuring momentary powers and flows is not adequate because the powers and > flows are dynamic.
We need to measure the pressure, because only steam contributes for the pressure and of course steam production rate is directly proportional to total enthalpy produced. If water inflow rate is constant. With short tests (steam sparging and water trap) we can establish this correlation quite accurately without too much efforts. Then when the correlation is established, we can just let device to run overnight and see the data in the morning. Primary advantage for measuring pressure is that we can do it continuously without any efforts. > For output energy measurement, the most basic and cheap approach involves > diverting the output into a barrel of water so as to achieve medium term > power integration. If we cannot measure the pressure, then next simplest method is to take a barrel filled with water, to put outlet hose into barrel and take inlet water from the same barrel. Then we need to measure the ΔT. If we have ice storage at known temperature, e.g. -18°C, then we can also put ice there and then measure how much E-Cat does melt ice. We do not need to insulate barrel, because we can measure heat dissipation rate and take this into consideration in calculations. 27 kW outlet steam will stir water enough. However, as you suggested, barrel switching may be more easy to do than using ice as a coolant. But main problem with this is that 27 kW is lots of power and will heat the barrel fast. Therefore steam calorimetry from pressure is always preferrable to sub-boiling water calorimetry. With megawatt power plant we can use swimming pool, but naturally this does not establish accurate calorimetry, but is just for the show. Other methods are just too complicated or prone for errors. –Jouni
