Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from THHuxleynew

Jed, this type of argument is not my favourite. Unsubstantiated. You can try to substantiate it and in doing so make a more precise point, but maybe not what you say above. I'm going to do it for the fans Rossi claims he used (which could not cool 1MW with the Rossi piping - but that is a separate argument).

Smith did a much better job substantiating this argument than I did. Let me quote him:

"If the unit were generating the amount of heat that Penon claims, and that heat had been

left to naturally dissipate, no human could have worked, or even survived, for long in the space.

Obviously, this temperature rise in the space never happened.

Alternatively, JMP could have used a roof-mounted fan to remove all rejected heat. Fan

sizing is:

CFM = Cubic Feet of air per Minute

c = Specific heat of air in BTU per pound of air per °F (BTU / Lb. °F) = 0.24

ΔT = Temperature difference of the air, in this case 130° F - 80° F

ρ = Average density of the air in pounds per cubic foot = 14.3

CFM = (2,700,000) x (1 / c) x (1 / 60) x (1 / 130 – 80) x ρ

= (2,700,000) x (1 / 0.24) x (1 / 60) x (1 / 50) x 14.3

= 53,625 CFM

A roof mounted fan to move this much air would have a blade diameter of about 54”, a

10 HP motor, would have dimensions of about 60” square and about 48” high, and would look

something like the next picture."

http://coldfusioncommunity.net…/01/0235.01_Exhibit_1.pdf

Is that better?

You cannot use only two panes of glass with a 54" fan blade. I am pretty sure a 10 HP fan would blow out the remaining glass if you tried.

More to the point, no one puts 1-MW class ventilation equipment in a room upstairs. You put it in open air, up on the roof, or in a space on the ground next to the building. Like an air conditioner compressor and fan. It would be crazy to enclose it in the building.

The part about having to separate the inlet and outlet ducts is my own observation, based on what I know about HVAC equipment. Even outdoors, warm air sticks around more than you might think. Putting the inlet right next to the outlet degrades performance. This is why you should trim back shrubbery around an air conditioner outside unit, to disperse the warm air.

Quote from THHuxleynew

14m^3/s from the two fans (50,000 m^3/hour). And BTW this gives you only 100kW cooling - a factor of 10 adrift.

Smith estimates 53,625 CFM (cubic feet per minute). That comes to 91,109 m^3/hour. So 50,000 m^3/hour would be enough for roughly 500 kW I suppose. However, Smith is talking about commercial grade ventilation equipment, such as the equipment shown in the photo on p. 17 of his report. That is a 60" by 48" roof mounted box. That works much better than the imaginary home-made heat exchanger Rossi described.

On p. 17, Smith goes on to say "the best way to remove the heat is with a cooling tower." He shows a photo of a 1-MW rated tower. In U.S. HVAC standards this is referred to as a 225 Ton unit, meaning it can melt 225 tons of ice in 24 hours. It is "about 12' x 12' x 12'." I pointed to similar photos of cooling towers with this much capacity. I said they are roughly the size of automobiles, which is about right.

You cannot hide a 12' x 12' x 12' cooling tower, and you sure as heck cannot put it inside. That would defeat the purpose, to say the least.

Actually, an air conditioner ventilation unit can be put inside a structure, to hide it. It has to be in a walled off area of the roof, not in a room. I saw one just yesterday at a swank resort hotel. There is a large wooden grill on the roof eaves, much larger than a window, with a lot of noise and wind coming from it. The equipment is just inside. This is more or less the same as plunking the unit on the roof, but you can't see it.

It was under one of the triangular eaves on the right side of this pretentious building:

They don't want visible HVAC equipment on the roof. That is a common aesthetic convention. Architects, interior designers, automobile designers and others feel a need to hide the functionality of structures and machines, as if it is somehow unseemly. Maybe they want it to look like a 19th century building, because they make no effort to hide the chimneys. They hide machinery under the eaves or at the service entrance. Clothing designers hide zippers. Computer designers don't want you to see the hard disk. I never understood that aesthetic.

Anyway, that's off topic!

Quote

Smith estimates 53,625 CFM (cubic feet per minute). That comes to 91,109 m^3/hour. So 50,000 m^3/hour would be enough for roughly 500 kW I suppose. However, Smith is talking about commercial grade ventilation equipment, such as the equipment shown in the photo on p. 17 of his report. That is a 60" by 48" roof mounted box. That works much better than the imaginary home-made heat exchanger Rossi described.

Yes, but I was doing the calculation for Rossi's claimed fans, less by a factor of 2 from what Smith says is needed. I agree - even with a good heat exchanger and super high power fans the airflow Rossi says he uses is marginal for 1MW.

The point here is that what Rossi says he has does not work, a stronger point than (what is also true) that a typical 1MW heat exchanger is not possible.

@Bob,

"Address of the site: 7861 NW 46th St., Doral, Florida, 33139 USA

Participants to the experiment: Carl-Oscar Gullström, Dr Andrea Rossi"

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.05249.pdf

Interpret that as you may, but it sounds like (to me) that Mr. Gullström participated in the experiment at the stated address.

I would not expect that Rossi will be honest about the details of his future experiments. If Rossi's QuarkX is producing mesons and pions as his first theory paper states, Rossi will never acknowledge the production of muons as a decay product of those mesons. Muons detection will place Rossi's certification efforts into the crapper. Even so, honesty is the best policy. If Rossi begins production of the QuarkX in a big way without acknowledging this muon generation overhanging his invention, he will be in big trouble with nuclear regulators. It is best to be honest and pay the price early on then be ruined at a later time.

Quote from Alan Smith

Well, the HVAC guy I spoke to calculated that a building like the one in Doral could dissipate 150-200kW all on its own. And I was under the impression there were ventilators in the roof? And bi doors, which were mostly left open.

As for Gullstrom's whereabouts, you are guessing, aren't you? I would merely like to point out that since the invention of the steamboat crossing the Atlantic is no longer perilous and fairly fast.

mostly left open.... You mean that all the doors were open all night long with no security?

@Bob,

I never said I fully believe anything. I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth. I don't mock your opinion. Don't mock mine. I'll give you this: the words are ambiguous and could be interpreted either way.

@Bob,

Someone said you were polite. It seems more passive-aggressive to me.

Quote from IH Fanboy

@Bob,

I never said I fully believe anything. I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth. I don't mock your opinion. Don't mock mine. I'll give you this: the words are ambiguous and could be interpreted either way.

A neutral observer would surely say a little bit more, or a little bit less, than that. Bob has cited numerous examples where statements that are ambiguous and could be interpreted either way from Rossi have corresponded to the least favourable real world facts.

This is called spin, and everyone can do it a bit, Rossi however stretches truth (in the examples Bob has noted and many others) to an unusual and unexpected extent.

You would have less an appearance of bias if you acknowledged this fact and applied it to these words, noting that given Rossi's past record what he says here provides no useful validation for what really happened. That is not what your previous words here seem to indicate.

Quote from AlainCo

i don't care about heat dissipation, because JMP circus is enough for me.

Please, believers, wake up! you have been fooled like I've been, like IH have been, like Dewey have been, like Ampenergo have been, like Hydrofusion have been.

Once you know you are fooled, you are no more fooled, you are just furious.

The heat dissipation issue is interesting, but personally it does not matter much to me either. There is a large body of evidence pointing to deliberate deception consistent throughout AR's career and ample evidence that his Ni+LiAlH4 system does not work. Any excess heat seen is negatively correlated with the rigor of the test, with Doral being the best example yet.

Quote from Bob

We now know that Rossi ran the entire Lugano test and that the professors were rarely there at all! Does this sound familiar?

Penon "took" the measurements for the 1 year test indeed..... he "took" them from Rossi!

My good friends you all seems to forget that in this epoch there exist dataloggers and that data can be taken by experimenters even if they are far away from the experiment. The vast majority of physics experiments is done by machines and DAQ systems without the physical presence of the scientist (e.g. satellite experiments, submarine experiments and even experiments on accelerators)

A full IR video footage was taken during the Lugano and even full data from two PCE power meters. All operations ware recorded and written on file. (read the report)

Also in normal life we have many examples of this way of working. Electric energy counters (or water, gas) are read by providers via a remote connection or rarely sending a technician to read them.

Similarly telling that Penon has taken the data from Rossi is simply false and a nasty example of disinformation.

Penon has taken data from his own DAQ system and from his own apparatus.

I really think that if some people continue here with this kind of disinformation will simply destroy all the forum.