Mats Lewan told me that the cylinder was not attached to the gas inlet (it just looked that way in some photos) and its purpose was a radiation sensor (probably a gamma scintillator). Mats said the frequency device was behind the eCat - so I keep looking for glimpses of it in the videos.
Regards, Bob Higgins From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:54 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box AG, I do not remember exactly where Rossi made the statement that the cores were now flat and planar or rectangular in shape. Seems like it was a question I asked him on his blog. I had suggested that he use this form factor many months ago because it had scaling advantages, but at the earlier time they answered that the cylindrical form worked better. I guess they reconsidered. Maybe someone else can help remember exactly when Rossi made the statement. I do not have any form of search for words to go through his archives to locate the exact place where the 600 C is mentioned. The exact temperature (600-1200) applied to the core has been bounced around frequently. You may have to do some digging. The RF leads question seems a little confusing for one main reason. A long cylinder was attached to the gas port at the time the RF device was mentioned. I have always assumed that this was the 'frequencies' device. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Aussie Guy E-Cat <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Nov 10, 2011 1:12 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box Sure no CPU will survive inside or next to the core but next to the heat sinks, easy to do. 140 deg C chips are available. Please share the data on the rectangular cores. Never read that before. Swedish reporter did say RF leads measured 300ma. Doesn't sound like a sensor. Easy to do PLC (Power Line Comms) to a CPU inside or he is using a 300ma current loop for his internal sensors due to too much interference from the cores. If the core is running at 600 deg C, so too must have the door knob earlier unit. It is hard to see now Rossi could keep that core at 600 deg C while the water was only a mm or so away. Where did you get the 600 deg C data from? I have never read that but then I have just started reading, reading.......reading. AG On 11/10/2011 4:01 PM, David Roberson wrote: > The three cores are now in a rectangular shape instead of cylindrical. > I would suggest that there is a thermal resistance(insulator of some > sort) desired between the cores and the heat sink. This would act as > a thermal matching system so that the cores can operate at nearly 600 > C while the heat sink is at a far lower temperature. > Time response data demonstrates that two time constants are at work. > One long one related to heat release and a shorter one associated with > the conduction of heat away from the heat sink and heating device. > He could easily disable a core by putting in material that does not > exhibit LENR. > The 1 MW unit must have operated with 3 cores present. One core only > produces 3.4 kW of output power in the driven mode, less in self > sustaining. > The core operates at a temperature that would destroy a > microcontroller. 600 C > I suspect that the two extra wires are actually for sensor reading. A > controlled driven unit would need to measure liquid level and > temperature to function well. I really suspect that the frequency > generating device is to mislead. > The test conducted on October 6 was using one core. The thermal > environment in this case would not be the same as using 3 cores. > Additional positive feedback of heat would occur due to the two > additional cores if they were active. I suspect that Rossi > has performed a delicate balance of thermal impedance when 3 cores are > present. This would suggest that the 1 core test should loose output > power at a faster rate. That would explain why the self sustaining > mode for the 1 MW test ran for such a long time. > It has been apparent that Rossi has made a serious effort to disguise > the real data by his actions. I suspect he wants to keep doubt alive > so that the 'war' does not start until the last moment. > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: Aussie Guy E-Cat <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Nov 9, 2011 11:41 pm > Subject: [Vo]:Inside the inner box > > I have been thinking about what should be inside the inner box as the > heat transfer from the reactor core to the fluid is no longer done > inside the door knob like reactor. > > Rossi says there are 3 cores inside each module and that is all he says. > I would suggest he may have encased all the cores inside a solid lead > slab like structure with a thermal interface compound applied to the top > and bottom surfaces so as to thermally transfer the heat into the upper > and assumed lower fin assemblies. What we see with the bolts is the > upper surface of the heat exchanger assembly and likely an identical > assembly (why make it different) on the bottom. The lead slab with the > embedded cores is then sandwiched inside and between the heat exchanger > fin assemblies. I also suggest as he said the 1 MW demo was only running > on 1 core per module, he has a was to activate and deactivate the > internal cores as desired. This adds additional weight to my belief that > the "RF Wires" are actually multi core shielded cable or if not he maybe > running a power line comms system that delivers both power and 2 way > data to the 3 cores. Easy to do today, especially if he has a micro > inside to assist the core control and do data logging that can be later > accessed for analysis. > > Having a solid lead slab structure would aid modular maintenance and > module fuel replacement as all the the maintenance guys would need do is > replace the lead slab with the 3 embedded reactor cores, which would > then be returned to Rossi for replacement of the fuel. > > From the weight of the E-Cat module, there is more inside the boxes > than just 3 door knob reactors, a bit of piping, fins, walls and a few > nuts and bolts. >
