Posting in an E-Cat thread!
Posted on 06/02/2013 7:17:12 PM PDT by Kevmo
Has the E-Cat been proven to work?
5.23.2013 | by Mike Weaver
In the world of LENR or cold fusion, one cannot help but come across Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat device. Rossi claims to harness LENR or cold fusion via a nickel-hydrogen process to produce excess thermal energy in his energy catalyzer. On May 20th, a report on independent testing of the E-Cat HT device was released. Let’s take a look!(updated 5-23-13 14:39EST)
First off, the reading list: ■The Report ■An article at ExtremeTech about the report ■An article at eCat News on the report
The report is billed as independent verification that the E-Cat device produces anomalous heat at levels far higher than can be accounted for by the energy inputs. At first blush, the report is quite interesting. The authors tested E-Cat HT devices in two experimental runs, 96 hours and 116 hours in length each performed in December 2012 and March 2013 respectively. Each test run produced anomalous heat output. I liked that they ran an E-Cat without “fuel” as a control during the 116 hour test and showed that it did not produce any heat beyond what was expected from the internal heating elements. The report references an earlier test made in November of 2012 which resulted in catastrophic failure of the E-Cat device.
The tests held in December 2012 and March 2013 are in fact subsequent to a previous attempt in November 2012 to make accurate measurements on a similar model of the E-Cat HT on the same premises. In that experiment the device was destroyed in the course of the experimental run, when the steel cylinder containing the active charge overheated and melted. The partial data gathered before the failure, however, yielded interesting results which warranted further in-depth investigation in future tests. Although the run was not successful as far as obtaining complete data is concerned, it was fruitful in that it demonstrated a huge production of excess heat, which however could not be quantified. The device used had similar, but not identical, features to those of the E-Cat HT used in the December and March runs.[1]
The device used for the November test is shown in these images.
If the thermal camera is correct, that is quite warm, indeed.
The key characteristic of the devices used appears to be heating elements with a core of “powder charge” which is the fuel.
As in the original E-Cat, the reaction is fueled by a mixture of nickel, hydrogen, and a catalyst, which is kept as an industrial trade secret. The charge sets off the production of thermal energy after having been activated by heat produced by a set of resistor coils located inside the reactor. Once operating temperature is reached, it is possible to control the reaction by regulating the power to the coils.[1]
Interesting stuff. I did see an item that troubled me somewhat, however.
It was not possible to evaluate the weight of the internal steel cylinder or of the caps because the ECat HT was already running when the test began. Weighing operations were therefore performed on another perfectly similar device present on the premises, comparing a cap-sealed cylinder containing the active charge with another identical cylinder, empty and without caps. The difference in weight obtained is 0.236 kg: this is therefore to be assigned to the charge loaded into the E-Cat HT and to the weight (not subtracted in the present test) of the two metal caps.[1]
Why weren’t they able to weigh the actual test device? How did they know that the one they did weigh was exactly identical? While this may not be a real issue, it continues to reinforce the impression that Rossi gives of possible shenanigans. A little thing, perhaps, but it does trouble me.
The report goes on to detail the methods used to gather data and the data itself. I have no real issue with any of this, and, frankly, I’m probably not qualified to judge a lot of it on its face. I am curious as to why they used estimates of energy output based upon thermal camera imaging. I would have thought that a calorimeter-style setup would have been far more precise and useful. Immerse the device (or the device + heat-tolerant, waterproof shell) into a container of water, seal the lid, and measure the temperature of the water over time. Easy, simple, precise measurement of energy output. Far simpler and less prone to confounders than their estimates and secondary measurement techniques. While I’m sure there was a good reason, again, it bothers me.
The report concludes:
The results obtained indicate that energy was produced in decidedly higher quantities than what may be gained from any conventional source.[1]
And
Even from the standpoint of a “blind” evaluation of volumetric energy density, if we consider the whole volume of the reactor core and the most conservative figures on energy production, we still get a value of (7.93 ± 0.8) 102 MJ/Liter that is one order of magnitude higher than any conventional source.[1]
Hrm. Interesting. The claim is that, not only did the E-Cat produce excess energy, it did so in such a way that the energy density of the “fuel” would be at least an order of magnitude higher than any conventional source. This report is interesting and it does provide evidence for the E-Cat and perhaps for LENR as a whole. I look forward to the scientific community’s response to this and, most importantly, to see if it can be replicated by an independent research group. Preferably without Rossi or his people controlling the experimental conditions.
Update 5-23-13 14:49EST: Came across this blog with a good analysis of the report. Give it a look, Ethan Siegel makes some very good points that I missed.
Be well
[1] http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1305/1305.3913.pdf
Install one offsite, let it run, and see what happens. As long as Rossi keeps playing these “look but don’t touch” games, it’ll never be more than a protracted parlor illusion.
Sounds encouraging. Rossi et al should set up a blind test and let the chips fall where they may. This secrecy crap is geting old, either it works or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t work, end the kabuki theater and go back to the drawing board. The only way he’s ever going to make money on LENR is to prove it works and go to market.
Pay no attention to the man behind the mirror....
If Rossi does that, his intellectual property is very likely to be stolen. He claims he’s sending units to paying customers, so he may yet already be “Installing one offsite, let it run, and see what happens.” If he’s been pushing snake oil this whole time, those customers will be squawking very loudly right about now.
The only way he’s ever going to make money on LENR is to prove it works and go to market.
***He may have found a way to protect his industrial secret and yet sell to customers willing to pay. Why should he care if people who are never going to buy one of his units within the next 5 years says, “This secrecy crap is geting old”?
How are they going to respond if they never see it? The "report" is unpublishable.
and, most importantly, to see if it can be replicated by an independent research group.
In other words, the current group isn't independent.
Let me know when they are available at Home Depot or Sears.
No.
He's making money by selling distribution rights. He'll never have to produce a working device to make money.
oh, you again
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
Seems this gets posted about every day. Is there some reason for promoting this? Is someone hoping to find investors?
I remember reading about this well over a year ago. Seems it’s on FR almost every day.
because the USPTO does not grant patents in this area of research
Don't you think that if someone had actually invented a device that would end the world's energy problems that he'd want it to be independently tested? Once tested he'd then then collect billions upon billions of investment dollars to put the device into production....
I work with thermal cameras, and on most of them, especially the more sophisticated ones, you can play all sorts of games with calibration, emissivity scale, etc.
IOW, I wouldn't take the temp in the photo as necessarily representative of actual temps reached.
Posting in an E-Cat thread!
There you go LYING again. They DO give patents.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=WhIgAgAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=%22Low+Energy+Nuclear+Reaction%22&source=bl&ots=Xuf1yRH2vB&sig=142QFcoB_2WmhjeCiLVn9AuUGlU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qEROUKH4JsjSrQHKmIGoBw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ&goback=.gde_4132340_member_161859049#v=onepage&q&f=false
STOP LYING
I didn’t post about Rossi for over a year. Then his device was submitted for independent (yet black box, so the industrial trade secret is preserved) testing. Those 7 scientists would have been free to publish that the device is a fraudulent POS if that was what they found. But instead, they find that the measured energy density is 50,000 times more than gasoline.
For a moment, presume that this thing is real. It would be the most significant technical development since gunpowder. Now assume for a moment that it aint real. It would make Rossi the greatest con man & magician in history. Either way, it is a significant issue that one would expect to be well discussed on FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.