Am 24.11.2011 19:48, schrieb Mary Yugo:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Peter Heckert
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Am 24.11.2011 19:22, schrieb Mary Yugo:
Did he not discuss the fact, that the electrical energy was not
enough for boiling?
It was barely enough for 60°, at this water flow rate.
I think this is evident and therefore much more important than all
this steam discussion.
I must have missed that discussion and the calculations though I
vaguely remember that claim. Can you provide a link? Was there a
mass flow meter or some other reliable flow measurement in the
experiment that refers to? The pump Rossi used can not be relied upon
alone as a measure of flow rate.
The Report of Essen and Kullander in english is here:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EssenHexperiment.pdf
They used a carafe to measure the water flow.
I citate what they write on page 2.
The bold enhancement is added by me. It is not in the original document.
They write this like a side note, but in my opinion this is the most
important part in the document.
begin citation:
*Initial running to reach vaporization.*
The temperatures of the inlet water and the outlet water were monitored
and recorded every 2 seconds. The heater was connected at 10:25 and the
boiling point was reached at 10:42. The detailed temperature-time
relation is shown in figure 6. The inlet water temperature was 17.3 °C
and increased slightly to 17.6 °C during this initial running. The
outlet water temperature increased from 20 °C at 10:27 to 60 °C at
10:36. This means a temperature increase by 40 °C in 9 minutes which is
essentially due to the electric heater. *It is worth noting that at this
point in time and temperature, 10:36 and 60°C, the 300 W from the heater
is barely sufficient to raise the temperature of the flowing water from
the inlet temperature of 17.6 °C to the 60 °C recorded at this time. *If
no additional heat had been generated internally, the temperature would
not exceed the 60 °C recorded at 10:36. Instead the temperature
increases faster after 10:36, as can be seen as a kink occurring at 60
°C in the temperature-time relation. (Figure 6). A temperature of 97.5
°C is reached at 10:40. The time taken to bring the water from 60 to
97.5 °C is 4 minutes. The 100 °C temperature is reached at 10:42 and at
about 10:45 all the water is completely vaporized found by visual checks
of the outlet tube and the valve letting out steam from the chimney.
This means that from this point in time, 10:45, 4.69 kW power is
delivered to the heating and vaporization, and 4.69 -- 0.30 = 4.39 kW
would have to come from the energy produced in the internal
nickel-hydrogen container.
end citation.
So there are only two conclusions possibe:
1) There was real excess energy.
2) There where serious errors or fraudulent tricks made with the input
energy or/and the waterflow.
A possibility would be to suck out the water with a vacuum in the wall
where the steam hose was inserted.
Another possibility would be that a wireless switch was used to activate
the heater in unwatched experiments.
Note, I dont say Rossi made these tricks. I say these possibilities must
be excluded for a scientific proof, because, if somebody 100 years later
reads the document then he has no opinion about the people, he will
believe it was a cheap trick. Scientific experiments must be documented
for eternity, not for a single day.
This is something that Rossi seemingly not understands.
Peter
