Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

    No matter how much I try to figure out the rationale for the debate going on here, I just can't quite succeed. The claim is that some magical gizmo in this little space in an office park in Florida was producing 1 MW of power pretty much continuously for an entire year while consuming considerably less power in the process. Better yet, nobody noticed. Whether this actually happened is being argued on the basis of the diameter of pipes, the existence or lack thereof of a window pane, and whether or not there was a giant invisible heat exchanger in the attic. The only so-called evidence that anything like this actually happened consists of the ravings of someone whose endless lies for years on end have been breathtaking in their brazenness. And yet, some 6,000 posts later, the argument goes on. I guess I just don't have the "special" perspective that many here do. From where I sit, the whole thing is too absurd to argue about with a straight face.

    Quote from Malcolm Lear

    Thanks Jed, I guess that means the thermocouple was measuring external pipe temperature.

    That is my guess. I can't be sure. But I know that Murray is a consummate professional and he would notice if the thermocouple (TC) was taped to the outside of the pipe -- or what-have-you. (I have actually seen that arrangement with some laboratory experiments! A dumb idea.)


    As I mentioned, the regulations for boilers specify that you install a dial thermometer with the stem measured to reach the center of the pipe. I think that is also where the TC probe should reach. I suppose Murray would notice if the TC was too close to reactor, where the pipe conducts heat directly from the reactor body.


    Let me just guess that the temperature was recorded correctly at around 103°C. Assume that the reactor core heating elements were well over 100°C. Any electric heating element would be hotter than that. Assume this is liquid water. It would be difficult to make it less that 103°C, and damn near impossible to make it boil.


    By that I mean you would have to work hard to create the smallest possible pressure between the reactor and the radiator in the pretend customer site. Any measurable pressure from elbow joints, crud in the pipes, or the serpentine pipes in the radiator would push the water pressure up enough to raise the temperature at least a few degrees above 100°C. I don't see how you could avoid it.


    The kind of old fashioned hot-water radiators I grew up with operate at 18 psi, or 1.24 bar. They go through low resistance loops from the basement up to the second or third floor. They were originally driven just by hot water rising, although the ones I recall were driven by small pumps that last for decades. The pressure is so low, and wear and tear is so low, the house I grew up in probably still uses the same pipes and radiators installed in the late 19th century. (The house also had gaslight fixtures, and boiler was originally coal-fired.) Here is a description of hot water radiators:


    http://www.oldhouseonline.com/articles/radiator-handbook


    18 psi raises the water boiling point to ~252°F, or 122°C


    https://durathermfluids.com/pd…ressure-boiling-point.pdf


    So, even with a circa-1900 house hot water radiator, there is no way you could have steam at 103°C. As I said before, even at 110°C steam is ruled out. Even with a 130-year-old low pressure boiler system, there is no way you could keep the pressure low enough to boil the water. The water in a circulating radiator is also filled with gunk, the way Rossi's reactor water was, which I think also raises the boiling point.


    You do not actually let the water get to 100°C with a circulating hot water radiator. (The document above says they are 80°C.) 19th century steam radiators are different. They do not have circulation pumps. Pressure is at a minimum. (2 psi according to the document above.) So the temperature is just over 100°C. The steam rises by itself, condenses in the radiator, and falls back to the basement boiler in the same pipe it rose in. This is like having a tea-kettle on the stove with a long spout going up to the second floor.


    Note that Rossi's reactor could not have had low 2 psi pressure, because it had many large pumps driving the fluid into the reactors, and one hidden pump driving water out of the radiator in the pretend customer site. (Which Smith says was also used to produce fake flow readings as part of the scam.) Also because the pipes are horizontal. With a 19th century steam radiator, the pipes are vertical. Any condensed water in them falls straight back into the boiler, without building up resistance or pressure. Condensed water does not slosh around in the pipes.


    The source above says the Empire State Building steam radiators are at 2 psi.

    Quote from interested observer

    No matter how much I try to figure out the rationale for the debate going on here, I just can't quite succeed. The claim is that some magical gizmo in this little space in an office park in Florida was producing 1 MW of power pretty much continuously for an entire year while consuming considerably less power in the process. Better yet, nobody noticed. Whether this actually happened is being argued on the basis of the diameter of pipes, the existence or lack thereof of a window pane, and whether or not there was a giant invisible heat exchanger in the attic. The only so-called evidence that anything like this actually happened consists of the ravings of someone whose endless lies for years on end have been breathtaking in their brazenness. And yet, some 6,000 posts later, the argument goes on. I guess I just don't have the "special" perspective that many here do. From where I sit, the whole thing is too absurd to argue about with a straight face.


    It's going to be really interesting if this thing ever goes to trial. Will the lawyers be allowed to use the term 'cold fusion' given the history and bias the public has towards the subject and given the premature announcement in the national media in 1989? Maybe they will use the term LENR (which in layman's terms will be defined as cold fusion) or not talk about the actual reaction at all (which I think would be a huge win for Rossi). For me Rossi's E-Cat did not pass the 'wife test' even before this fiasco so I just don't see how 100% of the jurors will find the preponderance of evidence in Rossi's favor.

    ,

    Quote from interested observer

    No matter how much I try to figure out the rationale for the debate going on here, I just can't quite succeed. The claim is that some magical gizmo in this little space in an office park in Florida was producing 1 MW of power pretty much continuously for an entire year while consuming considerably less power in the process. Better yet, nobody noticed. Whether this actually happened is being argued on the basis of the diameter of pipes, the existence or lack thereof of a window pane, and whether or not there was a giant invisible heat exchanger in the attic. The only so-called evidence that anything like this actually happened consists of the ravings of someone whose endless lies for years on end have been breathtaking in their brazenness. And yet, some 6,000 posts later, the argument goes on. I guess I just don't have the "special" perspective that many here do. From where I sit, the whole thing is too absurd to argue about with a straight face.


    Your mind is clear

    The year-long independent e-cat test with paying industrial customer has a positive report from the ERV, and both COP and output power are very high!

    Great - that looks really good. I guess it will be worth billions.

    Unfortunately IH have refused to pay for it!

    What? Are they idiots? Maybe they could not get payment lined up?

    They had payment ready and waiting, but said they did not believe Rossi's device worked.

    But the test had independent monitoring, and the report was positive. This is not some marginal result you can debate about. It is obvious when you have that much excess power!

    Well, they said the measurements were e-mailed to the ERV from Rossi

    That does not sound very independent. But there are records? Automatic capture?

    All that equipment was removed. we don't really know

    OK - but the test would be to a proper test plan from IH, so at least we know the calorimetry is Ok. How can you go wrong with high power and high COP?

    Well, the test plan in the contract was not followed. But in any case Rossi replaced the original equipment with his own. And removed that at the end of the test. There is now no record of it.

    Well, this is unfortunate. But, with such a large test there must be workers who understand the calorimetry

    No. Rossi did it all himself.

    And anyway the paying customer provides validation independent of the calorimetry

    The paying customer was Rossi himself, pretending to be Johnson Matthey and make commercial platinum sponges. Rossi did buy some platinum sponge from Johnson Matthey, and put it in tubes warmed by the plant. However this was not hot enough so he added electric heaters. He did all this inside a super-secret container that was heavily insulated

    It does not sound as though Rossi as customer could have dissipated 1MW?

    No, but that does not matter. According to Rossi he had an extra heat exchanger on the second floor to dissipate the 1MW. So that is OK.

    Well... I guess it does not matter who used the power, as long as it was used. So where did the heat exchanger output go? Up a roof vent?

    No. Rossi was cleverer than that. He did not want anyone to know about the heat exchanger so there is absolutely no evidence it existed. He removed individual panes of glass from a second floor window frame when the heat exchanger was needed and replaced them when google cameras went by, so it looks as though the windows have glass in them in some of the pictures. The rest of the time he says he had high power fans and tubing making a homebrew heat exchanger.

    That is surprising - but I guess with enough narrow tubing you can make a 1MW heat exchanger. Has Rossi disclosed the design, or, even better shown experts the heat exchanger?

    Well, Rossi actually dismantled the heat exchanger after the test was finished and reused its parts. He is very economical. But he told his expert Wong the exact length and size of the tubes, and the size of the fans and enclosure. And for added authenticity, on the very day that Wong arrived, one year after the end of the test, Rossi called in glass replacement people to replace the glass.

    That does not make sense. Anyway it does not matter. Wong could calculate the airspeed and use that and the pipe diameter and length to estimate the heat dissipated?

    No. In Wong's expert testimony he used a rule-of-thumb value for dissipation that ignores tubing diameter and assumes moderate wind velocity. He gets a dissipation figure of 1.4MW.

    OK, but he is an expert. Why did he only do an approximate calculation instead of using the data Rossi provided? he must have known that Rossi's tubes (150mm) were much larger than normal and therefore would dissipate much less per unit area? And that the air speed from those fans in such a large enclosure would be low, not moderate? Those two effects together would surely reduce dissipation by at least a factor of 10 from the one-size-fits-all figure?

    Well, his report is correct, and also helpful to Rossi...

    So it is just Rossi's word that the heat exchanger existed, and based on his data, when not estimated but calculated, it does not work? Also it seems not to have been in action when google cameras pass in spite of the fact that the plant at that time was emitting 1MW and the customer box cannot dissipate anything at all? I guess Rossi must have plenty of other expert evidence lined up?

    It seems not. Maybe he is going to testify himself.

    Let us hope so!

    IH have asked that Rossi not be allowed to give expert testimony because he would be biased.

    Really? I wonder why they think that.

    so much pipe fun... notice 264-19 where Murray says the pipe had a DN40 valve with about 5 elbows on the inside of the container.


    Might be fun for someone to figure the impedance to the flow for that.


    I am not good at that, but I would think it would really put a drag on the claimed flow rates.

    • Official Post

    THH,


    So now you are talking to yourself, just like Rossi. :) The one exchange with yourself, where you point out Rossi buying platinum sponge from Johnson Matthey, is at best a Rossisays. Rossisays in his deposition, that he started with some sponge he brought over from Italy. He rambles on the sponge thing a bit, which is a sure sign he is lying his arse off. Then he rambles on about graphene, never saying clearly that he actually did something with it, and then back again to say he talked with Matthey about some sponge. At best, he put a tiny bit in one of the serpentine pipes for plausible deniability...along the lines of your post a few weeks ago that he often weaves a tiny truth into his massive lies.


    Bass believed there was sponge in the black box serpentine pipes, but only because Rossi and Johnson led him to believe that. In Johnson's depo, he admitted never having seen any sponge. How Bass convinced himself that a few sponges in those 4 pipes could absorb 1MW 24/7, without ever being changed out...well, that is why I think he is guilty as sin too. He is like the get-away car driver, who claims he was just giving his buddy a ride to the bank, and thought the mask and gun were for a Halloween party his buddy was going to after making a withdrawal.

    Quote from IHSupporter

    so much pipe fun... notice 264-19 where Murray says the pipe had a DN40 valve with about 5 elbows on the inside of the container.


    Might be fun for someone to figure the impedance to the flow for that.


    I am not good at that, but I would think it would really put a drag on the claimed flow rates.


    Uh huh. For each BF unit. So if Murray knew this all along, why did he suggest in Exhibit 5 that all of the steam flux was going through a single DN40 pipe, and then complain that that would be impossible? It's called misdirection. And it seems that IH's experts are perfectly fine with that kind of tactic.


    215-3, p 164

    12· · · · A.· · -- the BF units at the back of the reactor,

    13· ·all of the pipes coming off were what I believe are

    14· ·DN40, 40-millimeter pipes.· I actually have a picture of

    15· ·a pipe joint that actually flags it as a DN40.

    16· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And those feed into a larger pipe,

    17· ·correct?

    18· · · · A.· · They feed into a main, and then the main goes

    19· ·across to the Johnson Matthey facility.

    Quote from Shane D.

    Bass believed there was sponge in the black box serpentine pipes, but only because Rossi and Johnson led him to believe that. In Johnson's depo, he admitted never having seen any sponge. How Bass convinced himself that a few sponges in those 4 pipes could absorb 1MW 24/7, without ever being changed out...well, that is why I think he is guilty as sin too. He is like the get-away car driver, who claims he was just giving his buddy a ride to the bank, and thought the mask and gun were for a Halloween party his buddy was going to after making a withdrawal.


    Well said. I do feel a little bit sorry for Bass because, like a lot of people, Rossi used him. On the other hand Bass should have figured things out pretty early. Maybe he did but the pay was too good.

    Quote from IHSupporter

    Murray says the pipe had a DN40 valve

    Oh no! Not the DN40 pipe again! We will be hearing about this!


    IHSupporter, you MUST know by now that there is only two issues that decide the entire case as presented by someone who is not biased and seeking truth!


    That is the DN40 pipe tells half the story. It says that Murray is an ignorant and IH evil.


    The flow meter is the other half and Rossi says it is valid. Those are the only two things you need to worry about! :thumbup:


    All the other mountains of so called evidence is simply to be ignored. The above two items outweigh ALL other testimony, facts and math. Take it from the one who truly knows as he is unbiased in all of this.


    You only need to know the pipe was larger than DN40 and the flow meter was fine per Rossi's word.

    And if you need a little more comfort, ask the kid who confirmed there was no glass in the second floor window. That is icing on the cake. :thumbup:


    Simply ignore the mountains of fraud, bad data, bad setup, missing equipment and rhetoric from the company that is the worse thing to ever happen to LENR. (IH) Rossi is the only path to commercial LENR! You must remember that! <X

    Remember that!

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    This dispute will not be resolved by your derisive posts.

    And it certainly will not be resolved by dishonest representations of intent either!


    The only reason I respond in such manner to you and you only, is that you continually make very derogatory statements about IH and any one connected to them with NO true evidence. You cherry pick a sentence and hang on to it like a bulldog even though it is absolutely clear to the real meaning. In the meantime, Rossi is to be considered the "only commercial LENR option"?


    You take out of context, present as fact your opinion and nitpick at the tiniest of details regarding IH, as proof of their evil and conspiratory ways and yet totally leave Rossi in shining armor! Do not try to say otherwise. This is total hypocrisy plain and simple.


    And then you claim to have no bias and only are seeking truth. Complete BS!


    You are intelligent, it is clear. So you must know that this case is absolutely one sided. Any yet you choose to deride IH and company for some, unknown reason. Perhaps just to troll, but then try to present a face of unbias and "seeking truth"! This is what triggers my posts back to you.


    You also accuse some of not replying, but you yourself do the same when hard facts come about. The DN40 pipe is the prime example. I state AGAIN : The memo was written to Penon asking for clarification of several issues. It was written BEFORE the lawsuit and was addressed to PENON, not you, not the court, not some blog. It was not a statement of fact under oath. It is absolutely clear the memo was written with the intent of getting Penon to answer issues about the test setup. Yet you keep making statements that it is misdirection and ill intent! That IH should write an apology to this blog, perhaps personally to you, that the DN40 statement was wrong and evil! (Even though you do not have absolute proof it was not DN40 all the length) Yet you ignore this because you twist it to fit your purpose! Never do you state that Penon should have answered as he was being paid. They were legitimate questions. Yet that does not matter because you want IH and company to be painted as evil and bad. You continually take that one memo out of context, out of intent and twist it to try and support your position.


    You ignore the mountains of misdirection by Rossi and yet you cling to one sentence and cry misdirection by IH, out of context and intent and then still state you are not biased and seeking truth! Pure B.S. And this happens repeatedly with you!


    I do not respond to elle, Mr. Gluck, etc. because they are at least honest about where they are coming from. I would do the same for you, except you state you are not biased and only looking for truth!


    The truth is smack plain in the middle of your face! Rossi is everything you accuse IH of being, yet you choose to paint him "the real deal" and IH "the worse thing that ever happened to LENR"!


    So to me, one thing is clear. Silly and blatantly inane posts deserve silly and derisive answers! :thumbup:

    Think about it?

    Quote from Bob

    You ignore the mountains of misdirection by Rossi and yet you cling to one sentence and cry misdirection by IH, out of context and intent and then still state you are not biased and seeking truth! Pure B.S. And this happens repeatedly with you!

    Yes. Such distortions are either confusion caused by wishful thinking, or intellectual dishonesty (trolling). A person needs to think carefully about the evidence as a whole, with a sense of perspective. This obsession with one small detail, the DN40 pipe, is symptomatic of not seeing the forest for the trees. For this one 40 mm tree. As I said several times, even if this detail is wrong, and it turns out the pipe was bigger than DN40, there are so many others reasons to think the Penon report was wrong that the pipe size is irrelevant. If the pipe were DN300 (1 foot) it would not make the test one bit more believable.

    Quote from Bob

    You ignore the mountains of misdirection by Rossi and yet you cling to one sentence and cry misdirection by IH, out of context and intent and then still state you are not biased and seeking truth! Pure B.S. And this happens repeatedly with you!


    The truth is smack plain in the middle of your face! Rossi is everything you accuse IH of being, yet you choose to paint him "the real deal" and IH "the worse thing that ever happened to LENR"!



    Bob,


    ..And IHFB does this rightfully so! A more nuanced answer would be in place, but i guess IHFB will react specifically to your post in more detail.


    Anyway, in my opinion Rossi is supposed to act the way he acts. This is what an inventor should do to get a earth shattering technology to the markets. Even if he is a total scam, which i think he is not, he is acting precisely according to expectations.


    The hypocrites of IH, on the other site, paint a picture of themselves as the world saviours. They want you to know that they are knowledgeable, professional and honest businessmen that with one hand on the bible and the other hand tickling the scrotum of the powerful will save mankind by monopolizing the IP around a promising technology.


    Proof for the latter statement, so IH being patent trolling, bullying, not so professional greaseballs, is in my opinion plentiful;


    Using APCO Worldwide & Jones Day

    Getting money from parties (Woodford & Chinese) and later stating that you knew the whole exercise was a charade

    Luxenergy

    Paying everybody with LENR knowledge, a good brain and low moral standards to discredit Rossi

    Hiring Israeli's that are named Uzi

    The deafening silence from Thomas Darden

    The Weasel tactics..


    ..And so on and so forth..


    JB

    Quote from interested observer

    No matter how much I try to figure out the rationale for the debate going on here, I just can't quite succeed. The claim is that some magical gizmo in this little space in an office park in Florida was producing 1 MW of power pretty much continuously for an entire year while consuming considerably less power in the process. Better yet, nobody noticed. Whether this actually happened is being argued on the basis of the diameter of pipes, the existence or lack thereof of a window pane, and whether or not there was a giant invisible heat exchanger in the attic. The only so-called evidence that anything like this actually happened consists of the ravings of someone whose endless lies for years on end have been breathtaking in their brazenness. And yet, some 6,000 posts later, the argument goes on. I guess I just don't have the "special" perspective that many here do. From where I sit, the whole thing is too absurd to argue about with a straight face.

    Indeed. The biggest "mystery" in the whole escapade is how/why supposedly experienced investors (or one's grandmother) would believe any piece of this charade from start to end (to the tune of $10M , over years, no less!), starting with Rossi's checkered (to put it mildly) background, proceeding thru his amateurish (again being mild) unverified experimental "apparatus" (insulation wrapped crude hairballs of pipe and strip/cartridge heaters with a couple of uncalibrated cheap thermocouple meters stuck into them like cooking a turkey (well, it is a turkey, no offense to turkeys intended)) and (intentionally) flawed "data" collection and carnival-barking, to his obvious blatant transparent lies, tampering and obfuscations. Yet, there are those that insist that somehow the world must prove definitively that Rossi and his great invention are NOT fake, and that pink flying unicorns do NOT exist, with no requirement to professionally and easily verify his great inventions actually DO work (how science and engineering are conducted in the real world).

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.