I'm nowhere near a computer (on the cellphone), but thanks for the links. The exchanger Rossi picked is for liquid-liquid heat exchange. See "E-Type" in their product range, listed under "single phase": http://www.swep.net/index.php?tpl=products-ranges&lang=en&id=352 The link you provided: http://www.swep.net/index.php? tpl=productsheets&lang=en&id=361&Type=E&Size=8T&Material=SC&Pressure=S Confirms that its only rated to 100C. Also, the 40 plate construction would logically contradict a 1ATM environment. It is quite a neat mental exercise to imagine interplay the steam expansion, and condensation in the series environment.
Those are just armchair observations and are not meant to create any new arguments to be rebutted; it's just interesting. I'm having trouble accessing the .pdf files from that website via Android. Has anyone been able to find the manifold that Rossi had used? > Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2011 11:44:25 +1030 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Two separate issues: air pocket; and conduction vrs > convection > > The model and manufacturer of the 6 Oct heat exchanger has been revealed: > SWEP E8T-SC-S > http://www.swep.net/index.php?tpl=productsheets&lang=en&id=361&Type=E&Size=8T&Material=SC&Pressure=S > > > in Mats Lewan's report: > http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3284962.ece/BINARY/Test+of+E-cat+October+6+%28pdf%29 > > > On 12/10/2011 11:32 AM, Robert Leguillon wrote: > > If you, or maybe Aussie Guy, can get Rossi to reveal the make and > > model of the exact heat-exchanger manifold used in the October 6th > > demo, I'd be happy to chip in on any parts costs. > > I'm just afraid that a copper pipe is going to be insufficient to > > model the larger mass of the thick brass manifold. With cold water > > flowing through one side, the "steam heat" could be simulated with > > alternate heat sources on the other side. > > This would be the best option to avoid insufficient modeling of an > > ad-hoc experiment (unless you have a couple of thick brass elbows that > > can be welded back-to-back, or some reasonable equivalent. >
