OK, correcting this. I think I am mixing up MW electric and MW thermal. A like sized region of a commercial fission core is producing about three times this much thermal output, ~3MW. Plants of that generation are about 33% efficient so the resulting electrical output is ~1MW, which I erroneously used for the thermal number in the previous mail.
So I think the thermal density Rossi describes is about 1/3 of an operating commercial LWR fission core. Jeff On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Jeff Berkowitz <[email protected]> wrote: > My back of the envelope scratching suggests that a like-sized > three-dimensional region of a fuel bundle in a conventional LWR fission > core produces just about the same amount of energy. That volume would > accommodate ~4 linear feet of ~100 fuel rods which would produce ~1 MW. > Note: I am not a nuclear engineer but I'm playing one tonight on the > interwebs. Ymmv. > > Jeff > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:19 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Jojo, I get 3.77 square meters of area with a quick calculation. This >> is the entire surface area of the cylinder. Please check your figures and >> let me know if there is an error. >> >> This is very interesting information from Rossi as, if true, his device >> now would fit nicely within a locomotive size tractor. It is time to do >> some further research into this. >> >> Dave >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> >> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wed, Aug 29, 2012 6:31 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi said... >> >> This is incredible power density. Seems unbelievable how you can pack >> 1MW output from these dimensions. If true, this is more revolutionary than >> we thought. >> >> I did some rough calculations. With diameter of the cylinder at 1.2 m, >> the area is 1.13 m2. Assuming that the coolant pipes take up about 50% if >> this area, and fitting remaining area with 100 reactors. Each reactor >> would have a diameter of 4.2 cm. Each 4.2 cm dia. reactor would be >> producing 10KW. >> >> Dave, maybe you can do some simulations on if it even is possible to >> remove this much heat from such a reactor. >> >> Another thing. Rossi says he's shocked. Does this mean that Rossi no >> longer does the main development. Otherwise, How can he be shocked by >> something he is developing himself? Or maybe, he is shocked by the extent >> of his own imagination. >> >> >> >> Jojo >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Patrick Ellul <[email protected]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Sent:* Thursday, August 30, 2012 5:45 AM >> *Subject:* [Vo]:Rossi said... >> >> Andrea Rossi >> August 29th, 2012 at 3:05 >> AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=63#comment-309975> >> Dear Dr Joseph Fine: >> You are perfectly right: in fact we are designing the new 1 MW plants, >> for hot temperature, and the dimensions will be those of a cylinder with a >> diameter of 1.2 m and a lencth od 0.4 m. >> Is shocking, I myself are surprised, but it is so. >> Warmest Regards, >> A.R. >> Andrea Rossi >> August 29th, 2012 at 9:45 >> AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=63#comment-310135> >> Dear Franco: >> Attention: the dimensions 1.2 x 0.4 is not the surface of the surface of >> the reactors! Inside this drum of 1.2 x 0.4 m there are 100 reactors , each >> of one having about 1 200 cm^2 of surface ! >> I talked of the dimensions of the external container, not of the heat >> exchange surface ! >> Warm Regards, >> A.R. >> >> Regards, >> Patrick >> >> >
