Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test

    Paradigmnoia


    Engineer48 says Rossi told him that most of the water flow through the Big Frankies was due to a single master pump and that the Prominent pumps were used as topping up pumps. I don't see any independent route for entry of this water into the Big Frankies so the water flow due to the master pump must be straight through the Prominent pumps and superimposed on the due to the pumps themselves.


    I think the relationship between water flow established by pressure on the inlet and flow due to the action of the Prominent pump itself is something we could determine empirically with Alan Fletcher's cooperation. It could very well be that the 83 L/hr required of each pump is not possible even with external pressure but then maybe it is possible. And even if 83 L/hr is possible I really do wonder about the 125 L/hr that seems to be needed from each pump when the plant is in the configuration it seems to be in on the last day of its operation (only 2 Big Frankies operating).

    I wont have any time for a couple of weeks. (I've left my pole up, but I'll move back to the covered porch).


    I have max 10 feet (floor to ceiling) .


    Plan A : try and replicate the heights of the tank, pumps and Frankies (A to D, top-to-bottom) . Not sure I can replicate the top big frankie A in the space available. Do we have the dimensions : top-of-tank to pump-center, pump-center to BF inlet for each BF?


    Plan B : explore positive inlet pressure.

    I don't think a 7-foot head is enough positive pressure .. maybe 0.2 bar with the pump near the floor and the inlet tank

    I can get a garden hose there (as long as it's not a hard freeze), but I think that's too uncontrollable as a pressure source. To explore significant positive-pressure I think I'd need a pump. Specifications? 125 l/hr? We could reduce the stroke-frequency from 180 to ... 90?

    The center-line is 4 inches above the base. The inlet/outlet tubes are 5 inches below/above that. My pressure guage doesn't work at these pressures, so the 1/2 inch tubes can connect directly without T's or L's

    I'm working with a 6 foot (72 inch) wire-frame shelf (with 1" shelf-height increments). I'd like to set the middle-shelf for the pump, and then adjust the buckets around that (One sits on the scale -- which reads +- so doesn't matter whether it's inlet or outlet).

    Alan Fletcher


    Some measurements. These are naive measurements that disregard issues of perspective, angle of view, etc:...


    Tops of BF units to the ground

    BF1 = 78.7 inches (exactly 2m)

    BF2 = 57.4 inches

    BF3 = 36.8 inches

    BF4 = 18 inches


    BF unit height

    13.4 inches


    Top of a BF unit to centre of pump

    7.9 inches


    BF water level (estimated) to centre of pump (i.e., outlet pressure)

    4.6 inches


    Centre of pump to BF inlet

    -3.2 inches

    Quote from Bruce__H

    Alan. We disagree on the results of your experiments. It seems that in the final 4 months of the Doral test there were only 18 pumps left to handle the entire 36000 L per day. That is 83 L/hour and I don't recall you ever reaching that number.


    I don't recall an "only 18 pumps" scenario. The only significant flows I recall are 36000 (4 big frankies) or 27000 (3 big frankies).
    EDIT1 : each Big Frankie has 6 pumps ... so with 3 Big Frankies running that's 18 pumps.

    EDIT2 : Penon reports some days at 36000 and some at 27000 -- is there a day when he reported 36000 when only three were running?

    In any case, I think the banks of pumps are segregated by big frankie. My experiments show that each bank of pumps could provide the 9000. They have slightly different heads .. but only by a couple of feet.

    Quote from Bruce__H

    Even big shots can make mistakes. A good example is Focardi's inability to recognize that the steam being emitted by Rossi's Ecat was wet (i.e., containing large amounts of unevaporated water) and that the instrument being used to assess this was unsuited to the job (it could only measure evaporated moisture, not unevaporated water droplets) . That led to a huge overestimate of the amount of heat being generated.


    My opinion here is that the old "tube boiler" would either deliver at least 75% steam quality, or would overflow. Focardi et al reported that it was NOT overflowing. 75% quality would be significantly over-unity.

    The "fat cat" (presumably also the big frankies) is a kettle boiler, and would either produce 95% steam quality, or would overflow. The original 1MW test checked for overflow. Presumably IH's test did too.

    Unfortunately one of Lewan's tests was overflowing, so the results are inconclusive,


    http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_steam_v410H.php#ecatdryout

    Quote from Alan Fletcher


    I don't recall an "only 18 pumps" scenario. The only significant flows I recall are 36000 (4 big frankies) or 27000 (3 big frankies).

    In any case, I think the banks of pumps are segregated by big frankie. My experiments show that each bank of pumps could provide the 9000. They have slightly different heads .. but only by a couple of feet.

    Could you get the pump to display or somehow calibrate to a specific low head rate?

    I mean, was it reliably flowing the same rate measured as the unit “thinks” it’s pumping? Can you lower the setting on the pump and get a proportionate drop in pumped water with the out-of-spec head? I recall that you were measuring the water. Can the pump be set up to 75 L/h , for example, then dialled down to 32 L/h and get 32 L/ hr?

    Just curious.

    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    Could you get the pump to display or somehow calibrate to a specific low head rate?

    I mean, was it reliably flowing the same rate measured as the unit “thinks” it’s pumping? Can you lower the setting on the pump and get a proportionate drop in pumped water with the out-of-spec head? I recall that you were measuring the water. Can the pump be set up to 75 L/h , for example, then dialled down to 32 L/h and get 32 L/ hr?

    Just curious.


    The pump is controlled by pulse speed and stroke distance. I did my main tests at maximum.

    You can input a callibration factor, to ask for a specific delivery, but I didn't use that.

    Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test

    Quote from Alan Fletcher

    In any case, I think the banks of pumps are segregated by big frankie. My experiments show that each bank of pumps could provide the 9000. They have slightly different heads .. but only by a couple of feet.


    The pumps are definitely segregated by Big Frankie. 6 pumps per unit.


    When you talk about head, do you mean pressure head at the outlet end of the pumps? If this is the case then the relationship between the pump outlet and the height of the Big Frankie it feeds is the same for all 24 pumps. For a particular bank of pumps the outlet pressure head head might go up and down a bit as water levels in the Big Frankies change, but I would guess that the head is on average about 1 foot.

    Quote
    avatar-default.svg Alan Fletcher wrote: 
    Quote
    Penon reports some days at 36000 and some at 27000 -- is there a day when he reported 36000 when only three were running?


    The "Big Frankies" gave constant trouble during the Doral test. They were full of rust to the extent that sight glasses showing the fluid levels had to be taken off and cleaned out from time to time. This is important because IH electrician Barry West who worked on site during the test reported (in August 2015) that there was no automatic way in which the Big Frankies were filled with water and that, instead, when a sight glass showed that a Big Frankie was low on water someone had to start up the pumps by hand to fill it up. The rust even made it all around the circuit since you can see it in the pump inlet hoses (the heat exchanger which was part of the loop where the steam condensed must have been a mess!)


    The Big Frankies leaked too. And the individual reactors in them shorted out, requiring them to be pulled out and replaced by Barry West. The leaking and shorting gave such trouble that in the Summer of 2015 one or another was often off line for repairs. At this time the total water reported flowing was often down to 27000 L/day. By late September Rossi's crew had finally given up on one of the Big Frankies (BF4) and shut it down permanently. This was reflected in the notes kept by Fabiani and in the report generated by Penon in mid September of 2015. Despite BF4 (the bottom one) being permanently out of action, from Oct 2-Dec 1 Penon's spreadsheets show 36000 L/day pumped every day during this time. After a 3 week interruption with lower pumping rates, 36000 L/day was regained and held steady from Dec 22-Feb 14 which was the final day of the test.


    You can find ...

    - Penon's spreadsheet for the entire year in court document 128-01.

    - Fabiani's daily log recording electrical shorts, flooding, and pulling BF units off line in the first 14 pages of document 207-55

    - Penon's Oct 2015 report showing only 3 BF's functional on pages 10-12 of document 207-58

    I went back to my Dec 18, 2017 results, scaled my output to Prominent's spec at 0.5 bar, and charted the results.

    Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spread…2ctMIA7HRKTexFc5VHhnHnIg/

    Screen capture of results (I could only find an X-Y scatter plot in google sheets).

    PROM-171218-02.png


    I'm not endorsing Rossi (or Penon) -- I personally would have run the pumps at about 80% of full capacity, to allow for fine adjustments.

    This plot shows that Rossi's claim of 72 L/hr is plausible.

    Quote from [email protected]

    This meta-information?

    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…/01/0235.01_Exhibit_1.pdf


    No ... I have a very low opinion of Smith (see above).

    He did show ONE graph of output when the output power persisted even when power was reportedly off.

    However, here I'm ONLY considering the reported flow. I think Bruce_H gave links to two meta-documents by Penon and Barry West , but I haven't looked them up yet.

    Quote from woodworker

    As a non-engineer/scientist, let me see if I understand correctly what you are saying: There were four widgets, one, representing 25% of the total capacity of the widgets, was removed/deactivated, and the output from the three was essentially the same as the output from the four? Wow, what a marvelous, in fact I should say magnificent, demonstration of the widgets - take one away with no reduction in output.


    No. The output is calculated from the flow. When one Big Frankie was taken off-line Penon reported that the flow dropped from 36,000 to 27,000 ... 25% less.

    (Again, just based on the main Penon report.)

    OK ... I think this is my most serious complaint about Smith's report (Supplemental)
    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…7/01/252-05-Exhibit-E.pdf

    Quote

    The alleged steam and condensate system was in fact a hot water flow system .....

    (Transcribed by hand)


    One little detail : how do you explain water, at 0 barg (atmospheric), reaching a temperature of 104F 104C ?

    In my opinion, 104F 104C is by definition super-heated steam.

    Edit : mistyped F for C

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.