[FINAL UPDATE] Corrected (again) Pordenone Hot Cat Report

I have received from Andrea Rossi another correction to the Hot Cat Report, along with this message:

Dear all:
Last typo left: the ssm has been 218 hours, not 118
Besides: the energy produced has been cut of 30% to subtract all the possible margins of error.
Warm Regards,
Andrea

The corrected report is in full below.

 

LEONARDO CORPORATION 

REPORT ON THE INTERNAL TEST PERFORMED ON THE “HOT CAT”

 

Report date: October 9th 2012

NOTICE : THIS REPORT IS ISSUED BY LEONARDO CORPORATION, NOT BY A THIRD PARTY. TESTS PERFORMED BY AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY WILL BE RELEASED UPON COMPLETION OF THE SAME.

IN THE PRESENT REPORT, WE ARE PRESENTING DATA OBTAINED BY US THROUGH A PARALLEL TEST PERFORMED WITH THE SAME INSTRUMENTATION USED BY SAID THIRD PARTY, ON THE SAME REACTOR, THE SO-CALLED “HOT CAT”.

PLEASE CONSIDER THESE FIGURES AS THOSE WE REASONABLY EXPECT TO SEE CONFIRMED IN THE FORTHCOMING INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY TEST.

THE REACTOR WAS MANUFACTURED IN THE USA.

MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTATION WAS CHOSEN SUBSEQUENTLY TO THE SWEDISH TEST PERFORMED ON SEPT. 6TH.

MEASUREMENTS WERE THEREFORE PERFORMED WITH THE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE PRECISION, AVOIDING THE USE OF AMP CLAMPS AND VOLTMETERS, IN PLACE OF WHICH THE INSTRUMENT DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT # 2 (MODULATED BY A VARIAC INSTEAD OF A TRIAC POWER SOURCE) WAS USED.

DATA

Please take note of the data format: a period  “.” is used to indicate the decimals and a comma “,” to indicate the thousands, not vice versa as in many countries; for instance, 2,000.00 means “two thousand point zero hundredths”.

REACTOR DESCRIPTION

The reactor is a cylinder having the following dimensions:

Length:                   33 cm

Diameter:               8.6 cm

(See photos in the Penon Report attached)

Surface:                  891 cm2

The internal cylinder has been eliminated; energy measurements were performed on the external surface only, through the Stephan-Boltzmann equation.

Weight without charge:     4331 g

Weight before test:           4351 g

Weight after test:              4350 g

Charge weight:                 20 g

Test started:                     Sept 25th at 08.00 AM

Test completed:                Oct 9th at 08.00 AM

Total duration of the test: 336 hours

OPERATION

Time from reactor startup to full power: 4 hours

Reactor shutdown time: 4 hours

Net operation time for stabilized reactor: 328 hours

TEMPERATURES

Average room temperature:                                       25 °C

Temperature reached after 4 hours:                           1050 °C

Average temperature for the following 328 hours:      1050 °C

POWER CONSUMPTION

Self-sustaining mode operation, total time:  218 hours

Peak power consumption: about 5 kW

Average power consumption:       about 2.4 kW (two point four kW)

TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMED

kWh 278.4

ENERGY PRODUCED

T(°K)4 = 2.838 * 1012

Wh = 2.838 * 1012 * 5.67 * 10-8 * 8.91 * 102 * 10-4 =  14.337 Wh * h-1           (fourteen point three hundred and thirty-seven kWh per hour)

TOTAL ENERGY IRRADIATED

kWh 3.268

COP

3.268/278.4 = 11.7 (eleven point seven)

POWER DENSITY

163.4 MW * kg-1 (one hundred and sixty-three point four MWh per kg)

(see the Ragone Plot at p. 15 of the Penon Report attached)

INSTRUMENT USED FOR MEASURING

TEMPERATURE ON THE EXTERNAL SURFACE:

Optris PI 160 Camera (see Attachment 1)

 

INSTRUMENT USED FOR MEASURING POWER

CONSUMPTION DURING THE TEST

Tursdale Technical Services, PCE-830 (See Attachment 2)

 

EXTERNAL REACTOR SURFACE COATING

Black paint, proprietary formulation, resistant up to 1200° C, made specifically for Leonardo Corp. by Universokrema, Treviso, Italy.

This test is under scrutiny by an independent third party.

DIRECTOR OF THE TEST:

DR. ANDREA ROSSI

CEO

LEONARDO CORPORATION

 

Below is a presentation of Rossi’s data based on calculations by E-Cat World reader, John A de Beer

Rossi Validation

// ]]>

  • MikeW

    Anyone any good at sums: Is this a load of rubbish or did someone just break the ‘Laws of Physics’?

    • Karl

      What laws? My thought is that we only have current theories to deal with and these may not be complete.

      • HeS

        I found old (2009) DIA report on “cold-fusion”.

        lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BarnhartBtechnology.pdf

        I believe, that LENR is real. Maybe Rossi device is real too?

    • dandelion

      In physics there are only models. Some of these models work as laws in particular cases or/and scales.

      • Ged

        I hope more people realize that.

  • ivan_cev

    After this enormous circus, the only think Mr Rossi can do is show us a real test of the device, (black box is ok)

    • Peter_Roe

      There has been a rather farcical element to recent communications, but that doesn’t detract (much) from Rossi’s achievement, which will hopefully be corroborated by an independent third party report.

      This is work in progress and I don’t think that Rossi is under any obligation to put on another demo for the benefit of people who are unlikely to be in the market for a 1MW CF boiler.

    • Ged

      Editing can bite anyone in the arse. I’ve seen so many badly edited news stories (not here, but elsewhere such as CNN even) that the meaning was garbled; and those are paid writers with paid editors watching over their shoulders. Rossi had to rush from this test in the US to a conference in Italy three days. I think we can cut him some slack in this case.

      • Omega Z

        Ged

        Worse, Actually 2 days. 9th was testing & 12th was conference.

        Beside traveling time he did a roughing out in data that probably should have been analyzed over weeks.

    • Redford

      Define “show us”. Because if it’s “show to some 3rd party and let them do their measurements so that they can present it under their name”, well, it’s done.

  • andreiko

    De omzetting van massa in energie is relevant Dr Rossi of derden kunnen dit aantonen zonder het geheim van de e-cat prijs te geven!

    Graag een reactie , (Dutch)

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Ha Andreiko,

      Wanneer je geen Engels kunt of wilt schrijven (blijkbaar kun je het wel lezen), raad ik je aan om op nederlandse sites te posten. Hier kan bijna niemand je berichten lezen en denk ik dat dergelijke postings niets bijdragen en eerder als storend worden ervaren. Op een internationaal forum is het etikette dat je in de internationale taal, nl Engels post.

      • stuey81

        please post in english if possible, most of us speak english

        • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

          My reply was to Andreiko to please post in English or not at all. Hope he finally gets the message as he is always posting in Dutch.

          • stuey81

            thank you mate

  • georgehants

    To prove Rossi has a device to produce the excess energy he claims one simply assumes I am asked to invest.
    I would require, one plumber with a couple of garden thermometers, one electrician with a volt meter etc.
    One full day or longer if I wish, one generator producing 240 volts for input that I would bring with me.
    One sheet of 1/16th steel of sufficient size to place his device on, isolating it from any other surface.
    A million words have been written on pointless technicalities, he is not claiming some microscopic effect that needs highly sophisticated investigation but an overwhelming gain that can be checked by a first year student.
    Time to end the uncertainty and move on.

    • Warthog

      You’re sounding more and more like “maryyugo”. Rossi doesn’t care what you think, and, having heard the same sentiments dozens of times, most people here don’t care either. They’re content to wait until the situation is resolved. I suggest the same to you.

      • georgehants

        Warthog, thank you, do you agree with the testing method above.
        What would you think is the reason for many reports none of which confirm a working E-Cat.
        Just interested, if rather than just childish abuse you can actually verbalise a reasoned reply.

  • trycantidary

    Stephan boltzman law , for total energy irradiated in excess of
    room temperature assuming constant temperature and area over time:

    Excess Energy emitted (joules) = Time (in hours) * sec / hour
    * Area (meters^2) * emissivity
    * constant (5.670400 * 10^-8 (J / (s * m^2 * K^4))
    * ((Temperature (Kelvin))^4 – (room Temperature (Kelvin))^4)

    checking surface area of cylinder:
    surface area = length * circumfrence = length * pi * d
    = pi * 33 cm * 8.6 cm = 891 cm^2

    converting surface area cm^2 to meter^2:
    1 cm = 10^-2 * m
    1 cm^2 = 10^-4 m^2

    So surface area of cylinder in m^2:
    891 cm^2 = 891 * 10^-4 m^2

    Temperature (Kelvin) = Temperature (Celsius) + 273.15

    T = hot cat temp in kelvin = 1050 + 273 = 1328
    RT = room temp in kelvin = 25 + 273 = 298
    T^4 – RT^4 = 1328^4 – 298^4 = 3110228525056 – 7886150416
    = 3102342374640 = 3.1023 * 10^12 (K^4)

    seconds / hour = 60 seconds / min * 60 min / hour = 3600

    hours of test = 328

    emissivity = .95 (estimated)

    Plugging in:

    Energy produced (Joules) =
    328 (hours) * 3600 (s/hr) * 891 * 10^-4 m^2
    * .95 * 5.670400 * 10^-8 (J / (s m^2 K^4))
    * 3.1023 * 10^12
    = 17582277998
    = 17.6 * 10^9 Joules

    1 Watt = 1 Joule / second
    1 KiloWatt Hour = 1000 Watt * 1 Hour
    = 1000 Joule / second * 3600 second / hour second * 1 Hr
    = 3.6 * 10^6 Joule
    so
    1 Joule = 1 / 3.6 * 10^-6 KWHr

    17.6 * 10^9 Joules = 17.6 / 3.6 * 10^3 KWHr
    = 4.8 ^ 10^3 KWHr

    This is the total excess energy emitted.

    Comparing to the total energy input (278.4 KWHr) we get a COP:
    COP = energy out / energy in =
    = 4.8 * 10^3 / 278.4
    = 17

    • Leonard Weinstein

      Where is the conduction and convection heat transfer to air here. If only radiation is considered, the COP would be low, since heat transfer to the air adds energy loss to just radiation.

      • Ged

        Exactly. Blackbody is being used -only- to give the most conservative estimate possible. Heat loss to convection/conduction is not considered in these experiments, so far (in Zurich they did attempt a slight convection calculation).

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      AR said 30% was deducted to be on the conservative side, meaning a reported cop of 17-5.1=11.9
      Near enough to the reported 11.7.
      Am I interpreting this right?

      • I think you are right. Convection loss is not so easy to estimate, although at high temperatures radiation tends to dominate.

        Radiation (and convection) by the endcaps were also ignored in the analysis. Endcaps form 11.5% of the total surface area. If the endcaps were not painted black then radiation through them was less than 11.5%, though.

        Someone good at fluid dynamics would be able to estimate the convection power loss.

  • daniel maris

    I am staying out of the maths debate…LOL But I was interested to see Matt Lewan’s name. Is he still basically onside? Does he still think Rossi a credible figure?

    • Karl

      I should guess Mats Lewan is still on the story of the E-Cat, if there is something to report. Since October last year there haven’t been that much officially shown by Rossi. It may change from now on.

      What Rossi is now indicating, to be verified by third a party soon, is certainly extremely interesting. A COP of 12-17 at 1000 degree Celsius in a 33 cm long and 8.6 cm diameter tube. Two week of operation generate about 5000 kWh of heat while it consumes 1 g of Nickel.

      If this is about right, using the heat only, I would consume about 3 gram of Nickel to heat my house in northern Europe including my supply hot water for dish and showers. Using generated electricity from the device would consume a factor 3 x 3 g (with 33% efficiency). Double that consumption for the electricity and a normal household require for light and computers etc. would totally consume about 20 g of nickel per year for its energy demand.

  • How many errors can one person make in one report? Rossi needs help. At a minimum he needs to have a competent engineer check his work especially before he publishes anything.

    • barty

      The tests were finished at 9th october, the conference was yesterday, 12th of october, so i think it was just a fast and unchecked written document.

      • Then he shouldn’t have posted it.

    • Ged

      The errors weren’t in the absolute numbers per ce, it seems to mostly just be editing problems. As you and others point out, a good editor would help, but considering how the conference was just three days after the tests finished, it’s not surprising things weren’t fully polished, even if it would have been best if they were.

      • Robyn

        I think it’s funny to read some people bemoan the number of errors in the original report, and then also get mad that there is no 3rd party confirmation.

        Rossi pushed this out quickly, but he doesn’t have much to lose from sloppiness. He has a groundbreaking invention, and he knows it. Who cares about a sloppy report if he is ultimately correct and his device changes energy for all time?

        Whereas a 3rd party tester would theoretically only have a reputation. And in the face of cold fusion science being an international pariah, if they published wrong numbers, they are subject to being discredited as badly or worse than Fleischmann and Pons.

        A 3rd party can’t afford to appear sloppy. Rossi can.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    All the skeptics should focus their ire on the Patent offices. They are refusing LENR patent applications when it has been proven in labs all over the world! ISSUE ROSSI A PATENT. We will then see his theory behind the E-Cat and why his invention is so much more productive than other LENR devises. IF the E-Cat works, everyone in Leonardo Corporation will become a billionaire. If it does not work, they will get less than zero, and if there is fraud, as many of you are suggesting, they will be prosecuted. Personally I think Rossi should not be publishing any information until after Beta testing proves or disproves his invention.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Why does it take over two hours to moderate my posts, while other comments are posted immediately?

      • Peter_Roe

        Don’t complain – I have a couple of posts on this page that are still in moderation after 24 hours!

    • Fly101

      IMHO Rossi will never get a patent not because of disbelief of LENR, but just because he’s not submitted a valid request.
      To get a patent one must submit a description of the invention such as to allow anyone who has reasonable knowledge of the trade to replicate it. He did not describe in his application the process or even the nature of the catalyst, so nobody can replicate the device.
      Whoever is under the delusion of this patent being awarded (Rossi included) should just forget about it. You either patent or keep secret know-how, you cannot have both.
      To be sure I checked my conclusions with a friend working for more than 20 years at the patent office and he confirmed my interpretation of the rules.
      Therefore, if he wants to avoid ending like Meucci, I urge Rossi to get a series of agreements with big companies (one of the top three of each possible application sector) that can guarantee vigorous product development and vigorous legal protection of a properly submitted patent, both of which Rossi cannot afford on his own.
      He should ask for a relatively small royalty (relatively to the value of the invention, in absolute terms it should not be THAT small), ask for an end of the license if products are not put on the market within say two to four years, and a royalty of a few % on each sold item.
      This way he would make sure he makes a lot of money while allowing fast development of the applications without risking losing everything to the same companies once they decide to enter that market after he’s demonstrated it convincingly while having no patent protection (which for the reasons above is what will happen if he goes on like this).

      • Richard

        The Tesla-J.P. Morgan-Wardenclyffe Tower scenario has been looming for a while now.

        Would a patent guarantee a bright future for his invention?
        I think this kind of online product development, for the world to see and discuss, just might.

  • Morgan

    I hate to say this but if he makes such simple mistakes whos to say the entire thing is not a huge mistake and there is no net energy at all?

    • Peter_Roe

      Yes, I’m sure you really hated to say that.

      If there are any remaining errors or omissions, they are likely to be small relative to the measured amount of anomalous heat. In any case a 3rd party report is due soon.

      • Patrik

        Well, Rossi promised the world a 3rd party report before. He promised we would have one by november 2011 for instance.

        I wonder what soon means this time.

      • Ged

        I think it is important to point out that Rossi didn’t have to release this report to Frank, and by extension us. Even if he had some transpositions and punctuation fluctuations, it was a service not an obligation to us.

        It’s awesome we were given this info, and so far all the reports from the conference have been good ones. Looking forward to the videos!

        • vbasic

          Correct. I can’t think of any other product where we get to see almost all the development phases. Wouldn’t it be something to be able to have similar detailed looks at favorite consumer products such as the ipad years before they were sold?

          • Omega Z

            vbasic

            Most people have a disconnect with product development.
            What many think should be done in a few days can take months.
            I can see it taking a couple months for a group to just determine the Criteria for testing the E-cat. So many variables to allow for & minor details being critical to a valid outcome.

            As you mentioned Ipads were in the works for years before they ever came to market. Even new versions with incremental changes can take a couple years. The gains Rossi has made in the last 8 months is considered light speed in development.

        • vbasic

          For all the hand wringing over the COP and ways to correctly calculate, isn’t there a simpler way to judge the machine. How about the way a business would do it? Find a heater that industries use to heat stuff to 1000 C. Hook it to your standard electric meter the type the meter man reads. Hook the hot cat doing the same work to a similar meter. After a few months, read the meter. The hot cat bill should be 6 times cheaper. Whether it’s LENR or the worlds most efficient electric heater, a buyer wouldn’t care, if it lowers my electric bills that much.

    • Luca Salvarani

      To Morgan

      I think the opposite: in a real scam all things are apparently perfect, no errors, mistakes or misunderstandings at all!

    • Ged

      The absolute numbers don’t seem to have changed, there were just transpositions in the editing. That isn’t that big a deal, even if it is annoying. The important thing is the errors have been corrected.

    • Redford

      As always : 3rd party. There has been some already. The more there will be, the more irrelevant the errors made by Rossi will be, because it’s less and less Rossi says.

  • I have run the calculations independently and can confirm what he says, but he has not corrected all the typos and some of his formulae are stated in a strange way, but not incorrectly. I can provide a PDF of my calculations – how do I upload?

    • Ged

      You can use Google documents to upload yours, that’s what I did for my Excel files graphing the data from the Zurich report.

    • Peter_Roe

      Thanks for taking the time to do that, John.

      It would seem that the ‘real’ COP, including convection losses and unrecorded radiation from the cylinder ends, and ignoring the arbitrary 30% reduction, might be as high as 20. If not, a little engineering could probably take it to that level or above quite easily.

  • Joseph Fine

    It’s not Power Density. It’s Energy Density. And, if you run it for six months, the Energy Density will be proportionately larger. A very impressive 20 grams.

    joseph

    • Omega Z

      Joseph Fine

      And 18 grams recycled.

      As to a Rossi statement, The E-cat doesn’t stop after 6 months due to Nickle depletion.

      It stops due to the secret catalyst depletion.
      But then I assume you probably already know that.

      • Peter_Roe

        Maybe it’s just hydrogen depletion. There will obviously be a limit on how much metal hydride H2 source can be included, and hydrogen is notoriously difficult to contain, so continuous low-level losses apart from any consumption are inevitable.

      • Thomas

        I would be laughing if the costs to manufacture and replace the “secret catalyst” would be higher than the amount of energy produced 🙂

        • Peter_Roe

          Rossi has suggested various figures for cost of replacement cartridges for a proposed home unit, up to about $100. For most people in Northern latitudes, who spend anything up to a couple of thousand dollars on winter heating, it would be a major saving, even with present electricity prices (unless the reduction is swallowed up by taxes).

      • KGB

        What did happen with those 2 grams? Converted to energy? I doubt it.. e=mc2 = 2g = 24.97GWh (Giga Watt Hours), according to the experiment description, this is a closed system. Mass should have stayed virtually the same for 3MWh (0.00001202 grams)

        Still too sloppy for science.

  • LCD

    Ok now that most people agree the calculations are probably conservative if wrong it’s important to note that this all hinges on a third party we know nothing about and we don’t know when they will be finished.

    So pace yourselves, you may be waiting a long time.

    • Karl

      I wouldn’t see it in that way. It seems that Rossi is moving reasonably fast in his R&D. There are also obviously several other players who will search for attention in the field of CF/LENR that he surely is aware of. Rossi said A with this preliminary report. My guess is that we do not have to wait to long to have B served through a report by a third party.

      • Fly101

        Except the Leaf is from a real car manufacturer, and Tesla is a niche manufacturer trying to make the big league. For the time being I’d trust Nissan more for after sales service etc. Also, the first sporty Tesla has been proven to be largely oversold in terms of performance, particularly range.

    • Redford

      I already know what will happen when 3rd party reports will be published. Skeptics will ask for a 3rd party report. I know that because there’s already a 3rd party report, with specific name of the 3rd parties explicitly written in it and putting their reputation on the table, that has been released a month ago from Zürich meeting, and skeptics keep on asking for one like this one doesn’t exist. I don’t even see them arguing against what’s inside or the persons of the 3rd parties – they just skip the fact that out of 3 authors, 2 are third parties. So I really don’t see why that would change. Those same people were entirely dismissing the fact that Levi, already a 3rd party, had been measuring the eCat all by himself more than a year ago for 17 hours. “How do you explain his results if Rossi’s a scam artis” is a question that was never answered, no more than “what do you think of the 3rd parties Zürich report ?”.

  • Michel

    Energy consumed : 278kWh (!) it is a very, very high power for a 33cm by 8.6cm cylinder …. high enough to rise anything close to 1000°C.

    An independant third party validation is needed to demonstrate the e-act is not just a kettle ..

    • Michel

      If the input is 278kWh, then the output power cannot be 3.268 but 3,268kWh in order to give the 12 COP. (comma, not point)

      3,268kWh = 3MWh

    • Michel

      (assuming the operating time is 110 hours : 328 hours minus 218 hours self sutsained mode, it leads to 2.5kW power input )