.
by
Tadej Bajda a.k.a.Tamal Krishna
das Krsko, Slovenia
.
.
Abstract
Description of a fictional device, cylindrical in shape, for starting a low energy nuclear reaction. Using an environment of hydrogen and nickel charecteristics, similiar to one in an E-Cat. Imagining hydrogen molecul as a spring resonant system and simply using frequency and power of electricity as a catalyst.
.
.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
I would like to draw your attention to US Pat. No. 7428816 (to Honeywell Corp.). It concerns low-boiling fluorochemical working fluids designed for converting relatively low-temperature heat into mechanical energy via the Rankine Cycle. I believe that Honeywell is primarily interested in selling these fluids and would therefore be willing to work with you, as long as you buy the fluid from them. I am hopeful this might shorten the path to electricity production, as well as other Ecat applications that would require mechanical energy (ie. pumps, fans, compressors, etc.). The benefits are that relatively lower working temperatures could be used. Honeywell obviously has lots of valuable expertise that might also be useful in developing these types of applications.
Kind Regards; HRG.
Dear Andrea,
you said that you are close to generate stable steam @350°C for electric generator.
Are you already coupling a steam turbine in your test or you are referring only to the steam generation? What is the size of the turbine ( in MW ) you are or will adopt?
Thank you so much
Neri B.
Dear Andrea,
first of all congratulations for the result of the test.
Can you give some details about the long running test expected this summer ? I think it would be nice to see real time data published on the web …
Greetings and thanks
Hermano Tobia
Dear Giuseppe:
We want to arrive to produce steam at 350°C in a stable situation to get a good Carnot cycle, and we are close.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Lucio Martini:
Scepticism is necessary, it is the antithesys to make a sinthesys, when it is honest and unbiased.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Koen,
The “unobvious” of eCat is the alledged catalysts that increase the output power for Nickel-Hydrogen reactions. It is still not clear to me how this works and I have done much thought on the subject (and my adult daugther thinks I am brilliant).
If eCat technology works and is commercialized, the world could greatly benefit from nearly free energy. While I doubt the Physics community would support a Nobel prize in Physics for Andrea Rossi, I suggest a Nobel Peace prize might be in order. In any event, I do not believe Andrea Rossi is in this for Nobel prizes, no matter how much deserved.
Dear Steven N Karels,
Dear Hank Mills,
Indeed, the unseen openness of Andrea Rossi in this JONP is very intriguing, despite your, others and my fatigueless probes for confidential information.
There is another complexity: the conditions needed to have a patent granted. Besides the novelty and the possibility of industrial application, the granting of a patent also depends on a so-called “inventive step”(EU), or “unobviousness”(US).
This means that the inventor has to invent something that other experts in the matter, who have the knowledge and the skills, would NOT obviously do when they have to solve the same problem. Besides that, a skilled person should be able to reproduce the invention, based on the patent description.
How to do something like that within a branch of technology that does not fully exist, or is at least very experimental ? What is the obvious and what is the unobvious ? Where do you find your skilled persons in a technology that is under development ? And what is the role of the entire JONP, publications and comments, in this ?
Fortunately, the “unobvious” could have been the core of the following improvements that are more or less logical steps, and as such, unfit for patents by themselves.
Personally, I believe that the fact that the “machines of the competitors”, elaborated by experts and scientists, do become more and more complex and expensive, is the ultimate proof of the inventive step that makes the E-Cat unique.
A Nobel Prize for the obvious, and a Patent for the unobvious are in place, I believe. The sympathy for Andrea Rossi that comes from the nearest friends, Professors, finds its basis in the respect for the man (and the team) that could do all this.
Thanks to all,
Kind regards,
Koen
Stimatissimo Ing. Rossi:
Dopo il test indipendente, leggo che i soliti “unbelievers” continuano ad allignare. Mi ricordano molto il “Colonnello Buttiglione” che aveva per motto: “UN BUON SOLDATO NON SI ARRENDE MAI, NEMMENO DAVANTI ALL’EVIDENZA!” Provengono dalla stessa scuola.
After the test 3rd part, I read on the blog that are aliving even the “unbelievers”. I remember the “Colonel Buttiglione” His motto was: “A GOOD SOLDIER NEVER SURREND, EVEN IN FRONT OF EVIDENCE!” They are from the same school!
I miei complimenti, continui a LAVOLALE, abbiamo tutti bisogno di Lei
Lucio Martini
May you do some more comment on this?
Are you generating steam for a turbine, if yes what type and what power output has?
I guess any way this will be great for a public demostration.
Giuseppe
Andrea Rossi
May 24th, 2013 at 7:24 AM
Dear Giuseppe:
We are working strongly on this, we are close to a success.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Giuseppe
May 24th, 2013 at 5:43 AM
Andrea,
How far are you and your team to release a tool that based on ecat has electricity as output?
Or you have no interest in a such kind of tools but only to termic energy and leave this option to the customers?
Giuseppe
Dear Steven N.Karels:
He,he,he…you are right!
Dear Giuseppe:
We are working strongly on this, we are close to a success.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Manuel Cilia:
Anything that is put between an energy generator and a load decreases the efficiency. The quantum depends on many factors in the different situations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear John:
1- to make a third party indipendent test
2- also
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
1- What was the purpose of the 3rd party test from your perspective?
2- Was it rather that the Professors urged it to be done, and you finally gave your consent based on their trustworthiness?
Best,
John
Dear Mr Rossi,
Are you losing very much energy between the Ecat and hotwater coils as this would create a different COP (energy in to hot water energy out). Do you have any numbers on this.
Thanks
Andrea,
How far are you and your team to release a tool that based on ecat has electricity as output?
Or you have no interest in a such kind of tools but only to termic energy and leave this option to the customers?
Giuseppe
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Maybe there is a secret energy source only found in Italy that the eCat secretly draws excess power from and is also undetectable by modern instrumentation? (LOL) I too noted in the test report that the total consumed power included power consumed by the control panel – the measurement was made just after the AC Wall outlet going to the cotrol unit. I was impressed by the throughness of the Investigator’s methodology.
Hello Hank Mills,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concepts. We, being outside of Leonardo Corporation, do not know the inner workings of eCat technology. So it is like the story of the blind man touching the elephant.
We are fortunate that Andrea Rossi allows us to post detailed technical questions and he even answers them within his restrictions on releasing too much confidential information.
I agree we must balance enthusiasm with control and not toss out incorrect information that will confuse others. I too am uncertain about the reaction mechanism since transmutation has been stated as a secondary effect. My guess is Hydrogen conversion to Helium with the Helium diffusing out of the eCat but it is just a guess.
I encourage you and others to keep asking questions from Andrea Rossi, making suggestions on applications or improvement ideas, etc. as long as Andrea Rossi wants to continue JONP.
Hoping to hear more from all of you – Steve
To the Readers:
A friend of mine, Prof. of Electric Measurements , put me a question that I think is important to reproduce here:
” The measurement of the electric energy consumed by the resistance could have been affected by the fact that a particular wave has been produced that the instrument of measurement could have not been able to measure”. This question is important. The answer is: the measurement of the electric energy that has been consumed by the resistances has been made BETWEEN THE PLUG OF THE GRID AND THE CONTROL PANEL, NOT BETWEEN THE CONTROL PANEL AND THE RESISTANCES. Therefore the wave of the electricity in the point in which the electric energy consumed has been measured was a full, regular wave od alternate current ( the instrumentation used allowed also to see the wave form). AGAIN:
THE MEASUREMENT MADE BY THE PCE 830 HAS BEEN TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE GRID OF THE OF THE ENERGY DISTRIBUTOR; AFTER THE MEASUREMENT OF ENERGY , THE ENERGY IS ENVOYED TO THE REGULATION SYSTEM ( ANGLE PHASE TRIAC), THEREFORE THE SOLE ENERGY MEASURED IS 380 VOLTS 3 PHASES 50 Hz !!!
Obviously the Examiners wanted to measure the energy consumed between the plug of the grid and the control panel exactly for this reason. This can be also found in the Report.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Domenico Canino:
I am not involved.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Ciao Andrea,
ma li hai visti questi svizzeri che chiedono finanziamenti per una città delle LENR?
Cosa ne pensi? C’entri Qualcosa?
http://lenr-cities.com/index.html
Hi Andrea.
what do you think about a swiss LENR city funding research? Are you involved?
http://lenr-cities.com/index.html
ciao
Hello Steven N. Karels,
There is a lot we do not understand about how the ECAT works. I, for one, have been trying to wrap my brain around it for a long time now. But since so much has changed — transmutation no longer being the main energy source — it is even more of a mystery than it used to be. For all we know, due to the very real need for confidentiality, there may be no nuclear processes happening at all. The true enrgy source could be something totally different. For all we know, maybe the zero point enrgy field is being tapped somehow. However, there are a few bits of info about the technology that seem to have remained true all along from the very start.
First, the reactor core must be heated to a certain temperature for the heat producing process to start.
Second, once this temperature is reached, radio frequency stimulation (100 watts worth powered an entire one megawatt plant) is enough to enhance them and keep them going. This seems to be a critical aspect of the technology.
Third, after the process is going with radio frequency stimulation, heat in the form of resistances somehow controls the reactions and makes sure they do not run away.
In the latest report, in the third test, it seems like the resistance heat and the radio frequency stimulation is taking place at the same time. Basically, I think the same coils are both emitting heat for control and radio frequencies for stimulation. However, in this test, soon after the radio frequencies are cut off, the temperature of the device drops. Intesrestingly, it does not drop as fast as it should, according to the report, so there still seem to be some minimal amount of reactions taking place.
In my opinion, this report is just more evidence the hot cat works. However, I sure wish we could see some data from a hot cat in a robust self sustain mode, in which the radio frequencies are not cut off and the temperature of the device stays the same or climbs for at least an hour. Such a feat would be totally impossible unless exotic processes are taking place in the device.
Please realize I may be wrong about my ideas of how the ECAT works. Part of me HATEs to speculate, because I realize I might be misleading people inadvertantly. But at the same time my curiosity about this technology is very high. Despite my efforts not to spend so much time thinking about it, I always come back to it.
Dear Gian:
Glazie.
Liposale quando molti, adesso
lavolale, lavolale!
Dear Herb Gillis:
No, the regulation made this way should be too weak, I think…but maybe I am wrong.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Steven N.Karels:
a- I think so
b- our loss of mass is so irrilevant, that weight does not change enough to make relevant the difference. As you correctly say, the other factors make totally useless consider this issue. Anyway, I do not see why not take the weight before and after, is not a problem.
c- Ithe difference that has been found during this test is so high that an increase will not change the validity of the evidence, but surely the longer the duration of the test, the higher the order of magnitude of the distance
d- the methodology that has been chosen is better because direct, not depending from the heat exchanger, which the measurement indirect. Commercially speaking, the situation is different, Customers are interested to the measurement of the efficiency of the plant. The test of the Professors had scientific purposes, not commercial. It has been different the test we made on April 30 through May 1 to validate the 1 MW plant for the Customer: it has been made measuring the fluid after the heat exchangers, for example, but that was a commercial test related to a plant of we supplied also the heat exchangers, therefore what was important was the efficiency of the plant, not of the mere E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear gian,
Thank you!
Kind Regards,
Martyn
Dear Serra Marco:
Good question.
The Report has been made with extreme conservativeness, because the Professors wanted to be convinced beyond any reasonable doubt of the result. All the margins of errors have been considered calculating the worst possible situation, the epsilon has been taken with the worst possible value for us, and the temperature has been chosen to guarantee the higher safety possible and higher possible stability. COP is proportional to the temperature. Every consideration favourable to us has been not considered, and the worst scenario has been considered. The test did not have any commercial purpose ( COP is a commercial issue) but only the purpose to understand beyond any possible error that the E-Cat produces energy in excess respect the energy introduced in it , producing not some Watthour, but an amount of many kWh in excess, to be sure that the excess of energy is real. In this sense, the Ragone diagram is an important index.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
One simple question:
Why the COP = 6 became a COP = 3 ?
Obviously, it is still a wonderfull result. I’m simply asking the reasons.
a – For stability reasons
b – For better exploit the heat produced
c – For optimal control of the reaction
d – confidential
Many thanx anyway for your work, even if you don’t answer.
Best regard
Marco
Dear Andrea Rossi,
There was mention in the Report about a planned 6 month test starting this summer. As I understand the Ragone Chart, the Peak Power density (W/kg) should not change by the test duration (6 months vs 100+ hours). However, the Specific Energy should increase linearly with the duration of the test.
a. Is this correct?
b. Would it not be prudent to weigh the eCat before and after the test period to determine the Peak Power density? We both know there are other reasons for mass loss (outgassing, humidity, etc) but it should give a maximum limit of the consumption of the “fuel”? Or alternatively, allow the independent testers to load and charge the cell they will be working with?
c. Assuming the eCat being tested maintains its output for 6 months, the Specific Energy should increase from approximately 6*10^^7 Wh/kg to about 2*10^^9 Wh/kg. Would not this more clearly differentiate the eCat power source from chemical methods?
d. Since the eCat that was tested is outputing around 800W, would not an alternative heat exchange mechanism be possible? Perhaps heating water from room temperature to something below boiling to preclude a phase change? Measure the beginning and ending temperatures and the flow rate to determine the heat generation? A long test using a different heat transfer mechanism than radiative heat (i.e., conductive) would go a long way in telling the eCat story. Opinions?
Dear Andrea Rossi:
The measurements of energy output from the hot-cat used in the 3rd party report were based on thermal radiation. With a view towards improving stability in operation and reducing the need for external heating in future designs; have you considered the possibility of isolating a reactor inside an evacuated outer vessel? The evacuated space would serve to eliminate most conductive and convective heat transfer, in favor of thermal radiative heat transfer. The outer wall of the evacuated vessel would then serve as the primary interface with a heat exchanger. Obviously this would require other changes (to maximize thermal radiation emission). However; do you think this general approach might enable the reactor to self-regulate (once the reaction is initiated in the usual way)?
Kind regards, and best of luck; HRG.
I agree with the considerations made by
Martyn Aubrey
May 23rd, 2013 at 9:33 AM
Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) and the Flywheel Effect.
SMART and USEFUL
Thank you Martyn
Andrea l’Italia ti ha nel cuore e tifa per te.
Auguri e vedi di trovare il modo per riposare un pò.
Lavolale e riposale.
Un abbraccio.
Dear Gian Luca:
Also in Italy it is very likely that the US Partner will maintain a manufacturing section. So we can save the jobs of our employees here. To cut jobs in this period is heartbreaking.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Cortese Andrea,
vista la Sua risposta alla mia domanda su (JONP e su ECATNEWS)….e
adesso cosa succede?….
http://ecatreport.com/andrearossi/andrea-rossi-whats-next
mi chiedevo se l'”HARD WORK in USA” non possa essere svolto anche
qui. In Italia.
So che Lei non ha un gran bel rapporto con le Istituzioni italiane ma
anche qui ci sono molte persone che credono in Lei, nel suo lavoro e che la
seguono con passione, da diversi anni, le Sue vicende.
Non crede che all’Italia (e agli italiani) sia da concedere una seconda CHANCE?
Nella speranza di non infastidirLa con queste domande
Cordialità vivissime
Gian Luca
Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
if the texts are short I can translate.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Steven N. Karels:
this is a very confidential issue,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Chris Beall:
1- correct
2- can accept single phase power
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Martyn Aubrey:
Thank you for your insight, I will reason upon it,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Maximum Power Transfer
Dear Dr. Rossi,
I agree with Koen Vandewalle (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=806&cpage=5#comment-700860) that the E-Cat would be more stable when it is operating with a proper load attached.
There are parallels with load matching for electrical power systems and transmission lines. Please look at the “Maximum Power Transfer Theorem” for details.
I am not sure exactly how this would work in relation to heat generation systems. Maybe the transfer rate of the heat exchanger has to match the rate at which the heat is generated in the source (i.e. the E-Cat), but I reckon that there must be a relevant common basis in these principles.
One electrical example of the effect of power transfer, that you will be very familiar with, is the variation of the output voltage of a battery or an AC/DC power generating set:
A disconnected battery or generator would have a high open-circuit output voltage when measured with a high impedance voltmeter. No current flows and there is zero power transferred. However, when the source is connected to a load resistance or impedance, the output voltage drops to the working level as current flows through the load and a voltage drop is created across it. Power is then developed in the load.
Likewise with the E-Cat, I expect that when the heat flows through the heat exchanger into the load, the output temperature may level off but the power transfer, in the form of heat, will stabilise.
I also wonder if it is possible that the heat exchanger could be analogous to an impedance matching transformer in an electrical circuit and could somehow be designed to match the E-Cat output to the load, to achieve maximum power (heat) transfer.
Parameters that could be varied to change the characteristics of the heat exchanger may include:
1. Having a different number of coils or pipes on the heat exchanger’s output (Secondary) to its input (Primary), in the same way that an electrical transformer can have a different number of input and output windings. Maybe even double secondary circuits for each primary.
2. Different diameter pipes for the primary and secondary heat exchange coils.
3. Different fluid flow rates through the primary and secondary coils of the heat exchanger.
4. A combination of 1, 2 and 3.
I suspect though, that your commercial partner is probably well ahead of me on this.
Sorry if this blog entry rambles a bit. These are just some wild ideas, but I hope they contain some potentially useful concepts.
Kind regards,
Martyn Aubrey
Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) and the Flywheel Effect
Dear Dr. Rossi,
A thought about the form of the heating signal sent to the Hot Cat, particularly during the start-up phase.
The signal used for the resistor coils ON/OFF cycle, as shown in the 3rd Party Report page 27 (Plot 7 and Plot 8), is a rectangular waveform with regular shaped pulses of constant maximum level, giving energy to the Hot Cat.
An idea that may allow more precise control of the energy delivered, would be to use a Pulse Width Modulation signal (PWM) and vary the width (time duration) of the pulses to adjust the amount of energy delivered in each pulse.
The regular rate (frequency) of the pulses would remain the same as the signal you are currently using (i.e. the waveform would still have the same start point for the rising (leading) edge of each pulse). However, the width of the pulse would be increased or decreased in proportion to the heating energy required.
e.g.
1. At start-up, a large amount of heat would be required to bring the E-Cat up to the working temperature for LENR to occur and the pulse width (length) would be long, maybe as much as 90-100% of the duty cycle.
2. As the E-Cat achieves LENR and requires less heat input, the pulse width can be reduced, possibly to 50-60% of the duty cycle.
3. When the E-Cat has reached its normal working temperature, the pulse width would then be reduced again to around 35%, the rate you have previously specified for the cat & mouse configuration (35% of cycle Activator ON, 65% of cycle Activator OFF).
These percentage figures are only examples, but I think they show the principle.
The overall effect would be like putting energy into a flywheel:
Large pushes are needed to start the wheel rotating, less as it speeds up, but only small taps to keep it rotating at speed.
Again, many congratulations on your continuing excellent work.
I’m looking forward to the day (later this year perhaps?) when I read on your blog that the first Hot Cat (& Mouse) 1MW plant is up and running with a customer. That will be another truly momentous event!
Kind regards,
Martyn Aubrey
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Thank you for your answer to my question on the HT2 resistor hookup. Paging back and forth through the report, I had, as you surmised, confused the description in one section with the photo in another.
1. Referring again to Figure 10, I deduce that the white wire connected to the device provides some sort of feedback to the controller, so that it can adjust the duty cycle (or perhaps the waveform) of the power being delivered to the resistors. Is this correct? If not, what is the function of the white wire?
2. In the HT2 test, the input to the controller is 3-phase. Is this a requirement or could the controller be designed to accept single-phase power? I am thinking here of what is typically available in US residential buildings.
Regards,
Chris Beall
Dear Andrea Rossi,
In the past, you have made reference to certain control techniques to maintain the energy generation (and therefore the Reactor temperature) of the Reactor. This includes:
a. temperature – originally controlled by electric resistive wires/resistors – it seems there is some minimum Reactor temperature and then it is unclear as to if the control slope (with temperature) is positive or negative (e.g., increasing temperature results in more Reactor power output)?
b. Some form of frequencies (radio?) applied during the Reactor operation – either modulated or turned on/off for control. Can you clarify this form of control?
c. Are there other forms of control you can discuss? (ultrasonics, soft radiation?)
Privato.
Scusi,avevo fretta e non ho tradotto in inglese.
Saluti G G
Dear Francesco:
Thank you for your trust.
For sure the small amounts of nickel we buy will not modify the value of the commodities. I am not able to give suggestions of this kind.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
True; besides, without the endorsement ( as a matter of fact a peer review) of one of the Physics well known by the Cornell University an article is not published on arXiv.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Ai lettori,in particolare italiani,riguardo alla pubblicazione su arXiv.
La Cornell university è una prestigiosa università statunitense,con antica tradizione tanto che da essa prese i natali nel 1893 la rivista Physical Review di prestigio primario a livello mondiale.
To the Readers: arXiv is menaged my Cornell University, among the most prestigious Universities in the USA, with an ancient tradition: in 1893 Cornell University founded the magazine Physical Review, considered one of the most important physical magazines in the World.
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Review
Dear Dr. Rossi,
I’d like to bet on the success of your invention.
What would you suggest me to invest on?
Buying nickel? I guess it wouldn’t be very much profitable. It shouldn’t increase in price. Any other materials/products?
Buying some stock option? some company that directly or indirectly would benefit from the spreading of this technology? for example, a company that produces a component/material that among other uses, it’s used in the production line of e-cat? a company that provides a service which directly or indirectly will increase its profits?
Anything else?
Thanks for your time
francesco
Dear Herb Gills:
The ssm and the stability of the reactor do not depend on the control of the temperature of the fluid within the range of the fluid during the operation. I cannot elaborate more, because this involves confidential information.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Rosemary Ainslie:
The affirmation of a technology does not depend from the media recognizement, but the media recognizement depends from the affirmation of the technology.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
p.s. “Affirmation” in this case means diffusion in the market
Dear Carloluna:
No, I did not.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Larry Jameson,
It is not yet arrived.
Warm Regards,
A.R.