Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from IH Fanboy

The manual was contradictory and said minimum elsewhere. That is why a same pump was purchased and tested. Though the tests are not complete, one can extrapolate the data Alan F. has collected out to a pump rate that would closely match that claimed by Rossi. For those who care, go to the thread where we are tracking the tests and read my commentary in light of the data that we have so far.

Oh no, no, no. That is factually incorrect, IHFB. Said pump was purchased, tested, and found to confirm Smith's basic conclusions, and confirm that Rossi was off by a factor of two. Providing even more evidence that Rossi is full of it.

No pass on this one. And by the way, I won a bunch of quatloos.

I don't know why you think you can slide by on fake facts, but I'm absolutely calling you on this one.

You know sometimes there's IHFB says, and then there's physics. I'm going with Fletcher's ACTUAL results and physics.

But thanks for the quatloo loan, between you and WCG, I'm back in the quatloos.

(Hi gang, I see not much has changed since I left. I've got a shiny new grant and don't have much time to post these days, so please don't take offense if I'm not around much.)

Quote from Paradigmnoia

And the tests, to date, do not indicate that double the flow rate is at all likely.

Yes they do. I think it is likely and we'll probably see that borne out with more tests. The head pressure increases the flow rate.

Quote from JedRothwell

Yes, he has. His second report includes photos that he took, and his description of his tour of the plant. Such as this comment, which I find hilarious:

"The only access to the mezzanine is a rickety wooden stairs, which the attorneys made this author climb first (load test) before they would use it. . . ."

Pure hyperbole and misdirection. Just like his marked up image of the front the building with big red arrows pointing to everything EXCEPT the two missing window panes. Pretty egregious slight of hand for a supposed impartial expert on the matter. Another example of Smith's slyness was his apparent certainty about there being no pipe to the mezzanine, although the image is cut off at the bottom so that you cannot see the bottom area of the mezzanine door.

Quote from sigmoidal

Oh no, no, no. That is factually incorrect IHFB. Said pump was purchased, tested, and found to confirm Smith's basic conclusions, and confirm that Rossi was off by a factor of two. Providing even more evidence that Rossi is full of it.

Sorry sig, that is factually false. And you know my quatloo count is multiple times what yours is right now. You cannot make such hard conclusions when the data is still being gathered. We have only limited testing done with head pressure, and what we have so far shows that head pressure makes a big difference in flow rate. More to come on that front. Good to see you back though!

Quote from JedRothwell

That would be an improvement but the results would still be meaningless. As you see from the schematic and photos, the meter was mostly out of the water, in a mostly-empty gravity return pipe. The manual for this meter warns not to install it that way. That's what Murray said and there is no doubt it is true. Sadly, it upset Peter Gluck to no end to hear that . . . but facts are facts.

Having it pulse every ~40 minutes is ridiculous.

The water meter issue is a perfect example of Rossi's Law*

*Rossi's Law states:

The number and quality of a measurement of a Rossi device is in inverse proportion to the sensitivity of the COP calculated using that measurement.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Sorry sig, that is factually false. And you know my quatloo count is multiple times what yours is right now. You cannot make such hard conclusions when the data is still being gathered. We have only limited testing done with head pressure, and what we have so far shows that head pressure makes a big difference in flow rate. More to come on that front. Good to see you back though!

OK, please provide for all of us the highest measured output and head pressure that Fletcher deems to have been correctly measured and reported. Note: please do not report any hand-waving estimates of what might occur if you squint hard and look sideways.

Thanks!

Congrats on the grant, sigmoidal. We will not take it personally that you find your time better spent elsewhere than in our company.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Yes they do. I think it is likely and we'll probably see that borne out with more tests. The head pressure increases the flow rate.

Of course the flow increases with head pressure. It is a "suction" pump. When the inlet pressure is higher than the outlet pressure, the pump becomes a(n expensive) flow restrictor. It is no longer metering. It is being operated out of specification if the inlet pressure is higher than the outlet pressure.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Of course the flow increases with head pressure. It is a "suction" pump. When the inlet pressure is higher than the outlet pressure, the pump becomes a(n expensive) flow restrictor. It is no longer metering. It is being operated out of specification if the inlet pressure is higher than the outlet pressure.

I don't think anyone plans on testing with inlet pressure higher than outlet pressure. Alan F. built a giant pipe in his back yard to increase outlet pressure. Nobody has suggested testing with an inlet pipe the same height (or higher) as the outlet pipe. But testing with some inlet pressure at varying values is something that needs to be done to have a complete understanding of the pump's operating parameters.

IH Fanboy ,

Right.

So why would water go anywhere but downhill at 0 bar outlet pressure? The company has a nice correction factor that goes as low as 0.5 bar which I thought matched up pretty well with the experiments done by Alan F.

The experiments by Alan F. show that the pump under test underperforms vis-à-vis the spec. That means that when Alan measures an output of 42L/h, that is likely a conservative value. And that does not even take into account any significant head pressure. You're going to see higher than 42L/h in further testing, trust me, including with an outlet pressure greater than 0 bar.

Quote from Zeus46

What nonsense... Its steam, flowing through a pipe! How would you measure that? Simple question.

I'd start with pressure.

AA isn't an Engineer because he doesn't understand that a reading of ZERO

is THE big red light. And he is NOW claiming that he read the report.

IHFB thinks that a piece of paper in the gap or a flange where the "steam" was escaping could have caused a back pressure resulting in negative pressure. I kid you not.

At least IHFB doesn't pretend to be an engineer.

He just comes up with stuff he imagines could be the cause of ZERO pressure causing an audible leak (which could just as easily have been a sucking sound).

Pete

Quote from PIH

IHFB thinks that a piece of paper in the gap or a flange where the "steam" was escaping could have caused a back pressure resulting in negative pressure. I kid you not.

LOL. You are full of it, I kid you not. Please provide a link to back your assertion. My comment about the observed steam leak had nothing to do with your imaginary cause of a back pressure.

Quote from IH Fanboy

The experiments by Alan F. show that the pump under test underperforms vis-à-vis the spec. That means that when Alan measures an output of 42L/h, that is likely a conservative value. And that does not even take into account any significant head pressure. You're going to see higher than 42L/h in further testing, trust me, including with an outlet pressure greater than 0 bar.

Well that was neat. I had to go through the whole Gamma pump test thread again. I missed most of it when I was away for the summer, and then just skimmed through it after I came back.

It does seem to be underperforming. I am just now going over the protocol to see if anything obvious is causing that. Or maybe just a tired pump.

IH Fanboy ,

Note that on the first page of the pump thread, I guestimated no more than 45 L/hr at 0.2 bar.

Quote from Eric Walker

Congrats on the grant, sigmoidal. We will not take it personally that you find your time better spent elsewhere than in our company.

Hahah! You slay me.
You know, be careful what you promise in a grant in order to compete, because you might just get it and have to work your tail off. Seems I never learn.

Anyway, I'm glad to hear that Alan Smith is going to the Maestro's performance, and looking forward to hearing the report.

And I do kind of miss ribbing IHFB, in a weird and probably unedifying way.

But those IHFB 'facts' that exist in that immutable and rarified space between his ears never cease to amaze.

Best to all!!

sigmoidal

@sig,

Check out blockchain technology if you want to grok immutability. In a future time, all truth will be encoded on a blockchain. Then you won't have to reference the rarified space between my ears for your serving of hard truths.