10KW LENR Demonstrator?

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:19 am

Wow I didn't quite expect all the detailed analysis. I will point out I did say it was a crude demo

Below some responses...

Crawdaddy wrote: A second video of the steam right at the point of generation would be awesome! (I know it's too much work for bruce tho).

Incidentally, these steam showers seem like they might cook you if you aren't careful1

Not possible to show the steam at the outlet because that would require cutting the copper piping (and then having to reconnect), and second I don't want to dump a bunch of steam into my closet (my wife would kill me)!

As far as cooking myself, well, that's the whole point of a steam shower! There is a diverter that connects on the end of the pipe outlet so steam isn't just shooting straight out like I shown in the beginning of the video. It is directed at the floor. It's pretty similar to any steam shower in the world. The link to the exact model is in the original post.

sparkyy0007 wrote: Looking at your video again at :20, the steam is completely invisible for the first 3 or so inches. What is this steam generator used for?

Uh... The steam is used for the steam shower, hence the glass enclosed structure I'm standing in with a bucket.

I connected the 11' rubber heater hose (5/8" ID) to the steam outlet at the wall so I could show what a 10kW off the shelf steam generator would produce (after all the losses in the copper tubing and the heater hose) just for comparison purposes. The heater hose is just for the test, normally there is a diverter that connects right at the wall to direct the steam down at the floor. The generator (located in the closet) is connected to the shower via ~25 feet of 1/2" insulated copper tubing.

sparkyy0007 wrote: Your steam is very dry, too dry (there's a little experimental error there)

Total energy transferred to cold water:
Q= (energy in pail at end) - (energy in pail at start)

Q=Cp(end mass*end temp - start mass* start temp)
=4.186KJ/Kg*k(13.8*81 - 12.3 * 21.3)
=3582.42 KJ

If that energy is transferred by latent heat only, how much excess water will accumulate ?
delH vap= 2260KJ/kg

Kg of steam = 3582.42/2260
= 1.585kg

the del Mass is 13.8-12.3 = 1.5 kg(reported)

So all the latent energy of the added water would be necessary for
3582KJ
You have a few percent error in you measurement of weights, no problem.

Its very dry!

The weight measurements were made on a cheap scale (you know, one of those scales used to check your weight?). The exact measurements were
bucket: 2.2 lbs
bucket + water start: 29.4lbs
bucket + water end: 32.6lbs

So really the delta was 1.45kg +/- some error on my cheap scale.

The scale is surely not accurate enough to be drawing conclusions on the dryness of the steam. If it will add additional clarity I can re-run with a better scale to get more exact numbers.

If you're interested I uploaded another little video so you get a better picture of the setup.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOd9wc6tCok>

If you have other questions let me know and I'll try to clarify.

Bruce

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 4:53 am

Bruce wrote:Wow I didn't quite expect all the detailed analysis. I will point out I did say it was a crude demo

Below some responses...

Crawdaddy wrote: A second video of the steam right at the point of generation would be awesome! (I know it's too much work for bruce tho).

Incidentally, these steam showers seem like they might cook you if you aren't careful1
Not possible to show the steam at the outlet because that would require cutting the copper piping (and then having to reconnect), and second I don't want to dump a bunch of steam into my closet (my wife would kill me)!

As far as cooking myself, well, that's the whole point of a steam shower! There is a diverter that connects on the end of the pipe outlet so steam isn't just shooting straight out like I shown in the beginning of the video. It is directed at the floor. It's pretty similar to any steam shower in the world. The link to the exact model is in the original post.

sparkyy0007 wrote: Looking at your video again at :20, the steam is completely invisible for the first 3 or so inches. What is this steam generator used for?
Uh... The steam is used for the steam shower, hence the glass enclosed structure I'm standing in with a bucket.

I connected the 11' rubber heater hose (5/8" ID) to the steam outlet at the wall so I could show what a 10kW off the shelf steam generator would produce (after all the losses in the copper tubing and the heater hose) just for comparison purposes. The heater hose is just for the test, normally there is a diverter that connects right at the wall to direct the steam down at the floor. The generator (located in the closet) is connected to the shower via ~25 feet of 1/2" insulated copper tubing.

sparkyy0007 wrote: Your steam is very dry, too dry (there's a little experimental error there)

Total energy transferred to cold water:
Q= (energy in pail at end) - (energy in pail at start)

Q=Cp(end mass*end temp - start mass* start temp)
=4.186KJ/Kg*k(13.8*81 - 12.3 * 21.3)
=3582.42 KJ

If that energy is transferred by latent heat only, how much excess water will accumulate ?
delH vap= 2260KJ/kg

Kg of steam = 3582.42/2260
= 1.585kg

the del Mass is 13.8-12.3 = 1.5 kg(reported)

So all the latent energy of the added water would be necessary for
3582KJ
You have a few percent error in you measurement of weights, no problem.

Its very dry!
The weight measurements were made on a cheap scale (you know, one of those scales used to check your weight?). The exact measurements were
bucket: 2.2 lbs
bucket + water start: 29.4lbs
bucket + water end: 32.6lbs

So really the delta was 1.45kg +/- some error on my cheap scale.

The scale is surely not accurate enough to be drawing conclusions on the dryness of the steam. If it will add additional clarity I can re-run with a better scale to get more exact numbers.

If you're interested I uploaded another little video so you get a better picture of the setup.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOd9wc6tCok>

If you have other questions let me know and I'll try to clarify.

Bruce

Bruce, what you would like to prove with your demonstrations?
Would you like to show that steam exhaust of your steam generator looks similarly to Rossi’s device? Yes, that’s right. And what?
For your note: students when study hydrodynamics learn the standard model “exhaust from the nozzle”. And that model is very common.
I would believe you if you say that can visually estimate from the distance the size of girl’s boobs

, but I do not believe that anybody can visually estimate the power of exhausting steam’s bunch.

Whether your presentation can deny the following?
We are discussing about device might produce some steam, producing or not producing some neutron or gamma flux (not specified till now which one or both type of radiation) shielded by insulating tape

, flow unknown, etc., etc., etc.
So, we have no discussing subject at all. And this is at least of 1 year experiments, demonstrations or whatever they call their performances.
Recall that Rossi’s device as such is very simple and they quite able with a very little budget to conduct better all required data in acceptable form.

sparkyy0007 · Post by **sparkyy0007** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:24 am

Joseph Chikva wrote: I would believe you if you say that can visually estimate from the distance the size of girl’s boobs , but I do not believe that anybody can visually estimate the power of exhausting steam’s bunch.

Maybe not, but we are getting better.

Come on Joseph, It is a comparative analysis to determine a limit.
Of course its difficult to quantify anything by a video, but you can compare.
If you watch a video of 2 cars in a race, you can tell which is going faster.
If you see a pix of the night sky, you can tell which stars are brighter.
If you watch two girls on a trampoline you..... well you get my drift.

The Krivit demo seemed weak, so crimbs showed what 700 or so watts of
steam looks like.
Bruce showed what ~8000 looks like.
Can you honestly tell us there's no difference?

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:49 am

sparkyy0007 wrote:
Joseph Chikva wrote: I would believe you if you say that can visually estimate from the distance the size of girl’s boobs , but I do not believe that anybody can visually estimate the power of exhausting steam’s bunch.

Maybe not, but we are getting better.

Come on Joseph, It is a comparative analysis to determine a limit.
Of course its difficult to quantify anything by a video, but you can compare.
If you watch a video of 2 cars in a race, you can tell which is going faster.
If you see a pix of the night sky, you can tell which stars are brighter.
If you watch two girls on a trampoline you..... well you get my drift.

The Krivit demo seemed weak, so crimbs showed what 700 or so watts of
steam looks like.
Bruce showed what ~8000 looks like.
Can you honestly tell us there's no difference?

I can not estimate the power carrying by steam from monitor
If you can - my congratulations.

painlord2k · Post by **painlord2k** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:59 am

D Tibbets wrote:
painlord2k wrote:Some topic covered by this thread can be easily explained if you do a bit of lateral thinking:
The description of steam flow sounds reasonable. But, then claiming that this description explains the difference between Rossi's and Chrismb's steam flow is nonsense. The steam flow from Chrismb's ~ ~ 700 Watt output traveled further from the end of the tube, and was obvously a larger volume per second. The Rossi's steam flow was slower and expanded faster, despite claimed ~ 4000-5000 Watts of heating.

Wait!

I think this thread become so messy and long that people are mixing up the tests.

Are we talking about the test with the bucket? The test recorded by Lewan?
They were two test, to start, AND they were recorded in April and claimed:

1st Test http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiEC ... ilData.pdf
Duration 2h10m - 20 MJ - 2.6kW

2nd Test http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiEC ... ilData.pdf
2h58m - 25MJ - 2.3kW

With an estimate 800-1000 W of power loss along the hose, the power output of the steam is around 1200 - 1600 W, not 3000 or more. This imply a large quantity of water was condensing in the hose.

The place where the experiment was conducted is above the sea level (other thing not considered in this discussion) so the boil point is 99,6 °C not 100°C. So, if the temp of the water in a boiling pot is 99.6 and the temperature measured is 100°C you have no wet steam (and the energy surplus is so low that it have not the power to cause droplets to leave the water surface and be pushed up to the chimney).

Giorgio · Post by **Giorgio** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:07 pm

painlord2k wrote:With an estimate 800-1000 W of power loss along the hose, the power output of the steam is around 1200 - 1600 W, not 3000 or more. This imply a large quantity of water was condensing in the hose.

That's impossible.
Once equilibrium conditions are reached, a rubber tube in still air, with an heat flow of 2,6Kw can NEVER dissipate that amount of heat.
A figure of merit could be 100W. Make it 200W if you want to be safe.

If you are taking the 1Kw figure from my previous post you should remember that I stated clearly that I was using an exaggerated figure of 1Kw just to remove any discussion about the amount of thermal losses due to the heat flow being 5Kw.

Giorgio · Post by **Giorgio** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:09 pm

painlord2k wrote:Are we talking about the test with the bucket? The test recorded by Lewan?

We are talking about the test recorded by Krivit.

Crawdaddy · Post by **Crawdaddy** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:14 pm

sparkyy0007

Nice calculation!

don't you also have to account for the energy of the liquid water heat transfer to the bucket?

That is to say that the 1.5kg of transferred steam also contributes to the temperature of the bucket once it condenses...

a minor difference to be sure.

Giorgio · Post by **Giorgio** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:28 pm

Looks like we are not the only one thinking that there is something weird in this test.
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... jWj2ZlEnsg

The Emperor without clothes!

Inlägg by Peter Ekstrom »Today, 12:07
Krivits (NewEnergyTimes.com) videos from his visit to Bologna reveals to me without any doubt that the E-Cat does not produce any net energy. The decisive moment is when Rossi shows off what the E-Cat produces, when, according to Rossi runs with power 5 kW. A small cloud of smoke (fog) front end of the tube shows that there is not much of a blow with dry steam: Keep in mind that there must be a power of 5 kW, which comes out of the tube!

For details see the document
http://www.fysik.org/WebSite/fragelada/ ... krivit.pdf

I doubt they will get a device from Rossi now...

chrismb · Post by **chrismb** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 4:10 pm

Bruce wrote:Crude "demo" details:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shRpnN6CAd8

A simple, but fine, effort Mr Bruce. Indeed, this was what I was expecting to see at a couple of kW and I wanted to do it because it makes it plain and obvious how much steam (visible or otherwise) should be ejected from a hose with kW of steam power coming out of it.

Now Not-Ing Rossi has two persons he can call 'imbeciles'.

At some stage in the near future, I suspect there will be many more people who will be imbeciles in his view, and, eventually, all the world will be Rossi-imbeciles and he will trudge around the place in his old age shouting [italian]'IMBECILE'[/italian] at anyone who contradicts him as he mutters to the few that might care to listen the story of how 'dark-powers' stopped him from completing his work because they all knew it would work and wanted to stop him.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:10 pm

Defkalion answers questions on their site.
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/

Defkalion GT
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:10 am
Offline

Andrea Rossi contractualy guarantees performance better than 6 on e-cats.

As posted already in other topics in this forum, Defkalion has never wittnesed a performance ratio less than 19 during all in house testing on e-cat lab prototypes.

Hyperion products performance ratio is described in Defkalion's White Paper as

..."The current range of products produce from 6 to 30 times more heat energy than the energy it takes to run the machine"...

Detailed products specs will be released following the issuing of performance, stability/functionality and safety Certificates from the Greek Authorities.

Thank you

Defkalion GT
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:01 pm
Offline

Safety test in progress by the Greek Authorities include procedures and scenarios (for all ranges of products) on:
-Stress tests
-Operational and safety test in not normal conditions (fire, earthquake etc). Please note that Greece is a country with earthquakes and very high safety standards because of the earthquakes
-EU regulation SEVESO II related tests (hydrogen storage and handling)
-Tests on critical components failure
-All tests for radiations etc, according to EU standards
-Safety/Stability tests
-Other safety related tests

All tests protocols and results will be released and published in Defkalion's site with the Certificates from the Greek Authorities before any releasing of products in Greece.

Thank you for your remarks

PS E-cat lab prototype shielding is 3 mm thick. Your toaster may produce more radiation than an e-cat .

Defkalion GT
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:17 pm
Offline

Guru wrote:

There is some inconsistency:

Mr. Rossi wrote at other site that Lead shielding weight is 50 kg for one device.
3 mm Lead shielding is at X times fewer then equivalent of 50 kg of Lead for one device.

*****
No inconsistency at all. Andreas Rossi has demonstrated different versions of e-cats (or e-"kittens") lab prototypes and has reported or answered questions according to the questions he was asked on what he had demonstrated.

Current version Hyperion products (in the kW range) weight is less than 30kg (including the reactor (or e-cat as it is known), its shield and thermal isolation, the hydrogen can, the pump, the heat management system, the coolant, electronics, the security components and its cover box.

No gamma above WHO/EU/National regulations limits is emitted in all modes of operation. No radioactive materials are in use.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:52 pm

Defkalion Press Conference in Athens
Introduces Rossi Energy Catalyzer
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... kalion.pdf

Presumably Defkalion have run several different sized E-Cats in order to determine that the COP was over 19. But chrismb is certain they can't take measurements properly and who would you rather believe? A blogger who pontificates from video snippets or a $200 million company that has actually tested them?

JoeP · Post by **JoeP** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 8:24 pm

parallel wrote:Defkalion Press Conference in Athens
Introduces Rossi Energy Catalyzer
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... kalion.pdf

Presumably Defkalion have run several different sized E-Cats in order to determine that the COP was over 19. But chrismb is certain they can't take measurements properly and who would you rather believe? A blogger who pontificates from video snippets or a $200 million company that has actually tested them?

That is just it though, you make assumption. chrismb can only work with what evidence is available. Certainly the rate of steam production from the end of the E-Cat appears weaker than the informal attempts to see what 1KW+ of steam power production looks like.

For all we know, this particular E-Cat may not be functioning as well as other tests. Too many variables.

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 8:52 pm

parallel wrote:Defkalion Press Conference in Athens
Introduces Rossi Energy Catalyzer
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... kalion.pdf

Presumably Defkalion have run several different sized E-Cats in order to determine that the COP was over 19. But chrismb is certain they can't take measurements properly and who would you rather believe? A blogger who pontificates from video snippets or a $200 million company that has actually tested them?

I'd like to know where you got the $200 million figure from. I can't find any such evaluation of the company nor stock related information. This appears to be a number either you or someone pulled out of your ass. As of right now the argument would be the rest of the Physics/Engineering world vs. Rossi and his paper mache doctorate, nothing more.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:36 pm

ScottL wrote:

I'd like to know where you got the $200 million figure from. I can't find any such evaluation of the company nor stock related information. This appears to be a number either you or someone pulled out of your ass.

Funded to the tune of 200m Euros (Google Translated Announcement)
ref http://ecatnews.com/?p=126

So it rather looks like the brown sticky fingers are yours.