can it loks like approaching 1, but imo conflicts with pce830 vs energy out curve (lowest blue/green graph) in second screenshot. Anyway it's clear that we are not seeing anything remarkable energy gain. This small changes can aswell be measurement errors. Lets hope new fuel is dryer tomorrow.
- Member since May 12th 2016
- Last Activity:
can that looks like avg cop stayed positive quite a while, but to be reaction based I think that lower avgs should also stay equal 1 to make cop meaningful, unless that is calc error i tried to explain above. (Returning temp to another bucket fluctuates both in temp and flow rate, which was not graphed yesterday)
Major diff. I see between Fri and Sat test is that on Fri controller was aware that reaction was not started, and it tried to trigger it. Whereas on Sat test controller SW assumed reaction being started pretty early and tried to keep it going. (compare power curves from test log).
It is pretty hard to develop controlling algorithm in SW without knowing the process or without proper realtime calorimetry. Luckily I have understood the first being true with me356 and that keeps my hope high for monday.
Can someone clarify, or estimate roughly (I have no numbers and formula at hand). If they yesterday took water in from one bucket (say 15C) and it returned through the whole system to another bucket (say at 28C), shouldn't that possible temp difference be taken into account while calculating COP, or is possible error so small that it is meaningles?
Now they measured only coolant intake and outlet temp, which would be accurate if both buckets would end up to same temp.
@Henry you are propably right. There is resistive heater according to Q/A, but it is too early say is that used only for heating reactor to working temp, and actual triggering of reaction can be caused by other means. Wave form looks like they cut current from top of the wave to get maximum harmonics and amplitude (there you get max pulse rising time, so max number of strong harmonics). To minimize rise time of the pulse, you should try to minimise inductance of the coil.
And yes that kind of drive is propably not allowed to be connected to grid directly, especilly if high power or big amounts, but it is possible to generate harmonics from dc stored in super capacitor or using inverter, whic would add the costs.
So are all the commentators on this forum happy with the experimental setup for the live me356 tests?
Maybe it is just me since I have never played with steam beyond kettle...
Other thing has been mentioned already, Faraday gage to eliminate fraud speculations afterwards. Here is an example of 1.5 kw energy transfer:
Even though I guess it's easier to make LENR work than tune antennas and hide them such a small box, but paeraskeptics are never happy
Visibility wise we still have uphill to climb with LENR energy. Totally dismissed from concrete energy plans in many countries.
Here is an example about Small Modular reactors (700MW) planned in Great Britain using traditional fission or Molten salt.
Good news is that if LENR gains traction before they fuel them, reactors can be reused as scrap metal, and steam turbines can be re-used for LENR reactors...
I had the same questions. It would bee nice to get also other updates beyond the sound cloud recordings which are nice also. Or am I missing some link?
I hope guys understand to take enough pics and videos, since if successful, they are the ones posted in many magazines and history books to come.
can thank you for clarification I thought it was about Quark-X schematic.
Top left section still does not make any sense to me. Also top right part of pic doesn't seem to relate to anything on else there.
I don't understand enough what we are searching from that design, but again looking at pic. right side, to me it looks like some kind of surface effect. If you look just strong magnetic field put iron bar inside instead of wire and maybe minimize air gap between coil and bar. But I'm lost enough about possible surface effects, so I think it is time for me to bail out messing this thread further.
can yes you got it right it must be 'of electricity' not 8T. Sorry I also had somehow missed your quote where correct text was already presented. Still wondering role of middle wire if there is no current fed to it, it will become place of eddy currents like in ukranian induction heater video you posted. But if you put strong enough current both in coil and inner wire, eddy currents (means also hot spots, magnetic fields etc.) will get formed in conducting material (Ni powder?) between wire and coil. Really a puzzle.
Btw. Those squares in top left of pic. are also strange. They look like explanation of how to approximate volume between wire and coil but why to mix basic geometry in this pic? Must be something else?
From Craig Cassarino's notes from communications with Industrial Heat an "iron core" is mentioned, but the circumstances of how it's used and how it did come up in discussions are not clear.
Raw Handwritten texts:
1) Magnetic field 8T (teslas) electricity flowing M (middle?) wire electric wire
2) Magnetic field strength of magnetic field (emphasizes importance of magnetic field strength?)
3) Coils and iron core B (Bm=Maximum induction (Tesla) in formulas?) 1000x stronger than coils only.
My interpretation of that picture:
They mean that when you put metal (wire) inside coil, you can achieve 1000 fold increase in permeability compared to pure air core (see iron core "Core material" chapter and Inductance formula in this article. )
BUT BUT now comes the interesting part (on which I'm not quite up to date in details). When you connect current to both in coil around reactor AND wire inside reactor you get strong magnetic field (8 Teslas is quite high). What that becomes in practice, is not just coil anymore, but transformer! What is interesting is that now metallic (Ni) powder between coil and inner wire becomes 'core' material passing magnetic field between coil and inner wire (simplest form of coil). Lots of formulas here
Normally when you put Voltage/current in to one coil of transformer, you get another voltage/current ratio out from another depending on turns and wire diameter of coils etc. Absolute maximum power that can be transferred through core depends on dimensions and permeability of core material. When that max is reached it is called saturation point, output doesn't increase further even you increase voltage of input. What then happens in saturation case inside core material, is that extra feed energy turns into heat in core material, because it doesn't get transferred to output anymore (can't remember are they eddy currents or something else).
So could it be that they feed current both to wire and coil and make magnetic field to max out in 'core' which is Ni powder etc. in this case! Eddy currents, hot spots in powder... Anybody? What that could mean
Also that 8Teslas sounds very high number, without calculating, I could guess you would need quite a coils and high current?
It goes without saying that people are entitled to their opinion, and you are certainly no exception.
Thank you sigmoidal on bringing clarity for many readers who have not followed whole story so closely.
To balance a bit I just want to add that this legal proceeding is merely about breach of contract. Does any of Rossis technology (e-cat, Hot-cat quark-x younameit) work or not is separate question. Many commenters here tries to predict outcome by technical success of earlier tests. Proving them definite true or false could affect on does Rossi get his 90 millions or Jail time, but not other way around.
Some think that even discussions in this forum could have affect on outcome, but with wide range of opinions and wild theories here, I highly doubt that the only thing they possibly learn from here is to concentrate even stricter on hard evidence and facts in court docket. Which might be what they should do.
Not to forget many failures of 'Rossi says' and failed promises of automated mega-factories etc. Court sealed few evidence documents out from trial, but they are still in docket to dig. With this 8000+ comments of endless debates about window reflections, stains in the floor, pipe diameters, steam traps, heat exchangers, Lugano tests etc. etc. Some could even think that scaring them off from reading here has been main goal after it slipped out that there is APCO connection, Israeli connection and threat-/bribing hints towards Italian and Swedish scientists ...
In a hope for future scientific behavioral pattern research of this thread also from this aspect.
Zeus46 Yes, I believe also so, but how it translates to steam flow numbers. And also flow impedance which contributes to pressure differential between steam input and condensed water output. Wish here would be real Steam engineers here in the forum.
The amount of ale you rock ...
Thank you Ahlfors pointing this out. That 247-01 is interesting read indeed. There are some other details also. Recommend others to dig it, since it is straight from horses mouth without someone says and that copy adds on perspective how things went.
Since I have no hands on experience on steam systems, I have been trying to understand Backup setup shown in first video and still can't get it right in my head...
If you connect all these pipes, or mainly steam input, and condensated water output directly to reactor heating circuit (=closed loop), what will happen in startup step? Contained water starts to boil at some point finally generating steam into reactor output. Steamed water volume expands 1700 fold?. As a result pressure release valve will spit out hot water and later hot steam around the room until system balances itself when overpressure (volume) is released by PR-valve and underpressure filled, by 'crack' after heat exchanger.
1) To make balance to be reached quicker, I would consider using proper vacuum bleed. So instead of using 'crack' Bob mentioned why not attach transparent stiff silicone tube in t-joint after condenser. I would hang it on 'U' shape and make sure open end is raised higher than heat exchanger. Filled partly with water at start.
2) Here comes the hard part to estimate without experience. Pressure differential before and after condenser in my understanding depends on flow impedance of condenser 'seen' by incoming steam. Bigger the flow impedance, bigger the pressure differential. If impedance is big enough you end up into situation where pressure release valve is leaking during whole test duration until your water in circuit runs low. Or is it by design that heat exchanger impedance is so low that pressure differential is always low enough when used within specifications? Heat exchanger internals must be quite open, since condensing steam causes it to flow quite fast through condenser?
If I calculated correctly using THHuxleynw and Test plan numbers, Condensing ratio in atmospheric pressure is 1672 (roughly depending on bleed valve and condensation level).
Steam production 16l/h water produces 26764l steam/h,
This means steam flow something between 0.2 and 446 l/min through condenser where upper limit is way more than specification limit of condenser. Or is steam so much easier flowing that you can calculate it almost as water volume (which is 0.2l/min)? Would it be wise to run test run with Nibe heater before packing up for the test.
Specification linked in test plan http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Stai…m:mGnzrpXN6FhindMVxA9isAw
MODEL Power Exchange surface CONNECTORS
shell / tube side
Flow of heating / heated media Dimension
Maximum pool dimension (Δ 60°C)* Maximum pool dimension (Δ 40°C)* B55 16kW 0.15 m² 1" / 3/4" 28/185 l/min 360/60mm 15.0 m3 10.5 m3
Just asking, since I like test to succeed on first try and getting spare parts can sometimes be difficult in field conditions and considering location of me356 lab.
He doesn't brag about scamming HF, that's reading what do you want to believe. What that mail shows is that he had many different possible partners to choose from and that he did let his devices test by different organisations. He just didn't make the effort to make the test succesful because he had already chosen a partner. If you have to miscontruct Rossi's sentences that badly to make a point how a giant fraud he is, then that only means how weak the arguments against him really are.
LLTL I stand partly corrected. Maybe I was too harsh saying Rossi bragging in that mail, but that doesn't take away fact that he made by purpose the test fail to get rid of business agreement instead of honestly negotiating it and that is below my bar even I understand the reason. It was easiest and cheapest way for him to get free from the HF agreement.
Since nobody is commenting Bob/MFMP planned calorimetry setup here, I put something up which are just my hunch and guesses without hands on experience nor accurate calculations.
In a hope that maybe someone could get idea and do the math.
1) Pipe Diameter/Insulation
In remote heating steam systems they don't want to condensate steam at all, so they use superheeated steam that returns back to plant as normal heat, because it flows more easily and does not damage piping and heat exchangers so quickly.
In your case you have rather small pipe diameter and non super heated 'normal' heat. In my guess you need proper insulation to keep steam not to condensate already before heat exchanger and also to minimize bigger heat loss caused by hotter pipe than in return side.
2) Water return
I think you did not show or mention pump that you would need to pump condensed water back to reactor? Or is reactor positioned below condensation level. Even not specifically mentioned in video, that reactor circuit should be closed circuit anyway to keep measurement errors minimum. yes?
If so, what ensures steam starts to flow to correct direction and not pushed through return pipe up to condenser and returning via input pipe?
So should there be similar back flow valve also in return pipe as you have in cooler input?
3) Vacuum bleed
When you try to avoid vacuum generated by condensing steam, you plan to leak air after reactor (around 4:50 mark in first video ). Maybe install manual valve instead of 'crack' to make it easier control the level of vacuum.
Also if you leak cool air into condensing stream, it further cools down condensed water a bit (on top of energy released in condenser). Luckily that is probably small percentage and possible slight error is in correct direction (false negative).
For easier maintenance, as a general rule I'd prefer to put manual valve to each pipe just in case to keep fluid from leaking if you need to quickly check or clean heat exchanger for example.
4) pressure release valve
As Jeff has mentioned many times and was shortly mentioned in the video. Pressure release valve is most important thing to take with you when you pack your stuff for the test.
All in all it should be pretty easy to distinguish between COP 1.0 and > 10 even with more modest setup, but it is better if you achieve even 10-30% uncertainty in measurements. And energy amounts beyond any chemical sources.
Good Luck for testing!
Edit: One more thing Bob mentioned laminar fluid flow after 20 cm straight tube. There are different levels of laminar, and strictly speaking this flow is far away pure laminar, but I don't think it matters in this case.
Old news. Is it such a big deal if HF does not think it was a big deal. As far as i know they are still involved.
Maybe you are right. As an entrepreneur, after reading that mail, I would not take that kind of business partner without either him paying in advance/escrow, or deliver before I pay.
Maybe I'm mixing too much personal values with (global)business values. I live in fool hope that some day they should be in same level.
The APCO astroturf stuff definitely rubs me the wrong way, as I've been on the receiving end of similar accusations on more than one occasion in the past. Accusations which were patently false from my own perspective. They are a distraction that sidetracks otherwise productive conversations. Allowing them to flourish gives a podium to people with fringe views. Anyone who succumbs to the temptation of raising the alarm and attacking forum members as APCO shills without bringing forward concrete, credible evidence risks a warning.
Your allegations of bias are noted. They will probably have little affect on how things are handled absent credible evidence of APCO astroturfing.
Eric, I hope you don't mean that APCO is not allowed to be mentioned at all here as part of some scenario? They are included in one of the Dardens mail distribution list in court docket.
What I see in this forum is that here can be detected patterns and activity that does not any more fit in to just personal interest category by any measure. It is clear that all LENR related forums have also both trolls and astroturfers. I'm not saying that it is especially APCO people nor even IH:s or Rossis paid trolls, they can be individuals having other motives as well.
I have mentioned Putin trolls earlier as an example and how trolling and stroturfing is pretty damn hard to spot and many times impossible to prove.
Difference: All real (biggest artillery in Europe) firepower related clips left out from first one to make it look like that army is mostly individuals or teams at max. running in forest equipped only with their personal guns. It is not about staging anything, but more about which parts you choose exclude.
Eric, many of these can't be proved water-tightly. They just looks suspicious, but ruling them out as just conspiracy theories is simply non credible especially in playground thread. Of course ones should be able to discuss respectfully without bashing or name calling etc. even having different opinions.
I just re-read my year old analysis about Marianne Macys blog article (pointing out tone change in 'The Lawsuit' chapter, and even it is just my opinion, I still found no reason to change word of it - before this play is over...
Rossi also bragged about his scamming HydroFusion out of a contract clause regarding one of his tests. Rossi promoted his scam, which he found to be ingenious, characterizing it as a 'masterpiece' in an email to IH.
What more evidence do you 'non-scammers' need?
Thank you for reminding of this fact since it can be found in court documents in Rossis mail sent to Darden. I have earlier listed evidence of lack of values and low business morale of IH-Tribe. That Rossi's mail and even bragging about scamming HF earns him position in list of disgusting business partners to be avoided at any cost.
Our old wise men had saying (poorly translates to) 'A man is known by the company he keeps', and maybe Rossi lives this saying true (by many of its interpretations).
I wonder Is this going to speed up LENR funding.Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
BREAKING NOW: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DECLARES EMERGENCY AT HANFORD WA