They state there is an auxillary heater.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Heckert" <peter.heck...@arcor.de>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Calulations for 1 MW plant.
Am 20.09.2011 20:38, schrieb Horace Heffner:
On Sep 20, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Peter Heckert wrote:
In all demonstrations, January demo, Essen Kulander demo, 3 Ny Teknik
demos, the electrical input energy was not enough to heat the water to
100° Celsius. (I dont know aout the Krivit demo)
There was without doubt some considerable boiling in all experiments and
so the COP should be larger than 2.
This is mass flow calorimetry.
There /must/ be more energy than the /measured/ electrical energy.
So there is something, lets hope it is not a trick.
Peter
I don't recall at all that there was not enough power to boil the water in
the initial tests. (My memory is not very good though!) Do you mean there
wasn't enough power applied to convert all the water flow to steam?
Yes. Kullander and Essen have calculated this explicitely and I
recalculated it and can confirm.
Also I dont think two Physics Professors can do errors here because this
is too simple to calculate.
Look here: <http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EssenHexperiment.pdf>
At Page 2 they write:
"It is worth noting that at this point in time and temperature, 10:36
and 60°C, the 300 W from the heater is barely sufficient to raise the
temperature of the flowing water from the inlet temperature of 17.6 °C
to the 60 °C recorded at this time. If no additional heat had been
generated internally, the temperature would not exceed the 60 °C
recorded at 10:36. Instead the temperature increases faster after
10:36,...."
I recalculated this. I did not recalculate the other documents, but
reliable persons said this and I made some rule of thumb estimations.
I guess one of the problems with making that assertion is not actually
knowing the true flow rate at all times. Mattia Rizzi observed pump rates
on a video which indicated much less than 2 gm/s.
Essen & Kullander measured it with a carafe. (See page 1, chapter
"Calibrations").
In the january experiment they measured the weigt of the water bottle.
They use a peristaltic pump. I was often in chemical labors in my life.
( I did electronics and computer servicing there)
They use peristaltic pumps, (equipped with calibrated hoses) when
accurate flow is required.
This should be pretty constant and a big variation would be audible.
If I recall correctly the Krivit demo was for the most part 1.94 gm/s,
input temp 23°C, and 748 W input, which makes for all the flow heated to
100°C plus 83 cc/sec steam generated. All that is hard to know too
because apparently Rossi touched the control panel. Manual adjustment is
apparently part of the process, as is changing duty factors. This is one
reason why a good kWh meter would be of use.
Yes but the heater is controlled by a zero crosspoint switch. The heater
should be on some seconds and off some seconds.
The current that they measured should be the maximum current and it
corresponded to the 300W rating of the band heater.
A technical problem exists because the thermal mass of the E-cats is so
high. Momentary power readings don't mean very much.
I think Kullander and Essen where there all the time and they watched
carefully what was going on.
Of course this cannot prove that there ai no hidden fake energy source
and that there are no tricks, but I think in the Kullander and Essen
demo we can be sure there was more energy than 300W. 600W would have
been required to heat the water flow to 100° and some additional 100
Watts are needed to get reasonable steam and boiling.
Only fast sampled power measurements integrated to cumulative energy is
meaningful, or first principle energy integrating techniques. Total
energy in vs total energy out for a long period is the meaningful number.
Yes of course for a scientific publication test this is necessary, but
not for a qualitative plausibility test.
Best,
Peter
