Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test

Quote from IH Fanboy

Entering my meditation period now. Hoping for enlightenment.

I hope that your the mediation was productive. Let's see.

Before, you said that the velocity of steam emerging from Rossi's hose (at a claimed 7kg/h) in the Krivit video was "in the ballpark" of that emerging from a hose at a measured 5.7 kg/h. Here are the 2 videos side by side. I have linked to them such that they both start with comparable shots of the steam and hose. I can't even hear the steam in the Krivit video but it is loud in the other video.

Do you still claim that these velocities are in the same ballpark? I know I have asked this before but I thought your answer was vague and evasive. I would like you to answer again after I have done my best to create conditions in which fair comparisons can be made. I think that the velocity of steam in the Krivit video is multiple times less than in the other one.

P.S. For some reason I can get the 5.7 kg/h video to start at the point I want but not the Krivit video. So please begin viewing the Krivit video at 11 minutes and 29 seconds. That will produce the comparison I intended

Quote from Bruce__H

I would like you to answer again after I have done my best to create conditions in which fair comparisons can be made.

He will not answer. He has no answer. He doesn't do technical questions. However, I appreciate your efforts to clarify this situation.

I do not think you queued up the second video.

By the way, I strongly recommend the sparging technique shown in the first video. I recommended it to Rossi. He ignored me and he ignored all other recommendations from all other people.

Quote from IH Fanboy

You and Bruce keep hanging your hat on this one. Seems kind of tenuous to me. The flow rates measured by Alan are consistent with 3 BF @ 27k l/d, and 4 BF @ 36k l/d. And that is mostly what we see in the logs. Yeah, you guys pin-pointed a time period in the log that doesn't match up. Okay, well done. But most of the data comports

Time to examine this again. You have agreed that only 3 BF units were working on October 13 2015 and on that day this is inadequate for the 36,0000 L/d figure recorded in Penon's report for that day. I have now found that in Penon's report there is the same type of indication that only 3 BF units were in play on the next day, October 14 2015. Yet 36,000 kg of water were again claimed to be pumped. So that day there is again a mismatch too.

I believe that this sort of mismatch is not rare. I think that no more than 3 BF units were ever in action from August 18 2015 right through to the end of the trial on Feb 14 2016. This is a 180 day period and consulting Penon's spreadsheets I find that 36,000 L/d was claimed on 116 of them (including nearly all of October, all of November, all of January, and the 14 days of February leading up to the end of the trial).

My reasons for thinking that BF4 was taken permanently offline on August 18 2015 are

1) Fabiani's log last mentions BF4 on that date with an explanation that it has been isolated because of hydraulic leaks and shorting to ground

2) Penon and Murray's attestations that BF4 was not in play in the middle of October

3) Penon's spreadsheet showing that the input energy absorbed by the 3 remaining BF units in mid October was actually a high point. For the entire rest of the Doral test the energy absorbed by the plant was lower than at this time.

4) Photos of the pumps taken near the end of the trial show that BF 4 ended up shut down and dry. In contrast to the rest of the setup the plumbing for BF4 (the bottom BF) had the thermal insulation stripped away and reconfigured. The sight glass on the unit is clean and no meniscus is visible.

Since Penon report 36,000 L/d being pumped on 114/180 days following Aug 18 2015, I conclude that there is a mismatch between the capacity of the 18 remaining pumps and the amount claimed to be pumped for a major part of the time. That is, it is not true that "most of the data comports" during this period. Instead, very little of it does.

I have mostly not cited particular documents as I went through my argument here. That was for clarity of exposition. If you want to know exactly where to look for all the information on a particular point then let me know and I will produce it.

Quote from JedRothwell

I do not think you queued up the second video.

I tried. But for some reason the queuing command doesn't work for that video.