Regarding the thermocouples and "isolation". I don't believe electrical isolation is responsible for a noticeable error because thermocouple measurements, particularly when measured with systems that accommodate more than one thermocouple, make the measurements differentially. I.E. the thermocouple voltage assessed is the voltage difference between the two wires. I think this eliminates the need for isolation as long as the common mode voltage doesn't saturate the front end to the A/D or cause it to go noticeably nonlinear.
Another point to consider about such tiny voltages is that making an electrical contact with thermocouple wires is not like touching two gold objects. The thermocouple junction will be oxidized when it is welded and it will not easily make a contact that breaks through the oxide - particularly at such low voltages. It would be worth a verification experiment. Absent that, I believe that measurement errors from the two thermocouples "touching" the electrically conductive heat exchanger in two different places and possibly with two different metals will be lost in the noise for a meter designed for more than one couple (as was used). Bob From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 7:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible mechanism-Excess Power Reading of ECAT Why should it be assumed that improper equipment been used in these tests? The meter used with the thermocouples is listed in Mats Lewan's report: * Temperature logger Testo 177-T3 0554 1765 Usb Interface The specification I read listed the temperature range as -40 to +120 C. Does that suggest that its accuracy goes out of specification if the temperature is greater than 120? I assume that it keeps working past that limit. I made an attempt to determine whether or not the inputs were isolated but did not see reference to that in the specifications. How can that be determined as this seems to be a professional meter. This issue would be resolved if it is determined that the thermocouples are isolated. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Peter Heckert <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Oct 22, 2011 5:11 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible mechanism-Excess Power Reading of ECAT Am 22.10.2011 22:16, schrieb Peter Heckert: It is common in science and technics, some people repeat the same error over and over because they refuse to think and instead judge from experience and belief. They think if it worked 3 times for then it will work 1000000 times for others. But this is junk science, Just want to add this: If Piantelli and Focardi made their thermic measurements (that where much more difficult) with the same care as Rossi, then their research is junk and this all is a waste of time. If they connected their elements directly to the metal, using a non insulated multichannel thermoamplifier, then they measured thermovoltage in the metal and not in the thermoelements and these in the metal can be influenced by the degree of hydrogen adsorption. Peter ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1411 / Virus Database: 1522/3968 - Release Date: 10/22/11
