Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    :rolleyes:

  • what Frank saw in the early spring was a much less developed version of the E-cat SKL : still plugged into the mains for input

    It appears that, even recently, neither the certifiers nor the partners are seeing a closed loop setup, as I had thought.


    Gerard McEk

    November 7, 2020 at 4:59 AM

    (snip)

    3. Do you expect any public happening (publication, presentation, paper) regarding the Ecat this year?

    4. Were most or all tests done by the certification agency done on a self looped Ecat SKL?

    5. Were self looped Ecat SKL(s) in operation witnessed by Partners the certification Agency? (snip)


    Andrea Rossi

    November 7, 2020 at 7:23 AM

    Gerard McEk: (snip)

    3- I am afraid not

    4- no

    5- no

    (snip)


    So a bit of bad news on two fronts : The demo is likely not going to happen later this year, but next ; and the self looped E-cat running from a battery has not yet been demonstrated to others (although Rossi has said he has achieved it).

    .

  • "Achieved it" makes it sound oh so difficult.


    He claims it needs 115W at 12V. That would be trivial to provide from a battery. Charging the battery from 920V output is only slightly harder. Perhaps an hours work to design a circuit and order parts, next day an hour or two to built it. Job done with the afternoon free to play tennis.




  • I have no fundamental objection to this setup.


    At this point self-powering is not required.


    However, I would replace the mains input with a motor-generator, or a battery pack sufficient to drive the control system for long enough that it would be impossible to produce the stated output.


    I would put an oscilloscope across the load resistor to ensure there are no suspicious waveforms that could fool the ammeter.


    I would also beef up the input power monitoring, and all the other instruments and the load resistor should be freshly calibrated.

  • Alan, the whole point of Rossi's delaying tactic from December last year to now was the he supposedly discovered and proved he could run the ecat closed loop, you know, raising toasts and all. Saying that:

    "At this point self-powering is not required." seems like an overly generous offer to a conman.

  • The plasma output might be high frequency AC or anyhow alternating pulses of very brief duration. In the Stockholm presentation (the unedited version) Rossi also suggested something along these lines (in Italian while discussing with other people, at about 1:28:30 if you have access to the video).


    I'm not sure how AC ammeters would respond to this sort of type of signal, but in my own plasma electrolysis tests using a standard DC ammeter in series with the cathode, under certain conditions when RF noise is the highest I get values close to 0 A or even negative current values. I'm assuming that's when the output is oscillating the most.

  • The plasma output might be high frequency AC or anyhow alternating pulses of very brief duration. In the Stockholm presentation (the unedited version) Rossi also suggested something along these lines (in Italian while discussing with other people, at about 1:28:30 if you have access to the video).


    I'm not sure how AC ammeters would respond to this sort of type of signal, but in my own plasma electrolysis tests using a standard DC ammeter in series with the cathode, under certain conditions when RF noise is the highest I get values close to 0 A or even negative current values. I'm assuming that's when the output is oscillating the most

    In general backfires from plasmas are blocked by chokes.

    Common examples are applied in Fluorescent lamp electronics.

    Such chokes can also help measuring current in systems with plasma disturbance.

  • Rob Woudenberg

    I think the general idea here is that the plasma disturbance itself is an anomaly worth harnessing rather than filtering/blocking out.


    On a related note, here is the relevant excerpt about AC from the Stockholm presentation that I transcribed when the full video got released. It seems to translate relatively well to English with Google Translate:


    * * *


    [1:28:52] [Vassallo] Ma c'è anche una produzione di energia elettrica oltre quella termica?

    [Fabiani] Che domanda!

    [Rossi] Noi facciamo la termica.

    [Vassallo] (*inaudible*)

    [Rossi] No, ho capito… no, la sua domanda è più profonda…

    [Fabiani] Me l'ha fatta prima!

    [Rossi] Lui ha chiesto dell'energia elettrica diretta. Ci stiamo lavorando. C'è.

    [1:29:08] [Fabiani] Ci fa delle domande capziose, il professore! *laughs*

    [Rossi] No. Ho detto c'è, c'è. C'è. Ma non siamo ancora capaci di…

    [Vassallo] Ci diamo del Tu, abbiamo detto, no?

    [Rossi] Sì, sì, Scusa. C'è, ma non siamo ancora capaci di usarla(?). C'è. Perché, vediamo dall'oscilloscopio che, noi, quando… quando lo usiamo in un altro modo, noi vediamo… noi sappiamo benissimo che troviamo solo corrente che si muove in un solo lato(?) su un tempo quadrato(??). Noi lo vediamo benissimo. Però, con l'oscilloscopio, vediamo - no? - usandolo in un altro modo, che c'è una corrente… sotto, che non è nostra. Secondo me (*inaudible*) non può essere nostra. (*inaudible*) Noi qui dentro facciamo corrente continua. Abbiamo un'alternata, ma facciamo la continua. Poi ci troviamo dell'alternata che non può essere, non può essere nostra.

    [Levi] Esatto.

    [Rossi] Non siamo ancora capaci di… ma c'è.

    [Vassallo] Ok. Se tanto va… quindi però se c'è, qua è dissipata.

    [Rossi] Sì, viene… viene termalizzata.

    [Vassallo] Viene dissipata.

    [Rossi] Viene termalizzata.

    [Vassallo] Va bene.