LENR Is Real

[parallel]

To repeat myself, the facts about the 1 MW plant are not yet known so it is premature to come to a conclusion.

It doesn't take pages to make the point. With the 1 MW plant is easy to measure the water flow and electric power input. If the output is steam the heat content depends on the wetness. If the temperature is high enough (say 120C) it is dry. If it is lower some other way must be used to determine the wetness. It is fairly straightforward. We don't know what the exit temperature was. Without that anything else is speculation.

Tom, years ago on the eestory blog I formalized your comments into what became known as Tom's First Law. "LENR is impossible so any reading of anomalous heat is measurement error."
With that background some doubt your lack of bias.
(As an aside, do you still believe the IPCC computer models are correct? A yes or no is sufficient.)

[ladajo]

I would really be happy if a guy like "Dewey Weaver", who is currently conducting Information Operations at the LENR forum, would take notice of a real science project in search of funding, such as..., ummm..., oh yes, Polywell!
It would be nice to see Industrial Heat / Deep River type investors pick up EMC2, or at least get in a room and talk.

Oh well, apparently Rossiclown was a shiny toy, soon to be cast aside as it was of low quality and fell apart upon real usage.

To repeat myself, the facts about the 1 MW plant are not yet known so it is premature to come to a conclusion.

ROTFLMAO!!!!

This is new, and too funny: "To repeat myself, I now accept uncertainty."
Truly funny given how certain you have been before about Rossiclown's shit working.

Would you like for me to roll out a plethora of quotes from you expressing certainty? It would be fun!

[ladajo]

If the temperature is high enough (say 120C) it is dry

Once again, you have expressed eloquently that you don't know what you are talking about.

Steam temperature is a function of pressure. Quality of Steam is another factor.
You really need to learn how to read a steam table.

[parallel]

ladjoLiar,
I am assuming the pressure was about atmospheric. Of course it would be different if higher.
As the trolls have made so many confusing comments, let me clarify my position. I believe the E-Cat works but the COP is uncertain.

[ladajo]

An 'oh, by the way', that you Rossibots do not fundamentally understand in steam engineering is that "Dry" steam or, actually 'Superheated' steam as it is known to those of us with professional training, sucks ass for heat transfer, and is the last thing you would want for a process heat source. Those types of applications are much better served by saturated steam, given the greater ease of extracting enthalpy of evaporation.
If that didn't make sense to you, then think of it as the need to 'cool' superheat first to then access the saturation zone, verses extracting directly the heat of vaporization (which is where most of the energy is stored).

Just saying.

Now, if you are doing phase change calorimetry, you would want to be very low superheat, or just across saturation curve for the given pressure.

The better answer is to do single phase calorimetry. Which would completely undermine Rossiclown's magic trick, where he claims full generation of energy to reach saturated vapor, when in fact, he is not. If you doubt, please be reminded of the Krivit videos showing Rossiclown dumping water AND steam down the drain. No chance that steam had reached the curve.

And again, the easiest way to know you are superheated, is to look at the press/temp curve, and make sure you are on the correct side.

[ladajo]

ladjoLiar,
I am assuming the pressure was about atmospheric. Of course it would be different if higher.
As the trolls have made so many confusing comments, let me clarify my position. I believe the E-Cat works but the COP is uncertain.

Really? So you still don't understand how to do it.
Lets start with a fundamental: How can you assume atmospheric for the Rossiclown device?
I invite you to examine diagrams and photos of these "tested" devices in action.

Please also recall, that if you wish to base your argument on the idea that the Krivit video shows steam (AND water) coming out of the output hose to the drain, and that therefore that is "atmospheric", you are missing the point that the boiling chamber was not at the end of the hose.
And, this matters not, as Rossiclown never measured "120C" for his early testing at atmospheric. Rossiclown has no idea what superheat is or how to get there. If he did, then he would have been faking the temp and pressure to show superheat. Interestingly, he is pretty thin on output pressure isn't he?
So, given that there was steam AND water coming out of the drain, can you claim that the steam was superheated and thus 100% quality?
(I'll help you out here to save you from potentially embarrassing yourself again; "NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT")
The only way for Rossiclown to better argue his case would have been to remove the output drain line, and show ONLY steam coming out of the chamber, which if visible, would immediately counter that it was superheated. And then, he would still need get a temp & pressure in order to show superheat, which he never has!
I wonder why? Maybe because he couldn't?

[ladajo]

I believe the E-Cat works but the COP is uncertain.

Again, another backpedal. Would you like me to show you where you have insisted what the COP is? Or would that be embarrassing as well?

[ladajo]

One more point to help you out: at atmospheric, water can pick up about 950 BTU/lb before it superheats with an entropy of about 1.78.
So say you superheat it another 46F (20C), then it would only pick up about 25 BTU/lb, for a total estimated 975BTU/lb with an entropy pushing 1.8.

My numbers are not exact, but certainly close enough for government work.

[parallel]

ladajoLiar, you have not falsified even one of my comments. You are so dumb it is not worth the time to educate you. Trolls like you waste everybodys time.

Jones Beene wrote this on Vortex.
"Most observers of the LENR/nickel hydride scene are unaware of the details of the Thermacore, Inc. runaway reaction back in 1996.

Unfortunately, this was the last effort that this company made in the field, and the main reason that they dropped LENR. The incident echoes other thermal runaways, including P&F, Mizuno, Mark Snoswell in Australia and Ahern. However, it was far more energetic than any of the prior incidents.

This was to have been an powered experiment but they never had time to apply input power. This was was a follow-on to a Phase one grant from USAF (document in LENR-CANR library) and was simply intended to be an analysis the absorption reaction of a large amount of nickel powder and hydrogen at modest pressure. Instead, it was likely the most energetic single event in the history of LENR.

Recently, Brian Ahern has been in contact with Nelson Gernert, the chief researcher in the new Thermacore (having gone through two changes of ownership) who was also in charge of the runaway. None of this has appeared in print before.

Gernert added 2.5 pounds of nickel powder (200 mesh of Ni-200) into a 3 liter stainless steel Dewar. The Dewar weighed 300 pounds. It was a strong pressure vessel with a hemispherical volume. Thermacore evacuated the nickel under vacuum for several days before adding H2 gas at 2 atmospheres (apparently there was no potassium but this detail needs to be verified).

The most amazing thing happened next. The powder immediately and spontaneously heated before external power could be added. The Dewar glowed orange (800C) and the engineers ran for cover. No external heat had been used and no radiation monitors were running. The nickel had sintered into a glob alloyed into the vessel and could not be removed.

The (then) owner of Thermacore, Yale Eastman was frightened that an explosion was imminent and that someone could be killed. He forbade any further work on LENR. The incident was not published.

The Dewar was no longer safe as a pressure vessel and they junked it. They did not measure it for radiation. Superficial thermal analysis - 3 liters of H2 gas at 2 atmosphere will have a heat of combustion of 74 kilojoules when combined with oxygen (but there was no oxygen in the Dewar).

Heating a 300 lb Stainless vessel to 800C requires 21 megajoules. That is ostensibly 289 times the possible chemical energy!"

[ladajo]

And this has what to do with Rossiclown?

We are not discussing LENR in general, we are discussing Rossiclown.

I just showed that you do not know what you are talking about in regard to steam engineering.
I also just proved to you that Rossi is full of shit (again).

Why are you trying to change the topic? Did I embarrass you?
Every day you find another way to make yourself look stupid. It is amusing!

Please stay and play!

[paperburn1]

So your saying that no one has duplicated or even come close to the most energetic reaction ever recorded?
second question
I have a Dewar cup that holds 32 oz, It weighs 6 oz, why would one need to weigh 300 pounds. heck ,even a Dewar rated to 5000 psi and holds 5 gallons only weighs about 100 pounds ish
The container holding 3 liters (less than a gallon) would have to contain 900 cubic inches of steel to weigh that much so the container was 5ish inches thick
all number back of envelope calculation accurate only to three beers.

[ladajo]

When I was much younger and dragging Dewers around, even full of N2, I could move it by myself.

[parallel]

ladajoLiar said: ""Dry" steam or, actually 'Superheated' steam as it is known to those of us with professional training,"

us with professional training? You are an anonymous troll whose "professional" training looks like it was by a kindergarten teacher. Dry steam is saturated steam that has been superheated a little to ensure there are no water droplets, as someone familiar with the subject would know. Others may recall that was the criticism with some of Rossi's earlier demos - that the steam may have been wet, giving an error in the heat calculation.

Also the subject and title of the thread is "LENR is Real" not something about Rossi made up by the lying troll.

[ladajo]

Dry steam is saturated steam that has been superheated a little to ensure there are no water droplets, as someone familiar with the subject would know. ...
...the steam may have been wet, giving an error in the heat calculation.

YOU REALLY ARE LOST ON THIS!!!!
HAHAHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

JUST WHEN I THOUGHT YOU COULDN'T LOOK MORE STUPID!!!!!

ROTFLAPMGO!!!!!

[ladajo]

Okay, now I have stopped rolling around on the floor, and settled down a bit <giggle>, I can help you out a little more <snicker>.

In the business, we would say "saturated vapor". Go ahead, try it Parallel, "saturated vapor". This is something I mentioned above.
One more time, "saturated vapor". Good job!
Now, "saturated vapor", is the technical term for 100% quality steam, which can also technically be called "superheated steam", even though, at that point, it is not actually superheated, just 100% quality. The reason we allow this term to have some fungibility, is that is REALLY STINKIN' HARD to hold steam at exactly the saturated vapor point, inevitably, you end up over the line. Which, is okay, as I showed you above, a little superheat, doesn't change to steam properties much at all.

Please don't make me laugh so hard I puke again, it really does hurt.

Tomorrow we will about steam entropy.