Andrea Rossi reactor, 32 day run in independent lab in Switzerland, very
high excess heat, shifted Ni and Li isotopes, no nuclear radiations, huge
mystery, Giuseppe Levi team 53 page report -- flaws...:Rich Murray
2014.10.10
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2014/10/andrea-rossi-reactor-32-day-run-in.html


https://animpossibleinvention.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/luganoreportsubmit.pdf

free full text full report 53 pages, with color photos, tables, graphs,
pictures --
had 1 gram nickel and lithium powder fuel with LiAlH4 (providing hydrogen)
in a sealed 2X20 cm alumina tube

Observation of abundant heat production from a reactor device and of
isotopic changes in the fuel

Giuseppe Levi
Bologna University, Bologna, Italy
Evelyn Foschi
Bologna, Italy
Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér
Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Hanno Essén
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

ABSTRACT

New results are presented from an extended experimental investigation of
anomalous heat production in a special type of reactor tube operating at
high temperatures.
The reactor, named E-Cat, is charged with a small amount of hydrogen-loaded
nickel powder plus some additives, mainly Lithium.
The reaction is primarily initiated by heat from resistor coils around the
reactor tube. Measurements of the radiated power from the reactor were
performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras.
The measurements of electrical power input were performed with a large
bandwidth three-phase power analyzer.
Data were collected during 32 days of running in March 2014.

The reactor operating point was set to about 1260 ºC in the first half of
the run, and at about 1400 °C in the second half.

The measured energy balance between input and output heat yielded a COP
factor of about 3.2 and 3.6 for the 1260 ºC and 1400 ºC runs, respectively.

The total net energy obtained during the 32 days run was about 1.5 MWh.
This amount of energy is far more than can be obtained from any known
chemical sources in the small reactor volume.

A sample of the fuel was carefully examined with respect to its isotopic
composition before the run and after the run, using several standard
methods: XPS, EDS, SIMS, ICP-MS and ICP-AES.
The isotope composition in Lithium and Nickel was found to agree with the
natural composition before the run, while after the run it was found to
have changed substantially.
Nuclear reactions are therefore indicated to be present in the run process,
which however is hard to reconcile with the fact that no radioactivity was
detected outside the reactor during the run.

1. Introduction

This paper presents the results from a new extended study carried out on
the “E-Cat” reactor, a device invented by Andrea Rossi. ...


9. Summary and concluding remarks

A 32-day test was performed on a reactor termed E-Cat, capable of producing
heat by exploiting an unknown reaction primed by heating and some
electro-magnetic stimulation.

In the past years, the same collaboration has performed similar
measurements on reactors operating in like manner, but differing both in
shape and construction materials from the one studied here.
Those tests have indicated an anomalous production of heat, which prompted
us to attempt a new, longer test.
The purpose of this longer measurement was to verify whether the production
of heat is reproducible in a new improved test set-up, and can go on for a
significant amount of time.
In order to assure that the reactor would operate for a prolonged length of
time, we chose to supply power to the E-Cat in such a way as to keep it
working in a stable and controlled manner.
For this reason, the performances obtained do not reflect the maximum
potential of the reactor, which was not an object of study here.

Our measurement, based on calculating the power emitted by the reactor
through radiation and convection, gave the following results:

the net production of the reactor after 32 days’ operation was (5825 ± 10%)
[MJ],

the density of thermal energy (if referred to an internal charge weighing 1
g) was (5.8 X 10E6 ± 10%) [MJ/kg],

while the density of power was equal to (2.1 X 10E6 ± 10%) [W/kg].

These values place the E-Cat beyond any other known conventional source of
energy. Even if one conservatively repeats the same calculations with
reference to the weight of the whole reactor rather than that of its
internal charge, one gets results confirming the non-conventional nature of
the form of energy generated by the E-Cat, namely (1.3 X 10E4 ± 10%)
[MJ/kg] for thermal energy density, and (4.7 X 10E3 ± 10%) [W/kg] for power
density.

The quantity of heat emitted constantly by the reactor and the length of
time during which the reactor was operating rule out, beyond any reasonable
doubt, a chemical reaction as underlying its operation.
This is emphasized by the fact that we stand considerably more than two
order of magnitudes from the region of the Ragone plot occupied by
conventional energy sources.

The fuel generating the excessive heat was analyzed with several methods
before and after the experimental run.
It was found that the Lithium and Nickel content in the fuel had the
natural isotopic composition before the run, but after the 32 days run the
isotopic composition has changed dramatically both for Lithium and Nickel.
Such a change can only take place via nuclear reactions.
It is thus clear that nuclear reactions have taken place in the burning
process.
This is also what can be suspected from the excessive heat being generated
in the process.

Although we have good knowledge of the composition of the fuel we presently
lack detailed information on the internal components of the reactor, and of
the methods by which the reaction is primed.

Since we are presently not in possession of this information, we think that
any attempt to explain the E-Cat heating process would be too much hampered
by the lack of this information, and thus we refrain from such discussions.

In summary, the performance of the E-Cat reactor is remarkable.
We have a device giving heat energy compatible with nuclear
transformations, but it operates at low energy and gives neither nuclear
radioactive waste nor emits radiation. From basic general knowledge in
nuclear physics this should not be possible.

Nevertheless we have to relate to the fact that the experimental results
from our test show heat production beyond chemical burning, and that the
E-Cat fuel undergoes nuclear transformations.
It is certainly most unsatisfying that these results so far have no
convincing theoretical explanation, but the experimental results cannot be
dismissed or ignored just because of lack of theoretical understanding.
Moreover, the E-Cat results are too conspicuous not to be followed up in
detail.
In addition, if proven sustainable in further tests the E-Cat invention has
a large potential to become an important energy source.
Further investigations are required to guide the interpretational work, and
one needs in particular as a first step detailed knowledge of all
parameters affecting the E-Cat operation.
Our work will continue in that direction.

Acknowledgments

By this work the authors would like to deeply and at heart honor the late
Sven Kullander, who initiated this independent test experiment.
He was a great source of inspiration and knowledge throughout the course of
this work.
The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat LLC for
providing us with the E-cat reactor to perform an independent test
measurement.
The authors would like to thank Prof. Ennio Bonetti (University of Bologna)
and Prof. Alessandro Passi (University of Bologna [ret.])
for critical reading of the manuscript.
All authors of the appendices are gratefully acknowledged for their
valuable contribution to this work.
This paper was partially sponsored by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences,
and Elforsk AB.
We would also like to thank Officine Ghidoni SA for putting their
laboratory at our disposal and allowing use of their AC power.
Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) for providing financial
support for the measurements performed for radiation protection purposes.



http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/10/08/new-scientific-report-on-the-e-cat-shows-excess-heat-and-nuclear-process/

[  http://animpossibleinvention.com/about/

About the author

Mats Lewan

For over fifteen years, journalist and public speaker Mats Lewan — author
of the book An Impossible Invention: The true story of the energy source
that could change the world— has been writing about technology and science
based on his profound knowledge in the field.
His style is captivating and easy to follow, even for those who are not
technology savvy. ...

New scientific report on the E-Cat shows excess heat and nuclear process

October 8, 2014   Uncategorized  Reports

...“Observation of abundant heat production from a reactor device and of
isotopic changes in the fuel” (Download here)
and is written by
Giuseppe Levi,
Evelyn Foschi,
Bo Höistad,
Roland Pettersson,
Lars Tegnér
and Hanno Essén,
all of whom also wrote an earlier third party report on the E-Cat.

... The authors are very careful not to make any decisive conclusions on
how the reaction occurs.
Yet, they make some interesting remarks, among them considerations on
similarities with observations in astrophysics.

Without any optimization with regard to input power, the reactor produced
between 3.2 and 3.6 times the input power, and a total energy of 1.5 MWh
from about 1 gram of fuel.

The reactor was switched off according to plan, with no signs of the
reaction slowing down.

As I point out in my book An Impossible Invention — an energy source of
this kind will have huge consequences for humanity, possibly solving a
series of global issues.

In order to avoid doubts that were presented with regard to their earlier
report, several things have been changed:
The measurement was performed during 32 days in a neutral laboratory in
Switzerland, electric measurment on the input power has been improved,
a 23-hour test of the reactor without [fuel] charge was done in order to
calibrate the measurement set-up,
and chemical analysis of the fuel before and after the run has been
performed with five different methods.

The report has been uploaded to Arxiv.org which, however has put it on
hold, without specifying any motive for this.
It has also been sent to Journal of Physics D.
I got the report sent to me by Hanno Essén who said that he now considers
it to be public, although not supposed to be published in any commercial
journal until further notice from Journal of Physics D.



http://weilerpsiblog.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/lenr-a-k-a-cold-fusion-has-reached-a-major-milestone/


Vo]:Leaning towards Inconclusive

Alan Fletcher via eskimo.com  a...@eskimo.com
1:44 PM (7 hours ago)  PST 2014.10.10

to vortex-l  Vortex-L@eskimo.com

I hate to say it, but I'm leaning to "inconclusive" for the report as a
whole.

Controls: I don't have any problems with the experimental controls as a
whole, and in particular Rossi's involvement, which was supervised at all
times. There is no chance that secret power was fed to the system.

Equipment structure: we know nothing about the internal structure of the
"tube". Where were the heaters? (In the first test they were held in place
by a cylindrical ceramic frame. Here they are just said to be "inside" the
cylinder). This is important, as it might help explain the heating-wire
"shadows" in fig 12.  It's apparently so simple that I doubt there are any
major trade secrets.  Also, it would have revealed if there was a
"magician" compartment to hold "fake ash". (But "fake" ash wouldn't have
surprised Rossi.)

Transmutation: the amount of material given for analysis was ridiculously
small -- in the end, a single particle of  Nickel "ash" was analyzed, which
might not be representative of the fuel as a whole.

Input power: since the input to the controller was from a
Rossi-inaccessible AC source, and was checked for DC, I don't think there
are any fake paths. It would have been interesting to see a very wide-band
oscilloscope trace on the heater feeds, just to confirm there's nothing
above the 5Kz (or whatever, 100 harmonics) that the meters monitored.
Similarly, there was no direct measurement of EM fields, but  Rossi had no
access to this. Nor, I think, would any "mole" on the team.

Output power: I'm inclined to agree with Jones Beene

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98226.html

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98253.html

and Goat Man that the translucence of the Alumina cylinder is a major
issue, and that the calculation of output power is questionable.

All we have to analyze are visible-spectrum photos 12a and 12b -- and we
don't even know when they were taken. In the "cool" half, or the "hot" half
of the test? There certainly appear to be "shadows" of the heating wires. I
presume (but there are no explicit photos) that during the dummy control
run and maybe during the "cool" half, that the wires did not show up as
"glowing" through the alumina.

In the first report we knew the structure of the coils ... held by a
cog-like ceramic holder, and that there was an outer steel cylinder which
prevented all direct radiation from escaping. The "melting" photos of the
first failed test showed light and dark bands which could be explained by
the different thermal conductivity of the "cogs" and the gaps between them.

But here we just see "shadows" of spiral wires, which are darker than the
background. The wires themselves are too narrow to show a shadow on the
outer cylinder when lit by a diffuse source on their inside. But with no
knowledge of the structure of the tube we are left with speculation only.
If we postulate that the "active" area is essentially a smaller cylinder
just inside the wires, shining through the outer semi-translucent alumina
cylinder, then we might be able to calculate the output power.  But, If
Might ....

(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- and the defkalion
hyperion -- Hi, google!)



Jones Beene  jone...@pacbell.net
9:35 AM PST (13 hours ago) Friday 2014.10.10

to vortex-l
Vortex-L@eskimo.com

Here is a reduction ad absurdum example of why this experiment was
unbelievably poorly designed.

NOTE: The experiment could still be gainful, but the Levi’s results do not
prove anything, as presented. The thermocouple does not help – it is
admitted by Levi that it was accurate only on the two caps, which were much
cooler.

Let’s say I claim to have a hundred watt OU lightbulb that I want to sell to
you for $1 million. If it were a glass bulb, and clear, and I use the IR
camera to measure the filament temperature, and then used that temperature
to compute the emissivity of the entire surface area of the bulb, say 100
cm^2, then you would cry foul – since the obviously only the surface area of
the filament is responsible. That filament area could be 1 cm^2 and in
effect, I have computed the power of the bulb with a 25:1 overestimate-
based on an incorrect assumption, but based on a correct reading and a
correct formula.

Next let’s say the bulb presented is frosted, and you are naïve and do not
know that it contains a hot filament - but I use the camera to focus on an
area of the bulb’s exterior, where from prior experience, I know that the
filament radiates the most photons, even if that reading is diminished in
intensity from a clear bulb … this technique can still result in a 3:1
over-estimate of the net emissivity of the bulb, since there is a strong
contribution from a hot filament. This can be demonstrated rather easily to
be factual.

That is the problem with this paper. Levi seems to be telling us only this:
that if one applies 800 watts to a Inconel wire, it will reach 1300 degrees.
But we already knew that.

We cannot extrapolate the emissivity of the resistor wire to the entire
surface of the reactor. As for a thermocouple, placement is everything. I
saw NO DATA on calibration of the thermocouple, only that someone who
already screwed up the experiment royally thinks that it verifies what could
be a grossly incorrect calibration. In fact this is admitted “We also found
that the ridges made thermal contact with any thermocouple probe placed on
the outer surface of the reactor extremely critical, making any direct
temperature measurement with the required precision impossible.” So they
admit the thermocouple reading was not done with any precision on the
exterior of the tube – only on the caps which are much cooler and
consequently the thermocouple verifies nothing!

$64 question: Was Rossi present at the time the reactor was opened?

If so, and this has been reported on E-Cat World, then that means the sample
which Bianchini tested was not independently obtained – and could have been
tampered with by Rossi himself – who is known to have purchased several
grams of Ni-62.



within the fellowship of service,  Rich Murray


Rich Murray,
MA Boston University Graduate School 1967 psychology,
BS MIT 1964 history and physics,
1039 Emory Street, Imperial Beach, CA 91932
rmfor...@gmail.com
505-819-7388 cell
619-623-3468 home
http://rmforall.blogspot.com
rich.murray11 free Skype audio, video chat
https://www.facebook.com/rmforall

Reply via email to