The latest system test where 107 individual ECAT modules were connected
together was successful but could have been much more convincing. System
instabilities forced the power output to be reduced to 470 kW and for it to be
run in an open loop mode instead of the 1 MW that we were all expecting. I had
hoped to see well behaved output steam temperature and pressure. But what
could we realistically expect to see under these conditions? Mr. Rossi did all
that was humanly possible as he found himself pressed against a schedule that
was not flexible when the real world system issues appeared. I have taken some
time to discuss some of the possibilities and problems.
It seems logical that a well designed ECAT steam control system would need to
monitor the water level and operating temperature. Some form of electronically
controlled input valve could ideally regulate the water level to an acceptable
degree and the duty cycle of the AC input waveform could be adjusted to
regulate the net heating power for the cores. This may sound easy, but it is
far from it. Boiling water tends to keep its vaporization temperature constant
which attempts to defeat the temperature loop. The control of temperature is
further complicated by the large delay that exists between the application of a
modified input power duty cycle and its effects upon water temperature.
Sluggish control and dangerous overshoots can easily be encountered due to this
delay. Determining the idea control algorithm is a complex and demanding task
with many tradeoffs needing to be considered.
Even if an individual module is working smoothly in isolation, a combination of
107 ECAT devices will complicate the situation immensely. The output pressure
and temperature variations caused by system instabilities can modify the
loading seen at each ECAT output and make it loose control entirely. I would
venture a guess that this is the reason why the test was run in the self
sustaining mode instead of the powered mode where the full 1 MW would have been
possible provided the system did not go unstable.
The self sustaining mode is not without its problems when subjected to the
loading of the other 106 ECAT modules. By reviewing the data from the October
test I was able to determine some of the characteristics expected to be
encountered in this mode. First, the core temperature must be operating at a
level that is below maximum output power available under stable drive
conditions. Notice that the output level is apparently 470 KWs for this system
test instead of the 1 MW available. This is a big sacrifice that the skeptics
love to complain about forever. They do not understand that this is necessary
if the core is to eventually cool off and cease to generate energy. Second,
loading of the brother ECATs will cause the internal water of each unit to
oscillate between boiling and non boiling conditions as the pressure on the far
side of the check valves varies. A quick review of the output vapor
temperature variations during the test demonstrates this condition quite well.
It will take an extended effort to eliminate the variation in the self
sustaining mode. I am not sure the task will be any easier for the feedback
controlled 1 MW system.
The great news is that Mr. Rossi has demonstrated a large system that generates
plenty of excess energy. This result is pretty much in line with what I
projected in my last review of the October test results. It is difficult to
understand how the skeptics are unable to realize that the ECAT is a real LENR
device that will change the world in time. We owe Mr. Rossi a great deal of
gratitude for standing up under such a ridiculous amount of ridicule. Sure,
his test procedures were imperfect but I was able to determine that the LENR
effect was present with careful observations.
Dave
