skeptical viewpoints re Rossi: John Pasquarette: Rich Murray 2011.11.11
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 6:24 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > What controls the temperature in the E-Cat's self-sustained mode? > > I had presumed that all the work Rossi did to go from resistivity heated > temperature control to self-sustained temperature control was geared around > feedback of the temperature to the heat transport mass flow rate. I didn't > have direct evidence of this, other than the relatively narrow range of > temperatures during self-sustained mode...... > Any mixture of water and steam self-regulates at a temperature set by the current pressure at each place in the system -- just like any boiling pot of water on a stove -- in Santa Fe at 7,000 feet altitude, the pressure is lower, while in a pressure cooker the increased pressure inside the sealed container causes the self-regulated boiling temperature to be be higher... Once the water is all turned into steam, then the steam temperature rises much more for each added unit of heat input, inside a pressurized system -- so in the Rossi device self-sustain mode, the fact that the temperature is so stable for hours proves conclusively that the coolant flow is still a mixture of water, mist, and steam gas... megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water -- cup of tea, anyone?]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 2011.11.10 fromRich Murray [email protected][email protected] [email protected], Rich Murray <[email protected]>, Rich Murray <[email protected]> dateMon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:54 AMsubject[Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water -- cup of tea, anyone?]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 [ Rich Murray: this nail in the coffin goes right to the point... using Rossi's own data... ] http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/H-Ni_Fusion/message/791 [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW from joshua.cude [email protected] to [email protected] date Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:02 AM subject [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW mailing list <H-Ni_Fusion.yahoogroups.com<http://h-ni_fusion.yahoogroups.com/> > 4:02 AM (1 hour ago) The presented evidence from the megawatt demo does not support output power above 70 kW in the "1 MW reactor". The calculation used by Rossi and Fioravanti to claim 470 kW assumes that essentially all the water pumped through the system is vaporized. However, there is no evidence presented in the report to support that assumption. Rossi collects liquid water at the exit of the reactor, but there is no evidence presented that liquid cannot be carried past this collector, entrained in the fast flowing steam, and into the heat exchanger. The only measurement reported is the temperature of the fluid as it exits. This is on average about 105 C, which probably corresponds to the boiling point inside the conduit at an elevated pressure due to the formation of some steam. The fact that no independent measurement was reported of pressure or steam quality indicates that Fioravanti is no more competent than Essen and Kallunder were. If one accepts the notion that above 100 C, the steam is dry, then the total power transfer is proportional to: T2-T1 if T2 <= 100 T2-T1 + 540 + (T2-100)(.5) if T2 > 100 By this calculation, at 100 C, the power transfer is about 65 kW, and at 100.1 C it is about 470 kW. The blue line in the attached figure (PowerTransfer.jpg) represents the result of this calculation for Rossi's latest data in arbitrary units. (The plateau would be about 470 kW.) Or even if you want to claim that the steam is only dry when it reaches 105 C a few minutes later, then the power would follow the dashed line. So Rossi and Fioravanti want us to believe that although it takes 2 hours for the power transfer to reach 65 kW (100 C), it takes only a few minutes to go from 65 kW to 470 kW. The power transfer to the water is proportional to the temperature difference between the water and the heating elements. So this amounts to a claim that the temperature of the heating elements changes essentially discontinuously by a huge amount, and exactly when the water begins to boil. How does it know? And how does it know to stop increasing essentially as soon as all the water is vaporized? If the power increased by another 10%, the steam temperature would increase to more than 200 C. Yet it settles in nicely to a fairly constant temperature just above 100 C, just as if regulated by a mixture of phases at the boiling point, which fluctuates a little because of irregular internal pressure. Such a discontinuous change in the temperature is simply not plausible. A few minutes after it reaches 100 C, the power transfer must still be quite close to the 65 kW, even as the temperature reaches 105 C. That means that the temperature is no indication of dry steam, and so the most we can say from the data presented, if it is accepted, is that the power output is higher than about 70 kW. No data is presented to determine how much higher. From: Rich Murray To: [email protected] dateMon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:49 PMsubjectRe: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 * * http://www.nyteknik.se//template/ver03/fragments/comment/commentsFetch.jsp?articleId=3303682&endPosition=25 [ Comment by Joshua Cude, after his comment very similar to the post quoted here. ] It's the old steam trick again In the first place, the report comes from Rossi, with no identification of the "customer", so it's just his word. We had Rossi's word yesterday, so there's nothing new today. And the amateurish quality of the report is amazing. In the second place, if you accept the data as given, there is no verification that the units weren't pre-heated for any number of hours through the night. Again, we have only Rossi's word. In the 3rd place, he's back to his old tricks of claiming all the water is converted to steam, without any measurement provided to verify it. That gives him a big factor of 8 in the output power. Remove the factor of 8 for claiming dry steam without evidence, add in 3 or 4 hours of heating during the night, and once again, there is no evidence for excess heat, let alone heat from nuclear reactions. That's if you accept the data that is given. Rossi has succeeded in prolonging uncertainty again; probably because certainty would not further his goals. Joshua Cude 29 Oct 2011 02:59 On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 6:24 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > What controls the temperature in the E-Cat's self-sustained mode? > > I had presumed that all the work Rossi did to go from resistivity heated > temperature control to self-sustained temperature control was geared around > feedback of the temperature to the heat transport mass flow rate. I didn't > have direct evidence of this, other than the relatively narrow range of > temperatures during self-sustained mode. > > Keep in mind that Rossi has stated on numerous occasions that his reaction > rate is an increasing function of temperature, and that therefore his > system can go into a runaway feedback loop thus destroying itself if it is > not carefully controlled. If the resistivity power can be varied during > the run, and the heat transport mass flow rate is constant, but high enough > to quench the reaction in the absence of resistivity heating, the > temperature control system is obvious. But if there is no resistivity > heating control there has to be control of the heat transport mass flow > rate, does there not? > >
