On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Joshua Cude <[email protected]> wrote: > Rossi assumes the output flow rate is equal to the input flow rate > ...
Here is how I see it. (1) Fioravanti signed the report. (2) The report has the following equation: Total energy produced : (steam kg x 627.5) + (100 - input water T) x kg of water heated x 1.14 (3) This implies that dry steam was flowing in the pipes, because 627.5 kWh/kg is the enthalpy of vaporization of water at 100 degrees. (4) This is thermodynamics 101. (5) Fioravanti is an engineer hired to check a million-dollar power generator. (6) Therefore he took that course. (7) So Fioravanti had good reasons to believe that the steam was dry. Anyone disputing this is basically claiming that the report is fake and that Fioravanti doesn't exist or isn't an engineer or became senile or was on drugs and/or was conspiring with Rossi. I find your "rate of change of power transfer too high vs thermal inertia" argument intriguing, but it would be nice if you could explain it logically and numerically. Currently, your explanations are entangled with a multitude of hypotheses and suppositions. -- Berke Durak
