Eventually, tomorrow Oct.6, Andrea Rossi will make a kind of perfect demo, measuring the energy balance of n individual E-cat for a decent duration, assisted by a very select public. Perhaps some 50 persons, cumulative IQ much over 8,000.
The setup he will use is his new, rather massive Ni-H type of generator, known by the nick-name Fat Cat, combined with a heat exchanger. The water used for cooling the generator and transformed there in steam, will be cooled and recirculated going through the heat exchanger and back to the Fat- Cat – this being the primary, closed, internal circuit.
The heat released will be measured in the secondary open flow
of the cooling water used in the heat exchanger. In principle,
4 temperatures-or 2 ∆T’s- inlet and outlet to the Fat-Cat, inlet and outlet cooling water, one flow (cooling water through the heat exchanger) have to be measured, recorded continuously and the heat produced has to be computed and shown on a screen. It would be wise to measure the pressure in the primary circuit nad to put a pressure relief valve there. The inlet, electric energy will be measured and recorded as in the precedent tests.
It is not known if there will be some kind of automation, e.g.
the temperature of the water entering the Fat Cat will control the
flow of water in the secondary circuit? How will this be combined
with the usual control via the electric heaters of the core(s) of the E-cat? Actually not much is known.
Rossi said recently something about many (say 100) people) helping him. We will see now what are they worth- how was the
heat exchanger designed? How many identical setups were already tested and how long? In case this setup does not go well,
how many replacements are prepared? Actually, it could be wise to show the participants a device already working in relatively constant regime and to avoid the messy startup- as for airplanes, the risks are always greater there. And to show later how an other second setup is put in function.
How well are the measuring instruments chosen? The PC program?
Again n principle, the technical solution is good and honest, what I strongly dislike is the internal circuit- combined with a potentially instable generator- I predict problems with the control of the unit.
By the way, when Rossi was still answering my messages I have suggested him direct condensation of the steam coming out from the E-cat by mixing it with a constant flow of water. In other words- see please: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/05/call-for-perfect-e-cat-experiment.html a steam-water mixing valve instead the heat exchanger; and open flow of the warm water thus obtained. No feedback via the closed circuit. In such cases, decisive experiments- all the complications have to be avoided. I have made many where the risks were greater than a fiasco. Murphy’s Laws are valid everywhere.
My impression was that Defkalion had (or still has, who knows?) very skilled engineers who could solve the instability problem combined with a closed circuit of the inner cooling liquid, hopefully Rossi’s present team is also good.
In Rossi’s system the heat losses are smaller then 5% if/when in steady functioning so we will know soon how much overunity
this Fat Cat is, during the short but stormy history of Rossi’s invention, the clams for the output/input factor have decreased from a spectacular 200;1 to a very modest 6;1 (guaranteed) plus promises of relatively short episodes of self-sustaining functioning. But please do not forget that input is always electric energy at least 3 times more expensive than raw thermal energy.
At the end of the experiment we probably will have a realistic value for the O/U factor.
I hope the participants will be free to measure radiations with their
own instruments. Perhaps Rossi will explain how his system, based
on a mystery catalyst and NOT on advanced nanotechnology as Piantelli’s (and being tolerant to the presence of air?) generates very small amounts of radiation. But this has to be proved.
I am reading on forums (with empathy) the many optimistic messages of the Rossi fans- they hope to get a demonstration that shows they were right. They hope Oct 6. will remain in the history of New Energy as kind of a “Sweet Thursday” (remember Steinbecks’ enchanting novel?)
I think the chances are greater for kind of Bitter Thursday- or bad tasting/testing one. The greatest chances are for not tasting at all, i.e. generating more questions than giving answers.
A management wisdom says that if you not must to take decisions,
than do not take any decisions. The same is true for predictions, actually I am not paid or appreciated for making this rather negative prediction. I don’t care much for my prestige in this case.
Anyway, the experiment of tomorrow is much better and therefore much more important and relevant than the 1MW demo with 52 untamed Fat Cats.
Obviously Friday I will be back for a thorough analysis of the test or for making “mea culpa”- but do not bet on the second possibility.
Unfortunately, I believe your prediction will be spot on, Peter. I think the reaction's instability is the result of a non-homogeneous heating inside the core. It is possible that "hot spots" occur and heat removal is not quick enough in those areas leading to Rossi reducing the rate of reaction to the point of near non-existence. Maybe a core design similar to a star fruit would be closer to optimal.ReplyDelete
I do however hope for the best. Europe and the world needs this to succeed.