Demonstration of the E-Cat QX - 24 November - Summary thread

Quote from oldguy

A simple wire coil with a nickel or cobalt core would do it.

That is called a choke.

Quote from Shane D.

I think they have gotten to Alan. Maybe spiked his beer? He went there to report, and all of a sudden, he gets tight lipped.

One more try before you go to bed Alan. In general terms, after the test, do you:

1. Feel better about the QX technology.

2. Feel about the same as before. This test was undefinitive.

3. Feel less optimistic.

3. Feel like you had too many beers.

Display More

1. I never felt more than curious about the QX. I remain curious.

2. See point 1 above.

3. Always optimistic. For example, I have 3 sons, I am sure I fathered them all.

3 . Was this a trick? You did 3 twice, I can still count.

ETA. You are quite right about bedtime. Long day today, another one tomorrow. BFN

From Mats Lewan

‘I think the demonstration today went well, with some limits that depends on what Rossi will accept to measure publicly. The problematic part is that the voltage over the reactor could not be measured, which would be necessary to calculate the electric power consumed by the reactor. In the calculations made by Rossi and Eng. William S. Hurley, who oversaw the measurements, the power consumed by the 1-ohm resistor was used as input power instead, assuming that the plasma inside the reactor has a resistance close to that of a conductor, thus consuming a negligible amount of power since the voltage across the reactor would be very low.

The dummy measurements that I insisted to do, which can be seen in the slides, consisted in replacing the reactor, first with a conductor, then with a 800-ohm resistance. Using a conductor gave a similar electric situation as when the reactor was running—a voltage across the 1-ohm resistor of about 0.4V, slightly higher than the 0.3V measured with the reactor in the circuit. Using a 800-ohm resistor instead of the reactor the voltage across the 1-ohm resistor was about 20mV. At that point we also measured the total voltage over both the 1-ohm and the 800-ohm resistance together, basically the output voltage of the black box power supply, which was then about 12V. That is consistent with the 20mV voltage across the 1-ohm resistor (it should be 15mV).

The 800-ohm dummy was used since at the current flowing through the circuit with the reactor – about 0.3A – the reactor would have consumed 72W electric power if it had a resistance of 800ohms. However, this would have meant that that the voltage across the reactor would have been about 240V. The dummy measurement with the 800-ohm resistor indicated three things: 1. The voltage from the power supply only reached only about 12V as a maximum. 2. If the reactor had a resistance of that order of magnitude it would have resulted in a much lower current, about 20mA, than the one measured with the reactor in place. 3. The power consumed by such a resistance in the circuit would only be about 0.3W.

From the two dummy measurements we can also conclude that the black box power supply adapts its output according to the resistance in the circuit, or rather, to how the reactor behaves. The dummy resistance that most closely replicated the situation with the reactor was using a conductor, indicating that the reactor really behaves as a conductor. This means that the power consumed by the resistance and the reactor together was about 0.3 x 0.3 = 0.9W, as used in the calculations, but that in fact, the reactor consumed a negligible part of that power, resulting in a COP that could be in the order of tens of thousands or more.

We can make another possible conclusion. Since the voltage across the 1-ohm resistance, while using a conductor as a dummy, was about 0.4V, the total output voltage from the power supply at normal operation could be about 0.4V, indicating that the voltage across the reactor could be at the order of magnitude of 0.1V, and the power consumed at 0.3A would be about 0.03W. This would result in a COP of about 1,000. (I don’t remember the value of thermal output power from the reactor, as calculated by William Hurley, but I think ot was about 30W).

Having said this, it seems strange that the power supply, even if it is a complex design, is such that it needs significant active cooling, resulting in a total system that has a COP of about 1 or less at this point. On the other hand, this is what Rossi explained to be one of the challenges in further development of the system.’

Low content posts in this thread are -as of now- likely to end up in the 'clearance' thread without individual explanations. I'm sure that this might upset a few people, but heck, sometimes life is cruel. Well past my bedtime, curious skypers calling me from japan and usa are to blame.

Quote from Ahlfors

T 12:08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjOoGtTFpNk

(SAIPEM, Nasdaq SAPMY)

You are on a roll today my friend! Something new for me in your video...Fabiani at that Rossi conference way back in Sept. 2012. About the time Penon's name popped up on JONP. So that pushes Fabiani's timeline with Rossi further back, *professionally*, then I knew of before. Yes, in his deposition, he admits being family friends with Rossi way back from the old country, but this is professional like I said.

Now, we have all these pieces falling into place, so where do we go with it? Keep digging.

New update on ECW (doing great job there BTW) from Lewan, to add on to what Alan already copied here:

UPDATE:

Mats also sent me the following:

DATA REPORT OF THE MEASUREMENTS MADE ON NOVEMBER 24TH 2017 ON THE E-CAT QUARKX TESTED AT THE IVA, GREV TUREGATAN 16, STOCKOLM, SWEDEN.

Duration of the measurement period: 1 hour: the measurement has been made after the apparatus has reached a reasonably constant temperature

amount of water pumped through the reactor: 1 000 g

Water temperature at the input of the reactor: 21 C

Water temperature at the output of the reactor: 41 C

Delta T: 20 C

Energy produced: 20 x 1.14 = 22.8 Wh/h

Measurement of the energy consumed ( during the hour for 30′ no energy has been supplied to the E-Cat) :

V: 0.3

OHM: 1

A: 0.3

Wh/h 0.09/2= 0.045

Ratio between Energy Produced and energy consumed: 22.8/0.045 = 506.66

Instrumentation used for the measurements:

Oscilloscope Tektronix TBS 1052B

K probes Omega supplied and calibrated by Prof. Bo Hoistad of the University of Uppsala

Water pump Prominent. The water pumped for 1 hour has been poured in a plastic container seat on a scale to measure exactly the water passed through the E-Cat.

Temperature Data Logger: PICO Technology

The scale to weight the water passed through the E-Cat has been supplied by Eng. Mats Lewan of Stockolm

William S. Hurley

Senior Engineer- Endeavor

Los Angeles

Quote from Ahlfors

http://www.andeavor.com/

Hmm, thank you Ahlfors. Now I see. I think. This Hurley, is he into the pool business?. If so, and it looks like he is, it all makes sense. H2O, calorimetry, pools, Los Angeles, yes, changing the world for the better. I would understand if so.

And this "Andeavor", I missed how that plays into this? Could you provide a few more images, or maybe sign language?

Ahlfors,

I searched a little, and this Hurley guy is not adding up to your images for me so far. I will look again tomorrow. No guarantees though, as, after our intrepid reporter gets a well earned good nights sleep, there should be a lot of other things going on.