Rossi, Angry that ‘Every Stupidity Gets Attention’

Andrea Rossi seems to be getting upset by some of the criticisms he is hearing about in response to the Lugano report. Earlier today he responded to an open letter to Stephan Pomp; he has now written in response to another criticism which comes from someone who goes by the name of ‘Raman’ who has claimed that there are fundamental errors in the report, such as some electrical measurements.

Below is a response to a reader who claims there is an error on page 14 of the report:

”Measurements performed during the dummy run with the PCE and ammeter clamps allowed us to measure an average current, for each of the three C1 cables, of I1 = 19.7A, and, for each C2 cable, a current of I1 / 2 = I2 = 9.85 A.”

That is sistematically wrong since I2=I1/1.732

Rossi responded:

Andrew:
Your comment is a typical example of the effects of the stupidities made by fake experts like “Raman”, that act as Professors, but lack the foundamentals of Physics, Electronics and Electrotechnics. The effects are that persons like you, clearly missing a professional understanding of the matter, instead of reading seriously a Report written by 6 Professors with a life dedicated to Science and Physics in particular, read the stupidities of imbeciles with an agenda and make us loose time to answer to absurd objections. I am not angry at you, you are just a candid non-expert-person, I am angry because every stupidity gets attention and we, honestly, do not have the time to answer. As you have perhaps read, I already suggested as a reference the wonderful book “Electronics for Dummies” to the “Prof” you got inspiration from, but he does not listen to me and continues to repeat the same stupidities.
Again:
The coils of the reactor are made with a proptietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it. Your phrase “”with or without reactions involved” is pretty arrogant, and such arrogamce, perhaps, forbids you to try to understand what I wrote. If you read carefully what I wrote and what is written in the Report, you will see that “with or without reactions” is a stupidity. The nature and composition of the coils are of paramount importance in our IP and for obvious reasons I will not give any more information, albeit you demand to me not to “state that (I) cannot comment further on this, ESPECIALLY BEING AWARE THAT THROUGH THE REPORT SOME FUNDAMENTAL ( SIC!) MISTAKES ARE CARRIED OUT, SUCH AS..” and at this point you add another titanic stupidity that the Readers can find in your comment: whom do you think you are talking with ?
And here is the answer to your titanically stupid statement ( I know, you are not the author of the titanic stupidity, you are just parrotting the suggestions of “Prof” Raman): just, please read … I will write in very simple language, to allow you (and “Prof” Raman, who insists not to buy ‘Electronics for Dummies’ as I suggested him) to understand, with a small effort and some focus (to Raman I suggest not to chew a gum at the same time).
THE ALIMENTATION CABLING OF THE REACTOR IS COMPOSED BY MEANS OF 2 PARTS FOR EVERY ROW:
1- ONE PART FROM THE CONTROL SYSTEM TO THE JOINT (C); THIS PART IS NAMED C1
2- AFTER THE JOINT C THE SAME CURRENT IS SUBDIVIDED INTO 2 ROWS HAVING THE SAME SECTION AND LENGTH: WE CALL THEM C2
BASED ON THE KIRCHHOFF LAW ( ALSO CALLED KICHHOFF JUNCTION RULE) , WE CAN MAKE THE DEDUCTION THAT THE CURRENT THAT FLOWS THROUGH THE ROW C1 IS EQUAL TO THE DOUBLE OF THE CURRENT THAT FLOWS ALONG EACH OF THE ROWS NAMED C2.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Note that his main cause for aggravation seems to be that responding to these kinds of issues causes him to lose time — presumably working on the 1 MW plant.

  • Billy Jackson

    Of course he’s angry. Every Dingle berry out there with a theory of why this wont work gets more attention and nods of acceptance than anything Rossi has to say with LENR and the E-cat. He has put his life’s work on the line here. repeatedly tested it, had it verified multiple times by professors who are considered top notch in their professions.

    Yet regardless of how much positive news he generates. its the negative news that gets attention He has to prove EVERYTHING .. they have to prove NOTHING, just accuse and let the rumor mill run wild. People latch on to anything that will prove their own bias regardless of if its truth or not.

    • Donk970

      Crazy isn’t it. It’s one thing to be skeptical but when the skeptics refuse to even look at the evidence because it can’t possibly be true, that’s just nuts. The other thing that’s really fascinating is how angry the skeptics are about this. This isn’t just simple skepticism it’s on a whole different level as though someone was threatening their religious views.

      • Mark

        The pseudoskeptic movement is a religious cult without the religion.

        • GreenWin

          It is now called “Scientism.” Orthodox science IS a religion. Exactly as it was when the Vatican ordered Galileo under house arrest. And when Dick Garwin refuses to read the data.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Someone is.

      • Freethinker

        Yes, I have seen rage and hate in the comments many places the last weeks, and at other times when there have been news on Rossi or LENR. That IS strange. Why the hate?

      • I know that phenomenon,

        nuts…

      • True Donk. It’s as if they don’t want the Ecat to be a success. Kind of like Rush Limbaugh saying he hopes Obama fails even though it means the country will suffer as a result.

      • Alain Samoun

        “threatening their religious views.”
        And, above all, their way to make a living…

        • GreenWin

          The JTRIG guys make a living writing FUD. They are expected to post X number of words to meet their daily quota of FUD.

          • Robert Ellefson

            Yeah, think of their children. These guys are just trying to put food on the table, after all.

          • GreenWin

            Shocking to think they might consider honest work. But crooks tend to take the easy way out.

      • timycelyn

        All the rage and hate….. it’s simple.

        They’re becoming frightened……

        • bachcole

          Not necessarily. They may have always been anxiety (which is unconscious fear) driven. This can be seen by their quick castigation of anyone who disagrees with them, no matter the subject. If they were talking about the merits of a particular salt shaker, they would flip out if someone disagreed with them.

        • Donk970

          One has to wonder what could be so frightening.

  • Christopher Calder

    This is the real news from that post

    “The coils of the reactor are made with a proprietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it.”

    I hope Hank Mills reads that post.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Or Rossi threw out a red herring.

      • Mark E Kitiman

        Because the Red Herrings Incandescence was only 900 °C.

        • Sanjeev

          Some more evidence to prove that Rossi (and authors) are correct –
          One page 14, its mentioned that they measured average current (not rms) and the formula used for power is the simple DC power fo3luma, RI^2. We know that the AC power needs power factor, which they do not consider.

          So it shows that they assumed the power waveform as pulsed DC instead of continuous sine wave. In case of pulsed DC Kirchhoff’s law is valid.

          • Obvious

            I think that if we take Rossi at his word, then unadulterated 3-phase power is clearly not fed into the delta resistor/inductor configuration. This is about the best nugget of info that can be squeezed out of this comment to Andrew.
            Although there is a limited set of theoretical configurations that do allow Kirchhoff’s law to be used for comparing the C2 and C1 currents, there is still a lot of blue sky in those possible answers.

    • hempenearth

      And MFMP

    • Sanjeev

      Yes, it may be possible to engineer an alloy that follows a very specific resistance profile.

      In the old shipping container days, one could see Rossi struggling with controls to keep some settings of input current etc. It looks like now IH has solved the problem and is able to automate the response of the system to keep it more stable.

  • This is the real news from that post

    “The coils of the reactor are made with a proprietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it.”

    I hope Hank Mills reads that post.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Or Rossi threw out a red herring.

      • Mark E Kitiman

        Because the Red Herrings Incandescence was only 900 °C.
        I can also understand Rossi being incandescent!

    • hempenearth

      And MFMP

    • Sanjeev

      Yes, it may be possible to engineer an alloy that follows a very specific resistance profile.

      In the old shipping container days, one could see Rossi struggling with controls to keep some settings of input current etc. It looks like now IH has solved the problem and is able to automate the response of the system to keep it more stable.

  • Freethinker

    Well, that may shut some faces up, but likely most of them will go on ….

    I get it that Rossi himself is fed up by this. But then again, the authors are not IH and Rossi’s team, so if they answer on some questions, should not be a problem, I would say.

  • Hi all

    The problem with Siegel and also Pomp and his co-conspirators is that they fail the Galileo test.

    They have never put their eye to the telescope and in point of fact actively attempt to prevent others from doing so.

    None of them has ever attempted to repeat any of the many successful LENR experiments, in order to prove or disprove them or even been involved in an actual test of any LENR device.

    They have instead swapped the experiment for blind faith.

    They are therefore engaged not in science, but in religion, and are as such each frauds in their claim of scientific endeavour.

    • hempenearth

      And merchants of doubt

  • Hi all

    The problem with Siegel and also Pomp and his co-conspirators is that they fail the Galileo test.

    They have never put their eye to the telescope and in point of fact actively attempt to prevent others from doing so.

    None of them has ever attempted to repeat any of the many successful LENR experiments, in order to prove or disprove them or even been involved in an actual test of any LENR device.

    They have instead swapped the experiment for blind faith.

    They are therefore engaged not in science, but in religion, and are as such each frauds in their claim of scientific endeavour.

    • hempenearth

      And merchants of doubt

  • Sanjeev

    Why are people asking Rossi these questions ? He did not write the report or done the measurements. The right people to ask are the authors of the report, and now they have agreed to answer it seems.

    But I can understand the pain of explaining it to those who do not want to understand, and just want to boast their textbook knowledge.

  • Sanjeev

    Why are people asking Rossi these questions ? He did not write the report or done the measurements. The right people to ask are the authors of the report, and now they have agreed to answer it seems.

    But I can understand the pain of explaining it to those who do not want to understand, and just want to boast their textbook knowledge.

  • LilyLover

    Pompusranmans of the world need to be stripped off of their academic degrees in science and any teaching privileges that they may have. If not now, surely after the domestic E-Cat sales begin. Lack of scientific attitude is reason enough. What do you do with the security guard who sleeps on the duty? What do you do to the soldier who works for the enemy? What do you do to a sportsman’s trophy after found guilty of extra-fair-substances? Then why the exemption for this clowning? If there is no such word as yet, let me call the Pompusranmans the first pair of anti-scientists. Anti-scientist is a person, who opposes truth, by any means possible, including but not limited to – defamation, pseudoscience, irrelevancy, jargon-traps, intimidation, forum sliding, side-show-distraction-tactics, name-calling, appeal to ignorance, comparing car with crow, selectively zooming, translating dolphin chatter into mathematics or simply being intellectually anti-honest. Let alone Rossi, it makes even me angry.

  • LilyLover

    Pompusranmans of the world need to be stripped off of their academic degrees in science and any teaching privileges that they may have. If not now, surely after the domestic E-Cat sales begin. Lack of scientific attitude is reason enough. What do you do with the security guard who sleeps on the duty? What do you do to the soldier who works for the enemy? What do you do to a sportsman’s trophy after found guilty of extra-fair-substances? Then why the exemption for this clowning? If there is no such word as yet, let me call the Pompusranmans the first pair of anti-scientists. Anti-scientist is a person, who opposes truth, by any means possible, including but not limited to – defamation, pseudoscience, irrelevancy, jargon-traps, intimidation, forum sliding, side-show-distraction-tactics, name-calling, appeal to ignorance, comparing car with crow, selectively zooming, translating dolphin chatter into mathematics or simply being intellectually anti-honest. Let alone Rossi, it makes even me angry.

  • gdaigle

    Yes, Rossi has every right to be upset and angry. That said, he doesn’t have to respond to what he considers stupid questions. He has “the goods”, right? Then no need to spew such venom when you know you will be vindicated. Rossi may be brilliant but lacks impulse control. I know that I wouldn’t want to work for him.

    • GreenWin

      It is fairly obvious that ALL taxpayers should be spitting angry about how their tax dollars are being used to spew false accusations, lies and character assassination by JTRIG psy-ops Perhaps it is time for a few therapists, counselors and shrinks should step up and critique the bullying behavior and WASTE of tax dollars that directly FUND this behavior.

  • gdaigle

    Yes, Rossi has every right to be upset and angry. That said, he doesn’t have to respond to what he considers stupid questions. He has “the goods”, right? Then no need to spew such venom when you know you will be vindicated. Rossi may be brilliant but lacks impulse control. I know that I wouldn’t want to work for him.

    • GreenWin

      Every taxpayer especially in the USA and UK should be spitting angry to see their tax dollars squandered in paid-for-FUD operations that retard knowledge and progress. Maybe a few therapists, counselors and shrinks should show some courage and critique the psyops bullies they (inadvertently) are funding.

    • GreenWin

      It is fairly obvious that ALL taxpayers should be spitting angry about how their tax dollars are being used to spew false accusations, lies and character assassination by JTRIG psy-ops Perhaps it is time for a few therapists, counselors and shrinks should step up and critique the bullying behavior and WASTE of tax dollars that directly FUND this behavior.

  • bachcole

    My operating system won’t work with JONP, so I can’t suggest to Rossi what I do: Don’t even read the morally deficient morons. Perhaps someone could pass that on to Rossi. It just isn’t worth one’s peace of mind to read these skeptopathic insects.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      „Morally deficit morons“? “Skeptopathic insects”? Discussing the setup, the results and the conclusions of an experiment is essential for the scientific method. If there are any flaws in a study, they must be uncovered. Trying to hide them would be morally reprehensible. You seem to imply that every person who raises a reasonable question with regard to the report has doubtful motifs.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Should read “deficient”. Must have been my word processor…

      • bachcole

        Sorry if I implied that. I am talking about certified skeptopaths, and I believe that they are the people that Rossi has allowed himself to get upset about. You and anyone else can question anything about the test setup that you like. But if someone says or implies that Rossi and the professors are crooks and/or incompetent, I will throw verbal rocks at them.

  • DickeFix

    Edit: The comment below is only correct for sine wave and not for the pulsed regulated signal in the E-Cat. See Sanjeevs comment below!

    Well Andrew is 100% right and Rossi and the report are wrong It will not be a factor of 2 but a factor of sqrt(3) between the current in C2 wires and the current in C1 wire since the C2 currents are 120 degrees out of phase.

    Compare selecting Line Current or Phase Current in drop-down menu in the calculator “3-Phase Delta (Balanced Load)” (for any voltage and resistance):

    https://www.watlow.com/reference/tools/3phase.cfm

    Mats Lewan speculates if one can save the stated measurement values in the report by assuming that the resistance of heating coils drop a factor of 3.34 in the active test compared to the dummy test due to hidden semiconductors somewhere in the heating circuit. That seems to me very, very unlikely considering the high temperatures and high currents we have in the circuit. You would need highly doped and high bandgap material like silicon carbide to have such low resistance and not get destroyed by the high temperature. Also most of the heating would take place in the semiconductors during dummy test, not the heating coils.

    A simpler explanation is that the input power was wrongly measured in the active reactor. The good thing with that explanation is that it would also explain the mysterious excess heat, the lack of radioactivity and save the standard nuclear science.

    • curious

      That is true: the discrepancy proves, at least, that the current in the C2 wires was not properly measured, Perhaps somebody threw in some guesswork.
      The other conclusion is that Rossi has nobody around with engineering knowledge to do some fact checking.
      The discrepancy does not explain the huge power gain, but something is wrong.

    • Sanjeev

      DickeFix, you are only 50% right. You are assuming that the input is a pure sine wave. You forgot the traic (and any other controlling circuits inside the magic box).

      If the current is short pulses (like shown in the PCE screenshots), then Rossi is 100% right. The peak current in resistors will be 2 x the line current because while the phase 1 is conducting the rest of the phases are acting as ground, i.e. 0V.

      Please let me know if there is an error in my reasoning here.

      • Sanjeev

        I mean 0.5 x
        🙂

        • DickeFix

          Sajeev, your question is relevant and interesting. I agree with your reasoning if the current pulses in the phases are non-overlapping. I thought a normal three phase triac circuit pulsed the phases synchronously so that all phases were active simultaneously but realize now that this is not necessarily true and the matter is quite complex.

          Lets say that Rossi control box chop the phases asynchronously and change the phase relations of the choppers as a function of power. That could lead to a very nonlinear “effective” load resistance when the power is regulated.

          This may be the crucial point of the E-Cat story. Maybe this can explain the power vs Joule heating discrepancy and save the E-Cat. Or maybe it can be an alternative explanation to the mystic clamp reversal and kill the E-Cat.

          • Sanjeev

            DickeFix, I’m glad that this kind of hair splitting analysis is actually revealing some great secrets !
            Let us know if you see any more anomalies…

      • Mark Szl

        Well i guess with your help we are in a way backward engineering this set up and teasing out more information that is not explicit in the report. Great!

        • Sanjeev

          Yes, this report is revealing a lot !

    • Mark Underwood

      I don’t understand why DickeFix says that the “C2 currents are 120 degrees out of phase” when Rossi has said “the control system continues to change the phase angle.”

  • GreenWin

    Unnamed pseudo-“scientists” working for disreputable agencies are behind this FUD. U.S. NBC News and Glenn Greenwald have written expose’s of GCHQ ops that pretend to be knowledgeable people online.

    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

    It is your USA and UK tax dollars at work, to retard humanity. 🙁

    • Depreciationman

      Consider that there could be people of noble intent who work for the government, have gamed the revolution that success of the E-Cat would cause, and reached a conclusion that the unintended consequences are worse than the status quo. What unintended consequences one might ask? Well, consider what happens to the economies of the Gulf Arab states when their oil revenue dries up (presuming that cheap E-Cat power transitions us to a hydrogen-cycle economy). If we think that these governments (putting aside whatever faults they may have) are generally keeping a lid on Islamic extremists, what happens when their economies collapse? Did someone think this through back in 1989, reach a similar conclusion, and (however wrong it may seem) act to suppress a geopolitically destabilizing technology?

      I am a supporter of the E-Cat, but I am aware that not all the consequences of its introduction will be benign.

      • GreenWin

        In fact, some of your ideas do come to mind Dman. However, repression at home does not relieve antagonism abroad. It doubles repression. The Gulf States are armed because WE arm them. The Gulf States are addicted to oil income because our genius Kissinger forced them to accept petrodollars. Now people of noble intent die to defend that badly envisioned policy.

        I am privy to discussions of how Abdullah must face the inevitable transition. There will be good petroleum income for heavy lift fuels and non-fuel products for a century. The Gulf States, like every other State on Earth will have to transition to a non-petro-exclusive economy. The fact that millions of their poorer brethren will enjoy higher standards of living, markedly reduces causes of radicalism.

        However, the most germane argument is, we have made our bed… and superior power guides this transition. Aside from that, these JTRIG operations are unauthorized, directed toward our own citizens, making them illegal. There is no nobility in voiding one’s solemn oath.

        • GreenWin

          What is harsh and hard to face, is the level and breadth of corruption the NBC News/Greenwald evidence confirms. These are agencies paid to protect and defend the very principles of justice, morality, ethics, honesty, kindness and generosity. How do agents living off of taxpayer’s money, attacking, sabotaging, assassinating the spirit and character of well-intentioned, innovative people purport to qualify for anything other than sociopaths, fanatics or criminals??

          Is anyone here willing to answer these questions? It does not take courage. It takes an ability to be rigorously honest with oneself.

  • Christopher Calder

    Someone posted this on this forum and I have sent the link on to a number of politicians, the US DOE, the California DOE, environmental groups, etc. In an informative YouTube video, Dr. Eugene Mallove details the history of the cold fusion cover-up by MIT scientists with financial interests in hot fusion research, and by the United States Patent Department.

    SEE – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6y98YwJ2GEE

    People who think that scientist cannot be dishonest have not looked into the facts of cold fusion and, for that matter, of “climate change” theology. You get all these crazy criticisms of Rossi because so many people have their oversized egos on the line. One scientist who I consider a friends was, in his own words, “relieved” when an associate of his assured him that the E-Cat could not work. My friend was shown to not care about the welfare of the entire planet, only in his promotion of a competing technology, the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor.

    • Josh G

      Very interesting link, hadn’t seen it before. Thank you for sharing.

  • Someone posted this on this forum and I have sent the link on to a number of politicians, the US DOE, the California DOE, environmental groups, etc. In an informative YouTube video, Dr. Eugene Mallove details the history of the cold fusion cover-up by MIT scientists with financial interests in hot fusion research, and by the United States Patent Department.

    SEE – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6y98YwJ2GEE

    People who think that scientist cannot be dishonest have not looked into the facts of cold fusion and, for that matter, of “climate change” theology. You get all these crazy criticisms of Rossi because so many people have their oversized egos on the line. One scientist, who I consider a friend, was, in his own words, “relieved” when an associate of his assured him that the E-Cat could not work. My friend was shown to not care about the welfare of the entire planet, only in his promotion of a competing technology, the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor.

    • Josh G

      Very interesting link, hadn’t seen it before. Thank you for sharing.

  • GreenWin

    Please note we are documenting the systematic censoring of publicly available news stories that expose the corruption behind these attacks on the good works of Elforsk-IH and hundreds of cold fusion pioneers before them. It is reprehensible, corrupt behavior.

  • GreenWin

    Please note we are documenting the systematic censoring of publicly available news stories that expose the corruption behind these attacks on the good works of Elforsk-IH and hundreds of cold fusion pioneers before them. It is reprehensible, corrupt behavior.

  • Sanjeev

    Here is an online circuit simulator to do your own test. Please let me know what results you get.
    http://www.falstad.com/circuit/

    • Sanjeev

      Btw, Rossi’s reply is correct only when the voltage source is considered as a pulsed source generating short duration pulses. Each phase is then a pulse generator separated by 120 degrees.

      You can paste this setup in the java applet (File->Import->paste)

      $ 1 5.0E-6 32.755850052045055 50 5.0 50
      r 160 64 368 64 0 100.0
      r 176 96 256 160 0 100.0
      r 368 96 288 160 0 100.0
      w 256 160 256 240 0
      w 288 160 288 240 0
      w 176 96 176 240 0
      w 160 64 160 240 0
      w 368 64 400 64 0
      w 400 64 400 240 0
      w 368 96 368 240 0
      w 160 240 176 240 0
      w 256 240 288 240 0
      w 368 240 400 240 0
      w 160 240 160 336 0
      w 256 240 256 336 0
      w 368 240 368 336 0
      v 160 336 160 368 0 5 50.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
      v 256 336 256 368 0 5 50.0 1.0 0.0 2.0943951023931953 0.5
      v 368 336 368 368 0 5 50.0 1.0 0.0 4.1887902047863905 0.5
      w 160 368 160 384 0
      w 256 368 256 384 0
      w 368 368 368 384 0
      w 160 384 256 384 0
      w 256 384 368 384 0
      w 368 384 480 384 0
      g 480 384 512 384 0
      o 1 64 0 33 0.625 0.0125 0 -1
      o 0 64 0 33 0.625 0.0125 0 -1
      o 2 64 0 33 0.625 0.0125 0 -1
      o 13 64 0 33 0.625 0.025 1 -1
      o 14 64 0 33 0.625 0.025 2 -1
      o 15 64 0 33 0.625 0.1 3 -1

      • Bob Greenyer

        Sanjeev,

        Your thinking is in-line with where we are on the control logic when matching the waveform.

        I love this app, good find, can you get “EveryCircuit” for iOS or Android and build a similar circuit and share the result?

        • Sanjeev

          I tried the Chrome app for Everycircuit. Its a nice app but the free version is limited, could not go too far. The results will be the same irrespective of the app. Its a very simple circuit if you assume a pulsed dc waveform. I think it can be better done using a microcontroller but I guess the need to push a KW forced them to use this as an alternative using 3 phase AC.

          • Bob Greenyer

            In time a custom circuit may suffice.

          • Bob Greenyer

            First, for those that want to see what the model that Sanjiv made looks like.

            http://bit.ly/1sL8ZDm

            Because you can’t follow the Facebook feed Sanjiv, Jouni posted this image

            http://bit.ly/1vI6wMo

            Which was followed up on by

            From Bob Higgins

            “yes the coils are inductors, but they are primarily resistors with a small inductance. They should be modelled as a resistor in series with an inductor.

            The inductance will also depend on the unknown metal inside the coil. At low temperatures, the Ni may actually raise the inductance, but at high temperatures the Ni will no longer be magnetic and will still be a conductor which will lower the inductance. So the inductance will be a function of this unknown amount of metal inside and it will be a function of temperature.”

            From Alan Goldwater

            “I calculated the inductances to be around 2 uH in Bob Higgins’ model. This is trivial reactance at 50 Hz or its harmonics. The factors Bob just mentioned are not likely to change this by a significant amount.

            Sanjeev’s simulation is not correct in another way [in addition to the inductance of the triple helix heater coils]. The pulses are not as shown, they are half cycles of sine wave (180 degrees), and so they overlap by 30 degrees. The calculation of power thus becomes complex as above. ”

            Can you work up a revised model taking into consideration these identified aspects and re-post the export here.

          • Sanjeev

            Thanks Bob for posting these links. I actually saw the circuit by Jouni and I think its correct. But the inductance (as Alan says) will be negligible at 50 Hz, there are only 3-4 turns I guess.

            Now a far fetched speculation is that the fuel itself can add to the inductance if it assumes superconducting properties. But that is a wild guess.

            I’m also interested in knowing why Alan thinks that the waveform is half sine wave. Where did he find that info ? All I could see is the screenshot on page 6 of the report which shows pulses. The ON time of triac is very less (perhaps 10%).

            I will do a sim of half sine wave also and post in a moment.

          • Sanjeev

            Sorry could not do the half sine wave circuit. This java applet does not have a Triac.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Alan is putting together a paper showing his rationale for controller design.

            He is a simulation that was posted on FB by Osmo Laarksonen that was inspired by your work

            http://www.partsim.com/simulator/#22349

            It also needs the microFUSION controller part of the sim modded which Alan intends to do if he has time as Osmo is has not got spare time in next few days.

            And you may have missed this.

            Bob Higgins adds more to consider

            “The inductance will also depend on the unknown metal inside the coil. At low temperatures, the Ni may actually raise the inductance, but at high temperatures the Ni will no longer be magnetic and will still be a conductor which will lower the inductance. So the inductance will be a function of this unknown amount of metal inside and it will be a function of temperature.”

            How critical this is we do not know.

            We might start a base camp thread for the controller design, let us know if you are interested in being on that team.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It would be interesting to implement an alternating or pulsating magnetic field, which induces a voltage in the heating coils. Such a field could possibly be generated by the reaction. As is known, DGT have measured strong magnetic fields near their reactors; however, it is not clear if these fields were static or variable. In case that a similar effect shows up in your experiments, one might expect that it would interfere with the electric measurements.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The very short, high current pulses though the triple helix solenoids will create magnetic pulses that will align the reactants in the middle and cause “pinch effect” on them.

          • Sanjeev

            Great ! Sure I’m interested in contributing.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Sanjeev,

            We have added you to the Controller group. you just need to sign up.

          • Sanjeev

            Thank you very much Bob, its done.

  • Sanjeev

    DickeFix, you are only 50% right. You are assuming that the input is a pure sine wave. You forgot the traic (and any other controlling circuits inside the magic box).

    If the current is short pulses (like shown in the PCE screenshots), then Rossi is 100% right. The peak current in resistors will be 2 x the line current because while the phase 1 is conducting the rest of the phases are acting as ground, i.e. 0V.

    Please let me know if there is an error in my reasoning here.

    • Sanjeev

      I mean 0.5 x
      🙂

  • Sanjeev

    Some more evidence to prove that Rossi (and authors) are correct –
    One page 14, its mentioned that they measured average current (not rms) and the formula used for power is the simple DC power fo3luma, RI^2. We know that the AC power needs power factor, which they do not consider.

    So it shows that they assumed the power waveform as pulsed DC instead of continuous sine wave. In case of pulsed DC Kirchhoff’s law is valid.

    • Obvious

      I think that if we take Rossi at his word, then unadulterated 3-phase power is clearly not fed into the delta resistor/inductor configuration. This is about the best nugget of info that can be squeezed out of this comment to Andrew.
      Although there is a limited set of theoretical configurations that do allow Kirchhoff’s law to be used for comparing the C2 and C1 currents, there is still a lot of blue sky in those possible answers.

    • real electrical engineer

      You are right on the dollar!
      To accurately measure AC power in my lab, I use lock-in amplifier (from Signal Recovery) to separate in phase and others, power factor is acceptable in field testing only. IR2 is simply average DC, current and voltage are in phase.

    • real electrical engineer

      Because they are pulses and not sine wave , one simply cannot do power factor correction. You are right. Too much B.S comments on web by “experts”, some are really wrong at the fundamental level.

      • Sanjeev

        Well at least some of them are reading the report, although not so carefully. 🙂
        Looks like attempts to cherry pick “problems” so that the overall public view can be turned towards negative, because “science” is always right.

    • DickeFix

      In the report on page 14 they state they use “average current” to calculate the Joule heat. Since it is a pulsed current I assume they really mean “true RMS current”.. Otherwise the calculations of the are wrong since one needs to take the time average of current squared to calculate the power. The relation I1=I2/2 is also very questionable since it depends on the pulse shape and overlap between the phases. It would be unusual if the pulses in the phases never would have any overlap…

      • Sanjeev

        When the aim is to calculate power, usually average current is used for a known waveform. For an unknown waves like sound, it makes more sense to take RMS. For pulse, it may be the same since its the dc equivalent of the pulsed current.
        They took the pulse as rectangular since its very narrow, so the error will be tiny. The pulse will not overlap since there is 120 deg of separation. You can see the
        screenshot, we do not see any compound waveform.

        Anyway, lets throw away the joule heating component. Its getting deducted from the input, so ignoring it will make the input higher and COP lower, but the difference is tiny, the COP still remains about the same, so I see no value in this argument.

        • DickeFix

          There are two independent phase angles. The 120 deg separation that I talk about is the phase between the input sine-waves that you cant change. The sinusoidal current (or rectified DC current) can be switched simultaneously on all phases (0 deg) or some other relative phase value. In addition the duty cycle of the pulses can be varied. I am a bit unsure if they really can be 120 deg out of phase with no overlap at all since if only one triac is closed there is no return path for the current; the other phases will not be ground but high impedance and no current will flow at all.

          To make things even more complex, the duty cycle and the relative switching phase can be a function of the power. This makes it very difficult to analyze how the total power consumption depends on the average RMS current that detemines the Joule losses. Maybe this can be an explanation of the apparent nonlinearity of the resistivity. I also wonder if the three phase power meters always will be correct.

    • Thomas Kaminski

      I think the test results are correct. A power factor assumes a reactive (capacitive, inductive, or a combination of inductive and capacitive) component. The load is likely mostly resistive, although the high frequency components of the triac pulse waveforms (sharp rise times) might enter slightly into the reactance calculation. I think the assumption that the load is mostly resistive is a good one. No power factor compensation is needed.

      This whole issue can be easily resolved with a duplicate setup — just put together a three-phase resistive load, use the same triac power supply and meters and make the measurements. No need for the ecat cylinder. There are many industrial resistive heaters that could be used to wire up the dummy load. I built a three phase heater for water using “instant on under sink” water heaters — it dissipated 18KW, raising 2 gallons per minute of water flow about 75 degrees F. I also cross checked the thermal output against the calorimetry and it matched.

  • andrea.s

    My comments on the JoNP [1] get spammed by A.R. (Antispam Robot), so I will post here a reply showing that the analysis by Rossi (reflecting the TPR2) is flawed.
    Thanks in advance to E-catworld for your hospitality.

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I respectfully draw your attention to the fact that both Andrew’s and your computations are wrong for what concerns the partition of an RMS current input into the resistor delta.

    Andrew states that I1rms/I2rms = sqrt(3) but this only holds for a linear, time-invariant three-phase circuit (i.e. with all triacs closed, which is not the case in your setup unless one intends to melt the reactor).

    When the triacs intervene, I1rms/I2rms decreases down to sqrt(2) till the current pulses are no longer overlapped (as is likely the case during the test of the dummy reactor).

    In no case I2rms=I1rms/2 : Kirchhoff’s law applies to instantaneous currents, not to their root mean squares.

    I have posted a few images to illustrate this:

    http://www.cobraf.com/showimage.php?image=/forum/immagini/R_123567784_1.jpg

    http://www.cobraf.com/showimage.php?image=/forum/immagini/R_123567784_2.jpg

    http://www.cobraf.com/showimage.php?image=/forum/immagini/R_123567784_3.jpg

    Sincerely,

    Andrea S.

    • DickeFix

      Nice simulations! Lets say that the controlbox can switch the three TRIACs totally independent (i.e. both duty cycle and the delay) and do this as a function of output power.

      1. Could that explain the nonlinear behaviour of the Power Consumption/Joule loss (i.e. the discrepancy in the report that Giancarlo found)?

      2. Could that explain the COP>3 that was observed WITHOUT assuming a reversal of the current clamp between the dummy and active E-Cat. Is it possible for a correctly installed current probe to measure the input power correctly for any pulses on the three phases, without knowing neither voltage nor load resistance?

      • Andreas Moraitis

        As far as I understand it, the above-mentioned points would be relevant for the calculation of joule heating losses from the cables, not for the measurement of the electric input. The estimated values for joule heating (p. 14 of the report) are two orders of magnitude lower than the electric output of the control box (which has been measured at position C1). Therefore, I guess that a correction of the factor would not change the calculated COP dramatically, despite the fact that the energy from joule heating is calculated on the basis of I^2.

        • curious

          I think the issue here is not the magnitude of the losses, but wether the inconsistency indicates the measurements were incorrect.

        • andrea.s

          Indeed the miscalculation of Joule heating does not change significantly the COP calculations, which is why I did not initially insist on this mistake (though I immediately noticed it) , concentrating instead on the anomaly of the current waveform.
          The miscalculation is however indicative of the low level of attention that the authors put in the electrical calculations, which are trivial but nobody apparently cared to check. Not the best attitude when working on a report that announces the invention of the century.
          However, i insist that the authors should do a better job than Rossi in answering objections: I would be happy to be proven wrong, and I don’t exclude being wrong since the information I have is limited to the contents of the TPR1 and TPR2.

          • DickeFix

            The reason why the Joule-heating is important is not because of its magnitude but because the factor of 3.34 difference in proportionality factor to the total power consumption between dummy run and active run. It is an indication that either the measured Joule-heating is too high in the active run or the measured power consumption is too low. If the measured power consumption is to low the COP is a factor 3.34 too high.

            I am doubtful that some complex triac-regulation really can explain this inconcistency in the report but I don´t rule it out either.

            Edit: I see now that “curious” already replied to this

    • Thomas Kaminski

      With the three phase supply and a three-triac circuit with conduction angles less than 60 degrees per half cycle, there will never be a case where more than two phases are “connected” at any given time. Triacs conduct when the gate is triggered and there is a potential difference between ends of the triac. The only way for that to happen is to have two or more triacs triggered simultaneously. They stop conducting (turn off) when the current drops to zero through the triac. This happens when the two phase voltages are at the same level, causing the current to drop to zero.

      For the three, three-phase power lines L1, L2, and L3, triacs T1, T2, and T3 and resistors R12, R23, R31 (delta-connected between L1 and L2, L2 and L3, and L3 and L1 respectively), current flows between L1 and L2 OR L2 and L3, OR L3 and L1. With a conduction angle of less than 120 degrees (60 degrees per half-cycle) there is never a case when all three lines are connected to the delta load.

      Let’s examine the current flowing in line L1. Triacs T1 and T2 are triggered when the voltage at line L1 is greater than the Voltage at Line L2. A pulse current flows from L1 to L2 through R12 in parallel with a series combination of R23 and R13.

      A bit later, triacs T1 and T3 are triggered when the voltage at L1 is greater than L3. A current flows from L1 to L3 through R13 in parallel with a series combination of R23 and R13. It stops flowing when the voltage at L1 is the same as the voltage at line L3, causing both triacs T1 and T2 to have zero current and they stop conducting.

      From the veiwpoint of R12, one current pulse flowed through it from L1 to L2 and a current pulse half as large flowed from L1 to L3 through both R12 and R23 . From the Viewpoint of R13, one current pulse flowed through it from L1 to L3 and one half as large flowed through it from L1 to L3 through R13 and R23. The currents split through the two paths, 2/3 and 1/3 of the current in line L1. From the viewpoint of L1, two current pulses flowed through it. adding the 1/3 and 2/3 currents, a total of 1 current pulse flowed through either R12 or R13. Thus the current in L1 is TWICE the current through R12 and TWICE the current through R13. This WHAT THE TEST OBSERVED.

      In one-half cycle (180 degrees), the voltage conditions are reversed and current flows INTO line L1 from first L2 and then later L3, backwards through the resistors. L1 sees one current pulse out and one back from each of L2 or L3, for four total current pulses. Resistors R13 and R12 each see one pulse out and one pulse back for two total current pulses. The AVERAGE current will be ZERO. The RMS current depends on the pulse shape and duration. With consistent firing angles, all pulse shapes will be the same, except that the positive and negative pulses will be opposite polarity.

      The ratio of Line to Load current is 2 to 1, not the square root of 2 or the square root of 3. A current ratio Line to Load was observed as 2 to 1.

      Here is an OpenOffice Spreadsheet that shows a similar result where the triacs are in-series with the phase resistors, simplifying the calculations (currents do not split 1/3 to 2/3) :

      https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0I7pqe_KM9taXNfdUlaaU5GVnc/view?usp=sharing

  • Why not crowd-source a test?

  • Edward Mayes

    A working plant on the market is the only thing that will silence these intellectual idiots.

    • friendlyprogrammer

      Well he is claiming a working plant is on the market, but nobody believes him. Even you must doubt him if you say he does not already have what he says.

      Rossi has habitually not understood what constitutes proof with the ecat. Every move he makes he seems to think will make this mainstream from his reports back in 2010. His demonstrations in 2011. The papers from 2013 and now again in 2014. All of these moves have not helped bring seriousness to the attention the ecat is receiving, and a boost in publicity is paramount.

      It needs proof of concept, and his “secret ingredients” are surely guessed by now, why not just fess up to them and rework these experiments based on nuclear and chemistry science instead of testing “secrets”.

  • Jonnyb

    Maybe I misunderstand the problem here. PF at best can be 1 into a purely resistive load, however it normally gets worse with any reactance. So are the doubters saying the load was more resistive than it was reported to be and they used a lower PF when it should have been higher. Does not look like that from what I have read. If anything it would be a worse result not a better result, could be wrong unless I was at the test to check things.

  • Jonnyb

    Maybe I misunderstand the problem here. PF at best can be 1 into a purely resistive load, however it normally gets worse with any reactance. So are the doubters saying the load was more resistive than it was reported to be and they used a lower PF when it should have been higher. Does not look like that from what I have read. If anything it would be a worse result not a better result, could be wrong unless I was at the test to check things I could not be 100% sure, sounds like yet more rubbish to me.

  • Sanjeev

    When the aim is to calculate power, usually average current is used for a known waveform. For an unknown waves like sound, it makes more sense to take RMS. For pulse, it may be the same since its the dc equivalent of the pulsed current.
    They took the pulse as rectangular since its very narrow, so the error will be tiny. The pulse will not overlap since there is 120 deg of separation. You can see the
    screenshot, we do not see any compound waveform.

    Anyway, lets throw away the joule heating component. Its getting deducted from the input, so ignoring it will make the input higher and COP lower, but the difference is tiny, the COP still remains about the same, so I see no value in this argument.

  • Sanjeev

    Well at least some of them are reading the report, although not so carefully. 🙂
    Looks like attempts to cherry pick “problems” so that the overall public view can be turned towards negative, because “science” is always right.

  • Sanjeev

    DickeFix, I’m glad that this kind of hair splitting analysis is actually revealing some great secrets !
    Let us know if you see any more anomalies…

  • Sanjeev

    Yes, this report is revealing a lot !

  • GreenWin

    In fact, some of your ideas do come to mind Dman. However, repression at home does not relieve antagonism abroad. It doubles repression. The Gulf States are armed because WE arm them. The Gulf States are addicted to oil income because our genius Kissinger forced them to accept petrodollars. Now people of noble intent die to defend that badly envisioned policy.

    I am privy to discussions of how Abdullah must face the inevitable transition. There will be good petroleum income for heavy lift fuels and non-fuel products for a century. The Gulf States, like every other State on Earth will have to transition to a non-petro-exclusive economy. The fact that millions of their poorer brethren will enjoy higher standards of living, markedly reduces causes of radicalism.

    However, the most germane argument is, we have made our bed… and superior power guides this transition. Aside from that, these JTRIG operations are unauthorized, directed toward our own citizens, making them illegal. There is no nobility in voiding one’s solemn oath.

    • GreenWin

      What is harsh and hard to face, is the level and breadth of corruption the NBC News/Greenwald evidence confirms. These are agencies paid to protect and defend the very principles of justice, morality, ethics, honesty, kindness and generosity. How do agents living off of taxpayer’s money, attacking, sabotaging, assassinating the spirit and character of well-intentioned, innovative people purport to qualify for anything other than sociopaths, fanatics or criminals??

      Is anyone here willing to answer these questions? It does not take courage. It takes an ability to be rigorously honest with oneself.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    As far as I understand it, the above-mentioned points would be relevant for the calculation of joule heating losses from the cables, not for the measurement of the electric input. The estimated values for joule heating (p. 14 of the report) are two orders of magnitude lower than the electric output of the control box (which has been measured at position C1). Therefore, I guess that a correction of the factor would not change the calculated COP dramatically, despite the fact that the energy from joule heating is calculated on the basis of I^2.