Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test

Videos (nothing to see ... just for the record: )

PGL RUN 05E 20170801 124709 -- 0.15 bar high output

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApQkuLnmIYM

PGL RUN 06C 20170801 174900 0.00 Bar Low Output

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8o2YbCRR-kY

Quote from Bruce__H

Take a look at this set of operating instructions and, in particular at the diagrams on pages 31-35. These show various installation possibilities and from these you can see that is is possible to have "back pressure" on the discharge side or the inlet side (or both).

http://prominent.us/promx/pdf/gamma_%204b_%20manual.pdf

The back pressure valve on the suction side is used mostly when the inlet tank is mounted high, or is very tall -- giving POSITIVE pressure on the valve.

This is so that the suction valve cannot be accidentally forced open when it should be closed.
(Also : use the suction back-pressure valve if there is a recirculating pump!)

(Exception to 'mostly' : when the suction line is very long ... fig 5)

I'll have to keep an eye on fig 11) - when there's a discharge back pressure valve then you must limit the height of the outlet.

I think I'm following all their guidelines.

I'm collecting all references of RossiSez^tm about the Gamma L flow.

Here's DT's original post from JONP :

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-…cpage=225#comment-1275480 (my bold)

Quote

DT
April 8, 2017 at 5:17 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi:

Surely you have realized that the “expertise” of Mr Smith, super-expert-consultant of IH in the litigation, is a fraud. It is totally based on two issues, both wrong:

1- he says that a COP higher than 1 is against the principles of thermodynamic

2- he says the pumps of the E-Cats had a flow rate of 36 liters per hour and gives evidence of this fact by a photo of the label of a Prominent pump installed on the E-Cat.

As a matter of fact, the cases can only be two: either Mr Smith is not an expert, and in this case the issue is over, or he is giving voluntary false information in change of money. In fact, it is impossible that an expert ignores that:

1- the thermodynamic principles must be applied to a specific system and in the case of the E-Cat the system is nuclear, not chemical, therefore it is possible that the COP is higher than one, because the chemical energy at the input induces nuclear energy: the three thermodynamic principles are fully respected because of the Einstein equation.

2- the Prominent pump , as every pump, has a flow rate that is in function of the hydraulic pressure: Mr Smith has hidden to the readers the fact that in the same photo that he reports in his “expertise” is clearly written that the pressure is 2 Bar at the flow of 36 liters per hour !!! Obviously if the pressure is lower, the flow rate increases. I have personally used that model of Prominent pump and at a pressure of 0.2 Bars its flow rate is about 90 liters per hour. If we look well the photo of the pumps system of the E-Cat we can see that the pumps have to raise the water of few tens of centimeters, while 2 Bars correspond to 20 meters !!!! At a rate of 90 liters per hour, the maximum flow rate of all the pumps combined is well above the 1,600 liters per hour necessary to the E-Cat to reach a rate of about 1 MW.

Not to mention other enormous errors, like for example the fact that the superheating of the steam must be made as he says: this guy does not even know how boilers work, or, most likely, lies in change of money.

Besides, somebody has to explain to him that the steam at 103 Celsius at room P is dry by physics laws. Plus, in the documents published by the Court is clearly described that along the steam line there was a trap to check if water was contained in the steam.

Mr Smith’s “expertise” is based upon his assumptions, with schematics he invented on the base of fake information, like the flow rate of the Prominent pumps.

Conclusion: the “expertise” of Mr Smith is a bogus and Mr Smith is a person that exposes himself to ridiculous errors in change, as he himself writes, of about 300 $ per hour.

If this is your foe, dear Andrea, you will destroy them also from the hospital, even if you remain asleep.

From Russia, with love,

DT

Display More

Here's the Mats Lewan Interview :

https://animpossibleinvention.…-was-rossis-top-priority/

Quote

Rossi explained a couple of things with regard to the heat exchanger.

1. A ‘circulator’ (positioned in connection to the heat exchanger) was used to stabilize the flow of steam and water through the whole system. Rossi wouldn’t comment on further data of the circulator since he said he was preparing a patent for this device.
2. This circulator had nothing to do with a pump of the model ‘Grundfos’ that was brought up by the defense’s expert witness Rick Smith who suggested that the Grundfos pump was used to make hot water flow through the system and that no steam was produced. The real use for the Grundfos pump was instead to push the water through a by-pass with a filter about once a week to make it cleaner.

...

The issue is that just next to ’32 l/h’ it says ’02 bar’. The reason is that any pump’s capacity depends on the pressure it needs to overcome to pump the water, the same way as the flow of air you can blow out of your mouth depends on how open it is. Now, 2 bars correspond to the pressure under 20 meters of water, which is way beyond the pressure in the E-Cat plant, and the pumps’ capacity in the actual situation was therefore much larger because the pressure on the pumps was about 1/10 of bar.

...

By the way, since you know these pumps, what capacity do they have at the actual pressure in the plant—about 0.2 bars?

“About 75 l/h.”

[ Note ROSSI says 1/10 = 0.1 bars ... he doesn't contradict Lewan's question but I think he meant 75 l/h at 0.1 bars ]

Display More

A mention that Rossi's right (per Lewan, I presume)

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-…cpage=256#comment-1285432

Quote

Al
July 22, 2017 at 10:15 PM

Dr Andrea Rossi,

I tested the Prominent pump and you were 100% right!

Godspeed,

Al

Reader and Rossi comments on the flow (no new data)

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-…cpage=255#comment-1285002

Quote

1. 86Lorenzo July 20, 2017 at 12:26 PM

   Dear Andrea Rossi:

   
   I read in the interview of Mats Lewan

   
   https://animpossibleinvention.com/blog/

   
   that the water pumps had a capacity superior to the amount measured by the flowmeter of the ERV: is it because the pumps were redundant and regulated to give you the necessary amount of water?

   
   Cheers

2. Translate Andrea Rossi July 20, 2017 at 2:33 PM

   86Lorenzo:

   
   Yes.

   
   Warm Regards,

   
   A.R.

Display More

Quote from Bruce__H

Is the suggestion that because the pumps collectively could pump more than enough water they didn't all have to be set at maximum? This contradicts the pictures we have of the pumps sitting on the big Frankies because almost every one of those pumps appears to be set at 100% stroke length.

Yes : they don't have to run at 90 l/h (DT) or even 75 l/h (AR)

They could be set to a lower pulse frequency (which would give more accurate control than the infinitely variable stroke length).

WHY do I still think somebody said they got 60 l/h ?

I know I SAID that ... but WHERE WAS IT !! AT least I have a DATE ... might be in my browser history ... Nope : I say the numbers are from memory!

Rossi's Smith Notes : https://animpossibleinvention.…h-supplemental-report.pdf

He writes 1m = 1/10 bar. (Actually ... I don't think he designed the Prominent pump section : for each BF the head is only a few inches) -- and on ECW engineer48 says there's a 1-way flow valve http://e-catworld.com/2016/07/…regarding-1mw-plant-test/ : I have to study that conversation.

E48 refers to yet another Prominant doc -- the 2016 catalog which has DIFFERENT advice!
http://prominent.us/promx/pdf/Catalog_US_2016_LR.pdf page 3 pdf p 14/323 (my bold)

Quote

– Positive suction head (flooded suction)
• Recommended with media which tend to develop
gases.
• Recommended with media which has high viscosity.
Installation Tips:
• Degassing pump must be used on suction lift
applications, not flooded suction.
• Metering pump can be located at and fed from the
foot of the supply tank.

– A ball-check-type injection valve
• Prevents back flow.
Installation Tip:
• Should be at the end of the discharge line; Teflon
injection valves are not spring-loaded and must be
oriented vertically into bottom of pipe for ball to seat.
Note: Pumps will not give consistent results
without backpressure; our injection valve provides
minimum backpressure when pumping into
atmosphere (AF1).

– Backpressure valve
• Adjustable spring tension on a diaphragm.
• Ensures accurate metering and prevents siphoning.
Installation Tips:
• Must be in the discharge line or mounted onto the
pump in the following cases:
√ When the discharge head is negligible (open-end
discharge).
√ The metering pump discharges into a vacuum
system or the positive suction head exceeds the
discharge head.
Note: At least 15 psig differential pressure is required to
provide repeatability of metering. (AF2)

Display More

AF1 : so maybe there IS an integral backpressure device ... But what's minimum -- 1 bar is "moderate" : 0.5 bar ???

AF2 : now we're back (pun intended) to a differential pressure ACROSS the pump !!!

EDIT: in the pump tables they no longer say "Minimum flow at maximum backpressure" ... it's "Capacity at maximum backpressure!"

EDIT: E48 didn't say there was an EXTERNAL 1-way flow : he has an exploded diagram (of the wrong pump) and is referring to the built-in suction/discharge valves.

??? Is THIS PHOTO Of the Doral 1MW in action. The stroke length is set to 40% not 100% !!!

Here's an ECW discussion : https://e-catworld.com/2017/04…ith-report-from-the-jonp/

E48 believes there's a MASTER pump ... and the Prominents only do topping up.

Quote

Engineer48  Bruce__H • 4 months ago

Hi Bruce,

It has always been my opinion that inside the ECat container there was a 2.5 mtr condensate head, which meant the bottom of the condensate holding tank was under 0.245 barg of pressure.

Rossi told me the 6 per Tiger Prominent pumps did not supply the total volume required for each Tiger and that there was another master pump that supplied the extra volume the topping pumps did not.

To do this and reach the highest Tiger, would require a 2.5 mtr condensate head. There are at least 2 x 2.5 mtr high condensate riser that show this is part of the system.

The 2 know 2.5 mtr high condensate risers are shown. I believe there is another not yet shown condensate riser.

Display More

Down the page there are three progressive photos of the pump end. Only the middle one is clear enough to see the dials.


The BOTTOM row seems to be set to 100% stroke ... otherwise we would see the "white bar" at the top of the knob.

Conversely, the top row is seen from the bottom. Again, no white bar, so THEY must be set to 40% EDIT: I can see the white bar at 100% on the 3rd from the left.

The middle too rows are end-on so we cant see which is which. If I had infinite time I'd try to do some image enhancement.

Any other photos of the pump end?

OK ... I've done a lot of reading of specs and blogs ....

1, I'm going to interpret "backpressure" as DISCHARGE - SUCTION heads (measured in inches, converted to BAR)

Series 10... : Backpressure controlled by discharge head

Flow calculated from outlet volume or mass

1 : INLET tank

2: Suction tube (minimum length)

3. Constant level by garden hose overflowing

4. Gamma L

5 Manometer

6. MINIMUM height ... 30" above inlet tank = 0.07 bar

7. ... Then we can do 0.1 bar = 40 inches .... up to 0.2 0.3 0.4 ...

8 MAXIMUM height : 0.5 bar at 17 feet (This brings us on to the Promininet calibration curve).

I *think* I can do this from my roof .... or I'll "borrow" a tall building

9. Volume measurement by volume (or weight)

10. Note that backpressure is discharge-suction

I expect that my pump will NOT be identical to the prominent specs.

I will then SCALE my results at 0.5 bar to Prominent's k-factor at 0.5 bar

Worried : as described this is a 2-man job. May be difficult to collect the outlet flow at 17 feet.

But I have an alternative scheme ...

That's it for the project ... I have a bunch of poetry stuff and radio show stuff to do tomorrow.
Scale should be arrive tomorrow.

IHFB : I'll send you an invoice for the next ... tranche.

... to be continued.