I re-did this plot.
Paradigmnoia
Since you put a lot of time and efforts in this plot, you may also want to show a plot with the water reservoir temperature added (and the calculated power or energy delivered), in order to illustrate how the water reservoir temperature reacts (or does not react) in dependence of the variation of the steam supply to the "customer".
I suggest you may not have understood the reason behind this discussion.
Sorry, I have stated very clearly that what only matters is the size of the allegedly 6m and long and 40mm diameter connection pipe from the 1MW plant to the "customer side"!
Wheter this connecting pipe is hooked up to the 1MW plant directly, or via a pipe reducer, or via pipe-size extender in order to match the size of the connection flange on the 1MW plant - we don't know, we can't know, and we don't need to know.
That's why we neither don't need to know and don't have to argue about the diameter of the piece of pipe which sticks out from the container.
If you don't wanna accept that fact, then it's a waste of time to discuss with you any longer.
42- have you ever seen a shipping container in real life?
Yes, I have.
And also pipes.
And again, we can argue about the size of the pipe on that old photo as long as you like - however it doesn't matter.
What matters is the size of the allegedly 6 m and long and 40mm diameter pipe from the 1MW plant to the "customer side".
Sure looks like it to me. Can you dispute my measurements and calculations above?
Oh boy! Sure it looks to me like DN50 at max. Can you dispute my eyes?
And even when this pipe is anything else than DN40 or DN50 - what does it really matter?
1.) It is a picture from the "old container"
2.) It is just the connection point. What matters is the pipe from the container to the "customer side".
And this line size could be the same size, reduced or extended size.
The only information about the size of that conection line this statement from Exhibit 5:
"5. The flow of steam through the pipe to J.M. Products.
You stated that the pressure of the steam that was available to J.M. Products (JMP) was nominally atmospheric pressure (0 kilo Pascals gauge (kPaG) or 14.7 psia). The steam passed through a stretch of insulated pipe that was at least 6 meters long before entering the JMP space. (Presumably there was additional steam pipe on the JMP side.) According to the data you have reported, the conserved mass flow rate of the system from February to November 2015 was on average 33,558 kg/day (1398 kg/h) and the temperature of the water and steam were on average 68.7o C and 102.8o C, respectively. The steam pressure was reported (for the entire period) to be 0 kPaG and the piping is DN40."
I respectfully disagree. The pressure loss using a DN80 pipe would be minuscule. At atmospheric pressure, a steam flow rate of 1500 kg/h, and a 6 meter long pipe, the loss would be 0.98 psi. And from my measurements above, the pipe in the old plant was probably DN80.
For steam piping, the recommended steam velocity is 80 ft/sec.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.…ng-steam-pipes-d_266.html
The velocity of 1500kg/h steam @0 barg through a DN80 pipe is 428 ft/sec. - Certainly no properly sizing.
And anyway, it's not a DN80 pipe.
And what's more, the 'old' photos seem to show a properly sized steam pipe. Just about.
No, a properly sized steam pipe would be DN100 or larger.
Even the photos from the "old container" certainly don't show a DN100 pipe (rather DN50 at max)
Because that is about all we have to go by.
No, that's not we have to go by.
We have the statement from Murray in Exhibit 5 - which says that the pipe from the 1MW plant to the "customer side" was 6m DN40.
You create your "alternative facts".
On this website some more detailed pictures from the "old 1MW plant" steam pipe.
http://pesn.com/2011/09/14/950…r_Gets_A_New_E-Cat_Model/
When you know that the width of a standard container is about 2.4m, then it's quite clear from that picture that the steam pipe is only about DN40.
In case that you don't believe, you could ask Mats Lewan if he has higher resulotion photos. Normally the DN value is stamped into the valve flanges. - So, also for Murray it shouldn't have been any proplem to verify the pipe size.
Its mentioned I think somewhere that DN40 pipe is used for the steam pipe. Do we know the source of this?
I'm wondering if "schedule 40" pipe was actually meant.
The source for the pipe size diameter (DN40 = 40mm) is Exhibit 5 of IH's counterclaims:
https://drive.google.com/file/…19-wyOTVVVkVva3AxZ1k/view
(And no, Murray is not talking about Schedule40, but DN40)
And if you read the postings here (e.g. the last one from DNI) then you would have seen the screenshot from a calculation which illustrates that you can't push 1500 kg/hour steam (@ 0barg) through a 40mm diameter 6m long pipe.
Just do your own calculation:
http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/c…-loss-through-piping.html
And by the way, the 477m/s steam velocity equals to 1067 mph (supersonic speed)!
...this strongly implies that he has no other employees.
Just for fun, let's take a look what did Rossi claim 5 yeas ago:
Iggy Dalrymple, August 18th, 2012 at 9:55 PM
Dear Dr Rossi,
How many people are working to develop, improve, manufacture, and market the E-Cat and the Hot-Cat?
Sincerely,
Iggy Dalrymple
Andrea Rossi, August 19th, 2012 at 2:01 AM
Dear Iggy Dalrymple:
As of today we are 63 persons, and growing up (three years ago we were 3, two years ago we were 6, last year we were 13).
Warmest Regards,
A.R.
Looks like this absurd 100.1°C vs 103°C dispute is just a lot of arguing for the sake of argument.
But I think our thresholds for proof of fraud are probably quite different.
Have you ever heard that some guys - when they don't want to accept the obvious - they rather hang on to self delusions.
Watch this:
OG - I don't know if Penon signed the cover report when he submitted the Annex docs but rest assured, when you see it, you're not going to be impressed in the least.
To say that it was shabby work is an insult to shabbist the world over. It is a total joke...
No surprise - his test plan wasn't impressive neither.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…nt-test-plan-fabio-penon/
Did somebody approve that plan? Who?
Btw: From where did Penon take the pressure and temperature values?
The OMEGA PX 309-100A5V doesn't have any integral display.
So, no chance to check the pressure directly at the instrument.
It is a simple pressure transmitter, which converts a pressure of 0 psi_a to a 0V output signal, and 100 psi_a pressure to 5V output signal.
This instrument needs to be hooked up to a control system, and the 0..5V signal from the instrument needs to be scaled (always) to the appropriate range of 0..100 psi_a by the control system.
So, if you read the pressure values from the display of the control system, you have to trust that system - and the guy who programmed it.
Likewise for the temperature probes and temperature measurements.
IF the water flow is 36K kg/day AND the pressure is 1 atm (0 gauge) AND the steam temperature is 103 THEN there IS a 100% phase change AND some super-heating.
But you can't push this 1500kg/h steam through a 6m long DN40 pipe, even not if you have perfect vacuum (0 bar abs) at the end of the 6m pipe.
This was already explained several times! Check yourself with this calculator:
http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/c…-loss-through-piping.html
Enter 3m instead of 6m, and you will see that you get for 3m pipe length already a pressure drop of 1 bar.
A brief glimps on the tables and graphs shows, that the power consumption of the 1MW plant was 10kW, and the total power consumption of the Doral site was 15kW.
So, roughly only 5kW el. power left for the operation of the JMP plant (and lighting, exhaust fans...).
This must cause some head-aches to the ones who made up all kind of crazy ideas about what kind of production goes on at the JMP side (e.g SMR)
... ending illegal immigration and deporting aliens...
Only about 5 mill are Native Americans (or a mix). Whereto should the other 320 mill be deported? 
I'm surprised that 124-06 (Exhibit 5), a letter from Joe Murray to Penon, has not gotten some attention from this crew this weekend.
As Paradigmnoia wrote, Exhibit 5 is not new. It was already included in the first answer from IH, and therefore the major issues have been discussed long time ago.
E.g. that it is not feasible to drive the 1398 kg/h steam @0 barg through a minimum 6m long pipeline with DN40 (40mm) diameter.
Everyone can easily check that with this calculator:
http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/c…-loss-through-piping.html
That fact is just ignored by Rossi supporter, and it is useless to discuss this again and again.
But I think in Exhibit A at page 63
https://drive.google.com/file/…19-wyX25RQi1WQmF1SzQ/view
there is some interesting new information:
"In connection with the instant litigation – and after the Plant ceased operating – Counter-Plaintiffs obtained electrical power data from Florida Power and Light (“FPL”) for the Doral Location where the Plant was operated. The FPL records show that often more power was being used at the Doral Location than being reported by USQL for the Plant, but sometimes less power was being used at the entire Doral Location than being reported by Fabiani and USQL just for the Plant."
Unfortunately the FPL records are not included in the docket files.
It would be good to have them, because I suspect that there was never significantly more el power consumed for the entire Doral site than the el. power for the 1MW plant - which would be another indication that there couldn't have been any real production at the JMP area of the Doral site.
Forty-Two. Your link leads to all the court documents....
Oh - Sorry.
Should be fixed now. Please try again.
Notable, that Rossi wrote on JONP (see above)...
"Obviously we cannot talk on behalf of the Customer and cannot know what he will do about the issue you raised"
... but as we got to know now from this court document (118-01)...
https://drive.google.com/file/…19-wyS3p4NUVmRVU3NTA/view
... Rossi was able to do a lot of things on behalf of the Customer.
In order to stop more mis-information (nowadays called "alternative facts"), here the term sheet for the 1MW plant rental (Exhibit 17):
https://drive.google.com/file/…QafY4T3lPYnczcmlDN1E/view
And here the e-mails from JMP, requesting IH to invoice them (Exhibit 18):
https://drive.google.com/file/…QafY4djdCeE9VUjVxSVE/view
One might think it is strange that "the customer" (JMP) is asking IH to invoice them, and that "the customer" defines how much energy he received.
However, this is not so strange anymore when you know that Rossi considers payments from "the customer" as evidence for the proper performance of the 1MW plant:
QuoteDisplay MoreJack
February 26th, 2015 at 9:07 AM
Hello again Mr. Rossi,
one more question for you.Assuming the best scenario for your 1MW plant, at the end of the tests and the R&D, do you think the Customer will come out of anonymity with a public statement?
Do you have any agreement with the Customer about this?I ask this because having a big Customer supporting you and saying publicly that your 1MW plant actually saved them money would be a huge push for the adoption of your E-Cats.
Thank you again.
Andrea Rossi
February 26th, 2015 at 3:01 PM
Jack:
Here is the issues hierarchy:
1st: work
2nd: complete the work
3rd: make the plant confirm for at least 1 year that it works properly, reliably, continuously, without chattering too much, or, better, without chattering at all: our work needs working plants, not chatters.
LENR will not be launched by sterile chatters moreless theoretical: they will be launched exclusively by a commercial breakthrough. Without it every imbecile will continue to chatter for nothing and theorize about nothing and stupidities said by guys that have nothing better to do will fill up thousands of void theories and innuendos.
4th: ” assuming the best scenario”, at the end of this year during which I will have sustained work shifts of 16-20 hours per day, I will get rest.
5th: all the following operations cited by you are the turf of commercial guys, not of me. Obviously we cannot talk on behalf of the Customer and cannot know what he will do about the issue you raised. All I know for sure is :
a- if the plant will respect the guarantees, the Customer will pay all that is due
b- if the plant will not respect the guarantees, the Customer will not pay and the plant will be returned.
All the rest is TDA ( Tongue- Displaced- Air).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
