I think what Shaun means is the “percolator effect” and not wet steam, per se.
It seems these two are being merged together, when there is a distinction.
Actually, the percolator effect (mass transfer via gas entrainment) is FAR more
misleading than wet steam would be, if you are looking for the enormity of
potential errors.
Basically – Rossi’s present “success” is tied completely to being able to turn
off the input power for many hours. Without that, which is in fact excellent
proof of a massive anomaly (but unquantifiable as to the level of gain) – there
is little that is valid in his testing, based only on water flow.
There is still the nagging question of “was the power turned off or not?” due
to the genset still running - but any practical person would have to conclude
there is a good case for a gigantic thermal anomaly for many hours. Yet there
is no real proof and any “customer” who thinks there was satisfactory proof for
a large investment - is not getting good technical assistance.
From: Jouni Valkonen
Uh Shaun, wet steam is physical impossibility. All water boilers on Earth
produce 99-95 dry steam, including Krivit's water boiler. You need to go high
pressures and high steam velocities in order to produce stable wet steam. So
please, at least you should get the basic physics right.
—Jouni
