I have been conducting a review of a graph of the ECAT internal temperature
(T2) versus time. This graph reveals some important facts concerning the
operation of the ECAT which can be uncovered with a bit of effort. I am
including several of the discoveries that I have uncovered for the benefit of
this technically qualified group. I know that I will have interesting feedback
regarding my points if history of the vortex is a guide.
It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with
the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly
revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we
first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is
indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous
values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger
unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of
greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is
in series with the output water flow which further increases the required
temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of
this point in time.
The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We
predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low.
My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a
measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the
ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also,
we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins
since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this
heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat
to flow from it.
The only other possible explanation for the anomalous reading at this time mark
would be if the water flow were high enough to fill the ECAT and start to
overflow into the heat exchanger. Of course, the rate of water flow into the
ECAT is one of the most contentious parameters that we have been discussing
within vortex. Some measurements suggest that overflow is occurring at this
time and others do not agree. Mats Lewan measured a flow rate of .91
grams/second at 18:57 by collecting water for a 6 minute period during which he
collected 328 grams of output. He collected enough water for a long enough
time to obtain a reasonable average. Meanwhile, the leakage water exiting the
ECAT case was measured and estimated to be 2 kilograms/hour. This calculates
to be .555 grams per second. The addition of the two yields 1.46 grams/second
as the assumed flow rate. I calculated the total water delivered to the ECAT
using this figure and obtained 1.46 grams/second x 9480 seconds = 13.8
kilograms. This is about one half of the estimated water capacity of the ECAT,
which is 30 kilograms.
There is support for a larger water input flow rate however. During the
September test documented by Mats the ECAT started to overfill after 8400
seconds. The ECAT used for that test (SN?) was reported to have a volume of
approximately 30 liters. Mats kept very accurate records of the water inflow
and I am very grateful to him. The water input flow rate can be calculated as
30000 grams divided by 8400 seconds, or 3.57 grams/second. This can be
converted into 12.857 liters/hour which is very close to the specification of
the pump (2 liters/hour). Also, during the September test the temperature
reading at what we now call T2 was 90.3 C which is below boiling. The
saturated pressure associated with this temperature is lower than atmospheric
and thus the pump should be capable of delivering its specified flow rate.
The argument presented above is so persuasive that I plan to analyze the
behavior of the ECAT further using the assumption that overflow is in fact
occurring much earlier than I anticipated. There must be a reason for the low
flow rate that Mats measured for the October test and I suspect that the data
has an effect hidden within.
I think that it is safe to assume that one of the two options I have listed is
functioning. Either the ECAT is overflowing quite early within the test, or
its water level is significantly lower and the temperature probe is not
touching the heat sink fins.
I have made several additional interesting observations during my review of
this particular graph which I will document for the group when convenient. I
do not wish to overload the vortex with too large of a post at one time.
Dave
