10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[ScottL]

tomclarke,

My point is that he can give UL any old bit of metal which he claims is a production prototype e-cat, get them to look at it, gain PR which will help the money to stay rolling in.

Sigh.

Once you state something you can't give it up no matter that even you find it is wrong.

UL would not accept "any old bit of metal" and the test is expensive and time consuming. Your delusion leads you to think someone would (or could) spend the money for a UL test on an old piece of metal and that would somehow convince large savvy investors not to test the device before parting with their money. That's ludicrous.

Next you will be telling us again that UL only tests for safety as if we didn't know that already.

Is there a timeframe on when these certs should be obtained? I know the current claim is to go commercial late this year and I find it likely that certs will be required to do so. Any word?

[cgray45]

Looking at What Rossi has supposedly said, which changes, much like the wind, we have:

Cold Fusion Now (represented by Ruby Carat) interviewed Rossi in his office in Florida on March 2nd; the interview covered various themes and one of the themes touched on was the safety certifications. Rossi, never quite free, to answer all questions openly, linked the certifications with the production line at the robotized factory where E-Cat devices are going to be manufactured: “The day when we will start the production is also bound to the day when we will be certified.” He further commented this relationship between the two by saying that they “cannot start a production before knowing what [they] have to produce and how [they] have to produce it, so [they] have to wait a little bit” for the UL’s final word, because their word will define what E-Cat is going to be like safety-wise. And since they are the ones with the final word, it would be the waste of time and effort and funds doing anything until they are given the green light from the UL. That there will be changes necessary, there is no doubt when it comes to the inventor: “… of course, we will have to make adjustments when we have the directions of the certificators.”

(from: http://rossidevice.com/andrea-rossi/ros ... ifications)

So we've got the amazing robot factory again. Most automated factories, take a lot of engineers and have to pass OSHA standards, and yet we hear nothing. Rather...strange, isn't it.

Not only that, and even more amusingly, robot factories are not nanotech fabrication units-- you have to have an idea what you're building when you put the factory together....and supposedly the E-cat hasn't even been checked by UL yet? A bit suspicious, no?

Interestingly enough, Rossi now claims that his amazing magic box (TM) produces no gamma rays whatsoever.
Except he also states here:

Andrea Rossi: The E-Cat machine is basically a heater. It uses a secret catalyser to fuse hydrogen and nickel together to form copper. Copper has a lower energy state than Nickel, and the excess energy is released in the form of a gamma ray. The gamma ray hits a wall of lead where it is absorbed and transformed into heat. The whole process is incredibly efficient and can heat any fluid that passes through the machine.

(http://oilprice.com/Interviews/The-Limi ... Rossi.html)

Now, we have a problem, because if you're punching out enough gamma rays to actually heat the water as he claims the device is, this isn't a home device. Not at all, never gonna happen, because you're punching out enough gamma rays to get into the "Drop dead now" is anything happens to a unit when its running using the MAgic Pixie Dust (TM) component.
Not only that, but if the gamma rays are the heating element, we know he's a fraud, end of argument, because that silly-ass foil wouldn't stop high energy rays. Determining how much gamma radiation it would take to heat a lead blanket to the level to produce 1MW or even .5MW worth of thermal energy isn't that hard, and it doesn't present a very promising picture.

[tomclarke]

Looking at What Rossi has supposedly said, which changes, much like the wind, we have:

Cold Fusion Now (represented by Ruby Carat) interviewed Rossi in his office in Florida on March 2nd; the interview covered various themes and one of the themes touched on was the safety certifications. Rossi, never quite free, to answer all questions openly, linked the certifications with the production line at the robotized factory where E-Cat devices are going to be manufactured: “The day when we will start the production is also bound to the day when we will be certified.” He further commented this relationship between the two by saying that they “cannot start a production before knowing what [they] have to produce and how [they] have to produce it, so [they] have to wait a little bit” for the UL’s final word, because their word will define what E-Cat is going to be like safety-wise. And since they are the ones with the final word, it would be the waste of time and effort and funds doing anything until they are given the green light from the UL. That there will be changes necessary, there is no doubt when it comes to the inventor: “… of course, we will have to make adjustments when we have the directions of the certificators.”

(from: http://rossidevice.com/andrea-rossi/ros ... ifications)

So we've got the amazing robot factory again. Most automated factories, take a lot of engineers and have to pass OSHA standards, and yet we hear nothing. Rather...strange, isn't it.

Not only that, and even more amusingly, robot factories are not nanotech fabrication units-- you have to have an idea what you're building when you put the factory together....and supposedly the E-cat hasn't even been checked by UL yet? A bit suspicious, no?

Interestingly enough, Rossi now claims that his amazing magic box (TM) produces no gamma rays whatsoever.
Except he also states here:

Andrea Rossi: The E-Cat machine is basically a heater. It uses a secret catalyser to fuse hydrogen and nickel together to form copper. Copper has a lower energy state than Nickel, and the excess energy is released in the form of a gamma ray. The gamma ray hits a wall of lead where it is absorbed and transformed into heat. The whole process is incredibly efficient and can heat any fluid that passes through the machine.

(http://oilprice.com/Interviews/The-Limi ... Rossi.html)

Now, we have a problem, because if you're punching out enough gamma rays to actually heat the water as he claims the device is, this isn't a home device. Not at all, never gonna happen, because you're punching out enough gamma rays to get into the "Drop dead now" is anything happens to a unit when its running using the MAgic Pixie Dust (TM) component.
Not only that, but if the gamma rays are the heating element, we know he's a fraud, end of argument, because that silly-ass foil wouldn't stop high energy rays. Determining how much gamma radiation it would take to heat a lead blanket to the level to produce 1MW or even .5MW worth of thermal energy isn't that hard, and it doesn't present a very promising picture.

It is funny. Connect the dots on any of Rossi's statements and you get nonsense. Yet there are some who continue to apologoise for him.

Reading the above it seems possible to me that the whole UL cert issue is raised by Rossi as a way of seeming close to production without actually having any evidence of real production.

[tomclarke]

tomclarke,

My point is that he can give UL any old bit of metal which he claims is a production prototype e-cat, get them to look at it, gain PR which will help the money to stay rolling in.

Sigh.

Once you state something you can't give it up no matter that even you find it is wrong.

UL would not accept "any old bit of metal" and the test is expensive and time consuming. Your delusion leads you to think someone would (or could) spend the money for a UL test on an old piece of metal and that would somehow convince large savvy investors not to test the device before parting with their money. That's ludicrous.

Next you will be telling us again that UL only tests for safety as if we didn't know that already.

Parallel,

Your analysis, as always, is based on the idea that what Rossi says will happen. Now were rossi a normal person, talking to UL engineers, you would reckon this is because they want UL cert and therefore this will happen.

However this is Rossi, and his statements (take my 4 statements above as example) don't mean what you think. They sound good, and turn out provably to mean nothing.

So in this case I have no expectation Rossi will ever get UL cert. It takes time, and negotiation. He is currently saying that the "final" prototype will depend on what are the safety issues. That looks good for a fair delay.

Of course, if he could get enough extra money from donations on strength of UL certification he might well go for that. It is a LOT easier to get a nice looking box UL certified than to make a working E-cat, and Rossi has not in the past worried abut niceties of regulation (dumping tons of toxic waste in Italy).

Just try and give Rossi's statements the caution most of us do, and you will find your assumptions collapse.

[KitemanSA]

UL engineers do not need working prototype. For example, any of Rossi's demo devices, which did not work, would suffice. UL is about safety, not performance.

Funny, I thought UL was about safety of a performing unit.

I HOPE no UL tester would pass a unit rated to 25kW output seeing only 0.5kW input and 0.5kW output. How would he know that the unit at RATED load was safe?

(1) UL will test safety, not, I believe operating performance. But they have many categoies, I'm willing to be corrected in specific cases.

(2) Rossi can give them a prototype which he claims is working and they can certify it safe. that says nothing about whether it actually works.

(3) I doubt very much UL would do calorimetry on output to determine output power, unless operating output power was part of tests.

There may indeed be some issue with UL listing of thee since there are two "Operating Load"s. First is the max rated input power, second is the max rated output power. Since this is a heat production unit, the safety of such units is related to the pressure and temperature of the working fluids. I suspect that the UL folk would require some indication that the max rated P&T of the working fluid had been achieved. But, maybe they are stupid.
then again, maybe this is being done by a fraudster and what is being "listed" is the electronic control box. If he implies that listing covers the whole thing, then there would be proof of fraud.

[tomclarke]

Funny, I thought UL was about safety of a performing unit.

I HOPE no UL tester would pass a unit rated to 25kW output seeing only 0.5kW input and 0.5kW output. How would he know that the unit at RATED load was safe?

(1) UL will test safety, not, I believe operating performance. But they have many categoies, I'm willing to be corrected in specific cases.

(2) Rossi can give them a prototype which he claims is working and they can certify it safe. that says nothing about whether it actually works.

(3) I doubt very much UL would do calorimetry on output to determine output power, unless operating output power was part of tests.

There may indeed be some issue with UL listing of thee since there are two "Operating Load"s. First is the max rated input power, second is the max rated output power. Since this is a heat production unit, the safety of such units is related to the pressure and temperature of the working fluids. I suspect that the UL folk would require some indication that the max rated P&T of the working fluid had been achieved. But, maybe they are stupid.
then again, maybe this is being done by a fraudster and what is being "listed" is the electronic control box. If he implies that listing covers the whole thing, then there would be proof of fraud.

No more proof of fraud than Rossi implying he would get NASA to test his box and then asking them $1,000,000 for the privilege of doing so. Or Rossi implying he has an e-cat factory in US when he did not.

I've noticed that Roosi's statements are interpreted when made in a very strong fashion, after this is proved false they are than reinterpreted as meaning the minimum possible.

[KitemanSA]

Interestingly enough, Rossi now claims that his amazing magic box (TM) produces no gamma rays whatsoever.
Except he also states here:

Andrea Rossi: The E-Cat machine is basically a heater. It uses a secret catalyser to fuse hydrogen and nickel together to form copper. Copper has a lower energy state than Nickel, and the excess energy is released in the form of a gamma ray. The gamma ray hits a wall of lead where it is absorbed and transformed into heat. The whole process is incredibly efficient and can heat any fluid that passes through the machine.

(http://oilprice.com/Interviews/The-Limi ... Rossi.html)

I fail to see where "no gamma rays whatsoever" is mentioned anywhere. Is this a case where you are mis-quoting for effect? Specific quote please.

Now, we have a problem, because if you're punching out enough gamma rays to actually heat the water as he claims the device is, this isn't a home device. Not at all, never gonna happen, because you're punching out enough gamma rays to get into the "Drop dead now" is anything happens to a unit when its running using the MAgic Pixie Dust (TM) component.
Not only that, but if the gamma rays are the heating element, we know he's a fraud, end of argument, because that silly-ass foil wouldn't stop high energy rays.

Which proves that EITHER he is a fraud OR he is incorrect about how the energy is converted.

Determining how much gamma radiation it would take to heat a lead blanket to the level to produce 1MW or even .5MW worth of thermal energy isn't that hard, and it doesn't present a very promising picture.

Very true, if the energy is indeed released as single high energy gammas. If coupled into a high number polariton, it may present as a large number of very LOW energy gamma. Actually, at that point it would be electrons creating the EM so x-rays. Low energy x-rays might be stopped by that amount of lead.

[seedload]

Kiteman,

I am curious about what has made you change your mind about Rossi. Previously, you were 50/50 as to whether this was a fraud/real ("teetering"). Previously, you all but ruled out delusion.

I am kind of teetering on the fence between real and scam. If this is delusion, it seems to need to be MASS delusion. Still possible, but less likely.

Now you believe he is most likely a fraud and consider legitimacy to be a SMALL likelihood.

Me? I think Rossi is a fraud. And a very good one. I believe this game has gone on longer than EEStor.

I tend to agree with your "thought" except I haven't ruled out delusion nor a SMALL likelihood that he might be on to something.
...

Apparently, everything anyone else says on this board that indicates that Rossi is being deceptive is dismissed by one justification or another. If everyone else is wrong then you have to have something else that is leading you to no longer believe him.

What have YOU seen that made YOU change YOUR mind?

Previously, you objected to my use of the term 'miracle' in relation to Rossi's supposed LENR. Now you use it yourself.

...
I "think" he is a fraud or a megalomaniac, or maybe just with a very remote likelihood a miracle might be happening and he might be right.

What have YOU seen that makes YOU consider a legitimate Rossi reactor to be a miracle?

Please, if we are all so logically inept that you need to continuously correct our logical mistakes, please provide us with the correct logic that has led you from giving Rossi as much as a 50% chance of being legit to now only having a "remote likelihood" of being legit.

Or, are you only able to argue the opposite side to your own conclusions?

[ladajo]

tomclarke,

UL will test safety, not, I believe operating performance. But they have many categoies, I'm willing to be corrected in specific cases.

Even though in an earlier post you admitted you were wrong, you still try to wiggle out of it in most unbecoming ways.

How do you suppose UL tests a device that produces considerable energy without checking the safety precautions to stop it overheating or even blowing up, under adverse conditions? Not to mention checking the radiation level.

Secondly, you appear ignorant that NOTHING on the sample can be changed after approval? The test has to be performed on an example of the production device for the UL stamp to be valid.

As you clearly know nothing about UL procedures and further state you can't be bothered to look them up, why do you write about them?

The issue Rossi faces with UL is what Standard(s) he will certify against.

Some exising will apply, but I maintain they will need to writ eup some new one(s) to cover his device. That means additional time and money just to get the standards drafted and accepted. Then, he would be tested against them.

The other issue he will face, is as a "home appliance", it must be tested for efficiency and rated. Now that will be intersting indeed.

As for what get tested and when. Rossi will have toprovide several samples for standards testing. UL will also send enigneers to his "factory" to inpsect the produticon line, and verify that it will produce devices to the standards certed. They will also preiodically revisit the line to verify that the line continues to meet the standards. In these visits they will take random samples to test again. All of this comes out of Rossi's pocket.
In order to maintain the UL certification, he must comply with this process.

I predict Rossi will use this "development drama" in order to further his timeline and "investiment take". It will never be his fault, but that of the 'system' conspiring to keep him from market.

I remain VERY curious as to what customer(s)/Company would buy and install uncertified experimental equipment of this type in a normal run application, without some serious liability coverage. But according to Rossi, he has sold more than one 1MW. The first of course being to a US Military component, as it is installed and operating here in the US Northeast (according to Rossi).

[ladajo]

It really is a shame that Rossi has clearly stated before the entire Florida Fiasco that he had a up and running factory here in the states producing Ecats. More than once.

Reality sucks for you, doesn't it?

First, I do recall having seen statements that Rossi had a Factory in Florida "for the production of E-Cats" (IIRC). Boeing maintains factories around the world "for the production" of their 777 and other planes. That doesn't mean that the ENTIRE item was manufactured at each an every plant.

Second, even if the factory in Florida did manufacture complete E-Cats before the discussions between Rossi and the Florida BRC, why is that necessarily a contradiction? What exactly did the BRC report state? IIRC, it said something along the lines of "all production is CURRENTLY" in Europe.

Third, given the appearant mission of the FBRC, the case may have devolved into "not producing reactors / radioactive material per our charter. Production of any such reactors are currently in Europe ... if anywhere. Any future plans to build in Florida subject to UL listing. Not our issue. "

So,
WERE built in the US (maybe)
Factory in US being totally revamped for major "home unit" production" during which time FBRC interview when the message was transmitted "not CURRENTLY in the US" but plans to produce in future.

And the lie is?

That Rossi has previously several times stated in clear and direct terms that he IS ALREADY making and selling Ecats in the US. And, also that many are already installed and operating.

Look it up. I am tired of spoon feeding.

[ladajo]

April 14th, 2012 at 4:00 PM
Dear Frank Acland:
We have already made all the engineering of the production line in the two factories we will set up (one in the USA, one in Europe) and we will have just to set up the software of the robots and fix the drawings after the requirements of the Certificators. I think that it will take from 6 to 12 months afer the certifications will be done to start the production.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

April 14th, 2012 at 3:50 AM
Dear Daniele Poponi,
I agree with you.
The certification process is going on. By the way, yesterday I spent all the day with the certification engineers and we made substantial progress. In this very moment I am working at my desk to make the paper work they asked me yesterday. It will take all today (Saturday) and tomorrow (Sunday), just to give you an idea of our endeavours on this issue.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

To do anything with UL you have to have the final working prototype for them to test. So either he does have something or it would be proof of lying. I think he has something.

Actually, you need to supply them a number of samples. The standards testing is destructive.

[ladajo]

tomclarke,

In Rossi-speak, this means at most that he has started to fill out some forms for UL testing. That requires no working hardware. When somone contacts UL and they confirm they have never received any hardware you will be the first to make such a reinterpretation and thus claim that Rossi is no liar.

You continue to be delusional. You don't meet with the UL engineers to fill out the application form.

In Rossi's case he will. They will need to develop new standards before actuall testing can proceed.

[ladajo]

Dear Herb Gills:
Today we sold in the USA a 1 MW plant which will go to a normal Customer. This installation will be visitable by the qualified public.
We wait to have completed the contractual procedure through the attorneys, then we will give communication. It will be in the North East of the USA, where I have been in these days.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... ent-133743

[ladajo]

Dear Matthew:
There is a typo: WE ARE MANUFACTURING 13 1MW THERMAL PLANTS LIKE THE ONE TESTED ON THE 28TH OF OCTOBER.
This is the correct version.
Warm Regards.
A.R.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... ent-123165

[ladajo]

Dear Andrea Rossi,

When do you intend to start production in the USA?

Sincerely,
Iggy Dalrymple

Andrea Rossi

November 1st, 2011 at 3:35 AM

Dear Iggy Dalrymple:
Already did. The charges are already made in the USA. Of course the work is in progress.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... ent-107829