No, SSC. To not sell, all over the planet, billions of simple heating devices that use practically no fuel-- now THAT would be idiotic. And Rossi had 6 years to figure that out. Hell, according to him, he does have market-ready ecats. If it were not for those pesky certificators, we'd be knee deep in ecats already. But they're still working on it, according to Rossi, so there is still hope (ROTFWL!). Like all high tech scams -- hope SoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooN.
Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test
-
-
What inlet and outlet pressures do you think would approximately replicate the conditions seen by the Prominernt pumps in the 1-year test at the Doral facility?
Bruce, only the people that had a complete knowledge on how the plant was made cold give you an answer.
My feeling is here there is only people that pretends to have that information but who are in fact simply mythomaniacs.
To complicate things all the "well informed" guys here consider any information coming from Rossi as false. So you can't ask him.
I think that you are doing a risky business. Darden people have shown unscrupulous behavior;
http://www.sifferkoll.se/siffe…ion-in-their-sec-filings/
http://www.sifferkoll.se/siffe…d-the-tax-payer-investor/
and in my opinion they are using you for their purposes.
-
Display More
Hi LDM. Your idea about driving the pump to high rates using external inputs is terrific! But I don't think that this is how the pumps were used during the Doral test.
Post #240 on this thread shows the pumps we are discussing sitting in front of the Big Frankies used in the Doral setup. Focus on the face of any one of these pumps. You may have to blow up the picture somehow. Near the bottom right of the pump face, right beside the power cord, you can see a cluster of 3 light-coloured discs arranged in a triangle. These discs are pieces of (I think) rubber covering up electrical ports that are not currently in use. The port at the bottom left of the cluster is the one that would be used for driving the pumps in the manner you describe.
So the inputs that would drive these pumps in "Contact" mode were never hooked up. That means that the stroke rate of each pump must have been programmed into it using the default selection menu, and I think that the top stroke rate you can achieve this way is 180 per minute.
I am totally agreeing with you that on the picture you are referring to the external ports for controlling the stroke rate are not connected.
Good point that you looked at the connectors on the picture, should have done that myself.
However I am not totally convinced since on the picture you refer to you can see that besides the black power cables in the cable ducts before the Prominents, there are also grey cables which seems to have no purpose. I wonder if those cables can be connected to the Prominents.
I am afraid that we can't determine that and Rossi won't tell us.
-
To not sell, all over the planet, billions of simple heating devices that use practically no fuel-- now THAT would be idiotic.
In fact IH had the opportunity to sell the devices ! And they lost it because they are not able to do any real business as their history demonstrates.
-
I am afraid that we can't determine that and Rossi won't tell us
Even if Rossi would answer nobody here is open to get this information.
According to Sifferkoll this forum is controlled by IH.
http://www.sifferkoll.se/siffe…e-simply-an-useful-idiot/
-
According to Sifferkoll this forum is controlled by IH.
Yes, if you like conspiracy theories, Sifferkoll has got a lot to offer.
BTW, now that IH settled and according to the agreement cannot sue Rossi regarding the E-Cat (or vice versa), and has no rights to Rossi's IP or any of his equipment, please remind us why IH is interested in controlling this forum?
This is highly suspicious behavior that's being alleged. Make sure to put on your tin-foil hat before answering, lest they control your mind without you even knowing it!
Maybe they are controlling Alan Fletcher and his pump experiment too! You can never rule this out completely, right?
-
However I am not totally convinced since on the picture you refer to you can see that besides the black power cables in the cable ducts before the Prominents, there are also grey cables which seems to have no purpose. I wonder if those cables can be connected to the Prominents.
Good catch! At least one of the grey cables emerges from each row of pumps attaches to a device sitting on the piping on the left.
Let me describe what I know about that piping on the left. As far as I can figure out, the tall vertical pipe on the left side of the photo is a drain. The short horizontal pipes attached to it lead to the inlets of the Big Frankies. Normally water from the Prominent pumps joins one of these short horizontal sections and goes into the bottom of one of the Big Frankies so as to fill them up (exactly as depicted on the photo posted by Rossi's friend). If one of the Big Frankies has to be drained for servicing, however, you would stop its pumps and turn one of the yellow handles you see on the horizontal sections. This would open up that horizontal section to the vertical pip[e and water would drain down it and out and flow away. This would also allow all the water in that particular Big Frankie to empty out too.
The grey wires that emerge from the pumps go to black devices sitting on these short horizontal stretches of piping. My guess is that these devices are sensors of some sort that would detect either pressure or water level at the inlet to the Big Frankies and feed back some signal to the pumps. The signal starts out in a single grey cable (which I think is coaxial with bnc connections) and then is split into many I don't know what the signal would be though. Is there an emergency shutoff input to the pumps? Would this be a system that shuts down pumps if there is too much backpressure? Is it a system that upregulates pumping if there it too little water pressure? I don't know.
-
Rossi is free to roam and so are we. Siffer, on the other hand, appears to have created some problems for himself.
-
-
Well, I've paid for the valve now, But perhaps you don't want it?
I wonder if it could be used to control forward pressure at the inlet.
-
What part of MINIMUM do you not comprehend?
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
This is an inaccurate and unnecessary characterization (that Jed is just making words mean whatever he chooses).
There is no disagreement about what 'minimum' means. The question is what that adjective modifies (minimum performance vs. minimum guaranteed performance at maximum rated capacity). And the reason you've gone to all this trouble to get a pump and test it is because Rossi contextually misused that adjective when characterizing the Prominent pump.
It is a fact that Rossi incorrectly stated that 32 l/h is the minimum flow of the pump, because the actual minimum flow is 1 l/h. So he was wrong by more than an order of magnitude. And further, he wrongly claimed that operating the pump at 60+ l/h is possible. So it is Rossi, like Humpty Dumpty, who when he uses a word, 'it means just what [he] chooses it to mean...' (for example, minimum flow rate, satisfied customers, independent validation, submission for certifications, GPT, SNAKES, robotic factories, product, masterpieces, endothermic processes, etc.)
It is not Jed's fault that Rossi misused that adjective in context. And Jed's use is consistent with the manufacturer's use, as I have pointed out several times from the manufacturer's specs.
-
Cripes.
Alan if you need colour in your water use a food colouring, available from any good grocer, of your choice. It won't clog your system, and it won't harm you.
-
Quote
In fact IH had the opportunity to sell the devices ! And they lost it because they are not able to do any real business as their history demonstrates.
No. Only a few billion dollars here and there... not much to speak of... as opposed to Rossi who has sold untold plants to the military -- pink, invisible, flying plants of course ...(ROTFWL!)
Like all of Rossi's distributors before them, IH could not get its hands on a WORKING ecat so they had nothing to sell. How soon we forget. Not only that but Rossi once refused to give a distributor anything to sell and then took back their license because they didn't sell anything! It's all here:
QuoteDisplay MoreFor all of us it was extremely important to show a working E-Cat to the potential customers. So, at the beginning of Spring 2014, we proposed to EFA the purchase of an E-Cat®; we were in talk for selling the thermal energy to an Italian company having a big district heating network. It was the perfect client where installing the low enthalpy E-Cat®. We never got an answer from EFA/Rossi neither all the purchasing contracts we had been asking for months. Moreover, in September 2014 we (Prometeon) placed an order for a 1 MW E-Cat®; as far as we know, it was the first signed order ever for an E-Cat®! Before accepting the order we warned our customer that they had 99% probabilities not to see their E-Cat®, but they still hoped to get it as they trusted Mr. Rossi, despite everything. As we expected, instead of organizing a party and giving the good news to the world, EFA/Leonardo Corporation never let us have all the solicited documents necessary to close the order: e.g. a supply contract, a maintenance contract, guarantees about the E-Cat® and the future fuel supplies, a technical manual with a detailed description of how to integrate an E-Cat® in an existing industrial environment and with a SCADA,…
Moreover, in one year and a half of work we found many customers seriously interested in buying the E-Cat, nominally already on the market, and we presented pre-orders and requests for demonstrations to both EFA and Mr Rossi, but we never had any kind of cooperation, we never received the purchasing contracts and it had never been possible to organize e demonstration. As far as we know, also other licensees had customers interested in installing an E-Cat® and they faced similar problems.The described situation put both EFA and Leonardo Corporation (Mr. Rossi) under pressure and this could be one of the main reasons why they decided to make their buy-back offer. Obviously we didn’t accept the offer; we had many customers ready to place orders the day after they would have received from EFA/Rossi the purchasing contracts and the due guarantees.
A few weeks later, in the month of December, we received a formal letter from EFA saying that our license contract was canceled because “we didn’t get enough orders, like it was written in the license contract”!! Obviously this was ridiculous and it was the final confirmation, if still needed, that it would have been impossible to see a working E-Cat®, probably for a long while.
In the following months we tried in every way to find a friendly solution to this very uncomfortable situation, also with the intermediation of Industrial Heat and Mr. Andrea Rossi, well informed through our letters, but it was not possible and surely not for our responsibility.
Finally, to avoid the risk of wasting time and money in a long, unhealthy legal battle, we decided to give up and to accept the buy-back, even because we did not want to have to deal with similar “partners” any more. Regarding the superior price offered, Rossi’s words suggest that we had good profits from the buy-back, while clearly the opposite is true.
“ [Rossi] We maintained with our former Licensees a friendly and collaborative relationship, open to the possibility of future collaboration upon specific issues.”
In our case this is ridiculously false!
What to say more? A very unpleasant experience. By our side we have already turned the page to follow an alternative and very promising route to get clean energy from LENR; the challenge is very stimulating and the scientists involved in the project are very well prepared and motivated.
http://e-catworld.com/2014/11/…es-e-cat-licensee-status/
Please, tell us what it is exactly about that message that you fail to understand?
-
It is a fact that Rossi incorrectly stated that 32 l/h is the minimum flow of the pump, because the actual minimum flow is 1 l/h.
Since Rossi is referring to the Gamma L Manual, which states "Minimum flow at Maximum Pressure" it is obvious (to most people : there may be exceptions at the left-end of the bell curve) that Rossi is referring to "Minimum guaranteed flow at maximum pump settings of 180 strokes/minute, 100% stroke length, with 2 bar backpressure."
I don't believe that anybody is worrying about the minimum flow the pump can be set to.
Taking Prominent's recommendation that "sensible" stroke-length is between 30% and 100% (infinitely adjustable), and the programmable stroke rate can be set between 1 and 180 strokes per minute, the minimum "sensible" flow at 2 bar is:1/180 * 30/100 * 32 l/hr = 0.053 l/hr. So YOU are off by a factor of 1/0.053 = about 20.
Of course, if you want to set the stroke length even lower (say 1%) and drive the pulses with the external control, you can 1 get ONE stroke per hour. That gives something like 10^-4 liters per hour.QuoteAnd further, he wrongly claimed that operating the pump at 60+ l/h is possible.
We don't know yet if his claim is right or wrong. That is the purpose of this experiment. -
And the reason you've gone to all this trouble to get a pump and test it is because Rossi contextually misused that adjective when characterizing the Prominent pump.
No, the reason I've gone to all the trouble is the "Expert" Smith did all his calculations with the erronious reading of the spec as "Maximum guaranteed flow at maximum settings." This was featured prominently in IH's opening statements. It was Rossi who (in Mats' interview) pointed out that error. Nobody here ... me included -- noticed that fatal mistake. -
If you ship it I'll try it. I'm not sure where you're located.
Still no reply from Prominent ... I've been too busy to call them. Need connectors to Pump and to Backpressure unit. -
minimum guaranteed performance at maximum rated capacity
Sig, what does that even mean? You seem to be combining words in such a way that is not consistent with the manufacturer's spec, which literally states it using the following terminology:
"Minimum pump capacity at maximum back pressure." (32 l/h)
http://prominent.us/promx/files/987604_04_12_gammal_us.pdf
I submit that "minimum guaranteed performance at maximum rated capacity" is quite different from "Minimum pump capacity at maximum back pressure."
