Yes Peter, I agree that a pump in the output path would completely change the situation. Your response is the type that we need. It is my understanding that everyone who witnessed the test believed that there was no pump in that position. Do you think otherwise? I would like to know as much as possible about the system test.
All of the facts (assumptions) are not equally important and most will not be used in simulations. I hope that a listing of these will stimulate thoughts. Thanks, Dave -----Original Message----- From: peter.heckert <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, Nov 7, 2011 6:14 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: October 28 Established ECAT System Facts ---- Original Nachricht ---- on: Andrea Selva <[email protected]> n: [email protected] atum: 07.11.2011 07:40 etreff: Re: [Vo]: October 28 Established ECAT System Facts > > 2). There is no pump within the output path between the ECAT?s and the > large water storage tank. > a). This configuration absolutely demands that the output vapor must be > greater than atmospheric pressure. This is necessary to push the water out > of the dissipaters. > b). This pressure can be estimated by someone who is skilled in the > calculation of liquid and vapor flow through pipes and dissipaters. We shouldnt make stuff more complicated than necessary. tatic pressure is calculated easily if construction details are known. ynamic pressure must be greater, but because the water flow was slow, he dynamic water pressure is probably the same. If Rossi doesnt give construction details then the result is not reliable nd it is waste of time to do this. If there was a pump in the output path and if the flow rate is a little bit arger han the water input flow, then a vacuum is created and all steam energy alculations are invalid. Peter
