Posted on 09/25/2011 7:03:47 PM PDT by Liberty1970
Daniele Passerinis blog 22 Passi damore e dintorni has an announcement from Dr. Brian Josephson, retired Cambridge University physics professor regarding an upcoming test that he will carry out on one of Andrea Rossis E-Cats:
On October 6th we will have the opportunity to make a long (more then 12 hours) of testing one of the modules of the RC 1 MW generator. The module will be Opened to us and we will have the opportunity to verify weights and volumes of the internal components. Heat measurements will be done at condensing the steam produced in heat exchanger and a secondary circuit where no water will be vaporized. This is NOT an official test of the University of Bologna Because the contract is not active yet.
Its no clear from this announcement where this testing will be taking place, but presumably it will be done in Uppsala, Sweden where Rossi has announced that testing will be taking place in October. Brian Josephson was a winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973. Regarding Dr. Josephsons testing, Andrea Rossi stated:
The measurement of energy will not therefore be made on the steam, to avoid all the issues concerning the quality of the steam, but the measurements of energy will be made on the delta T of the water of the secondary circuit heated by the steam! This way, the amount of energy produced will be calculated in an undisputable way. The steam runs in a primary circuit, which is a closed loop, where the steam is condensed after exchanging heat with the water of the secondary circuit, which will never evaporate. Therefore, the energy is calculated on the base of the delta T of the heated water and its flow rate, indipendently from the temperature of the steam, that does not enter in the energy calculation parameters.
From this statement it is clear that Rossi is trying his best to nullify the wet steam issue that many people have been speculating on after analyzing videos of the E-Cat that were released earlier this summer. Dr. Josephsons background in theoretical physics should give some authority to any reports he makes; it will be interesting to see what he finds out, and how his report is received by those who are anxious to hear some definite conclusions regarding the E-Cat.
There should be more concern about accounting for all inputs, rather than the boiled water at the output.
It will be like opening night for David Copperfield or Uri Geller.
There was, and a summary of the data is to be found on the LENR/CANR website. The naysayers simply ignore it, despite the fact that it was done at the exact behest of one of the physicists who had attended the first demo and pointed out the steam quality issue. The test was "quick and dirty" and not suitable for scientific publication, but more than sufficient to answer the "yes/no" point about steam quality being an issue......it isn't.
Please point out what "inputs" were NOT measured. Certainly all sources and magnitudes of electric power were accounted for.
Still making childish comments, I see. Is there some reason that you just cannot manage to communicate as an adult on these threads???
I think it could be.
I'm looking forward to these independent tests, and looking forward more to the 1MW Ecat going into extended production.
I keep saying that the best initial application of a device that produces low-quality steam would be in district-heating systems, where the ecat could supply steam to a whole town or city from a central location.
This particular test hasn't even taken place yet.
Certainly all sources and magnitudes of electric power were accounted for.
Certainly? Isn't that a big assumption, especially for someone with your credentials?
I seem to recall from months ago that Rossi had already said something about one possible usage of E-CAT was to pre-heat the intake water for a manufacturing plant up to 150 or 180 degrees, thereby reducing the amount of coal needed to accomplish steam for production.
RE home water heating. Anyone have an opinion on how well an e-cat water heater, say 50-60 gallons, might perform in keeping up w/ hot water production during peak usage, such as during morning showers, shower + dishwasher, etc?
Would it be arranged like an electric unit, do you think, where the hot, enclosed element heats the water or would it be more likely to have water flow through a heat excanger?
The e-cat would need to power way down when no cold water is being introduced into the vessel. And for safety, it probably wouldn’t run very ‘hot’, so I’m wondering if it will have the immediate response of a natural gas water heater.
The question applies to all the tests.
"Certainly? Isn't that a big assumption, especially for someone with your credentials?"
Nope. The witnesses specifically checked for sources of additional electric input and ruled that out, and especially so in the later tests.
There was some ridiculous speculation that the heating might be by induced current, but that is ludicrous. I've worked with RF induction furnaces in this power range, and the electronics needed to drive 5000W is physically LARGE. The smaller of the two units I used was about a meter each way. And that is with the workpiece immediately at the RF coil. The notion that such an apparatus might be in another room/floor is so asinine as to beggar imagination (1/r2).
And what are your credentials......still waiting on that? Why are you so reluctant to let us know what YOUR technical expertise level is?? Is it, perhaps, the same problem that Krivit has......i.e. he has none.
This has more to do with the size of the tank than anything else. At this point, the only one who knows anything about the "throttleability" of the E-Cat is Rossi.
I think Rossi is thinking more along the lines of home heating, initially and particularly in north Europe, where demand is higher and somewhat more constant. One major factor in the E-Cats favor for such sites is Europes infrastructure for "neighborhood heating" as opposed to the US's individual home approach. Of course, for apartments and high-rise condos, there would be no difference.
Moonman62: "This particular test hasn't even taken place yet."
Wonder Warthog: The question applies to all the tests.
So certainty of accounting for all inputs applies to tests that haven't even taken place yet. Is that part of the scientific method?
Judging from the inverse relationship between your claimed credentials and the quality of your posts, I don't see how it's relevant.
Obviously, I was referring to tests that HAD taken place. The idea that I was talking about the proposed test is soley a figment of your imagination.
I'll stack up the quality of my posts next to yours any day of the week, buddy. You have yet, on ANY CF thread, to post a single technical point. Just brainless sarcasm.
“how well an e-cat water heater, say 50-60 gallons, might perform in keeping up w/ hot water production during peak usage, such as during morning showers, shower + dishwasher, etc?
“
It will keep up with one adult but never any teenager.
You assume obviousness as much as certainty. That's not scientific, in spite of your claimed credentials.
Okay. I've wasted enough time trying to get you to rise above your childishness and actually discuss the issues. "Obviously" you are incapable of doing so. End of dialog. Bye.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.