I am probably naive. However, it seems to me that if one design a loop back, an absolute measurement can be had. Once the Ecat is at full operation let the ecat generate steam and run a turbine with an electrical generator. As the COP for the turbine is well known exact knowledge can be determined without very inaccurate flow measurement, A COP of 3.5 will be enough for a turbine with COP of 0.3 -that should be no problem to reach.
Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com [email protected] +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Steve High <[email protected]> wrote: > As a non-technical person who greatly enjoys and respects this forum > I am extremely cautious about opening new threads, so I have thought long > and hard about this and I think the time is right. I hope the brain trust > here will take a little time to answer. > > My question: why would this not work? > > 1) Build a well insulated box about the size of a generous walk in > closet, large enough to comfortably accommodate the ECat, its electronics, > the frame and other supporting equipment, as well as a couple human > technicians. > > 2) Design and build an airflow system that, under steady > conditions, can most accurately measure the temperature of the air coming > in, leaving, and the volume of air being transferred. > > 3) Perform a series of calibration runs using a resistance > heater, and accurately measure the power coming through the outflow under > all combinations of temperature and airflow (and pressure if that's an > issue). By comparing these results to the known power being input to the > resistance heater, one will know the power being lost through the insulated > walls for all combinations of temperature and airflow. > > 4) Turn on the ECat and run it anyway you like provided it is > at or close to a steady state. Adjust the airflow so the ECat is kept at a > comfortable temperature. Follow four simple measurements, input power, temp > in, temp out and volume of air transferred. Run your results through your > calibrated software. Now you know how much power the ECat is producing. > > I think it is fair to say at this juncture that the current > report if far from convincing, for regular posters at Vortex not to mention > the general public, due to the byzantine issues being raised concerning the > IR camera, the transmissivity of the alumina, and a host of other things. I > would venture a guess that one would not be able to find a single, > objective, expert member of the human race who could look at all this and > say for certain whether the results are valid or not. And even if such a > person existed, would he or she be able to convince the common person, > given all the objections being raised by the skeptics? > > I sincerely hope that Darden or one of his lieutenants is > following this forum because I think I have something important to say. In > order for the ECat to reach its stated goal of lifting fellow human beings > out of poverty the technology is going to have to prove itself convincing > to the common, reasonably well educated person, the journalist, the > politician, the lobbyist, the board member of the philanthropic > organization that wishes to participate in the lifting up of humanity. In > other words somebody like me. I think I would be a thousand times more > convinced by a well-conducted airflow calorimetry than by the convoluted > investigations that have taken place up to this point. If the brain trust > at Vortex has any reason to say this wouldn't work, please let me know. > > > >
