Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test

Following up on ebay.uk : There's a NEW (old-model) version at http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PROM…NGE-1-10-BAR/332292808715 (#65 new vs #30 used) .... about $105 (WITH a make-an-offer option .... #50??).

(And NO reply from Prominent. I'll email again next week).

Quote from Alan Smith

Alan Fletcher

Made a generous offer on that Ebay pump. If it is accepted I can tranship it to you or ask for direct delivery.

They seem to be set up for international shipping, so just specify delivery to me.
I'll put my address in my profile.

Quote from PeterMetz

Prior to testing at .2 bar I would check to see if 32 l/h @ 2 bar and 36.2 l/h @ 1 bar is achievable with this pump and your test setup. I am also curious how much the pump heats up or heats the water running at maximum rate at .2 bar.

Right now I can only test with a water head ... around 0.15 bar ... maybe 0.2 bar.

With the adjustable back-pressure valve I can go higher ... I only have a manometer up to 1 bar (But they are cheap online).

The next limiting factor will be how leaky the system is. Still a few drips at the connector between the Prominent tube and the 1/2 inch tube.

I'll be happy if we can reach 1 bar, which IS directly in the Prominent spec.

I'm running a bit late and have some webmaster stuff to do, so I'm not sure when I'll run the first test.

Wow! No bets (even quatloos) from a whole bunch of people I'd expect to be interested!

AbD sent me some comments by email, and gave me permission to post them here

Quote

And good luck with the Prominent pump. I've written a fair amount about it; there are really two issues: what is the full pump rate from such a pump at low back pressure, and was the Smith mention so stupid that when Lukacs pointed this out to Pace, IH laid down and played dead.

It wasn't so stupid, it was merely incomplete. The "maximum" is actually mentioned as "maximum" in a Prominent document. The word "capacity" is more commonly used. Capacity means maximum. "Minimum capacity" then is a guaranteed capacity. Rossi plays with words, but may not realize it. His argument about pumps is based on centrifugal pumps, not on metering pumps. Generally, within rated pressure, a metering pump is designed to give relatively constant flow. There is some variation in that, especially, I would expect, at low flow settings, even large error.

The simplest test you can do is to measure flow rate at atmospheric pressure (inlet and outlet). However, measuring pressure over a range of back-pressures, from negative 0.2 bar to positive 0.2 bar would be very useful. As well, measuring flow at a back pressure of the minimum level with a specification, which I think is 0.5 bar, would provide possible comparison between your results and Prominent specifications.

As well, measuring actual flow at atmospheric, across the range of settings (including no-flow setting), would be simple and useful. This might validate the statement of "two to three times" in that pamphlet. I.e., I suspect, this is with low flow settings, nowhere near maximum stroke rate/length.

There is history that might explain how Rossi got sucked into his position. Now there are multiple comments from anon users on JONP claiming to have tested the pumps, but with no details.

Be careful, when you report, to give full details so that anyone else can readily confirm your results. That will be scientific verifiability, crucial to acceptable reports. It's what is missing from many reports. That you are not anonymous is very important: scientific reports cannot be anonymous for obvious reasons.

Display More

Will somebody please check my results spreadsheet .... https://docs.google.com/spread…nnzm8vus/edit?usp=sharing

Should be set to "anyone can see and comment".

I have a separate spreadsheet set up for error calculations. For this run it doesn't matter.

Ready-to-run photos :

Outlet height : 60.5 inches 0.15 bar

Bottom (zero)

Top of water : 18.5 inches

Top assembly : (with Genuine Mount Konocti Obsidian)

Close up of cylinder (slightly OOF) .. showing how I can line up the camera to eliminate parallax

Manometer (fluid-loaded)

Overview : I coiled the outlet tube so there are no bubbles. (Will start off with a few due to leaks).

Any overflow from the cylinder goes into a low pan (so I can read the bottom of the cylinder) and then into the green bucket.

Quoting one of my songs (on the first mad-made nuclear reaction at the University of Chicago) :

Quote

At the University of Chicago

In a squash court under a football stand

Enrico Fermi was the leader of the team

A team that was part of Project Manhattan

They built a pile of pure Carbon bricks

Nestling the purest Uranium eggs

When the pile was built and ready to run

Fermi calmly called a break for lunch

Display More

I'm off for a snack ... and then ... THE RUN !!!!

Good news : I can switch the pump on, turn off the power, and then restart pumping by turning on the power. So I don't have to jump up a ladder to record the volume.

Good news : I've repurposed two of my security webcams, so I have one on the manometer and a general view of me photographing the measurement of the volume. (Incidentally, these two cameras recorded a felony burglary last week!!! Only a window screen broken and $10 food stolen, but still ... )

Bad news: The outlet is too splashy. Can't read the level accurately. Working on it.

I think everything else is good to go.

WARNING: don't use the results to say RossiSez^tm flow proven/disproven ... UNTIL we have a run within Prominent's specs -- say 1 bar

WONDERING: why none of the most vociferous posters haven't made a bet ... Dewey, Mary Y, Rothwell, even TH Huxley, IH Fanboy ...

There's a teeny (few drops per minute) leakage at the outlet of the pump, and (required!) at the manometer.

A messy porch, with a lawnmower, old fridge, mowing-shoes ... now THAT's nit-picking.

Quote from ele

What a mess......

What is the role of your shoes in the setup ?

The role of the shoes? So I can run like heck if my supa-dupa-cold-fusion-nucular experiment blows ... (ps My Volcano, Konocti is NOT extinct, or even dormant. It's HIGH RISK !!!) https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/vol…ear_lake_geo_hist_40.html)